Skip to main content
Social Sci LibreTexts

10.S: Conclusion and Exercises

  • Page ID
  • In 1968, a cigarette company in the United States decided to target women as tobacco consumers and used a clever marketing campaign to entice them to take up smoking. “You’ve come a long way, baby!” billboards proclaimed. Women, according to the carefully constructed rhetoric, had moved away from their historic oppressed status and could—and should—now enjoy the full complement of twentieth-century consumer pleasures. Like men, they deserved to enjoy themselves and relax with a cigarette. The campaigns were extremely successful; within several years, smoking rates among women had increased dramatically. But had women really come a long way? We now know that tobacco (including in vaporized form) is a highly addictive substance and that its use is correlated with a host of serious health conditions. In responding to the marketing rhetoric, women moved into a new sphere of bodily pleasure and possibly enjoyed increased independence, but they did so at a huge cost to their health. They also succumbed to a long-term financial relationship with tobacco companies who relied on addicting individuals in order to profit. Knowing about the structures at work behind the scenes and the risks they took, few people today would agree that women’s embrace of tobacco represented a huge step forward.

    Perhaps saying “You’ve come a long way, baby!” with the cynical interpretation with which we read it today can serve as an analogy for our contemporary explorations of gender and culture. Certainly, many women in the United States today enjoy heightened freedoms. We can travel to previously forbidden spaces, study disciplines long considered the domain of men, shape our families to meet our own needs, work in whatever field we choose, and, we believe, live according to our own wishes. But we would be naive to ignore how gender continues to shape, constrain, and inform our lives. The research and methods of anthropology can help us become more aware of the ongoing consequences of our gendered heritage and the ways in which we are all complicit in maintaining gender ideologies that limit and restrict people’s possibilities.

    By committing to speak out against subtle, gender-based discrimination and to support those struggling along difficult paths, today’s anthropologists can emulate pioneers such as Franz Boas and Margaret Mead, who sought to fuse research and action. May we all be kinder to those who differ from the norm, whatever that norm may be. Only then will we all—women, men and those who identify with neither category—have truly come a long way. (But we will leave the infantilizing “baby” to those tobacco companies!)


    1. What is “natural” about how you experience gender and human sexuality? What aspects are at least partially shaped by culture? How do other cultures’ beliefs and practices regarding gender and sexuality differ from those commonly found in the United States? Are there any parallels? Does it depend on which U.S. community we are talking about? What about your own beliefs and practices?
    2. Reflect on the various ways you have “learned” about gender and sexuality throughout your life. Which influences do you think had the biggest impact?
    3. How important is your gender to how you think about yourself, to your “identity” or self-definition, to your everyday life? Reflect on what it would be like to be a different gender.
    4. How important is your “sexuality” and “sexual orientation” to how you think about yourself, to your identity or self-definition? Reflect on what it would be like if you altered your sexual identity or practices.
    5. In what ways have your school settings been shaped by and around gender norms?
    6. How are anthropologists influenced by gender norms? How has this affected the discipline of anthropology?


    • Androgyny: cultural definitions of gender that recognize some gender differentiation, but also accept “gender bending” and role-crossing according to individual capacities and preferences.
    • Binary model of gender: cultural definitions of gender that include only two identities--male and female.
    • Biologic sex: refers to male and female identity based on internal and external sex organs and chromosomes. While male and female are the most common biologic sexes, a percentage of the human population is intersex with ambiguous or mixed biological sex characteristics.
    • Biological determinism: a theory that biological differences between males and females leads to fundamentally different capacities, preferences, and gendered behaviors. This scientifically unsupported view suggests that gender roles are rooted in biology, not culture.
    • Cisgender: a term used to describe those who identify with the sex and gender they were assigned at birth.
    • Dyads: two people in a socially approved pairing. One example is a married couple.
    • Gender: the set of culturally and historically invented beliefs and expectations about gender that one learns and performs. Gender is an “identity” one can choose in some societies, but there is pressure in all societies to conform to expected gender roles and identities.
    • Gender ideology: a complex set of beliefs about gender and gendered capacities, propensities, preferences, identities and socially expected behaviors and interactions that apply to males, females, and other gender categories. Gender ideology can differ among cultures and is acquired through enculturation. Also known as a cultural model of gender.
    • Heteronormativity: a term coined by French philosopher Michel Foucault to refer to the often-unnoticed system of rights and privileges that accompany normative sexual choices and family formation.
    • Legitimizing ideologies: a set of complex belief systems, often developed by those in power, to rationalize, explain, and perpetuate systems of inequality.
    • Matrifocal: groups of related females (e.g. mother-her sisters-their offspring) form the core of the family and constitute the family’s most central and enduring social and emotional ties.
    • Matrilineal: societies where descent or kinship group membership is transmitted through women, from mothers to their children (male and female), and then through daughters, to their children, and so forth.
    • Matrilocal: a woman-centered kinship group where living arrangements after marriage often center around households containing related women.
    • Patriarchy: describes a society with a male-dominated political and authority structure and an ideology that privileges males over females in domestic and public spheres.
    • Patrifocal: groups of related males (e.g. a father-his brothers) and their male offspring form the core of the family and constitute the family’s most central and enduring social and emotional ties.
    • Patrilineal: societies where descent or kinship group membership is transmitted through men, from men to their children (male and female), and then through sons, to their children, and so forth.
    • Patrilocal: a male-centered kinship group where living arrangements after marriage often center around households containing related men.
    • Third gender: a gender identity that exists in non-binary gender systems offering one or more gender roles separate from male or female.
    • Transgender: a category for people who transition from one sex to another, either male-to-female or female-to-male.


    Activity 1: How Does Gender Shape Your Life?

    Think about everything, and we do mean everything, you did since waking up this morning. Include micro-behaviors, tiny behavioral acts that take minutes or even seconds, as well as objects, substances, and language, spoken and written. Think about all the “cultural” (i.e. not found “in nature”) artifacts associated with these behaviors. For example, while urinating is natural, your “toilet” is a cultural invention. Now, which activities and behaviors were in some way “gendered”? That is, which had an element associated with “female” or “male” in some way?

    As you think about how gender has shaped your life today, consider:

    • What did you sleep in?
    • How did you handle bodily functions?
    • How did you clean yourself?
    • How did you modify your body? (e.g. “shaving”, “makeup,” “deodorant”)
    • What do the names for products, like deodorants, perfumes or aftershave, convey?

    List all these gendered (and gender-neutral) aspects of your day thus far. Also consider: how typical is today? Would a weekend involve more or less “gendered” dimensions?

    Activity 2. Understanding Gender from a Martian Perspective.

    If you were a Martian, what would you have to “know” or “learn” in order to follow gender rules on a college campus? As you consider your response, think about the following questions.

    In what ways are we a gender “binary” culture? An “opposite sex” culture? An “androgynous” culture?

    Are areas of U.S. life informally sexually segregated? Are there, informally, “male” and “female” spheres? Are there male spheres where women are not supposed to go? Or spheres where if they go, they incur certain risks? Are there any parallels for men who enter female spheres?

    Are there any elements of an “honor” and “shame” culture in the U.S. that a Martian should be aware of? What about in your own social circle?

    Activity 3. Ethnographic Interview: How has Gender Changed Over Time?

