[12]  Williams’ idea was that sexual reproduction introduced genetic variety in order to enable genes to survive in changing or novel environments. 48-49, 2001. [RETURN TO TEXT], [31]  Zimmer, Carl, Evolution: The Triumph of an Idea, HarperCollins, New York, pp. a kind of “accidental holdover” from the era of single-celled organisms. 14, p. 98. January 2001; ... Dupre´ considers recent attempts to explain gendered difference in human behaviour by an appeal to evolutionary theory, particularly in … A central claim of evolutionary psychology is that the brain (and therefore the mind) evolved to solve problems encountered by our hunter-gatherer ancestors during the upper Pleistocene period over 10,000 years ago. Yet in their volume, Slanted Truths, they stated unequivocally that meiotic sex evolved “520 million years ago.”[45]  How, pray tell, could the bacteria that are supposed to be responsible for the evolution of sex have “stabilized a billion years ago” (as Grass� observed that they did), and then 500 million years after that stabilization, mutate enough to “evolve” the painstaking process of meiosis? He was an invited speaker to the 2003 International Conference on Creationism. Behaviour , … And, in fact, evidence is beginning to mount that perhaps the DNA Repair Hypothesis is itself in need of “repair.”  As Maddox noted: We must not overlook an important fact throughout all of this: These theories valiantly attempt to explain why sex exists now, but they do not explain the origin of sex. Is sex the product of a historical accident or the product of an intelligent Creator? monthName[5] = 'June' Five forces can cause genetic variation and evolution in a population: mutations, natural selection, genetic drift, genetic hitchhiking, and gene flow. monthName[3] = 'April' The origin and maintenance of sex and recombination is not easily explained by natural selection. Gender stratification occurs when gender differences give men greater privilege and power over women, transgender and gender-non-conforming people. One leading theory goes back to the bizarre nature of certain machinery we all carry around in our cells — little engines known as mitochondria that help convert food to energy. It is those very facts—that meiosis allegedly has “evolved” the ability to halve the chromosome number (but only for gametes), and that it actually can provide “unlimited new material”—which make the meiotic process so incredible. lm_year=a.getYear();lm_year=((lm_year<1000)? Evolutionists freely admit that the origin of the sexual process remains one of the most difficult problems in biology. Niles Eldridge, a staunch evolutionist from the American Museum of Natural History, has declared: “Sex occurs in all major groups of life.”[7]. But the change of a single-celled, asexual prokaryote (like a bacterium) into a multi-celled, sexual eukaryote would not be a “magical” process carried out by just a few, well-chosen beneficial mutations (as if nature had the power to “choose” anything!). monthName[6] = 'July' Regeneration is another form of asexual reproduction that allows organisms (e.g. '0':'')+lm_month; F… So to keep mitochondria in check many organisms kill the ones from their mates. The essential idea behind the Lottery Principle is that since sex introduces variability, organisms would have a better chance of producing offspring that will survive if they reproduce a range of types rather than merely more of the same. A single parent is all that is required. [RETURN TO TEXT], [34]  Mayr, Ernst, What Evolution Is, Basic Books, New York, p. 98, 2001. Evolutionists believe that the driving forces behind evolution are natural selection and genetic mutations occurring over lengthy spans of geologic time (see Peter Ward[33]). Evolution by sexual selection is an idea that goes back to Charles Darwin. As Reichenbach and Anderson summarized the issue: It is that “diversity in the species,” according to the principle, which helps an organism maintain its competitive edge in nature’s struggle of “survival of the fittest.”  But the Lottery Principle has fallen on hard times of late. He had little doubt that it explained much about human beings, and modern biologists generally agree. As Carl Zimmer wrote under the title of “Evolution from Within” in his volume, Parasite Rex: “A line of clones might do well enough in a forest, but what if that forest changed over a few centuries to a prairie? And while they seem to be working for us, they have no binding contract to continue to do so. 31, p. 104. [RETURN TO TEXT], [29]  Ridley, Ref. 155-157, 1979. [RETURN TO TEXT], [39]  Cavalli-Sforza, Luigi Luca, Genes, Peoples, and Languages, North Point Press, New York, p. 176, 2000. [RETURN TO TEXT], [38]  Cartwright, John, Ref. [RETURN TO TEXT], [12]  Williams, George C., Sex and Evolution: in the Monographs in Population Biology series, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1975. Evolutionists have practically been forced to concede that there must be “some advantage” to a system as physiologically and energetically complex as sex-as Mark Ridley admitted when he wrote: “...