Did women also hunt? Yes.
“As much as men”?
No, beyond any shadow of doubt. Stop trying to white wash over history and verifiable evidence to try and push your personal agenda of stoking culture-wars.
Unless we’re talking about tribes where the men took care of the children, the above statement is exaggerated at best and borders on anti-history/anti-anthropology nonsense at worst.
You might as well post that the men spent as much time taking care of the children than the women. And if you can admit that is false for the majority of human history, then you can clearly see how this being false also disqualifies the “women spent as much time hunting” statement.
Again, there is no debate on the fact that many women were great hunters and not just gatherers, but you also can’t deny that most of the women took care of the kids.
Looks like I took the bait, didn’t I…smh lol
Women hunted as much as men. If your masculinity can’t deal with that reality then I would advise therapy.
Yeaaah… the whole “We were matriarchs!” myth…
What if I were to tell you that the word “some” was implied instead of the “all” that you decided was the implication instead?
What “some”? I’m responding to OP and their posted image.
You should probably look up what “implied” means.
The only thing that might predispose women is when they get pregnant. Most forms of hunting don’t require excessive strength. This is not speculation, prehistoric people do not give a shit about your value system or how it imposes itself on science. Animals in animal world be animals.
No, you don’t understand, this is all communist propaganda! /j
My mom would puke at these, even I feel some nausea. It just was such a horrible time to be alive. I wouldn’t wish these times on my worst enemy
Yes, octomom has a baby.
I thought everyone knew this. Tasks based on sex were not so prevalent until high cultures formed and people started settling down instead of being nomadic.
Men definitely did more hunting then woman in most of human history lmao you are insane
prove it
Men are faster and stronger. Men don’t spend a good portion of their lives growing children and breastfeeding them. So more free time to hunt. Men’s eyesight is literally better at picking up motion than woman’s and men have better reflex’s and hand eye coordination. Men outperform woman in almost all aspents of what it takes to be a great hunter back in the early human days.
pretty much every study of these sort of things show that there is very little difference in performance between women and men - maybe on the scale of 5%. There is more difference between members of the group than there is between the genders. so it didn’t really make much difference when it came to deciding who should do what.
ultimately, it doesn’t matter, the difference is so slight that it was basically not noticeable, if it even did exist.
all modern anthropological research demonstrates that women and men pretty much did an equal share of all tasks, including hunting and raising children. if your masculinity can’t handle that fact then I’d recommend therapy.
You really like that therapy line huh. Look there is a reason we have womans and men’s divisions in sports. Men would destroy the woman at almost all sports. If your fragile femininity cannot handle that, I recommend therapy. This has nothing to do with my masculinity and everything to with science and results. Sorry it doesn’t work out the way you want it to. Again. Therapy.
Edit: word
Actually, the history of why women divisions arose in sports is far more nuanced than you seem to believe. The main reasons for doing so were primarily rooted in sexism. Historical records show that women were able to compete with, and win against, men in sporting events during the early middle ages.
Anyways, I see there’s no reasoning with you, so I hope you have a pleasant evening
You can downvote me and science, but wake me up if you come up with an argument disputing the entire field of endocrinology, molecular biology, and the rest of biology by extension. Not to mention archeology and anthropology.
At the very simplest way to understand, you do know the difference between testosterone and estrogen, and their biological mechanisms, correct? Rhetorical.
It’s the anthropology that proves the claim.
Tell us more about your opinions on high school biology and how no woman ever hunted as much as men in her culture.
Now, now, don’t twist the things I said into a flat-out lie to fit your agenda.
Try and stay fact based if you are capable. No need for defamation.
I specifically said in general, the majority. Stop trying to start more culture wars by making false and inflammatory comments.
So you agree with the meme, great.
(I thought) the meme implies all women. Oh I understand your other comment now. My comment is only valid if the meme implied all women, and i had no malicious intent.
If reading as “some”, then yes I fully agree. I guess it depends who is reading it, and I’m assuming it was written that way by design, to get people like us to fight over a misunderstanding.
Sending good vibes🤙
Edit: (I thought)
Tasks based on sex were not so prevalent until high cultures formed…
Like being pregnant and giving birth (as many times as possible), breastfeeding, and raising those same infants while the men are doing tasks that are unfeasible for pregnant breastfeeding women taking care of infants?, like hunting, building shelters and going to war, among other things? (Which some women did, but the majority did not)
Oh, ya ya, for sure. A lot of people in this thread seem to be sharing the same anti-anthropology delusion. Which is very concerning but not surprising in the age of misinformation. More culture-war BS.
Anthropology tends to support the fact that women and men pretty much all had equal share of pretty much every task in the palaeolithic and neolithic eras.
You shouldn’t just reject scientific advances because it goes against what you learned at school. What you learned was wrong. Science adapts based on new evidence. You can too.
Not just nomadic. Many sedentary societies lack strong gender divisions in labor as well.
I grew up in Da Yoop. In my high school, our head cheer leader was an expert bow hunter. This “discovery” is not in any way a surprise to me.
