Archaeological evidence shatters the myth of men as hunters and women as gatherers
Archaeological evidence shatters the myth of men as hunters and women as gatherers
Analysis of data from dozens of foraging societies around the world shows that women hunt in at least 79% of these societies, opposing the widespread belief that men exclusively hunt and women exclusively gather. Abigail Anderson of Seattle Pacific University, US, and colleagues presented these find...
Analysis of mounting archaeological evidence from across human history and prehistory is challenging the widespread belief that men exclusively hunt and women exclusively gather.
Analysis of data from dozens of foraging societies around the world shows that women hunt in at least 79% of these societies, opposing long-held perceptions about gender roles in foraging societies.
Gender stereotypes have influenced previous archaeological studies, with, for instance, some researchers reluctant to interpret objects buried with women as hunting tools.
There is a call for reevaluation of such evidence and caution against misapplying the idea of men as hunters and women as gatherers in future research.
I fucking knew it. People have this idea that human roles are defined by biology. No, they are defined by competition. When we compete against the environment, being 20% weaker or smaller doesn't matter; you can throw a spear just as fine as the biggest person. When we compete against each other, being 1% stronger is a gigantic, monumental advantage.
This nonsense about gender roles is from lampooning nobility post-enlightenment. Us peasants have always just did what needed to be done.
They are certainly influenced by biology however. T is a hell of a drug.
Gender stereotypes have influenced previous archaeological studies, with, for instance, some researchers reluctant to interpret objects buried with women as hunting tools.
Other ways stereotypes influence arch studies?
Interesting actually, what are some ways stereotypes affect any academic field?
Asking in good faith and with genuine curiousity. I have never thought about things in this way. Don't be a redditor and shoo me for not knowing. Cheers
Well, one good example is the idea that women weren't warriors. For a long time, every time someone opened up a tomb of someone that was buried in the style of a great warrior, with weapons and armor and other such and sundry stuff, they just assumed the skeleton was of a man and didn't even check it.
Going back, turns out, more than a handful were women.
“The dorsal nerves of the clitoris were omitted from every anatomy textbook I could find. They were omitted from every OB/GYN textbook I could find. They were nowhere described in plastic surgery or OB/GYN literature. They were nowhere considered in literature on female genital cosmetic surgery. Surgeons were operating blind to nerves.”
I recommended The Gendered Brain by G. Rippon. It's a history of stereotyped neuroscience.
See original article here -> journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0287101
Shout out to Emma Stone's character in The Croods for mirroring this before it was even acknowledged.
Wasn’t that debunked a long time ago?
If ancient hunter gatherers got plant material from Digesta, then this line of roles will be even more blury.