10 Comments

Agreed. It’s important to note the health of the family lies with the mother. Preparing safe food keeping clean house watching for safety of the young. Without these skills whether innate or learned family is doomed. The birth rate is usually 51 percent born are male. With preferential breeding however this number has likely changed without natural selection deciding what’s best for evolution. Humanity fails to recognize these vital skills females have bc they think they are easy to obtain. We know better.

A woman will give her life for her young. Birthing is dangerous business. She will risk her life to kill prey for her young. She will give up monetary opportunities and impoverish herself. for the privilege of raising her young. If not she risks the loss of opportunity to imprint herself on her young or know their safety. Society wishes this loss bc then they get to control the mindset of the innocent. Look at the many fatherless children who become subject to controls outside the family. The mother is stretched beyond bounds and can’t watch the innocents. Then they lose them. Whether to government controls like Edward Snowden was lost to an evil government project until he found his truth. Or to drugs or evil exploitive trades.

All I can say is when it happens to you get off your chairs stand up and fight back. You might lose but you will have sent a message and inspired others. I could go on but you can do this better than I can. Have a great day !

Expand full comment

One possible reason (far from the only one) that activities may be gendered is the associational risk of putting two genders in common contact over time. Perhaps it is simply “safer” societally to have genders separated, when not in the established family setting, so when at “work” (fewer murders; less disruption of successful raising of offspring).

Expand full comment

Heather, the middle part of that chart is fascinating. Makes one so curious as to why some of the tasks that could physically be done by either sex, and that were, in fact, often shared across sexes (N, E, G) have little obvious rationale. For instance, why cordage making or basket making would be skewed in either direction, albeit that the tasks are not well defined.

On our own farm, it's easy to see why my wife would be the primary processer of our broiler chickens (small hands make evisceration much easier, and I'm more emotionally suited to the 'dispatch' part of the process) and why I would be the one to de-horn calves or corral the bull. But, why am I the one to plant, tend, and harvest the garden beds, and she the one to weed, process, and store the harvest? Why do we come to these tasks so easily, without much thought involved, with neither of us being raised in this life? I know this must be cultural, not evolutionary, but still...

Seems you're resurrecting the serial essay of older times. Well done; I'll be back for part 2 and beyond. Thanks.

Expand full comment

The emergent phenomenon of periodic descent into mass violence which we are entering has been with us since civilization began.

I firmly believe it to be rooted in the conflict between “natural selection” and “sexual selection”.

In one of his first teachings, 2500 years ago, the Buddha discusses it …

ATTADAṆḌA SUTTA

The Discourse on Being Violent

from “The Buddha before Buddhism”

translation by Gil Fronsdal

Violence gives birth to fear; [Just] look at people and [their] quarrels.

I will speak of my dismay

And the way that I was shaken.

Seeing people thrashing about

Like fish in little water,

And seeing them feuding with each other,

I became afraid.

The world is completely without a core.

Everywhere things are changing.

Wanting a place of my own,

I saw nothing not already taken.

I felt discontent at seeing

Only conflict to the very end.

Then I saw an arrow here,

Hard to see,

embedded in the heart.

Pierced by this arrow,

[People] dash about in all directions.

When the arrow’s pulled out

They don’t run, and they don’t sink

Expand full comment