Men Suck: Sin Entered the World Because Adam Didn't Give a Flip

I've been flummoxed by the hyper-fundie principle of why women are supposed to be subject to men. It has nothing to do with the prooftexted verses they pick out of their favorite Bible passages or the eisegetical reading of the Bible. It is all about their view of The Fall. The claim that a woman deceived the man and caused him to eat the cumquat and thus needs to pay penance until the end of the age.


So, let's assume for arguments sake that everything that was written about the fall of man in the Garden of Eden is factually correct. We have to do that for this argument because a fundie would have it no other way. Of course, even if you came at them with proof from their hallowed, inerrant, infallible, OMG!...you let your Bawble touch the floor!!!!, written magically by the hand of God book, that their arguments are false, they will hang onto the fact that you don't worship the Bible and thus, your proof is biased and ignorant, and can be summarily dismissed.

That being said, I am not writing this for a fundie. I don't care about them. Sure, I want them to change, don't get me wrong, but its the people who are negatively affected by this crap – namely women and children (and men that desire to love women for how God created them) that I write for. My audience, I hope, are those who feel so strongly that the fundie principles are wrong but cannot get past the “fact” that they can seem so right.

These people – patriarchalists, hyper-fundamentalists, chauvinists, devout and proud women, abusive men, manipulative wives, etc. - have perfected their craft and, most importantly, their arguments. The problem for them is that, most of the time, their baloney sausage can be ripped to shreds quite easily. Usually, all it takes is a person on the outside raising one eyebrow, furling the brow irreparably, and uttering a strong “Huh!!!!!?”

Ok. Back to the subject at hand.

In Genesis 2:15, God was giving directions to Adam (Eve had not been created yet) about what he could and couldn't eat. According to God, Adam was allowed to eat from every tree in the garden except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Now, I have no way of knowing what this tree was, but I'm pretty sure it was a a crab apple tree. Crab apples are so delicious that, once you eat one, you have to eat a hundred. Eating a hundred crab apples does a little number to a person's bowels and you learn quickly the knowledge of good and evil, if you catch my drift, but I digress.

Right after God told Adam to not eat the cumquats from the tree, he put him to sleep and made woman from his rib. We won't get into the stupid logic about women being subservient to man because woman came from man. It was just the weird way that God decided to create the two peeps. Any conclusion from that is simply conjecture and is most likely from the ignorant people groups of the early world, trying to make heads or tails about the nature of things. Not to mention that the curse came AFTER the eating of the cumquat and thus, the order of creation to prove roles for the sexes is simply retroactive application and is thus false.

So, the snake comes to Eve and asks her if what God really told them about the naughty tree was correct. He debated with her about the fact that God would kill them if they ate the cumquat, finally convincing her that God didn't really mean that he would kill them but that men and women would know good and evil just like God did. So, Eve, who had not been told directly by God (anyone who says otherwise is not basing their argument on their hallowed book) that the tree was naughty, ate it.

Then, after the debate with the snake (which we see only took up five verses, but I think, in reality, Eve likely debated the slithery vermin for hours, knowing everything I know about women) we get a one liner. “Eve ate, then gave it to Adam, and Adam ate it.”

Really? Adam ate the fruit with no arguments? Why didn't Adam ask Eve why she would eat and then offer it to him? Why didn't Adam require convincing from the snake or Eve that what God actually said wasn't really what He meant? Why was there no protest but just a shoulder shrug and a biting into the juicy flesh?

Eve didn't have to force feed Adam. Adam WASN'T deceived, no matter how you look at it. He was irresponsible, untrustworthy, disobedient, stupid, asinine, and most of all, NOT OFF THE HOOK by any means.

The Bible's narrative is that Adam caused sin to enter into the world. Why doesn't it state that Eve did? Why do women have to mentally flog themselves over the fact that they caused Adam to sin when in fact Eve debated with the snake and Adam didn't give a crap?

Are women smarter than men so the serpent knew he had to convince Eve, and then Adam, the dumb idiot, would just follow?

As you may suspect, there is a thread of sarcasm through all of my questions and rightly so. The fact is, God gave directions to Adam and it is possible Adam told Eve, though we don't know that – just the fact that Eve knew about the order from God. And, with the knowledge, they both ate the fruit. Eve, after losing a debate, and Adam, after – um....well....nothing. He just ate it.

And women need to be hidden in the home doing wifely duties and letting the men lead because they caused the first man to sin?

Both ate. Both sinned. Both are equally at fault for what they did, regardless of how they got there. Eve was just smarter about it. Thus, being that the curse of Adam has been lifted since Christ's sacrifice, BOTH should be subservient to one another, treating each other with the respect, grace, mercy, and tolerance that every individual human being on this earth deserves.

Women. Lose your chains! You are free from guilt! Live as God intended and go out and be successful in everything you put your hand to.

And to the men that preach the slavery of women as being God's proper way and the women that regurgitate it as if it is the right and proper idea, shame on you! Go ahead and stay in your stupid formulaic rut of life, never realizing YOUR fullest potential, or the potential of the blindly accepting followers you control.