Women's Status in Egalitarian Society: Implications for Social Evolution

Abstract

The analysis of women's status in egalitarian society is inseparable from the analysis of egalitarian social-economic structure as a whole, and concepts based on the hierarchical structure of our society distort both. To see relations of power and property that characterize our society as present in band societies, although extremely weak, obscures the qualitatively different relations that obtained when, in place of dyadic lines of dependency, each individual was dependent upon the group as a whole, "public" and "private" spheres were not dichotomized, and decisions were made by and large by those who would be carrying them out.Assumptions of female subservience in egalitarian society both derive from and perpetuate a view of such society as merely an incipient form of our own. This problem, along with ethnocentric reporting of data, leads to contradictory ethnographic accounts of women's status among hunter/gatherers, as illustrated by material on Australian Aborigines and on the Ojibwa. Similar problems obtain for the more elaborated but still egalitarian Iroquois.The failure to deal historically with changes in egalitarian societies as they became involved in the "capitalist world system," recently discussed by Wallerstein, further compounds problems of analyzing their structure. As a result of these various difficulties, the fundamental transformation in women's status that accompanied ranking and hierarchy is commonly obscured. However, an understanding of egalitarian society as based on production for use and control by the producers over their work lays the basis for examining the linked processes proposed by Engels, whereby specialization of labor and production for exchange led to private property, class differences, and the subservience of women in the economic family unit. The present paper, submitted in final form IO IX 77, was sent for comment to 5o scholars. The responses are printed below and are followed by a reply by the author.The analysis of women's status in egalitarian society is inseparable from the analysis of egalitarian socialeconomic structure as a whole, and concepts based on the hierarchical structure of our society distort both. I shall argue that the tendency to attribute to band societies the relations of power and property characteristic of our own obscures the qualitatively different relations that obtained when ties of economic dependency linked the individual directly with the group as a whole, when public and private spheres were not dichotomized, and when decisions were made by and large by those who would be carrying them out. I shall attempt to show that a historical approach and an avoidance of ethnocentric phraseology in the study of such societies reveals that their egalitarianism applied as fully to women as to men. Further, I shall point out that this is a fact of great importance to the understanding of social evolution.Demonstrating that women's status in egalitarian society was qualitatively different from that in our own presents problems at several levels. First,...

Prehistoric Myths in Modern Political Philosophy

“…They have virtually no property crime, and nonlethal violence tends to be low. Some researchers argue that rape and other forms of violence targeting women are relatively low in band societies (Leacock 1998;Boehm 2001). Lee (1982) argues that women in band society have high political equality and personal autonomy, which might account for low rates of violence.…”

Une approche de l’étude du droit et du colonialisme : vers une perspective autohistorique amérindienne sur le changement juridique, la colonisation, les sexes et la résistance à la colonisation

“…Anderson reconnaît que son interprétation de l'histoire huronne et montagnaise est le produit d'une lecture critique de l'ouvrage d'Eleanor Leacock (1978Leacock ( , 1980 sur le statut des femmes dans les sociétés amérin-diennes. Dans cet essai très important, Leacock (1978) explique comment la structure hiérarchique considérée comme normale dans la société moderne déforme l'analyse de la structure socio-économique égalitaire et le statut des femmes dans les sociétés égalitaires.…”

“…Dans cet essai très important, Leacock (1978) explique comment la structure hiérarchique considérée comme normale dans la société moderne déforme l'analyse de la structure socio-économique égalitaire et le statut des femmes dans les sociétés égalitaires. La critique de Leacock des problèmes d'interprétation créés par une perspective eurocentrique a servi subséquemment à la plupart des chercheurs de point de départ à l'examen de l'impact de la colonisation sur les relations entre sexes dans les sociétés amérindiennes.…”

“…L'influence du travail de Leacock (1978) se retrouve aussi dans la récente étude de Carol Devens (1992), Countering Colonization : Native American Women and the Great Lakes Missions, 1630-1900, qui essaie de combiner les thèmes de sexes et résistance. Devens soutient que les hommes autochtones étaient relativement faciles à convertir au christianisme parce que cette acceptation constituait pour eux une façon de s'adapter au nouveau contexte économique créé par l'arrivée des missionnaires jésuites et l'établissement du commerce des fourrures.…”

“…Dans le sillage des conclusions de plusieurs historiennes féministes ayant étudié l'histoire des premiers rapports avec les autochtones dans l'ouest canadien (Brown, 1980;Van Kirk, 1980), Attwood (1990, p. 126) souligne, en parlant de l'oeuvre d 'Ann McGrath (1987), que «la différence entre les sexes a joué un rôle fondamental » dans la nature et le résultat des premières relations entre Européens et autochtones 11 d'Australie. Depuis le début des années 1980, les universitaires féministes, qu'elles fussent sociologues, anthropologues ou historiennes, ont entrepris de brosser un portrait beaucoup plus nuancé du rôle joué par les femmes autochtones (ou indigènes) dans le processus de colonisation européenne et de l'impact de ce processus sur les relations entre sexes parmi les peuples indigènes (Leacock, 1978(Leacock, , 1980Van Kirk, 1987;Anderson, 1991;Bonvillian, 1989;Bourgeault, 1988Bourgeault, , 1989Devens, 1992;Emberley, 1993;Foster, 1993). Dans la section suivante, nous étudierons les questions et thèmes les plus importants soulevés dans la documentation nord-américaine récente sur les femmes autochtones 10.…”