    Interview someone at least age 65 (if you are close to 65, find someone a generation older or younger than you). Ask that person: What kind of changes in gender roles, gender relations, gender restrictions or privileges have occurred within your lifetime? After you conclude your interview, compare notes with others to find common threads. Then ask someone closer to your age what changes they anticipate may happen their lifetime?

    Activity 4. Bathroom Transgression.

    Transgender people often face dilemmas when needing to use public restrooms. As a way to experience what it’s like to be an ally, some people have started intentionally using bathrooms designated for others—an issue that took on a heightened relevance in 2016, when North Carolina banned transgender people from using sex-segregated bathrooms that did not correspond to the sex registered on their birth certificates. As part of this activity, consider whether you dare enter the bathroom you don’t normally use. If you do, then try it! What happens when you enter the men’s room, or the women’s room? How are these boundaries patrolled and enforced? Many European countries offer unisex facilities; do you think the U.S. should do so as well? Or do you agree with some politicians in North Carolina who cited safety concerns for public restroom use by transgender individuals?

    Note: keep safety in mind if you choose this activity, and beware of settings where people may be hostile to an experiment like this.

    Activity 5. Analyzing Gendered Stereotypes and Masculinity in Music Videos.

    Popular culture plays an enormous role in shaping our ideas about gender, about femininity and masculinity, and about sexuality. Watch several of the videos below, paying careful attention to how these concepts are visible in current music videos. Do they draw on gendered stereotypes or push boundaries of expected gendered norms? Specify which videos you watched in your response, and also look for examples of other videos that could stimulate fruitful conversations about masculinity, femininity and other gender dynamics.

    Watch Maddi & Tae, “Girl in a Country Song.” This song is partly a response to Blake Shelton—“Boys ’Round Here,” and Florida Georgia Line—“Get your Shine On.” What do you think of Maddi & Tae’s portrayal of men in their video? How does it compare with portrayals of women in videos by Blake Shelton and Florida Georgia Line?

    Compare “Bitch in Business” (created by MBA students), to “Girl in a Country Song.” Pay particular attention to the third and fourth verses of “Bitch in Business.” Would you change any lyrics, or do you think they are justified? What about the word “Bitch” itself? Is it problematic? In what ways? Do words matter? Can you really change the historically negative associations of a word, like “bitch” or “slut”? Are there parallels to ethnic slurs?

    Compare Niki Minaj and Lady Gaga: how do they deploy gender in their songs, lyrics and videos? How do their strategies compare to a male artist from a similar genre?

    Compare Sir Mix-A-Lot, “Baby Got Back” and Niki Minaj, “Anaconda.” How do they deploy gender in their songs, lyrics, and videos? Is there any significant difference between what Minaj does in her video and what Sir Mix-a-Lot does in his? How is race used in these videos?

    Should the music video industry be regulated and if so, in what ways and why? Does it make a difference if the videos are frequently consumed by (and marketed to) young people, pre-teens and teens, rather than adults who have a more fully-developed personal sense of identity? What concerns might you as a parent have?

    For further exploration and analysis, view the video, Hip-Hop: Beyond Beats and Rhymes ( Do you think the analysis provided by filmmaker Byron Hurt can be applied to these music videos?

    Also view Dreamworlds 3 (, which analyzes the stories told in popular culture about gender and sexuality. How well does this analysis apply to contemporary videos, including the ones that you’ve just viewed?


    Educational Media Companies and Distributors:

    Documentary Education Resources. One of the earliest distributors of anthropology-ethnographic films. Includes older, but still very useful, ethnographic films. Such films document ways of life that are rapidly disappearing.

    Media Education Foundation. Focuses on contemporary USA culture, with a wide range of videos analyzing mass media, popular culture, and advertising. . Videos often include teaching guides.

    Women Make Movies. Wide range of films/videos by women filmmakers on diverse topics, social groups, both within the US and throughout the world. One of the earliest distributors of films on gender.

    Women’s Media Center. More U.S.-centered resources, especially contemporary issues of women’s representation in the media.

    Some Key Accessible Readings by Anthropologists:

    Brettell, Carolyn and Brettell, Carolyn B. and Carolyn F. Sargent, eds. Gender in Cross-Cultural Perspective. 6th edition (New York: Routledge, 2012). Excellent collection of articles, with overviews. Also includes a Film Bibliography for each topical section of the book.

    Geller, Pamela L. and Miranda K. Stockett, eds., Feminist Anthropology: Past, Present, and Future (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006). Many articles by biological and archeological anthropologists.

    Hodgson, Dorothy L., ed. The Gender, Culture, and Power Reader. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016). Useful reader for students and non-specialist readers. Includes a wide range of articles, often adapted from longer academic articles.

    Ellen Lewin, ed., Feminist Anthropology: A Reader (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2006). Excellent collection with introductory essay by editor, a pioneer in feminist and Lesbian-Gay studies.

    Strum, Shirley and Fedigan, Linda, eds., Primate Encounters: Models of Science, Gender and Society (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000).

    Ward, Martha and Monica Edelstein, A World full of Women. 6th edition (New York: Routledge/Taylor Francis, 2014). Readable overview of the field.

    Some Useful Organizational Websites

    American Men’s Studies Association

    Association for Feminist Anthropology, American Anthropological Association

    VOICES: Journal of the Association for Feminist Anthropology

    Book reviews from the Association for Feminist Anthropology

    Association for Queer Anthropology

    Center for American Women and Politics, Rutgers University

    Feminist Majority Foundation

    Guttmacher Center (Research on reproductive health)

    National Women’s Studies Association

    Planned Parenthood


    Dr. Mukhopadhyay specializes in gender, sexuality, race/ethnicity, and culture-cognition, with research in the USA and India on gendered families, politics, and science-engineering. In graduate school she co-created one of the earliest gender-culture courses. She has developed numerous gender classes and taught, for 20 years, a popular anthropology and gender-oriented, multi-section Human Sexuality course. Gender-related publications include: Cognitive Anthropology Through a Gendered Lens (2011). How Exportable are Western Theories of Gendered Science? (2009), A Feminist Cognitive Anthropology: The Case of Women and Mathematics (2004), Women, Education and Family Structure in India (1994, with S. Seymour). She co-authored an early Annual Review of Anthropology article on gender (1988) and is in the Association for Feminist Anthropology. In other work, she served as a Key Advisor for the AAA RACE project; co-authored How Real is Race: A Sourcebook on Race, Culture and Biology, (2nd Edition, 2014) and promotes active learning approaches to teaching about culture (cf.2007).

    Tami Blumenfield is Assistant Professor of Asian Studies at Furman University and was a 2016 Fulbright Scholar affiliated with Yunnan University. Since 2001, she has been engaged in a long-term ethnographic fieldwork project in northwest Yunnan Province, studying changes in education, social life, and ecology in Na communities. Blumenfield is the co-editor of Cultural Heritage Politics in China, with Helaine Silverman (2013), and of Doing Fieldwork in China…With Kids! with Candice Cornet (2016). Blumenfield also produced Some Na Ceremonies, a Berkeley Media film by Onci Archei and Ruheng Duoji. Blumenfield holds a PhD in Sociocultural Anthropology from the University of Washington.

