Again you accuse me of thinking illogically, without having possession of the facts yourself!
"Darwin was, after all, a man of his time, class and society. True, he was committed to a monogenic, rather than the prevailing polygenic, view of human origins, but he still divided humanity into distinct races according to differences in skin, eye or hair colour. He was also convinced that evolution was progressive, and that the white races—especially the Europeans—were evolutionarily more advanced than the black races, thus establishing race differences and a racial hierarchy. Darwin's views on gender, too, were utterly conventional. He stated that the result of sexual selection is for men to be, “more courageous, pugnacious and energetic than woman [with] a more inventive genius. His brain is absolutely larger [...] the formation of her skull is said to be intermediate between the child and the man” (
Darwin 1871). Although female choice explains sexual selection, it is the males who evolve in order to meet the chosen criteria of strength and power; such nineteenth century differentiation between the sexes was crucial in providing an alleged biological basis for the superiority of the male."
Source:
Darwin, race and gender
This topic is about ID vs Evolution, not sociology, not ethical or legal issues, not about human rights, etc.
And you don’t understand that evolution has nothing to do with men’s or woman’s strengths and weakness, gender inequality or equality, human rights, masters and slavery, human society in general.
All of these are social, ethical, legal and political issues, not related to any ways to Natural Selection.
So I don’t give a bloody damn about the social issues or the politics in Darwin’s days, because it is bloody irrelevant.
Do you bloody understand, BillibardsBall?
Natural Evolution only related to biological changes to the population, due to environmental conditions (eg changes to climates, terrains, if they were living with contacts outside of their region or were they living in isolation, water and food availability, etc), over some period of times (eg times as in numbers of generations than months or years).
Evolution concern with multiple possible and alternative mechanisms, in which population required to adapt and survive and continue to produce descendants better than the ancestors, or don’t adapt and go extinct.
Evolution with passing the traits needed to descendants, via genetics. So it concerns genes, chromosomes and DNA/RNA, etc.
You cannot pass gender or racial equality/inequality or social qualities or dysfunction via genes and DNA.
Beside all this, Evolution isn’t just about humans; it is also about other animals, about plants, bacteria, archaea, etc. What uses animals or trees would have with gender or other social equalities? Does vegetables or fruits consider life as slaves?
All you are doing is trying to change the subjects.
If you want to talk merely about social conditions of humans or the societies concerning Darwin’s time in comparison to the time of the Bible, then create a new thread, BilliardsBall.
Stop wasting my times.
