title: author: publisher: isbn10 | asin: print isbn13: ebook isbn13: language: subject publication date: lcc: ddc:

subject:

Making Gender : The Politics and Erotics of Culture Ortner, Sherry B. Beacon Press 0 0!0"#$$! %! 0 0!0"#$$$ %! 0 0!0"#&#' English Se( role, Se( sy)*olis), Se( role++Political as,ects, -e)inist anthro,ology. .%%# G/"!%.#&.O!! .%%#e* $0&.' Se( role, Se( sy)*olis), Se( role++Political as,ects, -e)inist anthro,ology. co0er Page i

Making Gender ,age1i Page ii 23SO B4 T5E 26T5O7 Sherpas Through Their Rituals High Religion: A Cultural and Political History of Sherpa Buddhism E89TE8 B4 T5E 26T5O7 Sexual Meanings: The Cultural Construction of Gender and Sexuality :;ith 5arriet <hitehead= Culture Po!er History: A Reader in Contemporary Social Theory :;ith /icholas B. 8irks and Geoff Eley= ,age1ii

Page iii

Making Gender The Politics and Erotics of Culture Sherry B. Ortner

,age1iii Page i0 Beacon Press '& Beacon Street Boston, Massachusetts 0'.0 +' %' Beacon Press *ooks are ,u*lished under the aus,ices of the 6nitarian 6ni0ersalist 2ssociation of Congregations. > .%%# *y Sherry B. Ortner 2ll rights reser0ed Printed in the 6nited States of 2)erica ?9s -e)ale to Male as /ature 9s to Culture@? ;as first ,u*lished in "eminist Studies in .%!' and re,u*lished in #oman$ Culture$ and Society, ed. Michelle Ai)*alist 7osaldo and 3ouise 3a),here, > .%!" *y the Board of Trustees of the 3eland Stanford Bunior 6ni0ersityC re,rinted ;ith the ,er)ission of the ,u*lishers, Stanford 6ni0ersity Press. ?The Dirgin and the State? ;as first ,u*lished in Michigan %iscussions in Anthropology in .%!# and re,u*lished in "eminist Studies ":$= :-all .%! =: .%$#C re,rinted *y ,er)ission of the ,u*lisher, -e)inist Studies, 9nc., <o)enEs Studies Progra), 6ni0ersity of Maryland, College Park, M8 '0!"'. ?7ank and Gender? ;as first ,u*lished as EEGender and Se(uality in 5ierarchical Societies: The Case of Polynesia and So)e Co),arati0e 9),lications,? in Sexual Meanings: The Cultural Construction of Gender and Sexuality, ed. Sherry B. Ortner and 5arriet <hitehead, > .% . Ca)*ridge 6ni0ersity PressC re,rinted ;ith the ,er)ission of Ca)*ridge 6ni0ersity Press. ?Gender 5ege)onies? ;as first ,u*lished in Cultural Criti&ue ." :<inter .%%0=: $& 0C re,rinted *y ,er)ission of O(ford 6ni0ersity Press. 0' 0. 00 %% !#&"$

Te(t design *y Christine Taylor Co),osition *y <ilsted F Taylor Pu*lishing Ser0ices 3i*rary of Congress Cataloging+in+Pu*lication 8ata Ortner, Sherry B., .%". Making gender : the ,olitics and erotics of genderGSherry B. Ortner. ,. c). 9ncludes *i*liogra,hical references and inde(. 9SB/ 0+ 0!0+"#$'+% :cloth= 9SB/ 0+ 0!0+"#$$+! :,a,er= .. Se( role. '. Se( sy)*olis). $. Se( rolePolitical as,ects. ". -e)inist anthro,ology. 9. Title. G/"!%.#&.0!! .%%# $0&.$dc'0 %#+.''%$ ,age1i0 Page 0

"or Shelly$ !ho died$ and to G!en$ !ho !as 'orn$ in the course of all this ,age10 Page 0ii

Contents Preface .. Making Gender: To;ard a -e)inist, Minority, Postcolonial, Su*altern, Etc., Theory of Practice '. 9s -e)ale to Male 2s /ature 9s to Culture@ $. The Dirgin and the State ". 7ank and Gender &. The Pro*le) of ?<o)en? 2s an 2nalytic Category #. Gender 5ege)onies !. So, (s -e)ale to Male 2s /ature 9s to Culture@ . Borderland Politics and Erotics: Gender and Se(uality in 5i)alayan Mountaineering /otes 3iterature Cited 9nde( ,age10ii Page i( i( . '. "$ &% ..# .$% .!$ . . '.$ '". '&&

Preface 9 find it strange to ,ut together a collection of )y o;n essays. 9t is not that 9 do not like to reflect u,on the), *ut there is a sense of ,ackaging the self that )akes )e unco)forta*le. /onetheless, here it is. These essays s,an a,,ro(i)ately t;enty+fi0e years, a fact that is Huite astonishing to )e. 2t one le0el 9 think of all of the) as 0ery )uch ali0e in the ,resent. They e)*ody issues that are still de*ated, ,ositions that are still held, and a fair nu)*er of truths that still see) true. 4et at another le0el all of the essays e(ist for )e as ,arts of a history, and this has se0eral i),lications. -irst, although 9 ha0e cleaned u, so)e gra))atical errors and the like, 9 ha0e decided not to ta),er ;ith their contents. There are things 9 ,ro*a*ly ;ould not ;rite today, and things 9 ;ish 9 had ;ritten differently, *ut there is so)ething science fiction+like in trying to un;rite and re;rite the essays no;, and 9 could not *ring )yself to do it. The historicity of the ,a,ers also )eans that each ;as e)*edded in a ,articular conte(t of ;riting that is still ali0e in )y )e)ory and consciousness. Each ;as ;ritten at a certain ,oint in ti)e, usually for a ,articular ,ur,ose, and often in the conte(t of ,articular relationshi,sof friendshi, and solidarity, or of antagonis) and co),etition, or *oth. 9 ha0e thus added a note for each of the ,re0iously ,u*lished essays detailing a *it of the ,ersonal and ,rofessional conte(t, and the so)eti)es Huite acri)onious intellectual ,olitics, ;ithin ;hich it ;as ;ritten.

-inally, of course, each essay has its o;n historically situated de*ts. The ,age1i( Page ( ackno;ledg)ents )ust thus for the )ost ,art *e taken essay *y essay. But a fe; *roader thanks need to *e e(,ressed here, *eginning ;ith 3auren Bryant, for)erly of Beacon Press, ;ho urged )e gently o0er the years to ,ut this *ook together, and Marya DanEt 5ul, no; of Beacon Press, ;ho she,herded it through re0ie;s and ,roduction ;ith a co)*ination of ;ar)th, good ;ill, and effecti0eness that 9 consistently a,,reciated. Thanks also to 3ouise 3a),here and se0eral anony)ous ,ress readers of the )anuscri,t as a ;hole, for useful co))ents and reactions. 2nd a 0ote of a,,reciation to SuIanne Cal,estri, li*rarian e(traordinaire of the 2nthro,ology 3i*rary at the 6ni0ersity of California, Berkeley. On a )ore ,ersonal le0el, 9 ha0e dedicated the *ook to Michelle Ai)*alist 7osaldo, ;ho first dre; )e into fe)inist anthro,ology. Shelly and 9 ;ere at once ,ersonally close and ,rofessionally co),etiti0e, and ;hen she died in a field;ork accident in .% . 9 )ourned the loss not only of an intense and co),elling friend, *ut of a shar, critic ;ho ke,t )e on )y toes intellectually. 9 ha0e also dedicated the *ook to )y daughter, G;en, no; a )addening teenager and a ;onderful hu)an *eing, ;ho kee,s )e on )y toes in e0er so )any other ;ays. -inally, for e(traordinary friendshi, at e0ery le0el,ersonal, ,olitical, intellectualo0er the years 9 thank 2*igail Ste;artC for ;ar) friendshi, as ;ell as generosity in ,ro0iding e(tensi0e and astute intellectual feed*ack, 9 thank /ancy Chodoro; and Budith StaceyC and for daily *acku, and lo0e, as ;ell as al;ays kind *ut insightful criticis)s, 9 thank Ti)othy 8. Taylor. ,age1( Page .

. Making Gender: To;ard a -e)inist, Minority, Postcolonial, Su*altern, Etc., Theory of Practice <ith the title ,hrase ?Making Gender,? 9 ,oint to the dou*le )eaning of ?)aking? that o,erates in conte),orary social and cultural studies. On the one hand ;e ha0e a 0ariety of ?constructionis)sEE in ;hich cultural categories, or historical su*Jects, or for)s of su*Jecti0ity are,assi0e 0oice)ade. The guiding theoretical fra)e;orks here deri0e fro) a nu)*er of strands of -rench theory as re,resented *y, a)ong others, 3ouis 2lthusser, BacHues 8errida, and Michel -oucault. 8es,ite significant differences *et;een these figures, all ha0e in their o;n ;ays directed us to see su*Jects as constructed *y, and su*Jected to, the cultural and historical discourses ;ithin ;hich they )ust o,erate. The usual ter)inology in this conte(t is the hea0ier ?construct? rather than the lighter ?)ake.? <ithin this ,ers,ecti0e, the )ethodology is te(tual analysis in a *road senseasking ;hat for)s of difference, ;hat kinds of identities and su*Ject ,ositions are constructed ;ithin the fra)e;ork of a gi0en cultural, ideological, or discursi0e for)ation. On the other hand ;e ha0e ?)aking? fro) the actorEs ,oint of 0ie;. The Huestion is ho; actors ?enact,? ?resist,? or ?negotiate? the ;orld as gi0en, and in so doing ?)ake? the ;orld. This )aking )ay turn out to ,roduce the sa)e old social and cultural thing?re,roduction.? Or it )ay turn out to ,roduce so)ething ne;, although not necessarily ;hat the actors intended. 9ndeed intention ,lays a co),le( role in the ,rocess, for ;hile intention is central to ;hat the actor seeks to acco),lishand therefore )ust *e ,age1. Page ' understood 0ery carefullyits relationshi, to the outco)e is often Huite o*liHue. 9n any e0ent, the ter)inology here is )ore fro) the language of craft than fro) hea0y industry, ?)aking? rather than ?construction,? as in E.P. Tho),sonEs The Ma)ing of the *nglish #or)ing Class. 2nd the )ethodology is funda)entally ethnogra,hic rather than te(tual, descri,ti0e and analytic rather than inter,reti0e or deconstructionistlooking at and listening to real ,eo,le doing real things in a gi0en historical )o)ent, ,ast or ,resent, and trying to figure out ho; ;hat they are doing or ha0e done ;ill or ;ill not reconfigure the ;orld they li0e in.

The anthro,ological ,roJect in the fullest sense, as 9 see it, )ust al;ays co),rise *oth kinds of ;ork. Studies of the ;ays in ;hich so)e set of ?te(ts?)edia ,roductions, literary creations, )edical ;ritings, religious discourses, and so on?constructs? categories, identities, or su*Ject ,ositions, are inco),lete and )isleading unless they ask to ;hat degree those te(ts successfully i),ose the)sel0es on real ,eo,le :and !hich people= in real ti)e. Si)ilarly, studies of the ;ays in ;hich ,eo,le resist, negotiate, or a,,ro,riate so)e feature of their ;orld are also inadeHuate and )isleading ;ithout careful analysis of the cultural )eanings and structural arrange)ents that construct and constrain their ?agency,? and that li)it the transfor)ati0e ,otential of all such intentionaliIed acti0ity. There is *y no; an i),ortant *ody of theory that ideally unites these t;o for)s of analysisa range of loosely interrelated ;ork that 9 ha0e else;here ,ulled together under the ru*ric of ?,ractice theory? :Ortner .% ", .% %=. Practice theory re,resents one of se0eral kinds of theoretical res,onse to earlier structural deter)inis)s,arsonian syste)s theory and related functionalis)s, 3K0i+Straussian structuralis), certain kinds of )echanistic Mar(is). <ithin a ,ractice fra)e;ork, there is an insistence, as in earlier structural+ deter)inist )odels, that hu)an action is constrained *y the gi0en social and cultural order :often condensed in the ter) ?structure?=C *ut there is also an insistence that hu)an action ma)es ?structure?re,roduces or transfor)s it, or *oth. 8es,ite the la*el, ,ractice theory is not really EEa theory,? in ,art *ecause it does not ,retend to so)e sort of for)al unity, and in ,art *ecause it lacks t;o key characteristics of classic social theory: an underlying narrati0e :for e(a),le, the )arch of )oderniIation=, and an underlying nor) of the social order :as in functionalis)Es assu)ed nor)s of ho)eostasis and integration=. There is only as it ;ere an argu)entthat hu)an action is )ade *y ?structure,? and at the sa)e ti)e al;ays )akes and ,otentially un)akes it. ,age1' Page $ The first round of for)al ;ork articulating 0arious as,ects of this theoretical fra)e;ork ;as done in the late .%!0s and early .% 0sthe key te(ts ;ere Pierre BourdieuEs +utline of a Theory of Practice :.%!!=, 2nthony GiddensEs Central Pro'lems in Social Theory :.%!%=, Marshall SahlinsEs Historical Metaphors and Mythical Realities :.% .=, and Michel de CerteauEs The Practice of *,eryday -ife :.% "=. Together this ;ork offers one of the ,otentially )ost ,o;erful and co),rehensi0e fra)e;orks a0aila*le for the understanding of cultural and social life. 4et in so)e ;ays it see)s *y no; to ha0e stalled out. 2lthough its earlier theorists ,ositioned the)sel0es, and the theory, *roadly on the side of the su*alternthe underlying Huestion ;as al;ays ho; relations of ,o;er and ineHuality tend to get re,roduced *ut can *e changed through ,racticeyet in fact :;ith the ,artial e(ce,tion of de Certeau= they )ade little effort to link u, ;ith the e(citing *ody of ;ork e)erging fro) fe)inist and other for)s of engaged scholarshi, in that sa)e era. . E(,lorations of the )ulti,le and contradictory for)s of ,o;er and of resistanceC of the )ulti,le for)s and degrees of ?agency?C of the relationshi, of the ,ri0ate and inti)ate to large+scale structural changeC of identity in a ;orld car0ed u, *y race, ethnicity, class, and genderC of the adeHuacy of the 0ery conce,t of structurethese and other issues ha0e re)ained relati0ely )arginal to ,ractice theoriIing, there*y Jeo,ardiIing its rele0ance to large areas of conte),orary social thought. 9n turn, although fe)inist anthro,ologists and others ;orking in ?engaged scholarshi,? ha0e *y no )eans ignored this ;ork,' )y sense is that there has *een a fairly dee, di0ide *et;een the t;o arenas of scholarshi,. -or one e(a),le, take a recent ,anel on ?2gency? at the 2)erican 2nthro,ological 2ssociation )eetings :.%%&=. This ,anel ;as concerned ;ith theoriIing agency for ;o)en and other su*altern su*Jects. <hile it see)ed self+e0ident to )e that the Huestion of ?agency? had *een ,ut on the ta*le ,recisely as ,art of the de0elo,)ent of ,ractice theories *eginning in the .%!0s, in fact there ;as 0ery little reference to that *ody of literature in the ,anel. Si)ilarly, in the introduction to their i),ortant collection of essays, "eminists Theori.e the Political :.%%'=, Budith Butler and Boan Scott s,ecifically raised :,artly in order to challenge= a range of Huestions surrounding the a*sence of an intentional su*Ject, or a notion of ?agency,EE in ,oststructuralist fe)inist theory. The contri*utors to the collection included ,hiloso,hers, literary critics, legal theorists, ,olitical theorists, historians, and an anthro,ologist. 4et none of the) addressed either the gen+ ,age1$ Page " eral theoretical argu)ents of ,ractice theory, or :;ith the e(ce,tion of one footnote on Bourdieu= its s,ecific theorists. E0en in )y o;n ;ritings 9 ha0e unintentionally tended to segregate the t;o ,ers,ecti0es. 9n the ;ork in ;hich 9 ha0e )ost e(,licitly addressed ,ractice theories :.% ", .% %= 9 ha0e not incor,orated gender or fe)inist issues :as co))ented on *y Collier and 4anagisako .% % and 3utI .%%0=, ;hile )y

fe)inist ;ork has fairly consistently ;orked fro) so)e for) of ,ractice ,ers,ecti0e ;ithout in0oking the intellectual genealogies or articulating the theoretical issues at stake. $ My ,ur,ose in this essay, then, ;hich )ay *oth stand in itself and *e taken to introduce the essays that follo;, is to critiHue ,ractice theory fro) a fe)inist and )ore generally su*altern ,ers,ecti0e. The ,ur,ose of this e(ercise in turn is to atte),t to dra; ,ractice theory )ore fully into the or*it of fe)inist and other su*altern theoriIing, in ,art *ecause these ,ers,ecti0es the)sel0es often fall into one or the other tra, ;ith ;hich 9 o,ened the essay: too )uch construction :te(tual, discursi0e, etc.= on the one hand, too )uch )aking :deconte(tualiIed ?resistance?= on the other. Since 9 see ,ractice theory as the only fra)e;ork that theoriIes a necessary dialectic *et;een the t;o e(tre)es, this strikes )e as a useful, and e0en urgent, endea0or. 3osing Po;er 9 *egin ;ith the ,ro*le) of the ,eculiar status of ,o;er in theories of ,ractice." /one of the )aJor theorists of ,ractice ignores ,o;er, yet it is al;ays in so)e sense offstage.& -or Bourdieu :e.g., .%%0=, for e(a),le, there are structures of ineHuality and of do)ination, and 0arious ,ractices re,roduce these structures :or )ore s,ecifically, re,roduce the categories that underlie the), and the )echanis)s that render the) unrecogniIa*le=. But the ,ractices the)sel0es are largely utilitarian and econo)istic, ;ith actors seeking to )a(i)iIe 0arious for)s of ca,ital to enhance their o;n ,ositions ;ithin these structures. Practices in Bourdieu are not ,ractices of ,o;er as suchacts of do)ination, control, 0iolenceC e(ercises of authority and clai)s of truthC ,erfor)ances of strutting, *oasting, hu)iliating. Or the other side: rage, i),otence, ,ain, hu)iliationC colla*oration and slee,ing ;ith the ene)yC struggle, resistance, re0olution. This is not to say that such relationshi,s and ,ractices e(haust the totality of social life. But the argu)ent ;ithin fe)inist, )inority, etc., theoriIing is to say, let us )o0e these thingsfor a changeto the center of the theory and see ;hat ha,,ens. Of the three )ain ,ractice theorists, Giddens is actually the strongest in ,age1" Page & foregrounding issues of ,o;er. 5e argues that ?orthodo( sociology lacked a theory of action LandM . . . this ;as directly linked to a failure to )ake Huestions of ,o;er central to social theory? :.%!%: '&$=. 4et his ;ork, too, often see)s detached fro) the concerns of fe)inist, )inority, ,ostcolonial, and su*altern theorists. One can tease out a nu)*er of ,ossi*le reasons for this: that he is ,ri)arily concerned ;ith social re,roduction rather than changeC that issues of ,o;er are locked into the for)alist language of ?structure? and EEagency?C that his ,ri)ary )odel of ,o;er is dra;n fro) ca,italist class relations and *ureaucratic structures, ;hich o,erate differently than relations of gender, race, and colonial do)ination. -inally, let us look at Marshall SahlinsEs handling of ,o;er in Historical Metaphors and Mythical Realities :.% .=, a ge) of a *ook fro) ;hich 9 take a great deal of ins,iration. 9n this *ook, Sahlins lays out his original for)ulation of a ,ractice+theoretical fra)e;ork. 5e illustrates the argu)ents sketchily :it is a short *ook= *ut ,ersuasi0ely ;ith )aterial fro) eighteenth+century 5a;aii ,ertaining to the arri0al and e0entual death of Ca,tain Ba)es Cook in the islands. Sahlins organiIes his theoretical fra)e;ork around ;hat he calls ?structures of the conJuncture,? historical )o)ents in ;hich different syste)s of thought and ,racticedifferent cultures in this case, *ut Sahlins clai)s that other for)s of difference ;ould ;ork Just as ;ellco)e into engage)ent ;ith one another, and ,otentially set in )otion radical kinds of conce,tual and ,ractical unra0ellings. The illustrati0e case is the ;ay in ;hich as,ects of traditional 5a;aiian culture *egan to unra0el, as 5a;aiianschiefs and co))oners, )en and ;o)enengaged differentially ;ith a 0ariety of Euro,ean ,ersons and ,ractices. Sahlins is attenti0e to the internal ,olitics of rank and gender a)ong the 5a;aiians the)sel0es. 9ndeed these internal relationshi,s of ,o;er and ,ri0ilege are central to his narrati0e and his theoretical fra)e;ork. 4et the engage)ent 'et!een the Euro,eans and the 5a;aiians is curiously not treated as a relationshi, of ,o;erhere Sahlins )o0es into the )ore a*stract language of ?e0ent? and ?structure of the conJuncture.? 9n the end, ;ithin SahlinsEs account, Cook ;as killed not *ecause of anything he or his )en did to the 5a;aiians, *ut *ecause he 0iolated a set of 5a;aiian cultural e(,ectations. SahlinsEs *ook *eca)e the target of a critiHue articulated fro) an e(,licitly ,ostcolonial ,ers,ecti0e: Gananath O*eyesekereEs The Apotheosis of Captain Coo): *uropean Mythma)ing in the Pacific :.%%'=. O*eyesekere

,age1& Page # did not hi)self focus on the Huestion of ,o;erC he ,ri)arily ;ent after SahlinsEs assertions that the 5a;aiians took Ca,tain Cook to *e a god, arguing that such a clai) is a ,roJection of Euro,ean orientalist fantasies rather than a re,resentation of 5a;aiian realities. Sahlins res,onded 0igorously in a .%%& *ook, Ho! /0ati,es/ Thin): A'out Captain Coo)$ for *xample. Most co))entators ha0e considered that Sahlins effecti0ely de)olished this ,articular ,art of O*eyesekereEs argu)ent at )ulti,le le0elsin ter)s of greater control of the data and greater ,lausi*ility of its inter,retation, and in ter)s of the ironic re0ersal of ,ositions ;herein the scholar ;riting fro) the ,ostcolonial ,osition ;as forced to deny the authenticity of nati0e 5a;aiian culture in fa0or of a uni0ersaliIed ?co))on sense.? 4et there is a strand of O*eyesekereEs *ook that 9 found 0ery co),elling, and thatunless 9 )issed so)ething in the e(traordinary detail of SahlinsEs res,onseSahlins ne0er refuted. O*eyesekere foregrounded incidents in ;hich Cook, the other British ca,tains, and the cre;)en all regularly co))itted acts of hu)iliation and 0iolence 0is+N+0is the 5a;aiians, including an a)*iguous incident in ;hich a ;ooden fence around a ritual co),ound ;as taken a;ay *y the) for fire;oodC se0ere and e(cessi0e floggings of 5a;aiians ;ho stole goods fro) the shi,sC and CookEs o;n increasing )oodiness, rage, and 0iolent re,risals in the face of the 5a;aiiansE increasing ?insolence.? # 2lthough this strand of O*eyesekereEs argu)ent got lost in the tangle of trying to ,ro0e ;hether or not the 5a;aiians took Cook to *e a god, it ,ro0ides the launching ,oint for re+reading the British+5a;aiian encounter in ter)s of its funda)ental ineHuality. 9t forces a recognition of the syste)atic ,ractices of ,o;er and do)ination, and s)all and large acts of resistance, that shado;ed the econo)ic, se(ual, and cultural e(changes that co),rised the ?structure of the conJuncture.? 9 a) inclined to take this ,iece of O*eyesekereEs critiHue Huite seriously, not only *ecause O*eyesekere su,,orts it ;ell and the al)ost indo)ita*le Sahlins is una*le to *lo; it a;ay, *ut *ecause it takes sha,e ,recisely in the ga, that 9 a) ,ointing to here, the dis,lace)ent of ,o;er and struggle in so)e of the )ost influential ;orks of ,ractice theory. 7eco0ering 2gency 9f ,ractice theory is so)e;hat ,ro*le)atic on issues of ,o;er, it is nonetheless i),ortant for its contri*utions to Huestions of agency. 9ndeed it is ,recisely for this reason that 9 a) arguing for a greater ra,,roche)ent *et;een fe)inist, )inority, ,ostcolonial, and su*altern scholarshi,, on the one ,age1# Page ! hand, and ,ractice theory on the other. Before launching on this discussion, ho;e0er, it )ust *e e),hasiIed that the ,ractice+theoretical ,ers,ecti0e on agency is in no ;ay a for) of 0oluntaris), does not ,resu)e that agents are free indi0iduals, does not construct the agent as a *ourgeois su*Ject, and so forth. 7ather, ,ractice theory is a site,erha,s the only sitein ;hich there is an effort to theoriIe hu)an agency ;ithout falling into any of those tra,s. The *xclusion of the Su'1ect and of Agency Earlier for)s of social theoryBritish+2)erican structural+functionalis), certain kinds of deter)inisticG)echanical Mar(is), -rench structuralis);ere s,ecifically ela*orated ;ithout an intentional su*Ject. -or *oth theoretical and real+;orld reasons, there ;as a co))it)ent to a 0ie; of society and history as )achines or organis)s, o,erating according to their o;n la;s and logics, Huite a,art fro) the desires and intentions of social actors. The .%!0s sa; a 0ariety of reactions against these )odels, including ,ractice theories, *ut also a range of ;ork gathered under the ru*ric of ,oststructuralis). Poststructuralis)s also sa; the)sel0es as reacting against the )echanis) and deter)inis) of the earlier structural:ist= fra)e;orks, yet in contrast to ,ractice+oriented a,,roaches, these schools sustained the ,osition that the intentional su*Ject or ?agent? )ust *e e(cluded fro) the theoretical )odel. -or s,ecific historical reasons, in turn, this anti+su*Ject or anti+agent ,oststructuralis) had ;hat )any felt to *e a sur,rising i),act on certain strands of fe)inist and ,ostcolonial scholarshi,. -e)inist theorists ;ho take the ,oststructuralist ,osition clearly assu)e that the deconstruction of the su*Ject is a radical act, and that lea0ing any notion of the su*Ject intact ,oses gra0e dangers, *oth intellectual and ,olitical: ?<hat are the ,olitical conseHuences for fe)inis) of e)*racing the su*Ject@ <hat kinds of racial and class ,ri0ileges re)ain intact ;hen the hu)anist su*Ject re)ains unchallenged@? :Butler and Scott .%%': (0i=. The entire

theoretical a,,aratus is often directed to;ard sho;ing the ;ays in ;hich the :a,,arent= su*Ject is actually an ideological effect, a discursi0ely constructed ,osition that cannot recogniIe its o;n constructedness. The anti+su*Ject ,osition has taken a related, *ut slightly different turn ;ithin discussions of ,ost)odernity :as a historical era= and ,ost)odernis) :as a theoretical ,osition=. 7ecent accounts of ,ost)odernity ha0e e),hasiIed a)ong other things the frag)entation of the ,ost)odern su*+ ,age1! Page Ject, its de,thlessness and lack of coherence. So)e :e.g., Baudrillard .% , 3yotard .% "= ha0e cele*rated this de0elo,)ent, ;hile others :es,ecially Ba)eson .% "= ha0e la)ented it, *ut all ha0e agreed that the era in ;hich su*Jects sought coherence, )eaning, and ,ur,ose in life, and e(,erienced alienation in the a*sence of such )eaning and ,ur,ose, ;as o0er. 9n res,onse to these ,ositions that o)it, e(clude, or *id fare;ell to the intentional su*Ject, there has *een a good deal of critical reaction across a *road front of fe)inist, )inority, ,ostcolonial, and su*altern theoriIing. The general ,oint across these 0arious res,onses is that the denial of the intentional su*Ject, and of ?agency,? *oth )isreads and ;orks against the intellectual and ,olitical interests of ;o)en, )inorities, ,ostcolonial, and other su*altern su*Jects. 9n a ,o;erful recent ,a,er, for e(a),le, BosK 3i)On considers so)e of the argu)ents a*out the ,ost)odern su*Ject in relation to his e(,eriences ;ith and o*ser0ations of *arroo) dancing and *ra;ling a)ong ,oor, ;orking+class Me(ican 2)ericans of south Te(as :.%%.=. 3i)On argues eloHuently that, ;hile life for these ,eo,le is indeed full of discontinuity, disru,tion, and frag)entation, the for)s and ,atterns of their dancing re,resent a struggle against these things, an effort, ho;e0er )o)entary and inadeHuate, to construct a ;orld of )eaning and coherence. Si)ilarly, in a discussion of )inority and ,ostcolonial discourse, 2*dul BanMoha)ed and 8a0id 3loyd address the ,oststructuralist rather than ,ost)odernist 0ariant of the ,ro*le): But ;here the ,oint of de,arture of ,oststructuralis) lies ;ithin the <estern tradition and ;orks to deconstruct its identity for)ations ?fro) ;ithin,? the critical difference is that )inorities, *y 0irtue of their 0ery social *eing, )ust *egin fro) a ,osition of o*Jecti0e non2identity ;hich is rooted in their econo)ic and cultural )arginaliIation 0is+N+0is the ?<est.? The non+identity ;hich the critical <estern intellectual seeks to :re=,roduce discursi0ely is for )inorities a gi0en of their social e(istence. But as such a gi0en it is not yet *y any )eans an inde( of li*eration. . . . On the contrary, the non+identity of )inorities re)ains the sign of )aterial da)age to ;hich the only coherent res,onse is struggle, not ironic distanciation. :.% !: .#= The 3nma)ing of "emale Agency Before considering the ;ays in ;hich ,ractice theory can restore agency ;ithout re,roducing the *ourgeois su*Ject, 9 ;ant to e(,lore *riefly, and through a concrete e(a),le, the notion of identity ?da)age? raised *y Ban+ ,age1 Page % Moha)ed and 3loyd :see also Ortner .%%&a=. 9 once s,ent so)e ti)e analyIing Grimms4 "airy Tales, ;ith an interest in seeing the ;ays in ;hich fe)ale agency ;as constructed differently fro) )ale agency, the ;ays in ;hich heroines ;ere different fro) heroes. ! 9 su,,ose 9 e(,ected to find the usual *inaries: ,assi0eGacti0e, ;eakGstrong, ti)orousG*ra0e, etc. <hat 9 had not Huite e(,ected to see ;as a recognition in the tales that fe)ale characters had to *e made to *e ,assi0e, ;eak, and ti)orous, that is, a recognition that agency in girls had to *e unmade. Most of the Gri))sE heroines are in the )ode of ;hat the folklorist Pro,, :.%# = calls ?0icti) heroes?: although they are the ,rotagonists, the action of the story is )o0ed along *y 0irtue of *ad things ha,,ening to the), rather than their initiating actions as in the case of the )aJority of )ale heroes. Thus non+agency, ,assi0ity, is to so)e e(tent *uilt into )ost of the) fro) the outset. 4et in )any cases e0en these 0icti) heroines take roles of acti0e agency in the early ,arts of the story. Though their initial )isfortunes )ay ha0e ha,,ened to the) through outside agency, they so)eti)es seiIe the action and carry it along the)sel0es, *eco)ing*rieflyheroines in the acti0e Huesting sense usually reser0ed for )ale heroes.

The structure of 0irtually all the tales is one of ?,assage,? of )o0ing fro) childhood to adulthood. -or the *oy heroes, ,assage generally in0ol0es the successful enact)ent of agencysol0ing a ,ro*le), finding a lost o*Ject, slaying the dragon. -or all of the fe)ale ,rotagonists, on the other hand, ,assage al)ost e(clusi0ely in0ol0es the renunciation of agency. 2gentic girls, girls ;ho seiIe the action too )uch, e0en for altruistic reasons, are ,unished in one of t;o ;ays. The less co))on for) of ,unish)ent, first, is the denial of ,assage to adulthood. -i0e of the tales ha0e heroines ;ho are fully acti0e and fully successful in enacting their ,roJects. To take the )ost fa)iliar e(a),le a)ong these, in ?5ansel and Gretel? it is Gretel ;ho tricks the ;itch and ,ushes her into the o0en. But at the end of the story Gretel returns to her natal ho)e, still in the status of child. She does not achie0e ;hat the 0ast )aJority of the Gri))sE heroines achie0ethe )ark of fe)ale adulthood, )arriage. 9n the )ore co))on fe)ale tale, the heroine gets )arried at the end. But if she has *een at all acti0e in the early ,art of the tale, she )ust in0aria*ly ,ass through se0ere trials *efore *eing ;orthy of )arrying the ,rince, or indeed *eing ;orthy of any )an at all. These trials al;ays in0ol0e sy)*ols and ,ractices of utter ,assi0ity andGor total inacti0ity, as ;ell as ,ractices of hu)ility and su*ordination. -or e(a),le, in ?S;eetheart 7oland? she ,age1% Page .0 cle0erly sa0es her skin at the *eginning, and then sa0es *oth herself and her lo0er, *ut for her ,ains her lo0er *etroths another ;o)an. 9n res,onse, the heroine turns herself first into a stone, then into a flo;er, and finally cleans house for so)e ti)e for a she,herd *efore )arrying her s;eetheart in the end. % The renunciation of agency here is Huite ,ainful. To *e a stone is to *e utterly inert and identitylessC to *e a flo;er is to ho,e to *e crushed: ?ESo)e*ody at least ;ill tread u,on )e,E she thought? :Grimms4 . . . .%"&: #&=. 9f any sort of agency )ust *e ,unished, e0en for ?good? girls, the ,unish)ent is e0en ;orse for ?*ad? fe)ale characters, ;itches and ;icked ste,)others. These ;o)en are highly agenticthey ha0e ,roJects, ,lans, ,lots. /eedless to say, they all co)e to terri*le ends. 2fter trying and failing to kill Sno; <hite, for e(a),le, the ste,)otherG;itch is in0ited to the ;edding of Sno; <hite and the Prince, *ut once there she is forced to dance in red+hot sli,,ers until she falls do;n dead. Since she and si)ilar characters ha0e done ;icked things, their ,unish)ents see) Justified on )oral grounds, yet ;ithin the general ,attern of ,unishing any sort of fe)ale agency, it see)s fair to suggest that they are ,unished as )uch for their e(cessi0e agency as for its )oral content..0 This detour through Grimms4 "airy Tales ;as )eant to )ake a nu)*er of ,oints. 2t one le0el 9 a) in agree)ent ;ith ,oststructuralist and other constructionist ,ositions: the for)s and distri*utions of ?agency? are al;ays culturally and ,olitically constructed. Thus Grimms4 "airy Tales, like any other cultural te(ts, )ust *e treated as ele)ents of a larger discourse, a uni0erse of ,olitically inflected )eanings through ;hich :a)ong other things= agency is culturally sha,ed and organiIed. 2t the sa)e ti)e, ho;e0er, ;e )ust assu)e that ?agency?defined )ini)ally as a sense that the self is an authoriIed social *eingis ,art of si),ly *eing hu)an, and thus that its a*sence or denial is as )uch of a ,ro*le) as its construction. 5ere the tales ha0e *een treated as ,ara*les of a certain failure in ,oststructuralist and other anti+su*Ject ,ositions, a failure to recogniIe that the a*sence of agency and legiti)ate intentionality )ust *e seen 0ery critically as effects of ,o;er. This argu)ent is not ne;C the de*ates a*out the ,olitical and e,iste)ological adeHuacy of *oth ,oststructuralis) and ,ost)odernis), s,ecifically ;ith res,ect to the agency Huestion, ha0e *een going on for so)e ti)e :see, e.g., 2lcoff .%%" L.% M=. But that is Just the ,ro*le). The de*ates tend to *e ,osed in such a ;ay that one a,,ears to ha0e to choose *et;een ,age1.0 Page .. total constructionis) and total 0oluntaris), *et;een the -oucauldian discursi0ely constructed :and su*Jected= su*Ject, or the free agent of <estern fantasy. 9t is the argu)ent of a ,ractice theory fra)e;ork, ho;e0er, that this choice is *oth unnecessary and ;rong, ;hich *rings us *ack, finally, to the ,oint of de,arture: the construction of agency ;ithin ,ractice theory, and its ,otential for resol0ing this ,ro*le). Practice Theory and the Reco,ery of the Su'1ect

9f ,oststructuralis) ;as one res,onse to earlier )echanistic and deter)inistic fra)e;orks, ,ractice theory ;as another. But ;hereas ,oststructuralis), like earlier theories, e(cluded the intentional su*Ject, ,ractice+ oriented theories offered a ;ay to ,ut hu)an intention and desire *ack into the ,icture. 9ronically enough, one of the chief architects of ,ractice theory, Pierre Bourdieu, nonetheless held out against the idea of the intentional su*Ject: for Bourdieu there are ,ractices, there are actors, *ut there are no significant intentionalities: actors strategiIe, *ut their strategies are dra;n fro) an internaliIed ha'itus that is itself a 0irtual )irror of e(ternal li)its and ,ossi*ilities. 2ctions are thus ?intelligi*le and coherent ;ithout s,ringing fro) an intention of coherence and a deli*erate decisionC Lthey areM adJusted to the future ;ithout *eing the ,roduct of a ,roJect or ,lan? :.%%0: &0&.=. .. On this ,articular ,oint, then, ;e )ust set Bourdieu aside. But *oth Giddens and Sahlins are, in different ;ays, Huite strong on issues of agency, and s,ecifically on the ;ays in ;hich agency is *oth a ,roduct and a ,roducer of society and history. Giddens theoriIes kno;ledgea*le and intentional agents ;ho ha0e the ca,acity to reflect on their o;n actions and the a*ility to see, to so)e e(tent, into the ;orkings of the larger forces that are i),inging u,on the). 2t the sa)e ti)e he recogniIes, and theoriIes, the al;ays co),le( relationshi, *et;een su*JectsE intentionality and kno;ledgea*ility, on the one hand, and, on the other, the actual sha,e :?structure?= of a ;orld ;hich is ne0er a direct outco)e of those intentions. Sahlins ;orks fro) the sa)e *asic assu),tions, *ut handles the) differently. <hereas Giddens takes Huestions of ?agency? at the generic le0el, SahlinsEs discussions are al;ays e)*edded ;ithin the inter,retation of ethnogra,hic and historical cases. 5e is thus a*le to sho; in Huite nuanced ;ays the cultural construction of su*Jects and agents, and the ;ays in ;hich those 0arying constructions *oth inflect the historical ,rocess, and are the)sel0es transfor)ed o0er ti)e :see es,ecially Sahlins .% & as ;ell as ,age1.. Page .' .% .=. Moreo0er, SahlinsEs actors are al;ays en)eshed ;ithin co),le( social and ,olitical ,rocesses, and ;e are ne0er a*le to i)agine :as so)eti)es ha,,ens ;ith GiddensEs a*stract )odeling= a ,ure ?agent? standing a,art fro) so)e larger, and constantly shifting, set of relationshi,s. 2t this ,oint, ;e )ust *egin to start ,ulling the ,ieces of the discussion together. The ,ro*le) is in )any ;ays one of re,resentation. <riting in ter)s of the old *inariesstructureGe0ent, structureGagency, ha*itusG,racticeis, 9 think, a dead end. The challenge is to ,icture indissolu*le for)ations of structurally e)*edded agency and intention+filled structures, to recogniIe the ;ays in ;hich the su*Ject is ,art of larger social and cultural ;e*s, and in ;hich social and cultural ?syste)s? are ,redicated u,on hu)an desires and ,roJects. Giddens and Sahlins ,oint us in the right direction, *ut ;e need to go further. Serious Ga)es 8ra;ing on the essays in this 0olu)e, 9 ;ant to ,ro,ose a )odel of ,ractice that e)*odies agency *ut does not *egin ;ith, or ,i0ot u,on, the agent, actor, or indi0idual. <hile there are 0ery definitely in this 0ie; actors and agents, desires and intentions, ,lans and ,lots, these are e)*edded ;ithin;hat shall ;e call the)@ ga)es@ ,roJects@ dra)as@ stories@in any e0ent, )oti0ated, organiIed, and socially co),le( ;ays of going a*out life in ,articular ti)es and ,laces. Of the ter)s Just noted, and for reasons that 9 ho,e ;ill *eco)e clear in the discussion to follo;, 9 find ?ga)es? to *e the )ost *roadly useful i)age. But *ecause the idea of the ga)e in English connotes so)ething relati0ely light and ,layful, 9 )odify the ter): ?serious ga)es.? .' The idea of the ?ga)e? is )eant to ca,ture si)ultaneously the follo;ing di)ensions: that social life is culturally organiIed and constructed, in ter)s of defining categories of actors, rules and goals of the ga)es, and so forthC that social life is ,recisely social, consisting of ;e*s of relationshi, and interaction *et;een )ulti,le, shiftingly interrelated su*Ject ,ositions, none of ;hich can *e e(tracted as autono)ous ?agents?C and yet at the sa)e ti)e there is EEagency,? that is, actors ,lay ;ith skill, intention, ;it, kno;ledge, intelligence. The idea that the ga)e is ?serious? is )eant to add into the eHuation the idea that ,o;er and ineHuality ,er0ade the ga)es of life in )ulti,le ;ays, and that, ;hile there )ay *e ,layfulness and ,leasure in the ,rocess, the stakes of these ga)es are often 0ery high. 9t follo;s in turn that the ga)es of life )ust *e ,layed ;ith intensity and so)eti)es deadly earnestness. 2s a final note there is an assu),tion that ,age1.' Page .$ there is ne0er only one ga)e, a ,oint that ;ill take on so)e i),ortance as the discussion ,roceeds.

