![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The Woman That Never Evolved, by Sarah Blaffer Hrdy, is a mix of physical anthropology/primatology and feminism. Writing in the late 1970s, Hrdy was trying to point out the errors in large amounts of "sociobiology," in particular the parts that came up with appealing-to-people's-preconceptions of things that don't need explaining because they aren't, in fact, true. Large amounts of what some writers assert are unique to humans, and then try to find explanations for, are in fact shared with numerous other kinds of primates (in particular, large amounts of human sexuality, including concealed ovulation and female orgasm). This doesn't mean they don't have evolutionary explanations: it means that any such explanations have to go back further, because they aren't unique to us. If, say, humans and macaques are similar in how they pair-bond, there's something other than large brains going on there.
Again, large parts of that approach--and this is hardly unique to the sociobiologists--start by assuming that women, and other female primates, do not compete, either with each other or with males of their own species. This is not merely unsupported, it is readily falsified. But that belief has led to writing about human evolution that assumes that only males had any agency, and describes female anatomy, behavior, etc. entirely in terms of males. (For example, a common but invalid assumption in these discussions is that all adult females reach their maximum reproductive potential, and within-species competition is only between males. Actual data show wide variation in number of pregnancies and births, and in infant mortality, in ways that correlate with status.)
Another part of Hrdy's goal is to look at the primate evidence (which is pretty sketchy, and was more so when this book was first published) to see what of value it has for feminists, in terms of what options our ancestry might include, and pitfalls to watch out for. One of those pitfalls is the assumption that women will automatically ally for a common goal, which can lead to not working to build or maintain that alliance.
If you dont find things like the mating patterns of gibbons and the effects of diet on social structure interesting, this is probably the wrong book for you.
Someone on LJ recommended this to me, but I didn't note down who when I ordered it from the library. I will probably ask the library for Hrdy's more recent Mother Nature: A History of Mothers, Infants, and Natural Selection soon.
[Meta: this is the first book I've finished in 2009. I may go back and post a bit about some of what I read in 2008, if memory and time allow. ETA: Memory is fuzzy after a while; I may pick up a bit, and the list and minimal comments are there in this book post from last January.]
Again, large parts of that approach--and this is hardly unique to the sociobiologists--start by assuming that women, and other female primates, do not compete, either with each other or with males of their own species. This is not merely unsupported, it is readily falsified. But that belief has led to writing about human evolution that assumes that only males had any agency, and describes female anatomy, behavior, etc. entirely in terms of males. (For example, a common but invalid assumption in these discussions is that all adult females reach their maximum reproductive potential, and within-species competition is only between males. Actual data show wide variation in number of pregnancies and births, and in infant mortality, in ways that correlate with status.)
Another part of Hrdy's goal is to look at the primate evidence (which is pretty sketchy, and was more so when this book was first published) to see what of value it has for feminists, in terms of what options our ancestry might include, and pitfalls to watch out for. One of those pitfalls is the assumption that women will automatically ally for a common goal, which can lead to not working to build or maintain that alliance.
If you dont find things like the mating patterns of gibbons and the effects of diet on social structure interesting, this is probably the wrong book for you.
Someone on LJ recommended this to me, but I didn't note down who when I ordered it from the library. I will probably ask the library for Hrdy's more recent Mother Nature: A History of Mothers, Infants, and Natural Selection soon.
[Meta: this is the first book I've finished in 2009. I may go back and post a bit about some of what I read in 2008, if memory and time allow. ETA: Memory is fuzzy after a while; I may pick up a bit, and the list and minimal comments are there in this book post from last January.]
Tags: