I’ve been teaching watercolor but didn’t have any watercolor paintings in my portfolio though I’ve been working with watercolor since early in the year. I’ve also re-discovered computer art after going to a show with a friend. Another artist in the show had some wonderful computer art so I had to try my own.
I don’t know of any such study. But, I can think of two reasons for the increase in C-sections that aren’t related to increasing head size. Speaking of evolution though, Neanderthals had larger heads than moderns do. It is also probable that their pregnancies lasted up to 10 months so the infant was better able to survive the cold. So head size is probably not an indicator of much.
I don’t know of any such study. But, I can think of two reasons for the increase in C-sections that aren’t related to increasing head size.
Speaking of evolution though, Neanderthals had larger heads than moderns do. It is also probable that their pregnancies lasted up to 10 months so the infant was better able to survive the cold. So head size is probably not an indicator of much.
This is a myth. People have always known the link between sex and children.
The myth came about because the first explorers and anthropologists generally men. They spoke with other men. When a 35 year old man asks where do babies come from the informant doesn’t talk about sex, he assumes the anthropologist knows about sex, he tells them the stork stories.
Women might not talk to a man about sex at all.
The earliest women anthropologists also talked to men. It would be improper for a male informant to talk about sex to a foreign woman.
When women began to become anthropologists and talked to women that it was discovered that indigenous women know about sex and childbirth just as they know that the cessation of their periods signaled pregnancy.
High infant mortality certainly wasn’t a new phenomenon in the Renaissance. However, as historian Elise Boulding writes, “women have yet to recover their status lost in the Renaissance” It might be argued that they are gaining on it.
During the Middle Ages women of all classes were more equal to their men than they were during and after the Renaissance.
Women of the crafts-producing class managed the shop while their husbands made product. Women participated in every craft from barrel making, thatching, weaving to brewing beer. For a man to become a master in his craft he had to marry. (A trace of this remains in that the first professional degree is called a bachelor’s – the university being a medieval institution)
A craftsman often married a woman who was a daughter of a member of his guild. Until he married he couldn’t set up his own shop because he wasn’t trained in purchasing, marketing, keeping track of product and cash flow, or supervising production, training and supervising apprentices, serving girls and journeymen. (things we now associate with management)
We know that marriage was important because if a craftsman died his widow could vote in the guild, and run the shop by hiring journeymen and apprentices. But if the craftsman’s wife died and and he didn’t have a daughter, aunt, mother or other female ready to take over her duties he reverted to journeyman status.
Upper class women ran the manors and estates when their husbands were off fighting for the king or on a crusade. Women supervised every aspect of the manor economy, waged war, and defended the estate.
Before the invention of the printing press, literacy was largely a matter of class. Upper class women and the daughters of scholars, doctors, lawyers and other educated professionals were taught to read. There were women professors in the University of Milan. There was a medical school ran by and for Jewish women doctors.
After the invention of the printing press, education was more a matter of gender. Craftspeople who could only afford to educate one child would preferentially educate their son(s) since the shop descended through the male line. Women were expected to ‘marry out’ so it was too expensive to educate them.
In addition, once sons learned to read, and more importantly, do arithmetic, it was easier for them to take over the management of a shop. They could give a person a certain amount of raw material and see that they got the proper amount of finished product – the putting out system – harbinger of capitalism.
Manufacturing and business moved out of the common room, to a room of its own, to a floor of its own, to a building of its own. It was the beginning of capitalism.
This left women identified with the home, the interior, the family. They were no longer seen as equal partners. They were illiterate as were children and spent their time with children and so were seen as childlike. From this came the worship of women as mothers and virgins – they were isolated in their homes and on their pedestals.
So, women’s low status is from an interesting blend of primogeniture (eldest son inheriting) and literacy for common folk. Now, the question is – is it better to be the equal partner of a craftsman in a small craft shop or be unequal, married to a man who is in the process of inventing capitalism, and have money to spend and children to spoil? (Of course this doesn’t take into account all the folk that became permanently poor)
No, it is not true!
The popular image of early of hunter/gatherers is that they are violent people who are ruled by the proverbial dominant male ‘big game’ hunter, but this is not the case.
First, hunting is not an exclusively male activity it is a communal activity for many groups. And women in hunter/gatherer societies, from the Philippines to the Arctic, from Australia to Africa, hunt.
