Darwin’s Views of Women Had a Considerable Effect on Society

Darwin’s View of Women

Darwin was very clear about his views of women. He believed women were far less intelligent than men and were inferior in many other ways. Darwin’s book, The Descent of Man, contains an entire section titled “Mental Powers of Men and Women” (Darwin 1871a, vol. 2, 327–329) proclaiming that men attain “a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can women—whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands” (Darwin 1871a, vol. 2, 327). Darwin also stated that “Man is more courageous, pugnacious, and energetic than woman, and has a more inventive genius. His brain is absolutely larger . . .” (Darwin 1871a, vol. 2, 316–317). Evolution, Darwin added, caused man to “ultimately become superior to woman . . . [especially] superior in mental endowment to woman” (Darwin 1871a, vol. 2, 328–329). Consequently, he once opined men not only were “more powerful in body and mind” than women, but even had “gained the power of selection” because, he believed, sexual selection, thus evolution, was in the males’ hands, and females were largely passive in this area (Darwin 1871, 597).

Darwin also believed that “the traditional stereotype of the breadwinning father and the stay-at-home mother [was] really part of our biological makeup” (Saini 2017a, 28). Among the more telling indications of Darwin’s attitude toward women are statements he penned as a young man that listed what he viewed as the advantages of marriage, including children and a constant companion, a friend in old age “who will feel interested in one, object to be beloved and played with—better than a dog anyhow—Home, and someone to take care of house—Charms of music and female chit-chat. These things are good for one’s health” (Barlow 1958, 232–233).

Furthermore, Darwin believed that the “struggle to reproduce was at least as important, if not more important, than the struggle to survive” (Hamlin 2014, 9). Darwin replaced the Genesis Creation account that taught all humans are brothers and sisters, all children of Adam and Eve, by producing “an alternative creation story and a brand new way to understand humans’ place in the universe,” namely we evolved by a process that produced significant differences in both the different races and the two sexes. Darwin concluded that the intellectual superiority of males is proved by the fact that men attain

a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can woman—whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands. . . . We may also infer . . . that if men are capable of a decided pre-eminence over women in many subjects, the average of mental power in man must be above that of women (Darwin 1871, 564).

In Darwin’s words, evolution resulted from the males’ “struggle with other males for the possession of the females” (Darwin 1859, 158). For this reason, men were more sexually aggressive then women. In support of his conclusion, Darwin cited the case of Australian “savage” women, who he claimed were constantly at “war both between members of the same tribe and distant tribes,” resulting in sexual selection do to sexual competition (Darwin 1871, 561). To support his view that “the strongest party always carries off the [female] prize,” Darwin also cited the
North American Indian custom that required males
to fight male competitors to gain wives (Darwin 1871,
562). The result was that a weaker man seldom could
“keep a wife that a stronger man thinks worth his
notice” (Darwin 1871, 562).

Darwin’s Views of Women Had a Major Influence
on Evolution and Academia

The fact that almost every major defender of
women attacked Darwin’s views indicates that they
felt that Darwin had a great deal of influence on
academia and ideas about the acceptance of evolution
in general (Bergman 2014).

A main reason many nineteenth century
evolutionary biologists argued for women’s inferiority
was because, as stated by Paul Broca (1824–1880),
Darwin believed that “unchecked female militancy
threatened to produce a perturbance of the” roles
of the sexes. Furthermore, female militancy, i.e.,
the women’s movement, also threatened to “divert
the orderly process of evolution” (Fee 1979, 415).
The fact is, not only Darwin, but also his disciples,
including especially “Prominent scientists [who] have long claimed that male and female brains
are fundamentally different, with women less
intelligent than men” believed much the same thing
(Saini, 2017b). Professor Angela Saini writes, “For
centuries, scientists have influenced decision makers
on important issues . . . We believe that what science
offers us is a story free from prejudice. . . . Yet when
it comes to women, so much of this story is wrong”
(Saini 2017a, 1) .

