A collection of shared (often taken for granted) persepctives, pactices, and material objects passed on from one generation to the next, essential for the maturation and successful functioning of human beings

1. SHARED particular way of acting and thinking - not an individual personality trait...pattern of behaviour shared by many people all members of a social group

2.MOSTLY SYSTEMATIC...not random collection of traits

        i.e. patriarchal culture system of naming

3. SOCIALLY LEARNED...developed in each individual through a process of enculturation or socialization

4) Knowledge passed down, actions socially acceptable, objects

5) ABSTRACT...helps us descrive and function in the world, through use of categories that oversimplify the great 'complexity' of life...putting things into boxs, never a perfect fit

6) ARBITRARY...each of the traits of a culture are selevtions out of a much broader range of possibl choices...most culture traits could easily have been something else

...influence our perceptions of many things:

i.e. the "Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis" says that indivduals experience the world based on the structure of the language they habitually use...

inuits in Nunavik region, Quebec, 53 words for snow...percieve more variation in the snow

Orthodox: cultural and linguistic categories constrain our minds and prevent us from thinking particular thoughs

Neo-Whorfian version: our experience of the world is influenced by the categories of our culture and language...gendered objects in French/Spanish

1. HOMOGENOUS: not all aspects of a culture are equally held or agreed upon by all members..development of subcultures

2. UNCHANGING: each process of social learning from generation to generation can leade to the changing of ultimately arbitrary habits

3. NEATLY BOUNDED: cultures constantly interacting with one another and individual traits can easily transfer through cultural diffusion

"the transfer of traits from one culture to another":

-direct contact

-intermediate contact

-stimulus diffusion

A groupd of people sharing

-ties through marriage and/or descent

-material resources

-rules against sex with at least some of the group's members (cultural universal)

A unit of social organization that affects human behaviour in complex industrial and small scale societies alike.

Nuclear Family: mother & father with children

Extended Family: cousins, aunts, uncles, grandparents

incest taboo (sex prohibition) across cultures:

-some cultures allow sex and marriage between 1st cousins (close social range)...to keep material things wihtin the family

-others, suc has collective farm societies of israeli Kibbutzim, discourage between members of the same farm

tied through blood/descent (through time)

tied through marriage i.e. in-laws (operates across space)

Polygyny- one husband many wives (sister wives)

Polyandry- one wife many husbands

poly=many

gamy=union

gany=female

andry=male

Patrilocal- couples live with/near parents of husband

Matrilineal- couples live with/near parents of wife

Neolocal- couples live apart from both sets of parents

1. Patrilineal- tracing family members and property through the male line

2. Matrilineal- tracing family membership and property throuh the female line

Tracing family membership and property rights through both male and female lines

several unilineally extended families tracing descent back to one male or female ancestor

Conglomeration of several lineages. Members often refer to one anothers as 'clan brother/sister'. Clans often own land and represent a political grouping. (could be mythical elements)

Descent traced though both genders without leading to larde, well-deifned groups holding property in common (like clans).

Instead, it depends on a network of relatives called kindred. 

Also, it is ego-centred rather than ancestor centred. (individualistic)

-most are similar to our own patterns

-both fathers sister and mother's sister referred to by term for aunt

etc.

-Has fewest terms

-all females in previous generation (i.e. mother and aunts) are mother

-All males are father

-siblings and cousins are brother or sister

-unlike Inuit, Hawaiian, or wester systems, different sides of the family have different terms.

-cousins on Mother's side are called mother or uncle

-counsins on Father's side are niece or nephew

fictive or ritual kinship

i.e. Paris is burning

sex= physical traits

gender= social construction

1. Sexual dimorphism (different body types)

2. Hormones/Physiology (i.e. pregnancy, menstruation, lactation)

1. Male Strength

2.Male Expendability

3. Female Compatability with child care

-leads to some commone trends. i.e. women focusing on less strenuous activity in and around the house; men engaged in more dangerous and prestigious activity in the public sphere

i.e.

-In Nepal, women leave children at home as they perform difficult agricultural work in the mountains

-Women were warriors among the Maori of New Zealand and West African Kingdom of Dahomey

-Women hold many political positions among hte Coast Salish of BC and Washington

-Agta women in the Philippines hunt and take infants with them

-Aka Pygmy women in CAR hunt while leaving their young to be looked after by their husbands 

1. A cultural construction involving categories of masculinity, femininity, and anything in between

As a result, gender in any culture is abstract (a simplification) and arbitrary (could be otherwise)

2. Cultural "Performance"

-A gender category is never entirely definable on its own but only makes sense in contast to its opposite.

