1

Student Number: 1563636

Clare Bright
Honors 394 A: Philosophy of Gender in Western Thought
17 November 2015
Question Number: 2
Arguments of Male Dominance and Female Inferiority from the Second Creation Story
The Bible opens with two contrasting stories of creation written by different authors, the J
writer and the P writer. The second creation story is found in Genesis 2 and 3, and describes the
formation of man and woman, then their eventual fall from the Garden of Eden. Over time, the
second creation story has become a fundamental argument to keep our society male dominant.
However, other interpretations of the story have been developed that contradict the misogynistic
arguments in an effort to counter the idea of female inferiority and move towards an equal
society. The main points of contention in the debate are based around the creation of Eve and
Eves role in the fall of mankind.
In Genesis 2, Eve is said to be made from the rib of man. Thus the argument for female
inferiority arises that man is made in the image of God, but woman is made in the image of man.
The apostle Paul solidifies this interpretation when writing, A man ought not to cover his head
since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man did not
come from woman, but woman from man (1 Corinthians 11:7-8, NIV). The idea of women
being inferior due to being in the image of man, instead of the image of God, was supported by
the Catholic Church and St. Thomas Aquinas. The argument is then supported by the idea of the

Great Chain of Being, in which God is at the top and the nothingness at the bottom. Human
beings fall somewhere in the middle, but if man is made in the image of God and woman is made
in the image of man, then men are more similar to God and would justifiably be placed over
women in the hierarchy. St. Augustine argues against women being made in the image of God by
stating that only man can be made in the image of God because the Holy Trinity consists of three
male parts (Augustine, 55). Therefore, women by themselves cannot be in the image of God, as
God has no feminine aspects. Overall, the argument is made that because Eve was made out of
Adam, women are inferior to males because women are not directly the image of God, and are
instead a reflection of the glory of man.
From the second creation story, the argument is also made that women were made as an
afterthought and for the pleasure of man. Henry claims that women are naturally subject to men
because God made women to be mans help mate, basically created for mans use, pleasure, and
help (Grimke, 102). The foundation of this argument is from Genesis 2:18, in which God says
that It is not good to let the man be alone. I will make a helper suitable to him (Genesis 2:18,
NIV). Therefore, if woman was made to be a helper for man, women are naturally subject to the
desires of men. Women were created for man, and men not for women. In addition, God gave
man dominion over all of the creatures in the Garden of Eden, and because women are
creatures, God gave man dominion over women as well other animals. Furthermore, the side for
male dominance claims that women are only an afterthought to men because man existed in
solitude before women and the world was in good order (The Womens Bible, 20). Women were
made after the creation of a perfect world, and thus are not necessary or important to the world,
since everything was able to function orderly without women; again, women were only made for

the pleasure of men. The arguments logically support male dominance because if women were
made to serve man, man is hierarchically superior to women.
Another argument made for female inferiority is that women caused the fall of human
beings from the Garden of Eden. In Genesis 3, Eve takes the fruit from the tree of good and evil
after being persuaded by the serpent, then eats it and gives it to Adam to eat as well. Because of
Eves actions, human beings were punished and separated from God and the Garden of Eden,
and were thereafter considered sinners because of Eves so called original sin. From this, the
arguments can be made that either women are inherently more evil than men, or that women
have less reasoning skills and need to be under the careful guidance of men. Either argument is a
primary source of support for female inferiority. The conclusion that women are more evil than
men comes from the idea that it was Eve who disobeyed the instructions of God, and that she
made Adam go against God. Therefore, women are temptresses and consistently try to get men to
stray from the will of God. It follows that Adam was not at fault for the fall of humans from the
Garden of Eden because he only went along with the actions of Eve. Another interpretation of
Eves role in the fall is that Eve was easily persuaded by the serpent to go against the will of
God, so women have reasoning skills lower than that of man because she was deceived by the
serpent. Women then need to be under the constant guidance of man so that women will not have
the opportunity to be further corrupted by the Devil. Whether Eve chose to eat from the tree out
of an inherently evil desire, or because she is more fallible than Adam, Eve provided evidence as
to what happens when women are not controlled by men. Eve led man astray, and thus men since
then have justified controlling women as guiding women away from temptation and evil that
women would easily succumb to, like Eve. Accordingly, due to Eves role in the fall, men need