[I]t is highly likely that sex has some advantage, and that the advantage is big. Notice, however, the admission by Margulis and Sagan that “meiosis seems connected with complex cell and tissue differentiation.”  Indeed it does—now! The Tangled Bank Hypothesis suggests that sex evolved in order to prepare offspring for the complicated world around them. Cracraft, Phylogenetic Patterns and the Evolutionary Process: Method and Theory in Comparative Biology, Columbia Universiy Press, New York, p.102, 1980. To understand life before the advent of males and females, you need a universal definition of each: Males produce a smaller sex cell (sperm or pollen) than their female counterparts. monthName[1] = 'February' 31, p. 103. Evolutionary biology is unable to reveal why animals would abandon asexual reproduction in favor of more costly and inefficient sexual reproduction. [RETURN TO TEXT], Brad Harrub is a graduate of Kentucky Wesleyan College, where he earned a B.S. Let's celebrate the natural variety of human existence! [RETURN TO TEXT], [10]  Crow, Ref. How, exactly, did nature accomplish the “invention” of the marvelous process we know as sex? The famous Stanford University geneticist, Luigi Cavalli-Sforza (who is the head of the International Human Genome Project), addressed this fact when he wrote: In addressing the complete ineffectiveness of mutations as an alleged evolutionary mechanism, Dr. Grass� observed: Grass� is not the only prominent evolutionist to take such a view in regard to mutations as an ineffectual driving force for evolution. The highly complex and intricate manner in which the human body reproduces offspring is not a matter of mere chance or a “lucky role of the dice.”  Rather, it is the product of an intelligent Creator. According to scientists, the very first organisms to dare engage in sex were more like Adam and Steve than Adam and Eve. Again, from an evolutionary viewpoint, sex would be considered “absurd.”  But from a design viewpoint, it is nothing short of incredible! added]. ((lm_year<70)?2000:1900):0)+lm_year; In addressing this very issue, Maddox asked quizzically: Exactly our point! Conspicuous viewers must be aware of what the media is presenting to them, and make sure they're not actively participating in a culture of oppression. A single individual cannot evolve alone; evolution is the process of changing the gene frequencies within a gene pool. Quite obviously, if everything remained the same, there would be no evolution. And how can evolution (via natural selection) explain it? [RETURN TO TEXT], [32]  Ridley, Mark, Ref. It is the complexity of this process, and the manner in which it is copied from generation to generation, which practically drove Mark Ridley to distraction in The Cooperative Gene. Currently, Dr. Thompson is the Executive Director of Apologetics Press and editor of Reason & Revelation. Evolutionary theorists ask us to believe that random, chance occurrences brought about this marvelously interdependent process of, first, splitting the genetic information into equal halves, and, second, recombining it through sexual reproduction. From an evolutionary perspective, it is beneficial … But how do evolutionists explain this? We suggest that there is no naturalistic explanation that can account for the origin and maintenance of sex. '0':'')+lm_second; Crow lamented: What is that “purpose”? Why, then, does sex exist? Don’t the asexual organisms ever “need” genetic variety in order to enable genes to survive in changing or novel environments (the Lottery Principle)? If, as evolutionists have argued, there is a materialistic answer for everything, then the question should be answered:  Why sex? degree in biology. First you need to understand the evolution of sexual reproduction, *before* dedicated genders … 14, p. 99. In his book, The Masterpiece of Nature: The Evolution of Genetics and Sexuality, Graham Bell described the dilemma in the following manner: The same year that Bell released his book, well-known evolutionist Philip Kitcher noted: “Despite some ingenious suggestions by orthodox Darwinians, there is no convincing Darwinian history for the emergence of sexual reproduction.”