Eurekalert.org

It's amazing what can be learned from fossils, skeletons, bones, teeth, artifacts.

"It is still unclear which activities corresponded to women and which ones to men...women may have been responsible for the preparation of furs and the elaboration of garments...  retouching of the edges of stone tools seems to have been a male task.

...specialization of labor by sex of the individuals was probably limited to a few tasks, as it is possible that both men and women participated equally in the hunting of big animals".

...

We have moved from thinking of [Neanderthal people] as little evolved beings, to know that they took care of the sick persons, buried their deceased, ate seafood, and even had different physical features than expected: there were redhead individuals, and with light skin and eyes. So far, we thought that the sexual division of labor was typical of sapiens societies, but apparently that's not true"

Since most of us have DNA from Neanderthal ancestors, this information tells us about a side of our own history, and well as the history of a hominid offshoot. 

Views: 376

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Why would the Neanderthals be different from Cro Magnon in these respects?    Women would be assigned tasks that would allow them to care for the young while completing those necessary tasks.  Maybe, before they got pregnant the first time, they were helping in the hunting, but are you saying this is different than the Cro Magnon did?

I'm really getting tired of this Atheist Nexus site.  When I post something, it gets posted somewhere else.  I just made the above entry, and it only showed the first half of wlhat I tried to save.  So here is the finishing remark.

I think about this aspect almost every time I come to a 4way intersection.  Let me explain:

Since a hunting team needs coordination between the hunters.  Each one has to be able to meld his own actions with those of the other members.  It seems to me that this ability to work with each other as a team effort, has been passed down through males much more pronounced than through the females.

I don't mean this as an insult toward females.  I'm stating it as what I consider an observed fact.  In other words, we can say that the average female is shorter than the average male.  It isn't a put down to state this fact.  I am saying that I think females don't have the inheirent ability to coordinate their actions with others as easy, or as well as men.

If four men come to a 4way intersection, they can almost go through it without any of them coming to a complete stop.  If four women come to the same intersection, they will all come to a complete stop, and then sit there and wonder who is going to proceed first.  As soon as one of them starts out, the other three will all start to enter the intersection at the same time to be next.

The next time you come to a 4 way stop, see if I'm not right in this. 

I think that generally speaking, men are able to coordinate between themselves better than women do, and that this ability has been handed down from actions starting when we begin hunting as a team.

Dunno, I haven't had any of the problems you're describing.  Which browser are you using?

MSN.

This was the first time it cut off part of my entry.  As far as putting it where I want it, it's possible that I'm not using the correct method.  And I'm evidently not the only one that has this problem, because we've had to start using "@Joseph" to make sure everyone knows who we are responding to.

MSN.

Ick.  I assume you mean Internet Explorer?  It does so many things wrong.  Most websites have versions for IE, obviously, since they have to work around its broken crap, but I wouldn't know how well any given site works in IE, since I haven't used it in probably 9 or 10 years, except to download a copy of Firefox or Chrome on a new PC.

The site works beautifully in Chrome, anyway.  That's what I primarily use.

And I'm evidently not the only one that has this problem, because we've had to start using "@Joseph" to make sure everyone knows who we are responding to.

That's mostly for discussions on comment walls, though.  Those don't allow direct responses and message nesting.  In these discussions, you still run into an issue, if you have enough responses nested in.  There's a maximum nesting depth.

One of the alternative methods of dealing with it, once you've hit maximum nesting depth is to just start a new reply off of the main article, linking to the reply that you're responding to and including a bit of quoted material that you're specifically responding to.  There's a bit of elaborate formatting necessary, if you want to be clear, but you get used to it.

Since a hunting team needs coordination between the hunters.  Each one has to be able to meld his own actions with those of the other members.  It seems to me that this ability to work with each other as a team effort, has been passed down through males much more pronounced than through the females.

What do you mean by passed down through?  Do you mean some sort of passing of information from one generation to the next, or are you talking about the passage of genes?  If you're speaking of the training of the next generation to do those jobs that that society has decided that a given person should do, it seems pretty much arbitrary, for whatever the society has decided.

