Unknown Speaker 00:01 Maybe or less of introductory remarks? Yes. It would certainly be good if possible. It's a pretty big group, but everybody can try. So we happy, yeah. Unknown Speaker 00:38 Well, my background is as an anthropologist, so I'm going to be approaching the subject of sociobiology. Unknown Speaker 00:56 From that point of view, I notice in the list of people who are here that is going around somewhere, that we do cover the whole gamut, as might be expected, of disciplines and of activities and of interest, as far as I can gather from, what where did it get to is on its way around? Yeah, yeah. Yeah, just keep it keep it moving on, sir. Bye, buddy can have a bit of an idea of who else is here. I guess we could go around and introduce ourselves, though, that always is, is you forget later, I think it may be it'd be just as good to introduce yourself when you start to say something. Because at least if you're anything like me, a whole bunch of names, you know, goes in one ear and out the other. So that people would try to remember it introduce themselves, that would probably help. Picking up with the last part of the session. I, I was, as an anthropologist, of course, reacting to what we consider feminine as itself being so culture bound that I was just writing a letter in connection with a woman's commission to the International Congress of the anthropological and ethnological sciences that met in Delhi last December, and had occasion there to meet a great many women from around the world. And we obviously all have a very common sense of interest and purpose. But as far as styles you could call feminine, you know, as an anthropologist, one could only respond to to, to the enormous differences among us, nor what I like to see similarity and style as any basis for, you know, our our sisterhood and our working together. They were, I was particularly impressed by the way that the Indian women were just absolutely tremendous and very winsome. And Polk feminine looking in their beautiful flowing saris, and yet, when they talk is this down to earth business, like boom, boom, boom, and none of this kind of slight, conciliatory, smiling way that we have learned to talk as women in this in our culture, and it just blew my mind. Well, moving, then to the whole question of sociobiology. I do, of course, start from the assumption that there is no particular discernible biological base for any of the behaviors we're involved in, except of course, nursing children having children in the first place. The it's a rather lovely little comment by Captain Cook when he arrives in Tahiti, I think Tahiti, we all think probably is the sine qua non of all the Koch feminine like dry thing. I mean, in our cultural terms, you know, Dorothy Lemoore, and the brass skirts and so on, and all this kind of business and, and cook arrives, and the women meet at the men and women meet him, but the woman, Queen O'Brien meets him, and he gives gifts and she gives gifts and she takes him with her entourage here and there, and he goes through all this and then he says, she was a woman in her 40s. Like most of the women on this island, this is Turkey, like most of the women on this island. She is very masculine. It was such a striking contrast to our view of Tanisha women, our Hollywood and I think those of us that have heard that are familiar with women cross culturally, I know what he meant. She was very straightforward and very businesslike and was not about being, you know, winsome or seductive or conciliatory, or or whatever. Whatever one might To think, as I say, in the dark theme and more tradition, the whole concepts of sociobiology. As you roll were built so strongly in our own cultural stereotypes that it's very hard to see where the science ends and the stereotypes begin. Now in general, sociobiology is said to be fine for the study of animals, but not applicable to humans, when could really discuss the field on the basis of how fun it is for the study of animals, because that is not a statement with which Unknown Speaker 05:44 a great many comparative psychologists agree. And having been educated by the comparative psychologist, Ethel tau, back to the work of another student of ants. Wilson, as you know, is a student of ant society. I had been educated to understand what Chanela and other student events meant, when he said, you simply can't make these kinds of comparisons across different kinds of animals, nevermind animals and humans. That's one area one could talk about. But it's not the one that I'm going to deal with now, but it's something that people might want to bring up and deal with. And some of us will have some data on that. Another area that's involved in sociobiology, as the study of the biological basis of behavior, that's how they define themselves, is the relationship between genes and behavior. And here, we're back on the old familiar ground that has been gone over in relation to theories of racial differences and cultural differences in behavior being due to inborn racial differences and so on where you're talking about, on the one hand, the whole genetic system and what it does and doesn't determine, and on the other hand, behavior and all its complexity, and what is it is referral in any sense to, to biological levels. The anthropologists, I think are united, they're divided in relation to sociobiology, but they're united. Even many of the socio Biological anthropologists would would would agree that what one says about humans is that they inherit the capacity for culture. And some even of the strong socio Biological anthropologists will say you can't say any more than that. Others will say you can, but that that that's an area that they have a range of opinion on. But that is certainly the position of the anthropologists. This, again, is something that we could discuss and talk about, some of you will have data and questions and want to the third level is the one that I would like to pick up on, however, to begin with, and that is the level at which sociobiology, as I already indicated, just picks up on our stereotypes and elevates them to the level of science. And here, by way of opening up that whole topic, I would like to read some sections from the primmer of sociobiology, that I would advise any of you that have not seen it and are really interested in knowing just what sociobiology is all about to get, you can write again, nothing, I wouldn't advise paying for it. They are very eager to send them around. If you just say that you want to teach sociobiology wherever you have stationery. It's David Barasch, sociobiology and behavior. And the with a foreword by Wilson, Edward Wilson and the publisher that you can come up and look at some of these things I brought here laters is Elsevier, which has offices here in New York. Else vi E. R. It's a Holland publisher. Publishing is very cheap in Holland in the Netherlands, but it has offices here in New York, and Barasch, who got a year off. As a matter of fact, we explore his ideas out of the think tank at Stanford last year, is elaborating further on the kind of thinking that he has in this book. And what I'm going to do is read a summary statement of what he says about the relationship between biology and behavior in relation to human sex roles because it really sums up I think, all of the kinds of general statements about males and females that are spin off of sociobiology and that you, you hear on the media and so on. Now Baris doesn't write a behavior specific genes. I'm going to read this because it'll just be quicker than if I start talking. Unknown Speaker 10:28 So I won't ramble. Bearish does not write a behavior specific genes as Wilson does. And Wilson does, as some of you may know, literally talks of conforming genes and aggression, aggression genes of altruistic genes, homosexual genes, he's very, very specific. But he refers to biologically based trends towards cultural behaviors, that he don't want to get too deep into some of this Barasch ignores the problem of how assuming such trends square with the growing knowledge of genetic process of how assuming such trends, squares with the growing knowledge of genetic processes, just a socio biologists largely ignore the profound discussion among geneticists over adaptation itself. That whole concept of adaptation is central to sociobiology. And geneticists at this point, those of you that are geneticists, or know the materials are themselves totally divided over to what extent the whole process of evolution is that adaptive and are not, by the way, most of them, particularly involved are interested in sociobiology. Instead, bearish draws on the familiar gender roles of our culture to make general conjectures. Hope we are going to play, let's pretend and see where it takes us. If the central theorem of sociobiology falls for humans, and the central theorem is, we tend to behave so as to maximize personal inclusive fitness, then what that is all behavior is directed towards passing down more of your genes and the next individual, and this is the central theorem of sociobiology. The Darwinian theory of the individuals struggling or in competition with all other individuals of the species for survival and the