Psychology Defined and Its Shift Toward Women

Modern psychology defines itself as the study of human behavior and mental processes. When applied to women, it often focuses on female-specific behavior, experiences, and identity formation, attempting to trace those back to biological, sociocultural, or psychoanalytic origins. A widely accepted secular definition characterizes the psychology of women as “the study of behavior (not excluding male gender-role behavior) mediated by the variable of female sex” (Denmark & Fernandez, 1993). However, this discipline historically emerged not in an unbiased vacuum but was shaped heavily by social, philosophical, and theological perspectives—many of which were unbiblical in origin and approach.

The Historical Distortion of Womanhood

From the early centuries of Church history, women were subjected to a barrage of dehumanizing views by influential theologians and philosophers, many of whom failed to uphold the dignity assigned to women in the inspired Word of God. The misinterpretations began with individuals such as Tertullian, Augustine, and Aquinas.

Tertullian’s statement that woman is “the devil’s gateway” contradicts Genesis 1:27, where it is written, “God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.” Both man and woman bear the image of God. The problem in Tertullian’s view lies not with Scripture, but with his interpretive bias that took Eve’s failure in Genesis 3 and expanded it into an indictment on all women.

Augustine, stating that “the woman herself alone is not the image of God,” shows a doctrinal misstep. Genesis 5:2 states, “He created them male and female, and He blessed them and named them Man in the day when they were created.” The Hebrew Scriptures affirm that woman is equally created in God’s image. Augustine’s failure to apply proper exegesis resulted in a theology that diminished woman’s spiritual standing.

Aquinas claimed that woman is “defective and misbegotten,” attributing her existence to a defect in the male seed. This biological reductionism again flies in the face of the theological truth found in Genesis 2:22, where Jehovah God directly forms woman from man’s rib—not from a defective seed but from a divinely intentional act. The woman is called a “helper suitable” for man (Genesis 2:18), not inferior or defective.

The Misuse of Science and the Brain-Womb Fallacy

Secular scientists of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries attempted to prove women’s intellectual inferiority by comparing brain sizes. This pseudoscience ignored that intelligence is not merely a function of mass but of neurological function and complexity. Psalm 139:14 reminds us that each person is “fearfully and wonderfully made”—a truth that applies equally to male and female.

Likewise, the so-called “brain-womb conflict” claimed women could not engage in intellectual pursuits without risking sterility. This is a materialist fallacy rooted in ignorance of human physiology and a worldview devoid of a biblical anthropology. Scripture makes no such claim. Proverbs 31 showcases a woman who is industrious, wise, and discerning, capable of managing a household and engaging in commerce.

Freud’s Psychoanalysis and Its Moral Bankruptcy

Freud’s theories were developed from a secular and godless worldview. His assertion that women suffer from “penis envy” and develop inferior superegos is not only unscientific but fundamentally incompatible with a biblical view of moral development. Proverbs 1:7 states, “The fear of Jehovah is the beginning of knowledge,” not phallic identification.

Freud’s claim that women are more emotionally centered and less ethically developed misrepresents the biblical reality that both men and women are moral agents accountable to God. Romans 2:15 indicates that the law is written on the hearts of all, not just males.

His psychology of women casts femininity as passive, dependent, and in need of male moral guidance—an affront to women such as Deborah (Judges 4–5), who led Israel, and Priscilla (Acts 18:26), who instructed Apollos. Biblical womanhood is active, wise, and dignified—not secondary in moral capacity.

Early Women Psychologists and the Educational Barrier

Despite the pervasive discrimination, early women psychologists like Mary Whiton Calkins and Margaret Floy Washburn made significant contributions. However, these were not recognized due to the dominant secular and often misogynistic academic culture. Yet, it must be emphasized that their success, while commendable, does not validate secular psychology as a whole. What it does underscore is that the imago Dei is present in all, enabling both men and women to excel when provided opportunity.

Current Psychological Themes and Methodological Bias

Modern psychology’s approach to women often includes two conflicting biases: alpha (exaggerating differences) and beta (minimizing them). Both approaches have significant theological and methodological shortcomings.

The alpha bias, which celebrates femininity as distinct and emphasizes care and relationality, may seem biblical on the surface, but risks essentialism that contradicts individual variability acknowledged in Scripture (Galatians 3:28). On the other hand, the beta bias undermines genuine differences rooted in God’s design (1 Peter 3:7) and attempts to level distinctions God instituted for His purposes.

The proper biblical balance acknowledges distinct roles and functions without affirming inequality in value or dignity. Titus 2:3–5 and Ephesians 5:22–33 give instruction regarding different roles without suggesting intellectual or moral inferiority.

Gender Identity and Scriptural Anthropology

Modern theories such as gender schema theory and feminist psychoanalysis misunderstand the nature of personhood. Chodorow’s idea that gender identity is shaped by early relational experiences and reinforced by social constructs dismisses God’s sovereign creative order. Genesis 1:27 is clear that God created human beings male and female from the beginning.

The claim that girls remain attached to the mother and boys break off to become autonomous is sociological observation, not divine ordinance. The danger of these theories lies in their detachment from Scripture. True identity is found in relationship to God, not merely in gender roles. Psalm 8:5 teaches that man—male and female—is crowned with glory and honor.

Gender schema theory likewise asserts that societal norms instill gender behavior. While it is true that social conditioning influences children, it is incorrect to assert that all gender distinctions are the result of conditioning. Deuteronomy 22:5 forbids cross-dressing, clearly implying that gender identity is not fluid but divinely appointed.

The Psychology of Women from a Biblical View

Biblical psychology affirms that men and women are created equal in value but distinct in function. Women are not moral inferiors, emotionally weaker, or intellectually deficient. Scripture honors the role of women in family, church, and society—though it maintains distinctions. Women are to be mothers (1 Timothy 5:14), teachers of younger women (Titus 2:4), and supporters of ministry (Romans 16:1–2).

Understanding the psychology of women requires a return to Scripture as the highest authority. Any psychological system that devalues biblical roles or imposes man-made limitations is to be rejected. The Proverbs 31 woman is intelligent, industrious, spiritually mature, and worthy of praise—offering the most accurate psychological portrait of a godly woman.

You May Also Enjoy

What Practical Counsel Does the Bible Offer on Sexual Relationships?

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS