Ch. 3 – Ancestors and Neighbors: Social Constructions of Gender at Other Times, Other

Places

Robert Wonser

Man the Hunter Theory

• The club-wielding caveman of pop culture lore may not be accurate.

• We examine:• 1) the archeological record; which includes fossil remains• 2) primatology, especially studies of living nonhuman

primates, such as chimpanzees and bonobos; and• 3) anthropological studies of preindustrial societies which

scientists believe may be very similar to, if not replicas of, the earliest human communities

Bones and Stones: The Archeological Record

• This is a difficult task, we have little fossil record to go on

• More importantly, “behavior leaves no fossils”• The further back we go, the less fossil record we

have• Consequently, “the fossil record available for

study is not a representative sample of the human groups that have inhabited the earth.”

Man the Hunter Myth• The account goes like this:• Sometime between12-28 million years ago, our ancestors were forced from the trees

as the climate became dryer. We adapted to the ground: bipedalism – we began walking on two feet change in our physical structure; the pelvis had to narrow to hold in our guts our brains grew bigger compared to our relative body size offspring were born sooner because they couldn’t remain inside of mothers because of the pelvis issue. Therefore, when children are born they require more time spent with their mothers mothers rear and men go out and hunt since foraging didn’t suffice.

• Hunts were more successful when men banded together led to better communication (language) and tools (weapons for hunting).

• We see the birth of the sexual division of labor—women as caretakers of the home and children and men as breadwinners and protectors—was adaptive; those who conformed to it enjoyed a distinctive advantage for survival.

• Mutually exclusive roles gave rise to male and female personality traits—women grew to be empathetic, nurturing and dependent, men grew to be daring, unemotional, and aggressive.

• Over time these adaptive characteristics were also naturally selected for in the evolutionary process.

So, what’s the problem with the Man the Hunter myth?

• Did you notice that this myth conveniently bears an uncanny resemblance to the traditional, middle-class nuclear family of Western societies?

• Who was/is anthropology dominated by?• As we know, the values and beliefs of our society, as

well as those of specific groups we belong to (anthropologists for instance) can influence or bias our understanding of the world around us.

• Feminists highlight two major criticisms:• Ethnocentrism and androcentrism

Ethnocentrism and Androcentrism

• ethnocentrism means that one views one’s own cultural beliefs and practices as superior to all others.

• Man the Hunter is ethnocentric in 2 ways:• 1) it inaccurately depicts contemporary Western gender relations as universal, both

historically and cross culturally• 2) the argument implies that the contemporary Western model of gender relations is the

only correct or appropriate model because it is natural and adaptive.• Androcentric means male-centered. The theory clearly emphasizes male behavior, with

females being overlooked or at best, portrayed as passive child bearers.• Alternative explanations exist; equally plausible as androcentric versions. For instance,

early technology could have been slings for carrying babies while allowing for gathering of food.

• Gender attribution is the process of linking archeological data (e.g. tools and other artifacts) with males and females.

• Rests on assumptions about what males and females did in prehistory, but these assumptions have often been colored by contemporary stereotypes of appropriate masculine and feminine behavior.

• Careful not to engage in gynecentrism (that is, “woman-centeredness”) in reconstructing history from a feminist perspective

• What does the interpretation of, rather than even the actual, Venus statue in your text tell us about gender norms today?

Our Primate Relatives• Our archeological record is full of gaps • Primatology – research on living, nonhuman primates. we’re very close to chimpanzees

and bonobos (we differentiated about 6 million years ago; a blink of the eye evolutionarily).• Can you anticipate some o the problems with this line of research?• Who does the research? Are they without bias?• There is tremendous variation amongst primates today

– 200 species of primates 40% females are equal to or dominant over males.– Therefore it is possible to cite any particular species for evidence of the particular trait

you’re looking for.• Finally, apes evolutionary past contributes to their present day traits; meaning we’ve evolved

as have present day monkeys and apes.• Notice the similarity to Man the Hunter?• Primate herds were said to be organized into dominance hierarchies and competed fiercely

for resource. • Why did these stereotypes emerge? Based on limited observations of only certain apes.• Most primate groups are matrifocal, group life and social organization center around

mothers.– E.g. even though male chimps may try to intimidate females into mating with them; it is the female who

typically initiates sexual activity with several males who must wait their turn.• Chimps and humans are omnivorous that is, they eat vegetables and meat. Both males and

females acquire food; females usually provide for their offspring; when it is shared, it is governed by age, genealogical relationship, and friendship.