more successful individual passing down their genes. This is the central theorem of sociobiology, denuded of some of the further attributes of Darwinism that we can come back and talk about if we want, because Darwin had other things to say too, but for the moment, that that is, how it is how it is placed by socio biologists. So moving back and forth, then between the subjunctive and the declarative mode, embedded guys does this in a very cute fashion. I'm going to string together some of his quotes to windy now bearish then speculates and I'm not going to seek keep saying quote, unquote, quote unquote, because this really is just stringing together various points. Men should be sexual aggressors. While women should be interested in reproductively relevant resources, you see the men are sexual aggressors to spread this firm as widely as possible. The women are interested in reproductively relevant resources because they have all this investment in the in the ovum, and so they are interested in investing in getting that the baby mind matured and born and taken care of. So men are supposed to spread their oath or their sperm as widely as possible while men. Women should be interested in reproductively relevant resources controlled by men and marry up. Women value men see here he slips into the declarative women value men who have the capacity to command respect, see, because I'm going to be able to control more resources. While too much competence and accomplishment by a woman is often threatening to a prospective male partner. This is not a culture bound. This is biologically based you see on a different kind of investment in the sperm and Unknown Speaker 14:37 it is more appropriate from an old man to marry a young woman than vice versa. The double standard, the greater choosing us of women, and pornography aimed at men should follow from the lesser investment and possible outcomes of population as biologically based tendencies. Now somehow rather bearish has prostitution or So following, I guess, to some extent that escaped me, I always have to go back and look it up again to see how he argues it's the right in relation to men but shouldn't fall in relation to women Barasch conduct according to his theory thing, Barasch continues males interact with other adults, since by competing with other males, a man can retain access to his female and also possibly attract additional mates, a line of reasoning that provides further support for the biology of the double standard argument. And he's saying he calls it that the biology and the double standard argument that is his phrase. Also, this also suggests and this is a direct quote again, why women have almost universally found themselves relegated to the nursery. While men derive their greatest satisfaction from their jobs. Men are out looking around to spread their sperm and women in the nursery taking care of the product of the ovum. I mean, this is exactly literally what he means. This is not any kind of exaggeration. And it's built in the book on a lot, by the way plays a distortion of a lot of material on animal behavior that builds up to this distortion and selection. Patra locality and bearish again is the most common living arrangements, since in laws can oversee their investment. Further outcomes of the drive to maximize personal inclusive fitness and this personal inclusive fitness is the biological phrase for passing down more of your sperm or were more of your genes through your sperm or over. Further outcomes to the drive to maximize personal inclusive fitness are the ability to identify cheaters, because a man will want to know whether it's really good or not in the woman and our great concern with the evaluation of each other's character trustworthiness and motives. These things are derived biologically from this desire to pass down more of your sperm, as well as sibling rivalry. Though sibling Unity has elsewhere been argued from the same basis, I mean, because sibling unity after all, that's Wilson's whole kinship hypothesis, you should be more interested in having your brother or sister pass down their genes than just some random person because then they will have more of your genes, you will share some some more of your more of the same genes as yours passed down that is and therefore, according to bearish race, prejudice also as biological base, because you antagonistic to somebody because they have less similar genes to yours than somebody of your own race. Now, it is tempting to catalyze catalogue myriad examples, this is me of contrasting female male relationships. female sexual aggression is covertly recognized in our own culture. That's why he says males should be more aggressive. And you know, we had the old saw she chased her till she he chased her until she caught him i is the way it goes. And everybody knows, females can be perfectly aggressive, sexually. And this is institutionalized as formal female courtship in many cultures. And by the way, a wonderful source on some of the ways in which societies were organized prior to the most recent periods of full colonization and modernization is a book by Edward Westermarck a big three volume, tome, the history of human marriage that has marvelous information about how things were so to speak, in the late 19th century, and where he will say, they used to have this custom, but it's gone now. And of course, it's long gone by now, almost 100 years later. It's really a great source. So the other other similar sources, but it's particularly good. Unknown Speaker 19:12 Now matcher locality is very common among hunter gatherers. This is something that I have worked on myself. It's also common among many horticultural societies. And in these societies, it's very clearly social, and not biological paternity. That's the issue. they phrase it very clearly. In fact, the early missionaries were dismayed by this the full freedom of women to have lovers and the the interest of the men was in having the children they were just very, very specifically and clearly not interested in whether or not they were their own biological children very strongly interested in having and having a children and in such cultures men seek out competent women on his labors they dependent right Part of the literature is full of this competence in the woman is what is valued. In fact, the point is so commonly made, it isn't just beauty, but competence and ability that a man is seeking. However, the ubiquitous phrase tends to that Baris uses renders empirical data such as these irrelevant to the socio biologists to then grants you see, there's a certain cultural overlay, which will constantly get this tendency coming through. Wilson states this himself where he says, we can only work our way around in this case, in this case, he's talking about aggression, our aggression, although undoubtedly there exists techniques by which this aspect of human nature can be gently hobbled in the interest of human welfare. And he goes on Wilson does to talk about sex differences with females less assertive and aggressive and more nurturance than males because of the evolution of these genetic predispositions. You see, that predispositions and they can be overlay. But they they tend to keep coming through. This is the way they are do so in from specific cultures. And when they don't work. They say, Well, sure, yeah. But on the average, on the whole, the norm, et cetera, et cetera. Now, barette Barish writes that adoption is a hangover from the past, because adoption, after all should be contrary to the socio biological principle, that main theorem. In the past, when humanity lived in small groups and orphan were likely to be related to the adopters, you see, that's what he says it's just it's a hangover from that time to how that gets hung over. The human genetic system is interesting. In dealing with that kind of relationship, of course, nobody does. Nobody tries to nor can anybody. Oh, the word genetics, of course, is showing that the things you can carry out at that level at all is familiar with working DNA. As another As another example, of cultural overlay, bearish cites the Eskimo enjoyment of swapping partners, which is contrary to the requirements of male fitness. In this case, he writes, quote, the rigor of the natural environment makes cooperation of greater value than absolute confidence in genetic relatedness. And so therefore, the Eskimo are willing to cooperate and switch going against their socio biological drive to increase their inclusive fitness. Now in this last point, and this is me, writing can bearish himself undermines his whole structure because during 99% of human history, according to ethnographic and archaeological evidence, cooperation, was in greater value than genetic relatedness. The broad sweep of human social history entailed an overall decrease in cooperativeness, and an increase in competitiveness along with the features that are typical of gender roles in our society. And this, of course, is an area in which a number of us have been doing quite a lot of work lately, a book that Monet Chan and I are editing called colonists, women and colonization. anthropological perspectives, is a series of case studies by 12 different