A concept (and later a book) that our early human ancestors had a biologically induced strict division of labor where man was the hunter and women predominately cared for the kids and gathered roots, nuts and berries. As an evolutionary catalyst the better nutrition from big game animals led to larger brains, tool-making, cooperation and even aggressive or strategic intelligence forged by the demands of male led hunting.

So in other words our genesis and advancement as a species is because Man was the Hunter.

The book was published in 1968 at the height of the feminist movement; so eventually another book came out written by female anthropologists called "Woman the Gatherer". It argues that human advancement and evolution had more to do with contributions by the female gender.

Fun stuff! LOL

There's another book that says that man would be a garden for his sake. Meaning to keep him busy so he wouldn't get himself in to trouble. And tha women would bear children and that because of her children she would be saved. Lol.

So, did the men not share their meat with the women or the women their berries with the men?

The Book claims the woman shared her berries. Revealed to all a knowledge that wasn't known. So I guess that makes women the catalyst for our "advancement".

Chimps hunt all the time.



They even hunt and eat African people's babies and toddlers. Jane Goodall used to give the Africans money for their dead children, so they wouldn't retaliate against the chimps, until she figured out the Africans were sometimes killing their own children to get money. She comes off as extremely cold in her interviews about it.

Keith

Some women I've met didn't get any meat.

Some women I've met don't want any meat.

Best classroom fight I ever had in college was about this topic.

Took a class that checked the box for my major and was an honors level course. I failed to notice it was also listed as a "Women's Studies" course. The class title was "Rethinking Gender in the Archaeological Record."
Class size was limited to 16 people. So there's me and 15 flannel wearin' women's lib lesbians. And Dr. Bettina Arnold was the professor, bless her heart, I loved her as a professor.

The topic on the 3rd day was sexual division of labor. All the "women" were doing the usual "women can do anything men can do better" arguing, I was staying silent, cause I knew I was outnumbered 15:1.

Dr. Arnold looks straight at me and asks "Kyle, what's your thoughts on this?" I shook my head fora second, then let em have it. I said men were hunters because women are too valuable to risk losing while hunting. As one man in the classroom, I could get all 15 women pregnant, and the "tribe" gains 15 people. If 1 woman dies, then its only 14. It only takes 1 man to grow the tribe, it takes a lot of women. If I died hunting, just find another man.

I thought for sure all 15 of them women were going to kill me.

After class Dr. Arnold thanked me for injecting logic into the discussion.

Not all are deserving…

That's an excellent true point. There are over 28 times as many ancient female lines as male lines, because most men never sucessfully bred.

Keith

Good post Kyle. You were lucky to have a prof that was well centered too.

Keith, mating success for male primates does kind of suck. I sure thought that in my high school years!

She was fairly left of center, but she at least wanted logic and reasoning to be part of the discussions.

After that first "discussion", it was no holds barred. Dr. Arnold would forward me the notes for the upcoming classes so I could formulate my arguments ahead of time.

I actually made a few friends in that class. Turns out some lesbians are only that way cause they hate men. And a few drinks turns them straight, for a while at least.

Lesbians often seem to be initially hostile, but also often warm up quickly when you talk to them. I sell to a lot of lesbians. Many clearly have hormonal issues. Most seem to like mutilating their faces and bodies. They usually have odd colored hair, many piercings, gauges in their ears and huge amounts of trashy tattoos.

Keith

Nowadays on the appearance, yes. This was back in the late 90s, when most of them would just wear combat boots and flannels. And maybe an odd piercing or two. There was only one that was heavily tattoed.

And Kyle, you had the perfect counter to what a woman couldn’t do as well as a man. Lol