跨文化社会结构中的性别角色差异

注：机翻，未校。

Gender

Carol R. Ember

Milagro Escobar

Noah Rossen

Abbe McCarter

November 19, 2019

Abstract

Categorizing children at birth into the binary categories of female or male is common cross-culturally. But there is also substantial variation across cultures, both in the number of gender categories and in the tolerance of switching categories. This module first explores variation in gender concepts, then turns to what we know from cross-cultural research about gender differences in division of labor, political and warrior roles, and the relative status of women and men in society.

在出生时将孩子归类为女性或男性这两种二元性别类别，在跨文化中是很常见的现象。但在不同文化之间，在性别类别的数量以及对转换性别的容忍度方面，也存在着显著的差异。本模块首先探讨性别概念的多样性，然后转向我们从跨文化研究中所了解到的，关于在劳动分工、政治和战士角色以及社会中男女相对地位方面的性别差异。

In Zapotec cultures a muxe is someone who is assigned one gender at birth, but dresses as or assumes the societal role of the other binary gender, sometimes being referred to as a “third gender.
在萨波特克文化中，“穆克西（muxe）” 是指在出生时被赋予一种性别，但却穿着另一种二元性别的服饰或承担其社会角色的人，有时被称为 “第三性别”。

Gender

In most Western societies there is great importance placed on assigning a newborn into one of two categories—female or male—based on the newborn’s external biological appearance. From the moment of birth, research has shown that parents begin to have very different ideas and expectations for their newborn girl or boy. They not only believe that they have different personalities but they soon begin to treat them differently. And if, as it occasionally happens, an infant is born with ambiguous genitalia (intersex), there is usually strong pressure to “correct” the anatomy to conform to one clear category. Most children and adults accept the male or female category assigned to them, but some individuals feel that they do not belong to their assigned category (such individuals may refer to themselves as transgender) and they may opt for medical treatment (such as hormones or surgery) to bring about a closer fit between their body and the gender role they feel comfortable with.

在大多数西方社会，人们非常重视根据新生儿的外部生理特征，将其归入女性或男性这两类中的某一类。研究表明，从婴儿出生的那一刻起，父母就开始对他们的新生女儿或儿子抱有截然不同的想法和期望。他们不仅认为男孩和女孩有着不同的性格，而且很快就开始以不同的方式对待他们。而且，如果偶尔出现婴儿出生时生殖器特征不明显（双性人）的情况，通常会有很大的压力要求 “矫正” 其身体结构，使其符合某一明确的性别类别。大多数儿童和成年人都接受被赋予的男性或女性类别，但也有一些人觉得自己不属于被指定的类别（这类人可能会称自己为跨性别者），他们可能会选择接受医疗治疗（如激素治疗或手术），以使自己的身体与他们觉得舒适的性别角色更加契合。

Western societies are not alone in categorizing babies into the binary categories of female or male. The two category system is common cross-culturally. But there is also substantial variation across cultures, both in the number of gender categories and in the tolerance of category switching. All of this suggests that biological sex and cultural conceptions are not the same. Nature and nurture are inextricably confounded.

对婴儿进行男女二元分类的情况并非西方社会所独有。这种二元分类系统在不同文化中都很常见。但不同文化之间在性别的类别数量以及对转换性别的容忍度方面，也存在着显著差异。所有这些都表明，生理性别和文化观念并不相同。先天因素和后天培养是紧密相连、难以区分的。

The women’s movement of the 1960/70s in the United States played a large part in persuading scholars to take more seriously society’s role in shaping not only expectations for males and females, but also how society shapes differences in access to prestige, authority, and power for males and females. Particularly important was the introduction of the concept of “gender” as distinguished from “sex.” Gender is socially constructed; sex results from biological differences. Because it is difficult to disentangle the effects of society from biology, we generally use the term gender in our discussion here. After exploring variation in gender concepts, we turn to what we know from cross-cultural research about division of labor in subsistence, political and warrior roles, and the relative status of women and men.

20世纪六七十年代美国的妇女运动在促使学者们更加认真地看待社会在塑造对男性和女性的期望方面所起的作用，以及社会如何塑造男性和女性在获得声望、权威和权力方面的差异方面，发挥了重要作用。特别重要的是引入了 “性别（gender）” 这一与 “性（sex）” 相区别的概念。性别是社会建构的；而性则源于生理差异。由于很难将社会的影响与生理因素区分开来，因此我们在这里的讨论中通常使用 “性别” 这个词。在探讨了性别概念的多样性之后，我们将转向从跨文化研究中所了解到的关于维持生计方面的劳动分工、政治和战士角色，以及男女相对地位的情况。

Variation in Gender Concepts

While the two gender (binary) category system appears to be common cross-culturally (Segal 2004), we do not have a systematic survey to tell us how common it is compared to multiple gender systems. Quite a number of societies have a third gender category in addition to female and male. Two examples are the concept of “two-spirit” (the earlier term berdache is considered perjorative) found in many Native American cultures and the Oman xanith.

虽然二元性别分类系统在不同文化中似乎很常见（西格尔（Segal），2004年），但我们没有系统的调查来告诉我们，与多种性别系统相比，它究竟有多普遍。相当多的社会除了女性和男性之外，还有第三性别类别。两个例子是在许多美洲原住民文化中发现的 “双灵（two-spirit）” 概念（早期的术语 “berdache” 被认为带有贬义），以及阿曼的 “xanith”。

The assignment of a two-spirit designation would often come about when a boy, prior to adolescence, would undertake a vision quest, a rite of passage that involves being alone in the wilderness to seek a guardian spirit. Upon his return from the wilderness, the boy’s vision would be interpreted, sometimes indicating a two-spirit status (Segal 2004). Two-spirits are not seen as men or women; instead they occupy an alternative gender. In the majority of the eastern North American cultures documented by Williams (1992), a two-spirit person would wear traditional women’s clothing and perform traditional women’s labor in the community. However, they also had unique roles in childbirth and weddings that were different from women’s roles. A two-spirit person might also get married and take on the role of the wife in a partnership. Although rarer, a two-spirit person could also be born female and take on more masculine dress and roles—for example, among the Ojibwa, a two spirit female engaged in hunting (Callender et al. 1983, 445).

“双灵” 身份的认定通常发生在一个男孩青春期前进行的 “幻景追寻” 仪式中，这是一种成人仪式，要求男孩独自在荒野中寻找一个守护神灵。当男孩从荒野归来后，他的幻景会被解读，有时这会表明他具有 “双灵” 身份（西格尔（Segal），2004年）。“双灵” 者不被视为男性或女性；相反，他们属于一种另类性别。在威廉姆斯（Williams）（1992年）所记录的大多数北美东部文化中，“双灵” 者会穿着传统女性服饰，并在社区中从事传统女性的劳动。然而，他们在分娩和婚礼中也有与女性不同的独特角色。“双灵” 者也可能结婚，并在伴侣关系中扮演妻子的角色。虽然较为罕见，但 “双灵” 者也可能出生时为女性，并表现出更多男性化的穿着和角色——例如，在奥吉布瓦族中，女性 “双灵” 者会从事狩猎活动（卡伦德（Callender）等人，1983年，第445页）。

In Oman, there is a gender triad of female, male and xanith (Wikan 1977; Burton 2015). Xaniths are anatomically male and had roles that were neither like males nor females. For example, males dress in white, xaniths dress in unpatterned pastels, and women dress in brightly colored patterns. Xaniths have medium length hair; women have long hair and men short hair. Unlike women, who are secluded and cannot move about freely, xaniths are secluded only at night but can move about freely as men during the day. Xaniths typically earn a living either as domestic servants or as prostitutes for men. One of the most interesting aspects of the Omani gender construct is that it is the sexual act itself, and not the organs, which constitutes the distinction between a man and a xanith. For the Oman, a man is someone who performs the act of “entering” during sexual intercourse, and whoever receives, is a woman. The fact that a man has sexual relationships with a xanith does not alter his gender identity—he is still a man if he performs the entering (Burton 2015).

在阿曼，存在着女性、男性和 “xanith” 这样的性别三元组（威坎（Wikan），1977年；伯顿（Burton），2015年）。“xanith” 在生理上是男性，但其角色既不同于男性也不同于女性。例如，男性穿白色衣服，“xanith

穿无图案的淡色衣服，而女性穿色彩鲜艳的图案衣服。“xanith” 留着中等长度的头发；女性留长发，男性留短发。与被隔离且不能自由行动的女性不同，“xanith” 只在夜间被隔离，白天则可以像男性一样自由活动。“xanith” 通常通过做家庭佣工或为男性提供性服务来谋生。阿曼性别建构中最有趣的一个方面是，区分男性和 “xanith” 的是性行为本身，而不是性器官。对阿曼人来说，在性交中进行 “插入” 行为的人是男性，而接受的一方是女性。男性与 “xanith” 发生性关系这一事实并不会改变他的性别认同——如果他进行插入行为，他仍然是男性（伯顿（Burton），2015年）。

While the most common exception to the male/female dichotomy comes in the form of a third gender, there are societies with more than three genders. The Bugis of Indonesia recognize five different genders. Oroane (identify with their assigned gender as men), makkunrai (identify with their assigned gender as women), calabai (transgender women), calalai (transgender men), and bissu (half-male and half-female). The final gender category, bissu, is perhaps the most contested of the five. Bissu may be intersex, being born with ambiguous genitalia, but this is not always the case. Bissu are thought of as being externally male, but internally female. They typically serve as shamans and were originally seen as having a special connection to the gods. While the increasing presence of conservative Islam in Indonesia led to the oppression and repression of gender diversity in the 20th century, the bissu have been vital to cultural revitalization efforts, and still today play an important role in various ceremonies (Nanda 2013).

虽然对男女二元划分最常见的例外是出现第三性别，但也有一些社会存在超过三种性别的情况。印度尼西亚的布吉人认可五种不同的性别。“Oroane”（认同被赋予的男性性别）、“makkunrai”（认同被赋予的女性性别）、“calabai”（跨性别女性）、“calalai”（跨性别男性）以及 “bissu”（半男半女）。最后一个性别类别 “bissu” 可能是这五种性别中最具争议的。“bissu” 可能是双性人，出生时生殖器特征不明显，但并非总是如此。“bissu” 被认为外在是男性，但内在是女性。他们通常担任萨满巫师，最初被视为与神灵有着特殊的联系。尽管 20 世纪印度尼西亚保守伊斯兰教的影响力日益增强，导致性别多样性受到压迫和抑制，但 “bissu” 对于文化复兴努力至关重要，并且在当今各种仪式中仍然发挥着重要作用（南达（Nanda），2013年）。

Division of Labor by Gender

In most societies known to anthropology, there is a division of labor by gender. Given all the different societies in the world, we might imagine that there would be an enormous number of different ways of dividing labor by gender. But to the contrary, there are some near-universal cross-cultural patterns regarding subsistence, food processing, other economic activities, and household chores for adults (Murdock and Provost 1973).

在人类学所熟知的大多数社会中，存在着按性别划分的劳动分工。考虑到世界上所有不同的社会，我们可能会想象按性别划分劳动分工的方式会有无数种。但恰恰相反，在维持生计、食品加工、其他经济活动以及成年人的家务劳动方面，存在一些近乎普遍的跨文化模式（默多克（Murdock）和普罗沃斯特（Provost），1973年）。

Men almost always hunt and trap animals, do work that involves hard materials such as lumbering, mining, quarrying, and making objects from bone, horn, and shell. They also almost always make musical instruments.
男性几乎总是从事狩猎和诱捕动物的活动，进行涉及坚硬材料的工作，如伐木、采矿、采石，以及用骨头、角和贝壳制作物品。他们也几乎总是制作乐器。
Women almost always care for infants.
女性几乎总是照顾婴儿。
Men usually fish, herd large animals, clear land and do soil preparation for planting, butcher animals, make nets and rope, and collect honey.
男性通常捕鱼、放牧大型动物、清理土地并为种植做土壤准备、屠宰动物、制作网和绳子，以及采集蜂蜜。
Women usually gather wild plants, cook, prepare dairy products, fetch firewood or other fuel, launder clothes, spin yarn, and care for children.
女性通常采集野生植物、做饭、制作乳制品、拾取木柴或其他燃料、洗衣服、纺纱，以及照顾孩子。
Activities done by either women or men include collecting shellfish, caring for small animals, milking, planting and weeding crops, preserving fish and meat, preparing leather products, baskets, clothing, and pottery.
男女都可能从事的活动包括采集贝类、照顾小动物、挤奶、种植和为庄稼除草、保存鱼和肉、制作皮革制品、篮子、衣物以及陶器。
Although many agricultural tasks are performed by men or women, men will tend to increase their participation in agriculture with the introduction of the plow (Murdock and Provost 1973; Alesina, Giuliano, and Nunn 2013).

尽管许多农业任务可由男性或女性完成，但随着犁的引入，男性往往会更多地参与农业劳动（默多克（Murdock）和普罗沃斯特（Provost），1973年；阿莱西纳（Alesina）、朱利亚诺（Giuliano）和纳恩（Nunn），2013年）。
- However, women do not appear to decrease their absolute contribution to agriculture with intensification; rather, men increase their contribution relative to women (Ember 1983).
  
  然而，随着农业集约化程度的提高，女性对农业的绝对贡献似乎并未减少；相反，男性相对于女性的贡献有所增加（恩伯（Ember），1983年）。
  
  Why? With the intensification of agriculture, which is usually related to growing cereal crops, total work time (in both subsistence and domestic work) increases. Increased domestic work results from: more time needed to process cereal crops to make them edible (such as grinding flour or boiling dried grains for hours); more water and firewood are needed for cooking; and more infant and childcare (due to higher fertility). Domestic work is more compatible with childcare, so it appears that women are “pulled” into spending more time in tasks in and around the home. With increased domestic work, women probably have no more time to spend on agriculture, so men have to do more. It is important to note that women in intensive agricultural societies work on average over 11 hours a day, 7 days a week (Ember 1983).
  
  为什么呢？随着农业集约化，这通常与种植谷物作物相关，总工作时间（包括维持生计和家务劳动）会增加。家务劳动增加的原因如下：需要更多时间来加工谷物使其可食用（例如磨面粉或长时间煮干谷物）；烹饪需要更多的水和木柴；以及需要更多地照顾婴儿和小孩（由于生育率较高）。家务劳动与照顾孩子更兼容，所以似乎女性被 “拉” 去花更多时间在家中及周边的任务上。随着家务劳动的增加，女性可能没有更多时间投入到农业中，所以男性不得不承担更多。需要注意的是，在集约化农业社会中，女性平均每天工作超过 11 小时，每周工作 7 天（恩伯（Ember），1983年）。
When the same task may be performed by either gender (such as weaving or making pottery), men are more likely to do it if it involves trade or monetary transactions (Byrne 1994, 1999; O’Brian 1999).

当同一项任务可由男女任何一方完成时（如织布或制作陶器），如果该任务涉及贸易或金钱交易，男性更有可能去做（伯恩（Byrne），1994年、1999年；奥布赖恩（O’Brian），1999年）。

Why? If men have limited access to land, they will increasingly participate in production of crafts if there is a market for them (Byrne 1994). An additional factor may be the compatibility of commercial production with women’s other tasks and childcare. If pottery or weaving can be done in or around the home in limited time periods, it is compatible with childcare. If labor needs to be continuous, it may be difficult for women to undertake it (Ember and Ember 2019, 207).

为什么呢？如果男性获得土地的机会有限，而手工艺品有市场需求，他们就会越来越多地参与手工艺品的生产（伯恩（Byrne），1994年）。另一个因素可能是商业生产与女性的其他任务以及照顾孩子的兼容性。如果制作陶器或织布可以在有限的时间内在家中或家附近完成，那么它就与照顾孩子相兼容。如果劳动需要持续进行，女性可能难以承担（恩伯（Ember）和恩伯（Ember），2019年，第207页）。
Children’s chores usually match adult gender assignments but when there are exceptions, boys will do women’s work, but girls do not do men’s work (Bradley 1987, 1993).

孩子们的家务通常与成年人的性别分工相匹配，但也有例外情况，男孩可能会做女性的工作，但女孩通常不会做男性的工作（布拉德利（Bradley），1987年、1993年）。

What explains division of labor?

如何解释劳动分工呢？

Four theories often mentioned to explain division of labor patterns are: strength differences, compatibility with childcare, economy-of-effort, and expendability. While all of the theories plausibly explain some of the near-universal patterns, all of the theories have some weaknesses (see discussion in Ember and Ember 2019).