people, most of them women, we have a token man, who, who are documenting the ways in which the original sex roles and male female relations were transformed by colonization during the colonial period. And you can just follow historically, the introduction of the double standard and some of the, the definitions of maleness and femaleness and so on, that are Unknown Speaker 23:56 familiar to us. But what Barish does in order to get around this, and since 99% of human history is spent as as hunter gatherers, where cooperation was, was the issue. He what he sort of slurs that over and he says 99% of human history, includes pasture was lived at the level of pastoralism, nomadism hunting, gathering and agricultural lism. He's lumping a whole lot of other societies in there, there were already societies that were involved with class relationships, and double standards and male female inequality and so on. And he knows he's doing and he's tricky about it because he cites Richard Lee and Irving DeVore as man, the hunter on this and in the page he cites it says very clearly 99% We were hunter gatherers, and he just saw the slides in and pastoral nomads, often very male dominated kinds of cultures agriculturalists which is just about everything up to the industrial rebel. Lucien so that he's been pretty sneaky here Unknown Speaker 25:08 okay Unknown Speaker 25:11 I think that at this point then I will quit I said I was only going to talk for 15 minutes and just setting up then this is the socio biological hypothesis then open the floor for for for a real workshop discussion and share information and raise questions and sharpen concepts. This is the is bearish is the whipping boy. And we can work on that for a while and then people who want to bring up you know, other particular areas that they have relation information that they would like to share, or find out more about so on can pick up and we'll see how it goes. Unknown Speaker 26:02 Yeah. Just a clarification, if I understand correctly, this theory or hypothesis only. Unknown Speaker 26:12 Tell us who you are. Unknown Speaker 26:13 These companies are a member of the Association for Women in psychology if I understand it correctly, bearish is hypothesis is that behavior is mediated not through the genes. It's not in the genes, but it's in people's genetic relatedness. That it oh, well, what is the mediation? What is no it is Unknown Speaker 26:46 through the genes but he speaks a predispositions trends. He know what I said. He's very vague. He doesn't speak behavior specific genes the way Millson Well, he's a little vaguer. But he sees trends. And he doesn't really define you know, how these how these trends work. But he really is speaking of genetically determined behavior, yes, as trends as predispositions. But he doesn't say how it's mediated? No, no, no, but neither does Wilson, none of the socio biologists do. Because when you get into the biology of genetic transmission, you're dealing with proteins that determined you know, all sorts of very does, you know, little detailed aspects of how of how they don't chemistry, the body is functioning and to move from that level to the level of behavior is such a huge gap. And nobody has, well, they tried to do with the level of hormones, testosterone, I guess that's the big, that's the big one, males have more testosterone and some more aggressive, that's the only one in relation to the sex related hormones that they've been able to try to get a handle on. But all the other things. Yeah. So yeah, I don't think people need to raise their hands. I think they can just talk, Greg, because now that we're in a circle, we can education, Unknown Speaker 28:07 but sort of understood that there was not only the socio biological approach, but also a very clear cut and feminist. Revision is sociobiology, that starts looking at some of the assumptions that as a sociologist, studies, for example, on this issue of aggression, testosterone, and finds oddly enough, are not high levels Unknown Speaker 28:36 of aggression, but rather high levels of depression Leif Unknown Speaker 28:39 Ostrom Unknown Speaker 28:41 I mean doing experiments of that nature, it seems to me that there there there is, there is indeed a sort of room in this discussion for considering the systematic even this is Unknown Speaker 29:01 where I have found some of this and I refer people this to be answering and talking with each other but I did have one other thing I will throw in the hopper because yeah, maybe maybe people are familiar with the psychology of consciousness by Robert Ornstein, the the editor of sort of human nature, which I think is folding right? So has folded human human being Unknown Speaker 29:30 oh they may be internal human behavior, but it's human nature that I that he's the editor. You mean it's human behavior, this folding and not human nature. i Well, okay, that that we can leave i and this is where he's talking about the split brain. This ties in with a point that you're making Because at a conference in Rutgers last spring, there were some some women very, very eagerly involved, though I don't know as feminist particularly I don't know they have their money in their source of funding and so on was was from very male oriented outfit, but eagerly involved in, in developing the whole notion from the split brains getting ready to associate biological hypothesis. But to tie in with all these things get related, and dealing with what is really feminine, and what is really masculine and, and their, their, their lack of any sense of cross cultural data was discouraging. And to realize, again, you have to each generation go through the same things. When Margaret Mead did years and years ago, though, she's gonna contradict your own self likely, you have to keep going over and over and over it because this woman was talking about the difference between the male and female side, and she is saying, and all of us know when we go home from a party, and we say, oh, you know, how so and so said, doesn't sell what's going on with them? And then your husband says to you, Oh, you didn't say all of that? How do you know all of that, and you as a woman, know all of that, because you're used to thinking situationally in an I guess, style, type. manner and putting it all together where your husband is thinking linearly. And it's just heard concretely what the man said period. And she was putting this data Canvas not socialization, but as biology. And so Orenstein says, close, try the following exercise, close your eyes and attempt to sense each side of your body separately, try to get in touch with the feelings of the left and the right side, their strengths, their weaknesses, when you are finished, open your eyes for a moment and reflect on one of these questions, close your eyes and sense the side of the answer repeat the process with a next question. Which side of you is more feminine? Which is more masculine? Which do you consider the dark side of yourself? Which side is the lighter? Which is the more active which is the more passive? Which side is the more logical which the more intuitive? Which is the more mysterious, which is the more artistic? And yeah, well, the left side tied to the right side of the brain and the right brain being the the the, you know, the left brain being the linear, rational, etcetera, etcetera. And the right thing is the intuitive and so on and so on. Unknown Speaker 32:41 let's equate these traits with one goes. With masculine one set with feminine Oh, absolutely easy to find this feminine is Oh, absolutely. Unknown Speaker 32:52 It just goes on to the right and the left brain and so on. I mean, he's right into the whole the whole right left brain thing. Unknown Speaker 33:01 Man. Watch. It don't ask me I find it difficult to argue that point of view, because they will, I mean, argue on that side of it. Yeah, just speak up and again, reintroduce you so my Unknown Speaker 33:18 name is Evan Morley in New York. I don't know whether this is myth or fact. If it's partly fact, I'd like to know what you think workforces operated to make itself we've always been valued for our small business, our lack of strength relative to the men who are owed it. And I'd like to know how that got going itself in a large group. How it got that way. And I assume genetically, nutrition and genes and all of that, but how why and why conspiracy of men got into the workout like that is Unknown Speaker 34:00 the whole question of so called sexual dimorphism well with some interesting data that have been being analyzed lately, concern the Anatol the, the earliest species of Homo sapiens just preceding our ourselves so to speak, and where you simply don't get sexual dimorphism Neandertal you get pretty even musculature males and females at least they can't find any strong dimorphism so you can say at least in males and females, and one man writing itself was a natural history a little while ago was saying, well, it couldn't come from the women hunting because women don't hunt it's the men that hunt which which is two things wrong with it one honey doesn't give you a heavy musculature. You know, the live lean Bushman hunters and some of you have seen that Phil and the other