I am not an ID enthusiast. As a Roman Catholic I am entirely comfortable to let the science run its course as it explains the created world. If the Intelligent Design's central claims have all a random-evolution explanation, then it does not make evolution any less speculative, but it makes ID failing the Occam razor test, and so, prehaps, it should be reserved for higher levels of academia. As a bystander in this, however, I cannot escape the feeling that bigoted fanaticism is all on the evolutionists' side. I cannot account for it any differently than assuming that it is an anti-religion bias that is driving them, not a search for truth, and so I cannot take the evolutionists at their word.
The woman-first nipple theory is, of course, just as good at explaining male nipples as man-first. Neither has anything to do with evolution and they are not mutually contradictory either, because we only have scriptural knowledge of the order of creation, not the gestational order of development.