Other ter)s could *e used to re,resent these for)s of e)*edded agency, or ;hat )ight *e called ?structures of agency.? ?ProJect,? for e(a),le, is useful in e),hasiIing the ,ur,osi0eness of the enter,rises of life, *ut ,erha,s carries o0ertones of too conscious a le0el of intentionality, and at the sa)e ti)e does not conJure u, a ,icture of an intensely social ,rocess, ;ith )ulti,le ,layers. ?8ra)a? co)e closer in this res,ectthere are )ulti,le interacting characters*ut the ter) see)s to ,ut too )uch ;eight on the ,rior ?scri,tingEE of the ,lay. .$ ?Stories? and ?narrati0es? can *e ,o;erful fra)es for this kind of discussion, yet they )ay also see) too e(clusi0ely linguistic or discursi0e, and carry o0ertones of ina,,ro,riate fictionality as ;ell.." /onetheless, 9 ha0e used all of these ter)s in certain conte(ts, and ha0e found all of the) analytically and inter,reti0ely effecti0e for certain ,ur,oses. 9 do not )ean to e(clude the) *ut ha0e settled for the )o)ent on ?serious ga)es? as the )ost co),rehensi0e theoretical category. 2t the sa)e ti)e 9 do not ;ant to fetishiIe ?ga)es? any )ore than ?structure,? ?agency,? and the like. 2ny such freeIing of categories is itself usually a )istake. The idea of the ga)e is on the one hand dra;n fro) a 0ariety of ,ast social theories :including ,ractice theoryC Bourdieu L.%%0M uses it e(tensi0ely= as a ;ay of getting ,ast the free agency Huestion, and theoriIing a ,icture of ,eo,le+in+:,o;er=+relationshi,s+in+,roJects as the relati0ely irreduci*le unit of ?,ractice.? 2t the sa)e ti)e, a fe)inistG)inorityG,ostcolonialGsu*altern ,ers,ecti0e forces oneforced )e, at any rateto ,ush the usage of the ga)e idea in 0arious directions, and to ,ut relati0ely no0el kinds of ,ressures on the conce,t. 2s a ;ay of seeing its heuristic t;ists and turns, then, 9 turn to the ,a,ers in this collection. <e )ay start, as 9 once started, ;ith de Beau0oir and the e(istentialists. One of the central ter)s of e(istentialist ,hiloso,hy is the ?,roJect,? the intentionaliIed 0ision of ,ur,ose, of )aking or constructing the self and the ;orld: The )ost rudi)entary *eha0ior )ust *e deter)ined *oth in relation to the real and ,resent factors ;hich condition it and in relation to a certain o*Ject, still to co)e, ;hich it is trying to *ring into *eing. This is ;hat ;e call the pro1ect. :Sartre .%# :%.= 9n The Second Sex :.%&$ L.%"%M=, Si)one de Beau0oir deri0es an entire se)iotics of gender fro) ,lacing a ,articular ,roJect at the center of her ,age1.$ Page ." analysis. She says, in effect, that one of the central ,roJects of hu)an e(istence is the atte),t to transcend the natural li)its of *eing hu)anthe ine0ita*le and irreduci*le *odily 0ulnera*ility to illness, inJury, and death. Both )en and ;o)en, as hu)an *eings, share this ,roJect, *ut they ha0e different relationshi,s to it. -ro) this *asic starting ,oint, de Beau0oir is a*le to de0elo, a 0ery ,o;erful account of the logic of gender in <estern cultural thought, and of the syste) of re,resentations through ;hich it is realiIed. 9n ?9s -e)ale to Male as /ature 9s to Culture@? 9 took this argu)ent and did little )ore than translate it and u,date it in relation to so)e fe)inist anthro,ological Huestions of the .%!0s. There ;ere a nu)*er of things right and ;rong ;ith that ,a,er, ;hich 9 discuss in se0eral other essays in this 0olu)e :?Gender 5ege)onies,? and ?So, (s -e)ale to Male . . .?=. 5ere 9 si),ly ,oint to the )ethodology, the idea that an understanding of the ,roJect, the underlying ga)e, ;ill allo; one to unra0el e(tensi0e as,ects of the se)iotics of the situation. Thus 9 *egan ;ith de Beau0oirEs ,oint that one of the i),ortant ga)es underlying gender ideologies is the ga)e of transcendence of nature, of *odily 0ulnera*ility and *odily li)its. Gi0en ;o)enEs *odily hostage to ,regnancy, child*irth, and nursing, in turn, a situation is created in ;hich ;o)en see) to stand for e0erything that hu)anity :*oth )en and ;o)en= is trying to esca,e and transcend. -or de Beau0oirEs analytic ,ur,oses, this situation is ;hat allo;s )en to construct the)sel0es as su*Jects 0is+N+0is ;o)en as o*Jects, Sel0es 0is+N+0is ;o)en as Others. 9 ;as less interested in the construction of su*Jects and o*Jects, and )ore in the construction and Justification of certain social arrange)ents, *ut the *asic ,oint ;as the sa)e. 9f, in these argu)ents, the ga)e is transcendence, the ?structure? that fra)es and ,roduces the ga)e is the organiIation of hu)an e(istence itself, the fact that 0ulnera*le *odily *eings are also *earers of reflecti0e consciousness ;ho can al;ays i)agine or fantasiIe esca,es and alternati0es. On a s)aller scale than the organiIation of hu)an e(istence, *ut still on a fairly large scale of ?structure,? ;e )ay look at the e)ergence in hu)an social e0olution of those large+scale for)ations of organiIed ineHuality called ?states,? as 9 did in a ,a,er called EEThe Dirgin and the State.? The official ,ro*le) of that ,a,er ;as, under ;hat conditions did ideas of the ,rotection of fe)ale ,urity and 0irginity, largely a*sent in ?si),le? and ?tri*al? societies, e)erge@ The short ans;er ;as, ?the rise of the state.? .& 9 ha0e so)e a)*i0alence today a*out this sort of social+e0olutionary argu)ent,

,age1." Page .& *ut the ,a,er see)s to ;ork on another le0el as ;ell, rele0ant for the ,resent discussion. That is, one can reread the ,a,er as an e(ercise in the structural ,roduction of ne; ga)es. States see) to generate at least t;o ne; ga)es that ha0e rele0ance for Huestions of gender. One is the ga)e of ,o;er and authority ;e ;ould call ,atriarchy, in ;hich the role of father as an essentially ,olitical role e)erges. -athers are constructed as disci,lined ,ositions ;ithin a hierarchy, )ade res,onsi*le to the state as ?heads of household?C at the sa)e ti)e fathers are accorded tre)endous ,o;er and authority o0er the su*ordinates ;ithin their households, the ;o)en and the Junior )alesC and finally fathers are highly fetishiIed ;ithin the sy)*olic order, as ancestors, gods, or God. The other ne; ga)e is that of social )o*ility, the ne;ly conJured desire to )o0e u,, no; that there is an u, to )o0e to. This ga)e intersects ;ith gender in an al)ost endless 0ariety of ;ays, *ut 9 call attention ,articularly to the ne;ly e)ergent ,ractice of hy,erga)y, of ;o)en )arrying u, the social ladder as ,art of their fathersE and *rothersE drea)s of )o*ility. The enforce)ent of fe)ale ,urity, 9 argued, is a corollary of this, a ;ay of constructing the ;o)an as ;orthy of the ho,ed+for higher+status hus*and. 4et though this is a )anEs ga)e, ;o)en often e)*race these desires and restrictions as ;ell, for there is al;ays a chance that the ga)e ;ill ;ork to their *enefit, or that of their daughters. :Male= ga)es of status and ,o;er are also at the heart of the ,a,er entitled ?7ank and Gender.? .# 5ere 9 locate a central ?ga)e? in ,lay across a large nu)*er of Polynesian societies, and try to sho; ho; the analytic gras, of this ga)e illu)inates an enor)ous range of gender and se(ual re,resentations and ,ractices in these societies. The ga)e is once again the ga)e of )o*ility in an ostensi*ly i))o*ile society, a society ;ith hereditary rankings. 9t in0ol0es a certain kinshi, strategy in ;hich, a)ong other things, daughters ideally re)ain attached to their ,arental households, *ring in hus*ands, and *ear children ;ho in turn re)ain attached. MenEs status is, once again, contingent u,on the control they can e(ercise o0er the se(uality of their sisters and daughters. 6nlike the ,re0ious ,a,er, ho;e0er, this one e(,licitly atte),ts to shift around and look at the syste) fro) the different ,ositions esta*lished *y the ga)e. Bunior )en and senior )en, chiefs and co))oners ,lay it differently. Both ;o)en and Junior )en are in )any ;ays ,a;ns ;ithin senior )enEs ga)es. But in so)e ,arts of Polynesia :es,ecially the <estern Polyne+ ,age1.& Page .# sian societies=, ;o)en can *e seen to ,lay the ga)e differently as sisters or as ;i0es. 2s sisters they identify ;ith their *rothersE ga)es of status, and they are the)sel0es re;arded in this ,osition ;ith status and res,ect. 9n )arrying and *eco)ing ?;i0es? ho;e0er, ;o)en often lose *oth status and ,o;er. This contradiction ;ill rea,,ear in other ethnogra,hic conte(ts as ;ell. -e)ale 2gency@ One of the ,ro*le)s running through the ,a,ers discussed so far is a tendency to see ;o)en as identified ;ith )ale ga)es, or as ,a;ns in )ale ga)es, or as other;ise ha0ing no autono)ous ,oint of 0ie; or intentionality. 2t the 0ery least it a,,ears that, e0en if ;o)en ha0e their o;n ,roJects, these do not significantly organiIe the cultural order of gender re,resentations and ,ractices, ;hich largely e)*ody a )ale ,oint of 0ie;. Thus the Huestion of ho; to think a*out ;o)enEs relationshi, to a hege)onically )asculinist :if not ?)ale do)inant?= social order )ust still *e addressed. 9t is unsatisfactory to assu)e that ;o)en ;holly identify ;ith the hege)ony, *ut it is nonetheless difficult to co)e u, ;ith an alternati0e that does not fall into the o,,osite tra,, casting ;o)en as enacting ;holly different :and often su,,osedly )orally *etter)ore ?nurturant? and so forth= ,roJects. Thus in the ,a,er called ?The Pro*le) of E<o)enE as an 2nalytic Category,? .! 9 s,ecifically undertake to look at ;o)en as agents ;ithoutideallyfalling into these 0arious tra,s. 2re there ?;o)enEs ga)es? as such@EE More generally, ho; is su*altern agency constructed and enacted@

The case in ,oint ;as the founding of the first Sher,a nunnery *y a grou, of young ;o)en. The Sher,as are a Ti*etan Buddhist ,eo,le of northeast /e,al ;ho) 9 ha0e *een studying since the )id+.%#0s. 9n the early decades of the t;entieth century, they *egan to u,grade their religion *y *uilding )onasteries. This ;as a grass+roots )o0e)ent on the ,art of so)e young )en fro) relati0ely high+status fa)ilies. Shortly after the first )onasteries ;ere *uilt, a grou, of young elite ;o)en secretly ran a;ay fro) their ho)es to take religious 0o;s in Ti*et, and then returned to found the first nunnery. 2lthough fro) one angle the ;o)en had their o;n gendered )oti0ations, co)ing fro) s,ecifically fe)ale e(,eriences in the society, the fact that *oth they and the )ale )onks ;ere fro) the )ore elite sectors of the ,age1.# Page .! society )eant that they shared as )any )oti0es as not. Moreo0er, the )en ;ho *eca)e )onks ;ere often the disad0antaged )iddle sons in elite fa)ilies, ;hich rendered the) in so)e ;ays structurally ,arallel to the ;o)en, ;ho ;ere disad0antaged ;ithin elite fa)ilies *y gender. Thus at one le0el the ,a,er ans;ered the Huestion of these ;o)enEs intentionalities *y saying, once again, that they ;ere not that )uch different fro) the )enEs. But to say that they shared )enEs )oti0es is not to say that they lacked :inde,endent= ?agency,? in the sense of authoriIation to ha0e oneEs o;n ,oint of 0ie; and desires. The ,oint is rather that the t;o for)s of agency are differently organiIed: ;o)enEs agency )ay *e seen as *ound into a contradiction that under)ines its ,ossi*ility for enact)ent. Sher,a ;o)en are in fact culturally constructed as relati0ely inde,endent and autono)ous ,ersons, as )any o*ser0ers ha0e noted. On the other hand they are restricted fro) enacting their inde,endence *ecause of gender+*iased ,ro,erty rules, the nor)ati0e authority of hus*ands o0er ;i0es, and the cultural re,resentations that ,ortray ;o)en as ;eak and e(cessi0ely self+interested. This contradiction of the si)ultaneous encourage)ent and under)ining of ;o)enEs agency a,,ears in other cultural conte(ts as ;ell. The elite 5a;aiian ;o)en ;ho ;ill *e discussed in a )o)ent see) to ha0e *een o,erating out of a si)ilar contradiction. Su*altern Practice Theory 9n order to discuss the t;o final essays in this *ook, 9 need to return for a )o)ent to the critiHue of ,ractice theory *egun earlier. 2s 7. <. Connell has e),hasiIed :.% !=, ,ractice theory in the hands of Bourdieu and Giddens in ,articular tended to e),hasiIe the role of ,ractice in social re,roduction rather than change. This ;as another as,ect of its see)ing disconnection fro), if not o,,osition to, the *odies of fe)inist, su*altern, )inority, and ,ostcolonial theory also e0ol0ing in this ,eriod. Of course Huestions of social re,roduction and social transfor)ation can ne0er, and should ne0er, *e ;holly se,arated. But there is a difference in the angle of 0ision and Huestioning ;ith ;hich one co)es at the analysis. One can do ,ractice analysis as a loo,, in ;hich ?structures? construct su*Jects and ,ractices, *ut su*Jects and ,ractices re,roduce ?structures.? Or one can do;hat shall ;e call it@ su*altern ,ractice theory@and choose to a0oid the loo,, to look for the sli,,ages in re,roduction, the erosions of long+standing ,atterns, the )o)ents of disorder and of outright ?resistance.? One a,,roach to this looser and )ore disru,ti0e 0ersion of ,ractice the+ ,age1.! Page . ory )ay *e seen in the ,a,er called ?Gender 5ege)onies.? 5ere the ,oint of de,arture is the lack of totaliIation of ?structure? itself. The ,a,er is ,ri)arily concerned ;ith rethinking ?uni0ersal )ale do)inance? *y ;ay of rethinking ?culture? or ?structureEEseeing these for)ations not as totaliIed hy,ercoherent o*Jects, *ut as al;ays ,artial hege)onies. Much of the ,a,er is taken u, ;ith looking at ethnogra,hic cases and trying to think a*out the ;ays in ;hich they are or are not ?)ale do)inant.? But the ,oint of the argu)ent is that, ;hate0er the hege)onic order of gender relations )ay *e;hether ?egalitarian,? or ?)ale do)inant,? or so)ething elseit ne0er e(hausts ;hat is going on. There are al;ays sites, and so)eti)es large sites, of alternati0e ,ractices and ,ers,ecti0es a0aila*le, and these )ay *eco)e the *ases of resistance and transfor)ation. Thus in the last ,art of the ,a,er, 9 return to Polynesia and look at the fa)ous case of nineteenth+century 5a;aii, in ;hich a grou, of elite ;o)en organiIed ;hat can only *e called a cultural cou,, and succeeded in o0erthro;ing the gender arrange)ents and ta*oos of their society.

2t one le0el the analysis ;as an enact)ent of the classic ,ractice theory agenda. 9 looked at ho; the 5a;aiian ;o)en ;ere constructed *y their o;n culture and history :,ushed *y cultural and historical contradictions, ena*led *y elite ,olitical status, etc.=, and ho; they in turn :re+= )ade their culture and history. But the e),hasis ;as on the disJunctions in, rather than the coherence of the structure, on the creati0ity of the ;o)en ;ithin the li)its of their traditional ,olitics, on the transfor)ations rather than the continuities that ensued. This, then, is one as,ect of the su*altern 0ersion of ,ractice theory, ;ith e0erything slightly*ut not co),letelytilted to;ard inco),leteness, insta*ility, and change. The final ,a,er co),le(ifies the ,icture in another ;ay, )ulti,lying not so )uch the sites of ,ractice, and the contradictions of ,ractice, around and ;ithin a single cultural ga)e, *ut the nu)*er of ga)es in ,lay. This ,a,er, called ?Borderland Politics and Erotics . . . ,? looks at the entry of ;o)en, *oth ?first ;orld? and Sher,a, into high+altitude 5i)alayan )ountaineering. 9n it 9 follo; a slo; interacti0e ,rocess that takes ,lace o0er the course of the ;hole t;entieth century. 9 look at ho; a set of gendered )eanings gets ;orked out interacti0ely, fro) a*out the .%'0s to the .%!0s, *et;een )en fro) ;estern andGor do)inant cultures :?sahi*s?= and :)ale= Sher,as in the inti)ate and dangerous arena of e(tre)e high+altitude )ountaineering. 9 then look at ho; those )eanings get desta*iliIed for *oth sahi*s and Sher,as as ;o)en enter the s,ort fro) the .%!0s on. Both first+;orld ,age1. Page .% ;o)en :?)e)sahi*s?= and Sher,a ;o)en co)e in at a*out the sa)e historical )o)ent. -or *oth it is a relati0ely radical act, gi0en the till+then o0er;hel)ingly )ale nature of the s,ort. But the styles of ,ractice and the )eanings at stake are different for the t;o sets of ;o)en, and for the )en as ;ell. 2nd in the end, things ha0e changed for all concerned, in desired and undesired ;ays, *y accident as ;ell as *y design. Borro;ing a ,hrase fro) an early fe)inist )anifesto :-irestone .%!'=, 9 call this long, )ulti+stranded and )ulti+loo, ,rocess a ?dialectic of se(?the )aking and re)aking of gender o0er a long duration, through cultural ga)es of *oth ,o;er and :;ould+*e= solidarity. The story of gender in 5i)alayan )ountaineering is glo*al and transnationalC there are )any ga)es in ,lay si)ultaneouslycolonial, national, racial, genderedand they all kee, changing o0er ti)e as ;ell. This )ulti,licity of ga)es in turn has )ulti,le effects. On the one hand it esta*lishes the li)its on any single one of the): ;ithin one :historically s,ecific, and no; changing= ordering of the ga)es, Sher,as had to ,lay the sahi*sE ga)e e0en if it killed the). On the other hand the sheer )ulti,licity of ga)es ,ro0ides a sense of alternati0es, a sense that there are other ;ays of doing the ga)e of life, e0en if those alternati0es are not i))ediately a0aila*le or not su*Jecti0ely desira*le. <hat is i),ortant is that they e(ist, and thus al;ays ,re0ent closure. So)e Brief Conclusions One of the central ga)es of life in )ost cultures is the gender ga)e, or )ore s,ecifically the )ulti,licity of gender ga)es a0aila*le in that ti)e and ,lace. The effort to understand the )aking and un)aking of gender, as ;ell as ;hat gender )akes, in0ol0es understanding the ;orkings of these ga)es as ga)es, ;ith their inclusions and e(clusions, )ulti,le ,ositions, co),le( rules, for)s of *odily acti0ity, structures of feeling and desire, and stakes of ;inning, losing, or si),ly ,laying. 9t in0ol0es as ;ell the Huestion of ho; gender ga)es the)sel0es collide ;ith, enco),ass, or are *ent to the ser0ice of, other ga)es, for gender is ne0er, as they say, the only ga)e in to;n. The idea of the ga)ethe serious ga)ein turn is )eant to resol0e a nu)*er of ,ro*le)s in a *roader theory of ,ractice, ,ro*le)s that arise ,articularly fro) concerns that ani)ate fe)inist, )inority, ,ostcolonial, and su*altern theoriIing. One is the necessity for retaining an acti0e intentional su*Ject ;ithout falling into so)e for) of free agency and 0oluntaris). 5ere 9 ha0e argued that, if ;e take the )ethodological unit of ,ractice ,age1.% Page '0 as the ga)e, rather than the ?agent,? ;e can ne0er lose sight of the )utual deter)ination:s= of agents and structures: of the fact that ,layers are ?agents,? skilled and intense strategiIers ;ho constantly stretch the ga)e e0en as they enact it, and the si)ultaneous fact that ,layers are defined and constructed :though ne0er ;holly contained= *y the ga)e. One can say a*out ga)es ;hat Sartre said a*out ,roJects: they are a ?)o0ing unity of su*Jecti0ity and o*Jecti0ity? :.%# : %!=. 2 second ,ro*le) is the necessity for focaliIing ,o;er relations and struggles ;ithin a ,ractice theoretical fra)e;orkC here the idea of the serious ga)e

signals a range of ,oints that e0ery schoolchild kno;s: that ga)es are al;ays in so)e sense contests, e0en if only ;ith the selfC that ga)es al;ays entail including so)e ,eo,le and e(cluding othersC that in )ost kinds of ga)es, so)e ,eo,le get to *e :or are forced to *e= EE9t? and others notC and so forth. -inally, there is the necessity for theoriIing ;ays to *reak out of the loo, of re,roductionC here the e),hasis is on loosening u, :;ithout totally a*andoning= the notion of structurerecogniIing its inco),letely hege)onic character, and recogniIing the )ulti,licity of ga)es in ,lay, *oth at any gi0en )o)ent, and across ti)e. 2 ne; and i),ro0ed *rand of ,ractice theory, in turn, holds out the ho,e of )ediating the )ost recent set of un,roducti0e *inaries on the theoretical landsca,e, *et;een te(tual studies and ethnogra,hically grounded studies, *et;een ?lit+crit? and so)e su,,osedly o*Jectifying ?social science,? . *et;een constructionist theories that e),hasiIe the ,roduction of su*Jects, and see)ingly 0oluntarist accounts that e),hasiIe ;hat su*Jects )ake. 4et ,erha,s the final co))ent needs to *e, once again, that this is not ?a theory,? so)ething that one either signs u, for or reJects. 7ather it is a ,roJect, a ;ay of trying conce,tually and re,resentationally to )i)ic social life itself as a ?)o0ing unity of su*Jecti0ity and o*Jecti0ity.? ,age1'0 Page '.

' 9s -e)ale to Male 2s /ature 9s to Culture@ Much of the creati0ity of anthro,ology deri0es fro) the tension *et;een t;o sets of de)ands: that ;e e(,lain hu)an uni0ersals, and that ;e e(,lain cultural ,articulars. Gi0en this tension, ;o)an ,ro0ides us ;ith one of the )ore challenging ,ro*le)s to *e dealt ;ith. The secondary status of ;o)an in society is one of the true uni0ersals, a ,an+cultural fact. 4et ;ithin that uni0ersal fact, the s,ecific cultural conce,tions and sy)*oliIations of ;o)an are e(traordinarily di0erse and e0en )utually contradictory. -urther, the actual treat)ent of ;o)en and their relati0e ,o;er and contri*ution 0ary enor)ously fro) culture to culture, and o0er different ,eriods in the history of ,articular cultural traditions. Both of these ,ointsthe uni0ersal fact and the cultural 0ariationconstitute ,ro*le)s to *e e(,lained. My interest in the ,ro*le) is of course )ore than acade)ic: 9 ;ish to see genuine change co)e a*out, the e)ergence of a social and cultural order in ;hich as )uch of the range of hu)an ,otential is o,en to ;o)en as is o,en to )en. The uni0ersality of fe)ale su*ordination, the fact that it e(ists ;ithin e0ery ty,e of social and econo)ic arrange)ent and in societies of e0ery degree of co),le(ity, indicates to )e that ;e are u, against so)ething 0ery ,rofound, 0ery stu**orn, so)ething ;e cannot rout out si),ly *y rearranging a fe; tasks and roles in the social syste), or e0en *y reordering the ;hole econo)ic structure. 9n this ,a,er 9 try to e(,ose the underlying logic of cultural thinking that assu)es the inferiority of ;o)enC 9 try to ,age1'. Page '' sho; the highly ,ersuasi0e nature of the logic, for if it ;ere not so ,ersuasi0e, ,eo,le ;ould not kee, su*scri*ing to it. But 9 also try to sho; the social and cultural sources of that logic, to indicate ;herein lies the ,otential for change. 9t is i),ortant to sort out the le0els of the ,ro*le). The confusion can *e staggering. -or e(a),le, de,ending on ;hich as,ect of Chinese culture ;e look at, ;e )ight e(tra,olate any of se0eral entirely different guesses concerning the status of ;o)en in China. 9n the ideology of Taois), yin, the fe)ale ,rinci,le, and yang, the )ale ,rinci,le, are gi0en eHual ;eightC ?the o,,osition, alternation, and interaction of these t;o forces gi0e rise to all ,heno)ena in the uni0erse? :Siu .%# : '=. 5ence ;e )ight guess that )aleness and fe)aleness are eHually 0alued in the general ideology of Chinese culture. . 3ooking at the social structure, ho;e0er, ;e see the strongly e),hasiIed ,atrilineal descent ,rinci,le, the i),ortance of sons, and the a*solute authority of the father in the fa)ily. Thus ;e )ight conclude that China is the archety,al ,atriarchal society. /e(t, looking at the actual roles ,layed, ,o;er and influence ;ielded, and )aterial contri*utions )ade *y ;o)en in Chinese societyall of ;hich are, u,on o*ser0ation, Huite su*stantial;e ;ould ha0e to say that ;o)en are allotted a great deal of :uns,oken= status in the syste). Or again, ;e )ight focus on the fact that a goddess, Puan 4in, is the central :)ost ;orshi,ed, )ost de,icted= deity in Chinese Buddhis), and ;e )ight *e te),ted to say, as )any ha0e tried to say a*out goddess+ ;orshi,ing cultures in ,rehistoric and early historical societies, that China is actually a sort of )atriarchy. 9n short, ;e )ust *e a*solutely clear a*out !hat ;e are trying to e(,lain *efore e(,laining it.

<e )ay differentiate three le0els of the ,ro*le): .. The uni0ersal fact of culturally attri*uted second+class status of ;o)an in e0ery society. T;o Huestions are i),ortant here. -irst, ;hat do ;e )ean *y thisC ;hat is our e0idence that this is a uni0ersal fact@ 2nd second, ho; are ;e to e(,lain this fact, once ha0ing esta*lished it@ '. S,ecific ideologies, sy)*oliIations, and socio+structural arrange)ents ,ertaining to ;o)en that 0ary ;idely fro) culture to culture. The ,ro*le) at this le0el is to account for any ,articular cultural co),le( in ter)s of factors s,ecific to that grou,the standard le0el of anthro,ological analysis. $. O*ser0a*le on+the+ground details of ;o)enEs acti0ities, contri*utions, ,o;ers, influence, etc., often at 0ariance ;ith cultural ideology :although al;ays constrained ;ithin the assu),tion that ;o)en )ay ne0er ,age1'' Page '$ *e officially ,ree)inent in the total syste)=. This is the le0el of direct o*ser0ation, often ado,ted no; *y fe)inist+oriented anthro,ologists. This ,a,er is ,ri)arily concerned ;ith the first of these le0els, the ,ro*le) of the uni0ersal de0aluation of ;o)en. The analysis thus de,ends not u,on s,ecific cultural data *ut rather u,on an analysis of ?culture? taken generically as a s,ecial sort of ,rocess in the ;orld. 2 discussion of the second le0el, the ,ro*le) of cross+cultural 0ariation in conce,tions and relati0e 0aluations of ;o)en, ;ill entail a great deal of cross+ cultural research and )ust *e ,ost,oned to another ti)e. 2s for the third le0el, it ;ill *e o*0ious fro) )y a,,roach that 9 ;ould consider it a )isguided endea0or to focus only u,on ;o)enEs actual though culturally unrecogniIed and un0alued ,o;ers in any gi0en society, ;ithout first understanding the o0erarching ideology and dee,er assu),tions of the culture that render such ,o;ers tri0ial. The 6ni0ersality of -e)ale Su*ordination <hat do 9 )ean ;hen 9 say that e0ery;here, in e0ery kno;n culture, ;o)en are considered in so)e degree inferior to )en@ -irst of all, 9 )ust stress that 9 a) talking a*out cultural e0aluationsC 9 a) saying that each culture, in its o;n ;ay and on its o;n ter)s, )akes this e0aluation. But ;hat ;ould constitute e0idence that a ,articular culture considers ;o)en inferior@ Three ty,es of data ;ould suffice: :.= ele)ents of cultural ideology and infor)antsE state)ents that explicitly de0alue ;o)en, granting the), their roles, their tasks, their ,roducts, and their social )ilieu( less ,restige than are granted to )en and the )ale correlatesC :'= sy)*olic de0ices, such as the attri*ution of defile)ent, ;hich )ay *e inter,reted as implicitly )aking a state)ent of inferior 0aluationC and :$= social+ structural arrange)ents that e(clude ;o)en fro) ,artici,ation in or contact ;ith so)e real) in ;hich the highest ,o;ers of the society are felt to reside. ' These three ty,es of data )ay all of course *e interrelated in any ,articular syste), though they need not necessarily *e. -urther, any one of the) ;ill usually *e sufficient to )ake the ,oint of fe)ale inferiority in a gi0en culture. Certainly, fe)ale e(clusion fro) the )ost sacred rite or the highest ,olitical council is sufficient e0idence. Certainly, e(,licit cultural ideology de0aluing ;o)en :and their tasks, roles, ,roducts, etc.= is sufficient e0idence. Sy)*olic indicat ors such as defile)ent are usually sufficient, although in a fe; cases in ;hich, say, )en and ;o)en are eHually ,olluting to one another, a further indi+ ,age1'$ Page '" cator is reHuiredand is, as far as )y in0estigations ha0e ascertained, al;ays a0aila*le. On any or all of these counts, then, 9 ;ould flatly assert that ;e find ;o)en su*ordinated to )en in e0ery kno;n society. The search for a genuinely egalitarian, let alone )atriarchal, culture has ,ro0ed fruitless. 2n e(a),le fro) one society that has traditionally *een on the credit side of this ledger ;ill suffice. 2)ong the )atrilineal Cro;, as 3o;ie :.%&#= ,oints out, ?<o)en . . . had highly honorific offices in the Sun 8anceC they could *eco)e directors of the To*acco Cere)ony and ,layed, if anything, a )ore cons,icuous ,art in it than the )enC they so)eti)es ,layed the hostess in the Cooked Meat -esti0alC they ;ere not de*arred fro) s;eating or doctoring or fro) seeking a 0ision? :,. #.=. /onetheless, ?<o)en Lduring )enstruationM for)erly rode inferior horses and e0idently this loo)ed as a source of conta)ination, for they ;ere not allo;ed to a,,roach either a ;ounded )an or )en starting on a ;ar ,arty. 2 ta*oo still lingers against their

co)ing near sacred o*Jects at these ti)es? :,. ""=. -urther, Just *efore enu)erating ;o)enEs rights of ,artici,ation in the 0arious rituals noted a*o0e, 3o;ie )entions one ,articular Sun 8ance 8oll *undle that ;as not su,,osed to *e un;ra,,ed *y a ;o)an :,. #0=. Pursuing this trail ;e find: ?2ccording to all 3odge Grass infor)ants and )ost others, the doll o;ned *y <rinkled+face took ,recedence not only of other dolls *ut of all other Cro; )edicines ;hatsoe0er. . . . This ,articular doll ;as not su,,osed to *e handled *y a ;o)an? :,. ''%=. $ 9n su), the Cro; are ,ro*a*ly a fairly ty,ical case. 4es, ;o)en ha0e certain ,o;ers and rights, in this case so)e that ,lace the) in fairly high ,ositions. 4et ulti)ately the line is dra;n: )enstruation is a threat to ;arfare, one of the )ost 0alued institutions of the tri*e, one that is central to their self+definitionC and the )ost sacred o*Ject of the tri*e is ta*oo to the direct sight and touch of ;o)en. Si)ilar e(a),les could *e )ulti,lied ad infinitu), *ut 9 think the onus is no longer u,on us to de)onstrate that fe)ale su*ordination is a cultural uni0ersalC it is u, to those ;ho ;ould argue against the ,oint to *ring forth countere(a),les. 9 shall take the uni0ersal secondary status of ;o)en as a gi0en, and ,roceed fro) there. /ature and Culture" 5o; are ;e to e(,lain the uni0ersal de0aluation of ;o)en@ <e could of course rest the case on *iological deter)inis). There is so)ething geneti+ ,age1'" Page '& cally inherent in the )ale of the s,ecies, so the *iological deter)inists ;ould argue, that )akes the) the naturally do)inant se(C that ?so)ething? is lacking in fe)ales, and as a result ;o)en are not only naturally su*ordinate *ut in general Huite satisfied ;ith their ,osition, since it affords the) ,rotection and the o,,ortunity to )a(i)iIe )aternal ,leasures, ;hich to the) are the )ost satisfying e(,eriences of life. <ithout going into a detailed refutation of this ,osition, 9 think it fair to say that it has failed to *e esta*lished to the satisfaction of al)ost anyone in acade)ic anthro,ology. This is to say, not that *iological facts are irrele0ant, or that )en and ;o)en are not different, *ut that these facts and differences only take on significance of su,eriorGinferior ;ithin the fra)e;ork of culturally defined 0alue syste)s. 9f ;e are un;illing to rest the case on genetic deter)inis), it see)s to )e that ;e ha0e only one ;ay to ,roceed. <e )ust atte),t to inter,ret fe)ale su*ordination in light of other uni0ersals, factors *uilt into the structure of the )ost generaliIed situation in ;hich all hu)an *eings, in ;hate0er culture, find the)sel0es. -or e(a),le, e0ery hu)an *eing has a ,hysical *ody and a sense of non,hysical )ind, is ,art of a society of other indi0iduals and an inheritor of a cultural tradition, and )ust engage in so)e relationshi,, ho;e0er )ediated, ;ith ?nature,? or the nonhu)an real), in order to sur0i0e. E0ery hu)an *eing is *orn :to a )other= and ulti)ately dies, all are assu)ed to ha0e an interest in ,ersonal sur0i0al, and societyGculture has its o;n interest in :or at least )o)entu) to;ard= continuity and sur0i0al, ;hich transcends the li0es and deaths of ,articular indi0iduals. 2nd so forth. 9t is in the real) of such uni0ersals of the hu)an condition that ;e )ust seek an e(,lanation for the uni0ersal fact of fe)ale de0aluation. 9 translate the ,ro*le), in other ;ords, into the follo;ing si),le Huestion. <hat could there *e in the generaliIed structure and conditions of e(istence, co))on to e0ery culture, that ;ould lead e0ery culture to ,lace a lo;er 0alue u,on ;o)en@ S,ecifically, )y thesis is that ;o)an is *eing identified ;ithor, if you ;ill, see)s to *e a sy)*ol ofso)ething that e0ery culture de0alues, so)ething that e0ery culture defines as *eing of a lo;er order of e(istence than itself. /o; it see)s that there is only one thing that ;ould fit that descri,tion, and that is ?nature? in the )ost generaliIed sense. E0ery culture, or, generically, ?culture,? is engaged in the ,rocess of generating and sustaining syste)s of )eaningful for)s :sy)*ols, artifacts, etc.= *y )eans of ;hich hu)anity transcends the gi0ens of natural e(istence, *ends the) to its ,ur,oses, controls the) in its interest. <e )ay thus ,age1'& Page '# *roadly eHuate culture ;ith the notion of hu)an consciousness, or ;ith the ,roducts of hu)an consciousness :i.e., syste)s of thought and technology=, *y )eans of ;hich hu)anity atte),ts to assert control o0er nature.

/o; the categories of ?nature? and ?culture? are of course conce,tual categoriesone can find no *oundary out in the actual ;orld *et;een the t;o states or real)s of *eing. 2nd there is no Huestion that so)e cultures articulate a )uch stronger o,,osition *et;een the t;o categories than othersit has e0en *een argued that ,ri)iti0e ,eo,les :so)e or all= do not see or intuit any distinction *et;een the hu)an cultural state and the state of nature at all. 4et 9 ;ould )aintain that the uni0ersality of ritual *etokens an assertion in all hu)an cultures of the s,ecifically hu)an a*ility to act u,on and regulate, rather than ,assi0ely )o0e ;ith and *e )o0ed *y, the gi0ens of natural e(istence. 9n ritual, the ,ur,osi0e )ani,ulation of gi0en for)s to;ard regulating and sustaining order, e0ery culture asserts that ,ro,er relations *et;een hu)an e(istence and natural forces de,end u,on cultureEs e),loying its s,ecial ,o;ers to regulate the o0erall ,rocesses of the ;orld and life. One real) of cultural thought in ;hich these ,oints are often articulated is that of conce,ts of ,urity and ,ollution. Dirtually e0ery culture has so)e such *eliefs, ;hich see) in large ,art :though not, of course, entirely= to *e concerned ;ith the relationshi, *et;een culture and nature :see Ortner .%!$a, .%!"=. 2 ;ell+kno;n as,ect of ,urityG,ollution *eliefs cross+culturally is that of the natural ?contagion? of ,ollutionC left to its o;n de0ices, ,ollution :for these ,ur,oses grossly eHuated ;ith the unregulated o,eration of natural energies= s,reads and o0er,o;ers all that it co)es in contact ;ith. Thus a ,uIIleif ,ollution is so strong, ho; can anything *e ,urified@ <hy is the ,urifying agent not itself ,olluted@ The ans;er, in kee,ing ;ith the ,resent line of argu)ent, is that ,urification is effected in a ritual conte(tC ,urification ritual, as a ,ur,osi0e acti0ity that ,its self+conscious :sy)*olic= action against natural energies, is )ore ,o;erful than those energies. 9n any case, )y ,oint is si),ly that e0ery culture i),licitly recogniIes and asserts a distinction *et;een the o,eration of nature and the o,eration of culture :hu)an consciousness and its ,roducts=C and further, that the distincti0eness of culture rests ,recisely on the fact that it can under )ost circu)stances transcend natural conditions and turn the) to its ,ur,oses. Thus culture :i.e., e0ery culture= at so)e le0el of a;areness asserts itself to *e not only distinct fro) *ut su,erior to nature, and that sense of distinc+ ,age1'# Page '! ti0eness and su,eriority rests ,recisely on the a*ility to transfor)to ?socialiIe? and ?culturaliIe?nature. 7eturning no; to the issue of ;o)en, their ,an+cultural second+class status could *e accounted for, Huite si),ly, *y ,ostulating that ;o)en are *eing identified or sy)*olically associated ;ith nature, as o,,osed to )en, ;ho are identified ;ith culture. Since it is al;ays cultureEs ,roJect to su*su)e and transcend nature, if ;o)en ;ere considered ,art of nature, then culture ;ould find it ?natural? to su*ordinate, not to say o,,ress, the). 4et although this argu)ent can *e sho;n to ha0e considera*le force, it see)s to o0ersi),lify the case. The for)ulation 9 ;ould like to defend and ela*orate on in the follo;ing section, then, is that ;o)en are seen ?)erely? as *eing closer to nature than )en. That is, culture :still eHuated relati0ely una)*iguously ;ith )en= recogniIes that ;o)en are acti0e ,artici,ants in its s,ecial ,rocesses, *ut at the sa)e ti)e sees the) as *eing )ore rooted in, or ha0ing )ore direct affinity ;ith, nature. The re0ision )ay see) )inor or e0en tri0ial, *ut 9 think it is a )ore accurate rendering of cultural assu),tions. -urther, the argu)ent cast in these ter)s has se0eral analytic ad0antages o0er the si),ler for)ulationC 9 shall discuss these later. 9t )ight si),ly *e stressed here that the re0ised argu)ent ;ould still account for the ,an+cultural de0aluation of ;o)en, for e0en if ;o)en are not eHuated ;ith nature, they are nonetheless seen as re,resenting a lo;er order of *eing, as *eing less transcendent of nature than )en are. The ne(t task of the ,a,er, then, is to consider ;hy they )ight *e 0ie;ed in that ;ay. <hy 9s <o)an Seen 2s Closer to /ature@ 9t all *egins of course ;ith the *ody and the natural ,rocreati0e functions s,ecific to ;o)en alone. <e can sort out for discussion three le0els at ;hich this a*solute ,hysiological fact has significance: :.= ;o)anEs 'ody and its functions, )ore in0ol0ed )ore of the ti)e ;ith ?s,ecies life,? see) to ,lace her closer to nature, in contrast to )anEs ,hysiology, ;hich frees hi) )ore co),letely to take u, the ,roJects of cultureC :'= ;o)anEs *ody and its functions ,lace her in social roles that in turn are considered to *e at a lo;er order of the cultural ,rocess than )anEsC and :$= ;o)anEs traditional social roles, i),osed *ecause of her *ody and its functions, in turn gi0e her a different psychic structure, ;hich, like her ,hysiological nature and her social roles, is seen as *eing closer to nature. 9 shall discuss each of these ,oints in turn, sho;ing first ho; in each instance certain factors strongly tend to ,age1'!

Page ' align ;o)an ;ith nature, then indicating other factors that de)onstrate her full align)ent ;ith culture, the co)*ined factors thus ,lacing her in a ,ro*le)atic inter)ediate ,osition. 9t ;ill *eco)e clear in the course of the discussion ;hy )en see) *y contrast less inter)ediate, )ore ,urely ?cultural? than ;o)en. 2nd 9 reiterate that 9 a) dealing only at the le0el of cultural and hu)an uni0ersals. These argu)ents are intended to a,,ly to generaliIed hu)anityC they gro; out of the hu)an condition, as hu)anity has e(,erienced and confronted it u, to the ,resent day. 5 #oman4s Physiology Seen As Closer to 0ature This ,art of )y argu)ent has *een antici,ated, ;ith su*tlety, cogency, and a great deal of hard data, *y de Beau0oir :.%&$=. 8e Beau0oir re0ie;s the ,hysiological structure, de0elo,)ent, and functions of the hu)an fe)ale and concludes that ?the fe)ale, to a greater e(tent than the )ale, is the ,rey of the s,ecies? :,. #0=. She ,oints out that )any )aJor areas and ,rocesses of the ;o)anEs *ody ser0e no a,,arent function for the health and sta*ility of the indi0idualC on the contrary, as they ,erfor) their s,ecific organic functions, they are often sources of disco)fort, ,ain, and danger. The *reasts are irrele0ant to ,ersonal healthC they )ay *e e(cised at any ti)e of a ;o)anEs life. ?Many of the o0arian secretions function for the *enefit of the egg, ,ro)oting its )aturation and ada,ting the uterus to its reHuire)entsC in res,ect to the organis) as a ;hole, they )ake for diseHuili*riu) rather than for regulationthe ;o)an is ada,ted to the needs of the egg rather than to her o;n reHuire)ents? :,. '"=. Menstruation is often unco)forta*le, so)eti)es ,ainfulC it freHuently has negati0e e)otional correlates and in any case in0ol0es *otherso)e tasks of cleansing and ;aste dis,osalC anda ,oint that de Beau0oir does not )entionin )any cultures it interru,ts a ;o)anEs routine, ,utting her in a stig)atiIed state in0ol0ing 0arious restrictions on her acti0ities and social contacts. 9n ,regnancy )any of the ;o)anEs 0ita)in and )ineral resources are channeled into nourishing the fetus, de,leting her o;n strength and energies. 2nd finally, child*irth itself is ,ainful and dangerous :,,. '"'! ,assi)=. 9n su), de Beau0oir concludes that the fe)ale ?is )ore ensla0ed to the s,ecies than the )ale, her ani)ality is )ore )anifest? :,. '$%=. <hile de Beau0oirEs *ook is ideological, her sur0ey of ;o)anEs ,hysiological situation see)s fair and accurate. 9t is si),ly a fact that ,ro,ortionately )ore of ;o)anEs *ody s,ace, for a greater ,ercentage of her lifeti)e, and at so)eso)eti)es greatcost to her ,ersonal health, strength, and

,age1' Page '% general sta*ility, is taken u, ;ith the natural ,rocesses surrounding the re,roduction of the s,ecies. 8e Beau0oir goes on to discuss the negati0e i),lications of ;o)anEs ?ensla0e)ent to the s,ecies? in relation to the ,roJects in ;hich hu)ans engage, ,roJects through ;hich culture is generated and defined. She arri0es thus at the cru( of her argu)ent :,,. & &%=: 5ere ;e ha0e the key to the ;hole )ystery. On the *iological le0el a s,ecies is )aintained only *y creating itself ane;C *ut this creation results only in re,eating the sa)e 3ife in )ore indi0iduals. But )an assures the re,etition of 3ife ;hile transcending 3ife through E(istence Li.e., goal+oriented, )eaningful actionMC *y this transcendence he creates 0alues that de,ri0e ,ure re,etition of all 0alue. 9n the ani)al, the freedo) and 0ariety of )ale acti0ities are 0ain *ecause no ,roJect is in0ol0ed. E(ce,t for his ser0ices to the s,ecies, ;hat he does is i))aterial. <hereas in ser0ing the s,ecies, the hu)an )ale also re)odels the face of the earth, he creates ne; instru)ents, he in0ents, he sha,es the future. 9n other ;ords, ;o)anEs *ody see)s to doo) her to )ere re,roduction of lifeC the )ale, in contrast, lacking natural creati0e functions, )ust :or has the o,,ortunity to= assert his creati0ity e(ternally, ?artificially,? through the )ediu) of technology and sy)*ols. 9n so doing, he creates relati0ely lasting, eternal, transcendent o*Jects, ;hile the ;o)an creates only ,erisha*leshu)an *eings. This for)ulation o,ens u, a nu)*er of i),ortant insights. 9t s,eaks, for e(a),le, to the great ,uIIle of ;hy )ale acti0ities in0ol0ing the destruction of life :hunting and ;arfare= are often gi0en )ore ,restige than the fe)aleEs a*ility to gi0e *irth, to create life. <ithin de Beau0oirEs fra)e;ork, ;e realiIe it is not the killing that is the rele0ant and 0alued as,ect of hunting and ;arfareC rather, it is the transcendental :social, cultural= nature of these acti0ities, as o,,osed to the naturalness of the ,rocess of *irth: ?-or it is not in gi0ing life *ut in risking life that )an is raised a*o0e the ani)alC that is ;hy su,eriority has *een accorded in hu)anity not to the se( that *rings forth *ut to that ;hich kills? :i*id.=. Thus if )ale is, as 9 a) suggesting, e0ery;here :unconsciously= associated ;ith culture and fe)ale see)s closer to nature, the rationale for these associations is not 0ery difficult to gras,, )erely fro) considering the i),lications of the ,hysiological contrast *et;een )ale and fe)ale. 2t the sa)e ti)e, ho;e0er, ;o)an cannot *e consigned fully to the category of ,age1'% Page $0 nature, for it is ,erfectly o*0ious that she is a full+fledged hu)an *eing endo;ed ;ith hu)an consciousness Just as a )an isC she is half of the hu)an race, ;ithout ;hose coo,eration the ;hole enter,rise ;ould colla,se. She )ay see) )ore in the ,ossession of nature than )an, *ut ha0ing consciousness, she thinks and s,eaksC she generates, co))unicates, and )ani,ulates sy)*ols, categories, and 0alues. She ,artici,ates in hu)an dialogues not only ;ith other ;o)en *ut also ;ith )en. 2s 3K0i+Strauss says, EE<o)an could ne0er *eco)e Just a sign and nothing )ore, since e0en in a )anEs ;orld she is still a ,erson, and since insofar as she is defined as a sign she )ust LstillM *e recogniIed as a generator of signs? :.%#%a:"%#=. 9ndeed, the fact of ;o)anEs full hu)an consciousness, her full in0ol0e)ent in and co))it)ent to cultureEs ,roJect of transcendence o0er nature, )ay ironically e(,lain another of the great ,uIIles of ?the ;o)an ,ro*le)?;o)anEs nearly uni0ersal unHuestioning acce,tance of her o;n de0aluation. -or it ;ould see) that, as a conscious hu)an and )e)*er of culture, she has follo;ed out the logic of cultureEs argu)ents and has reached cultureEs conclusions along ;ith the )en. 2s de Beau0oir ,uts it :,. &%=: -or she, too, is an e(istent, she feels the urge to sur,ass, and her ,roJect is not )ere re,etition *ut transcendence to;ards a different futurein her heart of hearts she finds confir)ation of the )asculine ,retensions. She Joins the )en in the festi0als that cele*rate the successes and 0ictories of the )ales. 5er )isfortune is to ha0e *een *iologically destined for the re,etition of 3ife, ;hen e0en in her o;n 0ie; 3ife does not carry ;ithin itself its reasons for *eing, reasons that are )ore i),ortant than life itself. 9n other ;ords, ;o)anEs consciousnessher )e)*ershi,, as it ;ere, in cultureis e0idenced in ,art *y the 0ery fact that she acce,ts her o;n de0aluation and takes cultureEs ,oint of 0ie;.