Although Charles Darwin was “the most influential
evolutionist of the nineteenth (or any) century, did not
intentionally upend traditional ideas about gender
and sex, . . . that is precisely what his writings helped
to do, as many. . . women’s rights activists immediately
recognized” (Hamlin 2014, 1). Today, one academic
professor concluded that evolutionary psychology
was “a scholarly field whose main aim seemed to be
to convince non-specialist readers of the scientific validity of the worst gender platitudes of our culture”
(Ruti 2015, 2. Emphasis in original). Some examples
she gives include “men are hardwired to cheat on
their partners; women are the faithful sex.”

According to Hamlin, “Darwin’s work helped to
usher in a new, evolutionary cosmology based not
on special creation and original sin but on individual
fitness, reproductive success, and human-animal
kinship” (Hamlin 2014, 4). The key point of Darwin’s
theory was that men’s brains and bodies were more
evolved because males had to compete for females, and
the strongest and smartest were more apt to mate,
thus natural selection caused men to become stronger
and more intelligent than women (Hamlin 2014, 5).

Men selected women on the basis of physical
beauty and sexual attraction, thus she evolved in
these traits. Conversely, men did not select women
based on her gross muscle strength, nor on her
intelligence beyond an average level (Miller 2000,
33–67). Natural selection, on the other hand, would
select for men who could take adequate care of their
families. As the hunters of food and protectors of the
family, males were critical for the family’s survival,
which included the wife and children (Hamlin
2014, 6). Thus, Darwin reasoned, evolution would
select for men at a much greater level than women,
consequently, they evolved to a higher level. Women
were protected by the men, were not generally soldiers
in armies and, consequently, women remained at a
lower level of development (Miller 2000, 215).

An early problem with the belief that males are
more intelligent than females is both males and
females inherit most of their traits from both their
mothers and fathers. Thus, if males were more
intelligent than females, this trait would not remain
a male trait for very long because their daughters
would inherit the father’s intelligence, as would
also their sons. Darwin rationalized his problem
by reasoning that certain traits are passed on from
males only to their male offspring, such as secondary
sexual traits including beards, and likewise, he
incorrectly believed, intelligence was passed on from
males to sons only, not daughters. The evidence for
this latter view Darwin never could explain.

Darwin, Women, and Evolution

Because Darwin’s view of women’s inferiority
was widely accepted for close to a century and a
half, many writers have, inspired by the women’s
movement and societal changes in the last 40 years
or so, penned scores of books and articles to refute
Darwin’s inferior-women belief. The importance of
Darwin’s views on women’s inferiority compared to
men is central to the women’s movement because of
“how women were viewed in one of the most critical
moments of modern scientific history, when the
foundation of biology were mapped out” based on
Darwinism (Saini 2017a, 13).

This fact is illustrated by a December 26, 1881
letter from a Mrs. Caroline Kennard (1827–1907)
sent to Darwin inquiring about his views on women
(Darwin Correspondence Project; Evans 2017, 225–
226). Kennard was very familiar with the scientific
view of women. Her stature in science was such that
her scientific achievements allowed her to be listed
in the 1885 Scientist’s International Directory as a
specialist on the botany of ferns and mosses.

This letter Kennard sent to Darwin was the “only
surviving direct challenge Darwin received on his
views on women’s intelligence” (Evans 2017, xxxiv).
Kennard, a prominent activist for the women’s
movement, was then living with her husband in the
wealthy suburb of Brookline, Massachusetts, in the
outskirts of Boston. Her interest in Darwin was due
to claims by those who argued for the inferiority of
women based on Darwin’s scientific authority in his
Origin of Species and other writings (Saini 2017, 13;
Evans 2017, 225).

Kennard is today actually best known primarily
for her correspondence with Darwin about his belief
that women are biologically inferior to men. Her
letter concerned what she termed her surprise that
an eminent scientist like Darwin believed women
were biologically inferior to men. She assumed his
work must have been misinterpreted by those who
believed women were inferior. Thus, she wrote
to Darwin asking him to clarify his answer and
elucidate his conclusions on this matter.

