, 95:507 | Cite as

Mary Versus Eve: Paternal Uncertainty and the Christian View of Women

  • Vladimir TumanovEmail author


The Virgin Mary and Eve constitute two opposite sexual poles in the way Christian discourse has approached women since the time of the church fathers. This stems from a predicament faced by the human male throughout hominid evolution, namely, paternal uncertainty. Because the male is potentially always at risk of unwittingly raising the offspring of another male, two (often complementary) male sexual strategies have evolved to counter this genetic threat: mate guarding and promiscuity. The Virgin Mary is the mythological expression of the mate guarding strategy. Mary is an eternal virgin, symbolically allaying all fear of paternal uncertainty. Mary makes it possible for the male psyche to have its reproductive cake and eat it too: she gives birth (so reproduction takes place) and yet requires no mate guarding effort or jealousy. Eve, the inventor of female sexuality, is repeatedly viewed by the church fathers, e.g., Augustine and Origen, as Mary’s opposite. Thus, Eve becomes the embodiment of the whore: both attractive in the context of the promiscuity strategy and repulsive in terms of paternal uncertainty: “Death by Eve, life by Mary” (St. Jerome). The Mary-Eve dichotomy has given a conceptual basis to what is known in psychology as the Madonna-Whore Dichotomy: the tendency to categorize women in terms of two polar opposites. This paper will explore the way mythology reflects biology, i.e., human psychological traits that have evolved over millennia.


Evolutionary psychology History of religion Paternal uncertainty Misogyny Virgin Mary Eve Church fathers Madonna-Whore Dichotomy Approach-avoidance conflict 


  1. Arnesen, I. J. (2009). The romantic world of Puccini: A new critical appraisal of the operas. Jefferson, NC: McFarland and Company.Google Scholar
  2. Ashe, G. (1988). The virgin: Mary’s cult and the re-emergence of the Goddess. London: Arkana.Google Scholar
  3. Baker, R. (2006). Sperm wars. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  4. Barsht, K. A. (2000). Defining the face: Observations on Dostoevsky’s creative process. In C. Kelly & S. Lovell (Eds.), Russian literature, modernism and the visual arts (pp. 23–57). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Baumeister, R. F., & Bushman, B. J. (2008). Social psychology and human nature. Belmont, CA: Thomson.Google Scholar
  6. Bellis, M. A., Hughes, K., Hughes, S., & Ashton, J. R. (2005). Measuring paternal discrepancy and its public health consequences. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 59, 749–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bloch, H. R. (1991). Medieval misogyny and the invention of Western romantic love. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  8. Boccaccio, G. (1972). The Decameron (G. H. Mc William, Trans.). London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  9. Boyce, P. (Ed.). (2001). Mary: The Virgin Mary in the life and writings of John Henry Newman. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.Google Scholar
  10. Brown, N. M., & Amatea, E. S. (2000). Love and intimate relationships: Journeys of the heart. Philadelphia: Brunner and Mazel.Google Scholar
  11. Buss, D. (2000). The dangerous passion. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  12. Buss, D. (2002). Human mate guarding. Neuroendocrinology Letters, 23(Suppl 4), 23–29.Google Scholar
  13. Chapman, G., et al. (1979). Monty Python’s the Life of Brian, Monty Python Scrapbook. New York: Methuen.Google Scholar
  14. Coon, D., & Mitterer, J. O. (2010). Introduction to psychology: Gateways to mind and behavior. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  15. Davidson, R. M. (2009). Flame of Yahweh: Sexuality in the Old Testament. Massachusetts: Peabody Publishing.Google Scholar
  16. Dawkins, R. (2006). The selfish gene. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Elliot, A. J., & Covington, M. V. (2001). Approach and avoidance motivation. Educational Psychology Review, 13(2), 73–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fisher, H. (1992). Anatomy of love: A natural history of mating, marriage, and why we stray. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  19. Freud, S. (1953–1964). In S James (Ed.), Standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud. London: Hogarth Press.Google Scholar
  20. Garber, R. L. R. (2003). Feminine figurae: Representations of gender in religious texts by medieval German women writers 1100–1375. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Garton, J. (1993). Norwegian women’s writing, 1850–1990. London: Athlone Press.Google Scholar
  22. Gerard, H. B., & Ruben, O. (1987). The dynamics of opinion formation. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 20). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  23. Hastings, R. (1975). Nature and reason in the Decameron. Manchester: University of Manchester Press.Google Scholar
  24. Hays, H. R. (1964). The dangerous sex: The myth of feminine evil. New York: Putnams.Google Scholar
  25. Karlsen, C. F. (1987). The devil in the shape of a woman: Witchcraft in colonial New England. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  26. Kerrigan, W. (1996). A theory of female coyness. Texas Studies in Literature and Language, 38.2, 209–214.Google Scholar
  27. Lalumière, M. L., & Kelly, D. S. (2007). The view from the cuckold. Evolutionary Psychology, 5(2), 358–362.Google Scholar
  28. Lüdemann, G. (1998). Virgin birth? The real story of Mary and her son Jesus (B. John, Trans.). Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: Trinity Press International.Google Scholar
  29. Larner, C. (1981). Enemies of God: The witch-hunt in Scotland. London: Chatto and Windus.Google Scholar
  30. Marsh, R. J. (1998). An image of their own: Feminism, revisionism and Russian culture. In M. Rosalind (Ed.), Women and Russian culture: Projections and self-perceptions (pp. 2–41). New York: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
  31. Miller, R. A. (2007). The limits of bodily integrity: Abortion, adultery and rape legislation in a comparative process. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
  32. Mollon, P. (2002). Shame and jealousy: The hidden turmoils. London: Karnac Books.Google Scholar
  33. Morrison, S. (2009). The accommodating serpent and God’s grace in Paradise Lost. Studies in English Literature, 49(1), 173–195.Google Scholar
  34. Panas, H. (1977). The gospel according to Judas (E. H. Marc, Trans.). London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
  35. Ranke-Heinemann, U. (1990). Eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven: Women, sexuality and Catholic Church (H. Peter, Trans.). New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  36. Riddley, M. (1996). The origins of virtue: Human instincts and the evolution of cooperation. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  37. Riddley, M. (2003). The red queen: Sex and evolution of human nature. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  38. Schaberg, J. (1987). The illegitimacy of Jesus: A feminist theological interpretation of the infancy narratives. San Francisco: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  39. Schlichting, G. (1982). Ein Jüdisches Leben Jesu. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr.Google Scholar
  40. Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Tertullian. (1885–1896). On the apparel of women. Sydney Thelwall Transl. In A. Roberts & J. Donaldson (Eds.), The Ante-Nicene fathers (Vol. 4). New York: The Christian Literature Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  42. Westermann, C. (1994). Genesis 1–11: A continental commentary. Minneapolos: Fortress Press.Google Scholar
  43. Wilson, M., & Martin, D. (1992). The man who mistook his wife for a chattel. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind. Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 289–322). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Wohlrab-Sahr, M., Julika, R., et al. (2000). Religion: Soziale Ordnung: Geschlechterordnung. Zur Bedeutung der Unterscheidung von Reinheit und Unreinheit im religiösen Kontext. In I. Lukatus (Ed.), Religion und Geschlechterverhältnis (pp. 279–298). Opaden: Leske + Budrich.Google Scholar
  45. Wright, R. (1994). The moral animal: Evolutionary psychology and everyday life. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Modern Languages and Literatures, UC115University of Western OntarioLondonCanada

Personalised recommendations