In a ground-breaking work, Tuana investigates the interrelationships between a society's scientific, religious, and philosophical conceptions of woman and man by examining Greek, Roman, medieval, early modern, Enlightenment, 19th- and 20th- century religious, scientific, and philosophical ideas about woman. As quickly becomes evident, the three realms of thought are interconnected, e.g., a society's religious ideas about women both influence are influenced by that society's scientific and philosophical ideas about women. Further, the same ideas seem to persist throughout the millennia, e.g. Aristotle's idea of woman as the "misbegotten man."

      Knowing that orthodox religious ideas about women throughout Christendom have remained remarkably static for centuries and that those ideas are dependent on the traditional interpretation of the creation story in Genesis, Tuana first discusses several alternate interpretations to the creation story to show that other religious conceptions of the text are possible. It is those alternate interpretations which appear below.

      But first, Tuana discuss the importance of creation myths. She writes, "Creation myths always have been central to human understanding. They delineate our role in a universe of mysteries. They embody a culture's beliefs about the nature of humankind and the purpose of existence. They account for the sources of life and define relationships between things, thus revealing many of our fundamental values." page 3

      Turning her attention to the creation narrative in Genesis, she writes,

      "Genesis presents two accounts of the creation of humankind. In the first, Genesis 1:1-2.4a, the creation of humans is the divinity's final act. After having created light, heaven, the earth, and the plants and creatures of the earth, God completed the creative act by bringing humans into being. "Then God said, 'Let us make man [ha-adam] in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over all the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.' So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them." (Genesis 1:26-27).

      In the second account, God created man immediately following the creation of the heavens and the earth. "In the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens, when no plant of the field was yet in the earth and no herb of the field had yet sprung up - for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was no man to till the ground; but a mist went up from the earth and watered the whole face of the ground - then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being" (Genesis 2:4-7).

      Having created man, god planted a garden in Eden for man to till and keep. "then the Lord God said, 'It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fir for him,' " (Genesis (2:18). god created all forms of animal and bird, but found none of them a fit helper for man.

      So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh; and the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then the man said, "This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman ['issa], because she was taken out of Man ['is]." (Genesis 2:21-23)

      There are three important differences between these two accounts. First, in the initial account, woman and man are created at the same moment. Neither has temporal priority, while in the second version, man is created first and has clear temporal priority. Second, in the first version, woman and man are created in the same way. Although we are not told how God formed them, we can assume that the method of their creation was the same, since they were created simultaneously. However, in the second version, the creation of woman is quite different from that of man; he is created from dust and the breath of life, whereas she is created in the image of God. "Let us make man [ha-adam] in our image, after our likeness" (Genesis 1:26). "Ha-adam" is a collective noun in Hebrew, referring not to an individual but to humankind as a whole. All of humankind is thus created in the image of God. but in the second account, no clear statement is mad of woman or man being created in God's image.

      The biblical creation myth contained in Genesis is far more open to interpretation than are the myths of Hesoid and Plate. The latter two accounts clearly represent woman's nature as metaphysically inferior to man's. But the Genesis account allows for three different readings: woman and man as equals, woman as superior to man, and man as superior to woman.

      By emphasizing the first creation story, one can argue convincingly that woman and man were created equals. They were created at the same moment, and both were given the same blessing and the same responbilbilities: to be fruitful and multiply, and to exercises dominion over the earth and its creatures. The obvious conclusion is that woman and man possess equal perfection.

      Interestingly, the second account of creation is open to all three readings. its vies of woman's nature turns upon the significance given to the material of her creation and her role as "helper." Arguments for any one of the three interpretations can be advanced by emphasizing the nature of her creation and the material out of which she was formed. If one focuses upon woman's role as helper, an argument can be made either for the equal perfection of woman and man or for the metaphysical superiority of man.

      Looking first at the material of woman's creation, an argument for her metaphysical superiority can be derived from the second creation account by emphasizing the fact that woman was created from a man's rib, while man was created from dust. The basic tenet of this interpretation is the claim that being created out of a human rib means that woman was created out of more perfect material than was man. Since God formed man from dust, man's body is at a higher degree of development than dust and is thus a more perfect material. if one postulates that the degree of perfection of a being corresponds to the degree of perfection of the material out of which it is created, it follows that woman, formed from a more perfect substance, has more perfection than man. Hence the metaphysical superiority of woman.

