[jonathan]

I was reading this article last night I found. I am a Christian and I already knew that Darwinian evolution is rascist. But I had no idea until now that it is sexist too.

It's interesting because many people have this idea like Christianity is sexist, and it's not true at all, but ironicly evolution is extremely sexist against women and if you read this article you will see.

Here is some few interesting quotes from the article:

A review of the most prominent late 19^th century writings by biologists focusing on Charles Darwin reveals that a major plank of evolution theory was the belief that women were intellectually and physically inferior to men. Female inferiority was a logical conclusion of the natural selection worldview because men were exposed to far greater selective pressures than women, especially in war, competition for mates, food and clothing. Conversely, women were protected from evolutionary selection by norms which dictated that men were to provide for and protect women and children. Darwinists taught that as a result of this protection, natural selection operated far more actively on males, producing male superiority in virtually all skill areas. As a result, males evolved more than females. The female inferiority doctrine is an excellent example of the armchair logic that has often been more important in establishing evolutionary theory than fossil and other empirical evidence...

..The intelligence gap that Darwinists believed existed between males and females was not minor, but of a level that caused some evolutionists to classify the sexes as two distinct psychological species, males as homo frontalis and females as homo parietalis...

..The extent of the doctrine’s effect can be gauged by the fact that the inferiority-of-women conclusion has heavily influenced theorists from Sigmund Freud to Havelock Ellis, who have had a major role in shaping our generation.¹² As eloquently argued by Durant, both racism and sexism were central to evolution:

‘Darwin introduced his discussion of psychology in the Descent by reasserting his commitment to the principle of continuity … [and] … Darwin rested his case upon a judicious blend of zoomorphic and anthropomorphic arguments. Savages, who were said to possess smaller brains and more prehensile limbs than the higher races, and whose lives were said to be dominated more by instinct and less by reason … were placed in an intermediate position between nature and man; and Darwin extended this placement by analogy to include not only children and congenital idiots but also women, some of whose powers of intuition, of rapid perception, and perhaps of imitation were “characteristic of the lower races, and therefore of a past and lower state of civilization”’ (Descent 1871:326–327).¹³

..
Darwin’s theory may have reflected his personal attitudes toward women and non-Caucasian races. When Darwin was concerned that his son Erasmus might marry a young lady named Martineau, he wrote that if Erasmus married her he would not be:[INDENT] ‘… much better than her “******.”—Imagine poor Erasmus a ****** philosophical and energetic a lady … . Martineau had just returned from … America, and was full of married women’s property rights … . Perfect equality of rights is part of her doctrine … . We must pray for our poor “******” … Martineau didn’t become a Darwin.’^14..


...Conflicts that Darwin perceived marriage would cause him included: ‘how should I manage all my business if I were obligated to go every day walking with my wife—Eheu!’ ..

...Darwin’s contemporary anthropologist, Allan McGrigor, concluded that women are less evolved than men and ‘… physically, mentally and morally, woman is a kind of adult child … it is doubtful if women have contributed one profound original idea of the slightest permanent value to the world.’²¹ Carl Vogt, professor of natural history at the University of Geneva, also accepted many of ‘the conclusions of England’s great modern naturalist, Charles Darwin.’
Vogt argued that ‘the child, the female, and the senile White’ all had the intellectual features and personality of the ‘grown up Negro,’ and that in intellect and personality the female was similar to both infants and the ‘lower’ races.²² Vogt concluded that human females were closer to the lower animals than males and had ‘a greater’ resemblance to apes than men.²³ He believed that the gap between males and females became greater as civilizations progressed, and was greatest in the advanced societies of Europe.²⁴ Darwin was ‘impressed by Vogt’s work and proud to number him among his advocates.’^25...

I don't think women are the same or equal in everything as men or have the same roles at all, but It's more than obvious that Darwin was an evil fool who has fueled rascism and sexism and eugenics all over the world. It's because of his evil ideas that gave rise to communism and socialism and other evils that this last century has been so bloody.

It's interesting to note such foolish assumptions were made by supposed "great minds" that were totally false and rediculous. Even his idea of what was the mechanism for evolution, pangenesis was proven wrong a long time ago, which is why they went to neo-darwinism which replaced pangenesis with mutations, which have proven to be total failure.

I think it's really important to recognise the huge unscientific assumptions that were made from the very beginning and realize that those same type of assumtions are made everyday in the field of evolution, and false conclusions based on faulty presuppositions.

I just don't understand how people in general even listened to this idiot.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i1/females.asp