Egalitarians are incapable of arguing against the obvious statistical facts that eviscerate their worldview, so their only last resort is the NAXALT argument; not all X are like that! Deboonked! There is evidence of 1 woman involved in a mammoth hunt in human history, some women fishing and hunting small animals, therefore egalitarians are right about everything!
I enjoyed your analysis of the published papers. Too often journalists seem to take for granted that a peer-review in an academic journal is de facto axiomatic. However, it's all very strange that anyone would presume that there were never any female hunters. We have a constellation named after Artimes - goddess of the hunt - after all.
~Referring to that One Rabbit and/or other "small game" animal hunted by that one girl whilst the men hauled back a Mammoth to the camp after several days of tracking.
Equivocation is alive and well in Academia! "Hunting" now can be used as a descriptor when some small game gets hunted on the side to complement *actual* food coming in.
The myth of "male hunter" started in Lee & DeVore's book "Man: The hunter", from 1968. That book (specially, the introductory essay) claimed that hunting was exclusively a male task. If women participate, it was an exceptional and isolated event. Of course, real specialists always knew this was not the case, but most researchers and general public had no clarity.
Now, thanks to this new study, we know for sure that female hunting was not exceptional (there is no universal rule about male hunting) nor isolated (because it is expected by the culture of those 50 societies; and could be more than 50).
Yep, we always knew that male hunters are majority and that they hunt more than women, but these are weird statements to bring here, because this is not a quantitative debate, but a qualitative one: do women share the same capabilities (qualifications) for hunting? The answer is yes.
In those societies where women don't hunt, it is not because of "biology", but because of the culture of those societies plus some environmental factors (type of prey, geography, etc.).
So, yes, the myth of the "male hunter", and of the "women gatherer", has finally been debunked.
Egalitarians are incapable of arguing against the obvious statistical facts that eviscerate their worldview, so their only last resort is the NAXALT argument; not all X are like that! Deboonked! There is evidence of 1 woman involved in a mammoth hunt in human history, some women fishing and hunting small animals, therefore egalitarians are right about everything!
I enjoyed your analysis of the published papers. Too often journalists seem to take for granted that a peer-review in an academic journal is de facto axiomatic. However, it's all very strange that anyone would presume that there were never any female hunters. We have a constellation named after Artimes - goddess of the hunt - after all.
So are the people that wrote that stupid? Deluded? Or just plain dishonest?
"Akteally Guise, We-myn Hunt!"
~Referring to that One Rabbit and/or other "small game" animal hunted by that one girl whilst the men hauled back a Mammoth to the camp after several days of tracking.
Equivocation is alive and well in Academia! "Hunting" now can be used as a descriptor when some small game gets hunted on the side to complement *actual* food coming in.
The myth of "male hunter" started in Lee & DeVore's book "Man: The hunter", from 1968. That book (specially, the introductory essay) claimed that hunting was exclusively a male task. If women participate, it was an exceptional and isolated event. Of course, real specialists always knew this was not the case, but most researchers and general public had no clarity.
Now, thanks to this new study, we know for sure that female hunting was not exceptional (there is no universal rule about male hunting) nor isolated (because it is expected by the culture of those 50 societies; and could be more than 50).
Yep, we always knew that male hunters are majority and that they hunt more than women, but these are weird statements to bring here, because this is not a quantitative debate, but a qualitative one: do women share the same capabilities (qualifications) for hunting? The answer is yes.
In those societies where women don't hunt, it is not because of "biology", but because of the culture of those societies plus some environmental factors (type of prey, geography, etc.).
So, yes, the myth of the "male hunter", and of the "women gatherer", has finally been debunked.