Gender is a relation, relative.

As such, it is something that is constantly expressed in the performances or interactions of peple

ie. Machismo in Mexico. Men are either machos who dominate their wives or mandilones who are bossed around by their wives 

-We are almost constantly performin in front of audiences.

-Play certain social roles which are constantly being judged by an 'audience' and by ourselves

-this is where gender emerges and is maintained

-only when we fee llike we can 'be ourselves' are we backstage (often alone)

Gender Relations can "naturally" shift over the course of the life cycle. In some cultures, any person can become more or less male, more or less female

i.e. The Hua of Papua New Guinea. Ny is a feminine substance stransferred over time between men and women in food, breath and sec. Older men therefore become figapa ('like wome') and women become kakora ('lke men')

i.e. the Hijra, male circumcision, femail ciscumcision, gender reassignment of hermaphrodites

"total Institution": a social settig in which all aspects of life are strictly controlled by a single authority (prison)

1. Humans are primarily rational creatures

2. 'Psychic Unity': all people have the same nature and equal opportunity to develop their reason. Stressed Universalism.

3. Advances in knowledge lead to progress of 'Cultural Evolution'

4. All societies would pass through a "unilinear" model of development from savagery to civilization. Europe had achieved the pinnacle of Progress...

       Hunter-Gatherers->Farmers->China->Europe

1. Emphasized the importance of Emotion over Reason.

Humanities over Hard Science.

2. Stressed 'Cultural Particularism'. Looked at National 'Spirit' and 'Folk cultures' over 'psychic unity

3. Rejected any necessary adherence to an overall scheme of cultural evolution

4/ Rejected negative effects of Modern Progress

Cash flows vs Gift Exchange

Cash Economy Vs GIft economy

Relationships matter...not just stuff

giving is ONE-WAY...not reciprocal, you get gratitude and respect in return for gifts

1. Production- handcrafting, manufacturing

2. Exchange- Buying, selling, gifting, sharing

3. Consumption- ingestion, use

1. Reciprocity- back and forth exchange of resources and gifts. Helps to construct particular kinds of social relationships. Different points in time. Creates obligations and expectation.

2. Redistribution- collection and distribution of resources by a central authority

3. Market Exchange- often between strangers. money and objects more important than social relationships

1. Generalized Reciprocit- giving without expectation of return at definite time in the future

      i.e. Parents->Child, sharing resources among family

2. Balanced Reciprocity- giving with the expectation of roughly matching return within a specific time period. Some form of social sanction (gossip, complaints, suspension of relationships) imposed if return gifts aren't forthcoming.

     i.e. birthday presents between friends, christmas presents, trading partnerships

3. Negative reciprocity ('barter')- an exchange relationship where each party tries to gain as much as they can while giving up as little as possible. Same as market exchange except no money is used 

i.e. The Kula Ring among the Tobian Islanders (south Pacific)

'the Kula'- alliances and prestige thorugh trading voyages between islands. men leave home island to other islands in search of trading partners. Expected that if they can get particular items (chell armbands or necklaces) they can achieve power...

(prevention of Balanced Reciprocity)

i.e. The Potlatch of the Kwakitul (BC) giving is done to embarass people oyu consider your rivals, people you don't like

The Potlatch- negotiating family position in social hierarchy through competitive gifts . during construction or negotiation of rank or social status...events of transition

The use of obligatory festival sponsorship by the rich. This reduces their savings to be more on par with the communit average. Thereby maintaining a culture of egalitarianism.

      i/e/ Carnival, popular Catholic fiestas by peasants in Latin American villages. Prominent community members give the gift of food, musicians, bullfights, fireworks, etc. In exchange for prestige and glessings...patron saint of village

"economic activity leades to social solidarity"

1. Mechanical solidarity- groups in society do the same things (i.e. Hunting and gathering) and so identify with each other

2. Organic Society- groups in society do different things and so need each other to survive (i.e. capitalism)

"Economic activity leads to tension"

1. As people work and produce surpluses, they form groups according to certain political intersts. I.e. Masters and slaves, lords and feudal peasants, upper classes and lower classes, Borgiousie and proletariate

2. believed that capitalism would create such social tension that it would give way to a new form of life: communism

"economic activity can be influenced by other cultural traits such as religion"

-Capitalism began in Europe and not elsewhere (india and Chin) due to the prise of Protestantism. Movement encouraged values such as sobriety, hard work, thrift...values that later took on a life of their own in the secular system known as capitalism

