Anthropology

Q: Negotiating Work and Family in America DIANNA SHANDY AND KARINE MOE Summary In this article, Dianna Shandy and Karine Moe explore the complexities of the latest research on how generations of women have handled the challenges of negotiating work and family in America. By combining labor statistics, interviews with more than 100 women, focus groups, and surveys of nearly 1000 college graduates, the authors explore the advances of women in the workforce, their experiences juggling families and careers outside of the home, and the subsequent choices new generations of women are making in this area. Anthropologists used to view the gender relationship between men and women as one of inherent male domination. Ernestine Friedl, however, argued that control of publicly distributed resources was key to women's power. Among the Hadza of Tanzania for example, men and women gather food equally, and subsequently relate to one another with relative gender equality. In contrast, when men supply virtually all of the food, such as among the Inuit of the Arctic, there is significant gender inequality. Similar cultural ranking exists in the United States. In the United States one's occupation determines relative rank. Today, women hold positions previously reserved for men onlypositions that include leadership, management, and business ownership. Women make up half of the workforce on all U.S. payrolls, and own one third of the businesses in the United States. Additionally, women now account for more than 50 percent of all college students and are the majority of those enrolled in graduate or professional schools. Women have made great strides toward gender equality in the workplace over the last few decades, but many are still opting out when they have children. Many gender-related factors both push women out of the workforce and pull them toward family and home, such as a woman's "second shift" or experiencing a "glass ceiling" (the proverbial barrier preventing advancement to a higher position). Unlike other industrialized nations, women in the United States of at least three generations have experienced and continue to experience significant structural barriers to flexible and affordable childcare. Given the low cultural ranking given of the occupation of "full-time motherhood," women often struggle to maintain a sense of gender equality, prestige, and power while at home. Some do so by forming strong social groups. Still others describe themselves as career women taking time off to stay home with kids. In "Negotiating Work and Family in America," Shandy and Moe report that when a parent leaves the workforce, 97 out of 100 times it is the woman who drops out.

Q: Negotiating Work and Family in America DIANNA SHANDY AND KARINE MOE Summary In this article, Dianna Shandy and Karine Moe explore the complexities of the latest research on how generations of women have handled the challenges of negotiating work and family in America. By combining labor statistics, interviews with more than 100 women, focus groups, and surveys of nearly 1000 college graduates, the authors explore the advances of women in the workforce, their experiences juggling families and careers outside of the home, and the subsequent choices new generations of women are making in this area. Anthropologists used to view the gender relationship between men and women as one of inherent male domination. Ernestine Friedl, however, argued that control of publicly distributed resources was key to women's power. Among the Hadza of Tanzania for example, men and women gather food equally, and subsequently relate to one another with relative gender equality. In contrast, when men supply virtually all of the food, such as among the Inuit of the Arctic, there is significant gender inequality. Similar cultural ranking exists in the United States. In the United States one's occupation determines relative rank. Today, women hold positions previously reserved for men onlypositions that include leadership, management, and business ownership. Women make up half of the workforce on all U.S. payrolls, and own one third of the businesses in the United States. Additionally, women now account for more than 50 percent of all college students and are the majority of those enrolled in graduate or professional schools. Women have made great strides toward gender equality in the workplace over the last few decades, but many are still opting out when they have children. Many gender-related factors both push women out of the workforce and pull them toward family and home, such as a woman's "second shift" or experiencing a "glass ceiling" (the proverbial barrier preventing advancement to a higher position). Unlike other industrialized nations, women in the United States of at least three generations have experienced and continue to experience significant structural barriers to flexible and affordable childcare. Given the low cultural ranking given of the occupation of "full-time motherhood," women often struggle to maintain a sense of gender equality, prestige, and power while at home. Some do so by forming strong social groups. Still others describe themselves as career women taking time off to stay home with kids. According to Shandy and Moe in "Negotiating Work and Family in America," women make up one third of all workers on U.S. payrolls.

Q: Negotiating Work and Family in America DIANNA SHANDY AND KARINE MOE Summary In this article, Dianna Shandy and Karine Moe explore the complexities of the latest research on how generations of women have handled the challenges of negotiating work and family in America. By combining labor statistics, interviews with more than 100 women, focus groups, and surveys of nearly 1000 college graduates, the authors explore the advances of women in the workforce, their experiences juggling families and careers outside of the home, and the subsequent choices new generations of women are making in this area. Anthropologists used to view the gender relationship between men and women as one of inherent male domination. Ernestine Friedl, however, argued that control of publicly distributed resources was key to women's power. Among the Hadza of Tanzania for example, men and women gather food equally, and subsequently relate to one another with relative gender equality. In contrast, when men supply virtually all of the food, such as among the Inuit of the Arctic, there is significant gender inequality. Similar cultural ranking exists in the United States. In the United States one's occupation determines relative rank. Today, women hold positions previously reserved for men onlypositions that include leadership, management, and business ownership. Women make up half of the workforce on all U.S. payrolls, and own one third of the businesses in the United States. Additionally, women now account for more than 50 percent of all college students and are the majority of those enrolled in graduate or professional schools. Women have made great strides toward gender equality in the workplace over the last few decades, but many are still opting out when they have children. Many gender-related factors both push women out of the workforce and pull them toward family and home, such as a woman's "second shift" or experiencing a "glass ceiling" (the proverbial barrier preventing advancement to a higher position). Unlike other industrialized nations, women in the United States of at least three generations have experienced and continue to experience significant structural barriers to flexible and affordable childcare. Given the low cultural ranking given of the occupation of "full-time motherhood," women often struggle to maintain a sense of gender equality, prestige, and power while at home. Some do so by forming strong social groups. Still others describe themselves as career women taking time off to stay home with kids. According to Shandy and Moe in "Negotiating Work and Family in America," anthropologist Ernestine Friedl argues that control of publicly shared resources, such as animal proteins, in hunter-gatherer societies determines the degree to which females are equal to males.

Q: Negotiating Work and Family in America DIANNA SHANDY AND KARINE MOE Summary In this article, Dianna Shandy and Karine Moe explore the complexities of the latest research on how generations of women have handled the challenges of negotiating work and family in America. By combining labor statistics, interviews with more than 100 women, focus groups, and surveys of nearly 1000 college graduates, the authors explore the advances of women in the workforce, their experiences juggling families and careers outside of the home, and the subsequent choices new generations of women are making in this area. Anthropologists used to view the gender relationship between men and women as one of inherent male domination. Ernestine Friedl, however, argued that control of publicly distributed resources was key to women's power. Among the Hadza of Tanzania for example, men and women gather food equally, and subsequently relate to one another with relative gender equality. In contrast, when men supply virtually all of the food, such as among the Inuit of the Arctic, there is significant gender inequality. Similar cultural ranking exists in the United States. In the United States one's occupation determines relative rank. Today, women hold positions previously reserved for men onlypositions that include leadership, management, and business ownership. Women make up half of the workforce on all U.S. payrolls, and own one third of the businesses in the United States. Additionally, women now account for more than 50 percent of all college students and are the majority of those enrolled in graduate or professional schools. Women have made great strides toward gender equality in the workplace over the last few decades, but many are still opting out when they have children. Many gender-related factors both push women out of the workforce and pull them toward family and home, such as a woman's "second shift" or experiencing a "glass ceiling" (the proverbial barrier preventing advancement to a higher position). Unlike other industrialized nations, women in the United States of at least three generations have experienced and continue to experience significant structural barriers to flexible and affordable childcare. Given the low cultural ranking given of the occupation of "full-time motherhood," women often struggle to maintain a sense of gender equality, prestige, and power while at home. Some do so by forming strong social groups. Still others describe themselves as career women taking time off to stay home with kids. In "Negotiating Work and Family in America," Shandy and Moe argue that even when men and women work at the same jobs, men always have domination over women.

Q: Negotiating Work and Family in America DIANNA SHANDY AND KARINE MOESummary In this article, Dianna Shandy and Karine Moe explore the complexities of the latest research on how generations of women have handled the challenges of negotiating work and family in America. By combining labor statistics, interviews with more than 100 women, focus groups, and surveys of nearly 1000 college graduates, the authors explore the advances of women in the workforce, their experiences juggling families and careers outside of the home, and the subsequent choices new generations of women are making in this area.Anthropologists used to view the gender relationship between men and women as one of inherent male domination. Ernestine Friedl, however, argued that control of publicly distributed resources was key to women's power. Among the Hadza of Tanzania for example, men and women gather food equally, and subsequently relate to one another with relative gender equality. In contrast, when men supply virtually all of the food, such as among the Inuit of the Arctic, there is significant gender inequality.Similar cultural ranking exists in the United States. In the United States one's occupation determines relative rank. Today, women hold positions previously reserved for men onlypositions that include leadership, management, and business ownership. Women make up half of the workforce on all U.S. payrolls, and own one third of the businesses in the United States. Additionally, women now account for more than 50 percent of all college students and are the majority of those enrolled in graduate or professional schools. Women have made great strides toward gender equality in the workplace over the last few decades, but many are still opting out when they have children.Many gender-related factors both push women out of the workforce and pull them toward family and home, such as a woman's "second shift" or experiencing a "glass ceiling" (the proverbial barrier preventing advancement to a higher position). Unlike other industrialized nations, women in the United States of at least three generations have experienced and continue to experience significant structural barriers to flexible and affordable childcare.Given the low cultural ranking given of the occupation of "full-time motherhood," women often struggle to maintain a sense of gender equality, prestige, and power while at home. Some do so by forming strong social groups. Still others describe themselves as career women taking time off to stay home with kids.In "Negotiating Work and Family in America," Shandy and Moe illustrate how the primary source of one's public social identity is his or her occupation.

Q: Negotiating Work and Family in America DIANNA SHANDY AND KARINE MOESummary In this article, Dianna Shandy and Karine Moe explore the complexities of the latest research on how generations of women have handled the challenges of negotiating work and family in America. By combining labor statistics, interviews with more than 100 women, focus groups, and surveys of nearly 1000 college graduates, the authors explore the advances of women in the workforce, their experiences juggling families and careers outside of the home, and the subsequent choices new generations of women are making in this area.Anthropologists used to view the gender relationship between men and women as one of inherent male domination. Ernestine Friedl, however, argued that control of publicly distributed resources was key to women's power. Among the Hadza of Tanzania for example, men and women gather food equally, and subsequently relate to one another with relative gender equality. In contrast, when men supply virtually all of the food, such as among the Inuit of the Arctic, there is significant gender inequality.Similar cultural ranking exists in the United States. In the United States one's occupation determines relative rank. Today, women hold positions previously reserved for men onlypositions that include leadership, management, and business ownership. Women make up half of the workforce on all U.S. payrolls, and own one third of the businesses in the United States. Additionally, women now account for more than 50 percent of all college students and are the majority of those enrolled in graduate or professional schools. Women have made great strides toward gender equality in the workplace over the last few decades, but many are still opting out when they have children.Many gender-related factors both push women out of the workforce and pull them toward family and home, such as a woman's "second shift" or experiencing a "glass ceiling" (the proverbial barrier preventing advancement to a higher position). Unlike other industrialized nations, women in the United States of at least three generations have experienced and continue to experience significant structural barriers to flexible and affordable childcare.Given the low cultural ranking given of the occupation of "full-time motherhood," women often struggle to maintain a sense of gender equality, prestige, and power while at home. Some do so by forming strong social groups. Still others describe themselves as career women taking time off to stay home with kids.In "Negotiating Work and Family in America," Shandy and Moe argue that it is only older women who face structural barriers in an attempt to negotiate work and family responsibilities.

