January 5, 2019 | David F. Coppedge

Male-Female Differences Matter

Efforts to enforce “equality” between the sexes can go awry with fake science, and consequences can be severe.

Clueless politicians, devoid of common sense and drunk on political correctness, try to pretend that genders are socially constructed. Some scientists go along with the fad (13 Sept 2018), but others use their eyes to observe the obvious.

Common Sense and Common Science

For instance, this article in Medical Xpress states flatly, “New findings on genes that drive male-female brain differences, timing of puberty.” Yes, there are differences, admit the scientists at Columbia University who found the genes that encode them – in roundworms.

“Remarkably, we found that each member of this pathway is conserved between worms and humans, indicating that we have perhaps uncovered a general principle for how sexual brain differences in the brain are genetically encoded.”

It’s true that a tiny fraction of people are born with abnormal chromosomes leading to challenges of gender ambiguity, but that is not an issue in the vast majority of births. So who are you going to fight, your feelings or your genes?

Whoops, We Goofed. Sorry, Guys.

How many laws have been written to correct for “gender inequality”? If those laws are based on bad science, one or the other sex is going to get hurt. In fact, that is happening, and it’s not the sex you think. Society has been led to believe that women suffer the most from gender inequality. This is not without reason; history has shown efforts to grant equality to women has been slow in coming: the Constitutional right to vote, for instance, was not granted till 1920 with the 19th Amendment, after decades of activism. Mention gender inequality today, and what comes to mind? Unequal pay, battered wives, sexual harrassment… the list goes on.

Accordingly, many laws like Title IX of the Civil Rights Act were written to correct these imbalances from privileged males, with their toxic masculinity. Universities proudly include Women’s Studies programs. Society loves the deference given to women, with NOW (the National Organization for Women), groups for women voters, women’s marches, and lobby groups for women’s rights. Now that we are all nodding our heads yes, let’s look at new study from the University of Missouri that says, “New measure of equality reveals a fuller picture of male well-being.” Male well-being? Who cares about the gender with all the privilege? “Measurement tool acknowledges the challenges men face that researchers say have been underestimated in some countries.”

Researchers from the University of Missouri and University of Essex in the United Kingdom say a new way of measuring gender inequality is fairer to both men and women, and presents a simplified but more accurate picture of peoples’ well-being than previous calculations. The new Basic Index of Gender Inequality (BIGI) focuses on three factors – educational opportunities, healthy life expectancy and overall life satisfaction.

The researchers were only trying to be fair. Everybody knows about the challenges women face, but don’t men face some on account of their sex?

“We calculated BIGI scores for 134 nations, representing 6.8 billion people,” said David Geary, Curators Distinguished Professor of Psychological Sciences in the MU College of Arts and Science about the study, published today in PLOS ONE, one of the world’s leading peer-reviewed journals focused on science and medicine. “Surprisingly, our new measure indicated that men are, on average, more disadvantaged than women in 91 countries compared with a relative disadvantage for women in 43 countries. We sought to correct the bias toward women’s issues in existing measures and at the same time develop a simple measure that is useful in any country in the world, regardless of their level of economic development.”

To be sure, 43 countries that disadvantage women are too many, but more than double that number of nations disadvantage men! How is that possible? Blame it on fake science that emerged out of political bias.

Until now the Global Gender Gap Index, introduced in 2006, had been one of the most established and well-used measures of national gender inequality, used by academics and policy makers across the world. But Stoet and Geary argue that it does not measure issues where men are at a disadvantage, such as harsher punishments for the same crime, compulsory military service and more occupational deaths. The complexity of the Global Gender Gap Index also means it is sometimes difficult to distinguish whether gender differences are the result of inequality or personal preference.

Clearly any imbalance is undesirable, but what is meant by imbalance? Does equal have to imply identical? Many men can relate to feeling victimized themselves, yet feel powerless to fight for their rights in a society highly biased toward women. If you doubt it, imagine a university opening a “men’s studies” program or citizens creating a “national organization for men” or the like. The recent #metoo movement exemplified the bias to always believe the woman in rape charges, disadvantaging men who are denied due process and standards of evidence. Some men are treated more harshly by judges in divorce cases—even when the innocent party—with ex-wives winning severe penalties against men, with exorbitant alimony and child-care charges they can ill afford to pay in some cases. Men are traditionally more likely to die in military conflicts and security-related jobs, or in risky occupations. They are usually the ones called upon to risk their lives to rescue women and children. Besides all this, men have a lower life expectancy. Given this added information, why would any woman want to transition to a man? Yes, it’s about time to try to be fair to both sexes when evaluating challenges to people’s well-being.

This subject is a hornet’s nest that could stir up vehement emotions on both sides, with horror stories to justify them. We’re just reporting what these secular scientists say; argue with them if you must, not with us. We are all for gender equality. Traditionally, women have been unfairly treated. Corrections have been necessary, but is it not possible to go overboard? As these articles illustrate, we need to get the science right before making laws.

Society would be so much better off if they started with Genesis. In the Garden of Eden, both male and female were created in the image of God. Both walked with God in the garden. Both sinned, and both will stand alone at the judgment, responsible for their own lives, without the ability to blame the other sex. The Bible has been the great liberator of women. Many women followed Jesus, and He treated them with gentleness and respect, setting an example for all of us. Women were the first to see the risen Christ. Women were present with the apostles at Pentecost, receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit equally. Finally, Paul says in Galatians 3:28, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

Equality before God does not rule out differences in body, mind and in roles in the created order. With many exceptions, men are generally stronger, generally taller, and generally less emotional than women. Those are not better things; just different. The stronger are encouraged in the Bible to give place to the weaker. And yet some women have been strong queens, strong athletes, and do well at traditional male occupations. Men and women were meant to complement each other and need each other’s strengths. A Biblical view of sex and gender would bring true unity and diversity, with men and women enjoying their own strengths and admiring the other’s endowments. God gave certain jobs to men, and other responsibilities to women; only men could be Levitical priests, for instances, but some women could prophesy. The second great commandment, to love our neighbors as ourselves, would never justify harming the other sex or considering one’s own sex as innately superior. The Biblical view of sex would undo much of the unfairness and bias in the laws in the 91 countries disadvantaging men, and in the 43 countries disadvantaging women. Why? Because it would adhere more closely to the Creator’s revealed design. Who knows better how to operate humans than the God who invented the sexes? We will always be better off acting like what we were created to be.

Exercise: List some women who have excelled at traditional male roles (e.g., Queen Elizabeth, Joan of Arc, Deborah the Judge) and men who have exhibited great sensitivity and tenderness (e.g., Ben Carson with his healing hands, Wolfgang Mozart in his music, poets, etc). How do these examples fit with what the Bible says about sex roles and human diversity? What is the range of acceptable diversity of each individual man or woman within a Biblical worldview? Which laws trying to correct for gender imbalance should Christians support, and which should they oppose?

(Visited 619 times, 1 visits today)

Leave a Reply