NationStates Jolt Archive

I know that the title may get a little attention I am doing this purely through an objective view.

In ancient cultures women were actually seen as an important part of society due to the fact they were seen more as birth givers, helped to tend crops, servants of the good(Priestesses included there),and raisers of children. As for men they tended fields, fought in wars, and hunted.

So to that men and women came to viewed as more equals, but with different roles in society.

This is due to the fact that in ancient times there were far higher rates of mortality for both genders during their prime which was due to high rates of women dying giving birth, diseases, and during war.

These overall mortalities rates and gender roles came to cause an imbalance through their own means. Added this helped to generate the need for roles to be made.

These roles came to be that women were kept in the home, for safety, and tended to domestic matters of crops and family.

To that men were the warriors and farmers who did the more dangerous jobs in order to protect their families from enemies and the evils of the outside world.

With all that the roles came to be that women were considered more important to the future in that they were the ones who gave birth and were more valuable to the future, while men were more expendable as long as a few men were able to procreate.

More to come

where did you get this from? did you ask some ancient women what her place in society was?

there is very little to suggest hard and fast gender roles in ancient society. in fact the majority of the evidence points to gender being either unimportant, unrecognised or far more complex than our current western binary concept of gender. there is plenty of evidence too that in many ancient societies one's gender had almost nothing to do with one's biological sex and everything to do with one's choices and wishes regarding one's place in society.

where did you get this from? did you ask some ancient women what her place in society was?

there is very little to suggest hard and fast gender roles in ancient society. in fact the majority of the evidence points to gender being either unimportant, unrecognised or far more complex than our current western binary concept of gender. there is plenty of evidence too that in many ancient societies one's gender had almost nothing to do with one's biological sex and everything to do with one's choices and wishes regarding one's place in society.The voices in my head told me.:D

Yet, in all reality I am doing an analysis of a certain region type in particular, but I am not telling until I am done.

I just have a few minutes, but there are plenty of us still around that know what the woman's place was within our ancient cultures. Gender roles were very egalitarian among most aboriginal peoples, and transgendered, or gay people also had a very important position among us as two-spirited peoples...the law-givers or arbitrators of the community.

There were of course divisions of labour, and not all aboriginal cultures are matrilineal...but women held important roles as leaders, both political and spiritual, and were never considered to be the property of men (nor was the reverse true).

As for gender being unimportant? Hardly. It was important...but gender was not particularly limiting for either males or females.

This really comes down to the specific culture, and just how ancient you want to get. I think the eventual domination of males in most cultures had a lot to do with the rise of standing armies, and the roles that men played in them. Nomadic societies had a higher likelihood of female warriors and leaders. However, once fields needed to be tended, militias more often would be fielded by the half of society that would more likely win in a toe-to-toe slugfest.

Eventually, this military structure, and the male domination of it, would usurp other traditional roles in society. Societies that may have had a strong female leadership role may have lost voice to the power behind the male militias, and the most influential among them.

Mike is right...it depends on the era or stage of development of the culture....in hunter gatherer societies women are the primary food suppliers...

I just have a few minutes, but there are plenty of us still around that know what the woman's place was within our ancient cultures. Gender roles were very egalitarian among most aboriginal peoples, and transgendered, or gay people also had a very important position among us as two-spirited peoples...the law-givers or arbitrators of the community.

There were of course divisions of labour, and not all aboriginal cultures are matrilineal...but women held important roles as leaders, both political and spiritual, and were never considered to be the property of men (nor was the reverse true).

As for gender being unimportant? Hardly. It was important...but gender was not particularly limiting for either males or females.

attitudes to gender are not the same in all aboriginal or ancient societies. some recent interpretations of material evidence uncovered in cyprus and elsewhere in the near east suggest that gender was indeed unimportant, or at least not in the way it dominates our identity in modern society. granted, most of the evidence is from figurines and cave art so any interpretations are going to be purely speculative but the important thing is not to assume characteristics of one society just because they are known in another which shares certain other characteristics.

A womans place is wherever she stands.
If it wasnt, wouldnt that create division by zero and/or nuclear explosions? Cant have two objects occupying the same space, after all.

I know that the title may get a little attention I am doing this purely through an objective view.

In ancient cultures women were actually seen as an important part of society due to the fact they were seen more as birth givers, helped to tend crops, servants of the good(Priestesses included there),and raisers of children. As for men they tended fields, fought in wars, and hunted.

So to that men and women came to viewed as more equals, but with different roles in society.

This is due to the fact that in ancient times there were far higher rates of mortality for both genders during their prime which was due to high rates of women dying giving birth, diseases, and during war.

These overall mortalities rates and gender roles came to cause an imbalance through their own means. Added this helped to generate the need for roles to be made.

These roles came to be that women were kept in the home, for safety, and tended to domestic matters of crops and family.

To that men were the warriors and farmers who did the more dangerous jobs in order to protect their families from enemies and the evils of the outside world.

With all that the roles came to be that women were considered more important to the future in that they were the ones who gave birth and were more valuable to the future, while men were more expendable as long as a few men were able to procreate.

More to come

Not really. Status in most societies comes from jobs. Jobs have traditionally been divided by gender. In pre-agricultural societies, as well as transitional societies, women tended to gather or grow vegetables and men hunted. Their rights were about equal, except in a few cases where there were no plants to harvest and men claimed all the rights. Like Eskimos, whose courtship rituals consisted of grabbing a woman by her belt and, if she resisted, raping her.

When food supplies diminished, men took over whatever means of food production remained. That's why agricultural Europeans thought that farming was men's work, and the hunter/gatherer native Americans they sought to "civilize" refused to do it because they thought it was women's work.

Of course, as men take over all the food production they also take away all the rights, just like the Eskimos. That's why in the modern age, when women can do most the wage earning (modern food producing) work that men do they also earn increasing rights.

Not really. Status in most societies comes from jobs. Jobs have traditionally been divided by gender. In pre-agricultural societies, as well as transitional societies, women tended to gather or grow vegetables and men hunted. Their rights were about equal, except in a few cases where there were no plants to harvest and men claimed all the rights. Like Eskimos, whose courtship rituals consisted of grabbing a woman by her belt and, if she resisted, raping her.

When food supplies diminished, men took over whatever means of food production remained. That's why agricultural Europeans thought that farming was men's work, and the hunter/gatherer native Americans they sought to "civilize" refused to do it because they thought it was women's work.

Of course, as men take over all the food production they also take away all the rights, just like the Eskimos. That's why in the modern age, when women can do most the wage earning (modern food producing) work that men do they also earn increasing rights.

Where are you getting your information from about the Inuit? The Inuit were, and still are in some cases, polyamorous. Women always had a strong choice in who they paired with. Men did not, and do not claim all the rights in Inuit culture.

I am sceptical of anyone who claims that 'separate but equal' has any place in reality. The fact is that whenever two groups are given separate duties, responsibilities and oppurtunities, one set is going to be better than the other.