9 ha0e tried here to sho; one ,art of the logic of that 0ie;, the ,art that gro;s directly fro) the ,hysiological differences *et;een )en and ;o)en. Because of ;o)anEs greater *odily in0ol0e)ent ;ith the natural functions surrounding re,roduction, she is seen as )ore a ,art of nature than )an is. 4et in ,art *ecause of her consciousness and ,artici,ation in hu)an social dialogue, she is recogniIed as a ,artici,ant in culture. Thus she a,,ears as so)ething inter)ediate *et;een culture and nature, lo;er on the scale of transcendence than )an. ,age1$0 Page $. 6 #oman4s Social Role Seen As Closer to 0ature <o)anEs ,hysiological functions, 9 ha0e Just argued, )ay tend in the)sel0es to )oti0ate & a 0ie; of ;o)an as closer to nature, a 0ie; she herself, as an o*ser0er of herself and the ;orld, ;ould tend to agree ;ith. <o)an creates naturally fro) ;ithin her o;n *eing, ;hereas )an is free to, or forced to, create artificially, that is, through cultural )eans, and in such a ;ay as to sustain culture. 9n addition, 9 no; ;ish to sho; ho; ;o)anEs ,hysiological functions ha0e tended uni0ersally to li)it her social )o0e)ent, and to confine her uni0ersally to certain social conte(ts ;hich in turn are seen as closer to nature. That is, not only her *odily ,rocesses *ut the social situation in ;hich her *odily ,rocesses locate her )ay carry this significance. 2nd insofar as she is ,er)anently associated :in the eyes of culture= ;ith these social )ilieu(, they add ;eight :,erha,s the decisi0e ,art of the *urden= to the 0ie; of ;o)an as closer to nature. 9 refer here of course to ;o)anEs confine)ent to the do)estic fa)ily conte(t, a confine)ent )oti0ated, no dou*t, *y her lactation ,rocesses. <o)anEs *ody, like that of all fe)ale )a))als, generates )ilk during and after ,regnancy for the feeding of the ne;*orn *a*y. The *a*y cannot sur0i0e ;ithout *reast )ilk or so)e si)ilar for)ula at this stage of life. Since the )otherEs *ody goes through its lactation ,rocesses in direct relation to a ,regnancy ;ith a ,articular child, the relationshi, of nursing *et;een )other and child is seen as a natural *ond, other feeding arrange)ents *eing seen in )ost cases as unnatural and )akeshift. Mothers and their children, according to cultural reasoning, *elong together. -urther, children *eyond infancy are not strong enough to engage in )aJor ;ork, yet are )o*ile and unruly and not ca,a*le of understanding 0arious dangersC they thus reHuire su,er0ision and constant care. Mother is the o*0ious ,erson for this task, as an e(tension of her natural nursing *ond ;ith the children, or *ecause she has a ne; infant and is already in0ol0ed ;ith child+oriented acti0ities. 5er o;n acti0ities are thus circu)scri*ed *y the li)itations and lo; le0els of her childrenEs strengths and skills:# she is confined to the do)estic fa)ily grou,C ?;o)anEs ,lace is in the ho)e.? <o)anEs association ;ith the do)estic circle ;ould contri*ute to the 0ie; of her as closer to nature in se0eral ;ays. 9n the first ,lace, the sheer fact of constant association ;ith children ,lays a role in the issueC one can easily see ho; infants and children )ight the)sel0es *e considered ,art of nature. 9nfants are *arely hu)an and utterly unsocialiIedC like ani)als they ,age1$. Page $' are una*le to ;alk u,right, they e(crete ;ithout control, they do not s,eak. E0en slightly older children are clearly not yet fully under the s;ay of culture. They do not yet understand social duties, res,onsi*ilities, and )oralsC their 0oca*ulary and their range of learned skills are s)all. One finds i),licit recognition of an association *et;een children and nature in )any cultural ,ractices. -or e(a),le, )ost cultures ha0e initiation rites for adolescents :,ri)arily for *oysC 9 shall return to this ,oint *elo;=, the ,oint of ;hich is to )o0e the child ritually fro) a less than fully hu)an state into full ,artici,ation in society and cultureC )any cultures do not hold funeral rites for children ;ho die at early ages, e(,licitly *ecause they are not yet fully social *eings. Thus children are likely to *e categoriIed ;ith nature, and ;o)anEs close association ;ith children )ay co),ound her ,otential for *eing seen as closer to nature herself. 9t is ironic that the rationale for *oysE initiation rites in )any cultures is that the *oys )ust *e ,urged of the defile)ent accrued fro) *eing around )other and other ;o)en so )uch of the ti)e, ;hen in fact )uch of the ;o)anEs defile)ent )ay deri0e fro) her *eing around children so )uch of the ti)e. The second )aJor ,ro*le)atic i),lication of ;o)enEs close association ;ith the do)estic conte(t deri0es fro) certain structural conflicts *et;een the fa)ily and society at large in any social syste). The i),lications of the ?do)esticG,u*lic o,,osition? in relation to the ,osition of ;o)en ha0e *een cogently de0elo,ed *y 7osaldo :.%!"=, and 9 si),ly ;ish to sho; its rele0ance to the ,resent argu)ent. The notion

that the do)estic unitthe *iological fa)ily charged ;ith re,roducing and socialiIing ne; )e)*ers of the societyis o,,osed to the ,u*lic entitythe su,eri),osed net;ork of alliances and relationshi,s that is the societyis also the *asis of 3K0i+StraussEs argu)ent in The *lementary Structures of 7inship :.%#%a=. 3K0i+Strauss argues not only that this o,,osition is ,resent in e0ery social syste), *ut further that it has the significance of the o,,osition *et;een nature and culture. The uni0ersal incest ,rohi*ition ! and its ally, the rule of e(oga)y :)arriage outside the grou,=, ensure that ?the risk of seeing a *iological fa)ily *eco)e esta*lished as a closed syste) is definitely eli)inatedC the *iological grou, can no longer stand a,art, and the *ond of alliance ;ith another fa)ily ensures the do)inance of the social o0er the *iological, and of the cultural o0er the natural? :,. "!%=. 2nd although not e0ery culture articulates a radical o,,osition *et;een the do)estic and the ,u*lic as such, it is hardly contesta*le that the do)estic is al;ays su*su)ed *y the ,u*licC do)estic units are allied ;ith one another through the enact+ ,age1$' Page $$ )ent of rules that are logically at a higher le0el than the units the)sel0esC this creates an e)ergent unitsocietythat is logically at a higher le0el than the do)estic units of ;hich it is co),osed. /o;, since ;o)en are associated ;ith, and indeed are )ore or less confined to, the do)estic conte(t, they are identified ;ith this lo;er order of socialGcultural organiIation. <hat are the i),lications of this for the ;ay they are 0ie;ed@ -irst, if the s,ecifically *iological :re,roducti0e= function of the fa)ily is stressed, as in 3K0i+StraussEs for)ulation, then the fa)ily :and hence ;o)an= is identified ;ith nature ,ure and si),le, as o,,osed to culture. But this is o*0iously too si),leC the ,oint see)s )ore adeHuately for)ulated as follo;s: the fa)ily :and hence ;o)an= re,resents lo;er+le0el, socially frag)enting, ,articularistic sorts of concerns, as o,,osed to interfa)ilial relations re,resenting higher+le0el, integrati0e, uni0ersalistic sorts of concerns. Since )en lack a ?natural? *asis :nursing, generaliIed to child care= for a fa)iliar orientation, their s,here of acti0ity is defined at the le0el of interfa)ilial relations. 2nd hence, so the cultural reasoning see)s to go, )en are the ?natural? ,ro,rietors of religion, ritual, ,olitics, and other real)s of cultural thought and action in ;hich uni0ersalistic state)ents of s,iritual and social synthesis are )ade. Thus )en are identified not only ;ith culture, in the sense of all hu)an creati0ity, as o,,osed to natureC they are identified in ,articular ;ith culture in the old+fashioned sense of the finer and higher as,ects of hu)an thoughtart, religion, la;, etc. 5ere again, the logic of cultural reasoning aligning ;o)an ;ith a lo;er order of culture than )an is clear and, on the surface, Huite co),elling. 2t the sa)e ti)e, ;o)an cannot *e fully consigned to nature, for there are as,ects of her situation, e0en ;ithin the do)estic conte(t, that undenia*ly de)onstrate her ,artici,ation in the cultural ,rocess. 9t goes ;ithout saying, of course, that e(ce,t for nursing ne;*orn infants :and artificial nursing de0ices can cut e0en this *iological tie=, there is no reason ;hy it has to *e )otheras o,,osed to father, or anyone else;ho re)ains identified ;ith child care. But e0en assu)ing that other ,ractical and e)otional reasons cons,ire to kee, ;o)an in this s,here, it is ,ossi*le to sho; that her acti0ities in the do)estic conte(t could as logically ,ut her sHuarely in the category of culture. 9n the first ,lace, one )ust ,oint out that ;o)an not only feeds and cleans u, after children in a si),le caretaker o,erationC she in fact is the ,ri)ary agent of their early socialiIation. 9t is she ;ho transfor)s ne;*orn in+ ,age1$$ Page $" fants fro) )ere organis)s into cultured hu)ans, teaching the) )anners and the ,ro,er ;ays to *eha0e in order to *eco)e full+fledged )e)*ers of the culture. On the *asis of her socialiIing functions alone, she could not *e )ore a re,resentati0e of culture. 4et in 0irtually e0ery society there is a ,oint at ;hich the socialiIation of *oys in transferred to the hands of )en. The *oys are considered, in one set of ter)s or another, not yet ?really? socialiIedC their entrKe into the real) of fully hu)an :social, cultural= status can *e acco),lished only *y )en. <e still see this in our o;n schools, ;here there is a gradual in0ersion in the ,ro,ortion of fe)ale to )ale teachers u, through the grades: )ost kindergarten teachers are fe)aleC )ost uni0ersity ,rofessors are )ale. Or again, take cooking. 9n the o0er;hel)ing )aJority of societies cooking is the ;o)anEs ;ork. /o dou*t this ste)s fro) ,ractical considerationssince the ;o)an has to stay ho)e ;ith the *a*y, it is con0enient for her to ,erfor) the chores centered in the ho)e. But if it is true, as 3K0i+Strauss has argued :.%#%*=, that transfor)ing the ra; into the cooked )ay re,resent, in )any syste)s of thought, the transition fro) nature

to culture, then here ;e ha0e ;o)an aligned ;ith this i),ortant culturaliIing ,rocess, ;hich could easily ,lace her in the category of culture, triu),hing o0er nature. 4et it is also interesting to note that ;hen a culture :e.g., -rance or China= de0elo,s a tradition of haute cuisine?real? cooking, as o,,osed to tri0ial ordinary do)estic cookingthe high chefs are al)ost al;ays )en. Thus the ,attern re,licates that in the area of socialiIation;o)en ,erfor) lo;er+le0el con0ersions fro) nature to culture, *ut ;hen the culture distinguishes a higher le0el of the sa)e functions, the higher le0el is restricted to )en. 9n short, ;e see once again so)e sources of ;o)anEs a,,earing )ore inter)ediate than )an ;ith res,ect to the natureGculture dichoto)y. 5er ?natural? association ;ith the do)estic conte(t :)oti0ated *y her natural lactation functions= tends to co),ound her ,otential for *eing 0ie;ed as closer to nature, *ecause of the ani)al+like nature of children, and *ecause of the infrasocial connotation of the do)estic grou, as against the rest of society. 4et at the sa)e ti)e her socialiIing and cooking functions ;ithin the do)estic conte(t sho; her to *e a ,o;erful agent of the cultural ,rocess, constantly transfor)ing ra; natural resources into cultural ,roducts. Belonging to culture, yet a,,earing to ha0e stronger and )ore direct connections ;ith nature, she is once again seen as situated *et;een the t;o real)s. ,age1$" Page $& 8 #oman4s Psyche Seen As Closer to 0ature The suggestion that ;o)an has not only a different *ody and a different social locus fro) )an *ut also a different ,sychic structure is )ost contro0ersial. 9 ;ill argue that she ,ro*a*ly does ha0e a different ,sychic structure, *ut 9 ;ill dra; hea0ily on Chodoro;Es ,a,er :.%!"= to esta*lish first that her ,sychic structure need not *e assu)ed to *e innateC it can *e accounted for, as Chodoro; con0incingly sho;s, *y the facts of the ,ro*a*ly uni0ersal fe)ale socialiIation e(,erience. /onetheless, if ;e grant the e),irical near uni0ersality of a ?fe)inine ,syche? ;ith certain s,ecific characteristics, these characteristics ;ould add ;eight to the cultural 0ie; of ;o)an as closer to nature. 9t is i),ortant to s,ecify ;hat ;e see as the do)inant and uni0ersal as,ects of the fe)inine ,syche. 9f ;e ,ostulate e)otionality or irrationality, ;e are confronted ;ith those traditions in 0arious ,arts of the ;orld in ;hich ;o)en functionally are, and are seen as, )ore ,ractical, ,rag)atic, and this+;orldly than )en. One rele0ant di)ension that does see) ,anculturally a,,lica*le is that of relati0e concreteness 0s. relati0e a*stractness: the fe)inine ,ersonality tends to *e in0ol0ed ;ith concrete feelings, things, and ,eo,le, rather than ;ith a*stract entitiesC it tends to;ard ,ersonalis) and ,articularis). 2 second, closely related, di)ension see)s to *e that of relati0e su*Jecti0ity 0s. relati0e o*Jecti0ity: Chodoro; cites CarlsonEs study :.%!.=, ;hich concludes that ?)ales re,resent e(,eriences of self, others, s,ace, and ti)e in indi0idualistic, o*Jecti0e, and distant ;ays, ;hile fe)ales re,resent e(,eriences in relati0ely inter,ersonal, su*Jecti0e, i))ediate ;ays? :Chodoro; .%!": &#, Huoting Carlson, ,. '!0=. 2lthough this and other studies ;ere done in <estern societies, Chodoro; sees their findings on the differences *et;een )ale and fe)ale ,ersonalityroughly, that )en are )ore o*Jecti0e and inclined to relate in ter)s of relati0ely a*stract categories, ;o)en )ore su*Jecti0e and inclined to relate in ter)s of relati0ely concrete ,heno)enaas ?general and nearly uni0ersal differences? :,. "$=. But the thrust of Chodoro;Es elegantly argued ,a,er is that these differences are not innate or genetically ,rogra))edC they arise fro) nearly uni0ersal features of fa)ily structure, na)ely that ?;o)en, uni0ersally, are largely res,onsi*le for early child care and for :at least= later fe)ale socialiIation? :,. "$= and that ?the structural situation of child rearing, reinforced *y fe)ale and )ale role training, ,roduces these differences, ;hich ,age1$& Page $# are re,licated and re,roduced in the se(ual sociology of adult life? :,. ""=. Chodoro; argues that, *ecause )other is the early socialiIer of *oth *oys and girls, *oth de0elo, ?,ersonal identification? ;ith her, i.e., diffuse identification ;ith her general ,ersonality, *eha0ior traits, 0alues, and attitudes :,. &.=. 2 son, ho;e0er, )ust ulti)ately shift to a )asculine role identity, ;hich in0ol0es *uilding an identification ;ith the father. Since father is al)ost al;ays )ore re)ote than )other :he is rarely in0ol0ed in child care, and ,erha,s ;orks a;ay fro) ho)e )uch of the day=, *uilding an identification ;ith father in0ol0es a ?,ositional identification,? i.e., identification ;ith fatherEs )ale role as a collection of a*stract ele)ents, rather than a ,ersonal identification ;ith father as a real indi0idual :,. "%=. -urther, as the *oy enters the larger social ;orld, he finds it in fact organiIed around )ore a*stract and uni0ersalistic criteria :7osaldo

.%!": ' '%C Chodoro;, ,. & =, as 9 ha0e indicated in the ,re0ious sectionC thus his earlier socialiIation ,re,ares hi) for, and is reinforced *y, the ty,e of adult social e(,erience he ;ill ha0e. -or a young girl, in contrast, the ,ersonal identification ;ith )other, ;hich ;as created in early infancy, can ,ersist into the ,rocess of learning fe)ale role identity. Because )other is i))ediate and ,resent ;hen the daughter is learning role identity, learning to *e a ;o)an in0ol0es the continuity and de0elo,)ent of a girlEs relationshi, to her )other, and sustains the identification ;ith her as an indi0idualC it does not in0ol0e the learning of e(ternally defined role characteristics :Chodoro;, ,. &.=. This ,attern ,re,ares the girl for, and is fully reinforced *y, her social situation in later lifeC she ;ill *eco)e in0ol0ed in the ;orld of ;o)en, ;hich is characteriIed *y fe; for)al role differences :7osaldo, ,. '%=, and ;hich in0ol0es again, in )otherhood, ?,ersonal identification? ;ith her children. 2nd so the cycle *egins ane;. Chodoro; de)onstrates to )y satisfaction at least that the fe)inine ,ersonality, characteriIed *y ,ersonalis) and ,articularis), can *e e(,lained as ha0ing *een generated *y social+structural arrange)ents rather than *y innate *iological factors. The ,oint need not *e *ela*ored further. But insofar as the ?fe)inine ,ersonality? has *een a nearly uni0ersal fact, it can *e argued that its characteristics )ay ha0e contri*uted further to the 0ie; of ;o)en as *eing so)eho; less cultural than )en. That is, ;o)en ;ould tend to enter into relationshi,s ;ith the ;orld that culture )ight see as *eing )ore ?like nature?i))anent and e)*edded in things as gi0enthan ?like cultureEEtranscending and transfor)ing things through the su,er+ ,age1$# Page $! i),osition of a*stract categories and trans,ersonal 0alues. <o)anEs relationshi,s tend to *e, like nature, relati0ely un)ediated, )ore direct, ;hereas )an not only tends to relate in a )ore )ediated ;ay, *ut in fact ulti)ately often relates )ore consistently and strongly to the )ediating categories and for)s than to the ,ersons or o*Jects the)sel0es. 9t is thus not difficult to see ho; the fe)inine ,ersonality ;ould lend ;eight to a 0ie; of ;o)en as *eing ?closer to nature.? 4et at the sa)e ti)e, the )odes of relating characteristic of ;o)en undenia*ly ,lay a ,o;erful and i),ortant role in the cultural ,rocess. -or Just as relati0ely un)ediated relating is in so)e sense at the lo;er end of the s,ectru) of hu)an s,iritual functions, e)*edded and ,articulariIing rather than transcending and synthesiIing, yet that )ode of relating also stands at the u,,er end of that s,ectru). Consider the )other+child relationshi,. Mothers tend to *e co))itted to their children as indi0iduals, regardless of se(, age, *eauty, clan affiliation, or other categories in ;hich the child )ight ,artici,ate. /o; any relationshi, ;ith this Hualitynot Just )other and child *ut any sort of highly ,ersonal, relati0ely un)ediated co))it)ent)ay *e seen as a challenge to culture and society ?fro) *elo;,? insofar as it re,resents the frag)entary ,otential of indi0idual loyalties 0is+N+0is the solidarity of the grou,. But it )ay also *e seen as e)*odying the synthesiIing agent for culture and society EEfro) a*o0e,? in that it re,resents generaliIed hu)an 0alues a*o0e and *eyond loyalties to ,articular social categories. E0ery society )ust ha0e social categories that transcend ,ersonal loyalties, *ut e0ery society )ust also generate a sense of ulti)ate )oral unity for all its )e)*ers a*o0e and *eyond those social categories. Thus that ,sychic )ode see)ingly ty,ical of ;o)en, ;hich tends to disregard categories and to seek ?co))union? :Chodoro;, ,. &&, follo;ing Bakan .%##= directly and ,ersonally ;ith others, although it )ay a,,ear infracultural fro) one ,oint of 0ie;, is at the sa)e ti)e associated ;ith the highest le0els of the cultural ,rocess. The 9),lications of 9nter)ediacy My ,ri)ary ,ur,ose in this ,a,er has *een to atte),t to e(,lain the uni0ersal secondary status of ;o)en. 9ntellectually and ,ersonally, 9 felt strongly challenged *y this ,ro*le)C 9 felt co),elled to deal ;ith it *efore undertaking an analysis of ;o)anEs ,osition in any ,articular society. 3ocal 0aria*les of econo)y, ecology, history, ,olitical and social structure, 0alues, and ;orld 0ie;these could e(,lain 0ariations ;ithin this uni0ersal, *ut ,age1$! Page $ they could not e(,lain the uni0ersal itself. 2nd if ;e ;ere not to acce,t the ideology of *iological deter)inis), then e(,lanation, it see)ed to )e, could only ,roceed *y reference to other uni0ersals of the hu)an cultural situation. Thus the general outlines of the a,,roachalthough not of course the ,articular solution offered;ere deter)ined *y the ,ro*le) itself, and not *y any ,redilection on )y ,art for glo*al a*stract structural analysis.

9 argued that the uni0ersal de0aluation of ;o)en could *e e(,lained *y ,ostulating that ;o)en are seen as closer to nature than )en, )en *eing seen as )ore uneHui0ocally occu,ying the high ground of culture. The cultureGnature distinction is itself a ,roduct of culture, culture *eing )ini)ally defined as the transcendence, *y )eans of syste)s of thought and technology, of the natural gi0ens of e(istence. This of course is an analytic definition, *ut 9 argued that at so)e le0el e0ery culture incor,orates this notion in one for) or other, if only through the ,erfor)ance of ritual as an assertion of the hu)an a*ility to )ani,ulate those gi0ens. 9n any case, the core of the ,a,er ;as concerned ;ith sho;ing ;hy ;o)en )ight tend to *e assu)ed, o0er and o0er, in the )ost di0erse sorts of ;orld0ie;s and in cultures of e0ery degree of co),le(ity, to *e closer to nature than )en. <o)anEs ,hysiology, )ore in0ol0ed )ore of the ti)e ;ith ?s,ecies life?C ;o)anEs association ;ith the structurally su*ordinate do)estic conte(t, charged ;ith the crucial function of transfor)ing ani)al+like infants into cultured *eingsC ?;o)anEs ,syche,? a,,ro,riately )olded to )othering functions *y her o;n socialiIation and tending to;ard greater ,ersonalis) and less )ediated )odes of relatingall these factors )ake ;o)an a,,ear to *e rooted )ore directly and dee,ly in nature. 2t the sa)e ti)e, ho;e0er, her EE)e)*ershi,? and fully necessary ,artici,ation in culture are recogniIed *y culture and cannot *e denied. Thus she is seen to occu,y an inter)ediate ,osition *et;een culture and nature. This inter)ediacy has se0eral i),lications for analysis, de,ending u,on ho; it is inter,reted. -irst, of course, it ans;ers )y ,ri)ary Huestion of ;hy ;o)an is e0ery;here seen as lo;er than )an, for e0en if she is not seen as nature ,ure and si),le, she is still seen as achie0ing less transcendence of nature than )an. 5ere inter)ediate si),ly )eans ?)iddle status? on a hierarchy of *eing fro) culture to nature. Second, inter)ediate )ay ha0e the significance of ?)ediating,? i.e., ,erfor)ing so)e sort of synthesiIing or con0erting function *et;een nature and culture, here seen :*y culture= not as t;o ends of a continuu) *ut as ,age1$ Page $% t;o radically different sorts of ,rocesses in the ;orld. The do)estic unitand hence ;o)an, ;ho in 0irtually e0ery case a,,ears as its ,ri)ary re,resentati0eis one of cultureEs crucial agencies for the con0ersion of nature into culture, es,ecially ;ith reference to the socialiIation of children. 2ny cultureEs continued 0ia*ility de,ends u,on ,ro,erly socialiIed indi0iduals ;ho ;ill see the ;orld in that cultureEs ter)s and adhere )ore or less unHuestioningly to its )oral ,rece,ts. The functions of the do)estic unit )ust *e closely controlled in order to ensure this outco)eC the sta*ility of the do)estic unit as an institution )ust *e ,laced as far as ,ossi*le *eyond Huestion. :<e see so)e as,ects of the ,rotection of the integrity and sta*ility of the do)estic grou, in the ,o;erful ta*oos against incest, )atricide, ,atricide, and fratricide. %= 9nsofar as ;o)an is uni0ersally the ,ri)ary agent of early socialiIation and is seen as 0irtually the e)*odi)ent of the functions of the do)estic grou,, she ;ill tend to co)e under the hea0ier restrictions and circu)scri,tions surrounding that unit. 5er :culturally defined= inter)ediate ,osition *et;een nature and culture, here ha0ing the significance of her mediation :i.e., ,erfor)ing con0ersion functions= *et;een nature and culture, ;ould thus account not only for her lo;er status *ut for the greater restrictions ,laced u,on her acti0ities. 9n 0irtually e0ery culture her ,er)issi*le se(ual acti0ities are )ore closely circu)scri*ed than )anEs, she is offered a )uch s)aller range of role choices, and she is afforded direct access to a far )ore li)ited range of its social institutions. -urther, she is al)ost uni0ersally socialiIed to ha0e a narro;er and generally )ore conser0ati0e set of attitudes and 0ie;s than )an, and the li)ited social conte(ts of her adult life reinforce this situation. This socially engendered conser0atis) and traditionalis) of ;o)anEs thinking is another,erha,s the ;orst, certainly the )ost insidious)ode of social restriction, and ;ould clearly *e related to her traditional function of ,roducing ;ell+socialiIed )e)*ers of the grou,. -inally, ;o)anEs inter)ediate ,osition )ay ha0e the i),lication of greater sy)*olic a)*iguity :see also 7osaldo .%!"=. Shifting our i)age of the cultureGnature relationshi, once again, ;e )ay en0ision culture in this case as a s)all clearing ;ithin the forest of the larger natural syste). -ro) this ,oint of 0ie;, that ;hich is inter)ediate *et;een culture and nature is located on the continuous ,eri,hery of cultureEs clearingC and though it )ay thus a,,ear to stand *oth a*o0e and *elo; culture, it is si),ly outside and around it. <e can *egin to understand then ho; a single syste) of cultural thought can often assign to ;o)an co),letely ,olariIed and a,,arently ,age1$% Page "0 contradictory )eanings, since e(tre)es, as ;e say, )eet. That she often re,resents *oth life and death is only the si),lest e(a),le one could )ention.

-or another ,ers,ecti0e on the sa)e ,oint, it ;ill *e recalled that the ,sychic )ode associated ;ith ;o)en see)s to stand at *oth the *otto) and the to, of the scale of hu)an )odes of relating. The tendency in that )ode is to get in0ol0ed )ore directly ;ith ,eo,le as indi0iduals and not as re,resentati0es of one social category or anotherC this )ode can *e seen as either ?ignoring? :and thus su*0erting= or ?transcending? :and thus achie0ing a higher synthesis of= those social categories, de,ending u,on the cultural 0ie; for any gi0en ,ur,ose. Thus ;e can account easily for *oth the su*0ersi0e fe)inine sy)*ols :;itches, e0il eye, )enstrual ,ollution, castrating )others= and the fe)inine sy)*ols of transcendence :)other goddesses, )erciful dis,ensers of sal0ation, fe)ale sy)*ols of Justice, and the strong ,resence of fe)inine sy)*olis) in the real)s of art, religion, ritual, and la;=. -e)inine sy)*olis), far )ore often than )asculine sy)*olis), )anifests this ,ro,ensity to;ard ,olariIed a)*iguityso)eti)es utterly e(alted, so)eti)es utterly de*ased, rarely ;ithin the nor)al range of hu)an ,ossi*ilities. 9f ;o)anEs :culturally 0ie;ed= inter)ediacy *et;een culture and nature has this i),lication of generaliIed a)*iguity of )eaning characteristic of )arginal ,heno)ena, then ;e are also in a *etter ,osition to account for those cultural and historical ?in0ersions? in ;hich ;o)en are in so)e ;ay or other sy)*olically aligned ;ith culture and )en ;ith nature. 2 nu)*er of cases co)e to )ind: the SirionO of BraIil, a)ong ;ho), according to 9ngha) :.%!.: .0% =, ?nature, the ra;, and )aleness? are o,,osed to ?culture, the cooked, the fe)aleness?C .0 /aIi Ger)any, in ;hich ;o)en ;ere said to *e the guardians of culture and )oralsC Euro,ean courtly lo0e, in ;hich )an considered hi)self the *east and ;o)an the ,ristine e(alted o*Jecta ,attern of thinking that ,ersists, for e(a),le, a)ong )odern S,anish ,easants :see Pitt+7i0ers .%#.C 7osaldo .%!"=. 2nd there are no dou*t other cases of this sort, including so)e as,ects of our o;n cultureEs 0ie; of ;o)en. Each such instance of an align)ent of ;o)en ;ith culture rather than nature reHuires detailed analysis of s,ecific historical and ethnogra,hic data. But in indicating ho; nature in general, and the fe)inine )ode of inter,ersonal relations in ,articular, can a,,ear fro) certain ,oints of 0ie; to stand *oth under and o0er :*ut really si),ly outside of= ,age1"0 Page ". the s,here of cultureEs hege)ony, ;e ha0e at least laid the ground;ork for such analyses. 9n short, the ,ostulate that ;o)an is 0ie;ed as closer to nature than )an has se0eral i),lications for further analysis, and can *e inter,reted in se0eral different ;ays. 9f it is 0ie;ed si),ly as a middle ,osition on a scale fro) culture do;n to nature, then it is still seen as lo;er than culture and thus accounts for the ,an+cultural assu),tion that ;o)an is lo;er than )an in the order of things. 9f it is read as a mediating ele)ent in the culture+nature relationshi,, then it )ay account in ,art for the cultural tendency not )erely to de0alue ;o)an *ut to circu)scri*e and restrict her functions, since culture )ust )aintain control o0er its :,rag)atic and sy)*olic= )echanis)s for the con0ersion of nature into culture. 2nd if it is read as an am'iguous status *et;een culture and nature, it )ay hel, account for the fact that, in s,ecific cultural ideologies and sy)*oliIations, ;o)an can occasionally *e aligned ;ith culture, and in any e0ent is often assigned ,olariIed and contradictory )eanings ;ithin a single sy)*olic syste). Middle status, )ediating functions, a)*iguous )eaningall are different readings, for different conte(tual ,ur,oses, of ;o)anEs *eing seen as inter)ediate *et;een nature and culture. Conclusions 6lti)ately, it )ust *e stressed again that the ;hole sche)e is a construct of culture rather than a fact of nature. <o)an is not ?in reality? any closer to :or further fro)= nature than )an*oth ha0e consciousness, *oth are )ortal. But there are certainly reasons ;hy she a,,ears that ;ay, ;hich is ;hat 9 ha0e tried to sho; in this ,a,er. The result is a :sadly= efficient feed*ack syste): 0arious as,ects of ;o)anEs situation :,hysical, social, ,sychological= contri*ute to her *eing seen as closer to nature, ;hile the 0ie; of her as closer to nature is in turn e)*odied in institutional for)s that re,roduce her situation. The i),lications for social change are si)ilarly circular: a different cultural 0ie; can only gro; out of a different social actualityC a different social actuality can only gro; out of a different cultural 0ie;. 9t is clear, then, that the situation )ust *e attacked fro) *oth sides. Efforts directed solely at changing the social institutionsthrough setting Huotas on hiring, for e(a),le, or through ,assing eHual+,ay+for+eHual+;ork la;scannot ha0e far+reaching effects if cultural language and ,age1".

Page "' i)agery continue to ,ur0ey a relati0ely de0alued 0ie; of ;o)en. But at the sa)e ti)e efforts directed solely at changing cultural assu),tionsthrough )ale and fe)ale consciousness+raising grou,s, for e(a),le, or through re0ision of educational )aterials and )ass+)edia i)agerycannot *e successful unless the institutional *ase of the society is changed to su,,ort and reinforce the changed cultural 0ie;. 6lti)ately, *oth )en and ;o)en can and )ust *e eHually in0ol0ed in ,roJects of creati0ity and transcendence. Only then ;ill ;o)en *e seen as aligned ;ith culture, in cultureEs ongoing dialectic ;ith nature. ,age1"' Page "$

$ The Dirgin and the State 9n an e(traordinarily ;ide range of societies in the ;orld one finds a ,eculiar ?co),le(?: ideologically it is held that the ,urity of the ;o)en reflects on the honor and status of their fa)iliesC and the ideology is enforced *y syste)atic and often Huite se0ere control of ;o)enEs social and es,ecially se(ual *eha0ior. One sees this ,attern )anifested a)ong ,easant societies in 3atin 2)erica and around the entire Mediterranean area, a)ong ,astoral no)adic tri*es of the Middle East and south;est 2sia, a)ong the castes of 9ndia, and a)ong the elites of China. 9n e(tre)e cases, such as classical 2thens or a)ong Brah)ins of 9ndia, ;o)en ;ere confined to the house for life. 9n i),erial Turkey, the sultan had 0ast nu)*ers of ;i0es and daughters ?in an ela*orately organiIed hare), or seraglio, ;ith disci,linary and ad)inistrati0e officers, ruled o0er *y LhisM )other? :Encyclo,aedia Britannica .%!", ":%0!=. 2)ong ,oorer ,easants and no)ads, a 0ariety of other de0ices0eilsC rules of *ody+disguising dress and of )odest de)eanorC restrictions on e(,ression, co))unication, and )o0e)entC all o0erseen *y the fa)ily in ,articular and the gossi, of the co))unity in generalser0e to restrict ;o)enEs social and se(ual *eha0ior as effecti0ely as if they ;ere locked u,. . 7e0ie;ing the 0ariety of cases, one tends to get in0ol0ed in ,articular cultural sy)*oliIations and ,ractices, and to lose sight of the *road si)ilarities of ,attern. -urther, the ,attern does not see) to *e confined to any ,articular ty,e of society, or to any consistent stratu): ,easants and elites, ,age1"$ Page "" agriculturalists and ,astoral no)ads, all see) to e)*race so)e 0ersion of the fe)ale ,urity ethic ;ith eHual intensity and co))it)ent. 9t see)s difficult to i)agine that there )ight *e a single inter,retation that ;ould co0er, or at least interrelate, all the cases. 9n fact, in the anthro,ological analyses of ,articular cases, a 0ariety of inter,reti0e fra)e;orks ha0e *een used: ,sychoanalytic, structural, functional, ecological, ,olitical, or so)e )i(ture of se0eral of these. 3et )e *egin to situate the Huestion of ;hy the control of fe)ale se(ual ,urity is such a ;ides,read and 0irulent ,heno)enon *y re0ie;ing *riefly so)e of the )aJor atte),ts at inter,retation in the anthro,ological literature. ' 9n an early essay fro) a ,sychoanalytic ,ers,ecti0e, Pathleen Gough :.%&&= analyIed the fe)ale initiation rites a)ong the /ayar and other grou,s of the Mala*ar region of 9ndia. Gough inter,reted the rituals as signifying the for)al renunciation *y the girlEs consanguineal kins)en of rights to her se(uality, in a social conte(t in ;hich there is e0idently strong incest te),tation. -urther, during these rites the young girl ;as actually or sy)*olically deflo;ered *y a ,erson other than her ,ros,ecti0e hus*and, and Gough inter,reted this ,oint as re,resenting )ale fear of the defloration of 0irgins in the course of nor)al se(uality. 2lthough /ayar ;o)en do not see) to fit our )odel in that, follo;ing their initiation they had great se(ual freedo), ;e )ust not forget that their freedo) ;as gained at the e(,ense of /a)*udiri Brah)in ;o)en, ;ho ;ere su*Ject to 0irtually total seclusion and control. 6ntold nu)*ers of /a)*udiri ;o)en died 0irgins, ;hile /a)*udiri )en )ated ;ith the con0eniently a0aila*le /ayar. 9n a su*seHuent counteressay, /ur 4al)an :.%#$= challenged :and ridiculed= GoughEs inter,retation and recast the ;hole argu)ent in ter)s of the control of fe)ale ,urity. 5e stressed that the rites esta*lish the ,urity of the ;o)en in their o;n castes and ser0e to define and regulate the ;o)enEs su*seHuent choices of )ates, ;ho )ust al;ays *e of eHual or higher caste status. The issue, he argued, is control of caste ,urity

and status as a ;hole, ;hich )ust *e )aintained *y regulation of fe)ale se(uality, *ecause regardless of the descent ,rinci,les o,erating ;ithin intracaste kinshi, grou,ings, caste as o,,osed to kin affiliation is al;ays inherited *ilaterally. -urther, if caste )e)*ershi, is defined as co)ing only through one ,arent, that ,arent is al;ays the )other. Thus for ,ur,oses of sustaining caste ,urity, the ;o)anEs ,urity in ,articular )ust *e controlled, ,rotected against ,ollution *y lo;er+caste )ates. Men, on the other hand, are free to ha0e se(ual relations ;ith anyone, ?high or lo;? as 4al)an says, and he then e(+ ,age1"" Page "& ,lains this in *oth cultural and natural ter)s. Culturally, 9ndians distinguish *et;een internal and e(ternal ,ollution. <o)en are su*Ject to internal ,ollution in se(ual intercourse, ;hich is 0ery hard if not i),ossi*le to cleanse, *ut )en are su*Ject only to e(ternal ,ollution in intercourse and can *e cleansed *y a si),le ritual *ath. 4et 4al)an goes further than this cultural ,oint, and relates the ideology to natural factors: ?the *ond *et;een the genitor and the child is tenuousC it can al;ays *e denied or )ini)iIedC the children can al;ays *e re,udiated *y the father? :.%#$: ".=. More recent studies ha0e tended to get a;ay fro) elusi0e unconscious factors and sy)*olic cultural notions of ,ure and i),ure, and to stress the *rass tacks of econo)ics and ,olitics. 3a;rence <atson :.%!'= descri*es the ,ractices of the GuaJiro of DeneIuela, a)ong ;ho) the 0irginity of a girl u,on )arriage is a*solutely de)anded, the result *eing assured *y a co)*ination of ,sychological terroris) and ,hysical ,unish)ent, )ostly enacted *y )others on their daughters. -or a serious offense, ?the )other )ay ,lace the ti, of a hot *randing iron on the girlEs 0agina to )ake the ,unish)ent a con0incing o*Ject lesson? :.%!': .&.=. $ <atson casts his inter,retation of this syste) in ter)s of the ,olitical structure of the society, in ;hich e0ery grou, is concerned a*out )aintaining its status in a rigid class syste)C the grou,Es status de,ends in ,art u,on the Huality of the ;o)en it can deli0er in the )arriage alliance ,rocess. Es,ecially a)ong the u,,er classes, influential chiefs o0ertly use )arriage alliances of daughters and sisters as a ;ay of *uilding u, follo;ings for ,olitical and )ilitary *acking. ?9f . . . a ;o)an causes her father or uncle to lose 0alua*le ,olitical allies *ecause of deficiencies in her se(ual *eha0ior, she *eco)es a lia*ility and she can seriously i),ede her lineageEs chances of *uilding u, a secure *ase of ,olitical su,,ort :.%!': .&"=. 9n this inter,retation, the sadistic control of fe)ale ,urity is si),ly a for) of realpoliti). 2nd finally, Bane Schneider :.%!.= ,resents an argu)ent in ter)s of ecological and econo)ic factors, and the ,olitics thereof. 9n her i),ortant ,a,er ?Of Digilance and Dirgins . . . ,? she *egins ;ith the general ,oint that ?honor can *e thought of as the ideology of a ,ro,erty holding grou, ;hich struggles to define, enlarge, and ,rotect its ,atri)ony in a co),etiti0e arena? :.%!.: '=. She then goes on to argue that *oth ,astoral and ,easant societies tend to *e highly socially frag)ented and ?unsolidary,? although the reasons for this social frag)entation are different in the t;o cases. 2nd according to Schneider, honor is the code that kee,s this ?centrifugal? situation together: it ?hel,s shore u, the identity of a grou, :a fa)ily or a lin+ ,age1"& Page "# eage= and co))it to it the loyalties of other;ise dou*tful )e)*ers. L9tM defines the grou,Es social *oundaries, contri*uting to its defense against the clai)s of eHui0alent co),eting grou,s. L9tM is also i),ortant as a su*stitute for ,hysical 0iolence in the defense of econo)ic interests. . . . 5onor regulates affairs a)ong )en? :.%!.: .!=. But ;hy the honor of the !omen@ <hy should the ;o)enEs honor re,resent the honor of the grou, as a ;hole@ Because, says Schneider, resolutely ,ractical to the end, a)ong the ,astoralists concerned ;ith lineage continuity, fe)ale re,roducti0e ca,acity is 0alua*le, and ;o)en are ?contested resources )uch like ,astures and ;ater? :.%!.: . =. 2s for the agrarian ,easants, the ,ro*le) see)s ,ri)arily to *e the ,otential frag)entation of the fa)ily of ,rocreation, ;ith fathers, sons, and *rothers set off against one another *ecause of inheritance rulesC here the daughtersGsisters ,ro0ide the one shared focus of concern that can hold the grou, together :.%!.: '.=. 9 ;ill restrain )y te),tation to dissect the circularities and self+contradictions of )any of these argu)ents and ;ill si),ly say that, ;ith the e(ce,tion of the ,sychoanalytic argu)ent, all of the) share co))on functionalist orientations: the ,urity of ;o)en is seen as ada,ti0e for the social coherence, econo)ic 0ia*ility, or cultural re,utation of the grou,, regardless of ;hether the grou, is a caste, lineage, or fa)ily. <hen the theorists try to e(,lain ;hy ;o)en in ,articular should re,resent the coherence and integrity of the grou,, rather than, say, a tote)ic *ird or a sacred flute, the ans;ers are )ore 0aria*lein ter)s of ;o)enEs natural child*earing a*ilities, ;o)enEs ,hysical structure :internal ,ollution=, ;o)enEs function as tokens of alliance, or ;o)enEs sy)*olic roles in the fa)ily. /one of these ans;ers is 0ery satisfactoryC all