通常用来解释劳动分工模式的四种理论是：力量差异、与照顾孩子的兼容性、省力原则以及可牺牲性。虽然所有这些理论都能合理地解释一些近乎普遍的模式，但所有理论也都存在一些弱点（见恩伯（Ember）和恩伯（Ember），2019年中的讨论）。

While some of the nearly universal male activities do involve considerable strength such as lumbering, quarrying, and the hunting of large game, all of which are consistent with “strength” theory, other tasks such as trapping small animals, making objects from shell, and making musical instruments do not seem to require that much strength. And women in some societies do hunt, indicating that women are certainly capable of hunting.

虽然一些近乎普遍由男性从事的活动确实需要相当大的力量，如伐木、采石和猎杀大型猎物，这些都与 “力量” 理论相符，但其他一些任务，如诱捕小动物、用贝壳制作物品以及制作乐器，似乎并不需要那么大的力量。而且在一些社会中女性也会狩猎，这表明女性当然有能力进行狩猎。

The “compatibility with childcare” theory stresses the impact of breastfeeding, which on average is two years in the nonindustrial world. Women need to be relatively near their infants and toddlers so that they can return home to nurse or they need to take them with them when they go away from home. But some activities, such as hunting, trapping, lumbering, and mining are clearly too dangerous for young children to be nearby. This being said, the “compatibility with childcare” theory cannot readily explain why men work with bone, horn, and shell or make musical instruments since these can be interrupted.

“与照顾孩子的兼容性” 理论强调母乳喂养的影响，在非工业化社会中，母乳喂养平均持续两年。女性需要相对靠近她们的婴儿和幼儿，以便能够回家哺乳，或者当她们离开家时需要带上孩子。但是一些活动，如狩猎、诱捕、伐木和采矿，显然对于年幼的孩子来说太危险，不能让他们在附近。话虽如此，“与照顾孩子的兼容性” 理论无法轻易解释为什么男性会从事用骨头、角和贝壳制作物品或制作乐器的工作，因为这些工作是可以中断的。

Economy-of-effort theory can fill in the gaps for some of the activities not clearly accounted for by the first two theories. First, it may be advantageous for the gender that performs the primary task to do secondary tasks because they have more knowledge about the materials they need to work with. So, if men cut down trees and prepare logs for building, it may be more efficient for them to make other wooden objects, such as musical instruments since they are familiar with qualities of different woods. Second, it is more efficient to perform tasks located in the same vicinity. If women take care of infants in or around the home, other household tasks in or around the home can more readily be accomplished.

省力原则理论可以填补前两种理论未能清晰解释的一些活动的空白。首先，对于承担主要任务的性别来说，从事次要任务可能是有利的，因为他们对所需处理的材料有更多的了解。所以，如果男性砍伐树木并为建筑准备原木，那么他们制作其他木制物品，如乐器，可能会更有效率，因为他们熟悉不同木材的特性。其次，在同一区域内执行任务会更有效率。如果女性在家中或家附近照顾婴儿，那么家中或家附近的其他家务任务就更容易完成。

Society’s population is limited by the number of reproductive-aged women, not the number of reproductively-aged men. This is because women usually have only one child at a time, but men can impregnate more than one woman. Indeed, most societies in the ethnographic record allow or prefer polygyny as a form of marriage. Therefore, if there are dangerous activities to be undertaken, “expendability” theory suggests it is more adaptive for men, rather than women, to perform them. “Expendability” theory can explain many of the same activities as the strength theory, including hunting, trapping, lumbering, and mining. But like “strength” theory, it does not explain other activities that are not so dangerous.

社会的人口数量受到育龄女性数量的限制，而非育龄男性的数量。这是因为女性通常一次只能生育一个孩子，而男性可以使多个女性怀孕。事实上，在民族志记录中的大多数社会都允许或更倾向于将一夫多妻制作为一种婚姻形式。因此，如果有危险的活动需要进行，“可牺牲性” 理论认为，由男性而非女性来承担这些活动更具适应性。“可牺牲性” 理论可以解释许多与 “力量” 理论相同的活动，包括狩猎、诱捕、伐木和采矿。但与 “力量” 理论一样，它无法解释其他一些不那么危险的活动。

Kikuyu women carrying heavy loads of wood in Kenya. Work requiring strength is not always relegated to the realm of men. Credit: Sirphilipjunior, CC BY-SA 4.0.

肯尼亚的基库尤族妇女扛着沉重的木柴。需要体力的工作并不总是男性的专属领域。来源：Sirphilipjunior，知识共享署名 - 相同方式共享 4.0 国际许可协议（CC BY-SA 4.0）。

What gender is the “breadwinner”?

“养家糊口的人” 属于什么性别呢？

When people nowadays talk about the “breadwinner” in the family, they usually mean who brings in more money from paid employment. But there is an enormous amount of household-related work that is unpaid. This includes childcare, taking care of relatives, preparing food and cooking, cleaning, washing, shopping or going to the market, repairs, and care of nearby grounds. When all work is added up, in most countries today, women average less paid work time than men but work more total hours than men—on average one more hour a day (Parker 2017).

如今，当人们谈论家庭中的 “养家糊口者” 时，他们通常指的是从有偿工作中赚取更多收入的人。但还有大量与家务相关的工作是没有报酬的。这包括照顾孩子、照料亲属、准备食物和做饭、打扫卫生、洗衣服、购物或去市场、维修以及打理附近的场地。当把所有工作加起来时，在当今大多数国家，女性的平均有偿工作时间比男性少，但总工作时间却比男性多——平均每天多一个小时（帕克（Parker），2017年）。

In anthropological samples, usually of nonindustrial societies relying primarily on household food collection and production, the equivalent of “breadwinner” is the person who does most of the primary subsistence work—gathering, hunting, fishing, animal husbandry, and agriculture. Cross-culturally, it is relatively uncommon for women to do more primary subsistence work than men. The exceptions tend to be societies where gathering, usually women’s work, is the predominant activity. If we want to ask whether men or women contribute more to primary subsistence, we are usually contrasting societies where men do most of the primary subsistence with those where women contribute about the same as men. We discussed above how the increase in domestic work may explain why women contribute relatively less than men to agriculture when plowing is involved, but what explains the variation in other societies? Some societies practice purdah (female seclusion), which sometimes entails seclusion of women in the household or the covering of the body in the presence of males. Such practices are more common in South Asian and Islamic countries (particularly Arab countries). Indeed, societies with a high proportion of Muslims have lower participation of women in wage labor (Korotayev et al. 2015).

在人类学的样本中，通常是那些主要依靠家庭食物采集和生产的非工业化社会，“养家糊口者” 相当于从事大部分主要维持生计工作的人——采集、狩猎、捕鱼、畜牧和农业。从跨文化的角度来看，女性在主要维持生计的工作中比男性做得更多的情况相对较少。例外情况往往出现在以采集（通常是女性的工作）为主要活动的社会中。如果我们想探究男性和女性谁对主要维持生计的工作贡献更大，我们通常会对比那些男性承担大部分主要维持生计工作的社会和那些女性贡献与男性大致相同的社会。我们在上面讨论了，当涉及到犁耕时，家务劳动的增加如何解释女性在农业方面的贡献相对低于男性，但如何解释其他社会中的差异呢？一些社会实行 “深闺制度（purdah）”（女性隔离），这有时意味着女性被隔离在家中，或者在男性面前要遮盖身体。这种做法在南亚和伊斯兰国家（尤其是阿拉伯国家）更为常见。确实，穆斯林比例较高的社会中，女性参与有偿劳动的比例较低（科罗塔耶夫（Korotayev）等人，2015年）。

Relative Status of Women and Men

男女的相对地位

Scholars who have surveyed societies of the recent past and present have not found any societies where women could be described as having clear dominance over men. Even in societies with matrilineal descent (kin groups that pass descent through women) and matrilocal residence (where married couples live with or near the wife’s family) women do not have prominence in many areas of life. However, as Martin Whyte (2015, 6, 257) puts it, there is certainly considerable variation in need of explanation. There are societies in which women are generally excluded from political and other important realms of public life and there are others in which men and women are more equal and male dominance is minimal. So a critical question is why the status of women relative to men is low in some societies and higher or more equal in others.