The readings this week were quite interesting and seemingly telltale of what is to come in class discussion and lecture this week. The "Land of the Walking Marriages" reading was the one that stood out most to me. I was intrigued by the people of Luoshui's completely different conception of the idea of 'marriage'. They considered marriage to be theoretically, purely based on love. There were no financial or economic responsibilities or expectations involved in the type of unions that they engaged in. These 'friend marriages' were informal, not legally binding, and allowed its members to continue to be apart of their own family. This strikes me as interesting in compared to the very traditional conception of monogamous marriage which saw the woman/bride leave her family to join her husbands family, sometimes without her explicit consent. The inherent respect and equality between genders of 'friend marriage' practised in this cultural group is a relief from the patriarchal formation of most other types of marriage unions. Even today it is expected that a woman metaphorically 'leave' her own family by way of taking on her husband's surname, thus losing part of her identity in the process. I wholeheartedly disagree with this practice as being a standard expectation in modern day marriage due to its inherent undermining of the woman's contribution to the union as an equal partner. The judgment, in my view, of the Luoshui's marriage practices as 'barbaric' or 'uncivilzed' is uncalled for and should be instead studied for its merits. 

Abu-Lughod offers a different perspective to veiling and describes it's history and current practice. I feel that everyone who forms a strong opinion about veiling should at least be educated as to what/where and how they are "used". This being said, I feel that the argument Abu-Lughod poses suffers from the fallacy Card Stacking. She brings essential information, the history of veiling, to the reader but fails to mention the consequences and penalties that befall a woman who refuses to wear a tradition veil at all. Threats, beatings, stonings, and murder meet these women whom act on their freedom of choice to refuse to veil. Often times these punishments come from the hands of family and loved ones. Abu-Lughod does a discredit to her argumentative essay by not including even the slightest reference to these occurrences.

'Ladies' Behind Bars was really the black sheep out of this week's readings. It dissects prison culture and focuses on what inmate's believe constitute a "lady" and a "man". Needless to say, the population consists of incarcerated males who engage in homosexual acts but still have defining gender roles and labels like "real man", "daddy", "kid", and "lady". Within prison culture here we find that rape is a reality met almost on a daily basis and is in fact a tool used to "turn out" the "ladies" (a practice by which raping another convict evokes the true gender identity of the victim). Gender roles within the prison are greatly overemphasized in order to justify the homosexual behavior occurring between two (often times straight) males. The most interesting thing was that the redefining of gender roles within prison (this is done b y the prisoners themselves) consequently redefines their perception of those genders. The idea here was an interesting one and one that made me really think about the subject for a while after reading it. For me, this piece was definitely the most engaging this week.

I began my readings this week with the "'Ladies' Behind Bars" article which was an interesting look on the reconstruction of gender in prisons. From the get go I was slightly jarred by the description of male inmates defining themselves as males "by juxtaposing maleness with femaleness, fabricating gender identity from the reflection...for inmates, the concept of female emerges from the concept of male." This claim, while perhaps holds some truth for longterm prisoners without close contact with a female, is something slightly unnerving for a woman to read. To think that entire populations of males consider femaleness to be secondary to or subordinate to or dependant on maleness is shortsighted to say the least. With that said however, taking the context of an all male prison to account, I can see how the lack of the opposite sex may lead to this slightly convoluted understandings of gender, and I believe would be worth studying more. Further, I found it interesting that a process or phenomenon of liminality, wherein males feel they are trapped between male and female and 'turn out' as female in the prison context is quite a strong indicator of gender as being a human and social construct to begin with. Being female or male may not necessarily be dependant on your biological makeup...this is also borne out in many instances with transgendered folks etc.  

The next reading that stood out to me is the article by Lila Abu-Lughod and its astute remarks about the politicization of women's lives in the middle-east vs in the west. Abu-Lughod brilliantly discusses the use of the 'veil' in middle-eastern societies as a 'mobile home' and 'portable seclusion', which is often considered a mechanism of control over women by many in the west. Abu-Lughod instead points out that clothing is not the primary issue in areas such as Afghanistan under Taliban control, in fact, the burqua was around long before then. She analogizes the wearing of the veil in muslim countries to the 'tyranny of fashion' in western countries, which I consider to be powerful at shedding light on the shallowness of focussing on women's clothes as a point of issue, as opposed to their lack of access to education, opportunity, etc. What is more important? Policing a woman's self-expression or lack thereof through her dress or ensuring that actual tangible equality is being bestowed upon her? I agree with Abu-Lughod that woman's clothing is often focussed on in order to avoid the real issues, and despise the fact that it is a recurring them worldwide.

Exchange Reading 2