[2]  Evolutionists since have freely admitted that the origin of gender and sexual reproduction still remains one of the most difficult problems in biology (see, for example, Maynard-Smith, 1986, p. 35). Feedback | Neutral mutations (which admittedly do occur) are, as their name implies, “neutral.”  They do not “propel” evolution forward in any significant fashion. The genes coding for immune system proteins evolve considerably faster. Though plus and minus create the equal-sized sex cells, plus mates only with minus and minus with plus. The point of the question is this. 14, p. 97. [RETURN TO TEXT], Male Sperm Cell Attempting to Penetrate Female Egg. The evolution of sex (and its accompanying reproductive capability) is not a favorite topic of discussion in most evolutionary circles, because no matter how many theories evolutionists conjure up (and there are several), they still must surmount the enormous hurdle of explaining the origin of the first fully functional female and the first fully functional male necessary to begin the process. Sexual reproduction requires organisms first to produce, and then maintain, gametes (reproductive cells-i.e., sperm and eggs). Richardson’s course, “HS 138: Sex, Gender, and Evolution,” which she began offering in the spring, forms the core of the website. Yet, as these theories valiantly attempt to explain why sex exists now, they do not explain the origin of sex. Evolution is dependent on change (the English word “evolution” derives from the Latin evolvere, meaning “to unroll, to change”). He concluded: Dr. Thomas’ money is perfectly safe. What to do if you think you qualify for a COVID-19 vaccine — and what to do after you receive it, Amazon, Virginia Mason to offer pop-up COVID-19 vaccine clinic, Coronavirus daily news updates, January 22: What to know today about COVID-19 in the Seattle area, Washington state and the world, Bellevue School District expands in-person learning — and takes teachers union to court, Seattle City Council seeks to require $4 per hour pandemic pay boost for grocery workers. [RETURN TO TEXT], [30]  Cartwright, John, Ref. But that’s another story. One evolutionary theory of gender is mate selection. Differences in sexual behaviour between men and women can be explained by looking at the different roles in child bearing and raising. 88,103,107. [RETURN TO TEXT], [28]  Maddox, Ref. But how did a process as incredibly complex as meiosis ever get started in the first place? As it turns out, the common “survival of the fittest” mentality cannot begin to explain the high cost of first evolving, and then maintaining, the sexual apparatus. To understand life before the advent of males and females, you need a universal definition … And the critical nature of meiosis to life as we know it has been acknowledged (albeit perhaps begrudgingly) even by evolutionists. In his book, The Red Queen,[23] Matt Ridley compared it to what occurs when you photocopy a document, then photocopy the photocopy, and then photocopy that photocopy, etc. At conception, the chromosomes inherited from the sperm are paired with the chromosomes inherited from the egg to give the new organism its full chromosomal complement. [RETURN TO TEXT], [36]  Mayr, Ernst, Ref. lm_second=a.getSeconds();lm_second=((lm_second<10)? [RETURN TO TEXT], [46]  Ackerman, Jennifer, Chance in the House of Fate, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA, pp. [RETURN TO TEXT], [44]  Margulis, Lynn and Dorion Sagan, Slanted Truths: Essays on Gaia, Symbiosis, and Evolution, Springer-Verlag, New York, p. 291, 1997. degree in biology. A spore is a reproductive cell that produces a new organism without fertilization. Why restrict our options? [RETURN TO TEXT], [2]  Bell, Ref. The presentation of women and femininity in history began centuries ago, most influentially with The Book of the City of Ladies (1405) by the French writer Christine de Pisan.Right through the early twentieth century amateur authors writing to support themselves created a rich social history of women and femininity. Deleterious mutations “will be selected against and will be eliminated in due time.”