The right mix of popular science and snark. It's like mix of Frans De Waal's "Our Inner Ape", Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs and Steel"(but for sex) andThe right mix of popular science and snark. It's like mix of Frans De Waal's "Our Inner Ape", Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs and Steel"(but for sex) and "The Third Chimpanzee", Frederich Engels "Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State", Dan Savage's "Savage Love", Laura Kipnis' "Against Love", Dossie Easton and Catherine A. Liszt's "Ethical Slut" (but without the hippie vibe).
It combines many studies and articles I've been reading and taking note of for years, such as:
The writing also has some hilarious quips from "Darwin says your mother is a whore", to a discussion in comparison sexual practices between chimpanzees, bonobos and humans that usually found bonobos and humans sharing traits ending with this challenge: "Genital-genital (G-G) rubbing between female bonobos appears to affirm female bonding, is present in all bonobo populations studied (wild and captive), and is completely absent in chimpanzees. Human data on G-G rubbing are presently unavailable. (Attention: ambitious graduate students!)"
One large anthropological portion of the book goes into some depth about the "fierce egalitarian" economy of small bands of foragers.
An area where I think the book is lacking is in examining agricultural/horticultural societies that have relatively flat social hierarchy and still have communal economies; particularly those societies that are both matrilocal and matrilineal. They tease us with referencing Lewis Henry Morgan.
Among areas I would like to see some research is physical anthropology on skeletal height and age among agriculturalists that do not have stratified society that still make active use of hunting, fishing and foraging to supplement their agriculture. This is something of a tangent from the focus of their book, but I do think it's an important area to considering when examining agriculture. Also, writers like Joel Johnson are phrasing it as a choice "Orgies or Beer: You Only Get One" ( http://gizmodo.com/5609549/orgies-or-... ). Anthropology and history point out that often societies have had both.
This book is highly recommended to any human being who has sex or is otherwise interested in studying human sexuality. ...more
O.K., I haven't read all of it. It's in three languages! Lots of first hand accounts about the early colonial period and indigenous people that you caO.K., I haven't read all of it. It's in three languages! Lots of first hand accounts about the early colonial period and indigenous people that you can not find anywhere else.
I picked up this title while visiting the Smithsonian Natural History Museum's "Emissaries of Peace" exhibit (on loan from the Museum of the CherokeeI picked up this title while visiting the Smithsonian Natural History Museum's "Emissaries of Peace" exhibit (on loan from the Museum of the Cherokee Indian); it's an exhibit I recommend.
This short book is an interesting first hand 18th century account of a Virginian second generation settler with the Cherokee. While not up to the rigor of say Jesuit Relations in regards to other Iroquois, Timberlake's firsthand account offer an fairly unique view into 18th century Cherokee village life. While I first thought Timberlake's memoirs were marred by his attempt to account for his spending and get out debt, it provides an unintentional cultural comparison between British's societies obsession with debt and political power of nobility versus the egalitarian communal ethics of the Cherokee. The reaction of Cherokee villagers with Timberlake compared to the reaction of Londoners is also a vivid contrast in cultures.
It is advised that you use two bookmarks with this one, with one in the a very detailed footnotes that almost stand as a book of their own, tirelessly compiled by Duane King that provides both archaeological and documentary verification of much of the contents of Timerblake's memoirs. Still, the tantalizing glimpse into the Cherokee traditional society of this unintentional ethnography will just leave anthropologists and historians hungry for more detail. The included bibliography seems like a good place to start....more
I'll be picking up more of his work, I'm sure. I find his epilogue compelling:
"The Huron are notable for the high degree of economic equality they maiI'll be picking up more of his work, I'm sure. I find his epilogue compelling:
"The Huron are notable for the high degree of economic equality they maintained, although they lived in communities that had as many as 2,000 inhabitants and formed a settlement cluster of approximately 20,000 people. The Huron also believed that no person or group had the right to dominate or exploit another, or even to tell an individual what to do. In recent years, anthropologists have tended to restrict such equality to hunter-gatherer societies and to stress the hierarchical features of agricultural, and even sedentary collecting, groups (Testart 1982). Furthermore, they have emphasized the rapidity with which such egalitarian societies are transformed into hierarchical ones, as surviving hunter-gatherer peoples enter into close relations with more complex societies (Bloch 1983). The questions to be answered are how and why did the Huron maintain a high degree of equality as their society grew larger and more complex?
"Hard work and generosity were rewarded with tangible public approval. The Huron economy was structured in a fashion that made generosity highly visible. Exchanges of goods were essential features of public feasts, life-cycle ceremonies, curing rituals, community and personal religious celebrations, ritual friendships, settlements of disputes and the conduct of diplomacy. These exchanges were so effective that there is no evidence that a barter system was needed to distribute goods. Moreover, if a longhouse burned down, the rest of the community competed in trying to compensate its inhabitants for their losses. Likewise, refugees were welcomed into Huron society and supported with food, clothing, and arable land until they could look after themselves. While ritual exchanges tended to even out disparities in the amount of goods possessed by individuals, the public nature of much of the giving, which included announcing the names of the donor and the recipient and the nature of the gift, ensured that those who were generous received full public recognition for that they had done. Mutual exchanges were also essential features of relations between neighboring groups that were not at war with each other.
"Huron society encouraged hard work but also generosity and economic equality. Public opinion was intolerant of personal idiosyncracies, yet the Huron rejected the idea that any one Huron person or group had the right to try to coerce or intimidate another. Exhibitions of authoritarian behavior was repudiated as illegitimate and disruptive of public order. With their social institutions, their religious beliefs, and above all by manipulating gossip and witchcraft, the Huron articulated a potent set of mechanisms for defending their ideals of political and economic equality. In the Huron context these mechanisms were as effective for defending equality as the state has proved to be defending private property and social inequality in hierarchical societies. While gossip and witchcraft become less effective for protecting equality as the scale of society increases, the self-reliance and mobility of Huron slash-and-burn horticulturalists allowed them to maintain a high degree of equality well beyond the point where it appears to have given way in societies that depended more heavily on geographically restricted resources. In that respect the Huron resemble other slash-and-burn horitculturalists who have an abundance or arable land, such as the egalitarian (gumloa) Kachin of Burma (Leach 1954; cf. Friedman 1975) and more particularly the Tupi-Guarani peoples of lowland South America, who were the object of most of Clastres' (1977) research. The quality of Huron and Iroquois society was not a myth by the product of a system that was built upon positive and negative sanctions, that in their own way, were no less intricate and coercive than are those found in larger-scale state societies."...more