Darwin wrote back to her to assure her that
no mistake was made: “Women . . . are inferior
intellectually,” he wrote. Since he was writing to a
woman, he added his belief that women are superior
to men in moral qualities (Evans 2017, 226). Darwin
concluded his letter adding, “I have written this letter
… only for your private use,” implying it should not
be shared with others. According to Saini, the most
eminent naturalist in the world, Darwin, produced
a letter that “rejected everything the women’s
movement was fighting for” (Saini 2017a, 14).

Mrs. Kennard need not have bothered to write
to Darwin about his views on this matter. Darwin
made it very clear in his Descent of Man and other
books that evolution proves women are inferior, and
Darwin explained in detail why this was true. Darwin
even felt that if evolution were true, the biological
inferiority of women must also be true.

Mrs. Kennard wrote a long letter back to Darwin,
noting such evidence as that most all educators (she
gives the figure of over 83%) are women (Evans 2017,
227). Darwin’s reply, if one was made, was not located
by the Darwin Correspondence Project. There is also
no evidence of a reply in his massive correspondence
in the Cambridge Public Library’s Archives and
Special Collections (Saini 2017a, 16).

Darwin believed that thousands of years of
evolution had evolved men to attract females in
general, a process he called sexual selection. All
females had to do was to choose, from the available
men, which man she wanted to father her offspring
(Miller 2000, 292–340). Thus, men had to compete
against other men to win the right to reproduce, as
was also true of most mammals.

Darwin drew his theory from the animal kingdom’s
focus on reproduction during mating seasons and
ignored the element of love, romance, and the need
for companionship and mutual attraction common
among humans. Darwin provided many examples
from the animal world in his published writings, and,
since he believed that humans had evolved as did all
other mammals, Darwin concluded humans must
have evolved with similar sexual drives as animals.

Furthermore, his sexual selection theory taught
that men evolved further than women because of
the “struggle between the males for possession of
the females,” and the better, stronger, and more
intelligent man would win, thus be able to reproduce
(Hamlin 2014, 8–9). Darwin even tried to explain
the origin of maladaptive traits by claiming that
they persisted because the opposite sex found them
attractive. Why that was so, he never adequately
explained (Hamlin 2014, 9). In short, Darwin
proposed that, to be attractive as mates, men must be
warriors and thinkers, thus evolution “honed them
into finer physical specimens with sharper minds.
Women are literally less evolved than men” (Saini
2017a, 15. Emphasis in original).

Darwin was not alone as a scientist supporting
these patronizing claims. Other examples include
Darwin’s own cousin, Francis Galton (Saini 2017a,
17). Nonetheless, Darwin is recognized as a major
force propagating the contemporary women-inferiority
belief. Darwin’s ideas were far more
influential than others who proposed evolution
because it was widely believed that “Darwin grounded
his theories in rigorous scientific observation and
experimentation and they have, by and large, turned
out to be accurate” (Hamlin 2014, 7).

Thus, Darwin’s views of women’s inferiority were
widely accepted for well over a century and are still
accepted by some today. Other evidence that Darwin
belied women were not the intellectual equals of men
was widely accepted is the fact that numerous books
and articles were written in an attempt to refute
Darwin’s belief in this area, often by persons who
accepted evolution (Saini 2017a, 20).

The Work of Eliza Burt Gamble

One of the most articulate women who openly
opposed Darwin was Eliza Burt Gamble (1841–1920),
a schoolteacher, school superintendent, and author
writing in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
She was active in Michigan’s women’s movement, and
was the author of three books. As Professor J. David
Hoeveler wrote, in “a half century of extraordinary
developments for American women, evolution found
an important relevance to the subject” and one woman
who contributed greatly to that debate was Eliza
(Hoeveler 2007, 157). Gamble realized that “scientists
had . . . widely accepted Darwin’s thesis but had ignored
facts” (Hoeveler 2007, 169) that contradicted his view
of women as inferior beings, so she set out to prove
that this central plank of Darwinism was wrong.

