Analysis Of Eliza Gamble's Descent Of Man

Male supremacy was a hallmark of western society during the late nineteenth and twentieth century. For much of the Victorian Era, intellectual progress was dedicated towards the justification of the white man’s supremacy. Evolution, imperialism, and social hierarchy were all examined under the lens of already existing societal norms. While revolutionary in its concept, Charles Darwin’s explanation of evolution and the dichotomy of the sexes fit within the overarching notions on man in British Empire. With his scientific justifications in Descent of Man, Charles Darwin seeks to reinforce the dogma of male superiority. With the dawn of the twentieth century, boundaries weakened and women began to gain influence among intellectual circles. This

Gamble first seeks to refute Darwinian perspectives of male superiority. In referencing the “superior degree of development” (Gamble 74) of “female in all the orders of life below mankind” (74), Gamble demonstrates an explicit understanding of Darwin’s rhetoric strategies. By countering Darwin’s argument on the same level of evolutionary science and societal class, Gamble challenges ideals on the essential characteristics of women. Gamble’s intimate understanding of Darwin’s theory sets her as an equal to Darwin. Gamble furthers this response by alluding to Darwin’s own “law of equal transmission of characters to both sexes” (76) in the development of females. Gamble’s use of Darwin’s own argument effectively bolsters her own ethos, a point critical to reaching a society still dominated by males. This parallel structure not only suggests a fallacy in Darwin’s reasoning, but one in the social dogma of male supremacy. However, it is Gamble’s novel point on highlighting those very differences that is crucial to her defense of women. Gamble cites the “distinctive characters” (77) of women including “perception and intuition” (77), along with “greater powers of endurance” (77) as unique traits of women. While aforementioned and subsequently dismissed by Darwin, Gamble’s

While Darwin left the qualities associated with maternity as a given, Gamble describes the results of natural selection in detail. By juxtaposing the “extreme egoism” (86) of males and the “altruism” (86) of females with “the unequal struggle for liberty and justice” (87), Gamble alters the connotations of the qualities of each sex. No longer are men envisioned as physically and mentally superior hunters that provided for families, but instead as tyrannical oppressors in the classic struggle for liberty. Gamble furthers her explanation of male oppression through sexual selection. With this, Gamble turns the connotation of male superiority on its head, suggesting that this supremacy is in fact a societal artifact, not a biological