is of course it had many, many Hunting gathering cultures really do do a lot of hunting. But if the third thing that's wrong with it is, is that most thing, most of the food acquisition or meat acquisition of large game animals, most of what's going on as small game animals, gathering and fishing and so on. But of large game animals, particularly that period would be done by collective hunting of various kinds. That kind of thing the Bushman used to do used to be all over the place in May of North America, in the past, which is digging big holes, and covering them over for animals to fall in, and the caught on spikes at the bottom driving animals over cliffs and building great surrounds. So you can see the men and the women both getting out and digging, and cutting and chopping to build these big surrounds driving the animals into them, and so on this would be what would have been going on and the musculature was fairly, fairly similar. So then the question comes up, okay, well, why don't you get a six division of labor? And what relevance does the SEC's division of labor then have for physical type and for sexual dimorphism. And I brought this book along. So I'll pass it around, because I think it's a it's a nice treat, and very nicely written many females, males, families, biosocial approach by, by a lever with a lot of these these kinds of materials, she feels that you don't begin to get sexual division of labor, until you get the invention of projectile points, that is bows and arrows and spears, because prior to that, honey wouldn't be specialized enough, you wouldn't get enough specialization to make it make any sense. Now, second division of labor allows, it's the first step in specialization and allows you to become a kind of more of an expert in doing something than you would otherwise. And the people I worked with in Canada, the women or the leather workers and the men don't know how to work leather, and the expertise of the women is their, you know, their specialty and leather work and then other Woodworkers. And they're expecting for a piece develops in relation to woodwork. And they, you know, the men do the snowshoe cranes and the women web them with the webbing, this kind of thing and you begin to get to a division of labor cooperative balance there between men and women. Okay, so why Yeah, Unknown Speaker 37:33 sociobiology, biological, Unknown Speaker 37:36 nothing at all. Unknown Speaker 37:38 That came out of this text. I'm a little confused on the rationale for this workshop. To go back to your question. My sense is that we would have thrown this material out a couple of years ago, why are we doing? What it is, and the history is Carol Carlson history in American states. And I'm I came because I wanted to know why suddenly feminists are feeling the need to deal with social understanding Alex Ross, just based on it. Is that the reason we're here? I mean, our feminists are grim women Unknown Speaker 38:20 going back and looking at these materials. Why don't you say, well, you're here and others will say why they're here. I'm here because they asked me. I don't mean to be facetious, but, you know, what are their issues? You know? Why not? Sure. Why not talk to that point? Unknown Speaker 38:39 I don't know. Because I don't know the material. Feels I kind of thought it might be a way of talking about what, if anything of value has been done? It seems like what we're talking about is stuff that has just thrown out. Unknown Speaker 38:53 Well, let me give one quick answer from my point of view, and then and again, open things up and buy. Soon as I've covered all the things I make a second season my desk and shut up more, but it sociobiology broke for me, so to speak with this film sociobiology, doing what comes naturally that actually was just a carryover from an earlier series of films on primal man and I don't know if anybody yet to see the those that were great big, elegantly done special specialty film shown on TV, and why the advertising using high schools and what they did before the socio biological elegance was simply to underwrite the old what stereotypes of aggression and competition and territoriality is essentially human nature and more masculine and feminine because they these concepts, of course, are been around for a long time. And the women's anthropology conference at actually gotta saw the film recorded the film, taped the, the text of the film, and got it around because these things are being fed to the students in high school. And most of us as teachers, we have to deal with them. With our students coming. Coming to class. This is what the sociobiology, doing what comes naturally says the text on Harvard University biologist Robert rivers speaks about the possibility of six determined behavior. Despite the assertions of the Women's Liberation Movement, Dr. Tourist feels that natural selection has been working for centuries, to develop emotional dispositions to match the male's natural physical freedom and the females more vulnerable, childbearing nature. I thought it made me stronger, not weaker, but anthropologist Ervin DeVore discusses the competitive drive for status among males of any species and the more probable survival of the genes of such dominant individuals. Now here's the quote from Trevor's, it's time we started viewing ourselves as having biological, genetic and natural components to our behavior. And that and having said that, these are these we personally have natural components right here, what they said they are, however, is this, the competition and aggression and double standard and that we should start setting up a physical and social world which matches these tendencies. So this is a political statement, sociobiology is a political movement, the, the people who and this passes around to who would have been writing in Boston and elsewhere on, on racism and sexism, and so on, have been pointing this out to science sort of people through and therefore one has to respond and document what's wrong with it. I personally hate always having to take the defensive. And I would prefer to put more of my time in on organizing women than getting involved in these kinds of battles. But as an anthropologist, I get asked to do these things is where I come from I do them but but to personally, I would, I feel that it is a way of just constantly taking our attention away, just particularly this period of developing movement among women and internationally, as well as nationally just take our attention away and get us caught in this kind of thing. Unknown Speaker 42:34 way though, instead of always being in their reactive position, in defensive position, is there a way where a feminist anthropologists and other behavioral sciences could organize to be proactive and to have just come up with their own theory and do their own research? And Unknown Speaker 42:57 yeah, we do that too. The only trouble is their hours and days I always said I think somebody here was someone to say so it seems to Unknown Speaker 43:08 me concerning the history of social and social sciences and how social conservatives in recent history with computers it sort of raises question marks about social science endeavor. You know, what the content conservative social Darwinism after the 60s We have just put the lid on the aspiration to the lives so it'd be a loyal crowd clapping IQs to the lid on this crazy world of aliens who are subjected to maternal instinct and legitimate social science in clubs and other professorships. I have to start saying, yes, and trying to you know, balance the offenders that Unknown Speaker 43:55 they don't you want to introduce yourself, so tortured, Unknown Speaker 44:04 honestly, as a teacher, the School of Library Information Science, which has gotten very interested in these career choices, work and most women mostly work and these are essential, nurturing, teaching stories. That was explained by the last social progressive period of time, the century that it was a natural thing for children is is natural to graduate students. And they feel that those things nature and so a human mother natural law. Unknown Speaker 44:47 I was just writing today about the attitude of the men towards children among the native Canadians and Montina Scobie within my work and the saying, in terms of our culture, you could only call it maternal you know this II He's nurturance you know, men had to be trained out of it. If anything, somebody here had a hand up really Unknown Speaker 45:13 mainly, I think since Jensen's our ratio here differences between resurgence of a hotel back to school, they lie within genetic explanations as race, sex differences. Now, why would you say it is taking place right now, I think, very serious political and social and economic dislocation. And it's a way of combating, really, Unknown Speaker 45:45 reform and showcasing extent Unknown Speaker 45:48 is in the institutions of our society, within the parameters of action programs and education. So I think this has to be you to answer your question, why is there a need is a workshop like this that has to be used in a much larger context of the social and political forces and all that and Alyssa Tillman, Rachel, Unknown Speaker 