It’s echo-chamber, culture-war nonsense. There’s a reason men are the vast majority of physical jobs, and it’s not because anyone is stopping qualified women from working.
Just as an example, in my personal experience, we rarely received women’s applications to work warehouse or roofing, and even less who met the qualifications of being able to pick up minimum 50lbs (not that heavy, approximately 2x 24’s of beer) on their own.
I’d also like to point out that, while I’m not trying to minimize her impressive achievements, your friend is from modern society, not ancient. She had the privilege of going to school, being a cheerleader and having free time, instead of cranking out babies in the ancient wilderness.
My SO has a theory that if the group of people lived in a harsh environment, ie. having to work for what you had with no guarantee of food or safety, etc, it was common for women to work just as much as men. Such a society needed all hands on deck, so to speak. But, when we start becoming “civilized”, and things started getting made for us, (as opposed to an individual making it themselves.) Women and men start having diverging roles. Essentially, there’s just not enough work, so womens role turns into raising the babies, to fill the time. Eventually, for whatever reason, “civilized” society just forgot about the hard times and assumes women have always been there just to raise babies.
Disclaimer: This is based on absolutely nothing. Maybe some random information that explain that women did “men” jobs too, once. Idk.
I promise you that there remains ‘enough work’ in early sedentary societies. The work, in fact, is endless - moreso than in a hunter-gatherer society, which is more reliant on circumstance than labor.
Divergence of roles seems to be connected to control of social power. As men come to dominate one sphere (typically warfare, since the average woman in the pre-modern period is intermittently disadvantaged in that by several months of pregnancy numerous times throughout her life), that power imbalance is used to strip power from women in other spheres (social, economic, sexual, etc).
This was more my take. I mean, like women just sat there and said, “Whelp, there’s nothing to do. Let’s just take care of the kids.” It’s not some natural evolution. And, for all the people studying the past (in the past) to just be like, “Men hunt, women gather,” is ignoring how women ended up in those roles in the first place. The fact that they needed “evidence” of this is, before comming to that conclusion is…disappointing, but not surprising.
It’s called the neolithic revolution.
In any way all of those are just speculations, it’s very hard to be sure about anything when you go more than 10000 years back in time, all I know is that in school they teach mostly lies
Personally I find it weird that we do generalities about a this population as it is very likely that they had all different cultures on the tribe level.
You’re right in some regard though I still believe taking note of trends is important, don’t you? If most pre-record civilizations we find have behaved and lived in a certain way it could tell us something notable about our past.
First of all it’s not even sure that thousands of years ago there was only primitive tribes around the globe, many finds indicate that on this planet existed civilisations different and more advanced even than are own, check Velikovsky and Graham Hancock he wrote many books about the subject.
Please don’t feed Graham Hancock’s delulus.
What? It seems that lemmy is already full of trolls
many finds indicate that on this planet existed civilisations different and more advanced even than are own
Insane nonsense
check Velikovsky and Graham Hancock he wrote many books about the subject.
Velikovsky: “Russian, Israeli and American author, known for his fringe catastrophist theories, widely considered as pseudoscientific by mainstream scholars” (wiki)
Graham Hancock: “British author who promotes pseudoscientific theories. Hancock aims to erode trust in known facts and archaeological expertise” (wiki)
Definitely not opportunistic sociopaths trying to distort reality to fit their personal agendas. /s
Neither have any qualifications whatsoever in the subject of history or archeology.
many finds indicate that on this planet existed civilisations different and more advanced even than are own
Oh lord.
Graham Hancock
🤭
A fine argument right there!
Uh, the Hollow Earth society completely disproved all your points with the help of the ancient aliens, fam, it came to me in a dream.
Wow you are very clever
Thank you, I sourced it as seriously as the conversation demanded.
That’s why when you see documentaries about tribes that had little to no contact to the outside world, women are often hunting and do the heavy lifting and men are at home raising kids and taking care of the village while the women are out there. I mean i haven’t seen it, but according to this one weird paper they must exist.
Sources?
Which tribes?
they’re being sarcastic, since they find it preposterous that women are people
So what do men have to offer besides being dumber more violent women? I hate my gender so fucking much.
Well for starters the meme is BS, check the other comments. Or just use common sense; there are plenty of traditional tribal societies around today, many of which are well documented. Have you EVER seen a woman from one of those communities hunting big game? I’ve been trying to think of one for the last 5 minutes and I can’t. I’m sure it happens but not a single example comes to mind.
Didnt downvote but ill bite.
Dont self-hate. There’s so many self-proclaimed misogynistic chauvanists to hate.
You offer your humanity. That is unique and not about the gender binary.
Your intrinsic traits mean people are more likely to listen to you.