To achieve this goal, she spent a year at the
Library of Congress researching Darwin’s view of
sexual inequality which resulted in her seminal book,
The Sexes in Science and History: An Inquiry into the
Dogma of Woman’s Inferiority to Man (Gamble 1916).
Gamble’s book centered around Darwin’s ideas in his
1871 book The Descent of Man on human evolution
and sexual selection. Her Dogma book proved very
popular, and today, a century after it was published,
is in over 3,000 libraries. Her “ideas were praised in
reform magazines and her writing style was generally
praised, but the scientific and mainstream press
balked at her conclusions and at her pretensions to
write about ‘science’” because she was not a scientist
(Saini 2017a, 21).

As a whole, science and particularly evolutionists,
rejected it as not being scientific, thus not worth
considering. As Saini shows, the many books and
articles written by Gamble refuting Darwin’s view of
women didn’t “win biologists around to her point of
view. Her arguments were doomed to never enter the
scientific mainstream” (Saini 2017a, 21). The “path
paved by Eliza Burt Gamble, the pioneering suffragist
who had dared to challenge Charles Darwin . . . was
being trodden again by a new generation of scientists”
(Saini 2017a, 27).

After Gamble’s other books were published
challenging Darwin’s view of women, the evolutionists
dug their heels in and, in the century after Gamble’s
death, evolutionists “became only more obsessed by
… enforcing the dogma that men are somehow better
than women” (Saini 2017a, 22).

Charlotte Perkins Gilman

Another woman who effectively challenged
Darwin’s view of women was Charlotte Perkins
Gilman (1860–1935) who wrote the best-selling
book entitled, Women and Economics: A Study of the
Economic Relation Between Men and Women as a
Factor in Social Evolution (Gilman 1898). The book
was an overnight success and was soon translated
into seven different languages. This leading American
author and social reformer observed that Darwin
taught “half of the human race [females] had been
kept down at a lower stage of evolution by the other
half [males]” (Saini 2017a, 18). Social Darwinism
permeates much of her book, which is still in print
today (Saini 2017a,18).

Her interest in evolution was developed by her
father, Frederick Gilman, who had a critical influence
on his daughter’s work. Frederick’s

interest in Darwinism, especially as it was
influencing scholarship in anthropology. He also
included . . . Popular Science [magazine] which was
[then] playing a key role in informing American
readers of new directions in evolutionary thinking.
Collectively, Charlotte’s new reading immersed her
in ideas about race. (Hoeveler 2007, 158)
His conclusion from this reading was that the
‘white man’ was on the “cutting edge of civilization’s
advancement and [the result was the] ‘primitive’
races [Blacks, would be judged] as evolutionary
losers” (Hoeveler 2007, 158).

His daughter, Charlotte,
had the same concerns, only about women as being
inferior to men, a topic she wrote in detail to deal
with some of the same arguments Darwin advocated.
Many other women followed the two women noted
above, but both Eliza Gamble and Charlotte Gilman
were leaders in debunking Darwin’s views on women.
Many modern academics have reiterated after them,
largely just repeating and updating these arguments
against Darwin’s view of women (Ruti 2015, 12).

Professor Ruti, in a review of evolutionary
psychology research, observed “what struck me
most forcefully was the field’s stubborn loyalty to
Darwin’s pronouncements about gender differences”
(Ruti 2015, 3). One result of Darwin’s influence
was widespread discrimination against women in
science until fairly recently (Schiebinger 1889). The
primary founder of the modern women’s movement,
Gloria Steinem, concluded that Darwin’s influence in
the latter part of the twentieth century was strong
enough that she covered Darwin’s contribution to the
problem of discrimination in several of her written
works (Steinem 2012, 139, 150, 299).