    Susan Harper, Ph.D., is an educator, activist, and advocate in Dallas, Texas. She holds a Ph.D. in Cultural Anthropology from Southern Methodist University and a Graduate Certificate in Women’s Studies from Texas Woman’s University. Her ethnographic research focuses on New Religious Movements, primarily NeoPaganism, in the American South; the intersection of gender, sexuality, and religious identity; and ses, sexuality, and sex education. Her work has been published in the Journal of Bisexuality. Susan is passionate about a variety of social justice causes, including domestic and intimate partner violence prevention and recovery, sexual assault prevention and recovery, LGBTQ equality and inclusion, and educational justice. She has given presentations on LGBTQ+ equality and inclusion to a variety of audiences, including the North Texas Society of Human Resource Managers, The Turning Point Rape Crisis Center, and various religious organizations. She teaches courses in anthropology, sociology, and Women’s and Gender Studies at various universities and colleges in the DFW area. She also serves as Graduate Reader/Editor for Texas Woman’s University. She is currently working on an autoethnography about burlesque and visual anthropology project exploring the use of Pinterest by practitioners of NeoPaganism.

    Abby Gondek is a PhD candidate in Global and Socio-cultural Studies (majoring in Anthropology/Sociology) at Florida International University in Miami, Florida. She defended her dissertation proposal in April 2016. Her project, “Jewish Women’s Transracial, Transdisciplinary and Transnational Social Science Networks, 1920–1970” uses social network analysis and grounded theory methodology to understand the relationships between the anti-racist and pro-political/economic justice stance taken by Jewish female social scientists and their Jewish gendered-racialized subjectivities. Further information about her work is available from and as well as


    The authors wish to thank the many people who supported this writing project. We especially appreciate the editorial guidance of Nina Brown and the constructive feedback from two anonymous reviewers. We are grateful to our students as well, particularly those in Blumenfield’s Gender in East Asia at Furman University who read a draft version of this chapter in 2016 and shared feedback that helped us improve the chapter, and to Mukhopadhyay’s students at California State University Chico and at San Jose State University. We also thank the many individuals who shared their lives with us and with other anthropologists, enabling us to understand and appreciate the breadth, depth, and richness of human cultural diversity. Finally, Carol Mukhopadhyay extends her thanks to Nina Brown and Tami Blumenfield, and to Susan Seymour, on many levels, for help on the 2016 Gender and the Presidential Election text box.


