Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Wright
Feminist theory does not call on us exclusively, or even primarily, to pay more attention to
women in the history of technology. Rather, it urges us to pay more attention to gender: to
those ideologies that have attributed certain characteristics to men and others to women. It
alerts us that beliefs about sex differences exert so pervasive and profound an influence
that we must take account not only of the ways in which gender assumptions have shaped
technology historically, but also of the ways in which gender notions shape that way we
write technology´s history. J. A McGaw, “No Passive Victims, No Separate Spheres: A
Feminist Perspective On Technology´s History” 1989
McGaw 1989: 178) separate spheres designated the public arena as masculine, making the
public records on which we so often rely not merely public but also masculine…Likewise, the
doctrine of separate spheres meant that men and women very rarely worked at the same
jobs or even in the same places.. We need not accept home and work, women´s activities
and men´s labor, as separate simply because Americans chose historically to separate them
spatially and rhetorically.
Quiénes son los que interactuaban en los espacios domésticos y productivos. Cómo se han
diferenciado estos espacios desde la evidencia. Cuáles son las implicaciones de esto?
One of the focuses of this chapter, then, is to demonstrate how contemporary concepts of
gender and the workplace have worked to bias not only our understanding of prehistoric
pottery production but also our interpretation of its development. Our understanding of the
prehistoric or historic record is better served, not by taking “separate spheres” as an
unquestioned given, but by raising the question: are gender spheres separate? If so, what
“social functions” might such separation -or lack thereof – have served? McGaw 1989 178.
Pp196
P199
The complex reality of how gender interacts with and supports production sequences is
glossed by a simple gender ideology that holds that pottery production is a male activity
whereas, in fact, it is a male and female activity. They also illustrate that pottery production
is a craft that, more often than not, is dependent upon a cooperative labor force, in that in
many societies -especially those that are small in scale and where production is for the
market or non-household consumption -it is participated in by a group and not a lone
producer. Although individual producers have been documented ethnographically, they are
more rare than situations in which several workers are engaged in varying parts of the
production sequence. This is especially true where vessels are formed consistently by one
gender or the other, “where children and adults of the opposite sex often participate in the
productive process” (Kramer 1985:79). This suggest that, in addition to their gender biases,
anthropologists have carried with them western assumptions about individualism and the
organization of production and distribution that have biased their accounts.
In summary, not only can pottery be both a male and female craft with women usually
integral to its production, but there also is little basis for the stereotype that when pottery is
produced for non-household consumption, women no longer participate in it. Rather, it
appears that, although there clearly are societies in which women do not produce pottery,
in many, because of reporting produres and the ideology of separate spheres, they are
“invisible” producers.
Cómo han sido entendidos los talleres (sitios de producción) y qué nos dice la evidencia
desde una perspectiva de género?
Thus he accounts for gender or the other as producers -based upon the ecological
parameters listed and the importance of agriculture. Scheduling problems occur when
“good weather and climate for pottery production” coincide with agriculture in societies in
which agriculture is a major subsistence activity (Arnold 1985:100). A solution to these
conflicts is for households to broaden their productive base through a division of labor. In
this scenario, men take over subsistence activities and women become the primary pottery
producers. P200. Arnold follows the ethnographic literature in assuming that when
scheduling conflicts occur between agriculture and other activities, men will assume
responsibility for agriculture.
There is evidence that men engage in activities more distant from their homes than women,
who, in contrast, work closer to home (Burton et al. 1977: 250) Nevertheless, as numerous
scholars have subsequently shown, although there is an obvious link between women and
childcare, there does not appear to be a set pattern on how individual societies arrange
“appropriate” childcare.
P201 These interpretations suggest that, although there are exceptions, there is a cross-
cultural pattern among sedentary agriculturalists for women to engage in activities near
their home, but that this choice is not due, at least exclusively, to childcare responsibilities.
In fact, all of the tasks documented cross-culturally by Murdock and Provost (1973) for
which there was a low index of male participation (e.g. gathering foods, dairy production,
spinning, laundering, water fetching, cooking, and preparation of plant foods) may occur
near dwellings. In order to account for this pattern, it seems appropriate to turn to the
ecological factors that may account for the division of labor. In particular, Arnold has
emphasized seasonal overlaps that may occur between agricultural and pottery production
as important ecological variables that should be observable in archaeological record.
Al parecer hay una relación entre las actividades que la mujer hace y la importancia de la
agricultura en la sociedad
El estudio de caso del componente cerámico de Harappa period, muestra técnicas cerámicas
que por lo complejas, debieron implicar un trabajo en conjunto de varios ceramistas. La
evidencia de tecnología muestra cooperación en un complejo sistema de scheduling
(planificación), y control de la secuencia de producción.
P210 Hay algunos indicadores espaciales para la manufactura de cerámica que nos dan
evidencia de la organización de la producción. El método tradicional de la identificación de
los talleres de cerámica es buscar especiales características como settling vats, áreas de
preparación y para guardar la clay, contenedores de agua, fogones, rotary devices, Wheel
pits, platforms, bebches, niches, storage rooms (DeBoer and Lathrap 1979:104ff; Kramer
1985:80) o herramientas asociadas con el trabajo, lítica, moldes, pigmentos. Hay también
diferentes tipos de talleres en donde la producción toma lugar. Estas unidades están
basadas en consideraciones espaciales y económicas Stark 1985: 160 1. Producción
doméstica referida a la producción asociada con áreas domésticas para la casa, 2) una
producción de taller asociada con áreas domésticas para consumo doméstico e intercambio,
u otro sistema econímico (intercambio entre lazos de parentesco) Eric 2017. 3. Talleres
separados que representan más de una unidad doméstica y no están integrados a ninguna
unidad doméstica.
Claassen in este volumen: las diversas actividades deberieron ser hechas y coordinadas
entre los contextos domésticos. Producción comunitaria. Esta división de labores debieron
ser una solución razonable para la continuación de farming, husbandry and craft production
Conclusiones
Hay problemas y limitaciones en ver la evidencia sesgada por perspectivas centradas en los
trabajos y participación de los hombre p213 also (Andener 1975, Orner 1974
ANTHROPOLOGY; Conkey and Spector 1984 archaeology)
Las etnografías han restado el papel de la mujer, pero este trabajo es una evidencia que la
mujer no tuvo ningún impedimiento para porducir cerámica en los contextos mecanizados o
no mecanizados, a pequeña o larga escala o para los contextos domésticos o para consumo
externo.
Pero hay que hacer un reconstrucción social de las labores Conkey and Spector 1984:16
Eso sugiere que cuando la evidencia sea mejor entendida los modelos evolutivos del estado
y sus relaciones con los grupos de parentesco necesitan ser revisados. P215
Lo que ella trató de hacer fue reexaminar las fuentes y sus perjuicios para documentar la
participación de mujeres in la producción y restaurar las cualidades dinámicas de la
temprana invención de la cerámica en el record arqueológico p215