to be the keepers of women, starting the idea of women as the property or under the subjugation
of men, which is the foundation of male dominance in society.
Finally, the view for male dominance uses Eves punishment for eating from the tree as
another important aspect of their argument. God tells Eve, in response to the fall, that Your
desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you (Genesis 3:16, NIV). The
proclamation that husbands are to rule over their wives is interpreted as men being the superior
governor of women in society. Gods punishment for women is interpreted as men being divinely
placed over women to prevent them from being led astray by temptations from the devil. Thus,
the punishment of Eve serves as the most direct argument for female inferiority, as it is supposed
that God put husbands in a position to rule over their wives, meaning men should have power
over women.
The other side of the argument uses the second creations story to depict women as being
equal or superior to men by challenging the dominant interpretation of the text. First, the counterarguments to the male dominant perspective focus on the idea of when woman was created. The
second creation story is in conflict with the first on the order of creation of man and woman if
the second creation story does not start with the generic man. The first creation story claims, So
God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he
created them (Genesis 1:27, NIV). In Genesis 1, the writer uses the generic man for the first part
of the verse, controversially meaning that humans were created in the image of God. God created
male and female at the same time and equally in the image of God according to the prominent
interpretation of Genesis 1. From this perspective, it becomes difficult to argue for male
supremacy, since Adam and Eve were created as equal beings. Alas, it then could be argued that
Genesis 2 might contradict this, because Eve was made from Adams rib, and thus women was

derived from man. However, looking at the specific language used in the original translations
and writings of Genesis, an argument could be made that more closely fits with the equality in
creation seen in Genesis 1. Although God makes Eve from Adam, the original man created was
addressed with the term HaAdam which is used to mean the generic, inclusive man. After
the creation of Eve, gender specific language is used, calling Adam Ish (man) and Eve Ishah
(woman). Therefore, both creation stories are congruent in stating that man and woman were
created at the same time, as although in Genesis 2, the generic man was before woman, the
gender specific man and woman were created at the same time.
However, since the male dominance side rejects the language differences between man
and generic man, an argument can still be made against female inferiority even if women were
created second. In the creation stories, God created the world in a gradually ascending series of
being and, if Eve was created last, she would have been the most perfect creation with the
highest importance due to the ascending authority of Gods creations (Womens Bible, 19).
Hildegard debated that by being the last creation, Eve could be said to have authority over Adam
because Eve is a more perfect creation than Adam (Gssmann, 54). Additionally, Hildegard
argues that only Eve and Jesus Christ were made from flesh and not from the seed of man
(Gssmann, 57). Therefore, Eve is a superior creation because she most closely resemblance
Jesus Christ in her creation. Another point can be made that Eve was made of superior substance
to Adam. While Adam was made from dirt, Eve was made from human flesh (Gssmann, 56).
Because Eve is made out of Adam, she becomes a being that is superior and more perfect than
Adam from her creation. Consequently, it becomes more beneficial for the male dominance side
to accept the equally timed creation of men and women from Genesis 1, because when arguing
that men came before women, an argument can be made that on the ascending scale of Gods