    1. 1. The Introduction and much of the material in the Foundations segment draws upon and synthesizes Mukhopadhyay’s decades of research, writing, and teaching courses on culture, gender, and human sexuality. Some of it has been published. Other material comes from lecture notes. See
    2. 2. We use quotation marks here and elsewhere in the chapter to alert readers to a culturally specific, culturally invented concept in the United States. We need to approach U.S. cultural inventions the same way we would a concept we encountered in a foreign, so-called “exotic” culture.
    3. 3. See Carolyn B. Brettell and Carolyn F. Sargent, Gender in Cross-Cultural Perspective (New York: Routledge, 2005). Also, Anne Fausto-Sterling, Myths of Gender. Biological Theories About Women and Men (New York: Basic Books, 1991). For some web-based examples of these nineteenth century views, see article at For a list of descriptive terms, see
    4. 4. For an example of a textbook, see Herant A. Katchadurian, Fundamentals of Human Sexuality (Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1989). See also Linda Stone, Kinship and Gender: An Introduction (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2013).
    5. 5. Material in the following paragraphs comes from Mukhopadhyay, unpublished Human Sexuality lecture notes.
    6. 6. Herant A. Katchadurian, Fundamentals of Human Sexuality, 365.
    7. 7. Phyllis Kaberry, Women of the Grassfields. A Study of the Economic Position of Women in Bamenda, British Cameroons (Colonial Research publication 14. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.1952) The image comes from the cover of her book, which is also available online:
    8. 8. See Barry S. Hewlett, Intimate Fathers: The Nature and Context of Aka Pygmy Paternal Infant Care (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1991); and personal communication with Mukhopadhyay.
    9. 9. W.H. Masters and V.E. Johnson, Human Sexual Response (New York: Bantam Books, 1966).
    10. 10. Some feminist scholars have also questioned the “naturalness” of the biological categories male and female. See for example, Judith Butler, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (New York: Routledge, 1999 [1990]).
    11. 11. For genital similarities, see Janet S. Hyde and John D. DeLamater, Understanding Human Sexuality (McGraw Hill, 2014), 94–101. For more parallels, see Mukhopadhyay’s online Human Sexuality course materials, at
    12. 12. For some idea of the enormous variability in human physical characteristics, see Chapter 1 and Chapter 2 in C. Mukhopadhyay, R. Henze, and Y. Moses, How Real is Race: Race, Culture and Biology (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2014).
    13. 13. Information about alternative gender roles in pre-contact Native American communities can be found in Martha Ward and Monica Edelstein, A World Full of Women (Boston: Pearson, 2013). Also, see the 2011 PBS Independent Lens film Two Spirits for an account of the role of two-spirit ideology in Navajo communities, including the story of a Navajo teenager who was the victim of a hate crime because of his two-spirit identity.
    14. 14. Martha Ward and Monica Edelstein, A World Full of Women.
    15. 15. Serena Nanda, Neither Man nor Woman: the Hijras of India (Boston, MA: Cengage, 1999); Serena Nanda, Gender Diversity: Cross-cultural Variations (Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland 2000); and Gayatri Reddy and Serena Nanda, “Hijras: An “Alternative” Sex/Gender in India,” in Gender in Cross-Cultural Perspective, ed. C. Brettell and C. Sargent, 278–285 (Upper Saddle River New Jersey: Pearson, 2005).
    16. 16. Janet S. Hyde and John D. DeLamater, Understanding Human Sexuality, 99; Martha Ward and Monica Edelstein, A World Full of Women.
    17. 17. Beverly Chinas, personal communication with Mukhopadhyay. See also her writings on Isthmus Zapotec women such as: Beverly Chinas, The Isthmus Zapotecs: A Matrifocal Culture of Mexico (New York: Harcourt Brace College Publishers 1997). For a film on this culture, see Maureen Gosling and Ellen Osborne, Blossoms of Fire, Film (San Francisco: Film Arts Foundation, 2001).
    18. 18. Gilbert Herdt, The Sambia (New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston, 2006). For an excellent film see Gilbert Herdt, Guardians of the Flutes (London UK: BBC, 1994).
    19. 19. More information about the Nu shu writing system can be found in the film by Yue-Qing Yang, Nu Shu: A Hidden Language of Women in China (New York: Women Make Movies, 1999).
    20. 20. Ernestine Friedl, Women and Men: An Anthropologist’s View (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1975). See Audrey Richards, Chisungu: A Girl’s Initiation Ceremony among the Bemba of Zambia (London: Faber, 1956) and A. Richards, Land, Labour and Diet in Northern Rhodesia, An Economic Study of the Bemba Tribe (London: Oxford, 1939).
    21. 21. See for example, Ian Hogbin, The Island of Menstruating Men: Religion in Wogeo, New Guinea (Scranton, PA: Chandler Publishing Company, 1970).
    22. 22. Susannah M Hoffman, Richard A Cowan and Paul Aratow, Kypseli: Men and Women Apart A Divided Reality (Berkeley CA: Berkeley Media, 1976).
    23. 23. Denise Lawrence, Menstrual Politics: Women and Pigs in Rural Portugal, in Blood Magic: The Anthropology of Menstruation, ed. Thomas Buckley and Alma Gottlieb, 117–136 (Berkeley: University of California Press. 1988.), 122–123.
    24. 24. See Some women are posing with photos of menstrual pads and hashtags #happytobleed:
    25. 25. See the film by Michael Camerini and Rina Gill, Dadi’s Family (Watertown, MA: DER, 1981).
    26. 26. Cynthia Nelson, “Public and Private Politics: Women in the Middle Eastern World” American Ethnologist 1 no. 3 (1974): 551–56.
    27. 27. Carol C. Mukhopadhyay, “Family Structure and Indian Women’s Participation in Science and Engineering,” in Women, Education and Family Structure in India, ed. Carol C. Mukhopadhyay and Susan Seymour, 103–133 (Boulder: Westview Press, 1994).
    28. 28. Elizabeth Fernea, Guests of the Ethnography of an Iraqi Village (New York: Anchor Books, 1965).
    29. 29. Susan Seymour, Cora Du Bois: Anthropologist, Diplomat, Agent (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 2015).
    30. 30. Carol C. Mukhopadhyay, “Women in Science: Is the Glass Ceiling Disappearing?” Proceedings of conference organized by the National Institute of Science and Technology Development Studies, the Department of Science and Technology, Government of India; Indian Council of Social Science Research; and the Indo-U.S. Science and Technology Forum. March 8–10, 2004. New Delhi, India.
    31. 31. See for instance, and
    32. 32. For more details, see the film by Leslee Udwin, India’s Daughter (Firenze, Italy: Berta Film). The Wikipedia article about the film notes the reluctance of the Indian government to air the film in India,’s_Daughter.
    33. 33. For a critique of the “myth” of the medieval chastity belt, see
    34. 34. See for example, the film by Sabiha Sumar, Silent Waters (Mumbai, India: Shringar Film). While this is not a documentary, the film reflects the tumultuous history of the partition into two countries.
    35. 35. For the !Kung San, see Marjorie Shostak, Nisa: Life and Words of a Kung Woman (New York: Vintage, 1983). For Trobrianders, see Annette B. Weiner, The Trobrianders of Papua New Guinea (New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston, 1987).
    36. 36. Shanshan Du, Chopsticks Only Work in Pairs: Gender Unity and Gender Equality Among the Lahu of Southwest China (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999).
    37. 37. Zhou Huashan, Zhong nu bu qingnan de muxi mosuo: Wufu de guodu? [Matrilineal Mosuo, Valuing Women without Devaluing Men: A Society without Fathers or Husbands?] (Beijing: Guangming Ribao Chubanshe, 2009 [2001]).
    38. 38. Ernestine Friedl, Women and Men: An Anthropologist’s View (Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1975).
    39. 39. Carol C. Mukhopadhyay, “Sati or Shakti: Women, Culture and Politics in India,” in Perspectives on Power: Women in Asia, Africa and Latin America, ed. Jean O’Barr, 11–26 (Durham: Center for International Studies, Duke University 1982).
    40. 40. Lila Abu-Lughod, Writing Women’s Worlds: Bedouin Stories (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008).
