3 ms·
Read the quote. It doesn't have to be intentional, they may assume some bodies are male when they aren't
by progval 6y ago
Read the quote. It doesn't have to be intentional, they may assume some bodies are male when they aren't
- mc32 6y agoYes that was an _exception_ unless you believe all (or most) of the sex identity assignments of historical human skeletons are suspect.
- progval 6y agoThere are other examples of this. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/11/prehistoric-female-hunter-discovery-upends-gender-role-assumptions/ https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/11/prehistor... > it revealed that between 30 and 50 percent of big game hunters could have been biologically female. > This new study is the latest twist in a decades-long debate about gender roles among early hunter-gather societies. The common assumption was that prehistoric men hunted while women gathered and reared their young. But for decades, some scholars have argued that these “traditional” roles—documented by anthropologists studying hunter-gatherer groups across the globe since the 19th century—don’t necessarily stretch into our deep past. And that's just looking at the first hits on a search engine. Whether or not there is indeed a systemic bias in archeology, this makes it worth mentioning that in that case, we're sure it's not bias.