So, apes and us

• What does all this tell us?• Limited due to the problems of generalizing our behavior

and past from contemporary primates as well as numerous primates (with different behavioral patterns).

• At the very least, such research calls into question stereotypes derived from early cursory reviews of small percentage of primate species and highlights the important roles females play in structuring primate societies.

• Many primates live in groups characterized by sociability and cooperation among males and females; which, are also not unknown among contemporary human societies.

Women and Men Elsewhere• Are Western constructions of gender universal?• What did Margaret Mead’s findings show us? She studied 3 tribes in New

Guinea.• She observed cultures in which men were expected to be timid and

nurturing and women were expected to be aggressive and competitive• Every society does have a division of labor based on gender (and age).• However, what is considered men’s work and women's work varies from

culture to culture.– E.G. in some cultures, women build the houses, in most, do the cooking (but

some exceptions).• Very few societies where women participate in metalworking, lumbering and

hunting large land and sea animals although there are some exceptions.• Most agree that men hold a monopoly on the use of physical violence in all

societies.• Considerable evidence that women may behave as aggressively as men,

particularly when competitiveness and verbal abusiveness are included as measures of aggression.

Gender Relations in Contemporary Foraging Societies

• Most like our primitive past (not exactly though)• The foraging society is also referred to as the hunting-gathering

society because its members meet their survival needs by hunting game (and fishing) and by gathering vegetation and other types of food in their surrounding environment.

• Even though it is usually thought that men hunt and women gather; there is in fact consider overlap.

• Six variations:– 1. men hunt, women process the catch; – 2. men hunt, women gather;– 3. men hunt, men and women gather;– 4. men hunt and fish, women hunt and gather;– 5. men and women independently hunt, fish, and gather’– 6. men and women communally hunt and gather.

1. Men hunt, women process the catch

• Ex: the Eskimo • Meat and fish are dietary staples and men are the chief food

providers.• This puts women at a disadvantage relative to me; they are

dependent on men for food as well as for goods obtained through trade with non-Eskimos. men have more power and prestige than women.

• Women are not powerless though, nor is women’s work considered unimportant.

• Women gather as well as make clothes. Think about how important warm clothes are where the Eskimos live!

• “.. The question, ‘Which is better (or more important), a good hunter or a good seamstress?’ is meaningless in Eskimo; both are indispensable”

• Despite all this; this type is the least egalitarian of the foraging societies.

The other Five types• Women in these societies take a much more active role in food

acquisition more equal access to societies’ resources and rewards.

• Ex: the Ju/hoansi have a clear division of labor by sex but it is not rigidly conformed to with men and women sometimes doing each others’ chores.

• Childrearing is viewed as the responsibility of both parents. As children grow up there are few experiences that set one sex apart from the other.

• Childrearing- nonauthoritarian; like their society in general• Aggressive behavior on the part of men is discouraged and they

rarely engage in organized armed conflict.• Although boys are taught from a young age how to kill large

animals, they are not taught to kill other people.• Egalitarian gender relations like the Ju/hoansi are characteristic of

the other types of hunting and gathering societies on our list.

Other types (continued)• One sex is not intrinsically valued over another.• Respect is earned based on his or her contribution to the general well-being of

the group.– E.G. the Aka (type six) who live in the rain forests of Central African

Republic– Work is a collective enterprise and few tasks are exclusively assigned to

one sex– Women, men and children care for infants, forage together for nuts,

vegetation, and caterpillars; and hunt cooperatively.– Aka fathers are more likely to kiss, hug or soothe a fussy infant that they

are holding. Aka fathers hold their infants 5 times more than any other father in other cultures.

– Cooperative interdependence is associated with highly egalitarian gender roles.

• Not limited to foraging societies:• The Vanatinai (island off of mainland Papua New Guinea) are horticultural and

their division of labor and gender relations are egalitarian.• In short, Vanatinai society “offers every adult, regardless of sex or kin group ,

the opportunity of excelling at prestigious activities such as participation in traditional exchange or ritual functions essential to health and prosperity”

Cross Cultural Data indicates:

• 1) contemporary Western constructions of gender are not universal.– Much variation of gender relations cross-culturally and

some are highly egalitarian– Contemporary hunting and gathering societies (if

representative of past cultures) do not support Man the Hunter theory but instead reinforce archeological and primatological data that indicate that at least some of our ancestors lived in groups characterized by cooperation and reciprocity and in which adults (male and female) actively contributed to group survival.