    41. 41. Mukhopadhyay and Seymour use the term “patrifocal” to describe households that consist of related males, usually brothers, and their sons, and the spouses and children of those males. See C. Mukhopadhyay and S. Seymour, “Introduction” in Women, Family, and Education in India (Boulder: Westview Press, 1994).
    42. 42. For powerful documentaries see, the film by Nishta Jain, Gulabi Gang (Stavanger, Norway: Kudos Family Distribution, 2012); and the film by Kim Longinotto, Pink Saris (New York: Women Make Movies, 2011).
    43. 43. Lionel Tiger, Men in Groups (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2005[1969]), 45.
    44. 44. Carol C. Mukhopadhyay, The Sexual Division of Labor in the Family, PhD Dissertation, University of California, Riverside, 1980, 192.
    45. 45. Carol C. Mukhopadhyay, fieldnotes, India; and Mukhopadhyay, The Cultural Context of Gendered Science: The Case of India, 2001,
    46. 46. For example, the major symposium on Man the Hunter sponsored by Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research included only four women among more than sixty listed participants. See Richard B. Lee and Irven DeVore, Man the Hunter (Chicago: Aldine Atherton, 1972[1968]), xiv–xvi.
    47. 47. Mukhopadhyay, Lecture Notes, Human Sexuality, Gender and Culture.
    48. 48. S.Washburn and C.S. Lancaster, “The Evolution of Hunting.” in Man the Hunter, 299.
    49. 49. Ibid., 303.
    50. 50. Jackson Katz, Tough Guise 2: Violence, Manhood and American Culture (Northampton, MA: Media Education Foundation, 2013).
    51. 51. Abigail Disney and Kathleen Hughes, The Armor of Light (New York: Fork Films, 2015).
    52. 52. Lionel Tiger and Robin Fox, The Imperial Animal (New York: Transaction Publishers, 1997 [1971]), 101.
    53. 53. Some useful reviews include the following: Linda M. Fedigan, “The Changing Role of Women in Models of Human Evolution” Annual Review of Anthropology 16 (1986): 25–66; Linda Fedigan, Primate Paradigms: Sex Roles and Social Bonds (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992); Pamela L. Geller and Miranda K. Stockett. Feminist Anthropology: Past, Present, and Future (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press 2006); Joan M. Gero and Margaret W. Conkey, Engendering Archeology: Women and Prehistory (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 1991); Shirley Strum and Linda Fedigan Primate Encounters: Models of Science, Gender and Society. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000); Meredith F. Small, What’s Love Got to Do with It? The Evolution of Human Mating (New York: Doubleday, 1995); Nancy Makepeace Tanner, On Becoming Human (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981). For a readable short article, see Meredith Small, “What’s Love Got to Do with It,” Discover Magazine, June 1991, 46–51.
    54. 54. Irven DeVore, ed. Primate Behavior (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965).
    55. 55. Ibid. Also, for primate politics in particular, see Sarah B. Hrdy, The Woman That Never Evolved (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999 [1981]). See also Hrdy’s website
    56. 56. Thelma Rowell. Social Behaviour of Monkeys (New York: Penguin Books, 1972). For an excellent online article on Rowell’s work with additional references, read Vinciane Despret, “Culture and Gender Do Not Dissolve into How Scientists ‘Read’ Nature: Thelma Rowell’s Heterodoxy.” In Rebels of Life. Iconoclastic Biologists in the Twentieth Century, edited by O. Hartman and M. Friedrich (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008), 340–355.
    57. 57. See Richard B. Lee and Irven DeVore, eds. Man the Hunter (Chicago: Aldine Atherton, 1972[1968]).
    58. 58. See Estioko-Griffin, Agnes A. Daughters of the Forest. Natural History 95(5):36–43 (May 1986).
    59. 59. Richard B. Lee, The !Kung San. Men, Women and Work in a Foraging Society (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1979).
    60. 60. Martha Ward and Monica Edelstein, A World Full of Women, 26.
    61. 61. Susan Seymour, “Multiple Caretaking of Infants and Young Children: An Area in Critical Need of a Feminist Psychological Anthropology,” Ethos 32 no. (2004): 538–556.
    62. 62. Serena Nanda and Richard L. Warms, Cultural Anthropology (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 2006), 274.
    63. 63. Ester Boserup, Women’s Role in Economic Development (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1970); Barbara D. Miller, Cultural Anthropology (Pearson/Allyn and Bacon, 2012).
    64. 64. Mauma Downie and Christina Gladwin, Florida Farm Wives: They Help the Family Farm Survive (Gainesville: Food and Resource Economics Department, University of Florida, 1981).
    65. 65. Judith K. Brown, “A Note on the Division of Labor by Sex,” American Anthropologist 72 (1970):1073–78.
    66. 66. See for some contemporary examples of the challenges and obstacles workplaces pose for working mothers, as well as efforts to advocate for improved accommodation of parenting and working.
    67. 67. Conrad Kottak, Cultural Anthropology. Appreciating Cultural Diversity (New York: McGraw Hill, 2013).
    68. 68. See C. Mukhopadhyay, Human Sexuality Lecture notes, for the following analysis, available from See also Mukhopadhyay, Part II, “Culture Creates Race,” especially chapter 7 and 9, in Carol Mukhopahdyay, R. Henze and Y. Moses How Real is Race? A Sourcebook on Race, Culture and Biology (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2014).
    69. 69. Ibid.
    70. 70. This and subsequent material comes from C. Mukhopadhyay, Part 2, especially chapter 9, and p. 182–185, in Carol Mukhopahdyay, R. Henze and Y. Moses. How Real is Race? A Sourcebook on Race, Culture and Biology, 2nd edition (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2014).
    71. 71. Carol C. Mukhopadhyay, Yolanda Moses and Rosemary Henze, How Real is Race?, Chapter 9.
    72. 72. Annette B. Weiner, The Trobrianders of Papua New Guinea (New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston, 1987).
    73. 73. Lu Hui, “Preferential Bilateral-Cross-Cousin Marriage among the Nuosu in Liangshan,” in Perspectives on the Yi of Southwest China, Stevan Harrell, ed. (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2001).
    74. 74. Elizabeth Fernea, Guests of the Sheik.
    75. 75. See the film Maasai Women, 1980.
    76. 76. An excellent documentary on two alternative paths some women take in contemporary India: the Miss India path and the fundamentalist Hindu path. Filmed in India, The World Before Her,
    77. 77. See and
    78. 2014-09-14/singles-now-outnumber-married-people-america-and-thats-good-thing for background and links to detailed information.
    79. 78. Material in this text box was adapted from “What Can We Learn from the Na? Shattering Ideas about Family and Relationships,” a TEDx FurmanU presentation by Tami Blumenfield. See also Tami Blumenfield, “Chinese Tour Groups in Europe, Chinese Tour Groups in Yunnan: Narrating a Nation in the World” The China Beat June 2, 2011.; Siobhan M. Mattison, Brooke Scelza, and Tami Blumenfield, “Paternal Investment and the Positive Effects of Fathers among the Matrilineal Mosuo (Na) of Southwest China” American Anthropologist 116 no. 3 (2014): 591–610; Tami Blumenfield, “Resilience in Mountainous Southwest China: Adopting a Socio-Ecological Approach to Community Change,” in Worlds in the Making: Interethnicity and the Processes of Generating Meaning in Southwestern China, Cahiers d’Extrême Asie 23 (2014).
    80. 79. See reviews in Naomi Quinn, “Anthropological Studies of Women’s Status,” Annual Review of Anthropology 6 (1977): 181–225; Carol Mukhopadhyay and Patricia Higgins, “Anthropological Studies of the Status of Women Revisited: l977-l987” Annual Review of Anthropology 17 (1988):461–95.
    81. 80. Michelle Rosaldo and Louise Lamphere, ed. Woman, Culture and Society (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1974).
    82. 81. Rayna Rapp Reiter, ed. Toward an Anthropology of Women (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1975); Karen Sacks, Sisters and Wives. The Past and Future of Sexual Equality (Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1979).
