Does Recent Scientific Research Overturn The Claims Of Radical Feminism And Support The Biblical Norms Of Human Sexuality? -- By: Robert D. Culver
Journal: Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
Volume: JETS 30:1 (Mar 1987)
Article: Does Recent Scientific Research Overturn The Claims Of Radical Feminism And Support The Biblical Norms Of Human Sexuality?
Author: Robert D. Culver
JETS 30:1 (March 1987) p. 39
Does Recent Scientific Research Overturn The Claims Of Radical Feminism And Support The Biblical Norms Of Human Sexuality?
Only recently have I become aware of the enormous scientific literature on the subject of biological causes for differences in normal behavior of male and female human beings. The subject itself has been stimulated in part by the feminist movement of the past twenty years. Hundreds of articles, research abstracts and summaries are now available. Much of it is readable by nonspecialists. The summaries of even technical articles are understandable to all industrious investigators. The sources consulted in preparation for this essay include reports of primary researches in biological anthropology, psychobiology, social psychology, genetics and social anthropology, summaries and analyses of large numbers of researches on aspects of the disciplines, and books covering the whole subject of biological causes of human behavior. This literature cites hundreds of literary sources.
I. Observed Common Sexual Roles Across Cultures
Beatrix A. Hamburg, director of the child psychiatry clinic at Stanford University School of Medicine, states:
There has been remarkable similarity in fundamental cultural patterns across human societies. Cross-cultural differences reflect not basic divergence but rather the influence of learning and environment on the expression of basic biologic heritage.
To date, the most comprehensive review and analysis of cross-cultural data on sex role behavior … reported on data from many anthropologists and covered over 600 societies in terms of male-female division of labor, ascription of social status, patterns of interpersonal behavior, and definitions of gender identity. On the basis of the available data he concludes that, although the behavioristic details are not universal, there are modal patterns of sex-role typing and behaviors that are strikingly widespread. The prevalent finding is that males are more sexually active, more dominant, more deferred to, less responsible, less nurturant, and less emotionally expressive than females. Women almost universally were given child-rearing roles. Division of labor by sexes was also almost universal. In general, male occupations tended to involve behavior that was strenuous, cooperative, and tended to require long periods of travel … The making of tools and weapons appears to be an activity that is assumed by men because of their direct relationship with activities defined as masculine. Women have major responsibility for gathering fuel, water and foods. They manufacture and
*Robert Culver, lecturer and author, lives in Houston, Minnesota.
JETS 30:1 (March 1987) p. 40
Click here to subscribe