[35]  That, then, leaves beneficial mutations, which, according to evolutionists, are incorporated into the species by natural selection, eventually resulting in new and different organisms. Such pickiness is an enormous paradox, says Laurence Hurst, a biologist at the University of Bath in England. That is to say, they constantly have to “run to try to improve” (and the development of sex would be one way of accomplishing that). Feminist theory uses the conflict approach to examine the reinforcement of gender roles and inequalities, highlighting the role of patriarchy in maintaining the oppression of women. '0':'')+lm_minute; monthName[4] = 'May' Evolutionary biology is unable to reveal why animals would abandon asexual reproduction in favor of more costly and inefficient sexual reproduction. 31, p. 98. In doing so, they offer clues to the mystery of why and how the sexes ever evolved. 2. Sir John Maddox, who served for over twenty-five years as the distinguished editor of Nature, the prestigious journal published by the British Association for the Advancement of Science (and who was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II in 1994 for “multiple contributions to science”), authored an amazing book titled What Remains to be Discovered in which he addressed the topic of the origin of sex, and stated forthrightly: The fact that the advantages of sex “are not obvious” is well known (though perhaps not often discussed) within academia. Evolutionists adhere to the view that the first organisms on Earth were asexual, and thus they believe that, during billions of years of Earth history, asexual organisms experienced numerous beneficial mutations that caused them to evolve into sexual organisms. He is a member of the Society for Neuroscience, and was listed in the 2001-2002 edition of Who’s Who Among Scientists and Researchers. '0':'')+lm_hour; As they move into adulthood, nearly half of these children (or even … In an asexual organism, by definition, any mutation that occurs in one generation will be passed on automatically to the next. According to Margulis and Sagan, bacteria “evolved” in such a fashion as to ultimately be responsible for sexual reproduction. The Evolution of Diversity. [RETURN TO TEXT], [16]  Zimmer, Carl, Ref. Oddly, however, most sexual beings have just two sexes — the loneliest number when it comes to finding a mate. In his 2001 book, Evolution: The Triumph of an Idea, Carl Zimmer admitted: From an evolutionary viewpoint, sex definitely is “an inefficient way to reproduce.”  Think about all the sexual process entails, including the complexity involved in reproducing the information carried within the DNA. In a landmark article published in 1989, Bernstein, Hopf, and Michod suggested that they had discovered the answer: DNA can be damaged in at least two ways. Ernst Mayr, who undeniably ranks as the most eminent evolutionary taxonomist in the world, remarked in his book, What Evolution Is: “Any mutation that induces changes in the phenotype [the outward, physical make-up of an organism-BT/BH] will either be favored or discriminated against by natural selection.... [T]he occurrence of new beneficial mutations is rather rare”[36] [emp. Nothing, in an evolutionary sense, forces organisms to reproduce sexually”[29] [emp. Evidence for the biological approach and its views on gender development. Jealousy seems to be an unique emotion among other negative emotions. If you haven't read Roughgarden's "Evolution's Rainbow" yet, you should. added]. Instead, we are encouraged to make decisions based on our personal strengths, interests, and feelings. We will have more to say about both processes later.]. Smaller parts of this molecule that hold the information for one or more of its functions are known as genes. The site is intended for teachers wanting to bring the issue of Darwin and gender into the classroom. Faye Flam’s Carnal Knowledge column appears Sundays in The Seattle Times. Genderrefers to the concepts o masculine and feminine whereas sex is the biological fact of being a male or female. monthName = new Array(12) [RETURN TO TEXT], [45]  Margulis, Lynn and Dorion Sagan, Ref. It suggests that sex would be favored by a variable environment, yet a close inspection of the global distribution of sex reveals that where environments are stable (such as in the tropics), sexual reproduction is most common. and Ph.D. degrees in microbiology. What scientists find puzzling is that most of them still use a system of two sexes — in their case plus and minus rather than male and female. There is more to the problem of the origin of sex, however, than “just” the fact of rare, beneficial mutations and their much-more-frequent cousins, the harmful, deleterious mutations. In certain lower forms of animals (e.g., hydra), and in yeasts, budding is a common form of asexual reproduction as a small protuberance on the surface of the parent cell increases in size until a wall forms to separate the new individual (the bud) from the parent. Links | Books lm_day=a.getDate();lm_day=((lm_day<10)? Yet cells of a newborn have had their clocks “set back.”  