Stone Age man had 'feminine side'

[redqueen]

Really interesting... I looked but didn't find anything more recent about this.

I of course bristle at the use or the term 'feminine', but it is the parlance of our times, alas.

http://m.phys.org/news/2012-07-stone-age-feminine-side.html

Dr Karina Croucher, who has studied buried remains of people living between 7,500 and 10,000 years ago across the Middle East, says the stereotypical view of how Neolithic men and women lived is wrong.

Unlike today, she argues, it was normal for men and women to show compassion for each other- and gender was not so clearly defined.

...

“This and other evidence shows that it’s clear the relationship between men and women during the Neolithic Period does not conform to the modern age.

...

“So we should not understand the past in our own terms: it’s more about their relationships with each other; materials and animals.

[seabeyond]

1. such a duh... and simple common sense. i cant wait to read. cooking dinnah.... thanks. nt

[mike_c]

2. anything at all we "know" or "don't know" about neolithic human life...

...is pure speculation, ranging from things made up from whole cloth to deductions from evidence such as burial remains, middens, and occasional artifacts. At best, the latter are filtered through our current social predispositions and preconceptions about gender, race, family/tribe, etc. At worst, they are forced along an arc of comprehension that is utterly foreign to the truth. Without real, contemporary accounts of neolithic life, all we can do is guess, and even the most educated guessing is subject to the speculator's unrecognized biases.

I take statements like "Unlike today, she argues, it was normal for men and women to show compassion for each other- and gender was not so clearly defined" with a big grain of salt.

[redqueen]

3. Yes, you have a good point,

But her whole reason for publishing her findings is based on your first point.

Her ideas about neolithic life are in conflict with previous ones, and many previous ideas were filtered through the point of view of the men who were predominantly responsible for forming them.

[mike_c]

4. I didn't mean to imply that there is anything wrong with that....

If speculation is all we've got, then advancing informed arguments for one view or another is fine, as long as we all realize that that's all they are, i.e. arguments in favor of differing speculative perspectives.

[seabeyond]

5. arguments in favor of differing speculative perspectives.

[ismnotwasm]

6. 'Cause you know real men

Don't show compassion. It's all feminine and shit.

This is an interesting article, I like the theory that early human beings gotta lot further with cooperation than they did with warfare. It's ridiculous to think of compassion only as a female trait- something evolved as protecting babies.

http://lefthandofeminism.wordpress.com/2011/03/12/cooperation-in-neolithic-culture-and-the-implications-for-feminism/

[seabeyond]

7. not to mention reality of even today. i know a hell of a lot of men with compassion. dont you?

we are told "real" men dont feel. that is the absurdity of it all. it is a pile of dung.

i watched hubby, watching those during katrina, tears in his eyes. he is not a crier, but.... it was there, and strong and effected him hugely.

why would i take that away so he could be a part of this faux, "real" men.

and i KNOW your man feels compassion. i have heard stories. not gonna take that away from them.

[ismnotwasm]

8. Damn straight

[redqueen]

9. I imagine it might be similar to the present,

With groups in different areas having varying kinds of social dynamics.

[ismnotwasm]

10. There's all kinds of theories

My favorite being that white people are direct descendants of Neanderthals. (a old instructor of mine Mentioned this in an ethnic diversity class.)That's been debunked though. There is some DNA evidence of cross breeding I believe.

And you are right, as human being became more complex, their interaction must have as well. We developed culture and cultural differences.

That's why I love reading old myths, and the Jungian approach of archetypes. Probably why I love science fiction, and speculative fiction. What if stories.

[MadrasT]

11. Articles like this don't do much for me.

They seem to want to present speculation as fact. Nobody actually knows what it was like then, and I am always skeptical that the researcher/author "sees" whatever they have a motivation to want to prove.

Interesting conjecture... I can't give it any particular value or credence beyond that.