use as e(,lanations the 0ery things that need e(,laining. <e are still left ;ith the ,arado( that )ale+defined structures re,resent the)sel0es and conce,tualiIe their unity and status through the ,urity of their ;o)en. 9 ;ould argue then that all of these e(,lanations can *e lu),ed together and that they share a set of co))on failings. -irst, all are static functional accounts, and lack ti)e de,th. Second, all share the co))on functionalist fallacy of reifying the unit under study and treating it as closed, e(clusi0e, and isolated fro) a larger social conte(tthe fa)ily, lineage, or caste is treated al)ost as a society in itself. 2nd finally, all e(,lanations, ;ith the e(ce,tion of the ,sychoanalytic discussion, take the ,oint of 0ie; that the ,ro*le) is one of )aleG)ale relations, in ;hich the ;o)en are inter)ediaries, rather than the ,ro*le) *eing, as it at least eHually is, a ,ro*le) of ,age1"# Page "! )aleGfe)ale relations. 2lthough each of the argu)ents contains so)e useful kernel of truth, none ,ro0ides a fra)e;ork for enco),assing and accounting for the ,heno)enon as a ;hole in cross+cultural, cross+class, and cross+se( ,ers,ecti0e. <hat 9 should like to do in this ,a,er, then, is to offer so)e o*ser0ations, thoughts, suggestions, and hy,otheses for e(,loring this ,ro*le) )ore syste)atically, and in a ;ay that ;ill illu)inate ,ro*le)s of social and cultural ,rocess in general, as ;ell as )aleGfe)ale relations in ,articular. 9 ;ould *egin *y noting that all of the )odern cases of societies concerned ;ith fe)ale ,urity are in fact of a certain ty,e, na)ely, that all are ,art of, or ha0e historically *een ,art of, states, or at least syste)s ;ith fairly highly de0elo,ed stratification. " Thus hy,er,ure Brah)ins and hy,er,oor Mediterranean ,easants share the status of *eing ,art+structures, ele)ents in larger stratified ,olitical structures. E0en ;hen the larger state structures in ;hich they originally de0elo,ed are no longer organically intact, all of the )odern grou,s in Huestion *ear the cultural ideologies, and ,articularly the religions, ;hich ;ere ,art of the organic e)ergence of their ancestral states in the first ,lace. Most of the societies concerned ;ith fe)ale ,urity are in0ol0ed in so+called great traditions, es,ecially Christianity, 9sla), and 5induis). 2nd these religions e0ol0ed in conJunction ;ith the e)ergence of states :or ?ci0iliIations,? or e),ires= ;hich, although )ost are no longer intact, nonetheless sha,ed the societies and cultures of the grou,s that *ear their cultural heritages. 2nd )ost of the ,easants ;hose ancient states ha0e decayed are no; in0ol0ed ;ith )odern states in ;ays that are structurally si)ilar to their ,laces in the original ones. 9t is true that there are ,re+state societies ;hich, for e(a),le, reHuire the 0irginity of ;o)en at )arriage, and ,ro*a*ly the )aJority of hu)an societies e(,ect relati0e se(ual faithfulness of ;o)en after )arriage. But no ,re+state societies, as far as 9 ha0e *een a*le to ascertain, e0ince the sort of ,attern 9 a) concerned ;ith herethe ideological linkage of fe)ale 0irginity and chastity to the social honor of the grou,, such chastity *eing secured *y the e(ertion of direct control o0er ;o)enEs )o*ility to the ,oint of lifeti)e seclusion, andGor through se0ere socialiIation of fear and sha)e concerning se(.& <hat 9 a) suggesting, then, is that this sort of concern ;ith the ,urity of ;o)en ;as ,art of, and so)eho; structurally, functionally, and sy)*olically *ound u, ;ith, the historical e)ergence of syste)atically stratified state+ty,e structures, in the e0olution of hu)an society.# Before e(a)ining ;hat the ,urity of ;o)en )ight ha0e to do ;ith the ,age1"! Page " e)ergence of states, ho;e0er, let )e sketch 0ery *riefly ;hat 9 see as the ,atterns and tendencies of fe)aleG)ale relations in ,re+state societies, or rather in conte),orary societies that ha0e historically *een outside of kno;n state syste)s, and that ha0e not the)sel0es e0ol0ed the social, ,olitical, and econo)ic characteristics of states. 9 ;ould *egin ;ith the ,oint that there is al;ays, e0en in the )ost ,ri)iti0e of kno;n societies, so)e sort of asy))etry *et;een the se(es. E0en the )ost )anifestly egalitarian of *and LhuntingGgatheringM societies accords so)e edge of authority or charis)a or status to )en, if only on the 0ie; that the *ig ga)e that the )en *ring ho)e is su,erior as food to the ;o)enEs gathered ,roduce. 9n slightly )ore co),le( *and societies, it see)s that there is al;ays so)e sacred center or ritual fro) ;hich ;o)en are e(cluded. 2nd although ;o)en )ay ha0e their sacred cere)onies, fro) ;hich )en are e(cluded, the )ale cere)onies are considered to *e for the ;elfare of the grou, as a ;hole, ;hile the ;o)enEs cere)onies are s,ecific to the ;elfare of ;o)en. -inally, in the )ost co),le( of the kno;n *and societies, ,ri)arily in 2ustralia, )ale authority is asserted through, and reinforced *y, syste)atic control of

the )arriage syste), the e(change of ;o)en and goods. Control of the )arriage syste), al;ays in the hands of )en, transfor)s diffuse authority or charis)a into the *eginnings of real ,o;er and control. /onetheless, *eing *artered a*out in a syste) of )arriage e(change is not the sa)e thing as ha0ing oneEs day+to+day *eha0ior and freedo) of )o0e)ent directly controlled, and in fact ;o)en in *and societies e0idently ha0e a great deal of autono)y of action, as long as they co),ly ;ith the legal rules of the ga)e. There is also no ideology in these societies a*out ,rotecting fe)ale ,urity. 9f anything, the ideology is Just the re0erse, and ;o)en are often seen as, to so)e degree, dangerous and ,olluting. 2ccording to Mary 8ouglas :.%##=, ,ollution *eliefs are syste)atically related to cultural category a)*iguities and ano)aliesC the danger and ,ollution of ;o)en ;ould see) to deri0e in large ,art fro) the fact that ;o)en syste)atically a,,ear as a)*iguous 0is+N+0is t;o 0ery i),ortant, and ,artly related, category distinctions that )ay *e co))on to all hu)an societies. The first distinction is the natureGculture dichoto)y, and 9 ha0e discussed at length else;here ;o)anEs a)*iguity 0is+N+0is this o,,osition :Ortner .%!', this 0olu)e=. The second is the structureGantistructure, or orderGdisorder dichoto)y, in ;hich )en and )ale grou,s are identified ;ith structure, order, social organiIation itself. 9nsofar as ;o)en are )o0ed around in )arriage, in a social e(change syste) controlled *y, and culturally seen as co),osed of, ,age1" Page "% structured grou,s of )en, ;o)en a,,ear interstitial ;ithin the funda)ental kinshi, architecture of society :7osaldo .%!"=. -urther, the a)*iguity of ;o)en ;ould deri0e not only fro) a )arriage ,ers,ecti0eC insofar as there is descent ideology, ;hether ,atrilineal or )atrilineal, ;o)en are seen as EEin *et;een? in these sorts of syste)s as ;ell, for descent grou,s :such as clans= see the)sel0es as grou,s of )ales, ;ith ;o)en as their re,roducti0e agents. <ith res,ect to either or *oth of these o,,ositionsnatureGculture, structureGantistructure;o)en )ay a,,ear a)*iguous, and hence ,otentially ,olluting and dangerous. 2nd although none of the si),lest huntingGgathering societies )anifest the ,ho*ia a*out fe)ale ,ollution and danger that a,,ears a)ong, for e(a),le, /e; Guinea horticulturalists, )ost ha0e a 0ariety of ta*oos and a0oidance rules that see) concerned ;ith kee,ing at least so)e of the *oundaries dra;n. /o; *et;een huntingGgathering *and societies on the one hand, and states on the other, there is o*0iously a 0ast range of ty,es of societies, of ;idely 0arying structure and co),le(ity. 9 ha0e yet to find or de0ise a classification sche)e that organiIes all of the) in so)e satisfactory e0olutionary seHuence. 9 ;ill ,lo; right through all this co),le(ity, ho;e0er, and si),ly say that through all the ty,es of ,re+state societies, fe)aleG)ale relations stay *roadly ;ithin the ,attern esta*lished o0er the range of *and societiesfro) relati0ely )utualistic and *alanced, to the e(tre)e cases of se( antagonis), ;ith )ale self+segregation, and strong e(,ressions of fear of ;o)en as dangerous. But again the e(,ression of and reaction to fear of ;o)en in those e(tre)e cases, and here 9 a) thinking largely of /e; Guinea and South 2)erica, in0ol0es exclusion of ;o)en, or atte),ts thereof, rather than syste)atic do)ination and control. My i)age here is the /e; Guinea or South 2)erican 0illage, ;ith the )en huddled in )enEs houses in the center off+li)its to the ;o)en, and the ;o)en strung out around the ,eri,hery in their indi0idual huts ;ith their uterine fa)ilies. E0en in /orth 2)erica, a )uch less e(tre)e area on this score, ;e find the )ale s;eat lodges, the ki0as into ;hich ;o)en are not allo;ed, and so forth. But as long as the ;o)en do not tres,ass on the off+li)its areas, they ha0e considera*le autono)y of action, and indeed a certain edge of ,o;er insofar as they can a,,ro,riate and Judiciously i),ly control of so)e of the ,o;ers ;ith ;hich the )ale culture endo;s the). 2s in *and societies, the one area in ;hich )en do e(ercise syste)atic control o0er ;o)en is the )arriage syste). 2gain, ho;e0er, there is no ideology that the ;o)en e(changed in )arriage )ust *e 0irginal, se(ually nai0e, and )ystically ,age1"% Page &0 ,ureC nor is seclusion of ;o)en ,racticed as a )eans of controlling their se(uality. -inally, ho;e0er, ;e get to the great di0ide: the rise of the state. 5ere there is a radical shift of *oth ideology and ,ractice. On the ground, ;e ha0e the e)ergence of the ,atriarchal e(tended fa)ily. 9ndeed here for the first ti)e the ter) ,atriarchy *eco)es a,,lica*le, *ecause the structure in0ol0es the a*solute authority of the father or other senior )ale o0er e0eryone in the householdall Junior )ales and all fe)ales. 2nd no; ;o)en are for the first ti)e *rought under direct and syste)atic control, first *y their natal fa)ilies, and then *y their hus*ands and their affinal kin. 2)ong elites, one has the i)age of ;o)en *eing rounded u, in great nu)*ers and confined in hare)s and analogous arrange)ents else;here. 2)ong the Brah)ins of 9ndia, they are locked in great ,urdah ,alaces and ne0er e)erge into the ;orld. The notion de0elo,s that

)en are directly res,onsi*le for the *eha0ior of their ;o)en, rendering it ,art of e0ery )anEs definition of self and )anliness that ?his? ;o)en ne0er esca,e his controlC his honor, and the honor of his grou,, are at stake. 2t the sa)e ti)e, there is a great shift in the ideology concerning ;o)en. Before they ;ere dangerous, *ut no; they are said to *e in danger , Justifying )ale ,rotection and guardianshi,. Before they ;ere ,olluting, and this had to *e defended against, *ut no; they are said to *e ,ure, and to need defending. 2t the sa)e ti)e, one finds for the first ti)e sy)*olic idealiIation of ;o)en in the )other+as,ect, rather than in the se(ualre,roducti0e as,ect. E0entually, as the sy)*ol syste) gets itself together in one ,art of the ;orld ;ith ;hich ;e are all fa)iliar, the ideal ;o)an e)erges as all the *est things at once, )other and 0irgin. /o; the ;ay in ;hich 9E0e descri*ed the ,attern, and the ;ay in ;hich it )ight, at first glance, *e 0ie;ed, is in ter)s of the do)estication of ;o)en, a sort of /eolithic of the se(es ;herein ;o)en, like ,lants and ani)als, ;ere *rought under control in the ser0ice of the race. 2ctually, ho;e0er, )y thinking is to en0ision the ,rocess in ter)s of the *eginnings of the do)estication of men, as ,art of a larger ,attern of syste)atiIation of hierarchy and control in the e0olution of state structures. 9 ;ill return to this ,oint later. 9n any case, the ;hole *usiness is terri*ly co),le(. <hat 9 shall do here is si),ly offer a *rief checklist of ,oints that 9 think ;ould *e i),ortant to consider in trying syste)atically to account for the changes in se(+role relations and ideology that see) to *e associated ;ith the e)ergence of the state. The checklist consists of the follo;ing ite)s, in no ,articular order: ,age1&0 Page &. the Huestion of diffusion, the Huestion of changes in the di0ision of la*or, changes in religious thought, changes in fa)ily structure, and changes in )arriage ,atterns. 9 shall only *e a*le to say a fe; ;ords a*out each, )erely ,ointing in the direction 9 think in0estigation should go. 8iffusion, first, is so)ething that cannot *e entirely ruled out. 9t is ,ossi*le that the ,attern 9 ha0e descri*edidealiIation of fe)ale chastityC ideology of ,rotection, control, and seclusion of the ;o)ende0elo,ed in one area of the ancient old ;orld, and reached other early states through trade and other diffusionary )echanis)s. Most of the kno;n conte),orary societies ;ith this ,attern are geogra,hically contiguous, in a *road *and fro) the circu)+Mediterranean area, across the Middle East and south;est 2sia, across 9ndia, and u, into China. ! The ne; ;orld indigenous states ;ould thus ha0e to *e in0estigated for inde,endent e0olution of the ,attern. E0en if indicated, ho;e0er, ;e kno; that diffusion in itself ne0er e(,lains 0ery )uch, for ,eo,les hear of )any ,eculiar custo)s ,racticed *y their neigh*ors, yet those ,ractices ;ill only *e ado,ted if the social structural and ideological conditions are ri,e for their rece,tion. That is, the diffusion ;ould only ha0e taken hold as inde,endently de0elo,ing societies e0ol0ed the sorts of structures ;ithin ;hich such a ,attern of se(+role relations ;ould *e functional and )eaningful. The second ,oint, 0ery *riefly, is the Huestion of ;hether changes in the di0ision of la*or )ay ha0e )oti0ated changes in se(+role relations and ideologies. one standard 0ie; has it that, ;ith the rise of ,lo; agriculture andGor syste)atic irrigation syste)s associated ;ith the rise of states, ;o)en ;ere e(cluded fro) )aJor roles in the s,here of ,roduction, ;hile their re,roducti0e 0alue in the fa)ily ;as )ore strongly e),hasiIed. My o;n reading of the data is Huite different. 9t is ,ro*a*ly true that )en *eca)e associated ;ith ,lo;ing as a s,ecific acti0ity, and ;ith the engineering and control of irrigation syste)s, and *oth of these ,oints are Huite i),ortant in the sy)*olics of )ale ,restige. /onetheless it see)s that ;o)en continued to *e fully ,roducti0e, and if anything ;orked e0en harder than they did *efore, in *oth grain ,roduction in the ;estern old ;orld and rice ,roduction in the east. The gradual ;ithdra;al of ;o)en fro) ,roduction :;here it ha,,ened= ;as, 9 think, a 0ery late de0elo,)ent. 9t ;ill thus not account for the e)ergence of the fe)ale ,urity ,attern, although it ;ill ha0e re,ercussions for that ,attern later. 9n the do)ain of religion, ne(t, 9 ;ould stress the ,oint that an ela*orated notion of ,urity in general only co)es in syste)atically ;ith the e)ergence ,age1&. Page &' of state structures. 9n ,re+state societies, including the si),lest that ;e kno;, one of course finds the notion that e(ce,tional ,urity, often including te),orary celi*acy, is reHuired for s,ecific i),ortant ,ur,oses. Generally, it is associated ;ith so)e )aJor )ale undertakinga hunt, a raid, or a ritualand is concei0ed in ter)s of ,urifying or at least not ,olluting )ale energies, so that they ;ill *e strong and focused for the *ig

e0ent. /onetheless, there is no notion that it ;ould *e good for so)e ,eo,le, fe)ale or )ale, to stri0e for ,er)anent e(ce,tional ,urity, including ,er)anent celi*acy. Such notions ,ro*a*ly co)e in ;ith ,er)anent standing ,riesthoods of so)e kind, and these of course are standard, 0irtually diagnostic, features of early states. 9f the chastity of ,riests ;as the first a,,lication of the notion of chastity to a social grou,, its rationale ;as ,ro*a*ly si)ilar to that for the e,isodic de)ands for ,urity in ,re+state societies: the ,riest is charged ;ith ,rotection of sacred o*Jects and acti0ities, and he :or so)eti)es she= )ust *e in a ,er)anent state of non+,ollution for the Jo*. But it ;ould see) that there is )ore to it than this. 9n ,articular 9 ;ould suggest that in state religions and cos)ologies, ;hat see)s to ha,,en is that the ;hole ,urity ceiling is raised, so to s,eak. That is, one finds syste)atic ela*oration of higher real)s of ,urity and sacredness than e(isted *efore, ;ith )ore e(acting de)ands u,on the laity for confor)ing to religious ideals. Thus it )ay *e a )atter of the religion ,ostulating higher, )ore sacred, and )ore de)anding gods :e.g., the 2Itec gods ;ho reHuired hu)an sacrifice=, andGor a )ore articulated after+death state :as, for e(a),le, in The *gyptian Boo) of the %ead=. Transcendental ,o;er, di0inity, sacredness, and ,urity are all )ore articulated than ,re0iously. 9t is not at all difficult to account for the e)ergence of such ideologies in state structures, in relation to the o0erall increased co),le(ity of societyfor e(a),le, )ore co),le( di0ine hierarchies )ay reflect )ore co),le( social hierarchiesC or )ore de)anding gods )ay reflect the greater de)ands of the state and the do)inant classesC or )ore ela*orated notions of afterlife )ay *e inter,reted as ,ro)ising the ne;ly e)ergent )asses their re;ards later rather than no;, and so forth. The situation is of course infinitely )ore co),le( than this, *ut cannot *e e(,lored here. My ,oint is si),ly that one ;ould *egin to in0estigate the ela*oration of the notion of fe)ale ,urity *y conte(tualiIing it in the e)ergence of syste)atic 0ie;s of transcendental ,urity in state cos)ologies in general. Purity as so)ething ,age1&' Page &$ that ;hole categories of ,eo,le )ight intrinsically ,ossess, or )ight syste)atically *e reHuired to sustain, is itself, 9 think, a ,roduct of state+related religious thought. MindG*ody dualis)s :reflecting, a)ong other things, ne; di0isions of la*or *et;een intellectualGartisticG,olitical elites and ,roducing )asses=, and the control of se(uality, sensuality, and )aterialis) :,art of, a)ong other things, a delayed+gratification, reduced+)aterial+e(,ectations ideology for the )asses= ;ould *e as,ects of this general ,attern. Co)ing do;n fro) the cos)ological heights to ground+le0el social structure, the fourth ite) co0ers changes in the structure of the fa)ily. 2gain 9 ;ill *e 0ery *rief, although the ,ro*le) reHuires detailed scrutiny. The key ,oint is undou*tedly the e)ergence of the ,atriarchal fa)ily structure, and ,ro*a*ly ideally the ,atriarchal e(tended fa)ily. But the ;ay in ;hich 9 ;ould look at this ,heno)enon, as 9 noted earlier, is in ter)s of the do)estication of )en, *oth as hus*andsGfathers, and as sons. Pro*a*ly the catalyst around ;hich the ;hole thing crystalliIed ;as ,ro,erty holding in one for) or another, although it ;as certainly not yet ?,ri0ate? ,ro,erty. Be that as it )ay, ;hat 9 think ;as at issue ;as the gradual dee,ening of in0ol0e)ent of indi0idual )ales in res,onsi*ility, as hus*andsGfathers, for their s,ecific fa)ily unitsnot Just econo)ic res,onsi*ility, for that ;as al;ays acce,ted, *ut also ;hat )ight *e called ,olitical accounta*ility. The fa)ily *eca)e in a sense an ad)inistrati0e unit, the *ase unit in the ,olitical+econo)ic structure of the state. The hus*andGfather ;as no longer si),ly res,onsi*le to his fa)ily, *ut also for his fa)ily 0is+N+0is the larger syste). 9t *eca)e the *ase, and often the only *ase of his Jural status. /o;, Judging fro) conte),orary cases, 9 i)agine that such dee,ening in0ol0e)ent of )en in fa)ilies ;as acce,ted only reluctantly, and as ,art of a tradeoff for ,atterns of deference and res,ect fro) ;i0es and children. The reluctance of )ales to *e in0ol0ed ;ith their fa)ilies e(ce,t on ter)s of distance, res,ect, and su*)ission on the ,art of the other )e)*ers is still 9 think to *e seen in )ost of the ;orld today, and the do)estication of )en is still largely inco),lete. /onetheless, the notion that )ales are not only econo)ically *ut also legally and ,olitically res,onsi*le for the ,ro,er functioning of the fa)ily unit see)s to *e ,art of the syste)atic e(tension of ,rinci,les of hierarchy, do)ination, and order in the e0olution of states as a ;hole. 7es,onsi*le hus*andsGfathers are )ore syste)atically incor,orated into the syste). ,age1&$ Page &" 7es,onsi*le hus*andsGfathers, ;hich is to say in this conte(t ,atriarchal hus*andsGfathers, in turn kee, e0eryone else in linethe ;o)en, of course, *ut also the sons. 9ndeed, ,erha,s the )ost striking characteristic of the ,atriarchal fa)ily is the ,rolongation of de,endence and su*Jugation of sons. This is such an o0erdeter)ined ,heno)enon that one can hardly *egin to sort out its sources and co),onents. 5o;e0er, let

it suffice to say that sons are held *ack fro) the acHuisition of ,ro,erty, ;i0es, and e)otional )aturity *y such a ,o;erful co)*ination of forces, e)anating fro) *oth father and )other, that it is certainly one of the key changes that ;e see in fa)ily structure, regardless of household co),osition :that is, regardless of ;hether the fa)ily is ?e(tended? or not=. Male initiation rites 0irtually disa,,ear in state societiesC far fro) fathers and other senior )ales facilitating, ho;e0er frighteningly, a young )aleEs ,assage to adulthood, the young adult )ale in the ,atriarchal fa)ily re)ains in a Jurally de,endent status at least until he is )arried, and often *eyond. 9n )any cases )arriage itself *eco)es the only rite of ,assage, and thus )anhood *eco)es eHuated ;ith res,onsi*ility for ;ife and children, ,art of the ,attern descri*ed a*o0e. This ,attern is likely to ha0e certain ,sychodyna)ic i),lications. One )ay ;ish to go the -reudian route, in ter)s of dee, unconscious factors, and 9 a) not i))une to the ,ersuasions of a ;ell+done -reudian analysis. Pathleen GoughEs ,a,er on fe)ale initiation rites, )entioned earlier, is an e(cellent and 0ery con0incing -reudian discussion of the sorts of fears and ideals of ;o)en ,roduced in such fa)ily situations in the 9ndian case. 5o;e0er, one can ,ro*a*ly account for a lot ;ithout recourse to unconscious factors, through careful sy)*olic analysis of cultural notions of )others and ;i0es in such syste)s. The ,i0otal ,oint of such analysis ;ould *e that )en ;ere not only ?do)esticated? as ,art of the crystalliIation of authority structures of the stateC they ;ere also Ju0eniliIed0is+N+0is ;o)en, senior )en, and the rulers and o0erclasses of the syste). /ote that 9 ha0e not tried to ,ostulate )oti0es for either ;o)en or )en in this ,rocess. 9 ha0e suggested that )en ;ere ?reluctant? a*out *eing do)esticated, *ut 9 ;ould i)agine that ;o)en had eHually )i(ed feelings a*out the greater ,resence of )ale authority in the fa)ily unit. 9 do not think it is useful to 0ie; this ,rocess in ter)s of :in EngelsEs fa)ous ,hrase= ?the ;orld historical defeat of ;o)en? *y )en, or other such )oti0ated for)ulations. The crystalliIation of ,atriarchal fa)ily cor,orations ;as dou*tless a ,reci,itate of larger ,olitical and econo)ic ,rocesses. /one+ ,age1&" Page && theless, once it got going, it *eca)e a social force in its o;n right, affecting not only the further e0olution of gender relations, *ut also the econo)ic and ,olitical e0olution of the larger syste) itself. The final ite) on the ,resent checklist is the Huestion of changes in )arriage syste)s. 9 noted earlier that concern for the ,urity of ;o)en is found, in conte),orary societies, a)ong *oth elites and lo;er strata. 9n southern Euro,e, the ,easants see) )uch )ore concerned a*out the issue than the u,,er classesC for elites the relati0e freedo) of their ;o)en is a sy)*ol of their )odernity, or else si),ly a sy)*ol of their *eing a*o0e the codes. 9n 9ndia or China, on the other hand, the Brah)ins and u,,er classes ;ere far stricter a*out the ,urity of their ;o)en than the lo;er castes and the ,easants. 9n trying to account for the e)ergence of a code of fe)ale ,urity as ,art of the e)ergence of the state, one ;ould ,erha,s ;ant to *egin ;ith the Huestion of ;hich stratu) started the ;hole thing. Thus so)e )ight argue that it ;as ,ro*a*ly originally an elite conceit, in that elite ;o)en :if not other ;o)en= did not need to engage in ,roducti0e la*or, and could *e secluded and ,rotected fro) the ,ollutions of ;ork and ,eo,le as a )ark of u,,er+class status. One could argue ;ith eHual logic, ho;e0er, that there are as,ects of ,easant social life and social structure that ;ould generate a concern for the ,urity of ;o)en, as in Bane SchneiderEs discussion ,re0iously noted. The ;ay out of the ,uIIle, 9 ;ould suggest, lies in stressing the stratified nature of the state as a totality, and seeking the dyna)ics of the ,rocess in the interaction *et;een elites and lo;er strata. 9n ,articular, )y analytic instinct is to look at ,atterns of hy,erga)y :u,+status )arriage, 0irtually al;ays *et;een u,,er )en and lo;er ;o)en= in state syste)s, and to consider 0ery centrally the ,ossi*ility that one of the significant de0elo,)ents in stratified societies ;as the shifting of )arriage fro) an essentially lateral transaction, *et;een essentially eHual grou,s, to at least a ,otentially 0ertical transaction, ;herein oneEs sister or daughter is ,otentially a ;ife or consort of a king or no*le)an, or could *e dedicated to the te),le and the ser0ices of the ,riesthood. 9 think it is fairly safe to e(,ect to find ,atterns and ideals of hy,erga)y, or ;hat )ight *e called 0ertical alliance, in stratified societies. Dertical alliance ;ould constitute one of se0eral sorts of ,aternalistic ties *et;een the strata. But ;hat analytic conseHuences flo; fro) ,utting this ,oint at the center of the analysis@ ,age1&&

Page &# 9n the first ,lace, as has *een noted *y others for 9ndia :e.g., Ta)*iah .%!$=, the assu),tion of syste)atic hy,erga)y as an ideal and to so)e e(tent as a ,ractice ;ill account for the ,heno)enon of ;o)en accu)ulating at the to, of the syste). Because lo;er+status fa)ilies are eager to )arry their ;o)en u,;ards for ,olitical reasons, the elites ;ould accu)ulate ;i0es. 2t the sa)e ti)e, the elites ;ould often *e una*le to get rid of their o;n sisters and daughters, for there is no;here further u, for those ;o)en to go. Thus the e)ergence of hare)s, ,urdah ,alaces, and so forth, ;ould ,artly *e a structural ,reci,itate of the hy,erga)y syste), rather than an indication of :a)ong other ,ossi*ilities= the e(traordinary lust of sultans. 2t the sa)e ti)e, the accu)ulation of ;i0es *y ,olygynous royalty and no*ility ;ould certainly ha0e 0alue in the sy)*olics of ,o;er, for it ;ould suggest their ,otency in e0erything fro) se( to ,olitics to the fertility of the land. Thus the i)age of herds of ,enned+u, ;o)en that is ,roJected in these sorts of syste)s flo;s ,artly fro) the dyna)ics of the )arriage syste), and not fro) )en rounding u, and controlling ;o)en as such. Second, hy,erga)y )ay ,ro0ide the strongest e(,lanation for the ,urity of ;o)en ideal and for certain ,eculiarities of this ideal. The conte(t of hy,erga)y is a conte(t of orientation to;ard u,;ard )o*ility, through )ani,ulation of )arriages. <e kno; that the economic 0alue of ;o)en *eco)es a focus in these conte(ts, for it is here that ;e find the e)ergence of do;ry :Goody .%!$=, enhancing the girlEs 0alue for a higher+status s,ouse. 9n addition, ho;e0er, there is the Huestion of her )ystical or s,iritual 0alue, her inner ;orthiness for such an alliance. The notions of 0irginity and chastity )ay *e ,articularly a,t for sy)*oliIing such 0alue, rather than, for e(a),le, e(ternal *eauty, *ecause 0irginity is a sy)*ol of e(clusi0eness and inaccessi*ility, nona0aila*ility to the general )asses, so)ething, in short, that is elite. 2 0irgin is an elite fe)ale a)ong fe)ales, ;ithheld, untouched, e(clusi0e. The assu),tion of hy,erga)y ;ould also account for one of the )aJor ,uIIles of the fe)ale ,urity ,heno)enon, na)ely, that the ;o)en of a gi0en grou, are e(,ected to *e ,urer than the )en, that u,on their higher ,urity hinges the honor of the grou,. 9 ;ould argue that the ;o)en are not, contrary to nati0e ideology, re,resenting and )aintaining the grou,Es actual status, *ut are oriented u,;ards and re,resent the ideal higher status of the grou,. One of the ,ro*le)s ;ith the ,urity literature, 9 think, has *een a failure to get *eneath nati0e ideologyC the nati0es Justify fe)ale ,urity in ter)s of )aintaining the grou,Es actual status, as a holding action for that ,age1&# Page &! status in the syste), ;hen in fact it is oriented to;ard an ideal and generally unattaina*le status. The unattaina*ility )ay in turn account for so)e of the sadis) and anger to;ard ;o)en e(,ressed in these ,urity ,atterns, for the ;o)en are re,resenting the o0er+classes the)sel0es. 2nd finally, the hy,erga)y assu),tion gi0es us at least one clue a*out a girlEs :or ;o)anEs= )oti0ation for coo,eration in her o;n su*ordination and control. -or if she is a good girl, she has the ,otential for ,ersonal status )o*ility ;hich in fact e(ceeds that of )ost of the )en of her grou,. 5ere it *eco)es intelligi*le that it is often ;o)en the)sel0es ;ho acti0ely re,roduce the ,atterns of fe)ale ,urity, socialiIing their daughters in fear of and sha)e a*out se(, telling the) that it is for their o;n good :;hich in a ;ay it is=, and s,ying on and gossi,ing a*out one anotherEs daughters as ,art of an o0erall dee, internaliIation of and loyalty to the syste). 2gain the ,oint is the future orientation of the ideology, to;ard so)e often Huite illusory *ut nonetheless re)otely i)agina*le status )o*ility, ;hich the girl herself internaliIes as the ?so)eday )y ,rince ;ill co)e? the)e. 9t is no ;onder too that ;o)en later )ay resent their hus*ands as dee,ly as hus*ands resent their ;i0esnot only or e0en necessarily *ecause of the hus*andsE direct do)ination, *ut for ;hat their hus*ands re,resent in status ter)s. -or if the hus*and is of oneEs o;n status le0el, then one has sa0ed all that ,urity for nothing, ;hile if he is of the ideal higher status le0el, he is likely to *e an undesira*le )ate ;ho is ;illing to take a lo;er+class ;ife *ecause of so)e ,ersonal or social defectso)e lecherous old MoliQrian ;ido;er, or so)eone of no*le credentials *ut no )oney. 2 final ,oint a*out hy,erga)y leads )e to )y *rief conclusions. /ote that, once again, ;o)en are crossing *oundaries, in this case *oundaries se,arating classes or castes or status grou,s in 0ertical stratification syste)s. Thus the a)*iguity of fe)aleness 0is+N+0is social categories re)ains at the core of the ,ro*le), and 0ie;s of ;o)en re)ain *ound in the ,urityG,ollution idio). Perha,s ,artly *ecause the *oundary crossing is in an u,;ard direction, ho;e0er, the sy)*oliIation of a)*iguity shifts fro) danger to ,urity, although the dee, structure, if one )ay use that ,hrase, re)ains the sa)e.

2t the ideological le0el, then, one )ay say that there has *een a fairly si),le structural transfor)ation, and nothing )uch has changed in )ale attitudes to;ard and )istrust of ;o)en. 9t is clear in conte),orary cultures ;ith fe)ale ,urity ideologies that ;o)en are still feared as a)*iguous and dangerous creatures. /onetheless 9 ;ish to close on an o,ti)istic note. ,age1&! Page & 3K0i+Strauss :.%#0= has suggested that there is no reason to assu)e that ;o)en and )en ;ould, if left to their o;n de0ices, for) dura*le *onds of )utual interde,endence. The ,hase of social e0olution that 9 ha0e *een discussing )ay ,erha,s least de,ressingly *e 0ie;ed as a long, ,ainful, and unfinished )o)ent in the dialectic of the e0olution of such *onds. % ,age1& Page &%

" 7ank and Gender 9ntroduction Since the days of the early 0oyagers, Polynesia has *een fa)ed for its distincti0e culture of gender and se(uality. Sensualis), eroticis), and a high le0el of se(ual acti0ity are acti0ely culti0ated throughout the area. 5o)ose(uality is unstig)atiIed. 7elations *et;een )en and ;o)en are relati0ely har)onious and )utually res,ectful. <o)en achie0e high ,u*lic office ;ith so)e regularity. -ro) a ;estern ,oint of 0ie;, the area has a,,eared as a EE,aradise? of ?li*eration,? li*eration of se( and of ;o)en. This ,icture is sur,risingly accurate as far as it goes, *ut it is only a ,artial ,icture. 2 )ore thorough e(cursion into the ethnogra,hic literature re0eals so)e )ore ,ro*le)atic features: enforced 0irginity of un)arried girls, a relati0ely high freHuency of ra,e, a 0ery )arked su*ordination of ;i0es to hus*ands ;ithin the do)estic conte(t. The ,ur,ose of this essay . is to de0elo, a general and syste)atic inter,retation of Polynesian society that ;ill account for as )any as ,ossi*le of the salient :and a,,arently contradictory= features of Polynesian gender culture. 9 ;ill argue that the se(Ggender syste) :as 7u*in L.%!&M calls it= can *e *est understood in relation to the ;orkings of the ?,restige syste),? the syste) ;ithin ;hich ,ersonal status is ascri*ed, achie0ed, ad0anced, and lost. ,age1&% Page #0 -or Polynesia the ?,restige syste)? is a syste) of hereditary ranking. ' Peo,le are *orn into certain statuses, high or lo;, that are theoretically unchangea*le for life, and that in turn are ,assed on to their offs,ring. Polynesia thus *elongs to that large class of societies la*eled ?hierarchical? in 3ouis 8u)ontEs :.%!0= classic for)ulation. 9n )odern ti)es the )ost fa)ous e(e),lar of the category is 9ndia, organiIed as a syste) of ranked castes. 8u)ont argues for the uniHueness of the 9ndian case, *ut the organiIational ,rinci,les he identifies for 9ndia )ay *e seen as central to a ;ide range of ;ell+kno;n societiesfeudal Euro,e, feudal Ba,an, ,re+)odern China, )uch of Southeast 2sia, and ,ro*a*ly the EEarchaic states? of Egy,t, Meso,ota)ia, and Central and South 2)erica. Most recently 9r0ing Gold)an has :inde,endently= discussed Polynesia in )uch the sa)e ter)s in ;hich 8u)ont discusses 9ndia, and Gold)anEs su,er* :in )y 0ie;= Ancient Polynesian Society :.%!0= ins,ired )uch of )y thinking in de0elo,ing the ,resent essay. The characteristic features of ?hierarchical? societies )ay *e 0ery *riefly su))ariIed here. The first is ;hat 8u)ont calls the ?enco),assing? status of ,restige criteria 0is+N+0is other ,rinci,les of social organiIation. This )eans, 0ery si),ly, that ,ersons andGor categories of ,ersons are ranked or graded according to criteria of social or religious 0alue that theoretically transcend i))ediate ,olitical and econo)ic ?realities.? /either great ;ealth nor great ,o;er necessarily generates great ,restige, ;hich deri0es rather fro) intangi*le Hualities like ?,urity? :in 9ndia= or ?)ana? :in Polynesia=, considered to *e largely innate and inherited. The highest social status in the syste) is the one highest on the scale of such Hualities, regardless of actual

,olitical or econo)ic ,o;er. To ,ut the ,oint slightly differently, doctrines of hereditary ,urity or heredity )ana are ideologies of aristocratic su,eriority, and these are the hege)onic ideologies of the society. The Brah)ins of 9ndia, and the highest+ranking aristocrats of Polynesia, )ay not in fact *e the )ost ,o;erful grou, in ter)s of ?real? ,olitics, *ut it is their 0alues that order society as a ;hole fro) high to lo;, and that )ust *e dra;n u,on to legiti)ate )ore )undane ,olitical and econo)ic ,o;er. The second distincti0e feature of hierarchical organiIation is ;hat 8u)ont calls ?holis),? ;hich has t;o interrelated as,ects. -irst, rather than the ?strata? *eing seen as inde,endent units that are then ?linked? in 0arious ;ays, they are seen as differentiated, functionally s,ecialiIed ,reci,itates of a ,rior ;hole. 9n ter)s of social ,ractice this )eans in turnthe second as,ect of holis)that social relations *et;een )e)*ers of the dif+ ,age1#0 Page #. ferent strata are organiIed in ter)s of )utual reci,rocities and o*ligations. 9nferiors o;e goods and ser0ices to su,eriors, *ut su,eriors also ha0e reci,rocal o*ligations to inferiors: no'lesse o'lige. Thus notions of ?e(,loitation? a,,ro,riate to the analysis of ?class? societies are only ,artially and i),erfectly a,,lica*le to the analysis of hierarchies. 9n the ,resent essay 9 ;ill atte),t to account for features of Polynesian gender and se(ual culture *y relating the) to 0arious as,ects of the hierarchical social organiIation, or in other ;ords, to as,ects of the ;orkings of ?the ,restige syste).? 9 )ust thus *egin *y Justifying the decision to dra; this ,articular set of connections. The decision ,artly deri0es fro) the fact that, as Just discussed, ,restige criteria are in fact ?enco),assing?: They ,ro0ide the largest fra)e;ork and the ulti)ate reference ,oint for the organiIation of al)ost e0ery as,ect of social life. -urther, )y reading of the general literature on se( and gender o0er a ;ide 0ariety of ethnogra,hic casesand not only in hierarchical societiessuggests that, e),irically, the ,restige syste) 0irtually al;ays see)s to ha0e ,o;erful interactions ;ith the gender syste). Thus in /e; Guinea the syste) of achie0ing ?*ig )an? status see)s ?key? to the organiIation of gender :see, for e(a),le, Strathern .% .=C in 9ndia it a,,ears to *e caste ranking :see Gough .%&&C 4al)an .%#$C 3each .%!0C Ta)*iah .%!$=C and in the Mediterranean it a,,ears to *e the syste) *y ;hich )en gain and lose ?honor? :see Pitt+7i0ers .%##, .%!!C B. Schneider .%!.=. -inally, and ,erha,s )ost i),ortantly, there is a )ore general theoretical reason for looking to ,restige. The ,restige syste) of any society is the syste) that defines the ulti)ate goals and ,ur,oses of life for actors in that society. 9t defines ;hat )en and ;o)en are, as ;ell as ;hat they are :or should *e= trying to acco),lish or to *eco)e, and it defines ho; they can and cannot go a*out that ,roJect. To anchor the analysis in the ,restige syste), in other ;ords, is to anchor it in cultural definitions of ,ersonal and social 0alue, rather than in e(ternally defined criteria. This does not )ean that ;e confine oursel0es analytically to e(,licit cultural notions and 0aluesC on the contrary, as ;ill *e e0ident in this essay, ;e )ust *e a;are that cultural categories and 0alues the)sel0es constitute inter,retations and e0en distortions of other configurations, ;hich )ust *e *rought to light through the a,,lication of our o;n :?e(ternal?= analytic tools. But ;e )ust start ;ith the cultural categories, or ;e ;ill distort the data fro) the outset. 9 *egin the discussion then *y descri*ing the for)al characteristics of the Polynesian ,restige :?rank?= syste). 9 then )o0e on to a discussion of the ,age1#. Page #' ,ri)ary goals of social action in such a syste). Briefly, these include the maintenance of status ,osition, ;hich is legiti)ate, and the ad,ancement of status ,osition, ;hich is not legiti)ate :and theoretically not e0en ,ossi*le=. 9 then consider the structurally a0aila*le )eans :or, in the Jargon, the ?strategies?= for achie0ing these goals, and s,ecifically those strategies ;ith the )a(i)u) nu)*er and ;idest range of i),lications for gender relations. Put 0ery si),ly, 9 ask first ;hat )en :for it is usually their ,restige syste)= are trying to do in these societies, and then ho; that ,roJect hinges on the organiIation of their relations ;ith ;o)en.