Conclusion

A small sample of the enormous literature produced
by the women’s movement, and both women and men
scholars from the middle 1800 to 2017, documents
that much concern was expressed about the major
negative impact Darwin had on society that was
detrimental to women. The documentation of the
major accounts of discrimination against women
clearly supports the conclusion that Darwin’s view
of women’s inferiority had a major adverse effect on
women’s opportunities and how they were perceived
by society at large.

Ironically, many writers referenced in this review
accepted evolution and attempted to harmonize their
view of male-female inequality with the evolutionary
forces that created humans (Saini 2017a, 94). In
contrast, the Scriptures and Christianity have
painted a lofty vision of women’s importance in the
family, the workforce, and society as a whole.

References

Barlow, Nora. ed. 1958. The Autobiography of Charles
Darwin 1809–1882. New York, New York: W. W. Norton
& Company.

Bergman, Jerry. 2014. The Darwin Effect: Its Influence on
Nazism, Eugenics, Racism, Communism, Capitalism and
Sexism. Green Forest, Arkansas: Master Books.

Darwin, Charles. 1859. On the Origin of Species by Means of
Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races
in the Struggle for Life. London, United Kingdom: John
Murray.

Darwin, Charles. 1871a. The Descent of Man, and Selection in
Relation to Sex. Vols. 1 and 2. London, United Kingdom:
John Murray.

Darwin, Charles. 1871b. The Descent of Man, and Selection in
Relation to Sex. London, United Kingdom: John Murray.

Darwin Correspondence Project, “Letter no. 13579,” accessed
on 30 November 2019. https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/
letter/DCP-LETT-13579.xml. The letter is not online yet. It
was reprinted in Evans, 2017, 225–226.

Evans, Samantha. ed. 2017. Darwin and Women: A Selection
of Letters. New York, New York: Cambridge University
Press.

Fee, Elizabeth. 1979. “Nineteenth-Century Craniology: The
Study of the Female Skull.” Bulletin of the History of
Medicine 53, no. 3 (Fall): 415–433.

Gamble, Eliza Burt. 1894. The Evolution of Woman: An Inquiry
Into the Dogma of Her Inferiority to Man. New York, New
York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.

Gamble, Eliza Burt. 1916. The Sexes in Science and History:
An Inquiry Into the Dogma of Woman’s Inferiority to Man.
Westport, Connecticut: Hyperion Press.

Gilman, Charlotte Perkins. 1898. Women and Economics—A
Study of the Economic Relation Between Men and Women
as a Factor in Social Evolution. Boston, Massachusetts:
Small, Maynard & Co.

Hamlin, Kimberly A. 2014. From Eve to Evolution: Darwin,
Science, and Women’s Rights in Gilded Age America.
Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press.

Hoeveler, J. David. 2007. The Evolutionists: American
Thinkers Confront Charles Darwin, 1860–1920. (Critical
Issues in American History). Boulder, Colorado: Rowman &
Littlefield Publishers.

Kluger, Jeffrey. 2019. “6 Questions.” Time 194, no. 10
(September): 68.

Miller, Geoffrey. 2000. The Mating Mind: How Sexual Choice
Shaped the Evolution of Human Nature. New York, New
York: Anchor Books.

Ruti, Mari. 2015. The Age of Scientific Sexism: How Evolutionary
Psychology Promotes Gender Profiling and Fans the Battle
of the Sexes. New York, New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

Saini, Angela. 2017a. Inferior: How Science Got Women
Wrong—and the New Research That’s Rewriting the Story.
Boston, Massachusetts: Beacon Press.

Saini, Angela. 2017b. “From Darwin to Damore, How Modern
Science Failed Women.” NBC News Now, October 17.
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/darwin-damore-how-modern-science-failed-women-ncna801586.

Schiebinger, Londa. 1989. The Mind Has No Sex?: Women in
the Origins of Modern Science. Cambridge, Massachusetts:
Harvard University Press.

Steinem, Gloria. 2012. Revolution from Within: A Book of
Self-Esteem. Boston, Massachusetts: Little, Brown and
Company.

SourceThis article originally appeared on answersingenesis.org

Views: 1