    83. 82. Peggy Sanday, Female Power and Male Dominance: On the Origins of Sexual Inequality (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981).
    84. 83. For an alternative ethnographic, research based video see N!ai: The Story of a !Kung Woman. 1980.
    85. 84. Carol Mukhopadhyay and Patricia Higgins, “Anthropological Studies of the Status of Women Revisited: l977-l987,” Annual Review of Anthropology 17 (1988), 462.
    86. 85. Ibid.
    87. 86. See for example, Evelyn Blackwood. Webs of Power. Women, Kin, and Community in a Sumatran Village (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield. 2000); Marcia Inhorn, Infertility and Patriarchy: The Cultural Politics of Gender and Family Life in Egypt (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1996); Thomas Buckley and Alma Gottlieb, ed. Blood Magic. The Anthropology of Menstruation. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988); Marcia Inhorn, and Frank Van Balen, eds. Infertility around the Globe: New Thinking on Childlessness, Gender and Reproductive Technologies (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002).
    88. 87. Johnnetta Cole, ed. All American Women: Lines That Divide, Ties That Bind (New York:Free Press, 1986).
    89. Louise Lamphere, Helena Ragone and Patricia Zavella, eds. Situated Lives: Gender and Culture in Everyday Life. (New York: Routledge, 1997).
    90. 88. See for example, Faye Ginsburg. Contested Lives: The Abortion Debate in an American Community (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989); Dorothy Holland and Margaret Eisenhart. Educated in Romance. (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1990); Peggy Sanday, Fraternity Gang Rape: Sex, Brotherhood, and Privilege on Campus. (New York: New York University Press, 2007).
    91. 89. Peggy Sanday, “The Socio-cultural Context of Rape: A Cross-cultural Study” Journal of Social Issues 37 no. 5 (1981): 5–27. See also Conrad Kottak, Cultural Anthropology. Appreciating Cultural Diversity (New York: McGraw Hill, 2013); Veena Das, Violence, Gender and Subjectivity, Annual Reviews of Anthropology 37 (2008):283–299; Tulsi Patel, ed. Sex-Selective Abortion in India. Gender, Society and New Reproductive Technologies (New Delhi, India: Sage Publications, 2007).
    92. 90. Eleanor Leacock and Helen I. Safa, eds., Women’s Work: Development and the Division of Labor by Gender (South Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey, 1986); Nandini Gunewardena and Ann Kingsolver, eds. The Gender of Globalization: Women Navigating Cultural and Economic Marginalities (Santa Fe, NM: School for Advanced Research Press, 2008); Kay B.Warren and Susan C. Bourque, “Women, Technology, and Development Ideologies. Frameworks and Findings,” in Sandra Morgen, ed. Critical Reviews for Research and Teaching (Washington, DC: American Anthropological Association Publication, 1989), 382–410.
    93. 91. Carol C. Mukhopadhyay and Susan Seymour, ed. Women, Education and Family Structure in India (Boulder: Westview Press, 1994).
    94. 92. Ellen Lewin, Lesbian Mothers: Accounts of Gender in American Culture (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. 1993).
    95. 93. See Joan Gero and Margaret Conkey, ed. Engendering Archeology. Women and Prehistory (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991); Sarah M. Nelson, Worlds of Gender. The Archeology of Women’s Lives Around the Globe. (Lanham, MD: Altamira, 2007). See also earlier volumes. Rosemary A. Joyce, Ancient Bodies, Ancient Lives: Sex, Gender and Archeology (New York: Thames and Hudson, 2008); Barbara Voss, “Sexuality Studies in Archeology,” Annual Review of Anthropology 37 (2008): 317–336.
    96. 94. The following analysis was developed by Mukhopadhyay in scholarly papers and in lecture notes.
    97. 95. Mary E. Hegland, Days of Revolution: Political Unrest in an Iranian Village (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2015).
    98. 96. This analysis was developed by Mukhopadhyay in scholarly papers and in lecture notes. An example of this pattern from Iran is Mary E. Hegland, Days of Revolution.
    99. 97. Conrad Kottak, Cultural Anthropology. Appreciating Cultural Diversity.15th ed. (McGraw Hill, 2013).
    100. 98. E. Friedl, Women and Men: An Anthropologist’s View; C. Mukhopadhyay and Patricia Higgins, “Anthropological Studies of the Status of Women Revisited: 1977–1987.” Annual Review of Anthropology 17 (1988): 461–495.
    101. 99. One 1970s male pilot, when asked about why there were no women pilots, said, without thinking, “Because women aren’t strong enough to fly the plane!” He then realized what he’d said and laughed. From Mukhopadhyay, field notes, 1980.
    102. 100. Ann Stoler, “Making Empire Respectable. The Politics of Race and Sexual Morality in Twentieth-century Colonial Cultures,” in Situated Lives. Gender and Culture in Everyday Life, ed. Louise Lamphere, H. Ragone, and P. Zavella, 373–399 (New York: Routledge, 1997).
    103. 101. Peggy Sanday, Women at the Center: Life in a Modern Matriarchy (Cornell: Cornell University Press, 2002).
    104. 102. Mukhopadhyay, lecture notes, Gender and Culture.
    105. 103. See for instance Annette B. Weiner, The Trobrianders of Papua New Guinea; Martha Ward and Monica Edelstein, A World Full of Women; Carolyn B. Brettell and Carolyn F. Sargent, eds. Gender in Cross-Cultural Perspective.
    106. 104. Kirsten Marie Ernst,“Rios, Pontes E Overdrives:” Northeastern Regionalism in a Globalized Brazil (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007); John Collins, “‘BUT WHAT IF I SHOULD NEED TO DEFECATE IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD, MADAME?’: Empire, Redemption, and the ‘Tradition of the Oppressed’ in a Brazilian World Heritage Site,” Cultural Anthropology 23 no. 2 (2012): 279–328; Jan Rocha, “Analysis: Brazil’s ‘Racial Democracy’” BBC News, April 19, 2000; Allan Charles Dawson, “Food and Spirits: Religion, Gender, and Identity in the ‘African’ Cuisine of Northeast Brazil,” African and Black Diaspora 5 (2012): 243–263; Alan P Marcus, “Sex, Color and Geography: Racialized Relations in Brazil and Its Predicaments” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 103(5): 1282–1299.
    107. 105. Ruth Landes, The City of Women (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1947), 2, 6–13, 61–64, 92, 106.
    108. 106. E. Franklin Frazier, “The Negro Family in Bahia, Brazil” American Sociological Review 7 no. 4 (1942): 476–477; E. Franklin Frazier, The Negro Family in the United States (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1939), 125. For the opposing view, see Mark Alan Healey, “‘The Sweet Matriarchy of Bahia’: Ruth Landes’ Ethnography of Race and Gender.” Disposition: The Cultural Practice of Latinamericanism II 23 no. 50 (1998): 101.
    109. 107. See Melville J. Herskovits, “The Negro in Bahia, Brazil: A Problem in Method” American Sociological Review 8 no. 4 (1943): 395–396; Edison Carneiro, “Letters from Edison Carneiro to Ruth Landes: Dating from September 28, 1938 to March 14, 1946” (Washington, DC: Box 2 Ruth Landes Papers, National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Institution, 1938); Ruth Landes, The City of Women (New York: MacMillan Company, 1947).
    110. 108. Ruth Landes, “Fetish Worship in Brazil” The Journal of American Folklore 53 no. 210(1940): 261.
    111. 109. Ruth Landes, The City of Women (New York: MacMillan Company, 1947), 31–32, 37.
    112. 110. Ruth Landes, “Negro Slavery and Female Status” African Affairs 52 no. 206 (1953): 55. Also, Ruth Landes, “A Cult Matriarchate and Male Homosexuality” The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 35 no. 3 (1940): 386–387, 393–394; Ruth Landes, “Negro Slavery and Female Status,” African Affairs 52 no. 206 (1953): 55–57.
    113. 111. J. Lorand Matory, “Gendered Agendas: The Secrets Scholars Keep about Yorùbá-Atlantic Religion,” Gender & History 15 no. 3 (2003): 413.
    114. 112. Cheryl Sterling, “Women-Space, Power, and the Sacred in Afro-Brazilian Culture,” The Global South 4 no. 1 (2010): 71–93.
    115. 113. Nandini Gunewardena and Ann Kingsolver, The Gender of Globalization: Women Navigating Cultural and Economic Marginalities (Santa Fe, NM: School for Advanced Research Press, 2008).
