Though women have played an integral part in the history of the discipline of anthropology, it was not until the early 1970’s that the field of anthropology and gender, or feminist anthropology emerged. Sex and gender roles have always been a vital part of any ethnographic study, but the contributors of this theory began to address the androcentric nature of anthropology itself. The substantial gap in information concerning the study of women was perceived as a male bias, a prejudice made more apparent because what little women-centered fieldwork was done received insufficient attention from the academic community. While anthropology was considered one of the more egalitarian fields of study, it was dominated by white, Western males who focused primarily on the study of men within a society. The women seen in fieldwork were merely identified in regard to their gender specific roles, something these feminist anthropologists hoped to rectify. Those women deserved to be accurately portrayed for the part they played in the human experience.
The 1960’s and 70’s belonged to a tumultuous period in American history, characterized by an array of social and political movements including anti-Vietnam war activism, the origination of a “counterculture” which strove for societal liberation, the civil rights movement, and the rise of feminism (McGee & Warms 2011: 396). Women began to question the limitations of their gender, rallying to promote their own rights and interests. Women’s liberation became encompassed within a variety of disciplines, including anthropology, exploring themes found cross-culturally such as patriarchy, discrimination, and objectification. In addition to the cultural anthropological focus on gender inequality, feminis...
... middle of paper ...
... and views of studied societies. Basic anthropological assumptions were questioned when it became evident that the male-centered field had neglected to document women and gender as important aspects of social life. While it is clear that several feminist anthropologists sought to correct the imbalance of knowledge by focusing solely on women and their significant impact upon the development of humankind, the theory has evolved to focus on gender as it relates to power, class, societal construction, and sexuality among others.
Works Cited
Kuklick, Henrika. 2008 Women in the Field in the Twentieth Century: Revolution, Involution, Devolution? A New History of Anthropology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Pub.
277-292
McGee, R. Jon, and Richard L. Warms. 2011 Culture and Personality. Anthropological Theory: an Introductory History. New York: McGraw-Hill. 396-436
Whitney Battle-Baptiste, the author of Black Feminist Archaeology creates the framework of this book because as a Black woman who is interested in race, gender, and cultural views, believes that too often in mainstream archaeological theory, Black culture and the experiences of Black women and our families are overlooked and dismissed. Dr. Baptiste states her explanation on how joining Black Feminist Theory and archaeology in her projects provides a way to open a discussion between archaeologists, which is her intent. It also shows that “when archaeologists critically engage with a dialogue about the intersectionality of race and gender, we begin to see the deeper forms of oppression and how they affect the lives of marginalized populations.”.
Gender history would not be possible without the rise of women and their headstrong goal of gaining a place in the history books. Early historians developed a more simple outlook, which simply classified every women be similar in class. As historian developed a more critical analysis, they included many social factors to explain women’s status change. Women created gender history, and now doors are open for other gender issues to be researched.
Throughout history, women have always aimed for a recognized place in society. Centuries ago, people looked at the role of women in society as being sociologically inferior. Seeing the revival of the Feminist movement, which boldly opposes the stereotypical characteristics of women in society, on one hand, and promotes the elevation of women's status in society, on the other, one would not find it hard to believe the drastic differences in opinion of people on this issue. What is amazing is how these differences reflect upon scholarly works in science.
Gender has played specific roles in societies all over the place. Men are usually seen as the dominant gender and therefore appear to be more important to society but women still have an important role. It was not that long ago that women did not have many rights or play an important role at all. In America, laws were put in place to make men and women equal and today many women have filled jobs thought of as a man’s job but there is still a common thought of women being less important in society than men. Before deciding if a woman’s role in society is complimentary or not, the role of all humans must be examined. A woman could appear to have a terrible role but maybe that’s because everybody has a terrible role in that type of society. Same
But when the “Women’s Movement,” is referred to, one would most likely think about the strides taken during the 1960’s for equal treatment of women. The sixties started off with a bang for women, as the Food and Drug Administration approved birth control pills, President John F. Kennedy established the President's Commission on the Status of Women and appointed Eleanor Roosevelt as chairwoman, and Betty Friedan published her famous and groundbreaking book, “The Feminine Mystique” (Imbornoni). The Women’s Movement of the 1960’s was a ground-breaking part of American history because along with African-Americans another minority group stood up for equality, women were finished with being complacent, and it changed women’s lives today.
French, Katherine L., and Allyson M. Poska. Women and Gender in the Western past. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin, 2007. Print.