creation that places women as superior to men. As Adam announces Eve as being bone of my
bones, and flesh of my flesh, the other side should likewise accept Eve as being of equal value
as man in her creation due to God making the two equally in the image of Him (Genesis 2:23,
NIV). Overall, the side against female inferiority claims that Eve is equal, or superior, to Adam,
if the argument is to be made from the assumption that Eve is formed after Adam.
As a result, it is difficult to argue the perspective that women were created solely for the
pleasure and help of men. The male dominance supporters are forced into either accepting that
gender specific man and woman were created at the same time, or at least equally in the image of
God. If men and women were created at the same time, then the idea that the world was perfect
with only man does nothing to argue for female inferiority, as the original man before the
creation of Eve is an inclusive, generic man without gender specifications. Additionally, as
man and woman are created equally in the image of God, both genders have equal minds and
souls. Therefore, it seems illogical to say that women were created for the sake of man, when
both man and woman are given the ability to think and have their own desires. Woman is not
created for the sake of man, but for her own sake, as is evident by the fact that women are their
own beings created equally to man with their own interests and desires (Gssmann, 56).
Furthermore, a counterargument against the idea that Eve is the most at fault for the fall
from the Garden of Eden is developed. The conclusions that Eve is either more easily deceived
or more evil are both unsatisfactory when considering that Adam also choose to eat from the tree
of knowledge of good and evil. If Eve had a lower capacity to reason and thus believed the
serpent convincing her that the fruit will make her more like God, then that means Adam was
more logical and did not believe the lies of the serpent. However, both Adam and Eve ate the
fruit, meaning that while Eve was deceived, Adam blatantly choose to follow along against the

will of God (McLaughlin, 80). Therefore, Adam can be said to be more evil than Eve, as Eve did
not fully know the implications of her actions while Adam did. Adam choose to go against God
due to his own desire to attain the knowledge of good and evil, without actually believing that
the fruit would help him be more like God, while Eve believed the serpent and ate the fruit
because she was convinced it would be beneficial to her. From this, it cannot be said that Adam
is less evil than Eve because Adams intentions in disobeying God were arguably more evil than
Eves intentions. The point could be made that if Eve has inferior reason and is more easily
deceived, than Adam is more at fault for the fall, because God would not have severely punished
his creation for Eves fallible mistakes if it was part of her created being. Similarly, when saying
that Eve is more evil than Adam, it puts Adam at fault because Adam still should have known
better than to eat from the tree. If Adam was less evil than Eve, then Eves persuasion would not
have been successful, as Adam would have held true to the commandments of God and not the
suggestions of Eve. Overall the point cannot be made that Eve is more at fault for the fall than
Adam, as the two are equally at fault by doing the same action. Accordingly, Eve cannot be
depicted as more evil or fallible without condemning Adam as more at fault for the fall.
Finally, the side against female inferiority claims that the punishment of Eve for the fall
does not put women under the dominion of men. The idea that the husband will rule over the
wife can also be interpreted as merely a biological prediction instead of God giving power to
men over women. The husband is more likely to have power over women due to the physical
disparity between the two sexes. Locke continues the argument by saying that the punishment
only gives conjugal power to the husband, in which women still must consent to entering the
partnership with their husband (Locke, 95). Additionally, earlier in Genesis, God suggests a
desire for humans to exist in a partnership society; after creating Eve, the relationship between

man and women is described as, For this reason, man will leave his father and mother and be
united to his wife, and they will become one flesh (Genesis 2:24, NIV). In this statement, the
desire is not for husband to rule over his wife, but for the two to be equal, united partners. One
could argue that this is claim was made before the fall, but the idea of a partnership society can
be seen in the life and teachings of Jesus, who came after the fall, as well and thus solidifies the
necessity of equality in marriage (Eisler, 121). The counterargument against the subjugation of
women to their husbands then is supported by both Genesis 2 and the later teachings of Jesus,
and thus agrees with Lockes idea that the rule of husbands over their wives is solely a biological
prediction and not a complete transfer of power to men.
Overall, the arguments made by those who argue for male dominance are less persuasive
than the counterarguments made against female inferiority. The idea that men and women were
not equally created in the image of God is a fallible argument. The point is based on the
formation of man from woman, the writings of Paul, and the supposed gender of the Trinity. As
examined in the counterarguments, it was actually the generic man that came before women, and
then gender specific man was distinguished as the female was created, which more closely
resembles the similar idea of men and women both being made in the image of God in Genesis 1.
In addition, the writings of Paul to the Corinthians claim that women are in the glory of men and
men in the glory of God. However, Paul contradicts himself in his writing to the Galatians, in
which he states that, There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male
and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:28, NIV). Therefore, the differences
in gender are unimportant in the overall being as everyone is the same through God. Pauls
inconsistency in his writing make it hard to use him as a solid support for the male dominance
argument, as other aspects of what he said could be used as a counterargument (Augustine, 59).