    116. 114. Women’s political power, when exerted, may go unnoticed by the global media. For an example, see the documentary Pray the Devil to Hell on women’s role in forcing Liberian President Charles Taylor from office and leading to the election of Ellen Johnson Sirleaf as President. For an excellent documentary on some of the alternative paths contemporary women in India are taking, see The World before Her. For more on changes in women’s education in India, see Carol C. Mukhopadhyay. 2001. “The Cultural Context of Gendered Science: The Case of India.” Available at
    117. 115. See the excellent film The Purity Myth: The Virginity Movement’s War Against Women. Available through Media Education Foundation.
    118. 116. Carol C. Mukhopadhyay. 1982. “Sati or Shakti: Women, Culture and Politics in India.” In Perspectives on Power: Women in Asia, Africa and Latin America, edited by Jean O’Barr, 11–26. Durham, NC: Center for International Studies, Duke University; Carol C. Mukhopadhyay. 2008. “Sati or Shakti: An Update in Light of Contemporary U.S. Presidential Politics.” Paper presented at Gender and Politics from a Feminist Anthropological Perspective. November 2008, San Francisco. On the 2016 Election, see: Carol Mukhopadhyay.. “Gender and Trump,” Social Justice blog, January 19, 2017,
    119. 117. For more information on the initial Trump video, see For coverage of the women accusing Trump and his response, see For coverage of Trumps’ response to the allegations, see
    120. 118. Carly Wayne, Nicholas Valentino and Marzia Oceno. 2016. “How Sexism Drives Support for Donald Trump.” Washington Post, October 23. Also see Libby Nelson. 2016. “Hostility toward Women Is One of the Strongest Predictors of Trump Support.” Vox. November 1. For an article that also covers research by psychologists, see Emily Crockett. 2016. “Why Misogyny Won.” Vox. November 15.
    121. 119. For examples of anti-Clinton rhetoric, see article and associated video at Figures for numbers of witches killed range from thousands to millions, with most suggesting at least 60,000–80,000 and probably far more. Regardless, it is estimated that 75–80 percent were women. See for example Douglas Linder. 2005. “A Brief History of Witchcraft Persecutions before Salem” and
    122. 120. Mark DiCamillo of the Field Poll suggested one reason polls were wrong is that female Trump voters hid their actual voting preferences from pollsters. DiCamillo is quoted in Debra J. Saunders. 2016. “How Herd Mentality Blinded Pollsters to Trump Potential.” San Francisco Chronicle. November 13, E3.
    123. 121. For a critique of those who “blame” Euro-American (“white”) women for Hillary Clinton’s defeat, see the article by Kelly Dittmar. 2016. “No, Women Didn’t Abandon Clinton, Nor Did She Fail to Win Their Support.” Ms. Magazine. November 14.
    124. 122. See Women in the World. 2016. “Donald Trump’s Victory Threatens to Upend Progressive Notions of Masculinity.” November 20.
    125. 123. For a powerful video reaction and interpretation of this election, see
    126. 124. There is a huge body of research on these (and other) topics that we simply have not been able to cover in one chapter of a book. We hope the material and references we have provided will give readers a starting point for further investigation!
    127. 125. Many gender studies scholars have moved away from labeling people “biologically female” or “biologically male,” shifting instead to terms like “assigned female at birth” and “assigned male at birth.” Terms that foreground assignment help recognize the fluidity of gender identity and the existence of intersex people who do not fit neatly into those categories.
    128. 126. Carol C. Mukhopadhyay, “A Feminist Cognitive Anthropology: The Case of Women and Mathematics” Ethos 32 no. 4 (2004): 458–492.
    129. 127. David Valentine, Imagining Transgender: An Ethnography of a Category (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2007). See also Jessi Hempel, “My Brother’s Pregnancy and the Making of a New American Family” TIME September 2016.
    130. 128. Gary G. Gates, “How Many People are Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender?” University of California, Los Angeles: Williams Institute, 2011.
    131. 129. David Carter, Stonewall: The Riots that Sparked a Gay Revolution (St. Martin’s Griffin, 2010); Eric Marcus, Making Gay History: The Half-Century Fight for Lesbian and Gay Equal Rights (New York: Harper Collins, 2002).
    132. 130. Jafari Sinclaire Allen, “‘In the Life’ In Diaspora: Autonomy / Desire / Community,” in Routledge Handbook of Sexuality, Health and Rights, ed. Peter Aggleton and Richard Parker (New York: Routledge, 2010), 459.
    133. 131. Kristen Schilt and Laurel Westbrook, “Doing Gender, Doing Heteronormativity: ‘Gender Normals,’ Transgender People, and the Social Maintenance of Heterosexuality” Gender and Society 23 no. 4 (2009): 440–464.
    134. 132. Justin McCarthy, “Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55%.” Gallup.
    135. 133. Ellen Lewin and William Leap, Out in Theory: The Emergence of Lesbian and Gay Anthropology (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2002); William Leap and Ellen Lewin, Out in the Field: Reflections of Lesbian and Gay Anthropologist (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1996).
    136. 134. Jessica Johnson, “The Citizen-Soldier: Masculinity, War, and Sacrifice at an Emerging Church in Seattle, Washington.” Political and Legal Anthropology Review 33 no. 2 (2010): 326–351.
    137. 135. Tamara Metz, Untying the Knot: Marriage, the State, and the Case for Their Divorce (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010).
    138. 136. Miriam Smith, “Gender Politics and the Same-Sex Marriage Debate in the United States,” Social Politics 17 no. 1 (2010): 1–28. Quote is on p.1
    139. 137. Luke Malone, “Here Are The 32 States Where You Can Be Fired For Being LGBT,”, February 12, 2015.
    140. 138. The Williams Institute. 2012. “America’s Shame: 40% of Homeless Youth are LGBT Kids.” San Diego Gay and Lesbian News, 13 July.
    141. 139. Fire, film by Mira Nair. 1996.
    142. 140. Don Kulick, “The Gender of Brazilian Transgendered Prostitutes” American Anthropologist 99 no. 3 (1997): 574–585.
    143. 141. Evelyn Blackwood, “Tombois in West Sumatra: Constructing Masculinity and Erotic Desire,” in Feminist Anthropology: A Reader, ed. Ellen Lewin, 411–434 (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2006).
    144. 142. Ara Wilson, The Intimate Economies of Bangkok: Tomboys, Tycoons, and Avon Ladies in the Global City (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004).
    145. 143. Lucetta Yip Lo Kam, Shanghai Lalas: Female Tongzhi Communities and Politics in Urban China. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2012).
    146. 144. Ibid.
    147. 145. Frances E. Mascia-Lees, ed., A Companion to the Anthropology of the Body and Embodiment (Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011).
    148. 146. Don Kulick and Jens Rydström, Loneliness and Its Opposite: Sex, Disability, and the Ethics of Engagement (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2015); Susan Greenhalgh, Fat-Talk Nation: The Human Costs of America’s War on Fat (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2015); Ellen Gruenbaum, The Female Circumcision Controversy: An Anthropological Perspective (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001); Seth M. Holmes, Fresh Fruit, Broken Bodies: Migrant Farmworkers in the United States (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2013); Eithne Luibhéid, Entry Denied: Controlling Sexuality at the Border (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2002).
    149. 147. Pamela Runestad, “The Medical Anthropologist as the Patient: Developing Research Questions on Hospital Food in Japan through Auto-Ethnography,”ASIANetwork Exchange 23 no. 1 (2016):66–82.
    150. 148. Emily Martin, The Woman in the Body (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1987); Emily Martin, “The Egg and the Sperm: How Science Has Constructed a Romance Based on Stereotypical Male-Female Roles” Signs 16 no. 3 (1991): 485–501.
    151. 149. Emily Martin, “The Egg and the Sperm,” 485.
    152. 150. David H. Freedman, “The Aggressive Egg,” Discover, June, 1992, 61–65.
    153. 151. The Miracle of Life, 1983. There was a sequel in 2001:
    154. 152. Corinne P. Hayden, “Gender, Genetics and Generation: Reformulating Biology in Lesbian Kinship,” Cultural Anthropology 10 no. 1 (1995): 41–63.