46:17 and our feminist drawing on these materials Unknown Speaker 46:20 as they're trying to fight against, Unknown Speaker 46:23 it is, but it's quite it's not some kind of using some of those some of those theories, that's sort of misunderstanding I think that I've come to that somehow that part of the tendency among feminists to reassert you know, something explicitly female, whatever, you know, has people have are looking back to so, so well, on logical theory. Unknown Speaker 46:50 Difference, people differ on the language in culture. And the most telling difference is biological, not on the genetic level, but on the invisible and structural logic capacity, and their children are not prepared to decision of a lone woman after having shot. All alone, we've decided not to have children, there will be no human species. We're going to have to address themselves to this back is a political group called the matriarch. Their slogan is, we will nurture most copper. Now, that's perfectly right. It also suggests that we have to look into our history and see if there ever was a time when we in fact, did govern. Because and if even if we didn't, what we should be doing in the future to govern and nurture. I mean, the geneticists that don't say anything to us, but as a biologist is true. What would happen to them if we didn't bear children more than they can? What are the institutions of rate pornography molestation, except to terrorize women to have children? For certain men? I mean, what is it all mean everything is sending one signal that one fact alone that women can have children and men. That has to be the thing that makes sense is not spraying or mysteriousness or saw or light or darkness, or ads or dogs and it has to continue with society that told me to check out your birth. Control. Is that somebody yours? Unknown Speaker 48:54 My name is Catherine. Singer. And what I'm interested in two things. First of all, how do we reconcile the idea of the female aesthetic, which is more or less what has been discussed? We've been our CNN sociobiology, which is more or less the face that just isn't true. It's used to oppress women. And how do we reconcile our idea of why not everybody agrees with this, that women are different, we look at things differently, so on and so forth, with sort of our own. Unknown Speaker 49:35 But this, you see, as soon as you take a crow from my point of view, as soon as you look at a cross culturally, this there's really no, there's no, there's no contradiction here. I mean, we're socialized as women, goodness knows we all have a very strong sense of being women and a strong sense of our differences for men. And the only point is that when you start looking cross constantly, you find the things that we just associate with being feminine are not those from other cultures and other times in other places. That's why I started out with, with Captain Cooks view of the Haitian women. Now I'm sure Tunisian women had a sense of themselves as women as different from men. From cooks point of view, however, the women were very masculine. That was his point of view. You know, all societies certainly have concepts of maleness and femaleness. And we have all kinds of, of ideologies around them, and socialize the sexes differently. It's, it's, it's simply that those that we're familiar with are not universal. Unknown Speaker 50:37 So I think we're misusing the terms on social biology, at least, Unknown Speaker 50:48 my understanding is Unknown Speaker 50:49 that it's a set of roles that have sprung from biology can take different forms and cultures. But they're not. There's not a one to one relationship between biology and associated. Unknown Speaker 51:04 Well, now this this, this is a very fair general statement. In fact, however, as you see from my reading bias, the way it gets actually used and applied, even though when my that Wilson in a moment of Mike back off and say something like this, for all practical purposes, when they really apply it, they they, they get into much more of a one to one relationship, they'll back away from it. But in effect, that's what they end up actually doing. And there are many variations among among them, of course, the extent to which they will and won't do what they do. The field is a bit of a pot curry, by the way, because it's a place now you can get money. So that a lot of people will just call themselves socio biologists to get the research grants, even though they may not particularly go along with a lot of those. Unknown Speaker 51:53 Yeah, go ahead. I'm good. So here's the benefit, it seems to me. Firstly, biologists somehow explain whatever exists and biologically determined. In other words, what is good because it is adaptive, and long asking most advice, and it is good, because in the circumstances it is but ultimately, it doesn't explain anything, because you would have to have a universal theory, where you would be able to explain why in different cultures, different customs, which sociobiology can do. Therefore, it's quite useless, it seems to me because it doesn't let you make predictions you have always to fit the text, they are definitely they reaction now. Unknown Speaker 52:48 I have one last bit of information to share with you and it comes back to this whole political question is being raised and that is one of the ways when you just thriving from your point, one of the areas where a great deal of socio biological anthropological sociological work is being done is in the Amazon area, and particularly among a group known as the Yanomamo who have been much much filmed and so on, Yanomamo the so called fierce people. And it's interesting that in the Amazon web and you had some million 500,000 people in the past and are reduced to something like 75,000 into this area, and study population dynamics to try and supposedly get a handle on pristine man, primitive man original man, you know, quotes, quotes, quotes, and the Yanomamo their fears people numbering about 10,000 or one of the biggest groups in the Amazon, the peaceful peoples were obliterated, you read that and you have no historical records, how beautifully they received this and so on and so on, then that group is wiped out. So for whatever reasons the Yanomamo became very militant in they first acquired the reputation for being fierce people in 1758 when they caught off the Spanish and thought it was slaving and so the shag marching in you know, whatever it is 1960 odd to this great primitive people and so on. So you have a whole distortion in the literature here but in addition what is going on they've discovered uranium Yanomamo lands and you know the whole the whole what's going on in the Amazon generally so that here you get a lifetime one of these books on on the world's wild places, and this is the ad it says meet the cannibal warriors of the Amazons green hell so that it's the it's the 20 century version of the only good Indian is dead Indian right except in this case, it's not only the people is the place the Amazon is Reading hell, so let's wipe it out make it a nice little suburb and the whole tie in here. I mean, it would be a very interesting topic to do an analysis of what level people are pulling strings and manipulating their networks and your connections and allocate monies, to tie these things together. But certainly the Yanomamo now are every single one of these, the film one an anthropological film is the Yanomamo every every college school room, I don't know about bracelets, but probably also as the fierce people. So if you hear that they're being wiped out, well, you know, after all these horrible people, there's a book on the Yanomamo by a geographer by the name of William small, where the people he worked with are rather more removed from from the inroads have both slavers and in recent time, people who have to robber and then recent time, there's people one thing and another. And these people are more peaceful that he does not find the kind of male dominance you have among the Yanomamo. And he does not find as much drug use. They use a lot of hallucinogenic drugs. And he's quite in his footnotes. He's a he's a geographer and a very measured guy. But in his footnotes, there are a running battle with shagging ons versions of the Yanomamo, you just get a whole different picture. It's just another piece, the way in which the socio biological hypothesis is used. And at this point, it has very little relevance to some of these basic biological theorems anymore, but it's all funded under the name of sociobiology, you haven't dropped yet. led to this question. I guess my question, I do think that many of us have been inverted, Unknown Speaker 57:04 in the same way that Unknown Speaker 57:07 patriarchy is determined by US presidents especie, their society their nurturing. And Unknown Speaker 57:21 this, I think, stands for me to explain patriarchy as opposed to a class which points to change. But how do we explain the basic dominance? I know there have been some studies that matriarchal societies Unknown Speaker 57:43 but from what I know, in these sort of these are few and not really ruling classes. And so our task is how do I think, independence, but Unknown Speaker 58:06 I think the best