If you’re into a long form video essay, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBn5VF_On2k
You get to be inclusivity batman
If your up for a punk song https://propagandhi.bandcamp.com/track/refusing-to-be-a-man
Gender is made up. A social construct used to divide, for the purpose of economic imperialism. If youre up for a book:
https://www.publishersweekly.com/9781557100238
Self-love is needed if you’re going to uplift others. Your intentions seem to be in the right place. Meet that with humility, humanity and accountabilty to learn and grow from mistakes and you’ll do fine.
One more thing that feels relevant, a sentiment from a friend:
I think that a lot of people on the left are focused on the idea of forgiveness coming from the people who were wronged, but I think that’s a misguided notion. It’s not my place to seek forgiveness from those I have wronged, and I don’t have any obligation to forgive those who have wronged me. I think that the harsh reality is that we live in an unjust world, where justice only exists if we fight tooth and nail for it, and will it into existence with our choices and actions.
So then if you believe what you’re saying, be a part of the fight to make our grass the greener
🥚
You’re living up to your user name.
You might need to get off the internet for a minute
dont tell me what to do
If you can afford it, you should try to find a therapist. Therapy helps.
I am American so that’s not an option
Would be a nice plot twist, but do you habe any sources for your claim? If this is real I would like to know more
Check out “The Dawn of Everything” by Wengrow and Graeber
Different point of view on your “source”, which is a mass market paperback made to sell and be consumed, not for serious scientific inquiry.
What I find interesting about this article is that it critiques heavily about the first 200 pages, says almost nothing about the next 600, and then says the conclusion is unsatisfactory because it didn’t quote the book the author wrote in 1991. It’s transparently personal.
Academics write books. Get over it.
This author is a crackpot that also went after Chomsky. Chomsky had a hilarious rebuttal from what I remember. He really has a thing for anarchists. I’ll trust these critics more when they do published rebuttals. I’m pretty sure several chapters in this book were published in some journals.
Yeah it’s a summary work that draws on decades of research. Both of these authors are extremely well-published in their respective fields. I’m like a third of the way through Dawn of Everything and it’s just as academic as “Debt” was, and neither are mass-market pulp. But work like this always draws hit pieces because it’s a way for critics to get their name out there.
Yeah, that critic made a career on doing hit pieces. I also find it unconvincing lmao.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10306201/
This paper has a lot of back and forth. Another commenter posted a rebuttal.
Don’t spread it around. It’s a complete fraud of a paper for all we know. Just the fact that it has convincing rebuttals is enough to make you consider it irrelevant.
It’s not a fraud. Science isn’t black and white. Discussing things is a good thing. It’s still peer reviewed and not retracted in a decent journal. Not everyone dismisses it. The authors have responded to some of the criticisms by publishing additional information in the linked “correction” (functions like an attachment added later). Science is a conversation.
No, you’re thinking of philosophy. Philosophy is a discussion. Science is a process. Just the fact that they are being accused of being misleading and outright falsyfyiing evidence is enough to simply ignore their purported results until they can produce a paper that fixes all those problems.
It’s not a discussion whether we can agree on something. The evidence should do the only talking.
I urge everyone to look up the book Invisible Women by Caroline Criado Perez. The cultural patriarchy is crazy.
Nobody questions how archeology is influenced by contemporary culture. When archeologists find a grave and goes “the body is buried with weapons and a shield, therefore it must be a warrior and thus a man. And they still fucking note how it’s weird that this definitely-a-man is smaller than other men from this culture, and his hips are wide, almost like a woman… But he’s a dude, he’s got weapons after all!” smh
I got the audiobook and I couldn’t finish it. I just couldn’t. I felt so much anger.
But what I managed to get through was fantastic. The part about public transport during winter was so eye opening.
Prehistoric humans were persistance hunters; women are about 40% leff efficient compared to men when it comes running, it has to do with center of balance and gait differences related to wider hips and doffering body shapes.
Also, women cant navigate for shit, even of they did run down prey to exhaustion they couldnt find their way back to the tribe.
This study this meme is based on is completely incorrect and should be retracted. Here’s a lay summary of its issues:
And the published article detailing the problems with that study’s issues:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513824000497
I remember reading this simply terrible article in Scientific American; the entire article was based on this fraud of a research paper referred to the meme above.
This paper was a complete fraud, and people just guzzled the cool-aid. He’ll they still do, looking at this thread.
I refuted this article when it was published based on their incredibly biased and cherry picked data sources which were entirely baseless.
I wish more people were willing to apply critical thinking and analysis to such claims. All falsified claims are a setback and detriment to humankind’s comprehension of the universe.
To say it’s “completely incorrect” is an exaggeration at best. The paper you cited is far more nuanced than that.
A bit of an exaggeration, sure. But only a bit. The lay summary of the article I referenced states the following:
Venkataraman et al. find that the paper commits every error that it was possible to make in the paper: leaving out important papers, including irrelevant papers, using duplicate papers, mis-coding their societies, getting the wrong values for “big” versus “small” game, and many others.
“commits every error that it was possible to make in the paper,” and, “completely incorrect,” aren’t very different.
THIS IS A GROUP EFFORT, PEOPLE!
*more than
