Sexual Division of Labor

Overview

The sexual division of labor is defined as the delegation of tasks between males and females. Each society has its own division of labor, which creates a wide range of variation among foraging groups. Misconceptions are embedded within the concept of a sexual division of labor, such as the failure to account for the extreme variation of hunter-gatherer societies, and thus serve to exacerbate the forager myth.

Stereotypes

Man the Hunter

One of the greatest misconceptions about hunter-gatherer societies is the notion of "man the hunter". The myth is based upon the idea that men procure the most food for their foraging groups, and without their contributions the groups would cease to exist. Furthermore, the stereotype claims that hunting is an activity performed by men alone. In many societies, both of these tenets are false.

The "Man the Hunter" myth has had implications for the study of human evolution as well as for those of human societies. It is often asserted that hunting large animals has driven human evolution more than any other factor. In this model of human evolution, males have procured meat necessary for encephalization, while developing the cooperative skills so important to modern human society. Because of their child-rearing obligations, women have been relegated to the more sedentary task of gathering vegetation. This model has many critiques, the most notable of which is the implication that only one sex has been responsible for driving the evolution of the human species (Slocum 1975).

Woman the Gatherer

Similar to the "Man the Hunter" myth is that of "woman the gatherer". This idea suggests that anyone who is able to walk is capable of collecting vegetation, and this is simply not true. Thus, the myth is that, biologically, women are not inclined to hunt and choose to gather instead. Furthermore, the myth holds that women do not procure as much food as men, that is to say that gathering is second to hunting. The truth is that gathering is a job that requires great skill as well as the knowledge of hundreds of species of vegetation. Just as with man the hunter, woman the gatherer is not a factual claim.

Behavioral Ecology Perspective

Both men and women have the option of investing resources either to provision children or have additional offspring. They must monitor costs and benefits of each alternative to maximize reproductive fitness. However, trade-offs differ between sexes. Females are likely to benefit most from parental effort because they are certain which offspring are theirs and have relatively few reproductive opportunities, each of which is relatively costly and risky. In contrast, males have no absolute certainty of paternity, but may have many more mating opportunities bearing relatively low costs and risks. Therefore, natural selection is more likely to favor male reproductive strategies that stress mating effort and female strategies that emphasize parental investment. This does not mean that selection never favors men who provision offspring or women who pursue additional mates, but the point at which these options become most beneficial for individual fitness differs between the two sexes. Differences in fitness goals create conflicts of interest between men and women that are expressed in sexual division of subsistence labor (Zeanah 2004).

Variation

Foraging societies exhibit great variation in the sexual division of labor. This uniqueness and diversity is illustrated through the examination of case studies about hunter-gatherer societies. According to Rhoda H. Halperin, geography and seasonal variation cause such differences in the sexual division of labor. Her research of the following case studies exemplifies this.

Case Study One: !Kung

The !Kung live predominately in the Kalahari Desert of Africa. The majority of the group's calories come from the gathering of roots, berries, fruits, and nuts, but hunting also provides additional calories.

Case Study Two: Ona

The Ona, otherwise known as Selk'nam, live in the Tierra del Fuego Islands of South America. They practice hunting, fishing, and gathering of shellfish, fungi, and vegetables.

Case Study Three: Tolowa

The Tolowa, of Northern California, have a diet based heavily on marine resources with terrestrial resources providing additional calories.

Case Study Four: Great Basin Shoshone

The Great Basin Indians live in the southwestern United States. Pine nuts and wild vegetables are the primary sources of food, with nuts providing the bulk of protein in their diet and animal protein being a secondary source of protein.

Case Study Five: Eskimo

The Eskimos live in the Arctic. While there are differences between inland and coastal groups, meat is the main source of nourishment in the Eskimo diet.

Through the examination of the case studies, it is evident that great variation exists in the sexual division of labor. In some groups there is male dominance in the hunting area, which is seen in Case Study Five: Eskimo. However, Case Study Two: Ona is an example of a group for whom tasks are not typically male or female, but rather they are shared. These are but five examples of the variation found in different foraging groups; in reality there is much more variation (Halperin 1980).

Although not a part of Halperin's study, the Agta of the Philippines also provide an interesting case study. Studies by P. Bion Griffin and Agnes Estioko-Griffin show that many Agta women actively participate in hunting (Estioko-Griffin and Griffin 1981). For more information regarding the Agta, see the Agta page.

Theories

Geographic Variation

According to research by Rhoda H. Halperin, the sexual division of labor can be explained by geographic variation. This theory is based upon research of different foraging societies in a variety of latitudes. Halperin's theory of geographic variation is based on the "relationships between factors which are ecological, specifically seasonal, and factors which are economic-organizational, specifically those concerning production processes" (Halperin 1980: 379).