The a,,roach 9 utiliIe thus entails identifying a ,articular ,attern of action that syste)atically links )alefe)ale relations on the one hand ;ith the largest culturally defined orders of ,restige relations on the other. The ,attern or strategy in Huestion is often :*ut not al;ays= ?hidden?C identifying it ,ro,erly is in )any ;ays the hardest ,art of ,erfor)ing the analysis. Parenthetically it )ight *e noted that, ;hereas the analysis of ?egalitarian? syste)s entails identifying the hidden constraints on ,restige+oriented action, the analysis of hierarchies entails locating the hidden possi'ilities for such action. -inally, in the conclusion, 9 turn to the i),lications of the Polynesian analysis for understanding se( and gender ,atterning in hierarchical societies in general. 9 try to esta*lish that there is in fact so)ething like a ?co),le(,? a coherent set of se(Ggender ,atterns characteristic of such societies, and that this ?co),le(? is *est inter,reted in relation to certain general structural features of hierarchical social organiIation. 9 *ase the co),arati0e discussion on GoodyEs and Ta)*iahEs essays in Bride!ealth and %o!ry, co0ering large areas of Euro,e and 2sia. 9n )aking )anifest the e),irical ,arallels *et;een Polynesia and these )ore ;ell+kno;n areas, and in critiHuing GoodyEs and Ta)*iahEs inter,retations of their data fro) the ,oint of 0ie; of the Polynesian analysis, 9 try to sho; that the inter,retation de0elo,ed in the ,resent essay for one fairly e(otic corner of the ;orld is in fact of Huite ;ide a,,lica*ility. The 7ank Syste) Structure and "unctioning Polynesia is the designation for a large nu)*er of islands in the south Pacific, including :to )ention a fe; that are fa)iliar to non+s,ecialists= 5a;aii, Tahiti, and Sa)oa. The ,o,ulations of the islands are historically re+ ,age1#' Page #$ lated to one another, although all of the historical links ha0e not *een fully esta*lished. The languages of the 0arious islands are also closely related, and the ,eo,les are racially 0ery si)ilar. -urther)ore, there are *oth general and s,ecific si)ilarities of social and cultural ,atterning o0er the ;hole of the area. 2)ong the )any social and cultural ,atterns shared, ;ith 0ariations, *y all Polynesian societies, ,erha,s the )ost ,ro)inent is the syste) of hereditary ranking. 9 argued earlier that Polynesian rank syste)s fit 8u)ontEs definition of ?hierarchical? societies, and )ust *e ke,t conce,tually distinct fro) societies organiIed in ter)s of ?class.? 9t )ay *e noted here, ho;e0er, that in so)e Polynesian societies the social organiIation is )ore classlike, ;hile in others it is )ore ?hierarchical? in the 8u)ontian sense. 9 ;ill use Gold)anEs ter)inology to tag the different ty,es, ?traditional? *eing the )ore hierarchical, ?stratifiedEE *eing the )ore classlike. $ 9n a future essay 9 ho,e to look into 0ariations of gender ,atterning in relation to 0ariations of social organiIation along the hierarchy+0ersus+class a(is, *ut such co),arati0e Huestions are *eyond the sco,e of the ,resent essay. 7ank in Polynesia o,erates through the kinshi, syste)." The ,ri)ary units of social, econo)ic, and ,olitical organiIation are :internally stratified= descent grou,s, at the a,e( of ;hich stand the ?chiefs? ;ho collecti0ely constitute the ?aristocracy? of the society. Such descent grou,s are so)eti)es ranked in relation to one another, ;ith so)e sort of su,re)e or ,ara)ount chief at the to, of this ranking, *ut such )eta+organiIation is not ,resent in all cases. <ithin descent grou,s all su*units and indi0iduals are ranked through the a,,lication of t;o si),le rules. These are: :a= that si*lings :9 confine )yself to )ales unless other;ise stated= are ranked *y *irth order, and :*= that descendants of si*lings are ranked collecti0ely *y the *irth order of their res,ecti0e ancestors. 5ence the elder *rother is senior to his younger *rother, and all the descendants of the elder *rother are senior :and socially su,erior= to all the descendants of the younger *rother. 2n elder and a younger *rother thus theoretically ,roduce t;o related descent lines that are ranked as su,erior and inferior, res,ecti0ely, ;ithin a single descent grou,. <ithin the res,ecti0e lines, in turn, the sa)e rules continue to a,,ly, and ranking is syste)atically a,,lied do;n to e0ery indi0idual, the eldest son of the eldest son :of the eldest son, etc.= *eing highest in the grou,, the youngest son of the youngest son :of the youngest son, etc.= *eing lo;est. 7anking is thus continuous fro) to, to *otto), the ,rinci,les of senior+ ,age1#$

Page #" ity of descent ,roducing a gradation of su,eriority and inferiority that enco),asses all )e)*ers of the grou,. 9n addition, ho;e0er, all Polynesian societies )ake a categorical distinction *et;een ?aristocracy? and one or )ore nonaristocratic classes. The ter)inological distinction is clear enough, *ut the Huestion of ;ho falls into ;hich category is e(tre)ely 0aria*le fro) one Polynesian society to the ne(t, and is often rather haIy at the *order e0en ;ithin any gi0en society. BestEs co))ent a*out the Maori is a,,lica*le to )ost Polynesian societies: ?9nas)uch as all )e)*ers of a tri*e are connected ;ith ;ell+*orn fa)ilies, then it *eco)es a difficult )atter to define the !are or tutua class, the ,eo,le of lo; degree. /e0er ha0e 9 )et a nati0e ;ho ;ould ad)it that he ;as a )e)*er of that class? :Best 9 .%'": $"#=. But the difficulty of stating authoritati0ely ;ho is ?in? the aristocracy, and the 0agueness of the *order *et;een aristocrats and e0eryone else, ;ill not affect the argu)ents in the ,resent essay. 2 fairly Junior )e)*er of the descent grou, as a ;hole )ay ;ell *e the senior figure in his locality, style hi)self as a )e)*er of the aristocracy, and *e treated as such in the local fra)e;ork of social relations. 9nsofar as this is the case his fa)ily ;ould e(hi*it the sa)e *eha0ioral tendencies and ,atterns characteristic of the ?aristocracy? in other localities or at higher le0els of the structure. <ithin the descent grou,, ?the aristocracy? consists of the senior linethe ?chief,? his senior son, his senior son, and so on. -ro) a ,ers,ecti0e e(ternal to any gi0en descent grou,, the aristocracy of the society as a ;hole consists of all the senior lines of all the descent grou,s. The e(tent to ;hich they for) a society+;ide self+conscious EEclass? is one of the )aJor a(es of 0ariation *et;een the )ost ?traditional? :or ranklike= and the )ost ?stratified? :or classlike= Polynesian societies. E0en in the si),lest, )ost ?traditional? cases, tendencies to;ard class for)ation are ,resent, ,articularly ;ith res,ect to )arriagesenior lines of different descent grou,s tend to inter)arry ;ith one another, across the grou,s, ;hereas the re)ainder of the descent grou, tends to *e endoga)ous, the )e)*ers )arrying ;ithin the unit. 9n the )ore co),le( ?stratified? syste)s, this tendency hardens into fi(ed rules and ,ractices of class endoga)y. Tendencies to;ard aristocratic class for)ation are also seen in 0isiting and feasting ,atternsaristocrats tra0el to 0isit one another, and host one another to la0ish hos,itality, ;ith the ,roduce su,,lied *y the hostEs descent grou,, eager to ha0e their chief ,ut on a good sho;. 9n so)e of the ?stratified? societies, the ruling class is in effect a single kin ,age1#" Page #& grou,, unrelated to the co))oners of the society. 9n )ost Polynesian societies, ho;e0er, the aristocrats are senior kin to their o;n co))oners, and this fact ,laces i),ortant constraints on true class for)ation, as ;ell as on class conflict. Chiefs and aristocrats share at least as )any interests ;ith their o;n co))oners as they do ;ith other )e)*ers of their status class. Thus the Maori, a ?traditional? Polynesian society organiIed along lines Huite close to the ideal state of affairs outlined here, say that it is i),ossi*le for chiefly and co))oner interests to di0erge :Mishkin .%#.: "$$=. This is surely an o0erstate)ent e0en in a traditional syste), *ut it refers to the fact that although all chiefs *elong to ?the aristocracy,? each is there only *y 0irtue of his kinshi, ,osition in his o;n descent grou,. 5e is )ore like a re,resentati0e of his grou, ;ithin the aristocratic circle, than a )e)*er of an e(clusi0e ?classEE ;ith interests di0ergent fro) those of the ?class? of co))oners. Polynesian ,olitics, religion, and econo)ics are all *est understood ;ith reference to the descent grou, organiIation and class tendencies Just outlined. Considering ,olitics first, ,o;er and authority are fairly directly ordered *y the nesting structure of the ranked units ;ithin the descent grou,. Chiefs ha0e *oth )ore ,o;er and ;ider ,o;erC lesser aristocrats :such as heads of Junior lineages= ha0e less ,o;er, and o0er s)aller unitsC and so on do;n to household heads. Po;er is a direct function of status ,osition. 9t is not ,ri)arily a function of ;ealth ,er se :though chiefs are generally a little richer than e0eryone else=C and it is not, e(ce,t in the )ost co),le(, ?stratified? societies, a direct function of control o0er econo)ic ,roduction. 2ccess to su,ernatural ,o;er :mana=, and degree of ,ersonal sacredness :tapu=, closely follo; the sa)e lines, although ta,u tends to *e graded along the continuu) of graded rank, ;hereas access to and control of )ana tends to *e *inaryaristocracy has it and co))oners do not. The ta,uG)ana distinction is thus ,artly intelligi*le in relation to the contrast *et;een continuously graded kinshi, rank on the one hand, and the :inci,ient or o0ert= class distinction *et;een aristocrats and co))oners on the other. The aristocracyEs e(clusi0e direct access to or ,ossession of )ana is in so)e cases the )ost i),ortant *asis of the class distinction :e.g., in Tiko,ia L-irth .%#$: $."M=. The significance of the chiefEs control of )ana for his ,olitical authority cannot *e o0erstated: Throughout )uch of the area the chiefs are *elie0ed to control the forces of

nature critical to life and death, e0en ;here their ;orldly ,o;er o0er their su*Jects is Huite )ini)al and circu)scri*ed. 2s for econo)ic organiIation, )ost o*ser0ers agree that the key to un+ ,age1#& Page ## derstanding the syste) in Polynesia lies in distri*ution rather than ,roduction. 2lthough chiefs ha0e certain regulatory functions in ,roduction, and are the ulti)ate titular ?o;ners? of all the land, they, and the aristocracy in general, do not ha0e actual control o0er the distri*ution of the )eans of ,roduction :,ri)arily land=, or o0er the actual e(ecution of ,roduction, e(ce,t in the ?stratified? syste)s. <ithin the distri*ution structure, on the other hand, the chief is focal: Sur,lus in the for) of gifts, tri*ute, first fruits, and the like is channeled u, to hi) fro) his kins)en, and he in turn redistri*utes )ost of it *ack do;n through the structure of the kin grou,. 7edistri*ution is one of the )ost funda)ental o*ligations and ,ri0ileges of chiefshi,C it dis,lays *oth his EE,o;er,? in ter)s of his a*ility to co))and resources fro) a ;ide grou,, and his Hualities of leadershi,, in the sense that his ;ide distri*utions a,,ear as generosity, and as concern for the ;elfare of the ;hole. 2s the chiefEs ,olitical authority is in the si),lest cases a function of his kinshi, seniority, so are his econo)ic functions and ca,acities. 9n the a*sence of ta(ation and other force+sanctioned sur,lus e(traction )echanis)s, ;hich only a,,ear in the ?stratified? societies, his ca,acity to dra; resources to hi)self de,ends u,on nor)al )echanis)s of kinshi, ,restations and e(changes. 2nd *y 0irtue of *eing at the ,innacle of the kin grou,, the chief si),ly has )ore kins)en :that is, )ore acti0e kin ties ;ith )ore ,eo,le= than other )e)*ers of the grou, :-irth .%!&: '$&=. 9 ha0e thus far *een using the ter)s ?chiefs? and ?aristocrats? so)e;hat interchangea*ly. But ;hereas all chiefs are aristocrats, all aristocrats are not chiefs. The chiefshi, is an office occu,ied *y a single indi0idual, ;hereas the aristocracy is a category and, in so)e cases, a social class. Thus, succession to the chiefshi, is a so)e;hat distinct issue. 9n a large nu)*er of cases the seniority ,rinci,le of ,restige ranking is the sa)e ,rinci,le that ,roduces the chiefthe chief is the senior son of the last chief. 9n other cases, ho;e0er, this does not a,,ly, and succession to high office o,erates on different ,rinci,les. The succession ,rinci,le )ust *e se,arately deter)ined for each society. 9t is also i),ortant to distinguish *et;een ,rinci,les, or rules, of succession, descent, and inheritance. Throughout Polynesia, succession to high office ,asses ,atrilineally :through the )ale line=, ;hether to the first+*orn son :,ri)ogeniture= or to so)e other ,atrilineally related )ale chosen *y so)e other criterion. 9n e(ce,tional cases it ,asses to a daughter or so)e other ,atrilineally related fe)ale, *ut al;ays ?in trust? for the ne(t ,atri+ ,age1## Page #! lineally related )ale ;hen he *eco)es a0aila*le, or after the death of the ;o)an. 8escent, ho;e0er, ,asses cognatically, that is, )e)*ershi, in a descent grou, ,asses through *oth )en and ;o)en. Throughout Polynesia descent grou,s are ,referentially endoga)ous, that is, it is *oth nor)al and ,referred for one to )arry a )e)*er of oneEs o;n descent grou, *eyond a certain ,rohi*ited degree of kinshi,. Gi0en these ,oints, a child nor)ally *elongs to the descent grou, of *oth of its ,arents. <hen the ,arents *elong to t;o different grou,s, the childEs affiliation see)s largely deter)ined *y residence*y ;hether the fa)ily resides ;ith the ;ifeEs or hus*andEs grou,. Gi0en cognatic descent, ho;e0er, the child also retains clai)s of )e)*ershi, in the other ,arentEs grou,, and can acti0ate that tie if he or she desires, for ;hate0er reason. 9nheritance ,atterns are si)ilar to descent ,atterns. By and large, inheritance is *ilateral, that is, *oth sons and daughters inherit rights in their fa)ilyEs real ,ro,erty, )ostly land. But a daughterEs rights in land are largely usufructoryshe and her hus*and and children can ;ork it and enJoy its ,roduce during her lifeti)e, *ut it re0erts to her *rothers or their children ;hen she dies. Only the *rothers can continue to ,ass land do;n to their children, unless again the ;o)anEs children reside and affiliate ;ith her kin rather than her hus*andEs. There is a general ,reference for 0irilocal residence, for the ;ife to reside ;ith her hus*andEs ,eo,le, *ut in fact the rates of u(orilocality, of hus*ands residing ;ith the ;ifeEs ,eo,le, are Huite high throughout Polynesia. <here the rate is re,orted it see)s to *e *et;een $0 ,ercent and "0 ,ercent of all ,ost)arital residence :5echt .%!!: .%$C 3oe* .%'#: 0C Mead .%$0: '$=. E0en in cases of 0irilocal

residence, ho;e0er, ;o)en co))only send one or )ore sons *ack to *e ado,ted into households of their i))ediate kin, and thus to retain a stake in the ,ro,erty. & -inally, one should also )ention rules of ;hat )ight *e called ?*reeding.? Throughout Polynesia these are so)e;hat 0aria*le. 9n general, ho;e0er, it a,,ears that the father is seen as the fi(ed ,oint of reference, ;hile the )other acts as the 0aria*le, that is, all things *eing eHual, one inherits oneEs fatherEs rank or status, *ut if there are )aJor di0ergences of status *et;een )other and father in either direction, the )other e(erts the greater ,ull on the childEs status, u, or do;n. /or)ally )arriages are *et;een ,ersons relati0ely eHual in rank, *ut *oth hy,erga)y :;o)en )arrying u,= and hy,oga)y :;o)en )arrying do;n= are ,ossi*le and not unco))on. ,age1#! Page # #hat %o Actors #ant and Ho! Can They Get (t9 <ithin the structure and rule syste) Just descri*ed, Polynesian )en and ;o)en ,ursue li0es infor)ed *y the 0alues and ideals *uilt into the syste), and constrained *y its structural constraints. The su,re)e cultural 0alues are i),licit in the clai) that issues of status and ,restige are culturally enco),assing. <hat e0ery Polynesian ;ants is, )ini)ally, to )aintain the status and ,restige gi0en *y the ,osition into ;hich he or she ;as *orn, and )a(i)ally, to i),ro0e ,osition and hence gain )ore ,restige. 9n theory, of course, status is fi(ed *y *irth. 2d0ance)ent or rise :as o,,osed to si),le )aintenance= is theoretically not ,ossi*le, although so)e Polynesian societies :those Gold)an la*els ?o,en?= allo; for the legiti)ate rise of e(ce,tional indi0iduals *y 0irtue of e(traordinary deeds in s,ecial circu)stances. 9n fact, ho;e0er, there is a hidden )echanis) of status ad0ance)ent a0aila*le, ;ith only )inor 0ariations, in all Polynesian societies, including the ?o,en? ones, ;hich does not de,end on e(traordinary ,ersonal characteristics or deeds at all. 9t de,ends si),ly on syste)atically )ani,ulating the descent syste) in a certain ;ay, and it ser0es as ;ell for )aintaining ,osition :;hich accounts for its legiti)acy= as for ad0ancing or rising. This )echanis), )oreo0er, hinges centrally on the )ani,ulation of ;o)en, and on the )ani,ulation of )en through ;o)en, *y senior )ales in ,ositions of authority. The )echanis) thus links the organiIation of gender relations to ulti)ate cultural goals, and as such it ;ill ,lay a )aJor role in su*seHuent discussions. 9 ;ill sketch it *riefly here, and return to it in )ore detail at 0arious ,oints throughout the essay. <e )ay *egin *y taking the ,oint of 0ie; of a Junior aristocrat seeking to rise in the syste). 9t ;ill *e recalled that a descent grou, consists of seniorGsu,erior and JuniorGinferior ?lines,? theoretically descended fro) senior and Junior si*lings. 9f a Junior line can *uild itself u, in siIe, strength, and ;ealth, it )ay arri0e at the ,ossi*ility of either fissioning off and esta*lishing a full+fledged inde,endent grou, of its o;n, or of )aking a *id for the leadershi, and do)inant ,osition in its o;n grou,. :This latter is only ,ossi*le if the senior line is 0ery i),o0erished in )e)*ershi,, andGor has no a,,ro,riate candidate to succeed to the chiefshi,. But this state of affairs )ay itself *e the result of the *uilding ,rocess of the Junior line, during ;hich it attracts )any )e)*ers of the senior line to its ranks Lsee also Biersack .%!"M.= Status ad0ance)ent through descent+line *uilding is e(,licitly recog+ ,age1# Page #% niIed a)ong the Maori :Best 99 .%'": '"=, *ut so)ething like it )ust take ,lace in all Polynesian societies. Thus e0en ;here it is not e(,licitly descri*ed, there are references throughout the literature to the i),ortance of )aintaining large grou, siIe, as ;ell as an interest in ;eakening other grou,s *y thinning their )e)*ershi, :for e(a),le, Buck .%$': '%C 3inton .%$%: .&!C Gifford .%'%: $0C Mariner 9 . '!: '=. E0en in those :)any= Polynesian societies in ;hich ;arfare is the )ore 0isi*le :if illegiti)ate= route to )o*ility, it )ay *e ,resu)ed that descent line andGor descent grou, *uilding is necessarily o,erating, for a grou, ;ould ha0e to attain relati0ely large siIe *efore it could undertake a )aJor )ilitary ca),aign. 8escent line gro;th, as ;ell as decline and deterioration, )ust often ha,,en ?naturally,? as a conseHuence of de)ogra,hic fluctuations in different lines. 9t is also, ho;e0er, highly )ani,ula*le, and in ;ays that are ,articularly significant for issues of gender. S,ecifically, it a,,ears that a father )ay utiliIe the *ilateral inheritance syste), the fle(i*ility of cognatic descent line affiliation, and the fle(i*ility of residence rules, to *ring ne; )e)*ers and e0en additional land into his or*it. Because daughters can inherit, sons+in+la; ;ith less su*stantial ,ro,erty stakes in their o;n lines )ay *e attracted into their ;i0esE lines, ;hile at the sa)e ti)e, gi0en the ,atrilineal *ias in the inheritance structure, they can hold on to their o;n land and *ring it

into their affinal lineEs or*it. 2nd ,erha,s e0en )ore i),ortant for this ,rocess, the children of an u(orilocal )arriage ;ould *e )ore likely to affiliate ;ith their )otherEs than their fatherEs kin, thus adding significant nu)*ers of ,eo,le to the line. Peo,le, e0en )ore than land, are the *asis of descent line strength. <e ha0e thus far 0ie;ed the ,rocess ,ri)arily fro) the ,oint of 0ie; of an u,;ardly )o*ile Junior aristocrat, for ;ho) *uilding u, a large descent line could result in )aJor status ad0ance)ent. <ith a large grou, there is the ,ossi*ility of either fission, in ;hich case the leader *eco)es the to, )an in the ne;ly inde,endent unit, or of direct takeo0er of leadershi, ;ithin the natal unit as the senior line ;ithers and ;anes. The ,rocess is not all that different for co))oners. 2 co))oner cannot actually en0ision *eco)ing a chief in his lifeti)e, *ecause he is not *y *irth a )e)*er of the aristocracy fro) ;hich chiefs are dra;n. But on a s)aller scale a co))oner )ight *uild his line to a ,oint at ;hich it *ehoo0es a chief to take notice of its strength, and thus to )ake s,ecial efforts to retain its loyalty to hi)self rather than, say, to his ,resu)ing younger *rother. Thus the chief )ight )arry one of his daughters into the line, andGor gi0e the line s,ecial land ,age1#% Page !0 grants, andGor a,,oint its leader to s,ecial office, and so forth, all of ;hich :*ut ,articularly the first= *egins a ,rocess of ?aristocratiIation? of the line. 9ndeed, e0en for an indi0idual ;ith no ,ersonal a)*itions for )o*ility, there is 0alue in ,laying the sa)e ga)e, in )aintaining the siIe and strength of the unit, ho;e0er s)all and lo;, of ;hich he is the head. 5eadshi, of any significance only e(ists ;hen there is )e)*ershi, of any significance. There is a sense then in ;hich e0en the littlest )an is actually or ,otentially engaged in this ,rocess. 2nd finally ;e )ust consider the high chiefs the)sel0es, ;ho ,ursue a slightly different though closely related set of strategies. 2 chief, like e0eryone else, ;ould ho,e to attract u(orilocal sons+in+la;, and ulti)ately to retain children of daughters as ;ell as sons, to )aintain or aug)ent the strength of his o;n ,articular line. But he also has an interest in the ;ell+*eing of the descent grou, as a ;holein its internal cohesi0eness and its e(ternal relations*ecause the grou,, and not Just his o;n line, is his ,olitical *ase. 5ence at least so)e chiefly daughters are e(,orted fro) the grou, to forge strategic alliances ;ith other grou,s, ;hile yet others, as ,re0iously noted, )ight *e )arried do;n into lo;er internal lines, to re;ard the) for ,ast ser0ices andGor to *ind the) )ore closely to the chiefly line. Beneath these 0arying strategies, ho;e0er, lies the sa)e thread: enriching, enlarging, and solidifying the descent grou, through retention of fe)ale as ;ell as )ale kin, the fe)ales in turn ?*inding in? additional )e)*ers or ,otentially schis)atic e(isting )e)*ers. 9t should *e noted for future reference that e0en the e(,ort of chiefly daughters to other grou,s for ,ur,oses of forging ,olitical alliances has a significance different fro) that of the e(oga)y ty,ically ,racticed in unilineal syste)s. Gi0en the cultural e),hasis on descent grou, endoga)y in Polynesia, e0en e(oga)ous )arriages are 0ie;ed as ?incor,orati0e,? or at least centri,etal. 2 Maori ?tri*e,? for e(a),le, 0ie;ed such )arriages as ?cords? to ?,ullEE other tri*es its ;ay ;hen assistance ;as needed in ;ar :Best 99 .%'": '$&=. Thus the retention of the daughterEs or sisterEs loyalty, if not her actual residential ,resence, re)ains crucial to the strategies of status )aintenance a)ong chiefs, as it is to strategies of *oth )aintenance and ad0ance)ent at other le0els of the syste). 2nother ;ay of 0isualiIing this ,rocess is to realiIe that, fro) the ,oint of 0ie; of heads of social units :;hether of households, descent lines, or full descent grou,s= cognatic kinshi, reckoning creates an in+*uilt ,ro*le): The units al;ays ha0e the ,otential for e0a,orating out fro) under the to,. ,age1!0 Page !. Gi0en the fact that e0eryone has dual affiliation, e0eryone could theoretically dis,erse to his or her other set of kin, lea0ing the head as head of nothing. There is thus great cultural e),hasis on centri,etal ,rocesses, on ?,ulling,? ?*inding,? and ?concentrating,? accounting a)ong other things for the ,reference for descent grou, endoga)y, and e0en in so)e cases for :chiefly= *rother+sister )arriage, ;hich EEconcentrates? the ?)ana? of the line in ;hich it occurs :see Pirk,atrick .%!%=. Pins;o)enes,ecially daughters and sistersare crucial to this ?,ulling in? ,rocess, in ;ays ;e ha0e already indicated, and on ;hich ;e ;ill ela*orate )ore fully in later sections.

Before )o0ing on to a consideration of the treat)ent of kins;o)en, ho;e0er, it is i),ortant to ree),hasiIe that )ani,ulations of descent, )arriage, and residence are not ends in the)sel0es. They ser0e the ,ur,ose of )aintaining or enhancing status, ;hich are the su,re)e goals of the syste). Much of the ensuing analysis ;ill concentrate on the relationshi, *et;een descent and )arriage )ani,ulations on the one hand, and ,atterns of gender relations on the other, *ut such )ani,ulations are )eans, not ends. The significant analytic relationshi, re)ains that *et;een status or ,restige on the one hand, and gender and se(uality on the other. Gender 7elations Sisters and %aughters The e),hasis on descent for the re,roduction of statusC the descent grou, as the )ost i),ortant social, econo)ic, and ,olitical unitC and finally the cognatic and endoga)ous nature of Polynesian descent grou,s, all co)*ine to )ake kin relations the )ost i),ortant relations in society. <ithin the general do)ain of kin relations, in turn, the cultural e),hasis falls u,on si*lingshi,. The si*ling a(is is *oth the a(is of unity and the a(is of di0ision in the syste). 2 solidary grou, of *rothers :;e ;ill co)e to the role of sisters in a )o)ent= is the cultural ideal, for)ing the structural *ack*one of a solidary kin grou,. But there is also inci,ient di0ision in this grou,: The Huestion of succession to headshi, of the unit di0ides one *rother :usually the eldest= fro) all the others. Gi0en high rates of di0orce and re)arriage, as ;ell as ,olygyny a)ong chiefs, there are half+*rothers as ;ell, ;hose clai)s to succession, like those of Junior full *rothers, are ;eaker, *ut ;ho )ay ;ell ha0e such designs nonetheless. Si*ling unity is the ideal, *ut si*ling ri0alry, so)eti)es 0iolent, is docu)ented throughout the area ,age1!. Page !' :Best 9 .%'": .00, ".$C -irth .%#$: .##, $$0C Buck .%$ : .&&C G. 7ogers .%!!: .!'C Mariner 9 . '!: .$!C Mariner 99 . '!: ..'C Oli0er .%!": #"", !'!, !"'=. # The res,ect for sisters, also docu)ented throughout Polynesia, ?fits? ;ith the general e),hasis on the si*ling a(is, *ut is not fully e(,lained *y it, and )ust *e e(,lored )ore fully. The sister is in so)e sense a ?key sy)*ol? :Ortner .%!$*C 8. Schneider .%# C Turner .%#!= in Polynesian culture, and like all good key sy)*ols she o,ens )any doors and guides us to i),ortant insights into the inner ;orkings of the syste). Brother+Sister and -ather+8aughter 7elations Gold)an ,oints out that the ter)s of address for o,,osite+se( si*lings :sister, *rother s,eakingC *rother, sister s,eaking= are throughout the area, and ;ith 0ery fe; e(ce,tions, *uilt on a ste) ter) that is related to the ter) for ?deity?: ?Throughout all of the area this one conce,t of the godlike Huality of *rother and sister to each other stands as a for)ida*le constant? :.%!0: "#0C see also -irth .%!0: '!' and ,assi)=. Gold)an cautions us against reasoning fro) ter)inology to *eha0ior, and indeed the *rother+sister relationshi, has a )arkedly different character in <estern and Eastern Polynesia :see Gold)anEs chart on the distri*ution of *rother+sister ?res,ects? L.%!0: &!%M=.! 9n the <est the *rother+sister relationshi, is one of great for)ality of interaction, or of co),lete for)al a0oidance. Cross+si*lings in such a0oidance relationshi,s do not s,eak to one another, eat together, slee, under the sa)e roof, or e0en :in so)e cases= re)ain in the roo) ;hen the other one is ,resent. 2*o0e all, the su*Ject of se( )ust ne0er *e raised ;hen an o,,osite se( si*ling is a*out :5unts)an and 5oo,er .%!&: "'&C Mead .%"%: $"C Gifford .%'%: '.C Gold)an .%!0: &!%=. 9n the East on the other hand the relationshi, is close and e0en inti)ate. 9n so)e cases *rothers and sisters are acti0e in facilitating the lo0e affairs of their o,,osite+se( si*lings. 9n Mangaia, for e(a),le, ?a *rother and sister )ay ease the ;ay for a si*lingEs ,artner of ;ho) they a,,ro0e? :Marshall .%!.: .' C see also 3oe* .%'#: #& for /iue, and -irth .%&!: . 0 for Tiko,ia. LTiko,ia is a ;estern Polynesian society ;ith ?eastern? *rother+sister relational ,atterns.M=. 2nd in 5a;aii, ?The )ost suita*le ,artner? for the king ;as his sisterC their offs,ring ;ere EEsacred? and ?di0ine? :Malo .%0$: 0=. Thus ;here, as in these e(a),les, the *rother+sister relationshi, is not )arked ;ith for)al res,ect and a0oidance, it often a,,ears as ha0ing ,articular inti)acy. ,age1!' Page !$

The <estern Polynesian ,attern of for)al res,ect *et;een *rother and sister has i),lications for intergenerational kinshi, relations. Throughout this ,art of Polynesia, the fatherEs sister stands in a relationshi, of e(ce,tional authority o0er her *rotherEs children :in Tonga, an e0en higher authority than their father=, and the )otherEs *rother stands in a relationshi, of e(ce,tional indulgence to his sisterEs children :5unts)an and 5oo,er .%!&: "'"C -irth .%&!: .%#, .%%C Mead .%$0: . , .$#"&C Gifford .%'%: .!, . , '$&C Pae,,ler .%!.: ,assi)C G. 7ogers .%!!: ,assi)=. -atherEs sisters and )otherEs *rothers also often ha0e i),ortant ritual res,onsi*ilities 0is+N+0is their cross nieces and ne,he;s, fro) ;hich the )other and father )ay *e e(cluded :5unts)an and 5oo,er .%!&: "'"C Mead .%$0: '!, '%. See also 5andy .%'$: !. and Suggs .%##: .'! for an Eastern case of this=. Concerning the co),le)entary issue of great inti)acy *et;een *rother and sister carrying into the succeeding generation, it should *e noted that although *rother+sister )arriage is rare, and is restricted to high aristocracy, first cousin )arriage is not unco))on throughout the area. Mostly it takes ,lace *et;een cross+cousins, that is, *et;een children of o,,osite+se( si*lings, and so carries the the)e of the s,ecial relationshi, *et;een o,,osite+se( si*lings further. 9n the MarHuesas it is the ,referred for) of )arriage, at all le0els of the society :Suggs .%##: .'!C 5andy .%'$: !.=, *ut in )ost cases it is ,referred and ,re0alent ,ri)arily a)ong the aristocracy, and o,tional for )e)*ers of other strata :Buck .%$ : .$0$C Gifford .%'%: .#C Oli0er .%!": !#"C 5andy and Pukui .%& : .0%=. Because cross+cousins are classed ;ith si*lings in )any Polynesian societies :Gold)an .%!0: "#"=, cross+cousin )arriage is so)eti)es culturally recogniIed as )arriage *et;een ?*rothers? and ?sisters,? and hence as a 0iolation of the incest ta*oo :Gifford .%'%: ''C Gold)an .%!0: "#"=;hich is nonetheless culturally rationaliIed in 0arious ;ays. % 9t ;ill *e useful *efore ,ursuing the discussion further to e(,and our sense of the sister, and to see her as, at the sa)e ti)e, the daughter of her and her *rothersE father. The cultural e),hasis on her as sister )akes sense in ter)s of the o0erall e),hasis on the si*ling unit, as the unit of *oth necessary solidarity and ,otential di0ision o0er ti)e. 9n fact ho;e0er the treat)ent of daughters is 0irtually constant throughout the area, e0en ;here :)ostly in Eastern Polynesia= the s,ecial res,ects, a0oidances, and o*ligations of the *rother+sister relationshi, are not culturally ela*orated. 9t )ay *e tentati0ely suggested that the sister a0oidance co),le( is a ,articular ,age1!$ Page !" 0ariant on the )ore general ,attern of s,ecial treat)ent of daughters. But ;e need not decide ;hether the daughter or the sister is the )ore *asic figure in this dra)a. 9t ;ill si),ly *e useful to *e a*le to shift fle(i*ly *et;een her t;o as,ects as the occasion arises. 9t ;ill *e recalled that daughters as ;ell as sons nor)ally inherit at least usufructory rights to real ,ro,erty throughout the area. .0 2lthough there is a general ,reference for, or at least a tendency to;ard, 0irilocal residence, there is also a high rate of u(orilocal residence, )ostly for reasons of the ;ifeEs ,ro,erty. 6(orilocal residence a,,ears to carry no sha)e or social disa*ility for the in+)arrying hus*and, nor is he ,laced in a su*ordinate or de,endent ,osition 0is+N+0is his affines, *ecause affinal relations, unlike kin relations, are not inherently hierarchical. Thus u(orilocal residence )ay often ha0e attractions for the indi0idual )ale, es,ecially a Junior sonG*rother ;ith no ,articular ,ros,ects of succession in his o;n line, ;ho can at least *etter his econo)ic situation if not his status ,ros,ects. -ro) the ,oint of 0ie; of his ;ifeEs kin, in turn, in+)arrying sons+in+la; are also highly attracti0e. /ot only do such sons+in+la; the)sel0es add strength to their affinal descent lines. They also ,ro*a*ly add their children ;ho, *ecause of residing ;ith the )otherEs kin and ;orking their land, ;ill tend to affiliate ;ith their )otherEs line rather than their fatherEs. Moreo0er, the in+)arrying sons+in+la; )ay also add land. 2 ;o)anEs land rights generally re0ert to her kins)en after she dies and cannot *e ,assed on to her children, unless she and the children re)ain on the land and affiliate ;ith her fatherEs and *rothersE line. MenEs rights, on the other hand, are ?real? and herita*leC e0en if they )o0e a;ay their clai)s are stronger on retaining the land and ,assing it on to their children. The u(orilocal son+in+la; )ay thus add hi)self, his children, and his land to his ;ifeEs grou,. Dirilocal residence, the ?nor)al? ,attern, )aintains the status HuoC it neither adds nor su*tracts )uch of significance for the ;ifeEs or hus*andEs line. 6(orilocal residence, on the other hand, has 0ery strong *uilding ,o;er for the ;ifeEs line. 9t is thus clear that enlarging a descent line *y )eans other than, or in addition to, natural increase entails holding on to daughters :or, fro) the *rothersE ,oint of 0ie;, sisters= and using the) to *ring in )en as in+)arrying sons+in+la;... 9t is this dyna)ic that ,ro0ides the *asis for understanding the ,eculiar treat)ent of Polynesian daughters: enforcing their 0irginity ;hile at the sa)e ti)e *eautifying the) and )aking the) )ore se(ually attracti0e. This ,attern )akes sense if ;e see the first ,art, control

,age1!" Page !& of 0irginity, as a sy)*olic ?holding on? to the daughter through close regulation of her se(ual *eha0ior, and the second ,art, the enhance)ent of her se(ual attractions, as an e(,ression of her function as ?*ait? for her descent line. The t;o ,ractices, in other ;ords, are really t;o sides of the sa)e coin, the coin of her role in the descent line *uilding ga)e. 3et us no; e(,lore so)e of the ra)ifications of controlling and *eautifying Polynesian daughters. Dirginity ?5olding on? to daughters )ay *egin early, ;ith s,ecial affection and indulgence accorded the) in childhood *y their fathers :see -irth .%#$: .&"C Pae,,ler .%!.: .%.=. But the fullest )anifestation of this tendency is seen in the guarding of un)arried daughtersE 0irginity. The )ost fully ela*orated for) of the se(ually controlled daughterGsister in turn is to *e seen in the institutionaliIed ?sacred )aid,? found throughout the aristocracy of <estern Polynesia. 9 ;ill *egin ;ith her, and then sho; ho; the ,rinci,les of her role, )inus the full institutional ,ara,hernalia, are to *e seen o,erating throughout the entire area, and through all le0els of society. The ?sacred )aid? co),le( has *een descri*ed *y Mead for Sa)oa. The Sa)oan sacred )aid, or taupo, is su,,osed to *e the chiefEs sistersE daughter, *ut often in fact it is his daughter :Mead .%$0: '#=. .' The taupo ,osition is one of ritual res,onsi*ility and honor. She heads the organiIation of un)arried girls and untitled )enEs ;i0es that has the res,onsi*ility of hosting and entertaining 0isiting ,arties that co)e to the 0illage. 5er ,osition is actually ritually su,erior to that of the chiefly heir and successor, the manaia, ;ho heads the organiIation of un)arried and untitled )en :Mead .%$0: ."=. She e0en recei0es )ore res,ect than the ;i0es of high chiefs :Mead .%$0: . "=..$ 5er )arriage is a 0illage affair :Mead .%$0: '!= and all the ;o)en of the 0illage )ake )ats and ta,a for her do;ry :Mead .%$0: !0=. 9n a real sense she is sy)*olically the daughterGsister of the entire 0illage, and its ,restige is tied u, ;ith her ,restige :Mead .%"%: #&=. But: The taupo is under strictest se(ual constraint. She has to retain her 0irginity until )arriage, and if she is seduced, it is dealt ;ith *y the fono, the go0erning council, as a ,u*lic cri)e ,unisha*le *y the dro;ning or *eating to death of her seducer :Mead .%$0: .!=. 5er )arriage )ay *e ,u*licly consu))ated :Mead .%"%: #$=, *ut e0en if it is not, there is ,u*lic dis,lay of the ,roof of her 0irginity in the for) of a *loodstained )at, after the con+ ,age1!& Page !# su))ation. 9f she is found not to *e a 0irgin, she is *eaten *y her :fe)ale= relati0es :Mead .%"%: &#=. 2 si)ilar institution is re,orted for ,re+si(teenth+century Tonga :G. 7ogers .%!!=C in )odern Tonga all the chiefEs un)arried daughters are called taupo :the ter) *orro;ed fro) Sa)oa= and )ust *e chaste :Gifford .%'%: .'%=, *ut the s,ecially fa0ored figure is the tamaha, the chiefEs sisterEs daughter :Gifford .%'%: !", !%, 0=. 2 taupo+ty,e institution is )entioned for Mangaia :Mead .%$0: %$=, and one o*ser0er notes in )odern ti)es that the only 0irgins andGor ?old )aids? in the Mangaian 0illage he studied ;ere fro) a high chiefly fa)ily :Marshall .%!.: .$0=. 9n Mangare0a, if the first *orn of the first ;ife of a high aristocrat is a fe)ale, she is gi0en the s,ecial status of tepeiru, ;ith 0ery high social rank. She often recei0es ?e(altation *y the ,eo,le of her district, and so)e tepeiru ;ent on to *eco)e de facto rulers of their grou,s? :Buck .%$ : .&#=. 2)ong the :ancient= Maori the institution closely rese)*led that in Sa)oa. The puhi, or sacred )aid, ;as usually the eldest daughter of a chief of high rank ?;ho ;as elected or chosen as a ,erson of conseHuence and )ade ta,u in the sense of ,rohi*ited. She had to re)ain a 0irgin until )arriage? :Best 9 .%'": "&0=. She often had cere)onial functions, and ;as highly res,ected, e0en EE,etted? and deferred to :.%'": $&.=. ?So)e fa)ous puhi *eca)e reno;ned chieftainesses in later life, and co))anded res,ect of their o;n and other tri*es? :.%'": "&$=. But they ;ere ?so)eti)es late )arrying *ecause their fa)ilies ;ere so ,articular a*out the choice of )ate? :.%'": "&0=. 2nd finally, in Puka,uka, the sacred )aid?an eldest daughter, eldest sister, or e0en fatherEs sister?is initiated ;ith s,ecial rites and ne0er )arries at all, ?re)aining a guarded 0irgin for life.? She is a fully sacred figure ;ho links the chief to the gods :5echt .%!!: .%#% =. 9t is i),ortant to note first that the sacred )aid ,osition is one of highso)eti)es 0ery highhonor. This )ay *e taken as, a)ong other things, an e(,ression of the genuine 0alue of the daughter or sister ;ho re)ains affiliated ;ith her natal grou,, in line ;ith the argu)ents ,resented earlier.

9n addition to great ,u*lic honor, the )ost o*0ious as,ect of the sacred )aidEs situation is her 0irginity, ;hich is culturally stressed and forcefully ,rotected. <hat is sy)*oliIed *y her 0irginity is not her o;n self+control :as in occasional, usually religious, )ale celi*acy= *ut the control *y her kins)en o0er her *eha0ior :see es,ecially Shore .% .=. 2s a sy)*ol of the structure discussed earlier, the daughterEs 0irginity thus re,resents the kins+ ,age1!# Page !! )enEs ?hold? on her, necessary for the ,rocess of *uilding or si),ly )aintaining descent line siIe and strength. The ,rocess of descent line )aintenance is ,articularly i),ortant for chiefs, ;hose 0ery ,osition de,ends u,on heading a large, internally cohesi0e, and e(ternally ;ell+connected grou, that is his econo)ic and ,olitical *ase. <e said earlier that chiefs )ay de,loy their daughters in a 0ariety of ;ays to achie0e this end, including retaining the) in u(orilocal )arriages, )arrying the) do;n into lo;er lines of the descent grou,, or sending the) out in geogra,hically e(oga)ous )arriages. But ;e also noted that all of these )ethods :including e(oga)y= assu)e the notion of the daughter as a centri,etal force. 9t is 0ital that she *e ?held? sy)*olically e0en ;hen sent out in )arriage for strategic ,ur,oses. /ot sur,risingly, then, the 0irginity of chiefly daughters is nearly uni,ersally reHuired throughout Polynesia, and *acked *y ,hysical force, e0en ;here there is no sacred )aid co),le( at all :Gold)an .%!0: &#"=. 2)ong co))oners, ho;e0er, there is also a generally re,orted tendency to o0ersee daughtersE se( li0es )ore closely than sonsE :e.g., Buck .%$': $"C Suggs .%##: #"C Gifford .%'%: '., .%.=. This ;ould *e consistent ;ith the ,oint that status )o*ility through descent line *uilding is an a0enue ,otentially o,en to all. 9n general ho;e0er, co))oner control of daughtersE se(ual *eha0ior is far less strict than a)ong the aristocracy, *ecause the chances of )o*ility for co))oners are clearly )ore re)ote :Gold)an .%!0: &#"=. Se( 2s Theft 2lthough high+status girls are hea0ily controlled, and lo;er+status girls are at least )ore closely ;atched than *oys, this does not )ean that there is little ,re)arital se(ual acti0ity in Polynesiafar fro) it. Boys, as ;e shall see, are encouraged to *e as se(ually acti0e as ,ossi*le, and )ost of their se(ual acti0ity takes ,lace ,recisely ;ith these sa)e girls. PaternalGfraternal control thus does not actually *lock ,re)arital se(ual acti0ity, *ut it does )ean that se( ;ith an un)arried girl is in so)e sense ?stolen? fro) her father andGor her *rothers. 9t is in the conte(t of a 0ie; of )uch of ,re)arital se( as ?theft? in turn that a fairly ;ide range of Polynesian se(ual ,ractices *eco)es intelligi*le: the se)i+institutionaliIed for) of :Huasi= ra,e called ?slee, cra;lingEEC the general interest in deflo;ering 0irginsC institutionaliIed elo,e)ent and )arriage *y ca,tureC and the dis,lays of hy)eneal *lood and other signals of ?triu),h? at ;eddings. /ot all ,re)arital se( in Polynesia is construed *y the ,arties in0ol0ed as ?theft,? *ut ,age1!! Page ! the ,roliferation of se(ual patterns ;ith theft connotations reHuires e(,lanation. 9 ;ill say a fe; ;ords a*out each. Slee, cra;ling, first, entails stealthily and une(,ectedly entering a girlEs house at night and ha0ing se( ;ith her, usually o0er her ,rotest and resistance. 9n Mangaia it is called motoro, and is seen as a sign of )asculinity. 2 )an ;ho gains se(ual access to a girl through for)al engage)ent is seen as a ;eakling. The i),ortant thing is to s;eet+talk her, rather than to use force, so that she ;ill not screa) and ;ake u, her fa)ily :Marshall .%!.: .'%=. 9n 7akahanga motoro is said to *e noncoerci0e, *ut the e),hasis again is on not ;aking the father, ;ho ;ill *eat the *oy if he disco0ers hi) :Dayda .%#.: '0"=. slee, cra;ling is also co))on in Mangare0a :motoroBuck .%$ : .'0=, in Sa)oa :moetotoloMead .%$0: #.C Shore .% .=, ." and in Tahiti :maferaOli0er .%!": $#&=,.& in the latter t;o cases a,,arently coerci0e. The institution e(,resses ;ell the fact that, *ecause un)arried girls are under the control of their fathers and *rothers, se( ;ith the) )ust *e ?stolen.? This is the case e0en ;hen they are consenting, as they so)eti)es are in slee, cra;ling, and usually are in other conte(ts. 9ndeed the fact that coercion in slee, cra;ling )ight range fro) none to total sho;s that the girlEs ,ersonal interest or lack of it is irrele0ant, for the ,ractice has )ore to do ;ith her structural ,osition than ;ith her senti)ents. On the other hand, the fact that there is often strong coercion, that slee, cra;ling often a,,ro(i)ates ra,e, ;ill reHuire further discussion, and 9 ;ill return to this as,ect of it later.