For many groups hunting is a community affair. The Mbuti Pygmies of Zaire net hunt and the pace is so leisurely that old people, children, and nursing mothers take part. Between casts of the nets everyone gets together to share tobacco or fruit that has been gathered, exchange stories, gossip and flirt. And for the most part the meat people eat are things like small antelope that are relatively easy for a woman or child to kill.
Batek women in Indonesia go fishing with their children as a way of entertaining them. I the hill country of India the Nayaka, take leisurely walks with their families along the way they will gather or hunt up small animals, notice what has changed since they passed this way before. Their walks are as much about gathering information about their environment as they are about food.
Second, we would assume that the person who kills the meat owns the meat and therefore receives status for the kill. But among many people it is the owner of the weapon – arrows (!Kung, Pygmies) or blow gun darts (Batek) that own the meat. Arrows and darts are traded amongst people and are often owned by people that stay in camp – old people, nursing mothers, people who are for one reason or another like to stay in camp. It is the owner of the meat is entitled to share out the meat.
Third, we assume that meat is the most valued food. But hunter/gatherers have a more varied diet than even rich western people. The only lack one thing that we have in abundance – sugar. And, like us, they love sugar the most valued food is honey. A child, or a woman, or an old person is as likely to find a bees nest as a man.
For more and for references see: Chapter I – The Original Information Culture – Hunter/Gatherers (full text)
See Questions On Quora
There are many kinds of hunter/gatherers. Woodburn in “Egalitarian Societies” (in) divides them into immediate return and delayed return hunter/gatherers. In immediate return H/G societies gender relations are egalitarian.
Now that doesn’t mean that all people do the same things. But women do hunt, men to take care of babies and most importantly all people have autonomy.
Leacock in “Women’s Status in Egalitarian Society: Implications for Social Evolution” (also in) has pointed out that the measure of egalitarianism is actually autonomy, not similarity. Even in our culture, we don’t want to be the same as our neighbor; we want to have the same opportunity to make our own decisions for our own lives – we want autonomy. She writes:
“Hunter/gatherer women and men make their decisions about their lives with great autonomy and even children have far more autonomy than we would think is proper.”
This is illustrated by Nissa, a !Kung women who went to live with her grandmother when she was about 5 years old. This is far more autonomy that we would allow.
For more please see:from my upcoming book, “Hunter/Gatherers to Digital Natives: Six Information Revolutions.
As Stephen Tempest says, "The Catholic Church was the only institution with a relatively stable and rational system of administration at all levels."
This is a major factor explaining the amazing wealth of the West. The other is that the Roman Catholic Church had the right of direct taxation – the tithe – which made them independent of any secular power.
This was a novelty. Since the first kingships, people had been governed by a tri-part elite consisting of the priesthood, the king, and the military. Sometimes one was more dominant and at other times another but they worked together to collect taxes, wage war (internal or external), and mediate with the god(s). The priesthood was usually the controller of education and information, and the recorder of history.
The fall of Rome broke the tripartite elite in the West. The Church was still the controller of information and education. But for the first time in history, the information controller was economically free of the other two elites. As we see in Stephen Tempest’s post, the secular and military were small, disorganized, varied, and local.
The Church, therefore, had a vested interest in the wealth of the commons. It was to the Church’s advantage for farmers to adopt new technologies that would increase their yield per acre, because the church was entitled to 10% of that yield.
The Church actively fostered technology. We see that in the pictures of God and Saints with technology.
We know that many things were invented in the East before they were either invented or discovered by the West. But, in traditionally organized cultures – those ruled by the tri-part elites – inventions were given to the state, or the church, or the military – in short, to the elite. The elite could use them in a way that did not threaten the power of the elite.
In the West, because of the Church’s teaching, individuals used inventions to produce, and sell more, thereby enriching the Church. This all fostered a spirit of individualism that in turn, fostered the scientific and economic growth of the West.
When Gutenberg introduced the press with movable type it didn’t occur to him to give it to the secular ruler. To him it seemed natural to print Bibles and sell them and since there was no such thing as patent law, others soon followed suit paving the way for secular education. Which eventually led to the invention of capitalism, The reformation, the enlightenment, modern science and the world we know today.
But it all started with the Church in the Middle Ages.