The best example of this theory is the comparison of case study one: !Kung and case study five: Eskimo. Due to the fact that the !Kung live in an environment that allows for plant growth and wildlife, the !Kung have more resources readily available to them. This abundance of resources allows for a greater number of group members, both men and women, to go out and procure food. The Eskimo, on the other hand, live in an environment where the extreme cold greatly limits their meat resources, which are scarce and difficult to capture. Therefore, only a few group members can hunt while the others stay behind to care for the children and process meat. Halperin believes that the abundance or scarcity of resources, which is determined by environmental conditions, creates the need for greater or fewer group members to procure food sources (Halperin 1980).

In addition to the abundance or scarcity of resources, Halperin suggests that food processing dictates the sexual division of labor. This element of Halperin's geographic variation theory is best described by comparing case study two: Ona and case study five: Eskimo. There is great geographic variation between the two groups. In the case of the Ona, the Tierra del Fuego Island provides easy access to fish while the grassy inland provides vegetation. A large portion of the Ona diet consists of fish. While both men and women fish, it is the women who process them, which is a fairly simple procedure that consists of laying the fish on the beach to dry. This operation enables women to both catch and process fish without the need for assistance. In the case of the Eskimo, however, the environment is not so generous. The extreme cold demands that all parts of the seal are used for food, clothing, shelter, and tools. Men hunt seals and bring them home to the women, who then distribute the meat and process what remains. Because processing sealskins is so time consuming and difficult, there is no time for women to hunt. Furthermore, men are dependent on women for their sewing skills and ability to process skins. For example, if women fall behind in making coats and boots, men cannot go out to hunt. Thus, men and women are mutually dependent on each other (Halperin 1980).

Halperin uses these examples to explain the geographic variation theory. Since different environments limit certain activities, groups must adopt a unique division of labor to accommodate their particular environment. Furthermore, Halperin believes that the environment creates a mutual dependency between men and women and the tasks they do. Cross-culturally, both men and women contribute to subsistence in a generally even pattern, but it is the geographic variation that explains labor patterns: "Among band-level hunter gatherers the male-female division of labor remains unspecialized. Female and male contributions to production complement one another"(Halperin 1980: 395).

Foraging and Sedentism

Patricia Draper's research suggests that the shift from the traditional hunting and gathering lifestyle to sedentism may have an effect on the sexual division of labor. Using the !Kung as an example, Draper cites two different groups, the traditional hunter-gatherer !Kung of /Du/da and the !Kung of Mahopa, who have become accustomed to sedentism (Draper 1975).

The !Kung rely heavily on wild vegetables as a main source of their diet, and the women of /Du/da contribute 60-80% of the daily food intake. Because of this, women have control over the food they gather and can distribute it as they see fit. Roles among the /Du/da !Kung are at times interchangeable, with women traveling great distances to forage and men building huts and carrying water back at camp. Survival in an extreme environment with harsh conditions is a group effort, which promotes a more egalitarian social system among the !Kung of /Du/da.

The !Kung of Mahopa reside at a permanent water source in the !Kangwa Valley and have become accustomed to sedentism. Although this group is also !Kung, their sexual division of labor is drastically different from the !Kung of /Du/da. Here, women are mostly homebound and make their contributions by doing domestic chores. Men are away most of the time and are able to achieve higher status through storage and wealth. Draper suggests that the role of women changed with the introduction of animal husbandry and crop planting. Women experienced a reduction in autonomy and men became more powerful.

Research

The "Man the Hunter" conference changed the way researchers think about and study hunter-gatherer societies. It inspired research on issues and raised questions that had not been previously considered, and for the first time, women's contributions to subsistence in foraging societies became an important topic of study. Furthermore, hunter-gatherer societies were now perceived as sexually egalitarian, and thus the idea that men and women are equal (Kelly 2007: 262).

Research was conducted to determine whether men and women contribute equally to foraging and to diet. Carol Ember and Betty Meehan used ethnographic data to look for patterns in food procurement and effective temperature (ET), and they found that (for the most part) men procure more food in colder environments. Some critics, such as Hunn, object to the scale used by Ember and Meehan to measure male food production. Rhoda Halperin takes issue with Ember's lack of consideration for women's work in areas where meat is the primary food source. In addition to child rearing, breastfeeding, and household management, women make and mend clothing, repair equipment, and prepare and store food. Therefore, women's contributions to survival are equally important to those made by men (Kelly 2007: 262-265).