Through investigations of writers as diverse as Silvia Federici, and Angela Davis, Maria Mies, and Sharon Hays, Judith Butler, and Steven Gregory we have come to understand that confronting the categorization of gender differences is a complex and nuanced project. Whether one is an ontologist, exploring the metaphysical nature of gender differences (that may or may not lead down the road of essentialism) or a phenomenologist exploring how exactly it is that one “does” gender—to the extent that there even exists a concept called gender—one must employ a varied and multipartite approach. Writers such as Federici, Mies, and Davis sketched out a framework of the history of gender roles for us. From what Federici calls a time of primitive consumption through feudalism, to the time of slavery and rapid industrialization and, indeed, through our current technological revolution, we have seen the basic gender differences between the sexes evolve over time. To be sure, our notions of what is expected from both women and men have changed since prehistoric times, and they continue to evolve. Sharon Hays in the chapter “Pyramids of Innequality” of her book Flat Broke with Children: Women in the Age of Welfare Reform shows us how, in the United States, poverty and access to the social safety net have been raced and gendered. She provides a springboard for further investigation.
The gender binary of Western culture dichotomizes disgendered females and males, categorizing women and men as opposing beings and excluding all other people. Former professor of Gender Studies Walter Lee Williams argues that gender binarism “ignores the great diversity of human existence,” (191) and is “an artifact of our society’s rigid sex-roles” (197). This social structure has proved detrimental to a plethora of people who fall outside the Western gender dichotomy. And while this gender-exclusive system is an unyielding element of present day North American culture, it only came to be upon European arrival to the Americas. As explained by Judith Lorber in her essay “Night to His Day: The Social Construction of Gender”, “gender is so pervasive in our society we assume it is bred into our genes” (356). Lorber goes on to explain that gender, like culture, is a human production that requires constant participation (358).
By using theories of popular ideology as base material, the same errors committed by early generations of male scholars will be repeated. This is a critical barrier to defining gender inequality. Perhaps the fact that gender inequality, like other forms of inequality, creates two competing sets of myths has been continuously overlooked. One myth that shows men’s advantage, the other one that reflects women’s. Making opposite claims about what is considered true or just, and yet share some particular
Ruth Benedict’s anthropological book, Patterns of Culture explores the dualism of culture and personality. Benedict studies different cultures such as the Zuni tribe and the Dobu Indians. Each culture she finds is so different and distinctive in relation to the norm of our society. Each difference is what makes it unique. Benedict compares the likenesses of culture and individuality, “A culture, like an individual, is a more or less consistent pattern of thought or action” (46), but note, they are not the same by use of the word, “like.” Benedict is saying that figuratively, cultures are like personalities. Culture and individuality are intertwined and dependent upon each other for survival.
Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies, Vol. 5, No. 3 (Autumn, 1980), pp. 17-20. JSTOR. 2
Women and gender studies contribute greatly to our understanding of the social and cultural world we inhabit. Studying the complex issues of this field has instituted many key insights. Two major insights that positively affected our society are the awareness through learning and through this awareness activism that can ensue.
Women’s oppression is not just unique to our history alone. Different civilizations around the world have portrayed women despicably. In Japan during world war two, teenage girls were rounded up into sex camps. “An estimated one hundred thousand to four hundred thousand girls were forced to do sexual favors for Japanese soldiers, some of the girls were as young as 11 years old. They serviced up to 50 Japanese soldiers a day, while enduring beatings, starvation, sterilization and abortions. Even today, over half the 27 million people enslaved are woman in underground sex brothels.” [Robinson]
Garcia’s research concentrates on previously published works on Cheyenne women by white men and reexamines these studies through a feminine point of view. As these white men migrated West, they recorded their observations. Unfortunately their reports were flawed and biased because the white men’s access was limited due to their outsider status and gender. These early observations reported Native American women performed menial work for the tribe such as berry picking. Garcia notes that what these men did not realize and understand was the rich communal life these women shared while berry picking. These men were also not aware of the culturally valued norms of feminine behavior such as modesty, kindness and being private, which led them to see these women as passive and subservient. The Cheyenne women were simply possessing the natural tribal values encouraged for women.
Although by the 1960s women were responsible for one-third of the work force, despite the propaganda surrounding the movement women were still urged to “go back home.” However the movement continued to burn on, and was redeveloping a new attitude by the 1970s. The movement was headed by a new generation that was younger and more educated in politics and social actions. These young women not only challenged the gender role expectations, but drove the feminist agenda that pursued to free women from oppression and male authority and redistribute power and social good among the sexes (Baumgardner and Richards, 2000). In just a few decades, the Women’s Liberation Movement has changed typical gender roles that once were never challenged or questioned.