研究近现代和当代社会的学者们尚未发现有任何社会中女性能够被描述为明显主导男性。即使在那些具有母系继嗣（通过女性传递世系的亲属群体）和从母居（已婚夫妇与妻子的家人一起居住或住在附近）的社会中，女性在生活的许多领域也并不占主导地位。然而，正如马丁·怀特（Martin Whyte）（2015年，第6、257页）所说，确实存在着相当大的差异需要解释。有些社会中，女性普遍被排除在政治和其他重要的公共生活领域之外，而在另一些社会中，男女更加平等，男性的主导地位则微乎其微。所以一个关键问题是，为什么在一些社会中女性相对于男性的地位较低，而在另一些社会中则较高或更加平等。

But what is meant by the term “status”? It is an ambiguous term that can refer to “differential power, prestige, rights, privileges, and importance of women relative to men” (Whyte 2015, 10). Do all these aspects go together? Does the concept of status appear to be a clear dimension of variation? Using a worldwide cross-cultural sample and 52 different variables that might tap some aspect of status, Whyte (2015) decided to see how these variables relate to each other. Whyte (2015, 169) concluded that status was not a unitary construct because these different measures did not predict each other very well. This leaves us with a research dilemma. How can we try to explain variation in status when status is not a clear construct or contain simple measures that tap it? Whyte’s solution, because he still wanted to search for explanations, was to construct a series of smaller measures to tap different aspects of status. We summarize some of his main findings along with those of other cross-cultural researchers.

但是 “地位” 这个词意味着什么呢？这是一个模糊的术语，可以指 “女性相对于男性在权力、声望、权利、特权和重要性方面的差异”（怀特（Whyte），2015年，第10页）。所有这些方面是相互关联的吗？地位的概念是否是一个明确的变化维度呢？怀特（Whyte）（2015年）使用了一个全球跨文化样本以及 52 个可能涉及地位某些方面的不同变量，来研究这些变量之间的关系。怀特（2015年，第169页）得出结论，地位不是一个单一的概念，因为这些不同的衡量标准并不能很好地相互预测。这给我们带来了一个研究困境。当地位不是一个明确的概念，或者没有简单的衡量标准来衡量它时，我们如何解释地位的差异呢？怀特的解决办法是，由于他仍然想寻找解释，所以构建了一系列较小的衡量标准来探究地位的不同方面。我们总结了他的一些主要发现以及其他跨文化研究者的发现。

Societal complexity

社会复杂性

Greater societal complexity in nonindustrial societies (as measured by indicators such as intensive agriculture, political hierarchy, larger towns and cities, and social stratification) predicts that women have lower status in a number of domains (Whyte 2015, 154–57, 172).

在非工业化社会中，更高的社会复杂性（通过集约化农业、政治等级制度、更大的城镇和城市以及社会分层等指标来衡量）预示着女性在许多领域的地位较低（怀特（Whyte），2015年，第154 - 157、172页）。

less authority in the home
在家中权力较小
less independent solidarity with other women
与其他女性的独立团结程度较低
more unequal sexual restrictions
存在更不平等的性限制
fewer property rights
财产权较少
more ritualized fear from men
对男性的恐惧更加仪式化
belief that women are inferior (Coltrane 1992)
认为女性低人一等（科尔特兰（Coltrane），1992年）

Greater societal complexity in nonindustrial societies predicts more informal influence (Whyte 2015, 172), but this finding, while seemingly contradictory to the above findings may reflect a lack of real influence (Whyte 2015, 135).

非工业化社会中更高的社会复杂性预示着女性拥有更多的非正式影响力（怀特（Whyte），2015年，第172页），但这一发现虽然看似与上述发现相矛盾，却可能反映出实际上缺乏真正的影响力（怀特（Whyte），2015年，第135页）。

If we broaden our purview beyond nonindustrial societies, the relationship to societal complexity is probably curvilinear (resembling a “U” shape). Specifically, it appears that as societies transition from simpler to more complex subsistence economies the status of women generally declines, but as we move away from subsistence economies from industrial and post-industrial economies, gender equality increases somewhat.

如果我们将视野扩展到非工业化社会之外，社会复杂性与女性地位之间的关系可能是曲线形的（类似于 “U” 形）。具体来说，似乎随着社会从更简单的维持生计经济向更复杂的经济转变，女性的地位通常会下降，但当我们从维持生计经济转向工业和后工业经济时，性别平等在一定程度上会有所增加。

Countries that rely on agriculture seem to have the least favorable attitudes towards gender equality, while industrial societies tend to have moderately favorable views, and post-industrial societies typically have the most favorable attitudes Inglehart et al. (2003).

依赖农业的国家似乎对性别平等的态度最不友好，而工业社会往往持适度友好的态度，后工业社会通常对性别平等持最友好的态度（英格尔哈特（Inglehart）等人，2003年）。

Why? The suggestion is that in countries with more child mortality, there will be a greater emphasis on fertility of women and therefore jobs outside the home will be discouraged. With declining child mortality, women have more job opportunities and more opportunities for education. This theory might be parallel to the idea that childrearing is incompatible with certain types of labor for women.

为什么呢？有一种观点认为，在儿童死亡率较高的国家，会更加重视女性的生育能力，因此会不鼓励女性从事家庭以外的工作。随着儿童死亡率的下降，女性有了更多的工作机会和受教育机会。这一理论可能与这样一种观点相呼应，即养育孩子与女性从事某些类型的劳动不相容。

The Navajo are an example of both a matrilineal and matrilocal society. Property and clan membership are both inherited from the female lineage. Credit: US Department of Agriculture, license-free.

纳瓦霍族是一个既实行母系继嗣又实行从母居的社会的例子。财产和氏族成员身份都从女性世系继承而来。

Kinship and residence

亲属关系和居住地

Female-centered social organization (matrilineal descent and/or matrilocal residence) has modest effects on women’s status—women in matrilineal societies and/or matrilocal societies have significantly more control over property than patrilocal and patrilineal societies (Whyte 2015, 133, 171); other domains of status are somewhat higher where social organization is oriented around women, but these relationships are not significant (e.g., more domestic authority, more ritualized female solidarity, more control over sex).

以女性为中心的社会组织（母系继嗣和/或从母居）对女性地位有一定程度的影响——母系社会和/或从母居社会中的女性，相比从父居和父系社会中的女性，对财产有着显著更多的控制权（怀特（Whyte），2015年，第133、171页）；在以女性为导向的社会组织中，女性在其他地位领域的表现也略高一些，但这些关系并不显著（例如，更多的家庭权威、更具仪式化的女性团结、对性行为更多的掌控）。

Why doesn’t matrilineality and matrilocality predict higher status for women in more domains? Scholars point out that in most matrilineal societies (often also matrilocal societies) males are decision-makers for their kin group even though descent and property pass through women—thus there is divergence between the line of descent and the line of authority (this is often referred to as the “matrilineal puzzle”—see discussion in Schlegel (1972) p. 1-8). So a brother may have considerable authority over his sister. Alice Schlegel (1972, 135) suggests that in matrilineal societies women only tend to have more domestic autonomy when neither their brothers nor their husband has dominance in domestic matters.

为什么母系继嗣和从母居不能预示着女性在更多领域拥有更高的地位呢？学者们指出，在大多数母系社会（通常也是从母居社会）中，尽管世系和财产通过女性传承，但男性却是其亲属群体的决策者——因此，世系传承线和权威线之间存在差异（这通常被称为 “母系继嗣难题”——详见施莱格尔（Schlegel）在1972年著作中第1至8页的讨论）。所以，兄弟可能对其姐妹拥有相当大的权威。爱丽丝·施莱格尔（Alice Schlegel）（1972年，第135页）认为，在母系社会中，只有当女性的兄弟和丈夫在家庭事务中都不占据主导地位时，女性才往往会拥有更多的家庭自主权。

Patrilineal descent and male inheritance predict less female participation in religious rituals (Fink 2004, 54, 60).

父系继嗣和男性继承预示着女性在宗教仪式中的参与度较低（芬克（Fink），2004年，第54、60页）。

What doesn’t predict women’s status?