Ethnographic data has shown the importance of large game hunting in foraging societies, which is credited to the cultural value of sharing meat and the prestige it bestows upon men with strong hunting skills. Research has found that women hunt as well, but their catches are usually small game that are hunted while they are gathering. There are always exceptions to the rule, such as the Philippine Agta. About 85% of Agta women hunt, which is attributed to women leaving their children in the care of others while they are out hunting. Data collected from cross-cultural studies conclude that the sexual division of labor is the result of pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding, and raising children. Childcare responsibilities usually limit women's opportunities to procure food through hunting (Kelly 2007: 265-268).

Selected Articles and Critical Reviews

The following article summaries relate research that has been conducted on the Sexual Division of Labor in foraging groups. Clicking on the links will take you to student-written critical reviews of these articles. These reviews are provided to illustrate how anthropologists think critically about published research.

In his article, Sexual division of labor and central place foraging: a model for the Carson Desert of western Nevada, David Zeanah uses a behavioral ecology model to reconstruct the sexual division of labor of the prehistoric peoples of the Carson Desert, and the role that it had in broader aspects of their society, such as settlement location and subsistence strategy. Zeanah seeks to dispel the myth of hunters and gatherers of the Carson Desert as working together in a “cooperative effort toward household self-sufficiency” (Steward 1938). Data gathered by ethnographers indicates that prey of men and women overlapped considerably. Gathering was more efficient, yet men still hunted. Men shared their food with the community, instead of hoarding it for their own offspring. The prevailing model of prehistoric peoples of the Carson Desert is a “limnosedentary” model in which the central base location, as well as the mobility patterns of both men and women were determined by the women’s foraging patterns (Zeanah 2004).

In her article, Ecology and Mode of Production: Seasonal Variation and the Division of Labor by Sex Among Hunter-Gatherers, Rhoda H. Halperin discusses how the environment effects tasks delegated to men and women in a variety of foraging societies. Halperin analyzes five case studies from a wide range of cultures and environments. Halperin asserts that different tasks are not greater than one another, rather the combination of the tasks improves the society. Futhermore, Halperin believes that there is basically an egalitarian pattern of labor division in a variety of latitudes (Halperin 1980).

Frank W. Marlowe analyzes variation in sex-specific foraging in Hunting and Gathering: The Human Sexual Division of Foraging Labor. This study examines whether the sexual division of labor is an established cooperation between men and women across hunting and gathering societies. There is no sexual division of labor in the majority of species, and Marlowe is interested in why it is so unusual among humans and through what circumstances it evolved (Marlowe 2007).

In the article !Kung Women: Contrasts in Sexual Egalitarianism in Foraging and Sedentary Contexts, Patricia Draper discusses her observations of a traditional hunting and gathering !Kung group and the !Kung of Mahopa who have become more accustomed to sedentism. Although both groups are !Kung, they have drastically different social systems and sexual egalitarianism in particular. Draper suggests that the shift from traditional foraging to sedentism is the probable cause of this (Draper, Patricia 1975).

Other Resources

In his blog A Very Remote Period Indeed, Julien Riel-Salvatore discusses the Sexual Division of Labor in Neandertals

The University of California Irvine has a sexual division of labor page with links to three anthropological articles on the subject.

This page contains a short essay about the contemporary division of labor.

Hunting Gathering And The Division Of Foraging Labor

References Cited

Draper, Patricia
1975 !Kung Women: Contrasts in Sexual Egalitarianism in Foraging and Sedentary Contexts. Toward an Anthropology of Women: 77-109.

Estioko-Griffin, Agnes, and P. Bion Griffin
1981 Woman the Hunter: The Agta. In Woman the Gatherer. Frances Dahlberg, ed. Pp. 121-151. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Halperin, Rhoda H.
1980 Ecology and Mode of Production: Seasonal Variation and the Division of Labor by Sex Among Hunter-Gatherers. Journal of Anthropological Research 36: 379-399.

Kelly, Robert L.
2007 The Foraging Spectrum: Diversity in Hunter-Gatherer Lifeways. Clinton Corners (NY): Eliot Werner Publications/Percheron Press.

Marlowe, Frank W.
2007 Hunting and Gathering: The Human Sexual Division of Foraging Labor. Cross-Cultural Research 41(2): 170-195.

Slocum, Sally
1975 Woman the Gatherer: Male Bias in Anthropology. In Toward an Anthropology of Women. R. R. Reiter, ed. Pp. 36-50. New York: Monthly Review Press.

Zeanah, David W.
2004 Sexual division of labor and central place foraging: a model for the Carson Desert of western Nevada. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 23: 1-32.

External Links

• Photo of hunters in the outback, taken from plawiuk.blogspot.com. For an external link, click here.
• Photo of Bukakhue San gatherers, taken from www.africa-ata.org. For an external link, click on San Gatherer.