The other great s,ort of adolescent se(ual acti0ities is deflo;ering 0irgins, the interest in ;hich is nearly uni0ersal throughout Polynesia. 8eflo;ering a 0irgin is a )aJor e0ent for a *oy, and *oys ?count cou,? as to ho; )any 0irgins they ha0e deflo;ered :see -irth .%&!: &.%C Marshall .%!.: .&.C Mead .%$0: %&%#=. 9n Tiko,ia a *oy )ight undergo a ,ri0ate religious ritual for success in deflo;ering 0irgins :-irth .%&!: &'$=. Most )en also clai) to ;ant 0irgin ;i0es, or at least girls ;ho ;ere 0irgins ;hen they first got to the) :-irth .%!&: &."C 3oe* .%'#: !&=. Because girls in fact do not )ake )uch effort to retain their 0irginity, the interest in the conHuest of 0irgins has again less to do ;ith conHuering the girl, than in succeeding in taking so)ething that ?*elongs? to her kins)en..# Elo,e)ent and )arriage *y ca,ture again carry the sa)e )essage. 9n Sa)oa the great thing is to elo,e ;ith the taupo of the ne(t 0illage, stealing her out fro) under the collecti0e nose of her kin :Mead .%$0: %&=. More generally, elo,e)ent is the standard for) of )arriage in Sa)oa, )odern ,age1! Page !% Tonga, and a)ong Tiko,ian co))oners :Mead .%$0: %&C .%"%: #"#!C G. 7ogers .%!!C Beaglehole .%".: % C -irth .%&!: "$%=. 2)ong the Tiko,ian aristocracy, on the other hand, 0irtually all )arriage is *y ca,ture. The ;o)an is selected *y the groo)Es kin, forci*ly taken fro) her household to the ;aiting *ridegroo), and held do;n for her first :ra,e= intercourse ;ith her hus*and :-irth .%&!: ""', "&0=. 9t is considered a sha)e for the *ridegroo) if the girl is not a 0irgin :-irth .%&!: "&.=. The ca,ture is often resisted 0iolently, in a )ore or less ,itched *attle, *y the girlEs fa)ily :as ;ell as *y the girl herself=, and later often retaliated in a counterca,ture :.%#$: "!0=. -inally, in this cluster of ,atterns e(,ressing the notion of se( as theft fro) the girlEs kin, 9 ;ould also include the ,attern of ,u*lic dis,lay of tokens of 0irginity at )arriage, re,orted fro) Sa)oa :Mead .%$0: %&%#=, and for Tiko,ia :-irth .%#$: "#"=. Tongans too e(,ect their ;o)en to *e 0irgins at )arriage, although they dis,ense ;ith the ,u*lic dis,lay of hy)eneal *lood as ?indelicate? :Mariner 9 . '!: .".=. /ote ho;e0er that at one Tui TongaEs ;edding, a )an at the door of the nu,tial cha)*er announced the *edding do;n of the *ride and groo) ;ith ?three hideous yells :si)ilar to the ;ar+;hoo,= . . . follo;ed u, i))ediately *y the loud and re,eated sound of the conch? :Mariner 9 . '!: .'"=. 9n all three cases the de)onstrations a,,ear as ?triu),hal,? e(,ressing 'oth the *oyEs triu),h in ?getting? the girl, and her kins)enEs triu),h in ha0ing successfully guarded her 0irginity until then. .! To reca,itulate: 2 girl has real 0alue to her descent line, ,articularly if she sustains her affiliation ;ith it and *rings in her hus*and, his land, and their children. There is thus structural )oti0ation for ?holding on? to a daughterGsister. This ?holding on? is sy)*olically e(,ressed through control of her 0irginity. The 0irgin *oth dis,lays her kins)enEs sy)*olic retention of her and, *ecause 0irginity is defined as highly honora*le, e(,resses her genuine 0alue to her grou,. 2t the sa)e ti)e the control structure )eans that se( ;ith her )ust *e ?taken,? ?stolen,? or other;ise forcefully a,,ro,riated, e0en ;hen she ,resents herself, as she often does, as a consenting ,arty. 5ence the ,re0alence of 0arious for)s of se(ual theftslee, cra;ling, )arriage *y ca,ture, triu),hal defloration of 0irgins, and the like. <e ha0e seen that so)e of these se(ual for)s are 0iolent, not only 0is+N+0is the girlEs fa)ily, *ut 0is+N+0is the girl herself. 9n fact the full range of se(ual 0iolence has yet to *e e(,lored and accounted for. 9n addition to the 0arious for)s already discussed, there is a fairly high incidence of ,lain ra,e, ,age1!% Page 0 *oth *y indi0idual )ales, and *y gangs. 9n order to understand this, as ;ell as to understand the full significance of the daughterGsister in general, ;e )ust e(,lore further the sy)*olic treat)ent of this figure. Beautification -or the full ,rocess of *uilding or e0en sustaining a descent line to ;ork itself out, the girl )ust not only *e retained *y her kin *ut )ust also *ring in a hus*and. The Puka,ukan sacred )aid ;ho re)ains celi*ate for her entire life is an e(tre)e sy)*ol of the first ,art of the ,rocess, *ut )ost sacred )aids, and indeed )ost daughters, ho;e0er closely guarded they )ay ha0e *een, e0entually )arry. 9f one side of the sy)*olic coin is strong control of the girlEs se(ual *eha0ior, rendering her re)ote if not ;holly inaccessi*le, the other side entails enhancing her attractions and her 0alue. 5ence the a,,arently contradictory ,ractice of ela*orately *eautifying the girl ;hile kee,ing her under sur0eillance and control. The danghterGsister is clearly *eing used as ?*ait.?

9t should *e re)e)*ered that her 0alue is already high. Econo)ically she has her inheritance that, if the *oy is ;illing to Join her grou,, *eco)es )ore ?real? and trans)issi*le to her and her hus*andEs children. 7itually too her status is high. Sacred )aids ha0e for)al status su,eriority, *ut all 0irgins ha0e the honor that deri0es fro) 0irginity itself. 9n other ;ords the guarding of her 0irginity is also ,art of her general social enhance)ent. Beyond all of this, ho;e0er, there are direct and syste)atic efforts ai)ed at enhancing a girlEs *eauty and se(ual desira*ility. 9n )ost cases the *eautification ,ractices are co)*ined ;ith the restraint andGor seclusion of the girl, thus sho;ing rather conclusi0ely the link *et;een retaining her as a 0irgin, and treating her as se(ual ?*ait.? 9n Tonga, ?s,ecial care LisM taken of the co),le(ion of a girl of rank.? 5er skin is lightened through the use of 0arious ,re,arations, and she is ke,t sitting in the shade as )uch as ,ossi*le. She sits on soft cushions to kee, her *uttocks and thighs soft and s)ooth, and sits in such a ;ay as to kee, her ankles fro) *eing )arred, all of ;hich *oth *eautifies and i))o*iliIes her si)ultaneously. 2 daughter of a 0ery high chief is *athed and oiled e0ery e0ening, after ;hich her knees are tied together and she is laid do;n on her side. The ,osition is said to ser0e the dual function of kee,ing her el*o;s s)ooth and securing her against se(ual attack :Gifford .%'%: .'%$0=. 9n Mangaia the u,,er ranks seclude young ,eo,le :;hy *oth se(es are included ;ill *e e(,lained shortly= for *leaching and fattening. Mangaian girls also ha0e their clitorises lengthened, and are gi0en instruction *y older ;o)en in achie0ing orgas) :Mar+ ,age1 0 Page . shall .%!.: ..0, .'", .''=. Tahiti too has *oth fattening and skin *leaching, and girls are ?trained? to *e ,leasing and char)ing to )en :Oli0er .%!": '&!, "$., ! $C 5enry .%' : '!"=. 9n the MarHuesas adolescent girls are ke,t at ho)e for skin *leaching :and in so)e cases tattooing= and for 0aginal treat)ents ai)ed at *eautifying their se(ual organs :Suggs .%##: , $%"', #&##C 5andy .%'$: !&. See also 5echt .%!!: .%0 on Puka,uka, and 5andy and Pukui .%& : %" on 5a;aii.=. The girl in these cases is al)ost ;holly turned into a sy)*olic o*Ject *y her kin. The result is so)eti)es for)ally dis,layed for the a,,reciation of the young )ales ;ho are its targets. 9n the MarHuesas there is ?ritual dis,lay? of the girlsE *odies and genitalia :Suggs .%##: =. 9n Mangare0a there are ?*eauty sho;s? at ;hich secluded children are *rought out and dis,layed :Buck .%$ : .'!' =. 2nd although these cases are so)e;hat e(tre)e :the MarHuesas in ,articular a,,ear e(tre)e in )any as,ects of their se(ual culture, although clearly ;ithin the Polynesian range= the ,rinci,le of dis,laying daughters and sisters as ,assi0e o*Jectified attractors of )en is seen in other cases as ;ell. 2)ong the Maori the sacred )aids :puhi= attract ?young )en, singly or in ,arties, L;ho co)eM fro) distant ,arts to see the) and try to find fa0or in their eyes? :Best 9 .%'": "&0=. 2nd in Mangaia, according to hearsay infor)ation Best ,icked u, a)ong the Maori, ?girls of good fa)ily stayed in a collecti0e house *efore )arriage. 2t the age of )arriage they ;ere lined u, against the ;all of the house, and young )en of rank ;ould co)e in and line u, and look the) o0er. Each )an then ,icked out one and if she ;ere agreea*le . . . they ;ere . . . )arried? :Best 9 .%'": "&$C she also 5andy and Pukui .%& : .0' on 5a;aii=. Elucidating the consistent cultural tendency to use a daughter or sister as se(ual *ait to ?,ull in? :desira*le= )en also allo;s us to account for ;hat ;ould other;ise *e so)e rather discordant re,orts concerning ,ost+contact Polynesian ,rositution. 9n the MarHuesas, Tahiti, and Mangaia, girls are re,orted to *e ,rostituted, )ainly to Euro,eans, *y their fathers andGor *rothers :Suggs .%##: #"C Oli0er .%!": $&#C Marshall .%!.: .&'=. Gi0en the o0erall Polynesian res,ect for sisters, and the s,ecial ,rotection of daughters, this ,attern ;ould )ake no sense at all unless it ;ere realiIed that the s,ecial ,rotection of these girls relates in ,art ,recisely to their 0alue as centri,etal forces, used to attract )en andGor their 0alua*les into the ;o)enEs fa)ilies. 9n the case of Euro,ean )en ;hat is a,,arently *eing ?dra;n in? is the )enEs su,erior mana, 0ia their inse)ination of the ;o)en :Sahlins .% .=. ,age1 . Page ' 7a,e The discussion de0elo,ed thus far also ,ro0ides us ;ith )ost of the ,ieces necessary to account for the ,re0alence of ra,e in Polynesia. 9 include here ordinary indi0idual ra,e, gang ra,e, slee, cra;ling ;here it is re,orted to *e ty,ically coerci0e, and )arriage *y ca,ture andGor a*duction. 7a,e and gang ra,e are re,orted for Tahiti :Oli0er .%!": $#$, #0!=, Mangaia :Marshall .%!.: .&'=, Sa)oa :Shore .% .=, and the MarHuesas :Suggs .%##: #$, %#, .'0=. Sa)oa, Tahiti, and Mangaia are all re,orted to ha0e slee, cra;ling

;ith fairly strong coercion :Mead .%"%: #.C Oli0er .%!": $#&C Marshall .%!.: .'%=. Tiko,ia has )arriage *y ca,ture, ;ith ra,e consu))ation, and e0en the re,ortedly less li*idinous :Best 9 .%'": "&0= Maori occasionally forci*ly a*duct un;illing *rides :Best 9 .%'": "#'=. . 7e,orted )oti0es for ra,e include anger at, and retaliation for, reJection, andGor an intention to ?ta)e? a ;o)an ;ho gets out of line. Mead re,orts anger o0er reJection as a )oti0e for coerci0e slee, cra;ling in Sa)oa :.%"%: #.=, and it is generally a reJected Maori suitor ;ho forci*ly a*ducts his *ride :Best 9 .%'": "#'=. 9n the MarHuesas girls ?;ho do not recei0e the ad0ances of )en? are often ra,ed :Suggs .%##: #$=. Bealous and ?difficult? MarHuesan ;i0es )ay also *e ra,ed *y their hus*ands to *ring the) into line :Suggs .%##: .'0=. 2nd in Mangaia gang ra,e is said to *e ,er,etrated ?to ta)e a haughty girl? :Marshall .%!.: .&'=. 9t should *e noted that the cultures treat these actions as se)iacce,ta*le and, as it ;ere, understanda*le. 2lthough a girlEs kins)en )ay a0enge her honor :or their o;n= *y *eating u, the *oyif she re,orts the incident to the)the pu'lic sanctions range fro) light to nil. 9n Mangaia the ,enalty is less than that for stealing a ,ig :Marshall .%!.: .&'=..% 9n light of our earlier discussions, )uch of this infor)ation is no; e(,lica*le. 7a,e ,resu,,oses the resistance of the girl :or ;o)an=, and it see)s reasona*le to suggest that girls acce,t the sy)*olic 0alue ,laced *y their kin on their 0irginity, their se(uality, and indeed their ,ersons. They ;ould tend to consider the)sel0es sought+after and 0alua*le o*Jects ;ho )ay 0oluntarily ;ithhold se( altogether, and ;ho al;ays at least retain the right to ,ick and choose their lo0ers. Because girls and ;o)en are in fact genuinely 0alued *y their kin, and in so)e sense ?*y society,? their stance is consistent ;ith their status, *ut to )en it )ay a,,ear ?stuck+u,? and haughty. 5ence the ?ta)ing? as,ects of ra,e )oti0ation. But a girlEs haughty stance )ight not in itself ,ro0oke se(ual assault, ;ere it not for the other )essage the girl is trans)itting, a )essage also consistent ;ith her self+,erce,tion as en+ ,age1 ' Page $ couraged *y her treat)ent in her kin grou,: enhanced se(ual attracti0eness. 9 suggest that it is the co)*ined and contradictory )essage trans)itted *y the girl?co)e hitherGgo a;ay?that is so ,ro0oking to the )en. The ,er)issi0e cultural attitude to;ard ra,e ;ould )oreo0er see) to recogniIe the ?legiti)acy,? as it ;ere, of this sort of reaction to this sort of *ind. '0 This discussion of the :non+kin= )ale reaction to the young ;o)anEs ,resentation and self+,resentation no; *rings us to the Huestion of ;hat young )en are u, to the)sel0es at this stage of life. 2s ;e turn to a consideration of adolescent )ales, it is i),ortant to kee, in )ind that girls, although )ore closely ;atched than *oys, are hardly se(ually una0aila*le. <hereas sacred )aids and high chiefsE daughters e(hi*it the e(tre)es of *oth control and enhance)ent, other girls are treated ;ith so)e;hat less of *oth. 9ndeed as one )o0es do;n the social ladder, the control a,,recia*ly di)inishes and the a0aila*ility corres,ondingly increases. On the other hand, *oys and )en of all classes are su*Ject to 0irtually no constraints. On the contrary, they are e(,ected *y society*y their seniors, their ,eers, and the girls the)sel0esto *e as se(ually acti0e, skilled, and successful as ,ossi*le. <e )ust no; consider so)e of the sources and conseHuences of this ,attern. Brothers 3et us return once again to the dyna)ics of status )aintenance and )o*ility, this ti)e fro) the ,oint of 0ie; of )ale si*lings. <e )ust first distinguish *et;een the select indi0idual ;ho ;ill succeed to the headshi, :;hether of household, descent line, or kin grou, as a ;hole=, and all the rest of the si*lings ;ho ;ill not. The successor is usually, *ut not al;ays, the first *ornC 9 ;ill refer to hi) as the senior si*ling ;hether he is ty,ically the eldest or not, and to all the rest as Juniors. <hereas there is only one senior son ,er father, there are ,otentially a large nu)*er of Juniors, including not only the full *rothers of the senior son, *ut also the sons of secondary ;i0es andGor concu*ines, and of other )arriages of the father. The senior si*ling is so)eti)es the )eta,horic ?chief? of his Juniors, ;ho are his )eta,horic ?co))oners? :Buck .%$': "&C 5andy and Pukui .%& : .%%=C in Tonga Junior si*lings *eco)e ?0irtual ser0ants? of senior si*lings :Gifford .%'%: ..'=, and in 5a;aii the Junior si*lings are )eta,horically their senior si*lingsE ?sla0es? :Malo .%0$: %#=. The structural ,ossi*ilities of, and constraints u,on, the life careers of se+ ,age1 $

Page " nior and Junior si*lings are as different as their statuses. The senior sonG*rother has an una)*iguous ,osition as heir to the headshi,, and an una)*iguous duty to )arry and re,roduce the line. The Junior si*lingsE situation, on the other hand, is )uch )ore a)*iguous, *oth ;ith res,ect to their ,ros,ects for succession, and ;ith res,ect to their o*ligation to )arry and re,roduce. 9t is these a)*iguities that ;e shall e(,lore in this section. <e ha0e seen that there is a tendency to try to hold onto sisters, for the enrich)ent of the grou, and hence for the :,otential= ad0ance)ent of its status. 9f a sister stays and *rings in resources, *oth hu)an and )aterial, this re,resents a gain for her kin. 5o;e0er, gi0en the status su,eriority of hus*and to ;ife :;hich ;ill *e e(,lored later=, it is considered ?nor)al? for daughtersGsisters to reside 0irilocally, and to )erge the)sel0es and their children ;ith their hus*andsE lines. Thus, if they stay ;ith their kin it is a gain, *ut if they lea0e, it is not seen as a loss. Brothers, on the other hand, are the *ack*one of the grou,, and their unity is essential. 2 *rother ;ho fissions off ;ith his descendants and follo;ers is taking the 0ery stuff of the grou, ;ith hi). By and large, it a,,ears that full *rothers, ,articularly in fa)ilies of any su*stance, nor)ally do stay together and share a concern for the ;elfare of the unit as a ;hole, *ut this outco)e is ne0er assured. The ,otential for s,lit is o*0iously situated at the ,oint of )arriage and re,roduction. 2n un)arried Junior *rother has no ;ife and children di0iding his interests *et;een his ,aternalGfraternal grou, and his o;n. 5e ;orks the ,aternal land, ,artici,ates in the ;ork ,roJects of the ,aternal household, and is si),ly a contri*uting )e)*er of the grou,. <e thus *egin to see so)e of the syste)ic ?interest? in delaying, if not ,rohi*iting, the )arriage of Junior *rothers. 9n fact, in Tiko,ia, the )arriage of Junior *rothers is discouraged altogether. They are e(,ected to re)ain single :though not celi*ate= for life, and to for) a cohesi0e *ody of ?e(ecuti0e officials? for the senior *rother ;ho has the ,osition of leadershi,, and ;ho )arries and re,roduces the ne(t leader and his fraternal e(ecuti0es :-irth .%!&: . =. The Maori sho; the sa)e ,attern in less e(tre)e for): ?Males see) to ha0e a;aited )ore )ature age until )arrying. They often took ;i0es ;hen )iddle aged, so)eti)es sla0e+class ;o)en, or a ;ido; of a *rother . . .? :Best 9 .%'": "&0=. 2nd in Tahiti too, as ;e shall see, Junior si*lings could Join a ?society? ;ith a ,ositi0e ethic in fa0or of singleness and against re,roduction. /or)ally ho;e0er there is an i),ortant counterforce that fa0ors e0entual )arriage and re,roduction *y Junior si*lings: the re,roduction of the ,age1 " Page & hierarchical structure itself. -or it is the Junior si*lings ;ho ,roduce the Junior descent lines, ranked collecti0ely *elo; the senior descent lines, and for)ing the co))oners of ;ho) the chiefs are chiefs. The notion of co))oners as descendants of Junior si*lings of chiefs is culturally articulated. The Tongare0ans call the younger *rother ?the link ;ith the ,eo,le? :Buck .%$': "&=, and the sa)e idea is e(,ressed in )ost other Polynesian societies :see Mishkin .%#.: "$"C -irth .%#$: $.'C Buck .%$ : ."&C Malo .%0$: %#C Gifford .%'%: ..'C Mariner 99 . '!: %0=. Bunior si*lings should thus ulti)ately )arry and re,roduce not only for the )aintenance of the siIe and ?;eight? of their descent line, *ut for the re,roduction of the hierarchical structure of ?classes? ;ithin the grou, and ;ithin society as a ;hole. 2t the sa)e ti)e they :and their descendants= )ust re)ain su*ordinate and loyal to the senior *rother andGor the senior line of the grou,. The actual incidence of Junior full si*lings fissioning off and )aking ;ar on senior *rothers for the headshi, is nearly i),ossi*le to deter)ine, *ut ;as ,ro*a*ly, in fact, rare. The incidence of half+*rother and cousin ?treason? ;as ,ro*a*ly so)e;hat higher :see Mariner 9 . '!: .$!C Oli0er .%!": !"'C G. 7ogers .%!!: .!'=. Most co))only, a Junior *rother )ight si),ly re,lace the senior *rother at the head of the unit if the senior a,,ears less co),etent. This is al;ays o,en as a ,ossi*ility, e0en in the strictest ,ri)ogeniturial syste)s :Gold)an .%!0: '#=. 9n theory the Junior *rother should si),ly hold the headshi, until a )ore co),etent )e)*er of the senior line co)es of age, *ut in ,ractice a strong Junior can ,ro*a*ly arrange things so that succession ,asses to his o;n descendants. 2ll of ;hich e(,lains the fact that si*ling ri0alry, in the for) of sus,icion and )istrust, see)s to go fro) senior to Junior si*ling rather than the other ;ay around as one )ight ha0e e(,ected. 9n the hierarchical society, it is ?ungra))atical? for a Junior to en0y a seniorC the ,ri0ileges accorded to the senior are *ased on a su,eriority seen as ?natural.? Seniors, on the other hand, )ay ;ell sus,ect the loyalty and su*ordinate solidarity of Juniors, gi0en the JuniorsE ,otential for ascent Just outlined. Thus *oth Tonga and Tahiti ha0e legends of older *rothers killing their younger si*lings :Mariner 99 . '!: ..'C Oli0er .%!": !'!=. Elder+ to+younger si*ling ri0alry is also docu)ented for Tiko,ia, ;here it is a,,arently encouraged *y the fact that

fathers tend to fa0or, senti)entally and )aterially, their young sons :-irth .%#$: .##=. 2 si)ilar ,attern is seen a)ong the Maori, ;here the youngest son is often s,oiled and ,etted *y the father, and tends to *e seen as )ore ,age1 & Page # intrinsically cle0er and talented than the eldest :Mishkin .%#.: "&&n.C see also 5andy and Pukui .%& : "# on 5a;aii=. Bunior si*lings then are in a ,eculiar and a)*iguous ,osition ;ithin the structure. Particularly in high+ranking fa)ilies, they are *oth high :*y ,arentage= and ,otentially lo; :as ,rogenitors of su*ordinate lines=, *ut also lo; :*y *irth order= and ,otentially high :*y re,lacing the senior or *y heading their o;n inde,endent grou,s=. They are, ;e *egin to see, a li)inal category in the social structure, and it is the 0arying and contradictory as,ects of their ,osition that ,ro0ide the key to )any features of )ale adolescent se(ual culture. Polynesian adolescence )ay *e characteriIed as a ,eriod in ;hich *oys for) cohorts, the ,ri)ary focus of ;hich, and the ,ri)ary to,ic of interest of ;hich, is se(: ha0ing a ;ide range and a large nu)*er of se(ual relations ;ith girls. Because elite girls are, for the )ost ,art, ;ell ;atched and controlled, it a,,ears that they ,artici,ate in adolescent acti0ities, if at all, only on a 0ery reduced scale. Si)ilarly, there is good e0idence that, in )any cases, the )ost senior elite )ales, those ;ho ;ill actually succeed to the titles and headshi,s, are often de facto re)o0ed fro) ,artici,ation. 9n so)e cases they, like elite girls, are secluded for fattening, tattooing, or skin *leaching. 9n other cases they are *etrothed in early childhood, or forced as youths into early )arriage :see -irth .%&!: ""0C Best 9 .%'": "&"&&C Malo .%0$: 0C 5andy and Pukui .%& : .0&=. The social co),osition of adolescent cohorts thus ,ri)arily includes :a= 1unior elite )ales, :*= co))oner )ales, and :c= co))oner fe)ales. 2dolescent social acti0ities include )aking assignations, ha0ing a large nu)*er of se(ual affairs, and e(changing infor)ation on such affairs as ;ell as se(ual folklore in general. 9n addition, *oys and girls s,end ti)e in sa)e+se( andGor cross+se( grou,s *eautifying the)sel0es, co),osing songs, ,oe)s, and entertain)ents, and engaging in ,leasant s,orts, ga)es, and a)use)ents. -or the )ost ,art they do little ,roducti0e ;ork. 9n )any Polynesian societies they li0e a,art fro) their ,arents, either in se(+segregated ?dor)itories,? or in indi0idual se,arate residences in their ,arentsE co),oundsC in other cases there are collecti0e houses ;here young ,eo,le )ay congregate and slee, ;hen they ;ish to *e a;ay fro) ho)e. :See Suggs L.%##: .!&M for a list of ten cases, in addition to the MarHuesas ;hich are his ,ri)ary focus. See also -irth L.%#$: 'M.= <e )ay no; consider this ?co),le(? of institutionaliIed se(ual acti0eness for adolescent )ales in relation to the structural ,ro*le)s of the ,age1 # Page ! )ale si*ling *ond already discussed. -ro) a ,urely functional ,oint of 0ie;, Polynesian adolescence )ay *e seen as *oth solidifying the si*ling *ond and contri*uting to the slight do;n;ard )o*ility of Junior si*lings, thus re,roducing correct united+*ut+hierarchical relations *et;een *rothers and their descendants. 9n the first ,lace, the )arriage and :legiti)ate= re,roduction of the Junior si*ling is si),ly delayed, ;ith his ha,,y and 0oluntary co),liance. The Junior *rother thus re)ains longer in his su*ordinate and de,endent role in his ,aternalGfraternal household :although the *eha0ioral freedo) and inde,endence )asks this de,endency to so)e e(tent=. 2t the sa)e ti)e, Polynesian adolescent culture e),hasiIes the i),ortance of large nu)*ers of affairs ;ith a range of girls. 2dolescent *oys should ,lay the field. Strong attach)ent to any one girl is antithetical to a ,ro,er adolescence, and )ay ha0e the unfortunate effect of leading to )arriage. The ,attern of lo; e)otional in0ol0e)ent, ,articularly ;ith )e)*ers of the o,,osite se(, *ut )ore generally ;ith any indi0idual, has *een re,orted *y so)e o*ser0ers to *egin in early childhood :Mead .%"%: .. C 3e0y .%!$: "%#=, and is *oth e(,ressed and reinforced during the adolescent ,eriod of ,laying the field. The effect of this e)otional detach)ent is not only to lea0e the si*ling *ond relati0ely unthreatened *y co),eting attach)ents during adolescence, *ut ,ossi*ly also to esta*lish :or reinforce= a ,attern that ;ill continue after )arriage as ;ell. 2s ;e shall see in the ne(t section, the hus*and+;ife *ond is relati0ely EE;eak,? and there is a sense in ;hich hus*ands :and ;i0es= re)ain Polynesian+style adolescents for life, ;ith freHuent adultery, di0orce, and serial )onoga)y.

Both delay of )arriage and encourage)ent of a ;ide range of nonin0ol0ing affairs su,,ort the cohesi0eness of the si*ling *ond and of kin :as against se(ualG)arital= relations in general. 2t the sa)e ti)e the social organiIation of adolescence encourages the do;n;ard social identification and e0en do;n;ard )o*ility of Junior si*lings. 2s already noted, )ale adolescent cohorts contain *oth Junior elites and co))oners. The elite *oy is often the leader, for)al or infor)al, of the grou,, and its social focus :Suggs .%##: %., %&C Mead .%$0: ."C Gifford .%'%: .' C -irth .%#$: $%'C Oli0er .%!": %#.=. 2s such he gains a sense of ,restige and leadershi, in relation to his structural Juniors, shifting his sense of hi)self fro) one of Junior elite to, in a sense, senior co))oner, ;hich is ,recisely the shift that )ust take ,lace in his orientation in order for hi) fully to acce,t his )ediating ,lace in the hierarchy, as ?link ;ith the ,eo,le.? ,age1 ! Page There is an analogous effect in his heterose(ual relations. Because elite girls are largely ke,t fro) ,artici,ating in the assignations and affairs :;hich does not fully ,re0ent the young )en fro) trying to court and seduce the), *ut ;hich )akes it all so)e;hat )ore difficult=, it is the lo;er+status girls ;ho are )ore se(ually a0aila*le. The chances are thus reasona*ly good that a *oy ;ill e0entually )arry a girl of slightly lo;er status than hi)self :radical differences in status *et;een hus*and and ;ife are generally fro;ned u,on=. The slightly lo;er status of the ;ife is i),ortant for not contradicting the nor)ati0e do)estic su,eriority of the hus*and, ;hich ;ill *e discussed later. '. More i),ortant for the ,resent argu)ent, lo;er status of the ;ife ;ill generally insure lo;er status of the children *ecause, as noted earlier, the social status of the children a,,ears to *e deter)ined )ore *y the )other than the father in the case of status discre,ancies *et;een the t;o. Thus the greater a0aila*ility of lo;er+status girls in adolescent acti0ities increases the ,ossi*ility of a Junior elite *oy )arrying and re,roducing in a slight do;n;ard direction, ;hich is desira*le for the re,roduction of correct hierarchical relations *et;een his and his elder *rotherEs descendants.'' But enough of functions. There is also a sense in ;hich adolescence is formally, as ;ell as functionally, a,,ro,riate to the structural situation of Junior )ale si*lings. The organiIation of the cohorts and their ty,ical *eha0ioral ,atterns, as ;ell as the ,atterning of the se(ual relations the)sel0es, )ay *e seen to encode and e(,ress the structural features of the Junior si*ling ,osition already discussed. Sons and *rothers, like daughters and sisters, are si)ultaneously sy)*ols and actors ;ithin their structural ,ositions. S,ecifically, Just as the Junior si*ling ,osition )ay *e seen as a li)inal one, so too the organiIation of adolescent acti0ity has ty,ical ?li)inal? Hualities :Turner .%#!C 0an Genne, .%#0=. -irst, adolescent se(ual acti0ity, or e0en hints thereof, has to *e in0isi*le to society at large. 9t takes ,lace in s,ecial houses or dor)itories, or else in the *ush or on the *each, and ,ro,erly at night in the dark :see, for e(a),le, Shore .% .=. 9n )any Polynesian societies o,,osite+se( adolescents, ,articularly indi0iduals ;ho are ha0ing se(ual relations ;ith one another, do not )i( at all in ,u*lic andGor during the day :Marshall .%!.: .'!C 3oe* .%'#: C Buck .%$ : . $C 5andy and Pukui .%& : .!.C Oli0er .%!": #.$=.'$ 9n addition to *eing ?outside? the structure, adolescent acti0ity ty,ically has certain antistructural Hualities. Maori young )en sho; off *y ?0io+ ,age1 Page % lating )inor ta,us? :Mishkin .%#.: "&$=. MarHuesan and Tongan young )en raid ,eo,leEs food storehouses :5andy .%'$: %!C Mariner 9 . '!: ! =. Slee, cra;ling, in ;hich the *oy *oth ?steals? the daughter under the fatherEs nose, and has illicit se(ual intercourse inside the house, surely has the sa)e antistructural Huality, as does dra)atically elo,ing ;ith the taupo in Sa)oa, and ,erha,s elo,ing ;ith any girl. Modern Tahitian youths e0en risk ?a little incest? for the e(cite)ent and 0irility of it all :5oo,er .%!#: '$&$#=. But the fullest de0elo,)ent of antistructural for)s and sy)*ols is seen in the )ost fully institutionaliIed adolescent organiIation, the :no; defunct= Tahitian arioi. 9ts )e)*ers ;ere ?co))unalistic? ;ith res,ect to ,ro,erty, they ;ent a*out gi0ing ?le;d ,lays and ,erfor)ances,? during ;hich they )ight EEsnatch the ta,a clothing off the ;o)en in the audience.? Their ,lays in0ol0ed social satire, including ?)aking Jokes of high ,ersonages.? 9n so)e conte(ts ?they *roke all the ta*us? :Oli0er .%!": ''&, %.$#' ,assi)C 5enry .%' : '$0"0 ,assi)=. But it is i),ortant to e),hasiIe that, des,ite the )any e(trastructural and antistructural Hualities of adolescent cohorts throughout Polynesia, ran) is al!ays maintained. 9n )ost, as noted, the elite *oys are the grou,sE infor)al leaders. 2nd in the Tahitian arioi, ;hich had a for)al structure of ranks and offices, only elite *oys could occu,y the u,,er ranks and higher offices :Oli0er .%!": %#.=. The co)*ination of *oth

structure and anti+structure in these cohorts thus e(,resses faithfully the dou*le as,ect of the Junior si*lingEs ,osition, as *oth :ideally= co))itted to his hierarchical relations and :,otentially= schis)atic fro) the). <hy Se(@ 9t could *e argued that adolescent )ale se(ual acti0ity functions, socially and ,sychologically, as a cathartic )echanis) for ,otentially disru,ti0e Junior si*lings. 2ll *ut the )ost elite indi0iduals are encouraged to ;aste the)sel0es in socially inconseHuential *ut ,ersonally a*sor*ing se(ual acti0ity, as ;ell as in ga)es and s,orts that )ay *e seen as ha0ing )any of the sa)e effects. The Sa)oans, in fact, classify se( ;ith other for)s of ?,lay? :Mead .%$0: "=, and Tongans liken it to the s,ort of ,igeon snaring :Gifford .%'%: ..!=. -urther)ore, in *oth se( and s,orts, ;ith their as,ects of ?;inning? and ?triu),hing,? young )en get to ,lay at ,o;er and status in ;ays that ha0e fe; real+;orld effects, *ut yet ,resu)a*ly satisfy desires for ,restige felt *y all in these status+conscious societies. The catharsis argu)ent )ay ;ell *e a,,ro,riate *ut hardly tells the ;hole story. Bunior )ales are ,otentially disru,ti0e, for 0arious structural ,age1 % Page %0 reasons, in )any societies, *ut there are alternati0e ;ays of controlling the). 9t )ust *e recalled at this ,oint that the ?,ro*le)? of Junior )ales centers a*out their )arriage and re,roduction, ;hich are *oth socially )oti0ated :for )aintaining the siIe and strength of the kin grou,, and for re,roducing heirarchical organiIation= and counter)oti0ated :as ,otentially schis)atic=. The ?solution? to the ,ro*le) of Junior si*lings ;ould thus intrinsically tend to focus, at least in ,art, on se(ual and re,roducti0e *eha0ior. 9n other ;ords, the first ans;er to the Huestion ?;hy se(@? is that se( is in fact central to the ,ro*le) at hand. 9t is, ho;e0er, ,ossi*le to carry the argu)ent further, through an e(,loration of the cultural )eanings of se( and re,roduction. Both se( and re,roduction in Polynesia ;ere, in the ,ast, dee,ly in0ol0ed in religious notions of the original creation of the cos)os, of ongoing creation and creati0e ,o;er, and of the ongoing fertility of the land. '" The gods ;ere *orn fro) the se(ual union *et;een :)ale= Sky and :fe)ale= Earth. 2ll of the gods ;ere )ale. 5u)ans ;ere *egat *y a god fashioning a ,hysical fe)ale for) fro) :nondi0ine= earth, then 0i0ifying her ;ith his *reath and )ating ;ith her. The ,rocess of cos)ic creation is a continuing ,rocess: ? . . . creation ;as not *elie0ed to *e one series of e0ents acco),lished in a distant ,ast, *ut to ,roceed continuously in all ti)e through fertiliIation? :5andy .%'!: '"=. The mana, the ?natural? energy or ,o;er u,on ;hich success and efficacy in all hu)an enter,rises de,ends, ;as itself in its original essence ,rocreati0e ,o;er :.%'!: '!=. ?Mana ;as ,ri)arily associated ;ith natureEs su,erior, di0ine as,ect, ;ith )ale ,rocreati0e energy, ;ith light, . . . Land ;ithM life? :.%'!: $&=. The Polynesians ?)ade generation, o,erati0e through se(ual union, a uni0ersal ,rinci,le of their natural ,hiloso,hyEE :.%'!: ."$=. The gods ;ere res,onsi*le in an ongoing ;ay for the fertility of the land. 9t ;as a,,arently thought that their di0ine li*ido needed to *e sti)ulated and aroused in order to get the) to ,erfor) their fertiliIing function. This ;as the rationale for the e(tensi0e use of erotic chanting and dancing in religious ritual, as ;ell as for se(ual orgies in ritual conte(ts, es,ecially during ?the season of a*undance? surrounding har0est: ?The erotic dancing . . . ;hich ;as in its origin a for) of ;orshi,, ;as designed to sti)ulate and *ring into action the mana of the gods ;ho ;ere *elie0ed to *e ani)ated *y the sa)e e)otions as )en, and on ;hose ,rocreati0e acti0ities the fecundity of hu)an *eings, the earth and sea de,ended? :5andy .%'!: '.0C see also $0! =. The idea that se(ual arousal raises ,roducti0ity is also seen in ,age1%0 Page %. )odern ti)es in the Mangaian ,ractice of telling o*scene Jokes to get ,eo,le to ;ork harder on collecti0e ,roJects :Marshall .%!.: .0%=. The s,ecific channel of di0ine mana on earth ;as the chief. ?2s the first *orn )ale of the tri*e, he stood for land and ,eo,le as the ,ri)e e)*odi)ent of generati0e ,o;er in nature? :5andy .%'!: .$ =. ?5e ;as the channel or )ediu) through ;hich the land ;as nourished,? and ;as *elie0ed to ha0e ?close ra,,ort? ;ith the natural ele)ents :5andy .%'!: ."., ."'C see also -irth .%!&: .!. and ,assi)C 5ocart .%.&: #$!C 3oe* .%'#: &&=. Gi0en the chiefEs association ;ith di0ine ,rocreation and fertility, EEthe generati0e organs . . . of the di0ine chief ;ere thought to *e ,articularly ,otent? :5andy .%'!: ."&=. Certain sacred and esoteric ;ords, ;hich gi0e ,o;er to certain MarHuesan s,ells, ?all had reference to the 0irile organ of the chief? :.%'!: ."$=, and one )odern MarHuesan eu,he)is) for the ,enis is ?chief? :Suggs .%##: .=. 9n the ,ast, 5a;aii

and Tahiti had rituals centering on the loincloths of the ?kings? and of the god+i)ages :5andy .%'!: ."#"%=. Beyond the s,here of religion, it )ay *e noted that chiefs are associated ;ith e(aggerated se(ual acti0ity and ,ro;ess in ordinary life. Chiefs are ty,ically ,olygynous :Gold)an .%!0: &#"= and are e(,ected to ha0e )ore affairs and conHuests :e.g., Gifford .%'%: '.=, as ;ell as to ,er,etrate )ore ra,e :see note . =. They are ,ro*a*ly also )ore 0isi*ly fertile, in that ;ith )ulti,le ;i0es, concu*ines, and ,assing affairs they ,ro*a*ly ,roduce )ore children than other )en. -urther)ore, chiefly re,roduction is )uch )ore highly ritualiIedtheir first )atings, andGor the *irth of their first children are e0ery;here surrounded ;ith ela*orate rites cele*rating the continuation of their lines :Gold)an .%!0: &''$# ,assi)=. Se0eral generaliIations a*out cultural notions of se( and re,roduction )ay *e dra;n fro) this sketch. -irst, and )ost clearly, *oth se( and re,roduction are *asically )asculine acti0ities. The fe)ale ,rinci,le is concei0ed as ,assi0e :5andy .%'!: .'=, a rece,tacle for and a 0ehicle of )ale se(ual and ,rocreati0e energy. 9t is ,artly no dou*t *ecause of these associations that )asculine ,ride in Polynesia is tied u, ;ith se(ual success in a ;ay that is less true of fe)inine ,ride :see Gold)an .%!0: &#"C Best 99 .%'": &$'C Mead .%"%: $0, .%C Marshall .%!.: '", .'#, .&.C Gifford .%'%: '., ..!=. 9n Mangaia it is said that ?the na)e of the island tra0els on its ,enis? :Marshall .%!.: '#=. 2s for fertility and re,roduction, the original res,onsi*ility of :)ale= gods for cos)ic creation, and the ongoing res,onsi*ility of *oth gods and ,age1%. Page %' chiefs for the fertility of nature, )ean that fertility too is *asically the doing of )en. '& These *eliefs thus ,ro*a*ly contri*ute to the notion ,re0alent in at least so)e Polynesian societies that the )ale contri*ution to hu)an conce,tion is greater than that of the fe)ale. Both Maori and Tiko,ia clai) that the ;o)an is )erely the ?ha0en? for the de0elo,)ent of the fetus, ;hich is )ade fro) the )ale contri*ution :Best 9 .%'": "0#C -irth .%&!: "!%=. Tahitians also attri*ute at least greater, if not e(clusi0e, re,roducti0e influence to the )ale than to the fe)ale :see Oli0er .%!": ".0C see also 5andy and Pukui .%& : &" for 5a;aiiC 5andy .%'$: !$ for the MarHuesas=. Both se( and re,roduction are thus )ale in general, and chiefly in ,articular. 9t )ay also *e noted that )arried )en are )eta,horic chiefs, the )eta,hor referring ,ri)arily to their status su,eriority 0is+N+0is their ;i0es, *ut also clearly descri*ing their se(ual situation, as *oth se(ually acti0e and re,roducti0e. 9t no; re)ains to ,oint out that adolescent )ales are nor)ati0ely se(ually acti0e 'ut not reproducti,e. The nor) against adolescent re,roduction is i),licit in a 0ariety of cultural rules and ,ractices. 9llegiti)acy is culturally fro;ned u,on in )any ,arts of the area :see Best 9 .%'": "!"C 3oe* .%'#: "C Buck .%$ : .'0=. This fact is sur,rising in light of the encourage)ent of acti0e adolescent se(, the a*sence of indigenous contrace,ti0e )ethods, and the actual high rate of illegiti)ate *irths. But the cultural 0ie; )akes sense in ter)s of the uns,oken rule that adolescents )ust not *e re,roducti0e. The co)*ination of encouraging intensi0e se(ual acti0ity for the un)arried ;hile ,rohi*iting their re,roduction reaches for)al e(,ression in the Tahitian arioi society, in ;hich )any of the i),licit nor)s of adolescence in other Polynesian societies ;ere here for)ally codified as rules. 9n the arioi society se(ual ,ro)iscuity of the )e)*ers ;as reHuired, *ut re,roduction ;as s,ecifically *anned. 2 ;o)an :andGor a cou,le= ;ho *ore a child and did not kill it ;as e(,elled fro) the society :Oli0er .%!": %"0C 5enry .%' : '$&=. 9 suggested earlier that the general focus on se(uality and :negati0e= re,roduction is sy)*olically :as ;ell as functionally= consistent ;ith the nature of the ?,ro*le)? of Junior si*lings in Polynesian hierarchical society. The )ore detailed e(,loration of the nor)s of adolescent se(ual *eha0ior no; allo;s us to see e0en )ore s,ecific sy)*olic consonances. The acti0e se(ual *eha0ior of Junior )ales aligns the) ;ith )aleness in general, including the )aleness of gods and chiefs, as the restraints on girlsE ,artici,ation aligns the) ;ith the cultural 0ie; of fe)aleness as ,assi0e. But the ,age1%' Page %$ nor)ati0e nonre,roducti0eness or infertility of Junior )ales distinguishes the) shar,ly fro) gods and chiefs :and )arried )en ;ho are )eta,horic chiefs=. Once again then Junior )ales are sy)*olically ?in *et;een,? affiliated ;ith high status *y their se(ual acti0eness, and ;ith lo; status *y their ,rescri*ed infertility.