Somatic cells die, but the germ line seems to be practically immortal. Additionally, various kinds of incompatibility factors (such as the blood Rh factor between mother and child) pass along more “costs” (some of which can be life threatening) that are automatically inherent in this “expensive” means of reproduction. Killers only mate with non-killers and you end up with two mating types. [RETURN TO TEXT], [26]  Ridley, Mark, Ref. With a bunch of blabber talk, with no real explanation. Stupid question—with a self-evident answer, right? In sexual organisms, problems also can arise in regard to tissue rejection between the mother and the newly formed embryo. monthName[11] = 'December' The current article reviews some of the current theories for why sexual reproduction exists today. How could nature evolve a female member of a species that produces eggs and is internally equipped to nourish a growing embryo, while at the same time evolving a male member that produces motile sperm cells? 31, p. 98. Many single-celled organisms reproduce asexually. Because they carry their own DNA, they can mutate, the scientists say, so you could in theory get a new strain of mitochondria that’s very good at replicating, but not very good for you. There will always be differences between men and women. ANSWER: There are two key aspects about sex that are contrary to the notion of evolution. Michod, The Evolution of Sex: DNA Repair Hypothesis, The Sociobiology of Sexual and Reproductive Strategies, ed. Yet finding and explaining that advantage seems to have eluded our evolutionary colleagues. While at Texas A&M, he served as Coordinator of the Cooperative Education Program in Biomedical Science. He currently serves as the Director of Scientific Information at Apologetics Press, and as associate editor of Reason & Revelation. Gender Role in Evolution . Some organisms do expand their sexual options by having many sexes — 100 for some pond-swimming protozoans. Many organisms, including some fungi, algae and single-celled pond-swimmers, still practice isogamy. Somewhere along this evolutionary path, both males and females were required in order to ensure the procreation that was necessary to further the existence of a particular species. Gender represents an abstract interpretation of sex and this notion is simply a societal construct. added). As the queen said to poor Alice, “Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place.”  Think of it as a “genetics arms race” in which an animal constantly must run the genetic gauntlet of being able to chase its prey, elude predators, and resist infection from disease-causing organisms. As Cartwright put it: But, as Cartwright went on to admit: “This theory is not without its problems and critics.”[25]  One of those problems, expressed by Mark Ridley (no kin to Matt), is: “We do not know for sure that sex exists to purge bad genes.”[26]  No, we certainly do not! In other words, as Cartwright put it:  “It is a sobering thought that the struggle for existence never gets any easier; however well adapted an animal may become, it still has the same chance of extinction as a newly formed species.”[20]  Biologists came to refer to the concept as the Red Queen Hypothesis, named after the character in Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass who took Alice on a lengthy run that actually went nowhere. To examine how gender influences mating preferences, researchers studied 4,764 men and 5,389 women from 33 different countries and 37 different cultures. Gender roles, as an example, exist solely because society as a whole chooses to accept them, but they are perpetuated by the media. [19]  His research suggested that the probability of organisms becoming extinct bears no relationship to how long they already may have survived. As Zimmer described it: The Tangled Bank Hypothesis, however, also has fallen on hard times. We would like to discuss each briefly. monthName[2] = 'March' In their study, they found that the gender differences exist even across cultures, which supports the idea of an evolutionary theory of jealousy. A very large number of people do not believe this, which is something that keeps evolution in the news. This apparent mismatch of biological sex and gender identity can lead to severe gender dysphoria. 