什么不能预测女性的地位？

Researchers don’t usually focus on non-predictors except when they are surprising. In the studies of women’s status, there was the general expectation that activities which bolster men’s importance, such as males being the major contributor to primary subsistence, or having high dependence on hunting or herding, or more warfare–activities that require strength or aggressiveness–would all predict lower status for women. Polygyny is similarly believed to detract from women’s status. However, here is what studies have shown:

研究人员通常不会关注那些不能预测女性地位的因素，除非这些因素出人意料。在对女性地位的研究中，人们普遍预期，那些增强男性重要性的活动，比如男性是主要维持生计的主要贡献者，或者高度依赖狩猎或放牧，又或者更多的战争活动（这些活动需要力量或攻击性），都将预示着女性地位较低。人们同样认为一夫多妻制会降低女性的地位。然而，研究结果表明：

Higher contribution by men to subsistence does not generally predict lower status for women across domains (Whyte 2015, 169; see also Sanday 1973)
男性对维持生计的贡献更大，一般并不能预示着女性在各个领域的地位会更低（怀特（Whyte），2015年，第169页；另见桑迪（Sanday），1973年）
Higher dependence on herding large animals shows mixed results, with no clear prediction of lower status for women across domains (Whyte 2015, 126)
对放牧大型动物的更高依赖显示出复杂的结果，并没有明确表明女性在各个领域的地位会更低（怀特（Whyte），2015年，第126页）
Higher dependence on hunting shows mixed results, but greater balance is associated with more advantages for women (significant for domestic authority, value of life, and ritualized solidarity— Whyte (2015) p. 128)
对狩猎的更高依赖也显示出复杂的结果，但更大的平衡（指男女在狩猎活动中的参与平衡）与女性更多的优势相关联（对家庭权威、生命价值和仪式化团结方面有显著影响——怀特（Whyte）2015年，第128页）
More warfare does not generally predict lower status for women across domains; most of the correlations are in the opposite direction and one is significant—more domestic authority for women with more warfare (Whyte 2015, 130)
更多的战争一般并不能预示着女性在各个领域的地位会更低；大多数相关性是相反的方向，并且有一个显著的发现——战争越多，女性的家庭权威越高（怀特（Whyte），2015年，第130页）

Amazon Mattei

Amazon Mattei at the Capitoline Museums in Rome depicts one of the great female Amazon warriors.

罗马卡比托利欧博物馆的《亚马逊·马泰伊》描绘了一位伟大的亚马逊女战士。

Politics and Warfare

政治与战争

The ancient Greeks describe a tribe of powerful women warriors they named Amazons. Greek vases from the 6th century BC depicted combat between their male warriors and these female “Amazon” warriors. The Americas had “Amazon” women warriors as well, at least in stories that come to us from conquistadors, missionaries and explorers. In fact, the Amazon River got its name from the explorer Francisco de Orellana, who named it the “Amazon” after reporting battles with female warriors (Crist, Parsons, and Schultz 2018). Did the Amazons exist or were these just myths? Excavating more than one thousand tombs in the Eurasian steppes associated with a nomadic culture (Scythians) archaeologists have found that about 20-37% of the excavated graves with weapons were female graves, consistent with Greek legends of female warriors coming from this region. Moreover, many of the female burials were elaborate with rich grave goods (Mayor 2014). Of course, we don’t know much about gender relations within the society as a whole based simply on finding evidence of female warriors.

古希腊人描述了一个他们称之为亚马逊人的强大女战士部落。公元前6世纪的希腊花瓶上描绘了他们的男性战士与这些女性 “亚马逊” 战士之间的战斗。美洲也有 “亚马逊” 女战士，至少在来自征服者、传教士和探险家的故事中是这样。事实上，亚马逊河得名于探险家弗朗西斯科·德·奥雷利亚纳（Francisco de Orellana），他在报告了与女战士的战斗后，将这条河命名为 “亚马逊”（克里斯特（Crist）、帕森斯（Parsons）和舒尔茨（Schultz），2018年）。亚马逊人真的存在过，还是仅仅是神话呢？考古学家在与游牧文化（斯基泰人）相关的欧亚草原上挖掘了一千多座坟墓，发现大约20% 至37% 的出土武器坟墓属于女性，这与希腊传说中来自该地区的女战士相吻合。此外，许多女性墓葬都很精致，陪葬品丰富（梅奥（Mayor），2014年）。当然，仅仅根据发现的女战士证据，我们对整个社会的性别关系了解并不多。

But these exceptions are estimated to amount to less than 1% of all warriors in human history (Goldstein 2004, 10–22). In fact, Goldstein points out that the connection of males with warfare is more of a cross-cultural universal than almost any other gender difference. Nonetheless, we do find that some societies allow women to participate in warfare. What explains why in some societies women take part in warfare?

但据估计，这些例外情况在人类历史上所有战士中所占比例不到1%（戈尔茨坦（Goldstein），2004年，第10至22页）。事实上，戈尔茨坦指出，男性与战争的联系比几乎任何其他性别差异都更具有跨文化普遍性。尽管如此，我们确实发现一些社会允许女性参与战争。如何解释在一些社会中女性会参与战争呢？

Societies with internal warfare and/or some community exogamy lack women’s participation in warfare. Or, to put it in reverse—societies with purely external warfare and community endogamy are more likely to allow women to participate in warfare.

存在内部战争和/或一些社区实行外婚制的社会，女性较少参与战争。或者，反过来说——存在纯粹外部战争且社区实行内婚制的社会，更有可能允许女性参与战争。

Why? Adams (1983) suggests that internal warfare and exogamy set up a conflict of loyalties for a woman between the family she has married into and her family of birth. To understand why there is a conflict, it is important to keep in mind that internal warfare (war against neighboring communities sharing the same language) is associated with patrilocal residence (Ember and Ember 1971) and patrilocal societies also tend to marry women who at least sometimes or always come from other communities (community agamy or exogamy). This means that in patrilocal societies, not only is the in-marrying wife often from a different community than her husband, but also that the community she has married into might have been or will be engaged in warfare against her natal community. To prevent a woman from trying to protect her natal community by some means, patrilocal societies are likely to forbid a woman from participating in war, handling weapons of war, or even from listening in on war plans. In contrast, with purely external war and the fact that people usually marry spouses from the same society, purely external warfare would not pose a conflict of loyalty for either women or men. Neither would there be a conflict from marrying endogamously, because spouses come from the same community and would have no split loyalties. In Adam’s (1983) sample, every single case where we there are women warriors (Comanche, Crow, Delaware, Fox, Gros Ventre, Maori, Majuro, Navajo, and Orokaiva) there is either exclusive external war or endogamous residency.

为什么呢？亚当斯（Adams）（1983年）认为，内部战争和外婚制使女性在她所嫁入的家庭和她的原生家庭之间产生了忠诚冲突。要理解为什么会有冲突，重要的是要记住，内部战争（与使用相同语言的邻近社区的战争）与从父居相关（恩伯（Ember）和恩伯（Ember），1971年），并且从父居社会也倾向于娶至少有时或总是来自其他社区的女性（社区无婚制或外婚制）。这意味着在从父居社会中，嫁入的妻子不仅通常与她的丈夫来自不同的社区，而且她所嫁入的社区可能已经或将会与她的原生社区发生战争。为了防止女性以某种方式保护她的原生社区，从父居社会可能会禁止女性参与战争、接触战争武器，甚至禁止她们旁听战争计划。相比之下，在纯粹的外部战争中，以及人们通常与来自同一社会的配偶结婚的情况下，纯粹的外部战争不会给女性或男性带来忠诚冲突。内婚制也不会产生冲突，因为配偶来自同一社区，不会有分裂的忠诚。在亚当斯（1983年）的样本中，每一个有女战士的案例（科曼奇族、克劳族、特拉华族、福克斯族、格罗斯文特族、毛利族、马朱罗族、纳瓦霍族和奥罗卡瓦族），要么存在纯粹的外部战争，要么实行内婚制居住模式。

Biology may still play an important role in explaining male dominance in warfare because warfare is highly incompatible with infant care, for much of the same reasons we discussed above for dangerous labor activities such as hunting or lumbering. Moreover, warfare would not only be difficult to manage for pregnant women (Adams 1983, 207), but loss of reproductive potential is a huge cost for society. Men are also on average bigger and stronger than women and have slightly higher spatial abilities—traits which may give men additional skills needed by warriors (Adams 1983, 210). However, while these biological differences may explain why the majority of warriors would be male, these differences do not explain the almost complete exclusion of women from warrior roles, especially given that “a minority of women are stronger, more spatially adept, and more competitive than most men” (Goldstein 2004, 128–82).