Gi0en the ,leasure, e(cite)ent, and freedo) of adolescence, it is not sur,rising that young ,eo,le seek to ,er,etuate it as long as ,ossi*le. <e ha0e seen that Tiko,ian Junior *rothers often ne0er )arry at all, and -irth re,orts that in )ost cases this is 0oluntary :.%#$: $!$=. E0en the senior *rother so)eti)es has to *e ,hysically coerced into )arriage, *ecause in this case he, along ;ith his Junior si*lings, is allo;ed to ,artici,ate in the adolescent dalliances :-irth .%&!: ""0=. 9n Tahiti one+fifth of the ,o,ulation is esti)ated to ha0e *elonged 0oluntarily to the arioi society :Oli0er .%!": %."=. Throughout the area un)arried girls a*ort, kill, or gi0e a;ay *a*ies in ado,tion on the e(,licit )oti0e of ,rolonging the girlsE youth and freedo) :-irth .%&!: $!$, &' C 3oe* .%'#: "C Suggs .%##: ""C Oli0er .%!": %"$=. Throughout the area too, *oth *oys and girls e(,ress directly their co))it)ent to and enJoy)ent of adolescence, and their un;illingness to end it ;ith )arriage. Their 0ie;s are echoed *y older )arried ,eo,le, ;ho look *ack on their o;n adolescent freedo) ;ith great senti)entality :-irth .%&!: "#&C Marshall .%!.: ."'C 5andy and Pukui .%& : .#!=. 6lti)ately, ho;e0er, )ost ,eo,le )arry of their o!n accord. Because for the )ost ,art only the highest elite )arriages are arranged :to insure the re,roduction of the senior line, as ;ell as its ,ro,er *reeding= all other )arriages are undertaken 0oluntarily. <hy ,eo,le )arry, and ;hat ha,,ens ;hen they do, is the su*Ject of the ne(t and final section of the analysis. Spouses and Parents 5us*ands and <i0es Marriage in Polynesia )ay *e said to *e only ;eakly structurally )oti0ated. 2l)ost all of the i),ortant social relations are kin relations, and s,ecifically si*ling relations and their deri0ati0esuncles, aunts, and cousins. 2ffinal relations are of 0ery little social conseHuence, and throughout the literature one can scarcely find references to the), no less e(tended discussions. Part of the ?;eak? )oti0ation for )arriage, and the lack of cultural interest in affinity, deri0es fro) the fact that )arriage nor)ally takes ,lace ;ithin the descent grou,, *et;een ,eo,le ;ho are already related to one ,age1%$ Page %" another *y kinshi,. /ot only is this the nor)al state of affairs, it is ,referred. The Maori 0ie; is ty,ical: ?Marriage ;ithin the !hanau L?tri*e?M )et ;ith )uch a,,ro0al, in that ,ro*le)s in the )arriage ;ould not ha0e ,olitical re,ercussions as o,,osed to intertri*al )arriage? :Best 9 .%'": ""!C see also 5echt .%!!: .%$C -irth .%#$: $.#C Buck .%$': $&C Suggs .%##: .'!C Beaglehole and Beaglehole .%".: !!C Oli0er .%!": #$ =. Marriage is thus secondary to or enco),assed *y kinshi, as a social organiIational ,rinci,le. 9t neither e(,resses nor forges i),ortant social or ,olitical alliances *et;een grou,s, nor does it generate any i),ortant ne; ,ersonal relationshi,s for the *ride andGor groo). 9t does not tie either hus*and or ;ife into e(tensi0e affinal o*ligations ;ith the otherEs kin, nor alternati0ely does it *ring either hus*and or ;ife any s,ecial hel, in coo,eration fro) the affines. '# Econo)ically, too, )arriage is only ;eakly )oti0ated. Because *oth )en and ;o)en inherit ,ro,erty, neither needs a s,ouse in order to ha0e the )eans of self+su,,ort. :See note .0 for e(ce,tions.= 2s for la*or, hus*ands and ;i0es ,ro0ide each other ;ith little that they cannot legiti)ately get fro) kins,ersons, or at least fro) so)eone other than a s,ouse. 2lthough there is :relati0ely *alanced= di0ision of la*or *y se( throughout the area, there is 0irtually no ,roducti0e or do)estic ;ork, including child care, that )ust *e ,erfor)ed *y a s,ouse, or e0en that ought ,referentially to *e ,erfor)ed *y a s,ouse.'! 9ndeed in the MarHuesas, there are certain inti)ate ser0ices that can only *e ,erfor)ed for a )an *y a kins;o)an, ;hich is one of the cultural reasons gi0en for ,referentially )arrying oneEs cross+cousin rather than an unrelated ;o)an :Suggs .%##: .'!=. One )ight at least e(,ect that a ;ife ,ro0ides a )an ;ith one thing a )other or sister cannot: se(. 9t is true a )an cannot get this fro) his :close= kins;o)en, *ut a ;ife is *y no )eans his only legiti)ate source. Se( is a0aila*le ;ith ;ido;s, di0orced ;o)en, and ;ith )ost un)arried girls. 9n addition there is al;ays the ,ossi*ility of se( ;ith other )enEs ;i0es, and although this is culturally unacce,ta*le, it is certainly freHuent enough: 5igh rates of adultery are re,orted throughout the area :3oe* .%'#: " , !%C Mead .%"%: # C .%$0: "C Suggs .%##: .$.C Best 9 .%'": "!"!&C Gold)an .%!0: &##C Malo .%0$: ', %., ' "C 5enry .%' : ' "C Oli0er .%!": $&", $& =.' The situation ;ith res,ect to se(ual de,endence is so)e;hat different for ;o)en, at least at the for)al le0el. Because un)arried girls are rela+ ,age1%"

Page %& ti0ely less se(ually free than *oys, and *ecause, as ;ill *e e(,lored shortly, )arried ;o)en are theoretically out of *ounds for )en other than their hus*ands, a ;o)an is a,,arently de,endent on ha0ing a hus*and for ha0ing legiti)ate se(ual relations. 9n ,ractice ho;e0er, ;e ha0e seen that )ost un)arried girls are tacitly ,er)itted )uch )ore se(ual freedo) than cultural ideology allo;s, and )arried ;o)en a,,ear to engage in e(tra)arital se(ual relations nearly as often as their hus*ands. 9t see)s, )oreo0er, that di0orced ;o)en )ay ha0e al)ost co),lete and legiti)ate se(ual freedo), e0en in those societies in ;hich ,re)arital fe)ale chastity and )arital fidelity are strongly e),hasiIed. 9n Tonga, for e(a),le, ?;hen once di0orced, L;o)enM )ay re)ain single if they ,lease, and enJoy all the li*erty that the )ost li*ertine heart can desire? :Mariner 99 . '!: ."&"#=. Mariner also ,oints out that so)e Tongan ;o)en choose ne0er to )arry, and ha0e si)ilar freedo) :. '!: ."&"#=. The relati0e lack of )aterial )utual de,endence *et;een hus*and and ;ife, as ;ell as the relati0e ,aucity of larger social i),lications of their )arriage, )ay ;ell account for the ;idely re,orted ?a)ia*ility? of hus*and+;ife relations in Polynesia :-irth .%#$: .''C 3oe* .%'#: !#C 5unts)an and 5oo,er .%!&: "''C Mariner 99 . '!: ." , ''#, ,assi)C Buck .%$': ..%=. '% Because there is little ,ractical or social necessity for staying together, one )ay assu)e that ;hen cou,les stay )arried :or for as long as they do stay )arried= the ,arties si),ly like each other. But the argu)ents that account for the a)ia*le Huality of relations *et;een Polynesian s,ouses also account for the high rates of adultery and di0orce.$0 There is little holding the relationshi, together either fro) the outside :structures of affinal o*ligations= or the inside :)utual de,endence=, and the relationshi, is largely sustained :or not, as the case )ay *e= on ,ersonal senti)ent. Personal senti)ent is, of course, a rather shifting *usiness in any society. But it is ,erha,s ,articularly so in Polynesia ;here, as noted earlier, the ha*it of not getting dee,ly e)otionally in0ol0ed ;ith other indi0iduals is often inculcated in childhood, and is strongly reinforced during the adolescent ,eriod of )o0ing Huickly fro) one lo0er to the ne(tC such ha*its ,ro*a*ly die hard, if e0er. 9f ;e then add in the fact that a ;o)an can al;ays return to her kin grou,, ;here she has land, and ;here she and her children are al;ays ;elco)e additions, ;e see )ost of the reasons for ;hat Mead called the ?*rittle? Huality of Polynesian )arriage :.%"%: #%=. The high rates of adultery throughout Polynesia ha0e already *een notedC the ,age1%& Page %# rates of di0orce are eHually high :Buck .%$ : ."$C 5echt .%!!: .%'C Mead .%"%: #%C 5andy .%'$: .00C Suggs .%##: .$$C Buck .%$': &"C Mariner 99 . '!: .".C Gifford .%'%: .#.C 3oe* .%'#: ! =. 2t this ,oint, ho;e0er, it is ;orth distinguishing *et;een getting )arried and staying )arried. Much of the discussion thus far ,ertains to the ;eak )oti0ation for staying )arriedC clearly the )oti0ation for getting )arried is stronger, and re)ains to *e e(,lored. On this issue it is i),ortant to distinguish further *et;een )ale and fe)ale ?interests.? <e *egin ;ith the )en, and s,ecifically ;ith the Junior )ales for ;ho) ;hether to )arry or not is a Huestion. 4oung )en, as ;e ha0e seen, are at least a)*i0alent a*out getting )arried. 6lti)ately ho;e0er they ha0e a real ?interest? in doing so: Only *y getting )arried can they re,roduce offs,ring that are legiti)ately theirs, and only *y ,roducing such offs,ring can they acHuire any inde,endent standing in the status syste) :as the head of a recogniIed social unit, no )atter ho; Junior and ho; s)all=, as ;ell as any ,ossi*ility of )o*ility ;ithin it. This ?interest? is culturally codified :or eHually, is a ,reci,itate of a ,rior cultural 0alue= in for)al )arkings of the higher status of the )arried state as such. 9n Sa)oa, for e(a),le, only )arried )en )ay get the aristocratic titles that allo; the) to sit on the fono, the go0erning council. Men ;ho are di0orced or ;ido;ed )ust lay aside their titles and resign fro) the fono in order to go courting again. 6n)arried )en are grou,ed ;ith untitled )en in a se,arate and su*ordinate organiIation, the duties of ;hich consist of carrying out fono+decreed ;ork ,roJects, and ser0ing food and drink to the )e)*ers of the fono ;hen they are )eeting :Mead .%$0: ."=. 9n Tiko,ia, too, )arried )en are classed ;ith EEelders? and ha0e co))unity authority, ;hereas *achelors ha0e )ore freedo) *ut re)ain social su*ordinates :-irth .%&!: &0%C .%#$: $$&C see also Buck .%$': &. for Tongare0a=. E0en ;here )arried )en do not ha0e higher ,u*lic status, it is nearly uni0ersal throughout Polynesia that a hus*andGfather has a*solutely high do)estic status. The role of hus*andGfather is generally defined as one of a*solute su,eriority and authority 0is+N+0is ;ife and children, no )atter ho; Junior the )an )ay *e in the ,u*lic hierarchy :see Best 9 .%'": "!!C Oli0er .%!": .$C Mead .%"%: #%=. 9n so)e cases the relationshi, is for)ulated through the )eta,hor of the hus*and as ?chief? and the ;ife as ?co))oner? found in a nu)*er

of <estern Polynesian societies :3oe* .%'#: #$C Gifford .%'%: .!, Pae,,ler .%!.: .!!C -irth .%#$: 0=. 9n Mangare0a, an ,age1%# Page %! Eastern Polynesian island, ;i0es feed their hus*ands *y hand, as ser0ants feed chiefs :Buck .%$ : ''"=. The )eta,hor of hus*and as chief e(,resses *oth the actual and ,otential status *enefits of )arrying and ,roducing childrenthe higher status of heading oneEs o;n social unit as o,,osed to *eing a de,endent in another unit, as ;ell as the ,otential for status )o*ility inherent in fathering :legiti)ate= children and thus founding an inci,ient descent line. The ?chiefly? status of the hus*and gi0es hi) :a)ong other things= the culturally defined right to e(,ect fidelity fro) his ;ife, e(,licitly ,arallel to the right any chief has to fidelity fro) his su*Jects. Thus in Tonga ?there ;as no ;ord for chastity e(ce,t one ;hich )eans Ere)aining fi(ed and faithful,E a,,lied only to a )arried ;o)an, and also to a ;arrior 0is+N+0is his chief? :Mariner 99 . '!: .$0=. 9n *oth Tonga and Tiko,ia )arried ;o)en are la*eled EEsacred? andGor ta*u, and should not under any circu)stances *e trifled ;ith :Gifford .%'%: .#C Mariner 9 . '!: .'", 99 . '!: .".C -irth .%&!: "!", .%#$: .. .%=. 9n fact, se(ual fidelity ;as de)anded of ;i0es at all le0els of society throughout the area :see Best 9 .%'": "&0, "!"C Oli0er .%!": $& =, although the )ore ?real? :i.e., the higher ranking= the chief, the )ore se0erely ;as adultery ;ith his ;ife ,enaliIed :Sahlins .%& : cha,. . ,assi)=. 9t is in the conte(t of these rules, related to the )eta,horic chiefliness of hus*ands, that the ,attern of intense hus*andly Jealousy, seen throughout Polynesia, *eco)es intelligi*le. 9n the MarHuesas, for e(a),le, Jealous hus*ands ?;ould *eat or e0en kill their ;i0es,? their ;i0esE lo0ers, or *oth :5andy .%'$: .00C Suggs .%##: .$'=. ?Most of the )urders Lin this societyM ;ere )oti0ated *y se(ual Jealousy? :5andy .%'$: &#=. 2)ong the Maori, ?adultery ;as 0ery serious. . . . The ;ife ;as so)eti)es killed *y her hus*and, or he )ay ha0e killed her lo0er. . . . Occasionally a )an ;ould discard an adulterous ;ife, or e(,ose her on a ,ath s,read+eagled, ;ith her li)*s ,egged do;n or co),ose and sing a song re0iling her? :Best 9 .%'": "!"=. 9n *oth the MarHuesas and Mangare0a, )en co))it suicide out of se(ual Jealousy :Suggs .%##: .$.C Buck .%$ : "!'. See also Oli0er .%!": &", '#, and 5enry .%' : '$0 on TahitiC and Marshall .%!.: .&% on Mangaia=. $. Such intense Jealousy )ay see) sur,rising in light of the ,oints )ade earlier to the effect that a )an does not really ?need? a ;ife for goods, ser0ices, se(, or significant social relations, and also in light of the ,atterns of lo; e)otional in0ol0e)ent in ,ersonal relations descri*ed for at least so)e ,age1%! Page % Polynesian societies. <e can see no;, ho;e0er, that ?hus*and? is not )erely a social role, *ut a ,restige status, as e(,ressed *y the )eta,hor of hus*and+as+chief. <ifely infidelity is thus not )erely a 0iolation of so)e sort of ?contract? *et;een the hus*and and ;ife, *ut an offense against the hus*andEs ,ride of status. The link *et;een se(ual Jealousy and other for)s of ,restige sensiti0ity is e(,licit in the MarHuesas and Mangare0a, ;here )ale suicide )ay *e )oti0ated *y offenses in either category. 2t issue in )ale se(ual Jealousy, in other ;ords, is not :,ri)arily= either )aterial need or dee, e)otional in0ol0e)ent, *ut rather the ,ride in status culturally associated ;ith hus*andhood itself. 2nd gi0en the intensity of status ,ride throughout the area :see Best 9 .%'": $ %C 99 .%'": ''&C -irth .%&!: ""0C Suggs .%##: .$"$&=, the intensity of hus*andsE Jealousy )akes sense. <e ha0e taken this little detour through the ,ro*le) of ;ifely infidelity as ,art of esta*lishing the ,oint that )arriage ,ro0ides )en ;ith *oth actual and ,otential status *enefits, such *enefits in turn *eing a)ong the ,ri)ary )oti0es for Polynesian )en to settle do;n and get )arried. 3ittle of this a,,lies to ;o)en. 9t is true that in )arrying ;o)en gain their only legiti)ate source of se(ual relations. 9n ,ractice ho;e0er, the hea0y ,enalties on ;ifely adultery )ean less se(ual freedo) for )arried ;o)en than for adolescent girls, as ;ell as the loss of gratification of *eing sought after *y )any )en, ;hich girls ha0e *een socialiIed to )a(i)iIe and enJoy. 9t is also true that so)e ;o)en gain ,ersonal )o*ility fro) )arriage, *ecause a ;ife shares her hus*andEs status :*ut generally not 0ice+0ersa=, and *ecause )ost )arriages are ,ro*a*ly de facto hy,erga)ous :see the earlier discussion that )en are )ore likely to )arry do;n as a result of the social co),osition of adolescent cohorts=. This )inor status accretion, ho;e0er, is surely offset *y a ;o)anEs de)otion to ?co))oner? 0is+N+0is her hus*and as chief. 2nd ;ifehood is a de)otion: Throughout )uch of <estern Polynesia the status of sister is for)ally higher than that of ;ife :5echt .%!!: ,assi)C Mead .%$0:

. "C Gifford .%'%: &%, !%C Pae,,ler .%!.: ,assi)=. But e0en ;here a sister does not ha0e for)al su,eriority, no;here is she categorically inferior to a *rother :although she )ay *e relati0ely inferior to so)e *rothers *y 0irtue of *irth order=. 2s a ;ife, on the other hand, her inferiority 0is+N+0is her hus*and is categorical and a*solute. $' 9t is difficult then to see the *enefits of )arriage for a ;o)an, and it is easy to see its costs: a loss of *oth status and freedo). 9t )ay thus *e suggested that girls )arry )ore at the instigation of their lo0ers, than out of any o0er;hel)ing )oti0e of their o;n.$$ 9t )ay also *e suggested, al+ ,age1% Page %% though the data are not a0aila*le to ,ro0e it, that ;o)en are ,ro*a*ly the ,ri)e instigators of di0orce. Gi0en the losses of status and freedo)C and gi0en the freedo) of di0orced ;o)enC and gi0en a ;o)anEs higher status as a kins;o)anC and gi0en the interest of her kin grou, in attracting her and her offs,ringit is highly ,ro*a*le that ;o)en are less ,ersonally co))itted to their )arriages than are their hus*ands. $" The relations of hus*ands and ;i0es to )arriage are thus structurally different, and ,ro*a*ly e)otionally different as ;ell. These differences continue into ,arenthood, to ;hich ;e no; turn. -athers and Mothers The social role of ,arent as ;e kno; itas central su,,orter, nurturer, and socialiIer of oneEs childrenis not a highly significant role in Polynesian society. Parenting functions are s,read o0er a ;ide range of kin of the *iological ,arents :Best 9 .%'": $#.C -irth .%#$: .$0C 3inton .%$%: .&%C Mead .%"%: '', $'C 5andy and Pukui .%& : %0=, and children are encouraged to see the)sel0es as *elonging to the ;ider kin grou,. Tiko,ians ha0e e(,licit ideology to the effect that *iological ,arents and children should not *e e(clusi0ely attached to one another :-irth .%&!: .%'=. 9nstitutionaliIed ado,tion andGor fosterage, ;hich are uni,ersal throughout Polynesia, and at a high rate, i),licitly carry the sa)e )essage :Carroll .%!0C 3e0y .%!$: "!$ "=. But the general dee),hasis on ,arenthood is differently realiIed for )en and for ;o)en. The differences are 0irtually direct functions of the differential structural relationshi,s of hus*ands and ;i0es to the )arriage. S,ecifically, a strong ,aternal role, like a strong hus*andly role, is su,,orted *y cultural ideology, ;hereas a strong )aternal role is not. -athers are granted )eta,horic ?chiefness? 0is+N+0is their children, as hus*ands are to their ;i0es. Their authority o0er their children is a*solute and unHuestiona*le. They are granted certain ,ri0ileges sy)*olic of this status in their households, and are e0en hedged a*out ;ith ta*us si)ilar to those surrounding a chief :see -irth .%#$: 0, .#$C Buck .%$': &.C Gifford .%'%: .!, . C see also 5andy and Pukui for the re0erse )eta,horthe chief as father to his ,eo,le L.%& : .% M=. 2ll of this ,ro0ides the) ;ith additional ,ersonal ,restigeC it also ,ro*a*ly strengthens their ?interest? in the ,aternal role and in the dura*ility of their relationshi,s ;ith their children. The result is that Polynesian fathers do a,,ear to take a strong interest in their ,aternal roles. Thus, 3inton clai)ed that MarHuesan fathers ;ere the sole socialiIers of their children :.%$%: .#"=, and although this ;as ,age1%% Page .00 ,ro*a*ly an o0erstate)ent, it surely reflects so)e of the tendencies descri*ed here. Si)ilarly, a Maori te(t says, ?The sal0ation of the )en of old ;as the attention they ,aid to raising children? :Best 99 .%'": '"=. 9n Tiko,ia, ?9n infant nutrition, education, disci,line and ritual of adolescence a father is closely associated ;ith his child . . . he is e(,ected to *e e)otionally concerned in its ;elfare? :-irth .%#$: .. =. The )eta,horic chiefly status of fathers *oth fosters this greater in0est)ent in the ,aternal role and e(,resses its 0ery ?,aternalis)?its strong authority co)*ined ;ith its caring, nurturing, and ,rotecting Hualities. The ,attern of strong fatherhood relates to, a)ong other things, the ?,olitical? interest )en ha0e in children. 3egiti)ate children, in fact, are the ,ri)ary raison dERtre of )arriage. They are not only a source of greater ,ersonal status for a )anC they are his social and ,olitical ?*ase.? <e ha0e seen that a chief :or a ?chief?= is only as strong as the social unit he heads, and that heading a flourishing social unit is also the only ,otential source of status )o*ility in the syste). Thus children )ust *e not only :legiti)ately= ,roduced, *ut raised as loyal adherents to their grou,. 2nd thus fathers ha0e a structurally induced interest not only in ha0ing legiti)ate children, *ut in o0erseeing their de0elo,)ent as loyal and adhering )e)*ers.

2ll of this is less true, if at all, for )others. Mothers ha0e little ?,olitical? interest in their children, a fact that )ay ;ell contri*ute to the high rates of a*ortion and infanticide throughout the area :A'ortion: Best 9 .%'": '"!C -irth .%&!: $!$, &'!, &' C 3oe* .%'#: "C 3inton .%$%: .#"C Oli0er .%!": #$C Malo .%0$: .0$. (nfanticide: Best 9 .%'": ".$C -irth .%&!: $!"C 3oe* .%'#: "C Oli0er .%!": #$C 5andy and Pukui .%& : !%C Gold)an .%!0: &#$=. Because ;o)en are not directly in0ol0ed in the ,rocesses of )aintaining or *uilding descent lines, ;o)en do not ?need? children for social or ,olitical ,ur,oses. 2t the sa)e ti)e, ;o)en gain 0irtually no ,ersonal status fro) )otherhood. Birth is not ritualiIed e(ce,t in the case of high+status ;o)en ,roducing the senior child ;ho ;ill carry on the senior line, and e0en in these cases the *irth rituals are generally concei0ed as *eing for the child and not for the )other :Gold)an .%!0: &''ff.C Best 99 .%'": 'C Buck .%$ : &.0C 5enry .%' : . "C Oli0er .%!": "."C Malo .%0$: . $=. $& 2nd the )other role is not granted any s,ecial cultural ,restige: The MarHuesan )other is ?res,ected *ut a figure of indifference? :3inton .%$%: .&%=. 9n Tonga a )other is as )uch a ?co))onerEE to her children as a ;ife is to her hus*and :Gifford .%'%: .!=. 2nd in Tiko,ia, ?They recogniIe no un0arying )oral o*ligationC they do not su*scri*e to the ,age1.00 Page .0. o,inion that a son is *ound to re)ain attached to his )other *y any filial senti)ent per se? :-irth .%#$: .#'C see also Mead .%"%: ... for Sa)oa=. The )other+child *ond is thus )uch like the ;ife+hus*and *ond fro) the ;ifeEs ,oint of 0ie;. 9t recei0es little cultural su,,ort and is largely a )atter of :0aria*le= ,ersonal senti)ent. The *ond has, like )arriage, an o,tional Huality, de,ending largely on ho; ;ell the ,arties get along. /ot sur,risingly, then, )others and children do not :so)e;hat to the chagrin of <estern o*ser0ers like 3inton= a,,ear to *e strongly co))itted to one another. Mothers )ay easily gi0e children u, for ado,tion or fosterage. E0en if they do not do so, they do not necessarily take an intense interest in the care, nurturing, and socialiIation of their children. 9n *oth the MarHuesas and 5a;aii, ;et nursing is a,,arently co))on ,ractice :3inton .%$%: .#"C Malo .%0$: %"=. 5a;aiians e0en ha0e a notion that so)e ;o)enEs la,s are ini)ical to their childrenEs health, and that the child of such a )other has to *e raised *y so)eone else in order to sur0i0e :5andy and Pukui .%& : " , "%=. More generally, it is re,orted throughout the area that ;o)en turn o0er the care of younger children to older children as early as ,ossi*le. Children in turn are free to ;ander off and affiliate ;ith other ?,arents? if they choose :see Mead .%"%: $$C 5andy and Pukui .%& : !.=. $# The ,arallels for ;o)en *et;een )otherhood and ;ifehood :as for )en *et;een fatherhood and hus*andhood= are syste)atic, as )ight ha0e *een ,redicted *y the fact that *oth are )eta,horic ?co))oner? statuses. Bust as ;i0es ha0e no great econo)ic or ?,olitical? stake in their )arriages, so )others ha0e little in their children. Bust as ;i0es gain no ,restige fro) )arriage, and indeed lose so)e, so )others gain none and ,erha,s lose so)e in )otherhood. 2nd thus as the ;ife+hus*and *ond is ?;eak? and easily *roken, so the )other+child *ond is ;eak and, if not easily ?*roken,? then certainly easily attenuated. 2t the sa)e ti)e, Just as the hus*and+;ife relationshi, is generally re,orted as ?a)ia*le,? so is the )other+child relationshi,, and dou*tless for the sa)e reasons. 9 said earlier that the fact that hus*ands and ;i0es did not ?need? each other could account in large ,art for the re,orted ?a)ia*le? Huality of )arital relations, ;hen those relationshi,s sur0i0ed, or for as long as they did. The sa)e ,oint )ay no; *e )ade of )other+child relations, ;hich si)ilarly lack structural )oti0ation or ?interest.? O*ser0ers re,eatedly re)ark that, although the )other is not a 0ery significant figure to the child, nonetheless )other+child relations are generally ?easyEE and af+ ,age1.0. Page .0' fectionate :see -irth .%&!: .!'C 3inton .%$%: .&%C Pae,,ler .%!.: .%.C G. 7ogers .%!!: .&%=. 9t )ay *e suggested that such easy affection is ,ossi*le in ,art ,recisely 'ecause )others and children do not ?need? each other in any structurally significant ;ay. Predicta*ly, on the other hand, father+child :and es,ecially father+son= relations are often re,orted as ?strained? :-irth .%#$: .&$C G. 7ogers .%!!: .&%C Oli0er .%!": !'"C 5andy and Pukui .%& : "%=. The differential relations of fathers and )others to their children )ay *e seen to ha0e effects that link *ack to the 0ery earliest discussions in this essay, and s,ecifically to the general cultural ,ro)inence and ,articular social dyna)ics of si*ling relations. The fatherEs )ore acti0e role in the care and socialiIation of

his children )anifests itself later in the do)estic cycle in the ,articular ,rotection of daughters ;ith ;hich ;e *egan this ;hole e(cursion. 9n addition, his ?interest? in the unity of his children as a grou,, and in their loyalty to his :and his successorEs, their *rotherEs= line, ;ould )anifest itself in the nonnor)ati0e *ut syste)atically seen ,attern of gi0ing s,ecial affection and attention to those of his children ;hose loyalty is not structurally assuredthe daughters and the younger sons. 5ence the ,attern of *a*ying and ,etting those other children, ;hich ,ro*a*ly does foster their loyalty, *ut ;hich )ay also incidentally contri*ute to the re,roduction of the ,attern of elder+to+younger si*ling en0y and )istrust. Potential elder+younger si*ling clea0age in turn underlay )any of the ,atterns of )ale adolescence discussed in the section on *rothers. 2nd finally, the )otherEs relati0e distance fro) her children also has i),ortant i),lications for the childrenEs si*ling relationshi,s. 5ere, 9 ;ould ,articularly stress the ,oint that ;hen )others turn o0er child care to others, as they freHuently do, the ,referred choice a,,ears to *e one of their older children :see Mead .%"%: '$C 3e0y .%!$: "&#=. 9n other ;ords, it is often si*lings the)sel0es ;ho are a)ong each otherEs significant caretakers and ,rotectors in younger years, and this ,oint is surely conseHuential for the e)otional under,innings of the si*ling relationshi,. The ?Status of <o)en? There is one )ore i),ortant link fro) the ,atterns of ,arenthood *ack to the ,atterns of si*lingshi, ;ith ;hich ;e *egan this essay. The ,oint )ay *e )ade *y raising the Huestion: 9f ;o)en are not ,ri)arily ;i0es and )others, in ter)s of cultural e),hasis, and a,,arently in ter)s of ,ersonal co))it)ent, then, ;hat, socially, are they@ <here are they socially focused, and ;hat are they doing of social significance@ The ,age1.0' Page .0$ ans;er, of course, is that they are continuing to *e ;hat they al;ays ;ere)ins!omen to their kin, sisters to their *rothers, and no; that they are in the ,arental generation, aunts to their *rothersE children. 2s adult kins;o)en they )ay *e i),ortant as fa)ily genealogists, ritual ,artici,ants, econo)ic )anagers, and e0en, if their *rothers are ?kings? :,ara)ount chiefs=, as their ?Hueens? :see 5echt .%!!: .%#C 5unts)an and 5oo,er .%!&: "'"C -irth .%&!: .%#C .%!&: .0&C Gifford .%'%: . ., '$'C Mariner 99 . '!: .0=. 2nd, as discussed earlier, as aunts to their *rothersE children they )ay also *e key ritual s,onsors, as ;ell as i),ortant authority figures in the childrenEs socialiIation. 9f as )others )arried ;o)en are hardly 0isi*le in the ethnogra,hic literature on Polynesia, as adult sisters and aunts they are e0ery;here. 9ndeed, the strong continuing ,artici,ation of ;o)en in their natal kin relations is clearly a large factor :as *oth cause and effect= in their ?;eak? ;ifely and )otherly roles. More i),ortantly, it )ay *e argued that ;o)enEs continuing kinshi, significance is one of the )aJor sources of their relati0ely high o0erall social status throughout the area, des,ite their ?co))oner? status in relation to their hus*ands and children. 9t )ay sur,rise the reader to learn that )ost o*ser0ers consider Polynesian ;o)en to ha0e Huite high social status, and further that 9 ;ould agree ;ith the) :e.g., 3oe* .%'#: 'C 3inton .%$%: .#'C Mariner 99 . '!: %&, ..%, '..C Oli0er .%!": ..$'=. $! This assess)ent is )ade des,ite the strong :*ut not a*solute= se(ual control of daughters and ;i0esC des,ite the high incidence of ra,e and other for)s of 0iolence, se(ual and other;ise, against ;o)enC des,ite the ty,ical :though not total= e(clusion of ;o)en fro) high religious ritual and high officeC des,ite :a certain a)ount of= cultural ideology of fe)ale ;eakness and ,ollutionC and des,ite the for)al su*ordination of ;i0es and the lack of )arked res,ect for )others. The conce,t of ?the status of ;o)en? has *een notoriously difficult to ,in do;n. 9t certainly reHuires a great deal )ore theoretical clarification and s,ecification than 9 ha0e s,ace for here. -or ,resent ,ur,oses 9 ;ill use the follo;ing inde(es of relati0ely ?high? or ?lo;? status: for)al cultural ideology concerning ;o)enEs ?nature,? Huality of )ale+fe)ale relations, access of ;o)en to significant ,u*lic roles, and degree of )ale control o0er fe)ale *eha0ior. My sense of the relati0ely high status of Polynesian ;o)en, then, deri0es fro) at least the follo;ing co),arati0e o*ser0ations: 9deology of fe)ale ,ollution and inferiority is far less ela*orated than, for e(a),le, in the /e; Guinea highlandsC$ the occasional se(ual ,age1.0$ Page .0" 0iolence does not, as in /e; Guinea, )anifest itself in antagonistic gender relations in e0eryday lifeC ;o)en in Polynesia do occasionally succeed to high office, and )ore freHuently than in )any other societiesC and se(ual control of ;o)en is less consistently and less effecti0ely a,,lied than, say, a)ong Musli)s or a)ong 9ndian Brah)ins. 2)ong these ,oints the )ost significant in )y 0ie; is the relati0ely lo; ela*oration of

cultural conce,tions :*oth for)al ideology and general folklore= of fe)ale inferiorityC Polynesians si),ly do not e(,ress, ;hether in ;ord or deed, )any notions of ;o)en as inherently less ;orthy sorts of ,ersons than )en. The ,ro*le) then is to account for this :,ro0isionally defined= ?high status? of Polynesian ;o)en. 9 ;ould argue that the ans;er lies in t;o interrelated ,oints: that )ins!omendaughters, sisters, auntsha0e culturally defined high status, and that kinshi, is analytically the ?enco),assing? do)ain of social relations. 9 said earlier that )arriage is su*ordinate to kinshi, in organiIing critical social relations)ost ,eo,le )arry kinC )arriage ,erfor)s fe; functions and esta*lishes fe; relations not already ,erfor)ed or esta*lished *y kinshi,C and it is kinshi, :s,ecifically, descent= rather than )arriage that generates rank and ,restige. 2nother ;ay of stating this ;ould *e to say, in the 8u)ontian sense, that kinshi, enco),asses )arriage in Polynesiathat the sy)*ols and 0alues of kinshi, are the hege)onic sy)*ols and 0alues in the syste). The high culturally assigned status of ;o)en as kin thus enco),asses their lo;er status as ;i0es, and ,roduces an o0erall cultural res,ect, or at least lack of disres,ect, for ;o)en in general. Sisters are )ore res,ected than ;i0es, and ;o)en in general a,,ear to *e seen )ore as sisters than as ;i0es :see also Shore .% .=. Thus if ;e look again at the list of inde(es of lo! status of Polynesian ;o)en, ;e see that )ost of the) ,ertain to se(ual and re,roducti0e functions, and thus essentially to ;i0es, lo0ers, and )others. The assign)ent of for)al su*ordination to ;i0es and )others is straightfor;ard. Much of the 0iolence, as ;e ha0e seen, is se(ual 0iolence, andGor 0iolence sti)ulated *y se(ual faults. /otions of ,ollution and ;eakness center ,ri)arily around se(ual relations andGor *irth. The *ias against succession of ;o)en to high office ;orks categorically only against ;i0esC sisters and other kins;o)en occasionally do succeed to ,u*lic office ;ithin their kin grou,s :Best 9 .%'": $&$, "&$C Buck .%$ : .&#C Gifford .%'%: C Mariner 9 . '!: .$!=. 2s for the strong control of sistersEGdaughtersE se(ual *eha0ior, ;hich )ight a,,ear on the surface to signal lo; status for ;o)en in )inship roles, it )ust *e recalled that such control is culturally associated ;ith high, and ,age1.0" Page .0& so)eti)es 0ery high, status. The Sa)oan sacred )aid for)ally outranks her )ale counter,art, the successor to the chiefshi,, and the Tui TongaEs sisterEs daughterone of the 0ery ;o)en ;ho as a girl )ust ha0e *een oiled and )assaged and had her knees tied together e0ery nightis for)ally the highest+ranking ,erson in the !hole society :Gifford .%'%: !", 0=. Thus )ost of the negati0e ideology concerning ;o)en centers u,on their se(ual and re,roducti0e acti0ities as lo0ers, ;i0es, and )othersC kins;o)en, ;ho are neither se(ual nor re,roducti0e fro) the ,oint of 0ie; of their kins)en, esca,e the ,ro*le)atic associations of such acti0ities and functions. 9t is not, ho;e0er, a )atter of si),ly *alancing off one set of cultural e0aluations :lo; status of ;i0es, etc.= against another :high status of sisters=, fro) an e(ternal ,oint of 0ie;. The culture )ust ,ro0ide the ;eighting, and in the Polynesian case, as 9 said, kinshi, has ,riority o0er )arital role definitions in the hierarchy of cultural ordering syste)s. Conclusion: Prestige, Pinshi,GMarriage, and Gender The reader )ay ;ell *e saying *y no;, ?This is all 0ery ;ell and good, *ut Polynesia is only one isolated, and ,ossi*ly Huite idiosyncratic ,art of the ;orld.? 9t re)ains for )e then to ,lace Polynesia in a larger co),arati0e conte(t, in relation to a range of other hierarchical societies, to sho; that this is not the case. The key te(ts for the discussion ;ill *e the e(tre)ely useful co),endia essays *y Goody and Ta)*iah, in their Joint 0olu)e, Bride!ealth and %o!ry. Goody and Ta)*iah deri0e )any generaliIations a*out the treat)ent and status of ;o)en in ?co),le(,? ?stratified? societies, fro) the fact that ;o)en in such societies are gi0en su*stantial ;ealth fro) their fa)ilies in the for) of do;ry or inheritance. Goody sur0eys the ;orld in general, *ut ,articularly the area fro) <estern Euro,e to Sri 3anka. 5e links do;ry to ?co),le( for)s of stratification,? arguing that do;ry functions as a ;ay of ,reser0ing the status of daughters as ;ell as sons. -ro) fe)ale endo;)ent in turn flo; )any i),lications re)iniscent of ;hat ;e ha0e seen in Polynesia: control o0er the ,re)arital se(ual acti0ity of daughtersC endoga)y and other for)s of in+)arriage, including *rother+sister )arriage in so)e scattered casesC significant ,atterns of ado,tion :for ,ur,oses of creating ?fictitious? heirs=C significant ,atterns of filiacentric unions :in+)arrying sons+in+la;= for the sa)e reasons. Ta)*iah confines hi)self to a s)aller area :9ndia, Sri 3anka, and )ainland Southeast 2sia= and fe;er 0aria*les, *ut his data sho; essentially the sa)e fa)iliar ,atterns. 5e finds do;ry linked

,age1.0& Page .0# ;ith hy,erga)y, guarding of fe)ale 0irginity, in+)arrying sons+in+la;, and certain ,atterns of institutionaliIed ado,tion. Ta)*iah, unlike Goody, syste)atically distinguishes *et;een do;ry and fe)ale inheritance, seeing the latter as a ?shift? fro) the for)er :9 ;ill return to his argu)ent on this ,oint shortly=. 5e then finds the ?shift? to *ilateral inheritance to *e associated ;ith a shift to: *ilateral kinshi,C higher rates of u(orilocal residenceC kin+grou, endoga)yC easier di0orce and higher di0orce ratesC )ore ado,tionC and )ore eHual status of ;o)en. Before discussing the :close= ,arallels *et;een Polynesia and these other areas, it should *e noted that Goody considers the kinshi,G)arriageGse(ualGinheritance ,atterns listed here to *e associated not only ;ith ?co),le( for)s of stratification,? *ut ;ith ?large states,? ha0ing econo)ies *ased on ?,lough and intensi0e agriculture? :.%!$: '#=. /either of these latter de0elo,)ents, ho;e0er, is characteristic of Polynesia. State for)ation co)es Huite late :in fact, ,ost+Euro,ean contact= in its historical de0elo,)entC agriculture no;here entailed the ,lough, and in only a fe; ,arts of the area did it a,,ro(i)ate the intensity of Eurasia :see Sahlins .%& =. 9t ;ould a,,ear, then, in Polynesia at least, that hierarchical social organiIation historically ,receded state for)ation and econo)ic intensification, and ;as at least as )uch a cause as an effect of these other ,heno)ena. Moreo0er, ;e ha0e seen that the hierarchical status syste) alone, ;ithout these other as,ects, has )ost of the correlates ,ertaining to gender discussed *y Goody and Ta)*iah, and is thus clearly the )ost rele0ant social structural di)ension for the analysis. <e ha0e seen in this essay that Polynesian se(Ggender ,atterns closely ,arallel those )anifested *y so)e or all of the societies co0ered *y Goody and Ta)*iah. 2nd as noted, *oth authors consider that the critical factor linking these ,atterns to hierarchical social organiIation is fe)ale endo;)ent or inheritance, *oth of ;hich ha0e :analogous= effects on the ;ay the girl is treated *efore, during, and after )arriage, and on the ;ays in ;hich )arriage itself tends to *e organiIed. But gi0ing daughters su*stantial ;ealth is actually itself )ore of a ,uIIle than either author notices, and reHuires so)e )ore syste)atic e(,lanation. <o)en could easily *e construed as social and econo)ic de,endents of )en, and usually are. There is thus no reason to gi0e the) )uch of anything, certainly not real estate, *ut not e0en 0alua*le )o0a*les in the for) of Je;els and )oney that they )ay kee, for the)sel0es for life and dis,ose ,age1.0# Page .0! of as they ;ish. The fact that ;o)en in hierarchical societies do syste)atically get su*stantial dura*le ;ealth fro) their natal fa)ilies thus )eans that so)e ,rior factors are already in o,eration, ;hich need to *e *rought to light. 9 ;ould suggest that *oth do;ry and fe)ale inheritance e(,ress certain ,ree(isting, general features of the social situation of ;o)en in hierarchical societies. 9t is inherent in the nature of hierarchies that certain nongender+*ased ,rinci,les of social organiIation take ,recedence o0er gender itself as a ,rinci,le of social organiIation. 9n these syste)s social units :castes, ranked lineages, or ;hate0er= that contain *oth )en and ;o)en are ranked on the *asis of ,rinci,les such as :in Polynesia= genealogical seniority. The status of the indi0idual in turn is *ased in the first instance on *irth ;ithin one or another such unit, and only secondarily :if at all= on any of the follo;ing: ,ersonal *iological characteristics :age, gender=C indi0idual talents, skills, or achie0e)entsC or functionally defined roles :?hunters,? ?sha)ans,? ?)id;i0es,? and so on=. 2ny or all of these other ;ays of classifying and ordering ,ersons )ay su*seHuently enter into further construction of social categories and grou,s, and the location of indi0iduals ;ithin the). But the ,eculiar feature of hierarchical syste)s is that the highest le0el ,rinci,les of social organiIation do not di0ide, *ut rather unite, ;o)en and )en in social categories and social units fro) ;hich *oth deri0e their ,ri)ary statuses, and in ;hich *oth share co))on ?interests.? There is a sense, then, in ;hich the logic of hierarchical syste)s inherently tends to;ard :e0en if it ne0er reaches= gender eHuality. 2t any gi0en le0el in the syste), )enEs and ;o)enEs statuses are )ore si)ilar to one anotherEs than to ,ersons of either se( at other le0els. $% 9t is in the conte(t of these ,oints then that ;e can understand ;hy ;o)en in such syste)s inherit or are endo;ed ;ith ,ro,erty: They are, in 0arying degrees in 0arious hierarchical societies, full+fledged )e)*ers of their ?classes,? and their rights to a share of the ;ealth of their natal units a,,ear, at one le0el, as ?natural? as the )enEs.