Cross cultural data indicates

• 2) the gendered division of labor does not necessarily produce gender inequality– Key intervening variable: the value placed on a

particular role or task.– Our society: women’s work is less valued; in other

societies women are seen as “essential partners” in the economy and decision making even though they may be responsible for different tasks.

– “many nonclass societies have no problem seeing differentiation without having to translate it into differential worth.”

Cross cultural data indicates:

• 3) women’s capacity to bear children does not automatically exclude them from certain activities because they bear children; nor are men automatically excluded from childrearing because they cannot bear children– In preindustrial societies, childbearing and childrearing does not

isolate mothers the way they do in our society.– The tasks are absorbed into a broader range of people, and

children are more incorporated into public activities. Moreover, motherhood conveys an increase in status, giving women greater say in matters.

– Nonbiological factors—environmental resources, size of the group, the economy, and ideology—play a more significant part in determining what is defined as appropriate “men’s work” and “women’s work” than do biological factors.

Multiple Genders• Gender is not a dichotomous category.• Some societies have three genders, some four.• The berdache of some Asian, South pacific, and North American Indian societies.• Berdaches are individuals who adopt the gender behavior ascribed to members of the

opposite sex. Women can become berdaches but most research focuses on men.• Berdaches lived, worked, and dressed as members of the opposite sex, although

they were often specialists in tasks associated with both sexes.• The Mohave, for instance allowed men and women to cross genders. Boys who

showed a preference for feminine toys and clothing would undergo an initiation ceremony at puberty during which they became alyha. As alyha, they adopted feminine names, painted their faces as women did, performed female tasks, and married en. When they married, alyha pretended to menstruate by cutting their upper thighs.

• A Mohave female who wished to pursue a masculine lifestyle underwent an initiation ceremony to become a hwame.

• Hwame dressed and lived much like men; engaged in hunting, farming, and shamanism (although they weren’t allowed to assume leadership positions or participate in warfare).

• Important to note: neither hwame nor alyha were considered abnormal or deviant within their cultures.

More about Berdaches• Extensive research conducted on Zuni berdaches, called lhamana by this

American Indian nation.• Although they cross-dressed, they are not transvestites or transsexuals

because their cross-dressing was routine, public, and without erotic motives.

• Nor were berdaches necessarily homosexual as we think of sexual orientation.

• There were Zunis who were sexually oriented to the opposite sex, some to the same sex, and still others who were sexually attracted to berdaches.

• Berdaches were not viewed negatively or as deviants because the Zuni’s conception of gender acquisition, which maintains that gender is not born with but develops over one’s lifetime.

• Until age six, children aren't called “boy” or “girl” but simply “child”• Berdaches were not seen as a threat to a rigid gender ideology but as an

affirmation of humanity’s original, pre-gendered unity—representatives of a form of solidarity and wholeness that transcended the division of humans into men and women.

• Assimilation into White society has caused many berdaches shame and to hide this status.

Other genders• Examples of gender crossing include Tahitian culture; among the

Omani Muslims; and the Hijras of India.• Gender as a process rather than fixed category.• Among the Hua of Papua New Guinea, gender is perceived as

changing throughout one's life.• Masculine- high status but weak and vulnerable• Feminine- invulnerable but polluted.• Children are at least partially feminine because mothers pass it onto

their offspring. more children a mother has the less feminine she becomes. after 3 births she is no longer considered polluted.• She can participate in discussions and rituals with men and share

their status and authority but must also observe their diet and sanitation because she is now vulnerable.

• For men, they lose their masculinity gradually by imparting it to boys during growth rituals consequentially becoming more polluted.

• Gender is fluid

Gender, Evolution and Culture

• At first we only had the Man the Hunter theory.• Then we overcorrected and went to a gynecentric view.• In reality, and as the evidence suggests, at least some

human communities were probably cooperative and quite flexible in their social organization.

• Women weren’t passive dependents on men but were active participants and providers

• How did we get from there to where we are now, a society characterized by gender inequality?

• Population growth, increased environmental danger from ecological changes and warfare, the establishment of trade and exchange relations between societies, change from nomadic to sedentary lifestyle and technological advances facilitating surpluses probably all played a role.