    155. 153. For some of the positive results for women, see Vanessa Fong, “China’s One-Child Policy and the Empowerment of Urban Daughters,” American Anthropologist 104 no. 4 (2002): 1098–1109.
    156. 154. The examples from Turkey come from: “The Biopolitics of the Family in Turkey: neoconservatism, sexuality and reproduction.” Session at 2015 American Anthropological Association meetings, Denver; and from a paper given by Sen Gupta in session 4–0615, “Development, Gender, and the neoliberal Social Imaginary,” at the 2015 American Anthropological Association meetings, Denver. There is a huge body of research on these topics (and others) that we simply could not cover in one chapter. We hope the references we have provided will give readers a starting point for further investigation!
    157. 155. Ruth Behar, “Introduction: Out of Exile,” in Women Writing Culture, ed. Ruth Behar and Deborah Gordon (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995); Peggy Golde, Women in the Field: Anthropological Experiences (Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing Company, 1970); Nancy J. Parezo, Hidden Scholars: Women Anthropologists and the Native American Southwest (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1993), 5–9.
    158. 156. Helen Brannagh, “Sex ‘Suggested’ and Power Play: Notes on Harassment in the Field,” in China: New Faces of Ethnography, ed. Bettina Gransow, Pal Nyiri, and Shiaw-Chian Fong (Piscataway, NJ: Verlag, 2005); Fran Markowitz and Michael Ashkenaziand, Sex, Sexuality, and the Anthropologist (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999).
    159. 157. See Candice Cornet and Tami Blumenfield, “Anthropological Fieldwork and Families in China and Beyond,” in Doing Fieldwork in China…with Kids! The Dynamics of Accompanied Fieldwork in the People’s Republic, ed. Candice Cornet and Tami Blumenfield (Copenhagen: NIAS Press, 2006); Tami Blumenfield, “Blurred Boundaries of Learning and Ethnography in an Era of Constant Connectedness: Lessons from Fieldwork with Children in Southwest China,” ibid, 69–85. Additional perspectives from a father-son duo and a mother-daughter pair in the same volume are those by Eriberto P. Lozada Jr. and E. Patrick Lozada III, “Opening the Door (开门): Doing Fieldwork with Children in Rural China,” and by Jeanne L. Shea, “Clean Your Plate and Don’t Be Polite: An American Mother’s Education in Early Childhood Parenting and Family Life in Shanghai, China.” For another discussion of how children influence perceptions of a fieldworking parent, see Jocelyn Linnekin, “Family and Other Uncontrollables: Impression Management in Accompanied Fieldwork,” in Fieldwork and Families: Constructing New Models for Ethnographic Research, ed. Juliana Flinn, Leslie Marshall, and Jocelyn Armstrong (Honolulu: Hawaii University Press, 1998), 71–83.
    160. 158. Lynn Bolles, “Telling the Story Straight: Black Feminist Intellectual Thought in Anthropology” Transforming Anthropology: Journal of the Association of Black Anthropologists 21 no. 1 (2013): 63–64.
    161. 159. See Christina Wasson et al., We’ve Come a Long Way, Maybe: Academic Climate Report of the Committee on the Status of Women in Anthropology, 2008, 5, 8. Available from and Elizabeth Rudd, E. Morrison, J. Picciano, and Maresi Nerad, “Social Science PhDs—Five+ Years Out: Anthropology Report. CIRGE Report 2008-01,” 2008.
    162. 160. Ibid.
    163. 161. See Agatha M. Beins and Judith L. Kennedy, Women’s Studies for the Future: Foundations, Interrogations, Politics (Rutgers, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2005); Florence Howe and Mari Jo Buhl, The Politics of Women’s Studies: Testimony from the 30 Founding Mothers (New York: The Feminist Press, 2000); Marilyn J. Boxer and Caroline Stimpson, When Women Ask the Questions: Creating Women’s Studies in America (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001); Susan Shaw and Janet Lee, Women’s Voices, Feminist Visions (New York: McGraw Hill, 2014).
    164. 162. Rachel Adams and Michael Savan, The Masculinity Studies Reader (New York: Wiley-Blackwell, 2002); Judith Keagan Gardiner, Masculinity Studies and Feminist Theory (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002); Matthew C. Gutmann, “Trafficking in Men: The Anthropology of Masculinity,” Annual Review of Anthropology 26 no. 1 (2007): 385–409. There were a number of earlier explorations of masculinity, several focused on African-American males. See for example Michelle Wallace, Black Macho and the Myth of the Superwoman (New York: Warner Books, 1980).
    165. 163. See especially numerous films available through Media Education Foundation and Women Make Movies. See also Susan Bordo, The Male Body: A New Look at Men in Public and in Private (New York: Farrar Straus and Giroux, 1999); Rebecca Solnit, Men Explain Things to Me (Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2014). Also, Jackson Katz’ film Tough Guise 2: Violence, Media, and the Crisis in Masculinity (2013) and the website have other books, articles, and workshops on gender violence prevention. See also Michael Kimmel, Guyland: The Perilous World Where Boys Become Men (New York: Harper Perennial, 2009).
    166. 164. Thomas Grego, Mehinaku: The Drama of Daily Life in a Brazilian Indian Village (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977). See also Paula Brown and Georgeda Buchbinder, Man and Woman in the New Guinea Highlands (Washington DC: American Anthropological Association, 1976); Gilbert Herdt, Guardians of the Flutes (film); Stanley Brandeis, Metaphors of Masculinity: Sex and Status in Andalusian Folklore (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1980); Sherry B. Ortner and Harriet Whitehead, Sexual Meanings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981); David Gilmore, Manhood in the Making: Cultural Concepts of Masculinity (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990).
    167. 165. See article by Matthew C. Guttman, “Trafficking in Men: The Anthropology of Masculinity,” Annual Review of Anthropology 26 (2007): 385–409.
    168. 166. See several excellent videos through Media Education Foundation including Dreamworlds 3, Killing Us Softly 4, The Purity Myth as well as those addressing masculinity such as Tough Guise 2, Joystick Warriors, and Hip Hop: Beyond Beats and Rhymes.
    169. 167. Philippe Bourgois and Jeffrey Schonberg, Righteous Dopefiend (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2009); Seth M. Holmes, Fresh Fruit, Broken Bodies: Migrant Farmworkers in the United States (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2013); Mary H. Moran, “Warriors or Soldiers? Masculinity and Ritual Transvestism in the Liberian Civil War,” in Situated Lives, ed. Louise Lamphere, Helena Ragone, and Patricia Zavella, 440–450. New York: Routledge, 1997); Kimberly Theidon, “Reconstructing Masculinities: The Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration of Former Combatants in Colombia,” in The Gender, Culture, and Power Reader, ed. Dorothy Hodgson, 420–429 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016); Casey High, “Warriors, Hunters, and Bruce Lee: Gendered Agency and the Transformation of Amazonian Masculinity” American Ethnologist 37 no. 4 (2010): 753–770.
    170. 168. James W. Messerschmidt, Masculinities in the Making: From the Local to the Global (Lanham, MD: Rowman Littlefield, 2015).
    171. 169. Liu Shao-hua, Passage to Manhood: Youth, Masculinity, and Migration in Southwest China (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2010).
    172. 170. See Marcia C. Inhorn, The New Arab Man: Emergent Masculinities, Technologies, and Islam in the Middle East (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2012); Marcia C. Inhorn, Wendy Chavkin, and Jose-Alberto Navarro, Globalized Fatherhood. New York: Berghahn. For discussion of Japan, see Mark J. McLelland. 2005. “Salarymen Doing Queer: Gay Men and the Heterosexual Public Sphere in Japan,” in Genders, Transgenders and Sexualities in Japan, edited by M. J. McLelland and R. Dasgupta, 96–110 (New York: Routledge, 2014).
    173. 171. Dipanita Nath, “Mardistan: Four Men Talk about Masculinity in Harjant Gill’s Film,” The Indian Express, August 25, 2014. The film is available online: