Re: Roots of contemporary sexism

        A civilization is a division of labor, made possible by a level of
agriculture that creates a surplus capable of supporting urban life.  The
earliest civilizations were, in world-systems terms, world-economies that
soon became world-empires.  If you accept the argument advanced by Frank
and Gills, the first such world-system arose from the confluence of Indus,
Tigris-Euphrates, and Nile societies about 5,000 years ago.  If you don't,
still these ancient societies constituted world-systems in their own
right.

        I will leave it to the anthropologists to thrash out whether most
pre-"civilized" communities ("minisystems") operated on a patriarchal
basis or not.  (I have a sinking feeling that most did.)

        Warren


On Sun, 11 Nov 2001, Harris, Craig wrote:

> i don't have any disagreement with the idea of the long history of
> patriarchy . . . i am less comfortable with the idea of "the beginnings of
> civilization" . . . what does "civilization" mean in a world systems
> perspective . . . 
> cheers,
> craig harris
> 
> 
> > ----------
> > From:       wwagar@binghamton.edu[SMTP:wwagar@binghamton.edu]
> > Sent:       Sunday, November 11, 2001 10:22 PM
> > To:         Shahijm2@aol.com
> > Cc:         Threehegemons@aol.com; wsn@csf.colorado.edu
> > Subject:    Re: Roots of contemporary sexism
> > 
> > 
> >     Jane Shahi makes a valid point.  Conserving culture is difficult
> > if not impossible without homes in which mothers and fathers pass on
> > values and mores to their young children;  and in this process, mothers
> > are generally much more active than fathers.  The more a culture is
> > challenged by alien influences, the greater its need for unquestioning
> > (and preferably sequestered) mothers.  
> > 
> >     But is it not true that since the beginnings of civilization,
> > patriarchy has been the dominant mode of gender relations everywhere?  Am
> > I saying something deeply controversial?  Civilization = patriarchy.  The
> > exploitation of the poor has everywhere been accompanied by the
> > sexploitation of the undersex, women.  Surplus value has been sweated from
> > the many by the few, and from women by men.  The less agency granted to
> > women, the easier it has been to keep them down and to take advantage of
> > their services in home, nursery, field, and factory.  One of those many
> > services is the acculturation of young children in the values and mores of
> > the male-dictated society, including an unexamined acceptance of
> > traditional gender roles.
> > 
> >     The culture of the Taliban is, to my way of thinking, one of
> > the most odious and reactionary examples of how sexism penetrates
> > "civilized" life, but there is plenty of sexism to go around in the United
> > States and other "advanced" societies.  Whatever the Taliban may think,
> > Western societies have only begun the long march to gender equality.
> > 
> >     Warren
> > 
> > 
> > On Sun, 11 Nov 2001 Shahijm2@aol.com wrote:
> > 
> > > In a message dated 11/11/01 2:23:57 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
> > > Threehegemons@aol.com writes:
> > > 
> > > << In the last few days we've seen a number of accounts as to why
> > intense 
> > > gender 
> > >  inequality exists in Afghanistan.  Among the reasons I recall:  decline
> > in 
> > >  traditional masculine occupations (an explanation that may have more 
> > >  relevance in other parts of the world), men spending their lives in 
> > > religious 
> > >  schools or armies, rebellion against the Soviet-backed government (an 
> > >  explanation that may have relevance elsewhere as well, not only in
> > formerly 
> > >  Communist states, but also in the US, where the right to abortion is
> > seen by 
> > >  its foes as the epitome of the imperial nature of the federal
> > government), 
> > >  cultural structures that predate the modern world, colonialism, etc,
> > and 
> > >  perhaps, metaphorically, a parallel with earlier persecutions of women
> > that 
> > >  were connected to capitalist transformations.
> > >  
> > >  I'm not sure why a number of these factors, in combination, might not
> > be at 
> > >  work.
> > >  
> > > I would like to add one thing more to the list above:  Some cultures are
> > very 
> > > protective of their women.  It might look like oppression to an
> > outsider.  
> > > Women are the transmission belts of a culture.  They are the ones
> > primarily 
> > > involved with imprinting cultural mores on young children, passing down 
> > > customs, traditions, etc.  When a culture feels threatened from outside 
> > > influences, I suggest that they clamp down on their women because they
> > are 
> > > afraid of losing their culture.  (sorry - no historical evidence for
> > this, 
> > > only my own observation.)
> > > Jane Shahi
> > >  
> > > 
> > 
>