There's a certain level of societal survival that will favor societies that do things a certain way, but that isn't necessarily dependent upon the actual capabilities of each sex.  A society could train both men and women to do the same jobs, putting women in harm's way as much as it does the men.  The men and women could be lost at the same rate and do the job equally well.  Yet, that society might not survive as well as another society that keeps the women in safer jobs, if reproductive capacity is at a premium, rather than maximizing the work output of each individual.

The loss of a male doesn't hurt the reproductive capacity of the society, while the loss of a female does.  Both losses hurt genetic diversity a tiny bit, but the female side of the equation is vastly more important for ensuring the maintenance of a population.

I don't mean this as an insult toward females.  I'm stating it as what I consider an observed fact.  In other words, we can say that the average female is shorter than the average male.  It isn't a put down to state this fact.  I am saying that I think females don't have the inheirent ability to coordinate their actions with others as easy, or as well as men.

The brute force factor is an obvious fact of human physiology, yes.  That is far from universal, though.  Many species have much larger and stronger females.  Many species have the females hunt, rather than the males.

When you're speaking of the inherent ability of women coordinating actions, compared to their male counterparts, though, I think you're flat-out making that up.

Sure, men are usually trained to coordinate better, on average, since boys are encouraged to go out for team sports at a much higher rate than girls are, and men are pushed into military service, while women are actively discouraged.  Both of those activities teach coordination with your teammates.  That isn't what the word "inherent" means, though.

I was talking about passing that trait down through genes.  You might be right in that males spend more time in team sports, and maybe that's the reason, but if you doubt what I say about 4way stops, let me know, and I'll take you to an intersection that is about as busy with female drivers as it is with male drivers.

I agree with everything you said above.

The same applies to driving as with everything else.  I know plenty of shitty male drivers, some dangerously so.  My roommate's step-father is one of those last sort.  He's been in several accidents, and after riding with him driving once, I refuse to do so again.

As for coordination at four-way stop-signs, you're running into the same issue again.  Women have it pressed into their heads from birth, by the entertainment media and their parents, that they're supposed to be driven around by their husband.  You almost always see it in a mixed-couple car: the man driving.

That has an impact on the development of skills.  Coordination isn't solely genetic, even though there is a genetic component.

And again, I can't help but feel that you're falling back on sitcoms and sexist jokes, for your evidence.  I don't think that reality would bear out your proposition, to nearly the degree that you think it would, and you'd still have to control for differences in upbringing, somehow.

You'd need an isolated testing facility, not the real world.  And trying to control for upbringing, to truly gauge inherent ability would be a complete freaking nightmare.

 I know plenty of shitty male drivers, some dangerously so.  My roommate's step-father is one of those last sort.  He's been in several accidents, and after riding with him driving once, I refuse to do so again.

I think I said, "generally speaking".  My wife thinks I'm a shitty driver.  I probably am since I always exceed the speed limit, except in residential areas.

You did bring in some things that have a bearing on the subject, and that I hadn't thought of.

Well, going above the speed limit is just a good idea, around here.  10 over on the highway is standard, and the occasional car going below the speed limit causes a hazard, as people swerve around.  But this guy is just ...

He always hits his brakes at the last possible second ... often past the last possible second, judging from the accident reports.  The guy has no idea where the right side of his car is, and he doesn't understand the capabilities of his vehicles as well as he thinks he does, nor comprehends what his driving feels like to everyone else in the car.

You can't be anywhere near as bad as this guy is.

I'm probably a bit above average on skill and spacial awareness in general.  My primary vehicle is a Kawasaki Ninja, so I'm used to assuming that any given person on the road isn't aware of my presence and is about to do the dumbest possible thing.  It's a good mental state to stay in, when you're on a bike.

You're not really thinking this through, Donald.  

 Women would be assigned tasks that...

So the big white boss is speaking and dividing the jobs? We all know that women have always been the ones who organize and multitask in groups while the men stand by and pretend that they are bosses.

Your own intersection example shows that women are more aware of others and that they take their time to coordinate their actions.

And women are taught to be more passive, too.  That has to have some kind of effect, on average, on their behavior in the proposed four-way-stop scenario.

RSS

About

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

Nexus on Social Media:

© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service