Why were women made weaker than men?

Resources.
Males are larger and stronger to take on the roles of protection, hunting and construction. All the risky heavy lifting type tasks. However all that requires more food and water to power a male. Even when at rest. In fact males need more rest in between heavy lifting to help them grow larger muscles to be able to life those heavier loads.

By being smaller but big enough to bear and care for children, the females do not require as much food, except perhaps when pregnant. They also don't need to spend as many minutes at complete rest provided they don't need to do those heavy lifting tasks.

So the family unit is more efficient, since it only needs enough food and resources to power the different roles in the group.

Apart from the food requirements, there was also the requirement to have some member of the family unit awake at most times. So the family unit which has different roles is more effective and more efficient as a unit than as individuals.

Of course we now have so much technology that physical size is of little relevance. Yet we are now hardwired to want to mate with the opposite sex who have the same physical attributes we have always desired most. Women want men who are larger than them, have resources and exhibit leadership qualities, etc. Men want women who are smaller than them but have large mammary glands, etc. Hence the sexual dimorphism will continue probably until our species becomes extinct.

Women are mentally and emotionally stronger than men

Because Men and Women are meant to be a team!

If an organism is evolving in limited resources, it slowly changes to make the best & most efficient use of those resources given the problems it encounters.

Spending calories keeping women strong and powerful who are NOT defending the family but instead taking care of it is taking calories away from the men who are defending it. If you have a woman defending, she can't be taking care of children.

Indeed, just the ability to create breast milk is a HUGE caloric demand, and that's completely ignoring gestating a child. Why would you have even more calories spent on size and speed if you're not going to use them?

There are other organisms where the female is larger than the male, but in most of them, the male is not used as defense. In some, the male is simply a means of moving sperm around:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceratiidae

No, this is not a comment on masculinity (or femininity). Humans are not Angler fish.

It *IS* a comment on evolution: It will, over eons, maximize the efficiency of its creatures. Any creature that is more efficient (all other things being equal) has an advantage over its competition. Hominids that spent their calories making those that defended the family bigger and stronger while spending the calories on those who gestated on gestation and breast milk ... rather than trying to make them equal in all things ... those hominids simply survived more often to the next generation.

We don't live on the plains of Africa any more and there is absolutely no doubt that that will effect our future evolution.

It connected with evolution, connected with gradual development and change of muscular men than to a sudden violent change, according to evolutionary theory.

Try pushing a watermelon out of your penis.

Disagree.

They are a team, designed to raise their lids. You don't need both to have the same strength, only one.

You seem to think that evolutionary changes happened based on what is fair, it did not.

cause thats the way god nnade us, take that up with hinn