explanation on that I find is if I chose the speaker this morning, the reproduction of motherhood. Their argument is, makes the most sense have the right to universally have male dominance in all known societies. It is because it has always been women who were children. And then you get the second argument is that infants get attached to the primary caretaker, which can always be a woman and most people mother. And there was no society where fathers with children as primary caretakers, and it would only be if we had, in fact, fathers as well as mothers or men as well as raising children that we would come to the equalities. It's not possible, the way our our family systems have been set up. Because it's totally anti logic. I mean, Unknown Speaker 59:22 yeah, well, I don't think that's getting in your thing at the moment. But I thought I just would call your attention to this is dealing with women and capitalist society, and the analysis of women's roles. Coming back to some of these questions about women's roles reproducers and so on, is Unknown Speaker 59:48 it was a really seminal work about 10 years ago by the Brazilian anthropologist daily at the saffioti and it's been translated from the Portuguese and put out there So some gasoline price books are I guess, in paperback? I wrote an introduction to it kind of summarizing the, the lines of work between between the time when she first wrote the book and, and, and the present just in relation to women's roles structurally in, in, in capitalist society, it's not asking the question of how do you get the patriarchy in the first place? I it's a good topic, verbally willing to get into it if people want to shs Yeah, I'm sorry, I know that. So barely SAF of IoT? Maybe, maybe you're and maybe you'd like to pick up on that one. Unknown Speaker 1:00:50 interested in going back and question and watch you introduce yourself. Unknown Speaker 1:00:56 Yeah. And I think that it's an interesting question, and I share some of your perplexity. Because I feel sympathetic to the, the idea of feminists, especially in a sense, but it does seem to contradict Unknown Speaker 1:01:17 the idea that there are no Unknown Speaker 1:01:20 in Born behavioral differences. Now, what I was thinking this morning was that Unknown Speaker 1:01:29 that kind of language takes place from within our culture, with an eye on our culture, now as an ethnic apologist, from within our culture, but I also have an eye on other cultures. Now, the, as Patrick was saying, all cultures make the distinction between males and females as well as other distinctions, other kinds of gender distinctions and that sense of distance, and opposition. Therefore, it's, it seems it's correct and okay for us to be able to talk about a female aesthetic, even though there is no socio biological basis. But I suppose the question that seems to come as types of question is, well, does that if there is a biological basis, what does that ultimately mean? And ultimately, they could be a way of living in which they were was no aesthetic difference between males and females? And I don't know if that's the question. With that in mind. Unknown Speaker 1:02:49 I guess I would like to close it sounds like your argument between French and American disguises for students. In that sort of way American feminists are saying that we're all at no from our own Zachary's role in world war against repression and recruitment are no differences between us. And the French Prime Minister saying listen, big difference, and we have to, we have to focus on this and really understand it and center and make ourselves the center. I you know, I don't quite know how your I can see sort of our response to sociobiology, sort of an American response, which is there are major differences between men and women. This is all cultural stereotypes. Unknown Speaker 1:03:41 know but I mean, our response is, if people's use it correctly for manga, it seems that the feminist response to sociobiology is sort of this is hogwash. Unknown Speaker 1:03:57 sociobiology Unknown Speaker 1:04:01 well this is this is the dominant field. The double standard is inborn member and male dominance is inborn. This is what they're doing Unknown Speaker 1:04:14 isn't a common road crest groups to move utopias and maybe terribly heretical and so on. But I thought I knew a lot of you told me this morning that we ran things we you know, we're our thing would be better etc. nurturing and goodness risk it seems to me it's very common for people to to build these utilities in the sky, and in other situations intrasexual where maybe 234 ethnic will begin power. Power distorts any utopian hierarchy, simply just say that's been traditionally seized. Unknown Speaker 1:04:59 You When we have our first days, and when anthropologists were organizing, we called ourselves refinitiv Collective and somehow rather, there was some idea that women should be nice and cooperative and, you know, not masculine and not, but all of us from professional women are in there competing, like mad, and we wouldn't even manage to survive. And we were somewhere else sitting around the room sort of being gentle. I had been in Africa, where, of course, it's not an image of women at all women are strong, because they are mothers, and they have authority because they are mothers. And, you know, there's none of this stuff that you're talking about, and so on. But anyway, so I came back and then all this group was sitting around being so I thought, What is this? Nobody wanted to come out and sound at all competitive or aggressive or assertive. And I was wondering how they teach. They were all smoking and gentle whispers. But it was, it was this I mean, I'm lampooning it, but there, but I did feel it was a little lampoon ish, because even in our own culture, after all, there's only one subset of women that are supposed to the in any way, follow a lot of these supposedly stereotypes of women anyway, certainly, if you think of black women, slave women, and so on, and, and the the necessity of being strong, physically, as well as psychologically, etc. And as you know, many women in different, you know, different different working class groups, different, different cultures, even the range of behaviors that you see, in our own, you know, certainly in our own city, is so diverse, really, that it's a little hard to, you know, to go with some of these ideas about what is feminine, but where we do have something in common is I don't see why it has to be unnecessarily in style or some greater nurturance or anything, what do we have in common a sense of common purpose in relation to the nature of our oppression, and their the fact that the oppression of women, as I see it, coming back to these early points, is central to the oppression of people generally. I mean, I I've written about this in my original introduction, angles, origin of the family, and I've been writing about it since in different ways. And I see it now that I'm, have been involved little war with women, anthropologist from different countries and in Delhi, where the whole Women's Commission sessions, just time after time, different women around the world, getting up and talking about the situation of women in the position of women. And the different kinds of battles they have for equality, are just hinting at the whole fabric of colonialism itself. And certainly in this country, women's oppression in capitalist societies is fundamental to all oppression, which is what saffiano is saying, she says it in a rather tedious, long winded way, I'm afraid she doesn't write, lucidly, but she has interesting stuff on Brazil, but to know, that's very important at this stage. So that in this sense, we have enormous common purpose and a common sense of our problems. And in a common sense of, of the nature of our oppression, that gives us a tremendous sense of commonality, I just said, never feel the need for anything, you know, biological underwrite that carries it because it just really aren't any very good data that they that I tell you in the field. What, the way that the Unknown Speaker 1:09:17 the contribution that women anthropologists have made to an understanding of evolution, is that the emphasis on men as hunters and therefore as cultural leaders, and so on is is a real distortion. And that falling along what I was saying about Neandertal, actually, that both men and women exchanging their products both involved in in various kinds of work and so on. We're, we're equally involved and we're making tools, you know, when we were inventing them as well as men were inventing and women inventing carrying straps, baskets, or what have you, presumably even up In a free floating way, kind of make conjectures. So in this sense, some of what Elaine Morgan was getting at is true, but you don't need the water for all seems to happen on dry Unknown Speaker 1:10:19 go with maybe spouse, idea, men, always a monthly exchange Unknown Speaker 1:10:24 women, just a very nice French ideas but Unknown Speaker 1:10:28 the theory Unknown Speaker 1:10:30 is there's no particular basis for it when you start looking at the way in which some of these, these hunting gathering and horticultural societies that that