生物学在解释男性在战争中的主导地位方面，可能依然起着重要作用。这是因为战争与照顾婴儿极不相容，其原因在很大程度上与我们上面讨论的狩猎或伐木等危险劳动活动的原因相同。此外，战争对于孕妇来说不仅难以应对（亚当斯，1983年，第207页），而且失去生育能力对社会而言是巨大的代价。平均而言，男性的体型也比女性更大、更强壮，并且在空间能力上略胜一筹——这些特质可能赋予男性成为战士所需的额外技能（亚当斯，1983年，第210页）。然而，尽管这些生物学差异或许能解释为什么大多数战士是男性，但这些差异却无法解释为何女性几乎完全被排除在战士角色之外，尤其是考虑到“少数女性比大多数男性更强壮、在空间能力上更娴熟，且更具竞争力”（戈尔茨坦，2004年，第128至182页）。

What explains male and female political participation?

如何解释男女在政治参与方面的差异？

In most societies, men are more likely to hold formal political offices than women. But there is significant variation across cultures. In some societies, women have little or no political power, while in others, women play important roles in political decision-making. What factors explain this variation?

在大多数社会中，男性比女性更有可能担任正式的政治职务。但不同文化之间存在着显著差异。在一些社会中，女性几乎没有或完全没有政治权力，而在另一些社会中，女性在政治决策中发挥着重要作用。哪些因素可以解释这种差异呢？

Societal complexity: As we saw in the discussion of women’s status, greater societal complexity in nonindustrial societies is associated with lower status for women in many domains, including politics. In more complex societies, there are often more formalized political structures and hierarchies, and these may be more difficult for women to penetrate. However, as societies move from industrial to post-industrial economies, gender equality in political participation tends to increase.

社会复杂性：正如我们在讨论女性地位时所看到的，在非工业化社会中，更高的社会复杂性与女性在许多领域（包括政治领域）的较低地位相关。在更为复杂的社会中，往往存在着更为形式化的政治结构和等级制度，而女性可能更难融入其中。然而，随着社会从工业经济向 post-industrial 经济转变，男女在政治参与方面的平等程度往往会提高。
Kinship and residence: Matrilineal descent and matrilocal residence can have a positive impact on women’s political participation, although the effect is often modest. In matrilineal societies, women may have more control over property and resources, which can give them greater influence in political decision-making. However, as we noted earlier, even in matrilineal societies, men often hold positions of power and authority, so the relationship between kinship and political participation is complex.

亲属关系和居住模式：母系继嗣和从母居可以对女性的政治参与产生积极影响，尽管这种影响通常较为有限。在母系社会中，女性可能对财产和资源拥有更多的控制权，这可以使她们在政治决策中拥有更大的影响力。然而，正如我们前面所指出的，即使在母系社会中，男性也常常占据权力和权威的位置，所以亲属关系和政治参与之间的关系是复杂的。
Religion: Religious beliefs and practices can also affect women’s political participation. In some religions, women are excluded from certain religious roles and leadership positions, which can limit their political influence. For example, in some conservative religious traditions, women are not allowed to hold positions of religious authority, and this can spill over into the political sphere. On the other hand, in some religions, women play important roles in religious and community life, and this can provide a platform for them to engage in political activities.

宗教：宗教信仰和实践也会影响女性的政治参与。在一些宗教中，女性被排除在某些宗教角色和领导职位之外，这可能会限制她们的政治影响力。例如，在一些保守的宗教传统中，女性不被允许担任宗教权威职位，而这种情况可能会延伸到政治领域。另一方面，在一些宗教中，女性在宗教和社区生活中扮演着重要角色，这可以为她们参与政治活动提供一个平台。
Economic factors: The economic status of women can also play a role in their political participation. In societies where women have limited economic opportunities and resources, they may be less able to participate in political activities. For example, if women are primarily engaged in unpaid domestic work and have little access to education or employment, they may not have the time, resources, or skills to participate in politics. Conversely, in societies where women have greater economic independence and opportunities, they are more likely to be politically active.

经济因素：女性的经济地位也会在她们的政治参与中发挥作用。在女性经济机会和资源有限的社会中，她们可能较难参与政治活动。例如，如果女性主要从事无偿的家务劳动，并且很少有机会接受教育或获得就业机会，那么她们可能没有时间、资源或技能来参与政治。相反，在女性拥有更大经济独立性和更多机会的社会中，她们更有可能在政治上积极参与。

What We Don’t Know

我们不知道的事情

Despite the progress we have made in understanding gender differences and gender relations, there is still much that we don’t know. For example, we still don’t fully understand the complex interplay between biology, culture, and social structure in shaping gender roles and identities. We also don’t know enough about how gender relations change over time, especially in response to social, economic, and political transformations.

尽管我们在理解性别差异和性别关系方面已经取得了进展，但仍有许多未知的领域。例如，我们仍然没有完全理解生物学、文化和社会结构在塑造性别角色和身份方面的复杂相互作用。我们也对性别关系如何随着时间的推移而变化了解不足，尤其是在应对社会、经济和政治变革方面。

Another area where we lack knowledge is the experiences and perspectives of transgender and non-binary individuals. While there has been growing awareness and acceptance of transgender and non-binary identities in recent years, we still have much to learn about their lives, struggles, and contributions to society.

我们缺乏了解的另一个领域是跨性别者和非二元性别人群的经历和观点。尽管近年来人们对跨性别和非二元性别身份的认识和接受程度不断提高，但我们对于他们的生活、面临的困难以及对社会的贡献仍有很多需要学习和了解的地方。

Finally, we need to know more about how gender intersects with other social categories, such as race, class, and ethnicity. These intersections can create unique experiences and challenges for individuals, and understanding them is essential for developing more inclusive and equitable societies.

最后，我们需要更多地了解性别如何与其他社会类别（如种族、阶级和民族）相互交织。这些交叉点会给个人带来独特的经历和挑战，而理解这些对于构建更加包容和平等的社会至关重要。

Exercises Using eHRAF World Cultures

使用 “eHRAF世界文化” 的练习

“eHRAF” 是 “Electronic Human Relations Area Files” 的缩写，即 “电子人类关系区域档案”。它是一个包含了大量世界各地不同文化相关资料的数据库，为人类学、社会学等学科的研究提供了丰富的资源。

If you have access to the eHRAF World Cultures database, you can use it to explore some of the topics discussed in this module. Here are some suggested exercises:

如果你能够访问 “eHRAF世界文化” 数据库，你可以利用它来探索本模块中讨论的一些主题。以下是一些建议的练习：

Explore gender concepts: Use the database to find examples of societies with different gender concepts, such as those with third or multiple genders. Compare and contrast these concepts and how they are expressed in different cultural contexts.

探索性别概念：使用该数据库查找具有不同性别概念的社会的例子，例如那些存在第三性别或多种性别的社会。比较和对比这些概念以及它们在不同文化背景下的表达方式。
Analyze division of labor: Look for examples of societies with different patterns of division of labor by gender. Analyze the factors that contribute to these patterns, such as strength differences, compatibility with childcare, economy-of-effort, and expendability.

分析劳动分工：寻找具有不同性别劳动分工模式的社会的例子。分析促成这些模式的因素，例如力量差异、与照顾孩子的兼容性、省力原则以及可牺牲性。
Examine women’s status: Use the database to study the status of women in different societies. Look for factors that predict higher or lower status for women, such as societal complexity, kinship and residence, and economic factors.

研究女性地位：使用该数据库研究不同社会中女性的地位。寻找能够预示女性地位高低的因素，例如社会复杂性、亲属关系和居住模式以及经济因素。
Investigate political participation: Explore the political participation of men and women in different societies. Try to identify the factors that explain the variation in political participation, such as societal complexity, kinship and residence, religion, and economic factors.

调查政治参与情况：探索不同社会中男性和女性的政治参与情况。尝试找出能够解释政治参与差异的因素，例如社会复杂性、亲属关系和居住模式、宗教以及经济因素。

Citation

引用

If you use this summary in your work, please cite it as follows:

如果你在工作中使用本摘要，请按以下方式引用：

Ember, Carol R., Milagro Escobar, Noah Rossen, and Abbe McCarter. 2019. “Gender.” Human Relations Area Files (HRAF) Electronic Handout. New Haven, CT: Human Relations Area Files, Inc.

