Who Came First? - Female or Male?

In the quest to understand the whole spectrum of creation we have to begin to question ourselves on who came first the female or the male?
In most religions it is always said that the Creator was a man who then created man in his likeness and then took from man and made woman.
Although a Creator will never be able to proven or disproven but should be looked to as a form of central power for each person individually when exploring the unknown the simple fact that men have nipples just like the female makes me seriously doubt that the Creator was of male origin because everything that I have read regarding religion states that the male deity created perfectly.
But if a male deity created humans so perfectly then why did he give men nipples? Nipples serve no purpose for the human male what-so-ever. But on the female they are meant to deliver nutrition the young. So with this absolute proof that can be seen everyday on the human male and female this evidence leads me to believe that a male deity did not create life as we know it but an A-sexual deity would have been responsible for our creation based on how religion defines a perfect creation. Humans and their ape like relatives are the only mammals on Earth where both the male and female have nipples. This is also able to be proven just by comparing other male and female species against the human and simian species of planet Earth. This would lead me to one simple evolutionary truth. That humans and simians evolved from an A-sexual ancestor that over time became two distinct genders female and male.

What's your opinion?

 

It's female. And it's not an opinion, it's biology.
Men's nipples are the red herring of life. It's best to ignore them completely.

 

When in doubt, The Good Book prevails:
Man came first.

 

^ This, and it can be demonstrated, much like evolution, by watching the developmental stages that fetuses go through. All babies have gills at one point - and they all start female as default until certain hormones do their work, too.

Well, in *this* context, anyway.

 

God created man.

When God saw what was created, God re-engineered and upgraded the design to create woman.

 

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy says no such thing. In fact, all it says on that subject is, "In the beginning the Universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move."

You should re-read The Good Book.

 

Neither.
Both belong to the same species and thus arrived together.

 

I own all of The Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy Books, including the one written by someone else, after Douglas Adam's death, what was it called? And Another Thing! In any event, as far as re-reading it would go, these books do not offer much incentive, as its humour is pretty much one-note, throughout. Every once in a while, I'll flip through it and parts of it, here and there, still get a little titter out of me, but otherwise, it's ... "meh." As far as the Bible would go, I am in the process of reading all of it, having started with "The Book of Genesis." I am up to "The Book of Ruth." So far, it's been a hell of a challenge ...

 

You are dead to me now, but I shall read on.

I have read the Bible dozens of times, front to back, and even in the way it was intended to be read. It doesn't get any less "buh?", though there is lots of blood, gore, incest, rape, prostitution, patricide, infanticide, genocide (a good deal of it with thumbs up from Mr. G Himself!), and straight up "I want to bone your wife" murder. So if you're into that kind of thing, you might really call it a "good" book.

I wouldn't, though.

You're much better off reading Douglas Adams.

 

After I am done reading the entire "Old Testament," I will begin the process of investigating Jewish sites to see how Jews resolve these conflicting aspects of this ancient narrative. If I stop and look up everything now, as I go, I will never get through the whole thing. It is a very difficult read ... but I am confident that these issues can - and will - be resolved, satisfactorally.

 

Oh my, young one, you... good luck.

 

>>SNORT!!!<<

 

Well, When Picard (male) reached his hand into the PrimeOoze, that was the catalyst for life...but Q took him to the PrimeSpot, and we do not really know what Q is, male or female...

...ok, enough of the blaspheming...


...I think Triumphant has it right...

...and has it right!!!...and left...

 

you know....writing....

....like this....

is.... ....rea...

...lly annoying....




....

:P

 

Nope, other mammalian males also have nipples, not just simians. There are a few that don't, like mice or horses, but most do.

No, babies don't have gills. They have pharyngeal arches which look kind of like gills. In mammals they develop into various muscles, bones, and other tissues, and in fish they develop into gills. But again, they're not gills they just look kind of like them.

 

Female. It's just considerate.

 

The chicken came first, obviously.

 

((...snicker))

 

Hi!

...thanks for the kind words, and I will look forward to reading your posts...pretty cool Forum here, and for me at least, so much to learn...see you 'round the Galaxy...

...HIjol

 

Who came first? That's a personal question, don't you think? Kirk would never tell, and he's grabbed plenty of headboards.