were not the complex societies that he's dealing with in Southeast Asia and don't even have the kind of phraseology that he was somewhat familiar with in the Amazon area. They just don't function that way. As a matter of fact, Lady Strauss she says that it's that you can't have a matrilineal natural local society, a society where the men marry in because it just wouldn't work. And that you you you have to have a man as the course change in the women. So he says matrilineal microlocal societies don't exist there. He says, moly, Robert Loewy only mentioned four of them, and he's already changing, dedicates his book to Morgan and never mentioned the Aeroflot. Now at the time if we were the classic matrilineal matter, local society, right. And at the time that lady Strauss's book came out, a book came out in anthropology, George Peter Murdoch's book social structure in which he documented all of the matrilineal, microlocal societies, many of the Native American societies for matrimonial not only your quad, but a whole bunch of them all across the Huron, Wyandotte, Cherokee, Choctaw, Chickasaw, Mandana, that's on him on and out into the hole in the southwest. And it's interesting, and Lady Strauss's new addition to his book in English, and it's updated preface he has all the new things that Murdoch wrote, never mentions that, but he has to write out of existence. These societies that contradict his or his argument, though, got really fascinated. Unknown Speaker 1:12:13 According to him, this is the basis for the interest of belief and find out. How do you explain yourself? Unknown Speaker 1:12:22 Another little question. Unknown Speaker 1:12:27 Feel like this isn't a universal law? Unknown Speaker 1:12:30 Yeah, yeah. Well, the the the, the kind of the line of thinking that anthropologists have maybe we might pick up here and add on some of this too, and Phil, in relation to insist to put it to sort of somehow terribly, simply, is that you have fairly, you know, small groups of people that are living together that are able to live together in one area and take advantage of a food that's just around them, the groups are fairly small. And as Rachael brown putting either marry out or die out, you actually you seek mates and other groups, millions Slater has tried to really work out how this would actually work with this fairly small group the size of it. And given the short lifespan, at the point at which somebody was ready to marry, that there actually wouldn't be somebody in the group to marry, marry somebody in an in a next group. And then the groups that would do that would be more productive, you know, these groups would survive war, because you develop these interlinked ties with these other groups, and so on. And the whole thing would have, over the years become institutionalized, and so on, and so on. I mean, these are the lines of thinking, but Unknown Speaker 1:13:51 it's kind of an important thing to deal with feelings, just like these are quite powerful, and they grab us and they're very good, titillating and tantalizing, and so on. And they pick up on very important things in our own tradition, for example, conflict and the dismissal of that. So I think it's really it's really important to deal with. First of all, I think that in late late Strauss's theory, the theory assumes certain things which are peculiar to our culture to the Western tradition, they, the male, the father figure in which all the authority and so it's consolidated and all that leading to the belt and ethical, the ethical crisis. And all that being involved with the development of the the infamous tech boom societies, particularly the simplest kinds of societies, to which he might want to apply this theory not have that kind of configuration of power within the family or between the genders so that his theory in that sense is really not applicable. But I think the best way to think about what is clear is loss on our own culture, and the experience of the individual in our own culture so that the experience is the visual learning, for example. That is, the moment of becoming a banker is a sign of the establishment and society experience, not the establishment of the society and the experience of the human species. So that what he's talking about something that's relevant, particularly to our country may be very useful in thinking about our lives, but not if not applicable on a course cultural, or personal basis. The third thing I want to say is that in that book that can be said for gram long female, and was she offers all kinds of explanations for the origin of the taboo, and for the origins of such institutions where they exist of men exchanging women and she constantly certain kinds of situations in which it might come about that men begin to have our women and men exchanged for certain certain purposes, or begins to conceive of themselves as selves as exchange movie when they're actually doing stuff or not. Unknown Speaker 1:16:25 I wrote an article on labor stress in in the summer issue of social research a couple of years ago, I was trying to think if I can remember just Just what the number was. But if you want to get in touch with me and send you a copy of it, or give me your address do it. Unknown Speaker 1:16:52 I don't think I'm in this room. You aren't you it? Was tiny theories as famous. In restaurants that probably when I revise history Unknown Speaker 1:17:12 Yeah, that's getting awful. But if it's, it's specializes, Unknown Speaker 1:17:16 just like what somebody else said before about the French point of view, French feminism versus American feminism. I'm a bicultural product myself, French and American. And I see this as really two cultures, two different cultures and the French, feminist. Theoretical, philosophical is really the French mind says if there is such things. And I think, though, that this exchange is very valuable, but we should look at it as well, what's valuable for us what we can use, and what we understand and what we don't maybe we can just ascribe it to the other culture. To see text without saying, Well, gee, we've got to, you know, swallow the whole thing or reject the whole thing? To look at it with a certain cultural relativism. Unknown Speaker 1:18:31 But the theory is this good, it has to explain all human behavior. Therefore, we cannot simply say they have plans they have. Unknown Speaker 1:18:40 It's only it's only as good as it works. Unknown Speaker 1:18:47 Yeah. We can reject it or accept it. But we cannot say this is when she really forget about it. Unknown Speaker 1:18:55 Exactly what I'm saying. Well, we can't say that we said we have to see what we can use. But there's a lot of things that maybe we can't that's Unknown Speaker 1:19:07 an article of mine in there that talks about the origin of patriarchy, among other things. Yeah. Yes, because we only put the news so somebody who hasn't raised anything yet, I think you have a chance right? Now, go ahead, if you bring it to Unknown Speaker 1:19:29 play, what is the logical steps is in the form of progressive playbooks, and these two Americans efforts in this show is with the rule of thumb games are much more than just comedy. And I never able to set him up on Saturday. Unknown Speaker 1:19:57 Yeah, well, you know, it's Unfortunately that the the hole and work in in this early childhood socialization and so on is somewhat of sort of tapered off. And the whole psychological anthropology now is into other kinds of things. And you get a lot of these cross cultural tests that are that don't deal with earliest socialization. But deal with, which started so early, you know, which. Exactly, I mean, exactly, that's what just bothers me about all of that all of that literature how very early it starts. So I I don't think Can you think of anything, that there's no new at this point, kind of cross cultural review on some of these kinds of materials that shows the the inadequacy of our culture bound view. Now, I was looking for these kinds of things. When I was doing a study of education in Zambia. That was a little while ago, though. And at that point, I was looking and it didn't, I couldn't find it. And as far as I know, there really isn't recent research of this type in relation to earliest childhood socialization and sex roles cross culturally. Now, if there isn't somebody knows. Right, that still goes on up at Harvard. And that's but that has been that it's been around. But yeah, yeah, it's not it's not new. And what one mega commons where he up there is beginning to do with some of that as a whole very different. Tearing it a whole different direction. Yeah. And that follows the lawn. Yeah, right. Yeah. Right. Very young one before Unknown Speaker 1:21:49 presumably, has taken the following, even Unknown Speaker 1:21:53 though I know really, to trace it. No, I haven't admitted. What I get into there again, are is again, the Ethno historical data and the life history data, the kinds of things that I've been working with, like the Autobiography of a Plains Indian woman where she talks about her youth and all the things she remembers as being out on horseback roaring around almost getting trampled by buffalo. All these things she's doing pretty shields called, you