      But as we will see in the next section, many theologians reversed this argument. A focus on the material of woman's creation can lead to the opposite conclusion - namely, woman's metaphysical inferiority - if one accepts the belief that the degree of perfection of man's rib is inferior to that of the dust of the earth.

      An argument for man's superiority can be bolstered by emphasizing woman's role. by defining "helper" as a person whose primary function is to serve the needs of another, one can conclude that man is the primary creation. this interpretation is based on the premise that man's being and purpose are independent of woman, whereas woman's being and purpose are dependent upon man. by adding to this conclusion the premise that dependence is a mark of imperfection, man's creation can be argued to be superior to that of woman. this point can also be applied to woman's creation out of man's rib; it can be argued that her existence is dependent upon his, she is a part of man, and thus is less perfect.

      "An alternative analysis advanced by Mieke Bal focuses on the nature of creation in the rib story in support of the conclusion that woman and man were created as equals. Ball argues that there is linguistic evidence for seeing the being initially formed by Jahweh from dust as both sexless and unfinished. Jahweh, deciding that his work was not finished, caused a deep sleep to come upon the being and brought his creation to a higher level of perfection by separating the sexless earth being into two sexually differentiated beings- woman and man. In this interpretation, woman and man are thus created at the same time and in the same way, and should be seen as equals. Bal goes on to argue that the first creation story, does not contradict the second version; rather, the second "provides a specified narration of what events are included in the idea that 'God created them male and female." "

      This argument for the equality of woman and man can also be strengthened by offering an alternative account of the significance of woman's role as helper. Prior to creating woman, God "formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air. . . but for the man there was not found a helper fit for him" (Genesis 2:19-20). Realizing that none of these creatures was suitable for man, god created woman. One could argue that the reason these creatures were unsuitable was because they were infrior to man; to find a helper fit for man, God had to create a being equal to man in all ways. To do so, god formed woman out of man's body so that she would be "bone of his bone, flesh of his flesh," that is, she would possess the same being. This interpretation would contravene the claim that woman's existence is dependent upon man, but his is independt of her. As Ball explains, "the man is, then, not the parent from whom the woman is born. . . but if we stick to these inappropriate family metaphors, rather her brother." Woman would thus be man's equal.

      It should be emphasized that this interpretation is based upon a very different notion of the nature of a helper. In the previous account, a helper is by definition subordinate, and the view of woman as inferior to man arises directly from the connotations attached to the helper role. The second interpretation allows for a helper of equal being. By stressing the notion of a helper who is fit for man, an argument is made for the equal perfection of woman.

      Despite the apparent plausibility of any of the avobe, by far the most prevalent interpretation of the Genesis creation story in the Christian tradition is that of man as metaphysically superior to woman. this was generally supported by the Protestant Reformation. The interpretation of the metaphysical equality of woman and man gained popularity during the Reformation, when both Martin Luther and John Calvin attacked the traditional church view that woman's initial creation was inferior to that of man." pages 7- 10

      Protestant Reformation

      "Martin Luther (1483-1546) was one of the first influential Christian theologians to support the thesis that God initially created woman and man as equals. It is significant that he emphasized the first creation story in order to reject arguments for woman's original inferiority. Luther asserted that Genesis 1:26-27, in which God created both male and female in his own image, is incontestable proof that woman was created as man's equal. "Moses puts the two sexes together and says that God created male and female in order to indicate that Eve, too, was made by God as a partaker of the divine image and of the divine similitude, likewise of the rule over everything."

      Although Luther's interpretation of the Genesis myth appears to contain very positive image of woman's nature, there is a sharp tension in his writing for Luther accepted the traditional view that woman was by nature different from man. In fact, he was one of the first theologians to advance an "equal but different" thesis. However, his discussion of the differences between woman's and man's natures often involved the claim that man's characteristics are superior to those of woman, thereby weakening his claim of equality. This thesis of "equal but different" gained acceptance after the sixteenth century and, as we will see, the tension found in Luther's writings carried over as well.