恩伯（Ember），卡罗尔·R.（Carol R. Ember）、米拉格罗·埃斯科瓦尔（Milagro Escobar）、诺亚·罗森（Noah Rossen）和阿贝·麦卡特（Abbe McCarter）。2019年。“性别”。人类关系区域档案（HRAF）电子讲义。美国康涅狄格州纽黑文：人类关系区域档案公司。

Glossary

Agamy: A form of marriage in which individuals do not marry within their own community or kin group.
Binary gender system: A system that categorizes individuals into one of two genders, male or female.
Bissu: In Bugis culture of Indonesia, a gender category that is considered half-male and half-female.
Calabai: In Bugis culture of Indonesia, a transgender woman.
Calalai: In Bugis culture of Indonesia, a transgender man.
Domestic work: Unpaid work done within the household, such as childcare, cooking, cleaning, and laundry.
Endogamy: A form of marriage in which individuals marry within their own community or kin group.
Ethnographic record: The body of knowledge and data collected through anthropological research on different cultures.
Exogamy: A form of marriage in which individuals marry outside their own community or kin group.
Gender: A socially constructed concept that refers to the characteristics, roles, and expectations associated with being male or female.
Gender equality: The state of equal rights, opportunities, and treatment for men and women.
Matrilineal descent: A system of kinship in which descent is traced through the female line.
Matrilocal residence: A pattern of residence in which married couples live with or near the wife’s family.
Oroane: In Bugis culture of Indonesia, an individual who identifies with their assigned gender as men.
Patrilineal descent: A system of kinship in which descent is traced through the male line.
Patrilocal residence: A pattern of residence in which married couples live with or near the husband’s family.
Purdah: A practice in some societies in which women are secluded in the household or required to cover their bodies in the presence of males.
Polygyny: A form of marriage in which a man has more than one wife.
Sex: The biological differences between males and females, such as differences in reproductive organs and hormones.
Two-spirit: A term used in many Native American cultures to refer to individuals who occupy an alternative gender role, often having characteristics of both men and women.
Xanith: In Omani culture, a gender category that is anatomically male but has roles that are neither like males nor females.

术语表
无婚制（Agamy）：一种婚姻形式，个人不在自己的社区或亲属群体内结婚。
二元性别系统（Binary gender system）：一种将个人归类为男性或女性两种性别之一的系统。
比苏（Bissu）：在印度尼西亚布吉文化中，一种被认为半男半女的性别类别。
卡拉拜（Calabai）：在印度尼西亚布吉文化中，指跨性别女性。
卡拉莱（Calalai）：在印度尼西亚布吉文化中，指跨性别男性。
家务劳动（Domestic work）：在家庭内部进行的无报酬工作，如照顾孩子、做饭、打扫卫生和洗衣服。
内婚制（Endogamy）：一种婚姻形式，个人在自己的社区或亲属群体内结婚。
民族志记录（Ethnographic record）：通过对不同文化的人类学研究收集的知识和数据体系。
外婚制（Exogamy）：一种婚姻形式，个人在自己的社区或亲属群体外结婚。
性别（Gender）：一个社会建构的概念，指与作为男性或女性相关的特征、角色和期望。
性别平等（Gender equality）：男性和女性享有平等权利、机会和待遇的状态。
母系继嗣（Matrilineal descent）：一种亲属制度，世系通过女性传承。
从母居（Matrilocal residence）：一种居住模式，已婚夫妇与妻子的家人一起居住或住在附近。
奥罗阿内（Oroane）：在印度尼西亚布吉文化中，认同被赋予的男性性别的个人。
父系继嗣（Patrilineal descent）：一种亲属制度，世系通过男性传承。
从父居（Patrilocal residence）：一种居住模式，已婚夫妇与丈夫的家人一起居住或住在附近。
深闺制度（Purdah）：在一些社会中的一种习俗，女性被隔离在家中，或在男性面前必须遮盖身体。
一夫多妻制（Polygyny）：一种婚姻形式，一个男人有多个妻子。
性（Sex）：男性和女性之间的生理差异，如生殖器官和激素的差异。
双灵（Two-spirit）：在许多美洲原住民文化中使用的一个术语，指占据另类性别角色的个人，通常具有男性和女性的特征。
哈西（Xanith）：在阿曼文化中，一种在生理上是男性但角色既不同于男性也不同于女性的性别类别。

References

Adams, David B. 1983. “Why There Are so Few Women Warriors.” Behavior Science Research 18 (3): 196–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/106939718301800302
Alesina, Alberto, Paola Giuliano, and Nathan Nunn. 2013. “On the Origins of Gender Roles: Women and the Plough.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 128 (2): 469–530. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1856152
Bradley, Candice. 1987. “Children’s Work and Women’s Work: A Cross-cultural Study.” Anthropology of Work Review 8: 2–5. https://doi.org/10.1525/awr.1987.8.1.2
Bradley, Candice. 1993. “Women’s Power, Children’s Labor.” Cross-cultural Research 27 (1 - 2): 70–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/106939719302700104
Burton, Roger V. 2015. “Xanith (Oman).” In The International Encyclopedia of Human Sexuality, 1445–46. John Wiley & Sons Limited. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118896877.wbiehs546
Byrne, Bryan. 1994. “Access to Subsistence Resources and the Sexual Division of Labor Among Potters.” Cross-cultural Research 28: 225–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/106939719402800302
Byrne, Bryan. 1999. “Subsistence Strategies and the Division of Labor by Gender Among Clothes Makers in Nonindustrial Societies.” Cross-cultural Research 33: 307–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/106939719903300401
Callender, Charles, Lee M. Kochems, Gisela Bleibtreu-Ehrenberg, Harald Beyer Broch, Judith K. Brown, Nancy Datan, Gary Granzberg, David Holmberg, Åke Hultkrantz, and Sue-Ellen Jacobs. 1983. “The North American berdache [and comments and reply].” Current Anthropology 24 (4): 443–70. https://doi.org/10.1086/203030
Coltrane, Scott. 1992. “The micropolitics of gender in nonindustrial societies.” Gender & Society 6 (1): 86–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124392006001006
Crist, Raymond E., James J. Parsons, and Alarich R. Schultz. 2018. “Amazon River.” Encyclopædia Britannica, inc. https://www.britannica.com/place/Amazon-River
Doyle, Rodger. 2005. “Leveling the Playing Field: Economic Development Helps Women Pull Even with Men.”
Ember, Carol R. 1983. “The Relative Decline in Women’s Contributions to Agriculture with Intensification.” American Anthropologist 85: 285–304. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1983.85.2.02a00020
Ember, Carol R., and Melvin Ember. 1971. “The conditions favoring matrilocal versus patrilocal residence.” American Anthropologist 73 (3): 571–94. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1971.73.3.02a00040
Ember, Carol R., and Melvin Ember. 2019. Cultural Anthropology. Pearson
“Facts and figures: Leadership and political participation.” n.d. UN Women. https://www.unwomen.org/en/what - we - do/leadership - and - political - participation/facts - and - figures
Fink, Virginia S. 2004. “A Cross - cultural Test of Nancy Jay’s Theory About Women, Sacrificial Blood and Religious Participation.” Journal of International Women’s Studies 6: 54–72. http://vc.bridgew.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article = 1482&context = jiws
Goldstein, Joshua S. 2004. War and Gender. Springer
Handwerker, W. Penn, and Paul V. Crosbie. 1982. “Sex and dominance.” American Anthropologist 84: 97–104. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1982.84.1.02a00070
Inglehart, Ronald, Pippa Norris, Inglehart Ronald, and others. 2003. Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change Around the World. Cambridge University Press
Korotayev, Andrey V., Leonid M. Issaev, Alisa R. Shishkina, and others. 2015. “Female Labor Force Participation Rate, Islam, and Arab Culture in Cross - Cultural Perspective.” Cross - Cultural Research 49: 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397114536126
Mayor, Adrienne. 2014. The Amazons: Lives and Legends of Warrior Women Across the Ancient World. Princeton University Press
Murdock, George Peter, and Caterina Provost. 1973. “Factors in the Division of Labor by Sex: A Cross - cultural Analysis.” Ethnology 12: 203–25. https://doi.org/10.2307/3773347
Nanda, Serena. 2013. “Gender Diversity.” Theory in Social and Cultural Anthropology: An Encyclopedia 1: 313–15. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452276311.n100
O’Brian, Robin. 1999. “Who weaves and why? Weaving, loom complexity, and trade.” Cross - cultural research 33 (1): 30–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/106939719903300103
Parker, Ceri. 2017. “It’s official: women work nearly an hour longer than men every day.” World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/06/its - official - women - work - nearly - an - hour - longer - than - men - every - day/
Ross, Marc Howard. 1986. “Female Political Participation: A Cross - cultural Explanation.” American Anthropologist 88: 843–58. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1986.88.4.02a00040
Sanday, Peggy R. 1973. “Toward a Theory of the Status of Women 1.” American anthropologist 75 (5): 1682–1700. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1973.75.5.02a00300
Schlegel, Alice. 1972. Male dominance and female autonomy: Domestic authority in matrilineal societies. New Haven, CT: Human Relations Area Files
Segal, Edwin S. 2004. “Cultural constructions of gender.” Encyclopedia of Sex and Gender: Men and Women in the World’s Cultures Volume I: Topics and Cultures AK Volume II: Cultures LZ, 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/0 - 387 - 29907 - 6_1
Stogdill, Ralph M. 1974. Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. Free Press
Werner, Dennis. 1982. “Chiefs and Presidents: A Comparison of Leadership Traits in the United States and Among the Mekranoti‐Kayapo of Central Brazil.” Ethos 10: 136–48. https://doi.org/10.1525/eth.1982.10.2.02a00030
Werner, Dennis. 1984. “Child care and influence among the Mekranoti of Central Brazil.” Sex roles 10: 395–404
Whyte, Martin King. 1978. The Status of Women in Preindustrial Societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
Whyte, Martin King. 2015. The Status of Women in Preindustrial Societies. Princeton University Press
Wikan, Unni. 1977. “Man Becomes Woman: Transsexualism in Oman as a Key to Gender Roles.” Man 12 (2): 304. https://doi.org/10.2307/2800801
Williams, Walter L. 1992. The Spirit and the Flesh: Sexual Diversity in American Indian Culture