know, that are just nothing to do with our image what women are supposed to be doing, or the new one pap ago, women were the the emphasis on running. when they're very young, both boys and girls and emphasis on running in the gym of women, women run and they sometimes will beat men and so on. I mean, but these are bits and pieces of ethno historical data, they don't get it what you're talking about. Right? Right. Except the old things that people knew that you know that an Africa was women who were the who were the courtesan considered to carry heavier loads than men. In fact, the Amazons, if you look in the early literature, the word Amazon was used, as far as I can see, to refer to these women porters, the Amazons were footsore and weary. So we stopped carrying all the baggage of the Portuguese who were trying to get in to where the Negro says, By the way, reminding this goal that they were looking for. And you know, you just read these things, but they're very, they're very, they're inferential. But but the whole notion of women is in any way being, you know, weak or inactive. In fact, Wilson, this is kind of elke story, when he spoke in sociobiology session in Washington at the AAA Yes, a couple of years ago. And it was a session I was on Stephen Gould and bearish it was quite an interesting session. And he had had written about you know, women always being at home and men bringing home the meat among hunters and gatherers and an agricultural societies and they're still doing it. And people have gotten after him and said, Look, you know, and and gathering societies, women often bring in most of the foodstuffs, particularly in tropical areas, they're doing most of the food getting so What's all this nonsense So, Wilson, it therefore, made himself at least a little familiar with the data and and read a study of Pat drapers, who had looked at the changing lifestyles of Bushman women, the South African hunter gatherers, when they first settled down and will houses and they're stuck with the babies as compared to when they're all working in a group and the original band society. And then they do change into being stuck with the babies just like that, which is just not true in the earlier scene. And he says, and he's explaining this and not using Quakers I'm using and says and it's upright As he says to me when they're out is gathering and so when he says they're very energetic his idea of what's going Unknown Speaker 1:25:19 on ask about regression Unknown Speaker 1:25:24 and some of the university students and so did I get stuck on this regression analysis points to the fact that you can't receive this information to society. But Melinda says we also aggressive, aggressive sexual, Unknown Speaker 1:26:02 well bearish sensory substitutes specifically that that the men should be the more aggressive sexually and that women should be interested in. In looking for men with resources and picking out the one that's going to we're going to get most out of that's where you put Barris is in relation to violence and rape that that is a is a whole other area where one needs more more research the there's a whole series on Native Americans called the American captivity series now where they have reproduced some almost 100 volumes more than 100 volumes of all the early accounts of people who were captured by American Indians, which they were big. These are big sellers after all, in the in the 19th century, and Washburn who would edits the series makes the point which other people have made to then in the earliest account, you don't find rate. And that in later accounts that begins to turn up, that is all the things they were doing, they didn't right, and you get that in the very earliest accounts of the colonial officials will say things like, how the Indians, you know, will never ravish women and I wish some of our, our men would have the same kind of consideration for the fairer sex and so on, you'll find this in the early colonial records. And so whether or not there was ever an occasional raid, you know, who knows, but it was certainly not something that was that was considered. You know, I mean, it just wasn't something that was that was considered a part of, of the scene or that it could happen at all. So that, that that becomes a problem. Now, this has been argued, you know, people have argued back and forth, and it's hard to ever settle these questions, because the, the information you have to dig for it so hard, and it's scattered. And then people want to say, Oh, well, that doesn't mean anything, you know, so on But, but I personally, just from my own gut reaction to the feeling of relationships among the people that even as late as 1950, that I was living with in the Canadian north, you know, what I mean? I just the whole issue of male violence towards women, you know, just was so far many things going on the scene that I'm that I that I, I feel about is something that definitely comes in as you begin to get the privatization of the woman's work and it becomes service within the lineage for the particular household. And you begin to get this when you do begin to get inequalities in in, in the whole fabric of the social organization based on developing specialization of labor based on trade and so on. And then you, you get enormous hostility between the sexes, a lot of information on the beginning is just full of all this, you get it also, in its quoting piece down and African societies and Amazonian societies, and you get a real battle of the sexes, actually, women don't go down. Easy, so to speak, when you begin to get a real conflict of interest, and men really taking over women's work and the products of their work and they end physically badgering them and women will fight back. moping supposedly, he was telling me about the males and how he was treated the women and people he was working with battery and again, so what are the women doing? He said, Oh, well aggressed against the man city. At one point, some young men were in swimming and women were just real man. They killed a couple of them. He hasn't printed that he hasn't published it, by the way, but I'll tell you, they won't publish them. So you really get a in the whole, you know, human history a whole kind of society where we can get developing differences class differences, status differences, male female hostility and violence against women and rape and, you know, all developing as I see it, as I see it at a particular stage in my home the whole development of specialization in labor and stuff. Yeah. Unknown Speaker 1:30:21 The non incidence of raping Native American culture was also due to the faculty and most of them when Unknown Speaker 1:30:29 they were matrimonial matched to local the women had very high status. They were not matriarch ease as you point out in the sense of women dominating man cooperative societies with with the sexes sharing responsibilities in different areas. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, as a matter of fact, what you get in later times when you when you will get to rape. You say on the claims, for example, a woman who's very promiscuous and it's just been going round very aggressively going after different men and a group of men this was a Cheyenne case, gang raped her. At the same time you also get in the literature, the case of a group of women gang raping a man who was very promiscuous and messing him up. And any of you who are interested in reading this kind of thing, just read the description and malinovski is the sexualize Unknown Speaker 1:31:21 of the fear of men of gang rape by women whether it happened or not now as he said he couldn't tell but there were so afraid of it as he talked about if it is an effective Unknown Speaker 1:31:33 where they were whereas men are brought up with the idea that they're immune to rape wars, you know, I mean, the first person who was treated St. Louis raise crisis. One is greater than men, Unknown Speaker 1:31:57 society men could be just as terrified of the rake or they would be Unknown Speaker 1:32:02 Vardhan or by women or they could just as afraid of castrating women can be castrated Unknown Speaker 1:32:09 Well, description and sexual life of savages because what he says is that they do manage to excite the man enough to rape him but they more than just rate them literally they they were among the sham they mess him up it came with filth, they using his fingers, his nose and so on to you know, whatever you want to call it, or something, whatever, but they they mess him up. I mean, he's a mess through and that's the whole idea to really mess him up. Because that's Unknown Speaker 1:32:43 really it's not you know, we all know it's not a sexual thing. It's a power thing. So I think can men be brave? Of course they can be grateful they can be violated and Camileo well, we don't know what I don't know Unknown Speaker 1:33:10 what you can't have a one to one. I mean, it has to be a game with a woman. raping a man Unknown Speaker 1:33:22 is definitely adaptive value for our Unknown Speaker 1:33:30 men and women want to do the same. Yeah, but Unknown Speaker 1:33:42 the ideas and men can spread them around but the 1000 women have to invest a lot of energy in each one.