Furthermore, it is important to note the possible bias in Pauls writings that encouraged him to
write females as inferior, which is a prominent part of the culture from his Jewish background.
The final argument against women being made in the image of God is that the Trinity consists of
three male parts according to Augustine, and thus female cannot be a direct reflection of God.
This argument focuses only on the use of the term Yahweh for God, and does not account for the
term Elohim. The term Yahweh can support the idea of a male God, but Elohim is the more
commonly used term in the Bible. Elohim is plural and has both male and female roots,
insinuating that part of the God or the majesty of God is at least in small part feminine. Therefore
the male dominance argument is not persuasive in the argument that men are given superiority
over women by being more similar to the image of God.
However, I likewise find the argument that Eve was created superior to Adam as equally
unpersuasive as the argument that Adam was superior to Eve. My disagreement is primarily with
the point that women was created after man. Although generic man was made before women in
Genesis 2, man and woman were gender specific at the same point in both creation stories. Even
if Eve was created after Adam, I would not agree that it follows the chain of ascending
superiority in Gods creation. The idea that man or woman is created with superiority over the
other contradicts Genesis 1, and thus I find to be unpersuasive, as solid arguments should match
both accounts of creation.
Due to flaws in the argument that men were created before women, I also find the idea
that women were created to be of assistance to men as unpersuasive. If men and women were
distinguished by gender at the same time and made equally in the image of God, I find it
improbable that women were made to please women. I believe the counterargument that women
have their own reason and equal minds to be persuasive in showing that women are not forced to

10

please men. Although women were said to be a helper to Adam in the second creation story, I
think this can tie in more with the idea of a partnership society, rather than the subjugation of
women in the male dominant society.
I find the counterargument that Eve and Adam were equally at fault for the fall from the
Garden of Eden to be convincing. Eve cannot be at fault due to a lack of reasoning or an inherent
evil instinct, which are the two main arguments from the male dominance side. If Eve had either
of the two, then Adam also would be condemned for the fall. I think the logic behind the
argument is persuasive in showing that both parties had to be equally at fault because they
ultimately made the same decision to eat the fruit, regardless of who persuaded them to do so.
Finally, I strongly disagree with the idea that Eves punishment was to be put under the
social rule of man. I find this argument to be illogical, as man is a similarly mortal and flawed
being. Man cannot be completely responsible for women, because men are equally capable of sin
as women. Therefore it would be unsound to further distance women from her Creator by putting
a fallible man between them. Males are also imperfect beings, so it goes against the principles of
God to put women under another being that could lead her astray rather than putting her directly
under Him (Grimke 102). Similarly, men cannot save women, so the social construct of women
having to be under their husband is harmful to the subjugation and an impossible standard for
men to be able to save their wives through careful guidance. Thus, by default I find the
counterargument from Locke and Grimke that husbands will rule over their wives with
biological, conjugal power more convincing. Although, this argument too is based on speculation
and personal interpretation of the punishment of Eve due to the fall. As a result, the argument for
male dominance due to the punishment of Eve is illogical, and in comparison, the
counterargument from Locke and Grimke is more persuasive.

11

In conclusion, the second creation story becomes a point of debate between people
fighting for and against female inferiority and male dominance. The arguments are centered on
the interpretation of Eves creation and purpose, and the cause and implications of the fall from
the Garden of Eden. Overall, the arguments for female equality are found to be more persuasive,
as male dominance arguments often involved a rejection of linguistics and Genesis 1, along with
including sometimes contradictory or self-condemning arguments. The more convincing
arguments were from the side depicting Eve as equal to man, since they related the second
creation story to the equality in the creation of man and woman from the first creation story, and
sought to bring a unity between the two stories while outlining key flaws in the male dominance
point of view.