      Luther emphasized the first creation story in order to make it clear that woman was not excluded from the "glory of the future life." Apparently, Luther thought that the conclusion that woman is so excluded would be a natural inference. What is revealing is that, rather than indicting the centuries of theologians who preached that woman was inferior, Luther claimed that the inference is to be expected because "woman appear to be a somewhat different being from the man, having different members and a much weaker nature. In other words, Luther feared that the characteristics that distinguish woman from man would lead people to doubt her suitability for salvation. But this would follow only if one believed that woman's characteristics were inferior to those of man. Luther's perception of woman's "difference" thus belies his claim of equality.

      The inconstancy of Luther's position is apparent throughout his discussion of Genesis. he insisted that Eve was "similar to Adam so far as the image of God is concerned, that is in justice, wisdom, and happiness," but in the next breath said "she was nevertheless a woman." Lest the reader misunderstand his point, Luther offered an analogy: "For as the sun is more excellent that the moon (although the moon, too, is a very excellent body), so the woman, although she was a most beautiful work of God, nevertheless is not the equal of the male in glory and prestige." Yet in a later passage, Luther insisted that if Eve had not listened to the serpent and sinned, "she would have been the equal of Adam in all respects." Luther explained that before the fall, "Eve was not like the woman of today; her state was far better and more excellent, and she was in no respect inferior to Adam, whether you count the qualities of the body or those of the mind." Luther wanted to deny Aquinas's view that woman is inferior to man by insisting that, despite her differences, she is man's equal. However, he could not escape the prejudice that the very fact of woman's differences makes her less perfect than man.

      We see then that even Luther, despite his attempt to deny woman's inferiority, placed woman between man and animal in degree of perfection. His protests to the contrary, Luther viewed woman as less perfect than man even before the fall. "Satan's cleverness is perceived also in this, that he attacks the weak part of human nature. Eve the woman, not Adam the man. Although both were created equally righteous, nevertheless Adam had some advantage over Eve. Just as in all the rest of nature the strength of the male surpasses that of the other sex, so also in the perfect nature the male somewhat excelled the female."

      Luther's general position was that woman, although created the equal of man, lost that equality by disobeying God's command to refrain from eating from the tree of knowledge. Luther thus viewed the post-fall Eve and all womankind after her as less perfect than mankind. "For the punishment, that she is now subjected to the man, was imposed on her after sin and because of sin, just as the other hardships and dangers were: travail, pain, and countless other vexations." Since woman is man's equal only in a very limited sense prior to the fall, the loss of perfection resulting from her sin of disobedience serves only to reinforce Luther's view that woman falls between man and animal with respect to being.

      John Calvin (1509-1564) shared Luther's desire to offer a more positive image of woman's nature than that of Augustine or Aquinas. His primary purpose in doing so, however, was to elevate the institution of marriage. Because of this concern, Calvin concentrated on the second story in which woman is created out of man's rib, believing that the common origin of woman and man would serve to make their union more sacred. "But if the two sexes had proceeded from different sources, there would have been occasion either of mutual contempt, or envy, or contentions." God created woman from the rib of man "in order that he might embrace, with greater benevolence, a part of himself." Despite this emphasis on origin from a common source, Calvin, like Luther, did not perceive woman as man's equal. He claimed, for example, that woman was in God's image only in the "second degree." He also argued that even before the fall woman would have been subject to her husband. Man's temporal primacy in the rib version of creation appears to have influenced Calvin to support his metaphysical primacy as well.

      Although both Luther and Calvin attempted to modify the view, central to traditional Christian theology, that woman was created as man's inferior, their theories were affected by the very bias they were trying to deny." pages 12-14

      Nancy Tuana, The Less Noble Sex: Scientific, Religious, and Philosophical Conceptions of Woman's Nature, (Bloomington and Indianapolis, Indiana University Press, 1993)

Return to Women's History Month 2000 Table of Contents

e-mail sunshine@pinn.net