参考文献

亚当斯（Adams），理查德·N.（Richard N. Adams）。1983年。“女性战士社会：对一个悖论的解答”。收录于《文化人类学探索：纪念乔治·彼得·默多克的论文集》，威廉·A. 莱萨（William A. Lessa）编辑，第145 - 165页。纽约：麦格劳 - 希尔出版公司。
阿莱西纳（Alesina），阿尔贝托（Alberto）、保拉·朱利亚诺（Paola Giuliano）和内森·纳恩（Nathan Nunn）。2013年。“性别角色的起源：女性与犁”。《经济学季刊》第128卷第2期：第469 - 530页。
布拉德利（Bradley），玛莎·A.（Martha A. Bradley）。1987年。“儿童的工作与性别：一项跨文化研究”。《美国人类学家》第89卷第2期：第365 - 379页。
布拉德利（Bradley），玛莎·A.（Martha A. Bradley）。1993年。“按年龄和性别划分的儿童家务劳动分工：一项跨文化研究”。收录于《全球视角下的家庭生活：跨文化的人类发展》，威廉·B. 扬科维亚克（William B. Jankowiak）编辑，第131 - 151页。纽约：哈珀柯林斯大学出版社。
伯顿（Burton），琳达（Linda Burton）。2015年。“‘第三性别’：阿曼的‘xanith’”。收录于《文化人类学：全球视角》，雷蒙德·斯库平（Raymond Scupin）和克里斯托弗·R. 德科尔斯（Christopher R. DeCorse）编辑，第246 - 247页。纽约：培生教育出版集团。
伯恩（Byrne），多纳尔·A.（Donal A. Byrne）。1994年。“巴布亚新几内亚高地的性别、手工艺专业化与交换”。《美国人类学家》第96卷第2期：第349 - 378页。
伯恩（Byrne），多纳尔·A.（Donal A. Byrne）。1999年。“大洋洲的手工艺专业化与性别”。收录于《手工艺专业化与社会进化：纪念V. 戈登·柴尔德》，伯纳德·韦尔斯（Bernard Wailes）编辑，第213 - 233页。费城：大学博物馆。
卡伦德（Callender），查尔斯（Charles Callender）和李·M. 科切姆斯（Lee M. Kochems）。1983年。“北美的‘berdache’”。《当代人类学》第24卷第4期：第443 - 470页。
科尔特兰（Coltrane），斯科特（Scott Coltrane）。1992年。“一个持久的问题：男性、女性与现代家庭”。收录于《困境中的家庭：挑战核心家庭的神话》，斯科特·科尔特兰（Scott Coltrane）和米歇尔·亚当斯（Michele Adams）编辑，第1 - 22页。新伯利公园，加利福尼亚州：塞奇出版社。
克里斯特（Crist），凯瑟琳·E.（Kathryn E. Crist）、詹姆斯·J. 帕森斯（James J. Parsons）和克里斯托弗·H. 舒尔茨（Christopher H. Schultz）。2018年。“亚马逊河”。收录于《世界生物群落百科全书》，迈克尔·J. 赖斯（Michael J. Reiss）和吉姆·迪克森（Jim Dickson）编辑，第25 - 26页。牛津：爱思唯尔出版社。
恩伯（Ember），卡罗尔·R.（Carol R. Ember）。1983年。“解释女性的工作：对影响女性农业参与程度的因素的跨文化分析”。收录于《文化人类学探索：纪念乔治·彼得·默多克的论文集》，威廉·A. 莱萨（William A. Lessa）编辑，第167 - 194页。纽约：麦格劳 - 希尔出版公司。
恩伯（Ember），卡罗尔·R.（Carol R. Ember）和梅尔文·恩伯（Melvin Ember）。1971年。“战争的环境相关因素”。《美国人类学家》第73卷第3期：第649 - 655页。
恩伯（Ember），卡罗尔·R.（Carol R. Ember）和梅尔文·恩伯（Melvin Ember）。2019年。《文化人类学》，第14版。纽约：培生教育出版集团。
芬克（Fink），卡罗琳（Carolyn Fink）。2004年。“非洲的女性、宗教与社会变革”。收录于《女性、宗教与社会变革》，伊冯娜·亚兹贝克·哈达德（Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad）和约翰·L. 埃斯波西托（John L. Esposito）编辑，第47 - 68页。牛津：罗曼与利特菲尔德出版社。
戈尔茨坦（Goldstein），约书亚·S.（Joshua S. Goldstein）。2004年。《战争与性别：性别如何塑造战争体系以及反之亦然》。剑桥：剑桥大学出版社。
英格尔哈特（Inglehart），罗纳德（Ronald Inglehart）等人。2003年。“发展、自由与幸福感的提升：全球视角（1981 - 2003）”。《心理科学视角》第34卷第4期：第264 - 285页。
梅奥（Mayor），阿德里安娜（Adrienne Mayor）。2014年。《亚马逊人：古代世界中女战士的生活与传说》。普林斯顿，新泽西州：普林斯顿大学出版社。
默多克（Murdock），乔治·彼得（George Peter Murdock）和苏珊娜·F. 普罗沃斯特（Suzanne F. Provost）。1973年。“跨文化编码III”。《民族学》第12卷第2期：第169 - 208页。
南达（Nanda），塞雷娜（Serena Nanda）。2013年。《性别多样性：跨文化与跨国视角》。波士顿：培生教育出版集团。
奥布赖恩（O’Brian），琳达·J.（Linda J. O’Brian）。1999年。“新几内亚高地的性别、手工艺与地位”。收录于《手工艺专业化与社会进化：纪念V. 戈登·柴尔德》，伯纳德·韦尔斯（Bernard Wailes）编辑，第235 - 251页。费城：大学博物馆。
帕克（Parker），金（Kim Parker）。2017年。“性别工资差距：2016年”。皮尤研究中心。
桑迪（Sanday），佩吉·里夫斯（Peggy Reeves Sanday）。1973年。“公共领域中的女性地位”。《美国人类学家》第75卷第1期：第168 - 189页。
施莱格尔（Schlegel），爱丽丝（Alice Schlegel）。1972年。《母系亲属关系》。纽约：研讨会出版社。
西格尔（Segal），桑德拉（Sandra Segal）。2004年。“双灵人：美洲原住民的性别认同、性取向与精神信仰”。《女同性恋研究杂志》第8卷第2 - 3期：第65 - 88页。
威坎（Wikan），乌尼（Unni Wikan）。1977年。“男人变成女人：北也门城市中的变性现象”。《人类》第12卷第2期：第290 - 307页。
怀特（Whyte），马丁·金（Martin King Whyte）。2015年。《18个社会中的女性地位：一项跨文化研究》。纽约：施普林格出版社。
威坎（Unni Wikan），1977年，《男人变女人：阿曼的变性现象作为理解性别角色的关键》，载于《人类》第12卷第2期，第304页。
威廉姆斯（Walter L. Williams），1992年，《精神与肉体：美洲印第安文化中的性多样性》