Q: Marriage and Adulthood in West AfricaSUSANNA FIORATTASummaryAcross cultures, marriage is a rite of passage that confers statusboth legal and socialon those who participate in it. Marriage often increases social status and, in some societies such as the United States, affords participants legal protections not available through other means. However, it is not generally thought of as something that affects an individual's status as an adult. Individuals in the United States and other countries have every reason to believe that they will be successful whether they marry or not. In her article, "Marriage and Adulthood in West Africa," Susanna Fioratta describes a society in Guinea where marriage is the only way to be considered a responsible adult.For both men and women in the Fouta Djallon, marriage is not a choice. It is vitally important that an individual be married in order to be considered a responsible adult worthy of offering advice, taking on roles in the community, and being trusted with money. Even potential leaderssuch as 72-year-old presidential candidatesmust have a wife, children, and a home; otherwise, they are considered incapable of being responsible, not worthy of offering advice, and unable to show sympathy or pity. In the local Pular language, there is not even a word to describe an unmarried adult woman. There are only words for girl or virgin (jiwo) and woman (debbo). A state of being an adult unmarried woman is incomprehensible.Achieving and maintaining a marriage in the Fouta Djallon is very difficult. Men must make enough money to support a wife and family, build a house, and care for extended family. This requires migrating to nearby countries to find work and save money. Women, for their part, must endure painful excision to be considered eligible for marriage. As wives, they must submit to their husbands at all times, cook and clean for a dozen or more individuals, bear and take care of children, maintain a garden of vegetables, and do so with inadequate funds. To make ends meet, wives often earn supplemental income selling snacks, cloth, or other items in the village. Divorce and premature death are not uncommon. When women are divorced or their husbands die prematurely, their parents quickly arrange new marriages; some widows are inherited as wives of their deceased husband's brothers.Fioratta argues that the challenges associated with marriage are what allow both men and women to demonstrate that they are responsible, trustworthy adults. Despite these challenges, particularly for women, marriage is a highly sought-after status and is necessary to becoming a respected elder in the community.The rite of passage for new babies in the Fouta Djallon may include a naming ceremony, animal sacrifice, and blessing by an imam or elder.

Q: Marriage and Adulthood in West Africa SUSANNA FIORATTA Summary Across cultures, marriage is a rite of passage that confers statusboth legal and socialon those who participate in it. Marriage often increases social status and, in some societies such as the United States, affords participants legal protections not available through other means. However, it is not generally thought of as something that affects an individual's status as an adult. Individuals in the United States and other countries have every reason to believe that they will be successful whether they marry or not. In her article, "Marriage and Adulthood in West Africa," Susanna Fioratta describes a society in Guinea where marriage is the only way to be considered a responsible adult. For both men and women in the Fouta Djallon, marriage is not a choice. It is vitally important that an individual be married in order to be considered a responsible adult worthy of offering advice, taking on roles in the community, and being trusted with money. Even potential leaderssuch as 72-year-old presidential candidatesmust have a wife, children, and a home; otherwise, they are considered incapable of being responsible, not worthy of offering advice, and unable to show sympathy or pity. In the local Pular language, there is not even a word to describe an unmarried adult woman. There are only words for girl or virgin (jiwo) and woman (debbo). A state of being an adult unmarried woman is incomprehensible. Achieving and maintaining a marriage in the Fouta Djallon is very difficult. Men must make enough money to support a wife and family, build a house, and care for extended family. This requires migrating to nearby countries to find work and save money. Women, for their part, must endure painful excision to be considered eligible for marriage. As wives, they must submit to their husbands at all times, cook and clean for a dozen or more individuals, bear and take care of children, maintain a garden of vegetables, and do so with inadequate funds. To make ends meet, wives often earn supplemental income selling snacks, cloth, or other items in the village. Divorce and premature death are not uncommon. When women are divorced or their husbands die prematurely, their parents quickly arrange new marriages; some widows are inherited as wives of their deceased husband's brothers. Fioratta argues that the challenges associated with marriage are what allow both men and women to demonstrate that they are responsible, trustworthy adults. Despite these challenges, particularly for women, marriage is a highly sought-after status and is necessary to becoming a respected elder in the community. Most women in the Fouta Djallon wait until they are in their thirties before accepting a marriage proposal.

Q: Marriage and Adulthood in West Africa SUSANNA FIORATTA Summary Across cultures, marriage is a rite of passage that confers statusboth legal and socialon those who participate in it. Marriage often increases social status and, in some societies such as the United States, affords participants legal protections not available through other means. However, it is not generally thought of as something that affects an individual's status as an adult. Individuals in the United States and other countries have every reason to believe that they will be successful whether they marry or not. In her article, "Marriage and Adulthood in West Africa," Susanna Fioratta describes a society in Guinea where marriage is the only way to be considered a responsible adult. For both men and women in the Fouta Djallon, marriage is not a choice. It is vitally important that an individual be married in order to be considered a responsible adult worthy of offering advice, taking on roles in the community, and being trusted with money. Even potential leaderssuch as 72-year-old presidential candidatesmust have a wife, children, and a home; otherwise, they are considered incapable of being responsible, not worthy of offering advice, and unable to show sympathy or pity. In the local Pular language, there is not even a word to describe an unmarried adult woman. There are only words for girl or virgin (jiwo) and woman (debbo). A state of being an adult unmarried woman is incomprehensible. Achieving and maintaining a marriage in the Fouta Djallon is very difficult. Men must make enough money to support a wife and family, build a house, and care for extended family. This requires migrating to nearby countries to find work and save money. Women, for their part, must endure painful excision to be considered eligible for marriage. As wives, they must submit to their husbands at all times, cook and clean for a dozen or more individuals, bear and take care of children, maintain a garden of vegetables, and do so with inadequate funds. To make ends meet, wives often earn supplemental income selling snacks, cloth, or other items in the village. Divorce and premature death are not uncommon. When women are divorced or their husbands die prematurely, their parents quickly arrange new marriages; some widows are inherited as wives of their deceased husband's brothers. Fioratta argues that the challenges associated with marriage are what allow both men and women to demonstrate that they are responsible, trustworthy adults. Despite these challenges, particularly for women, marriage is a highly sought-after status and is necessary to becoming a respected elder in the community. A marriage, considered an important alliance between families in Fouta Djallon, is typically arranged by the parents of the bride.

Q: Marriage and Adulthood in West AfricaSUSANNA FIORATTASummaryAcross cultures, marriage is a rite of passage that confers statusboth legal and socialon those who participate in it. Marriage often increases social status and, in some societies such as the United States, affords participants legal protections not available through other means. However, it is not generally thought of as something that affects an individual's status as an adult. Individuals in the United States and other countries have every reason to believe that they will be successful whether they marry or not. In her article, "Marriage and Adulthood in West Africa," Susanna Fioratta describes a society in Guinea where marriage is the only way to be considered a responsible adult.For both men and women in the Fouta Djallon, marriage is not a choice. It is vitally important that an individual be married in order to be considered a responsible adult worthy of offering advice, taking on roles in the community, and being trusted with money. Even potential leaderssuch as 72-year-old presidential candidatesmust have a wife, children, and a home; otherwise, they are considered incapable of being responsible, not worthy of offering advice, and unable to show sympathy or pity. In the local Pular language, there is not even a word to describe an unmarried adult woman. There are only words for girl or virgin (jiwo) and woman (debbo). A state of being an adult unmarried woman is incomprehensible.Achieving and maintaining a marriage in the Fouta Djallon is very difficult. Men must make enough money to support a wife and family, build a house, and care for extended family. This requires migrating to nearby countries to find work and save money. Women, for their part, must endure painful excision to be considered eligible for marriage. As wives, they must submit to their husbands at all times, cook and clean for a dozen or more individuals, bear and take care of children, maintain a garden of vegetables, and do so with inadequate funds. To make ends meet, wives often earn supplemental income selling snacks, cloth, or other items in the village. Divorce and premature death are not uncommon. When women are divorced or their husbands die prematurely, their parents quickly arrange new marriages; some widows are inherited as wives of their deceased husband's brothers.Fioratta argues that the challenges associated with marriage are what allow both men and women to demonstrate that they are responsible, trustworthy adults. Despite these challenges, particularly for women, marriage is a highly sought-after status and is necessary to becoming a respected elder in the community.Because everyone in Fouta Djallon understands the societal importance of marriage, the community works together to make it relatively easy to find a spouse and maintain a healthy marriage.

Q: Marriage and Adulthood in West Africa SUSANNA FIORATTA Summary Across cultures, marriage is a rite of passage that confers statusboth legal and socialon those who participate in it. Marriage often increases social status and, in some societies such as the United States, affords participants legal protections not available through other means. However, it is not generally thought of as something that affects an individual's status as an adult. Individuals in the United States and other countries have every reason to believe that they will be successful whether they marry or not. In her article, "Marriage and Adulthood in West Africa," Susanna Fioratta describes a society in Guinea where marriage is the only way to be considered a responsible adult. For both men and women in the Fouta Djallon, marriage is not a choice. It is vitally important that an individual be married in order to be considered a responsible adult worthy of offering advice, taking on roles in the community, and being trusted with money. Even potential leaderssuch as 72-year-old presidential candidatesmust have a wife, children, and a home; otherwise, they are considered incapable of being responsible, not worthy of offering advice, and unable to show sympathy or pity. In the local Pular language, there is not even a word to describe an unmarried adult woman. There are only words for girl or virgin (jiwo) and woman (debbo). A state of being an adult unmarried woman is incomprehensible. Achieving and maintaining a marriage in the Fouta Djallon is very difficult. Men must make enough money to support a wife and family, build a house, and care for extended family. This requires migrating to nearby countries to find work and save money. Women, for their part, must endure painful excision to be considered eligible for marriage. As wives, they must submit to their husbands at all times, cook and clean for a dozen or more individuals, bear and take care of children, maintain a garden of vegetables, and do so with inadequate funds. To make ends meet, wives often earn supplemental income selling snacks, cloth, or other items in the village. Divorce and premature death are not uncommon. When women are divorced or their husbands die prematurely, their parents quickly arrange new marriages; some widows are inherited as wives of their deceased husband's brothers. Fioratta argues that the challenges associated with marriage are what allow both men and women to demonstrate that they are responsible, trustworthy adults. Despite these challenges, particularly for women, marriage is a highly sought-after status and is necessary to becoming a respected elder in the community. It is ideal that newlyweds have children soon after they marry so that the husband may establish himself as the head of the household.

Q: Marriage and Adulthood in West Africa SUSANNA FIORATTA Summary Across cultures, marriage is a rite of passage that confers statusboth legal and socialon those who participate in it. Marriage often increases social status and, in some societies such as the United States, affords participants legal protections not available through other means. However, it is not generally thought of as something that affects an individual's status as an adult. Individuals in the United States and other countries have every reason to believe that they will be successful whether they marry or not. In her article, "Marriage and Adulthood in West Africa," Susanna Fioratta describes a society in Guinea where marriage is the only way to be considered a responsible adult. For both men and women in the Fouta Djallon, marriage is not a choice. It is vitally important that an individual be married in order to be considered a responsible adult worthy of offering advice, taking on roles in the community, and being trusted with money. Even potential leaderssuch as 72-year-old presidential candidatesmust have a wife, children, and a home; otherwise, they are considered incapable of being responsible, not worthy of offering advice, and unable to show sympathy or pity. In the local Pular language, there is not even a word to describe an unmarried adult woman. There are only words for girl or virgin (jiwo) and woman (debbo). A state of being an adult unmarried woman is incomprehensible. Achieving and maintaining a marriage in the Fouta Djallon is very difficult. Men must make enough money to support a wife and family, build a house, and care for extended family. This requires migrating to nearby countries to find work and save money. Women, for their part, must endure painful excision to be considered eligible for marriage. As wives, they must submit to their husbands at all times, cook and clean for a dozen or more individuals, bear and take care of children, maintain a garden of vegetables, and do so with inadequate funds. To make ends meet, wives often earn supplemental income selling snacks, cloth, or other items in the village. Divorce and premature death are not uncommon. When women are divorced or their husbands die prematurely, their parents quickly arrange new marriages; some widows are inherited as wives of their deceased husband's brothers. Fioratta argues that the challenges associated with marriage are what allow both men and women to demonstrate that they are responsible, trustworthy adults. Despite these challenges, particularly for women, marriage is a highly sought-after status and is necessary to becoming a respected elder in the community. In the Fouta Djallon highlands of Guinea in West Africa, an individual's marital status has no bearing on his or her standing within the community.

Q: Polyandry: When Brothers Take a Wife MELVYN C. GOLDSTEIN Summary In this article, Goldstein discusses the functions of a rare custom, fraternal polyandry. Along with monogamy, it is one of the most common forms of marriage in Tibetan society. Among the Tibetans of northern Nepal, it is common for a woman to marry two or more men who are brothers. This arrangement is generally made with the consent of the woman's parents. The oldest brother typically manages the household, with all of the brothers dividing the work equally and participating as sexual partners with the wife. Although brothers in such an arrangement can quarrel with each other and occasionally argue over sexual rights to the shared spouse, many men and women prefer the arrangement. All of the children of the marriage are treated equally by all of the brothers, and no attempt is made to keep track of biological linkage. All of the children treat all the brothers equally, in some regions referring to them as "elder" or "younger." Divorce is possible; an unhappy brother can simply leave the main house and set up his own household. Any children remain in the main household, even if the departing brother is the real father. Two theories have previously been advanced by anthropologists to explain polyandry. One argues that the custom results from a shortage of women due to female infanticide. The other is that polyandry correlates with a shortage of arable land. The claim is that with polyandrous marriage, land can be held in the same male line without subdivision. Goldstein challenges both explanations. There is not, he argues, a high rate of female infanticide among Tibetans, and many Tibetan women live out their lives unmarried, yet bear children. If scarce land were the problem, one would expect poor families with little land to practice polyandry, but it is wealthy farmers who prefer the custom. Polyandry does serve to reduce the birth rate, but Tibetans do not recognize this latent function. Instead, for the wealthier Tibetans who practice it, polyandry is desirable because it permits them to keep land holdings together and continue to live a more prosperous life. By entering into a polyandrous marriage with his brothers, a Tibetan man has access to family land, animals, and any other inheritances. He shares any work burden with his brothers, and thus is afforded greater security. He may not have as much personal freedom as he would in a monogamous marriage, but what he loses in freedom he gains in the economic security, affluence, and prestige that comes with a larger, asset-holding, polyandrous family. In "Polyandry: When Brothers Take a Wife," Goldstein argues that the Tibetan practice of polyandry is analogous to the practice of primogeniture in nineteenth-century England.

Q: Polyandry: When Brothers Take a Wife MELVYN C. GOLDSTEIN Summary In this article, Goldstein discusses the functions of a rare custom, fraternal polyandry. Along with monogamy, it is one of the most common forms of marriage in Tibetan society. Among the Tibetans of northern Nepal, it is common for a woman to marry two or more men who are brothers. This arrangement is generally made with the consent of the woman's parents. The oldest brother typically manages the household, with all of the brothers dividing the work equally and participating as sexual partners with the wife. Although brothers in such an arrangement can quarrel with each other and occasionally argue over sexual rights to the shared spouse, many men and women prefer the arrangement. All of the children of the marriage are treated equally by all of the brothers, and no attempt is made to keep track of biological linkage. All of the children treat all the brothers equally, in some regions referring to them as "elder" or "younger." Divorce is possible; an unhappy brother can simply leave the main house and set up his own household. Any children remain in the main household, even if the departing brother is the real father. Two theories have previously been advanced by anthropologists to explain polyandry. One argues that the custom results from a shortage of women due to female infanticide. The other is that polyandry correlates with a shortage of arable land. The claim is that with polyandrous marriage, land can be held in the same male line without subdivision. Goldstein challenges both explanations. There is not, he argues, a high rate of female infanticide among Tibetans, and many Tibetan women live out their lives unmarried, yet bear children. If scarce land were the problem, one would expect poor families with little land to practice polyandry, but it is wealthy farmers who prefer the custom. Polyandry does serve to reduce the birth rate, but Tibetans do not recognize this latent function. Instead, for the wealthier Tibetans who practice it, polyandry is desirable because it permits them to keep land holdings together and continue to live a more prosperous life. By entering into a polyandrous marriage with his brothers, a Tibetan man has access to family land, animals, and any other inheritances. He shares any work burden with his brothers, and thus is afforded greater security. He may not have as much personal freedom as he would in a monogamous marriage, but what he loses in freedom he gains in the economic security, affluence, and prestige that comes with a larger, asset-holding, polyandrous family. According to Goldstein's "Polyandry: When Brothers Take a Wife," Tibetan polyandry is a response to a shortage of arable land.

Q: Polyandry: When Brothers Take a Wife MELVYN C. GOLDSTEIN Summary In this article, Goldstein discusses the functions of a rare custom, fraternal polyandry. Along with monogamy, it is one of the most common forms of marriage in Tibetan society. Among the Tibetans of northern Nepal, it is common for a woman to marry two or more men who are brothers. This arrangement is generally made with the consent of the woman's parents. The oldest brother typically manages the household, with all of the brothers dividing the work equally and participating as sexual partners with the wife. Although brothers in such an arrangement can quarrel with each other and occasionally argue over sexual rights to the shared spouse, many men and women prefer the arrangement. All of the children of the marriage are treated equally by all of the brothers, and no attempt is made to keep track of biological linkage. All of the children treat all the brothers equally, in some regions referring to them as "elder" or "younger." Divorce is possible; an unhappy brother can simply leave the main house and set up his own household. Any children remain in the main household, even if the departing brother is the real father. Two theories have previously been advanced by anthropologists to explain polyandry. One argues that the custom results from a shortage of women due to female infanticide. The other is that polyandry correlates with a shortage of arable land. The claim is that with polyandrous marriage, land can be held in the same male line without subdivision. Goldstein challenges both explanations. There is not, he argues, a high rate of female infanticide among Tibetans, and many Tibetan women live out their lives unmarried, yet bear children. If scarce land were the problem, one would expect poor families with little land to practice polyandry, but it is wealthy farmers who prefer the custom. Polyandry does serve to reduce the birth rate, but Tibetans do not recognize this latent function. Instead, for the wealthier Tibetans who practice it, polyandry is desirable because it permits them to keep land holdings together and continue to live a more prosperous life. By entering into a polyandrous marriage with his brothers, a Tibetan man has access to family land, animals, and any other inheritances. He shares any work burden with his brothers, and thus is afforded greater security. He may not have as much personal freedom as he would in a monogamous marriage, but what he loses in freedom he gains in the economic security, affluence, and prestige that comes with a larger, asset-holding, polyandrous family. In "Polyandry: When Brothers Take a Wife," Goldstein argues that Tibetan polyandry functions to reduce the birth rate.

Q: Polyandry: When Brothers Take a Wife MELVYN C. GOLDSTEIN Summary In this article, Goldstein discusses the functions of a rare custom, fraternal polyandry. Along with monogamy, it is one of the most common forms of marriage in Tibetan society. Among the Tibetans of northern Nepal, it is common for a woman to marry two or more men who are brothers. This arrangement is generally made with the consent of the woman's parents. The oldest brother typically manages the household, with all of the brothers dividing the work equally and participating as sexual partners with the wife. Although brothers in such an arrangement can quarrel with each other and occasionally argue over sexual rights to the shared spouse, many men and women prefer the arrangement. All of the children of the marriage are treated equally by all of the brothers, and no attempt is made to keep track of biological linkage. All of the children treat all the brothers equally, in some regions referring to them as "elder" or "younger." Divorce is possible; an unhappy brother can simply leave the main house and set up his own household. Any children remain in the main household, even if the departing brother is the real father. Two theories have previously been advanced by anthropologists to explain polyandry. One argues that the custom results from a shortage of women due to female infanticide. The other is that polyandry correlates with a shortage of arable land. The claim is that with polyandrous marriage, land can be held in the same male line without subdivision. Goldstein challenges both explanations. There is not, he argues, a high rate of female infanticide among Tibetans, and many Tibetan women live out their lives unmarried, yet bear children. If scarce land were the problem, one would expect poor families with little land to practice polyandry, but it is wealthy farmers who prefer the custom. Polyandry does serve to reduce the birth rate, but Tibetans do not recognize this latent function. Instead, for the wealthier Tibetans who practice it, polyandry is desirable because it permits them to keep land holdings together and continue to live a more prosperous life. By entering into a polyandrous marriage with his brothers, a Tibetan man has access to family land, animals, and any other inheritances. He shares any work burden with his brothers, and thus is afforded greater security. He may not have as much personal freedom as he would in a monogamous marriage, but what he loses in freedom he gains in the economic security, affluence, and prestige that comes with a larger, asset-holding, polyandrous family. Goldstein believes that Tibetan polyandry is a response to high rates of female infanticide.

Q: Polyandry: When Brothers Take a Wife MELVYN C. GOLDSTEIN Summary In this article, Goldstein discusses the functions of a rare custom, fraternal polyandry. Along with monogamy, it is one of the most common forms of marriage in Tibetan society. Among the Tibetans of northern Nepal, it is common for a woman to marry two or more men who are brothers. This arrangement is generally made with the consent of the woman's parents. The oldest brother typically manages the household, with all of the brothers dividing the work equally and participating as sexual partners with the wife. Although brothers in such an arrangement can quarrel with each other and occasionally argue over sexual rights to the shared spouse, many men and women prefer the arrangement. All of the children of the marriage are treated equally by all of the brothers, and no attempt is made to keep track of biological linkage. All of the children treat all the brothers equally, in some regions referring to them as "elder" or "younger." Divorce is possible; an unhappy brother can simply leave the main house and set up his own household. Any children remain in the main household, even if the departing brother is the real father. Two theories have previously been advanced by anthropologists to explain polyandry. One argues that the custom results from a shortage of women due to female infanticide. The other is that polyandry correlates with a shortage of arable land. The claim is that with polyandrous marriage, land can be held in the same male line without subdivision. Goldstein challenges both explanations. There is not, he argues, a high rate of female infanticide among Tibetans, and many Tibetan women live out their lives unmarried, yet bear children. If scarce land were the problem, one would expect poor families with little land to practice polyandry, but it is wealthy farmers who prefer the custom. Polyandry does serve to reduce the birth rate, but Tibetans do not recognize this latent function. Instead, for the wealthier Tibetans who practice it, polyandry is desirable because it permits them to keep land holdings together and continue to live a more prosperous life. By entering into a polyandrous marriage with his brothers, a Tibetan man has access to family land, animals, and any other inheritances. He shares any work burden with his brothers, and thus is afforded greater security. He may not have as much personal freedom as he would in a monogamous marriage, but what he loses in freedom he gains in the economic security, affluence, and prestige that comes with a larger, asset-holding, polyandrous family. According to Goldstein's "Polyandry: When Brothers Take a Wife," it is richer Tibetans living in Nepal who prefer polyandry.

Q: Family and Kinship in Village India DAVID W. McCURDY Summary In this article, David McCurdy describes the importance of kinship among rural Bhil tribal peoples living in Ratakote, a hill village located in the southern part of Rajasthan near Udaipur, India. He argues that an elaborate and extended kinship system is not only a useful way for peasants to organize their labor, land holdings, and broader social connections, but that it is also a system that can be adapted to the market-dominated economic system currently emerging in India. Americans find it difficult to comprehend the importance of extended kinship, but for the Bhils, the significance of kinship seems elementary. A wedding arranged by a villager for his daughter in 1985 illustrates the point nicely. To begin the arrangement, the father must consult the members of his patrilineage, who must later provide money and labor for the wedding. He will send out word to his feminal kinthe relatives of the women who have married into his line and the relatives of the men that women of his line have marriedin other villages. When prospective grooms are found, the first consideration is clan membership. Clans are large and consist of local lineages living in many villages over a wide territory. Bhils cannot marry into their own, their mother's, or their father's mother's clans; this constitutes incest. Once a suitable spouse is found, negotiations commence to set a dapa (bride price), the money and prestige goods given by the groom's family to that of the bride. Bride price is part of an exchange for the labor and loyalty of the bride. Marriage becomes an alliance between the two families but involves potential conflict. To clearly state that rights to her loyalty, labor, and children shift to her husband's family at marriage, the wedding ceremony symbolizes the bride's removal from her natal group. After marriage, a relationship built on formal respect keeps the bride's family at a proper distance. Extended kinship systems seem well suited to agrarian peasant life where families best control landholding and economic production. Today, India is industrializing and the market economy is attracting many rural peasants to cities as well as restructuring economic relationships in rural villages. The market economy can easily weaken kinship systems by providing individuals with salaries and independence, causing people to move to find work, and creating jobs that compete for time with family obligations. Despite expansion of the market, Indians, including the Bhils described in this article, have adapted kinship relationships to provide support as they scatter across their country and around the world. In "Family and Kinship in Village India," McCurdy notes that clans are localized organizations of relatives, made up of a person's close male relatives who are all descended from a known common ancestor.

Q: Family and Kinship in Village India DAVID W. McCURDY Summary In this article, David McCurdy describes the importance of kinship among rural Bhil tribal peoples living in Ratakote, a hill village located in the southern part of Rajasthan near Udaipur, India. He argues that an elaborate and extended kinship system is not only a useful way for peasants to organize their labor, land holdings, and broader social connections, but that it is also a system that can be adapted to the market-dominated economic system currently emerging in India. Americans find it difficult to comprehend the importance of extended kinship, but for the Bhils, the significance of kinship seems elementary. A wedding arranged by a villager for his daughter in 1985 illustrates the point nicely. To begin the arrangement, the father must consult the members of his patrilineage, who must later provide money and labor for the wedding. He will send out word to his feminal kinthe relatives of the women who have married into his line and the relatives of the men that women of his line have marriedin other villages. When prospective grooms are found, the first consideration is clan membership. Clans are large and consist of local lineages living in many villages over a wide territory. Bhils cannot marry into their own, their mother's, or their father's mother's clans; this constitutes incest. Once a suitable spouse is found, negotiations commence to set a dapa (bride price), the money and prestige goods given by the groom's family to that of the bride. Bride price is part of an exchange for the labor and loyalty of the bride. Marriage becomes an alliance between the two families but involves potential conflict. To clearly state that rights to her loyalty, labor, and children shift to her husband's family at marriage, the wedding ceremony symbolizes the bride's removal from her natal group. After marriage, a relationship built on formal respect keeps the bride's family at a proper distance. Extended kinship systems seem well suited to agrarian peasant life where families best control landholding and economic production. Today, India is industrializing and the market economy is attracting many rural peasants to cities as well as restructuring economic relationships in rural villages. The market economy can easily weaken kinship systems by providing individuals with salaries and independence, causing people to move to find work, and creating jobs that compete for time with family obligations. Despite expansion of the market, Indians, including the Bhils described in this article, have adapted kinship relationships to provide support as they scatter across their country and around the world. In "Family and Kinship in Village India," McCurdy notes that when a groom ritually breaks into his future bride's house at the beginning of the final wedding ceremony, the act is one way to symbolize her movement from her natal family to his.

Q: Family and Kinship in Village India DAVID W. McCURDY Summary In this article, David McCurdy describes the importance of kinship among rural Bhil tribal peoples living in Ratakote, a hill village located in the southern part of Rajasthan near Udaipur, India. He argues that an elaborate and extended kinship system is not only a useful way for peasants to organize their labor, land holdings, and broader social connections, but that it is also a system that can be adapted to the market-dominated economic system currently emerging in India. Americans find it difficult to comprehend the importance of extended kinship, but for the Bhils, the significance of kinship seems elementary. A wedding arranged by a villager for his daughter in 1985 illustrates the point nicely. To begin the arrangement, the father must consult the members of his patrilineage, who must later provide money and labor for the wedding. He will send out word to his feminal kinthe relatives of the women who have married into his line and the relatives of the men that women of his line have marriedin other villages. When prospective grooms are found, the first consideration is clan membership. Clans are large and consist of local lineages living in many villages over a wide territory. Bhils cannot marry into their own, their mother's, or their father's mother's clans; this constitutes incest. Once a suitable spouse is found, negotiations commence to set a dapa (bride price), the money and prestige goods given by the groom's family to that of the bride. Bride price is part of an exchange for the labor and loyalty of the bride. Marriage becomes an alliance between the two families but involves potential conflict. To clearly state that rights to her loyalty, labor, and children shift to her husband's family at marriage, the wedding ceremony symbolizes the bride's removal from her natal group. After marriage, a relationship built on formal respect keeps the bride's family at a proper distance. Extended kinship systems seem well suited to agrarian peasant life where families best control landholding and economic production. Today, India is industrializing and the market economy is attracting many rural peasants to cities as well as restructuring economic relationships in rural villages. The market economy can easily weaken kinship systems by providing individuals with salaries and independence, causing people to move to find work, and creating jobs that compete for time with family obligations. Despite expansion of the market, Indians, including the Bhils described in this article, have adapted kinship relationships to provide support as they scatter across their country and around the world. According to McCurdy in "Family and Kinship in Village India," the term feminal kin refers to the relatives of the men who have married women of one's own line, or the relatives of the women who have married men of one's own line.

Q: Family and Kinship in Village India DAVID W. McCURDY Summary In this article, David McCurdy describes the importance of kinship among rural Bhil tribal peoples living in Ratakote, a hill village located in the southern part of Rajasthan near Udaipur, India. He argues that an elaborate and extended kinship system is not only a useful way for peasants to organize their labor, land holdings, and broader social connections, but that it is also a system that can be adapted to the market-dominated economic system currently emerging in India. Americans find it difficult to comprehend the importance of extended kinship, but for the Bhils, the significance of kinship seems elementary. A wedding arranged by a villager for his daughter in 1985 illustrates the point nicely. To begin the arrangement, the father must consult the members of his patrilineage, who must later provide money and labor for the wedding. He will send out word to his feminal kinthe relatives of the women who have married into his line and the relatives of the men that women of his line have marriedin other villages. When prospective grooms are found, the first consideration is clan membership. Clans are large and consist of local lineages living in many villages over a wide territory. Bhils cannot marry into their own, their mother's, or their father's mother's clans; this constitutes incest. Once a suitable spouse is found, negotiations commence to set a dapa (bride price), the money and prestige goods given by the groom's family to that of the bride. Bride price is part of an exchange for the labor and loyalty of the bride. Marriage becomes an alliance between the two families but involves potential conflict. To clearly state that rights to her loyalty, labor, and children shift to her husband's family at marriage, the wedding ceremony symbolizes the bride's removal from her natal group. After marriage, a relationship built on formal respect keeps the bride's family at a proper distance. Extended kinship systems seem well suited to agrarian peasant life where families best control landholding and economic production. Today, India is industrializing and the market economy is attracting many rural peasants to cities as well as restructuring economic relationships in rural villages. The market economy can easily weaken kinship systems by providing individuals with salaries and independence, causing people to move to find work, and creating jobs that compete for time with family obligations. Despite expansion of the market, Indians, including the Bhils described in this article, have adapted kinship relationships to provide support as they scatter across their country and around the world. According to McCurdy in "Family and Kinship in Village India," marriage allies the families of the bride and groom, which then become equal partners in an association of feminal kin.

Q: Family and Kinship in Village India DAVID W. McCURDY Summary In this article, David McCurdy describes the importance of kinship among rural Bhil tribal peoples living in Ratakote, a hill village located in the southern part of Rajasthan near Udaipur, India. He argues that an elaborate and extended kinship system is not only a useful way for peasants to organize their labor, land holdings, and broader social connections, but that it is also a system that can be adapted to the market-dominated economic system currently emerging in India. Americans find it difficult to comprehend the importance of extended kinship, but for the Bhils, the significance of kinship seems elementary. A wedding arranged by a villager for his daughter in 1985 illustrates the point nicely. To begin the arrangement, the father must consult the members of his patrilineage, who must later provide money and labor for the wedding. He will send out word to his feminal kinthe relatives of the women who have married into his line and the relatives of the men that women of his line have marriedin other villages. When prospective grooms are found, the first consideration is clan membership. Clans are large and consist of local lineages living in many villages over a wide territory. Bhils cannot marry into their own, their mother's, or their father's mother's clans; this constitutes incest. Once a suitable spouse is found, negotiations commence to set a dapa (bride price), the money and prestige goods given by the groom's family to that of the bride. Bride price is part of an exchange for the labor and loyalty of the bride. Marriage becomes an alliance between the two families but involves potential conflict. To clearly state that rights to her loyalty, labor, and children shift to her husband's family at marriage, the wedding ceremony symbolizes the bride's removal from her natal group. After marriage, a relationship built on formal respect keeps the bride's family at a proper distance. Extended kinship systems seem well suited to agrarian peasant life where families best control landholding and economic production. Today, India is industrializing and the market economy is attracting many rural peasants to cities as well as restructuring economic relationships in rural villages. The market economy can easily weaken kinship systems by providing individuals with salaries and independence, causing people to move to find work, and creating jobs that compete for time with family obligations. Despite expansion of the market, Indians, including the Bhils described in this article, have adapted kinship relationships to provide support as they scatter across their country and around the world. According to McCurdy in "Family and Kinship in Village India," until recently Bhil tribals were only permitted to marry people from their own village, thus limiting the scope of their economic and social worlds.

Q: Family and Kinship in Village India DAVID W. McCURDY Summary In this article, David McCurdy describes the importance of kinship among rural Bhil tribal peoples living in Ratakote, a hill village located in the southern part of Rajasthan near Udaipur, India. He argues that an elaborate and extended kinship system is not only a useful way for peasants to organize their labor, land holdings, and broader social connections, but that it is also a system that can be adapted to the market-dominated economic system currently emerging in India. Americans find it difficult to comprehend the importance of extended kinship, but for the Bhils, the significance of kinship seems elementary. A wedding arranged by a villager for his daughter in 1985 illustrates the point nicely. To begin the arrangement, the father must consult the members of his patrilineage, who must later provide money and labor for the wedding. He will send out word to his feminal kinthe relatives of the women who have married into his line and the relatives of the men that women of his line have marriedin other villages. When prospective grooms are found, the first consideration is clan membership. Clans are large and consist of local lineages living in many villages over a wide territory. Bhils cannot marry into their own, their mother's, or their father's mother's clans; this constitutes incest. Once a suitable spouse is found, negotiations commence to set a dapa (bride price), the money and prestige goods given by the groom's family to that of the bride. Bride price is part of an exchange for the labor and loyalty of the bride. Marriage becomes an alliance between the two families but involves potential conflict. To clearly state that rights to her loyalty, labor, and children shift to her husband's family at marriage, the wedding ceremony symbolizes the bride's removal from her natal group. After marriage, a relationship built on formal respect keeps the bride's family at a proper distance. Extended kinship systems seem well suited to agrarian peasant life where families best control landholding and economic production. Today, India is industrializing and the market economy is attracting many rural peasants to cities as well as restructuring economic relationships in rural villages. The market economy can easily weaken kinship systems by providing individuals with salaries and independence, causing people to move to find work, and creating jobs that compete for time with family obligations. Despite expansion of the market, Indians, including the Bhils described in this article, have adapted kinship relationships to provide support as they scatter across their country and around the world. In his article "Family and Kinship in Village India," McCurdy argues that family and kinship relations have been extended to provide support in the market economy.

1 2 3 … 197 Next »

Q&A Hero

Anthropology

Subjects