5, p. 60. document.write(lm_day+' '+monthName[lm_month-1]+' '+lm_year); Yet there is an even more important question than why sex exists. There is the added problem related to the two different types of cell division we mentioned earlier-mitosis and meiosis. When pressed to answer questions such as, “Where did males and females actually come from?,” “What is the evolutionary origin of sex?,” evolutionists become silent. [RETURN TO TEXT], [49]  Hoffman, Banesh, Albert Einstein, New American Library, p. 73. Research shows that females and males – including girls and boys, as well as women and men – have many psychological differences. 3, p. 254. What (or, better yet, Who) “intricately connected it with complex cell and tissue differentiation”? monthName[9] = 'October' 15, pp. [RETURN TO TEXT], [43]  Mayr, Ernst, Ref. How can “old” people produce “young” babies? As they have struggled to explain the existence of sexual reproduction in nature, evolutionists have suggested four different (and sometimes contradictory) theories, known in the literature as: (1) the Lottery Principle; (2) the Tangled Bank Hypothesis; (3) the Red Queen Hypothesis; and (4) the DNA Repair Hypothesis. It is one thing to develop a theory or hypothesis to explain something that already exists, but it is entirely another to develop a theory or hypothesis to explain why that something (in this case, sex) does exist. They propagate as your cells divide and, in animals, pass from mothers to offspring through eggs. That’s because sex was invented before heterosexuality — before males or females, for that matter. In fact, quite the opposite would be true. Why is this the case? In a speech presented at Hobart College several years ago, the late Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould spoke out in a somewhat militant fashion about the subject when he said: All of this raises the question:  If mutations are not the cause of evolutionary change, then what is? [RETURN TO TEXT], [7]  Eldredgen Niles and Joel. [RETURN TO TEXT], [35]  Mayr, Ernst, Ref. [RETURN TO TEXT], [13]  Zimmer, Carl, Parasite Rex, The Free Press, New York, p. 163, 2000. With all due respect, there is not an evolutionist on the planet who has been able to come up with an adequate (much less believable) explanation as to how somatic cells reproduce by mitosis (thereby maintaining the species’ standard chromosome number in each cell), while gametes are produced by meiosis—wherein that chromosome number is halved so that, at the union of the male and female gametes during reproduction, the standard number is reinstated. According to scientists, the very first organisms to dare engage in sex were more like Adam and Steve than Adam and Eve. Sexual reproduction, on the other hand, would be like purchasing a small number of tickets, but giving each of them a different number. 43, p. 115. If we all descended from these single-celled creatures, as Margulis and Sagan have suggested, then why was the simple-yet-efficient method of asexual reproduction set aside in favor of sexual reproduction? Read carefully the following scenario, as set forth in Jennifer Ackerman’s 2001 book, Chance in the House of Fate, and as you do, concentrate on the items we have placed in bold print that are intended to draw the reader’s attention to the “just-so” nature of the account being proffered. Exactly how did we arrive at two separate genders-each with its own physiology? In doing so, they offer clues to the mystery of why and how the sexes ever evolved. iology texts illustrate amoebas evolving into intermediate organisms, which then give rise to amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and, eventually, humans. Anyone would be fair game. Perhaps Cartwright summarized the issue well when he said: “There is perhaps no single explanation for the maintenance of sex in the face of severe cost.”[30]  Since he is speaking of a strictly naturalistic explanation, we would agree wholeheartedly. 1. 3, p. 254. Meiosis (from the Greek meaning to split), on the other hand, occurs only in sex cells (i.e., eggs and sperm); during this type of replication, only half of the chromosomal material is copied and passed on. In essence, this means examining the differing reproductive challenges faced by the sexes throughout our species’ history, and linking these with psychological and behavioural characteristics. Our somatic (body) cells age. 14, p. 99. No one has been able to explain—from an evolutionary viewpoint—the origin of sex, the origin of the incredibly complex meiotic process that makes sex possible, or the intricate development of the embryo (which is itself a marvel of design).