5a0ing said this, ho;e0er, one )ust also hasten to add that there is still an o0erall )ale+fa0oring *ias in the syste): <ithin the ?strata,? )en are for)ally su,erior to ;o)en, ha0e near+e(clusi0e access to ,ositions of social leadershi,, and do)inate decision )aking on issues of i),ortance to the unit as a ;hole. 9t is this ,oint that reHuires the analyst to continue to ,age1.0! Page .0 take the )ale ,oint of 0ie;, and to look at the ;ays in ;hich ;o)en :as ;ell as Junior )en= are ?used? *y senior )en in the transactions that re,roduce the syste) as a ;hole, and the do)inance of senior )en ;ithin it. 7eturning to GoodyEs and Ta)*iahEs argu)ents, let us agree that hierarchy has ?so)ething to do ;ith? certain ;ides,read gender ,atterns found in hierarchical societies. The real Huestion is, ;hat is the logic of the relationshi,@ 5ere 9 di0erge fro) *oth authors. <e ha0e seen in the ,resent essay that the link *et;een rank and gender lies in the organiIation of the kinshi,G)arriage syste). Critical for the Polynesian analysis has *een the cognatic+endoga)ous nature of Polynesian descent grou,s, and the fact that )arriage relations are su*ordinate to kin relations ;ithin such an organiIation of descent. The cognatic+endoga)ous ty,e of kinshi,G)arriage organiIation ,re0ails, ;ith )inor 0ariations, fro) Polynesia, through Southeast 2sia and Sri 3anka, to a nu)*er of societies of south 9ndia :see Ta)*iah=. Most of the ?0ariations? fro) this ,attern are in the direction of )atrilineal descent, )ost fa)ously a)ong the /ayar, *ut also in )any ,arts of Southeast 2sia. Cognatic kinshi, organiIation is not, ho;e0er, the only ty,e ,ossi*le in hierarchical syste)s. 9n 9ndia and China :to take the t;o )ost fa)iliar e(a),les= internally stratified kin grou,s tend to *e ,atrilineal and e(oga)ous. 9n other ;ords, there a,,ear to *e at least t;o )aJor ;ays of organiIing descent and )arriage in hierarchical societies or, to turn the ,oint around, hierarchical syste)s )ay *e *uilt u,on t;o 0ery different ty,es of kinshi, syste)s, a ,atrilineal e(oga)ous ty,e, and a cognatic+endoga)ous ty,e ;ith occasionally realiIed tendencies to;ard )atriliny. The first lesson to *e dra;n fro) this is that the ty,e of kinshi, syste) in0ol0ed is a relati0ely inde,endently 0arying factor in the analysis. 9t is neither a logical ,recondition nor a logical conseHuence of hierarchical social organiIation. <hether a gi0en society is of one or the other ty,e is often largely a function of geogra,hic area, or at any rate, a function of historical factors ,ro*a*ly largely *eyond our retrie0al. 9 stress this ,oint *ecause 9 consider it i),ortant to see the o,eration of certain indeter)inate cultural factors in the analysis, and not to sustain an illusion of airtight structural deter)inis). 9 ;ill return to this ,oint shortly. The s,lit :;hether 0ie;ed areally or ty,ologically= *et;een the ,atrilineal and the cognatic syste)s in fact lines u, neatly ;ith a s,lit *et;een ,atterns of fe)ale ,ro,erty accession through do;ry :in the ,atrilineal syste)s= and through inheritance :in the cognatic syste)s=. Both Goody and ,age1.0 Page .0% Ta)*iah o*scure *oth of these s,lits, although they do so in different ;ays. Goody, in a dri0e to )ake a fully structurally deter)ined argu)ent, si),ly )erges do;ry and fe)ale inheritance under the ru*ric of ?di0erging de0olution,? seeing *oth as correlates of ?stratification,? and ignoring )aJor area differences as ;ell as the different e),irical correlates of the t;o ty,es. Ta)*iah, ;ho is )ore area+conscious, recogniIes the *reak *et;een 9ndia on the one hand and Sri 3anka and Southeast 2sia on the other, *ut ,roceeds to analyIe Sri 3anka and Southeast 2sia as ?;eakenings? of the classical 9ndian syste), ;ith 9ndian ,atriliny, 0irilocality, and do;ry ?;eakening? to;ard cognatic :or EE*ilateral?= kinshi, reckoning, *alanced ,atterns of 0irilocal and u(orilocal residence, and eHual )ale and fe)ale inheritance. 2lthough Ta)*iah argues 0ehe)ently against so)e unna)ed o,,onent that the ,attern should *e 0ie;ed in this ;ay, 9 su*)it that Sri 3anka and a fe; south 9ndian grou,s are far )ore straightfor;ardly seen as ty,ologically :and ,ro*a*ly historically= ,art of the PolynesianGSoutheast 2sian ,attern, rather than as ?;eakenings? of the classical 9ndian ty,e. "0 The concordance *et;een ,atriliny, e(oga)y, and do;ry on the one hand, and *et;een cognatic descent reckoning, endoga)y, and fe)ale inheritance on the other, gi0es radically different significance to )arriage in the t;o syste)s. 9n the first, )arriage carries an enor)ous *urden in the re,roduction of status relations. 8aughters ;ill *e )arried into other grou,s, and unrelated ;o)en ;ill *e entering oneEs o;n grou,. Seeing that the daughter )arries ?;ell,? and that inco)ing ;o)en are of suita*le statuses, are issues of great i),ortance for *oth internal ?Huality? and e(ternal ?sho;? of the grou,, as ;ell as for the Huality of

intergrou, relations. 8o;ry, ;hich is gi0en at )arriage, is generally a,,ro,riate to the )arriage+e),hasis of the syste)C it also s,ecifically :as )ost authors ha0e e),hasiIed= aids in ,rocuring desira*le )ates and )arriage connections, and in ,utting on a good ?sho;? for the grou, itself. 9t is further i),ortant that do;ry al)ost ne0er in0ol0es land. 9n a ,atrilineal syste), a ;o)anEs children ;ill *elong to the grou, of their father. 9f she o*tained land fro) her kin grou,, and ,assed it to her children, it ;ould auto)atically *e alienated fro) her grou,. 9f ;o)en are to get ;ealth in ,atrilineally organiIed hierarchical syste)s, as our earlier logic suggests they should, then they ;ill nearly ine0ita*ly get it in the for) of do;ry, that is, as a set of mo,a'le goods endo;ed u,on the ;o)en at marriage. -or reci,rocal reasons, fe)ale inheritance is eHually consistent ;ith cognatic descent and endoga)ous )arriage. 2s discussed at length in this es+ ,age1.0% Page ..0 say, )arriage is not of great significance in such syste)s, and the a*sence of any s,ecial *esto;al of ;ealth, designated as a marriage portion, is consistent ;ith this o0erall none),hasis. 2t the sa)e ti)e, a ;o)anEs children in a cognatic syste) are as )uch hers as her hus*andEs, their )ore acti0e affiliation de,ending ,ri)arily on ;here they li0e. Thus fe)ale inheritance of land and the further de0olution of such land to her children does not auto)atically alienate it fro) her kin grou,, and the ,ro*le)s that )ilitate against fe)ale land inheritance in ,atrilineal syste)s are a*sent. The relati0e dee),hasis on )arriage in the cognatic+endoga)ous syste)s, on the one hand, and the hea0y e),hasis on )arriage in the ,atrilineal+e(oga)ous syste)s on the other, in turn )ay *e seen to influence :or at least correlate ;ith= differential ,atterns of di0orce. <e ha0e seen in Polynesia that di0orce is easy and freHuent, and ;e suggested that this ,attern is at least ,artly e(,lica*le in ter)s of the fact that Polynesian ;o)en retain significant roles in relation to their consanguineal kin throughout their li0es. 9n the ,atrilineal syste)s, on the other hand, ;o)en generally do not retain such roles, or at least not to any;here near the degree seen in Polynesia. Corres,ondingly, di0orce in these syste)s tends to *e )ore socially unacce,ta*le :often ;holly so=, and in ,ractice infreHuent. The descent rules in the t;o syste)s feed into these differential ,atterns. 9n the ,atrilineal syste)s a ;o)anEs children *elong to her hus*andEs kin unit, and if she lea0es she )ust either lea0e the children ;ith her hus*andEs kin or *ring the) *ack as non+kin into her o;n grou,. 9n cognatic syste)s on the other hand, the children *elong as )uch to the )other as to the father, and are as )uch kin to her kin as to his. Thus although ,ersonal conflicts o0er children )ay arise, such conflicts are not *uilt into the syste) as structural constraints against di0orce. 2nd finally, the differential ,atterns of fe)ale ,ro,erty accession in the t;o syste)s also su,,ort the differential di0orce ,atterns. <e ha0e seen that fe)ale land inheritance :0ersus do;ries of )o0a*le goods= is facilitated *y the cognatic+endoga)ous social organiIation. Such inheritance, unlike a do;ry, can in turn ,ro0ide ;o)en ;ith )eans of self+su,,ort in case of di0orce, and thus contri*utes to the greater ease and feasi*ility of di0orce in these syste)s. The u,shot of all this is seen not only in the differential actual ,atterns of di0orce, and in the differential cultural attitudes to;ard itC it is seen in the gender ideology as ;ell. <hereas Polynesian ;o)en are not characteriIed as innately ;eak, de,endent, and needy of ,rotection and su,,ort fro) )en, such notions are ,re0alent in the gender ideologies of the ,atrilineal ,age1..0 Page ... syste)s. The 9ndian ;o)an, for e(a),le, is culturally descri*ed as a ?naturally? ;eak and de,endent creature, reHuiring lifeti)e ,rotectionfirst fro) her father, later fro) her hus*and, and finally fro) her sons. The general hege)ony of kinshi, o0er affinity in defining ,ersonal status in Polynesia, Southeast 2sia, and si)ilar societies, and the s,ecific ,oint that ;o)en are defined )ore in ter)s of kinshi, than of )arital roles in such syste)s, has e0en )ore general i),lications. 9n e(oga)ousGdo;ry syste)s ;o)en are seen )ore in ter)s of the )arriages they ;ill contract, and the affinal connections they ;ill engender for their grou,s, than in ter)s of their ongoing 0alue as )e)*ers of the grou, itself. 9 ha0e argued for Polynesia, on the other hand, that there is a ,riority of kinshi, o0er )arital role definitions of ;o)en, and that this ,riority tends to accord ;o)en )ore social res,ect or, if you ;ill, higher status. Corres,ondingly, it a,,ears that in the do;ry syste)s, in ;hich )arital status, ,resent or future, takes ,recedence o0er kinshi, status in defining the o0erall role identity of ;o)en, ;o)enEs social res,ect is generally lo;er. 2ssess)ents of lo;, as of high, status are difficult to ,in do;n, *ut certainly the ;o)en of 9ndia or China hardly a,,ear to *e ?a,,reciated?

in the sa)e ;ay in their societies as the ;o)en of Polynesia or Southeast 2sia. <e )ight ,ause here to consider for a )o)ent ;hy an e),hasis on a )arital as against a kinshi, definition of ;o)en ;ould tend to ha0e a ?do;ngrading? effect. 9t see)s to )e that here again the ans;ers lie *eyond the structural logic of ,articular syste)s, and lie rather in di)ensions intrinsic to )arital relations and kinshi, relations as such. 9t ;ould see) that in )arriage a ;o)anEs distincti0ely feminine :as against generically hu)an= attri*utes)ainly centering on *iological re,roductionare highlighted, ;hereas in kinshi, roles they are not. Thus in )arriage a ;o)an is )ore o,en to *eing seen as a radically different ty,e of hu)an *eing, ;hereas in the conte(t of kinshi, she is )ore easily seen as si),ly occu,ying different social roles. 9n all societies, of course, ;o)en :like )en= are *oth kins,ersons and s,ousesC ;hat is at issue is the relati0e do)inance of one or the other di)ension. There is one ,attern that )ight ha0e *een e(,ected to *e differentiated *y the do;ryGfe)ale inheritance di0ide, *ut is not, na)ely the guarding of daughtersE 0irginity. This is a ,attern that a,,ears throughout 0irtually all hierarchical societies, ;hether ,atrilineal or cognatic. Most of the analyses of the ,heno)enon ha0e centered on its relationshi, to )arriage i),licationskee,ing u, the girlEs ?0alue,? thus assuring her of a good )arriage ,age1... Page ..' andGor assuring her fa)ily of good )arital connections :Goody .%!$C Ortner .%!# Lthis 0olu)eMC e(,ressing her natal fa)ilyEs high status *y gi0ing the 0irgin as a ,recious ?gift? in )arriage, the sa)e ,oint *eing )ade *y sending her off ;ith a 0alua*le do;ry :Ta)*iah .%!$=C or ,rotecting her status grou, :e.g., her caste= fro) i),ro,er status infusions through ;rong )arriages :4al)an .%#$=. One ;ould thus e(,ect that guarding daughtersE chastity ;ould *e )ore associated ;ith the do;ry syste)s, ;here young ;o)en are seen ,ri)arily in ter)s of their )arital futures. 9n fact ho;e0er, ;e ha0e seen that ,re)arital fe)ale chastity is also e),hasiIed in Polynesia, ;here ;o)en are seen )ore as kins,ersons, and less as )arriage e(,ort ite)s. 9t ;ould a,,ear, then, that an e),hasis on 0irginity )ay ha0e to do ;ith )ore general features of hierarchical syste)s :it is 0irtually none(istent in ?si),ler? societies= and less ;ith the s,ecific 0ariations of kinshi, and )arriage organiIation ;ithin the). Both Goody :.%!$= and 9 :.%!#= ha0e se,arately )ade this clai), although neither of us, 9 no; think, did so for the right reasons. Based on the discussions of the ,resent essay, 9 ;ould no; suggest that the concern for the 0irginity of daughters in hierarchical societies, across the do;ryGfe)ale inheritance di0ide, relates )ore to the argu)ent )ade earlier concerning the general ele0ation in status of ;o)en in such syste)s. That is, stratification *y nongender+*ased ,rinci,les ,laces ;o)en in each ?stratu)? on a )ore eHual footing ;ith )en, raising the) to;ard eHui0alence ;ith )en at any gi0en le0el. 9n this sense, 9 argued, ;o)enEs status tends to *e higher in such societies than in si),ler societies in ;hich gender itself is often a do)inant ,rinci,le of social ranking. 9t )ust further *e noted that the culti0ation of 0irginity, ;hate0er ;e )ay think of it co)ing fro) our o;n cultural *ackgrounds, is in fact associated in all hierarchical syste)s ;ith high cultural 0alue. 9n Polynesia ;e ha0e seen that this is the case, *ut in ,atrilineal 9ndia too the 0irgin is seen as a EEgift,? a ,recious and 0alua*le o*Ject :see Ta)*iah .%!$=. 2nd of course 0irginity has 0ery e(alted significance in Christian ideology too. Dirginity thus a,,ears in its cultural conte(ts to *e an e(,ression and culti0ation of the o0erall higher ?0alue? of ;o)en in such syste)s. 9 ;ould suggest then that the )eaning that gi0es 0irginity high 0alue in all hierarchical societies is the sa)e as that ;hich gi0es ;o)en relati0ely higher status in such societiesthat ;o)en are, first of all, co+)e)*ers of their o;n status grou,s, and only secondarily fe)ales. -or clearly 0irginity do;n,lays the uniHuely fe)inine ca,acity to *e ,enetrated and to gi0e *irth to children. ". ,age1..' Page ..$ 2 0irgin is still a generic kins,ersonC a non+0irgin is do;ngraded to )ere ;o)anhood. The Huestion then of ;hether 0irginity is ?really? oriented to;ard a girlEs )arital ,ros,ects, as the argu)ents noted earlier ;ould clai), or rather e(,resses her ongoing i),ortance ;ithin her kin grou, as the Polynesian analysis ;ould ha0e it :see also B. Schneider .%!.=, is actually a Huestion of secondary inter,retations ,laced *y s,ecific cultures on the )ore generally a0aila*le sy)*ol. 9n the do;ry syste)s, ;ith their )arital e),hasis, the )arriage+oriented inter,retations corres,ond ;ith cultural 0ie;s and are ,ro*a*ly a,,ro,riate for their cases, ;hereas in the fe)ale inheritance syste)s the inter,retation stressing the sy)*olic retention of the girl for her kin grou, is ,ro*a*ly )ore a,,ro,riate.

The ;hole e),hasis on do;ry andGor fe)ale inheritance has tended to focus discussion on ;o)en, and 9 )ust no; also say a fe; ;ords a*out the )en. 2lthough the Polynesian fe)ale ,atterns are consistent ;ith )any of the fe)ale ,atterns co))on to hierarchical societies in general, and ;ith 0irtually all of the ,atterns seen in the Sri 3anka+Southeast 2sian area, Polynesian )ale ,atterns )ay a,,ear di0ergent fro) all the rest. /o;here else do ;e see the e(tre)e e),hasis on )ale se(ual acti0ity so characteristic of Polynesia, and here it )ight *e thought that ;e are in the ,resence of so)ething culturally idiosyncratic, ha0ing little to do ;ith general structural characteristics of hierarchical social organiIation. 9n fact, ho;e0er, 9 ;ould argue Huite the contrary. The ,ro*le) of Junior )ale si*lings discussed in this essay for Polynesia is in fact ende)ic to all hierarchical syste)s. Only one si*ling can succeed to the headshi,, ;hether that *e the ,osition of head of household, or the kingshi, of the ;hole real). The differences of ,ri0ilege and o,,ortunity *et;een senior and Junior si*lings in hierarchical societies are thus e0ery;here ,otential sources of social clea0age. 2nd e0ery;here Junior si*lings )ust so)eho; *e ?taken care of,? ;hether *y )ethods that ensure their de,endency and loyalty to the ?house,? or *y )ethods that effecti0ely re)o0e the) fro) direct interest in kinshi, and status affairs, or *y so)e co)*ination of the t;o a,,roaches. The Ti*etan syste) of i),arti*le )ale inheritance and fraternal ,olyandry, for e(a),le, res,onds to the first i),ulse, ;hile Ti*etan Buddhist )onasteries that took in one+fifth of the )ale ,o,ulation, ideally al;ays Junior si*lings, res,onded to the second :see e.g., Stein .%!'=. -ocusing ,urely on ?di0ersionary? or ?re)o0al? tactics for dealing ;ith the ,ro*le) of Junior si*lings, ho;e0er, the encourage)ent of hy,eracti0e ,age1..$ Page .." :*ut nonre,roducti0e= se(uality for Junior Polynesian )ales is clearly si),ly one a)ong se0eral functional eHui0alents that ;ould ser0e these ,ur,oses. Other ,ossi*le solutions ;ould include freHuent ;arfare :for ;hich of course there are other )oti0es as ;ell=, andGor ,er,etual ;arfare training, to ;hich so)e Polynesian societies ;ere de0oted :see also, for e(a),le, the /ayar=. 2nd as the Ti*etan e(a),le suggests, another )aJor ,ossi*ility ;ould *e religious )onasticis). Monasticis) in fact ;as the great solution of Eurasia, in *oth Christianity in the <est and Buddhis) in the East. "' Polynesia historically esca,ed the :early= influences of either of these ?high? religions, ;hile at the sa)e ti)e not de0elo,ing an ascetic tradition of its o;n. 9t is not too farfetched to suggest, ho;e0er, that the asceticis) of the Euro,ean and 2sian religions and the :nonre,roducti0e= eroticis) of Polynesia are si),ly in0erse transfor)ational solutions to the sa)e general ,ro*le), the ,ro*le) of ;hat to do ;ith Junior )ale si*lings in hierarchical societies. 9n su), Polynesia is hardly an idiosyncratic case. Polynesian ,atterns of fe)ale ?treat)ent? are ;ell ;ithin the range seen in other ?hierarchical? societies, and the )ale ,atterns a,,ear as functional eHui0alents of, and si),le sy)*olic transfor)ations u,on, )ale ,atterns o0er the sa)e range. 9t is clearly ,ossi*le to say that ;hat ;e ha0e seen in Polynesia is at least as )uch a set of structural correlates of EEhierarchy? in general, as of ,eculiar Polynesian cultural traits. On the other hand, 9 ha0e also argued that idiosyncratic, historically e0ol0ed, cultural differences ,lay a )aJor role in affecting 0ariations ;ithin the general ,attern. The )arriage+cu)+do;ry orientation of the ,atrilineal syste)s of Euro,e and 2sia, and the kinshi,+ cu)+fe)ale inheritance e),hasis of the cognatic syste)s of Southeast 2sia and Polynesia, are *oth congruent ;ith hierarchical )acro+organiIation, *ut are not directly deri0a*le fro) it. Each in turn has different conseHuences for the 0ie;s and treat)ent of ;o)en in their res,ecti0e areas. 9f the ,restige syste) and the kinshi, syste) are thus so)e;hat inde,endent of one another, at least analytically, it )ay *e suggested that ;e could also look for different kinds of relationshi,s *et;een the t;o ?le0els.? 9f, for e(a),le, in Polynesia, hierarchy in general raises the status of ;o)en, and so :inde,endently= does the fact that kinshi, enco),asses and su*ordinates the significance of )arriage, ;e can say that the status syste) and the kinshi, syste) are consistent ;ith one another. 9n 9ndia, on the other hand, stratification raises the status of ;o)en *ut the )arital orientation of the kinshi, syste) has a de,ressing effect on fe)ale statusC thus the status sys+ ,age1.." Page ..& te) and the kinshi, syste) could *e said to *e a contradictory relationshi, ;ith res,ect to ;o)en. 9t ;ould *e interesting to ,ursue, for e(a),le, the high degree of ela*oration of notions of fe)ale ,ollution in 9ndia, co),ared to the relati0ely lo; degree of ela*oration of such notions in Polynesia :or Southeast 2sia= in light

of this contrast. But that is another ,a,er. ,age1..& Page ..#

& The Pro*le) of ?<o)en? 2s an 2nalytic Category The most serious deficiency of a model 'ased on t!o opposed spheres appears$ in short$ in its alliance !ith the dualisms of the past$ dichotomies !hich teach that !omen must 'e understood not in terms of relationship!ith other !omen and !ith men'ut of difference and apartness: 7osaldo,.% 0: "0% This ,a,er *egan as a rethinking of so)e ,atterns in )y o;n ,ast fe)inist ;ork. -or one thing, although 9 ha0e *een syste)atically concerned ;ith the cultural construction of gender categories, 9 ha0e done 0ery little on ;o)en as social actors. -or another, 9 ha0e ne0er atte),ted to e(,lore issues ,ertaining to gender :or ;o)en= a)ong the Sher,as, the ,eo,le a)ong ;ho) 9 ha0e done all )y ,ri)ary ethnogra,hic research. Thus for this ,a,er 9 decided to tackle the role of Sher,a ;o)en in the founding of the first Sher,a nunnery. 2s the ,a,er ,rogressed, ho;e0er, 9 realiIed that there ;as another rethinking going on in the analysis, a kind of illu)ination of a ,rogra))atic ,a,er *y Michelle 7osaldo called ?The 6se and 2*use of 2nthro,ology: 7eflections on -e)inis) and Cross+Cultural 6nderstanding? :.% 0=. 7osaldo argued, inter alia, :.= that e0en though )en are uni0ersally ?do)inant? 0is+N+0is ;o)en, ;e should sto, ,aying so )uch attention to this ,ointC :'= that e),irical ;ork u,on the li0es and e(,eriences of ;o)en should not *e the ,ri)ary focus of fe)inist researchC :$= that e0en though the o,,osition *et;een ?do)estic? and ?,u*licEE do)ains :;hich 7osaldo herself had esta*lished as central to the analysis of gender L.%!"M= see)s to *e heuristically useful, it is actually of negati0e 0alue, since it leads to an e),hasis on ?difference? *et;een ;o)en and )en rather than on ?relations?C and :"= that ulti)ately gender cannot *e adeHuately understood e(ce,t in relation to other structures of social asy))etry. ,age1..# Page ..! 3aid out sche)atically like this, 7osaldoEs ,oints see) reasona*ly clear. 4et the ,a,er itself, at least to )e, ;as not at all clear at the ti)e, insofar as it see)ed si)ultaneously to gi0e and take *ack )ost of its o;n ,oints: ;e )ust insist on uni0ersal )ale do)inance *ut ignore it analyticallyC ;e )ust study ;o)en *ut not gi0e ?;o)en? as such undue analytic e),hasisC the do)esticG,u*lic o,,osition ?is as telling as any e(,lanation yet ,ut forth? :.% 0: $%%= for )any gender ,atterns, *ut it should *e dro,,ed as an analytic toolC and so on. 4et as 9 ;orked )y ;ay through the Sher,a nunnery analysis that follo;s here, 9 found that ;hat 9 ;as doing, essentially, ;as illustrating )ost of 7osaldoEs ,oints. <ithout forecasting the results any further, then, 9 ;ill si),ly ,erfor) the analysis, and allo; those ,oints to e)erge at the end as outco)es rather than as ,rescri,tions. The Sher,as are an ethnically Ti*etan grou, li0ing at high altitudes in a relati0ely re)ote area of northeastern /e,al *ordering on Ti*et. Their traditional econo)ic *ase co)*ines agriculture, dairy herding, and long+distance trade. They li0e in s)all 0illages, in nuclear fa)ily households, and ,ro,erty in *oth land and ani)als is ,ri0ately o;ned *y fa)ilies. They ,ractice the Ti*etan Buddhist religion. 9n the ,ast $0 years, they ha0e *eco)e internationally fa)ous as guides and ,orters for 5i)alayan )ountaineering e(,editions :0on -Srer+5ai)endorf .%#", .%!&C 7. Paul .%!0C Ortner .%!0, .%! =. Early in the t;entieth century, the Sher,as *egan to *uild Buddhist )onasteries. They had al;ays ,racticed a ?folk? for) of Ti*etan Buddhis), in ;hich local )arried ,riests :lama= conducted rituals in 0illage te),les and in households for the *enefit of the general ,o,ulace. But the Sher,as had ne0er *efore had the )ore ?orthodo(? )onastic institutions, in ;hich celi*ate indi0iduals li0e and ,ractice religion on a full+ti)e *asis. Monastics are nor)ati0ely re)o0ed fro) ordinary social life, do not do any ,roducti0e la*or, and de0ote the)sel0es )a(i)ally to their o;n s,iritual i),ro0e)ent :and incidentally, *ut not ,ri)arily, to the general ;elfare=.

The first :)ale= )onastery, Teng*oche, ;as founded in .%.#. The initiati0e for the founding a,,arently ca)e fro) high+status indi0idualsa 0ery high reincarnate Ti*etan la)a, and three ;ealthy Sher,a lay)en. The high reincarnate la)aEs )oti0es in sti)ulating the founding )ay *e inter,reted ,artly in ter)s of religious e),ire *uildingthis )an had already, at Huite a young age, founded his o;n )onastery in Ti*et, and ;as no; a,,arently looking further afield :2IiI .%! =. . The lay s,onsors, for their ,art, ;ere all successful traders ;ho had recently *eco)e Huite ;ealthy. 9n the late ,age1..! Page .. nineteenth century, )aJor transfor)ations had *een taking ,lace in the larger north 9ndian+5i)alayan region. 9n north 9ndia, the British ;ere in their )ost acti0e ,hase of econo)ic de0elo,)ent. 9n /e,al, the 7ana fa)ily had taken all effecti0e ,o;er fro) the king, and had *egun a ,rocess of rationaliIing ta( collections throughout the country. The three Sher,a traders in0ol0ed in founding Teng*oche )onastery had all *een rather dra)atically enriched, directly or indirectly, *y the econo)ic *oo) created *y the British. 9n addition, t;o of the) had *een a,,ointed ta( collectors for the 7ana regi)e, and their ta( collecting ,ositions generated *oth additional ;ealth and so)e real local ,o;er. The third )an ;as the son+in+la; of one of the other t;o. 2s a result of *oth their sudden rise to ;ealth, and their in0ol0e)ent ;ith the alien and sus,ect /e,alese state, these )en ;ould ha0e had difficulties in )aintaining social res,ect and legiti)acy of leadershi, ;ithin the Sher,a co))unity. To )ake a 0ery long story :Ortner .% %= short, it a,,ears that their in0ol0e)ent in )onastery *uilding re,resented, in ,art, an atte),t to shore u, such res,ect and legiti)acy. The story of the founding of the first Sher,a nunnery, 8e0uche, is Huite different. There is no e0idence of instigation on the ,art of high religious leaders or ;ealthy ,atrons. 7ather it a,,ears that a grou, of religiously inclined ;o)en got together and, in a grass+roots ;ay, s,onsored and *uilt the institution. Since the ;o)en ;ere not in0ol0ed in ,u*lic ,olitics, as the ?*ig )en? *ehind the founding of Teng*oche ;ere, the t;o foundings see) to contrast in ?ty,ical? fe)aleG)ale ;ays: <hereas the founding of Teng*oche a,,ears to *e understanda*le in ter)s of changes in the ?,u*lic? do)ain :)acro+,olitics and econo)ics=, the founding of 8e0uche a,,ears to ,ertain )ore to the ;orld of ;o)enEs ?,ri0ate? or ?do)esticEE e(,erience. 4et although this i),ression is created *y the different e),hases in the accounts of the t;o foundings, 9 shall try to sho; that the situation ;as far )ore co),le( than that. 8e0uche /unnery 8e0uche nunnery ;as ,ro*a*ly *egun around .%'&, and ;as co),leted in .%' . The nunnery co),le(, consisting of a te),le and associated structures, as ;ell as indi0idual houses *elonging to the nuns, is situated in a glade in a high 0alley of Phu)*u, the u,,er Sher,a region. 9t is located a short distance fro) Teng*oche )onastery, a *it further north on the trail leading to so)e of the highest Sher,a 0illages, and ulti)ately to Mt. E0erest. ,age1.. Page ..% Currently, there are eight fully ordained celi*ate nuns :ani=, and fi0e other ;o)en attached to the nunnery in the status of ?,eri,heral ones? :)or!a=. ' The distinction *et;een the fully ordained nuns and the )or!a ,ertains to )atters of ritual ,artici,ation rather than le0els of religious achie0e)entC there are in fact no such le0els in the nunnery, as there are in the )ale )onasteries. The )onasteries also ha0e grades of s,iritual or )oral distinction, the lo;er *eing called ra'chung, and the higher called gelung, *ut all Sher,a nuns are only ra'chung.$ The nunnery, like a )onastery, has a nu)*er of rotating )anagerial officesthe )onyer, ;ho kee,s the keys to the te),le and is in charge of seeing that the ,re)ises are in order, and t;o nyermu, ;ho are essentially the *usiness )anagers, one kee,ing accounts, and the other *uying food and *eing in charge of the kitchen ;hen collecti0e )eals are ,re,ared. The official head of the nunnery is the :)ale= head la)a of Teng*oche )onastery, ;ho sits on the ?throne? in the nunnery te),le during i),ortant religious rituals ;hich he co)es to lead. 8e0uche is actually defined as a *ranch of Teng*oche, although it handles )ost of its o;n internal affairs. The financing of the nunnery is no different fro) that of a )onastery, and ;orks as follo;s. Gifts are usually in cash, *ut in the ,ast also included so)e land." The cash )ay *e gi0en outright, either for i))ediate e(,enditure or to *e used as lending ca,ital, or it )ay *e ,ledged in the for) of annual interest on a designated *ody of ca,ital retained *y the donor. Big donors, *oth lay and religious, tend to gi0e s,ecifically

ear)arked giftsendo;)ents for the annual ,erfor)ance of ,articular rituals, or lu), su)s for the ,urchase of ,articular te),le ite)s :or, in the early days, for the construction of ,articular structures, including the te),le itself=. <hen gifts are gi0en to the nunnery ?as a ;hole,? they go to;ard the )aintenance of the te),le, the ,urchase of te),le ,ara,hernalia, and the feeding of the nuns !hen they are engaged in collecti,e acti,itiesdaily co))unal tea drinking, and the ,erfor)ance of te),le rituals. -or ongoing su*sistence, ho;e0er, each nun )ust ,ro0ide for herself. She )ust *uy or see to the construction of her o;n house, and )ust ,ro0ide her o;n food, e(ce,t on those ritual occasions ;hen she is su,,orted *y the general fund.& /or)ally, a ;o)anEs fa)ily ;ill ,ro0ide *oth the house and the ongoing su*sistence for her. They )ay set aside fields for her su,,ort, to *e ;orked *y fa)ily )e)*ers or, in a ;ealthy fa)ily, *y tenants or ;age la*orers. Or they )ay si),ly o*ligate the)sel0es to ,ro0ide her ;ith food fro) their o;n holdings. 9n addition, the nun ;ill *e fed, and recei0e a cer+ ,age1..% Page .'0 tain a)ount of )oney and grain in donations, ;hene0er she ,erfor)s rituals for lay ,eo,le, indi0idually or ;ith other nuns. <e ha0e 0irtually no infor)ation on day+to+day life in the nunnery. <e kno; that there is daily co))unal tea drinking. Beyond that, ;hen there are no rituals scheduled, it a,,ears that the nuns :like the )onks in the )onasteries= nor)ally cook and eat in their o;n indi0idual houses, and ,ri0ately ,erfor) their o;n de0otions. 2t least once a )onth, ho;e0er, so)e collecti0e ritual is scheduled. On the tenth day of each )onth, the nuns ,erfor) a tso ritual, ;hich entails large offerings of foods to the gods, distri*uted to all the )ortals ,resent after;ards. # Once a year the nuns also do a ritual of s,iritual ,urification called 7usem :analogous to the )onksE %orsem= for se0en days. They also do a )ore intensi0e 0ersion, called 7ar!i Chagye, of the annual lay,eo,leEs ritual of atone)ent and )erit+)aking :0yungne=C the nunsE 0ersion entails fasting e0ery other day for si(teen days. 9n su))er, there is :ideally= one )onth of retreat, or yerne, during ;hich ti)e all the nuns )ust re)ain in the nunnery and ,artici,ate in daily rituals.! 9n addition to all this, the nuns )ay *e in0ited at any ti)e to ,artici,ate collecti0ely in )ortuary rituals in ,ri0ate ho)es, and they )ay also *e in0ited indi0idually to ,erfor) other rituals for households. The Story of the -ounding of 8e0uche The account 9 recei0ed of the founding of 8e0uche ca)e fro) one of the founding ;o)en, /ga;ang Sa)den :her religious na)e=. <hen 9 inter0ie;ed her in .%!%, she ;as eighty+three years old. Many years *efore, she had *roken her nunEs 0o;s and )arried, in fact se0eral ti)es o0er. 5er last hus*and ;as no; deceased, and she ;as li0ing in a s)all house on the grounds of Teng*oche )onastery, as a )or!a of the )onastery. 2s 9 ;as a*le to ,iece together fro) other sources, /ga;ang Sa)den ;as *orn into a fa)ily of so)e su*stance. 5er father )ay ha0e *een a pem'u, a ta( collector. One of her *rothers had *een a pem'u, and he and another *rother ;ere *oth a,,arently ,o;erful )en in their ti)e.% One of these *rothers in turn ;as the father of a )an ser0ing as a local go0ern)ent official :pradhan panch= at the ti)e of )y field;ork. 2nd one of her sisters )arried another pem'u, ;hose son in turn has *eco)e one of the )ost ,ro)inent, res,ected, and influential )en currently acti0e in the area. There is good reason to *elie0e that )ost of the early 8e0uche nuns :as ;ell as )ost of the early Teng*oche )onks= ;ere fro) relati0ely ;ell+to+do, ,age1.'0 Page .'. high+status fa)ilies. Gi0en the fact that a nun or )onk )ust *e su,,orted *y her or his fa)ily, the ,attern of dra;ing )onastics fro) the higher le0els of Sher,a society still generally holds today. <hen /ga;ang Sa)den ;as t;enty+four, her father *etrothed her to a ;ealthy older )an ;ho already had one ;ife. .0 She did not ;ant to get )arried, and so ran a;ay fro) ho)e ;ith the intention of *eco)ing a nun. 3acking )oney and needing the a,,ro,riate attire for taking her 0o;s, she dyed a ;hite *louse red. 2nother ;o)an, ;ho ;as to *eco)e another of the founding nuns, kindly ga0e her so)e food to carry on her Journey. She fled to 7u)*u )onastery, o0er the *order in Ti*et, ;here she took 0o;s fro) the high reincarnate la)a ;ho had *een instru)ental in the founding of Teng*oche )onastery...

2ll the other founding nuns.' also took their 0o;s at 7u)*u, although ;hether or not they did so at the sa)e ti)e as /ga;ang Sa)den is not clear. 2ll of the) e0entually )igrated *ack to the Phu)*u area, ;here they ,ursued their religious studies together, ,ro*a*ly under the instruction of one of the Teng*oche )onks. /ga;ang Sa)den said that she )astered the first t;o *ooks of reading and ;riting after only one ;inter of study. E0entually, the nuns hatched the idea of founding a nunnery in Phu)*u. 2s /ga;ang Sa)den tells it: One night, she and the other ani ;ere sitting together and drinking tea. They ;ere talking a*out *uilding a house ;here they could do religious ;ork together. They did not slee, all night. The ne(t )orning they got u, and decided to go and ,ut their reHuest to 3a)a Gulu, the head of Teng*oche )onastery. 5e said that it ;as good that they had co)e, and he ga0e the) the ?order? or the authority to *uild a te),leGnunnery. 3a)a Gulu told the nuns to co)e *ack on /e; 4earEs day. They ca)e *ack and he ga0e the) so)e )oney, *ut )ore i),ortantly, he ga0e the) an idol, a ,rayer *ook, and a chorten La Buddhist sy)*ol of the cos)os. The three ite)s ;ere sy)*olic of the three essential s,iritual su,,orts of a religious institution and of religious ,racticeM. 2ll the Teng*oche )onks also ga0e the) )oney, fro) their ,ersonal resources. 3a)a Gulu also told the nuns to go out *egging for donations. 5e ga0e the) a letter of authoriIation and so)e religious )edicine to take ;ith the) to distri*ute to ,eo,le..$ They ;ent to each 0illage and ga0e the letter and )edicines to a ,ro)inent )an, ;ho then called e0ery*ody together and e(,lained the ;o)enEs )ission. They recei0ed ,age1.'. Page .'' enor)ous donations. They ;ent as far a;ay as Pha,hlu and Ahung, 0illages in the lo;er Sher,a 0alley, a*out forty )iles south of their area. The story continues, enu)erating additional contri*utions fro) religious donors: 3a)a Gulu ga0e ,rinci,al fro) ;hich interest could *e used to su,,ort the )onthly tso ritual. The Aatul 7i),oche ." Lthe high la)a fro) ;ho) the nuns had all taken their 0o;sM ga0e ,rinci,al for the su,,ort of three other rituals. The Aatul 7i),oche also sent t;o large loads of old ;oolen clothing fro) 7u)*u )onastery..& /ga;ang Sa)den sold these clothes to )ake )ore )oney for *uilding the nunnery. 2s for lay donors, )any of these ;ere either the sa)e ,eo,le in0ol0ed in the founding of Teng*oche )onastery, or else closely associated ;ith the). One ;as Par)a 3a)a of Ahung, one of the original three ;ealthy and ,o;erful ,atrons of Teng*oche. /ga;ang Sa)den descri*ed Par)a 3a)aEs su,,ort as second only to 3a)a GuluEs, and one of Par)a 3a)aEs daughters *eca)e one of the founding grou, of nuns. 2nother i),ortant lay s,onsor ;as a certain Pule, ;ho ;as )arried to a kins;o)an of Par)a 3a)a. Pule s,onsored the large ,rayer ;heel on the site of the nunnery. Takto Pusang, Par)a 3a)aEs son+in+la; and another for)er s,onsor of Teng*oche, ?also ga0e a lot.? 9n addition, there ;ere s)aller donations fro) 0irtually e0ery adult in Phu)*u. /ga;ang Sa)denEs )other ga0e food, and a turHuoise ;hich could *e sold. 2nother )an ga0e a 0alua*le ge), a .i. 2nd so on. /ga;ang Sa)den and Par)a 3a)aEs daughter, 2ni Tarchin, *uilt their o;n s)all houses at the nunnery site e0en *efore the te),le ;as *egun. Once the *uilding ;ork *egan, 3a)a Gulu stayed in 8e0uche fro) start to finish. 5e and all the Teng*oche )onks hel,ed 0ery )uch ;ith the la*or. 2ll the Phu)*u 0illage ,eo,le ca)e to hel,. There are so )any ,eo,le there ;erenEt enough ,lates to feed the) on..# The nuns *ought a *olt of cotton cloth and laid it out on the ground, and ,eo,le sat *ehind it. The food ,ortions ;ere du),ed directly on the cloth Lan unheard of )ode of ser0ing foodMT Each of the nuns also ga0e the ;orkers one dayEs food, out of her o;n resources. 2ll the structural ;ork on the )ain te),le and the large ,rayer ;heel associated ;ith it, as ;ell as the ,ainting of the frescoes, ;as finished *y the ti)e ,age1.''

Page .'$ of the consecration, the ramne, in .%' . :/ga;ang Sa)den and others recalled that )any ;ealthy and ,o;erful ,eo,le ca)e to the ramne.= But the te),le still reHuired )ore internal furnishings, and once again /ga;ang Sa)den ;ent into action: 2fter the ramne, she and t;o other nuns Lincluding Par)a 3a)aEs daughterM ;ent to 3hasa, ;here they contacted Ge)*u Tse,al Lthe third of the three *ig Teng*oche s,onsors and a for)er head ta( collectorGem'u;ho had fled to 3hasa after *eing in0ol0ed in a )urder caseM and also her t;o younger *rothers. These three )en hel,ed the ani, calling ,eo,le together, *uying the) all *eer, and raising a lot of donations. <ith the )oney the ani *ought car,ets and dragon+hangings in 3hasa for furnishing the interior of the te),le. 4ou can still see all these things inside the te),le today. On the ;ay *ack fro) 3hasa to Phu)*u the nuns sto,,ed in Shigatse, ;here another Sher,a L@M )an ga0e the) )ore car,ets. Thus they furnished the te),le. 9n this account of the founding of 8e0uche, then, ;hat is e),hasiIed are the initiati0es of the young ;o)en in0ol0ed, *oth in launching the ,rocess, and in carrying it through to co),letion. 2lthough the roles ,layed *y high religious leaders and ;ealthy lay s,onsors :including, indeed, )ost of the sa)e ,eo,le in0ol0ed in the founding of Teng*oche= are fully noted, these ,eo,le are not ,resented as the ,ri)e )o0ers in the ,rocess, as they are in the case of Teng*oche )onastery. This difference in the accounts of the t;o foundings )ay of course *e an artifact of the inter0ie;ing. 5ad 9 inter0ie;ed )ale infor)ants a*out the founding of 8e0uche, ,erha,s they ;ould ha0e descri*ed the initiati0es as co)ing fro) the high la)as and ;ealthy s,onsors rather than fro) the nuns. .! 2lternati0ely, had 9 *een a*le to inter0ie; so)e of the original Teng*oche )onks :none of the) ;ere ali0e at the ti)e of the research=, ,erha,s they ;ould ha0e descri*ed the founding of Teng*oche )ore as a ,roduct of their o;n grass+roots efforts :as /ga;ang Sa)den descri*es the founding of 8e0uche= than as ha0ing *een generated *y the higher+u,s. 6nfortunately, ;e lack the s,ace andGor the data to deal ;ith Huestions of 0ariations in narratorsE ,ers,ecti0es here, although ;e shall return to the ,ossi*ility of a )ore ground+le0el angle on the founding of Teng*oche *elo;. 2ll of this aside, ho;e0er, ;e ha0e here an account of the founding of 8e0uche nunnery that ,ortrays it as the fruit of initiati0es on the ,art of a grou, of ;o)en. 9t see)s reasona*le, then, to atte),t to understand this e0ent at least ,artly ;ith reference to certain ,atterns of Sher,a ;o)enEs ,age1.'$ Page .'" li0es. 9 should declare at the outset, ho;e0er, that 9 do not *elie0e one can get 0ery far in the analysis *y focusing on ;o)en actors alone. That is, e0en though 8e0uche is an institution created *y and for ;o)en, 9 shall argue that ;e cannot understand the forces *ehind its founding ;ithout e(,loring the ,arallels :as ;ell as the differences= *et;een ;o)enEs and )enEs li0es, and ;ithout conte(tualiIing the e(,eriences of 'oth se(es ;ithin certain larger structures of social relations. The Situation of <o)en a)ong the Sher,as The ,osition of ;o)en :and )ore generally, the ,attern of gender relations= a)ong the Sher,as deser0es a ,a,er in its o;n right, and only the *arest sketch can *e gi0en here. The follo;ing is *ased on )y o;n field o*ser0ations and con0ersations, as ;ell as on March :.%!%=, the only e(tended treat)ent of the su*Ject currently a0aila*le. 2t the le0el of for)al ideology, *oth Sher,a )en and Sher,a ;o)en say that ;o)en are ?lo;er? than )en. -e)aleness is a lo;er for) of re*irth. . 2 hu)an *orn as a ;o)an is *eing ,unished for ,ast sins. <o)en in turn ha0e )ore ,ro,ensity than )en to accu)ulate e0en )ore sins since, a)ong other things, )others acHuire the sins of their young children, as ;ell as the de)erit of their o;n *ad deeds. 9f a ;o)an nonetheless )anages to accu)ulate )uch )erit, the *est she can ho,e for is re*irth as a )an. One as,ect of ;o)enEs ?lo;ness? is that they are gamchu, or that they generate gamchu, a kind of negati0e force ;hich causes ,ersons or things ;ith any s,ecial ,o;ers to *e drained of these ,o;ers. Thus, for e(a),le, a ;o)an should ne0er touch the head or shoulders of a )an, and es,ecially of a la)a, or he )ight lose his greater s,iritual ,otency. Potency thus lost can ne0er *e restored. <o)en are also )ythically *la)ed for a nu)*er of )isha,s that ha0e har)ed the Sher,a co))unity as a ;hole. -or e(a),le, one la)aEs ;ife, in a folktale, intruded herself into a situation in ;hich a god ;as 0isiting her hus*and. The la)a had *een la)enting to the god that there ;as no salt in the Sher,a area, and

the god had *een on the 0erge of agreeing to rectify the situation. But ;hen the ;ife arri0ed, the god :;ho couldnEt stand ;o)en *ecause they are gamchu= ;ithdre;, and ne0er 0isited hu)ans again. Thus the Sher,as still ha0e to )ake arduous trading e(,editions to o*tain salt. 9n another tale, the ancestor Me),ali and the ancestress 9k,ali o;ned )any cattle. Me),ali ;arned 9k,ali not to say ?,he;? ;hen she got tired of doing her cattle chores. But after rounding u, one hundred co;s, she ;as tired ,age1.'" Page .'& and in0oluntarily said ?,he;,? ;hereu,on all the co;s ran a;ay. /o;, the tale concludes, no*ody, not e0en the richest ,eo,le, can kee, )ore than one hundred head of cattle. 2nd a third little story: 9n the ti)e of the Guru 7i),oche, the founder of Ti*etan Buddhis), ,eo,le used to li0e for one thousand years. One day the Guru 7i),oche in0ited all the la)as to take ong, a ritual of long life. But one la)aEs ;ife ;ould not let hi) go, and so no; ,eo,le are doo)ed to short li0es. 9n )odern Sher,a social life, ;o)en are seen as *eing )ore dri0en than )en *y greed, )aterialis), and en0y. 2s a result, it is *elie0ed that they )ay *eco)e ,oisoners :,oisoning unsus,ecting guests is thought to *e a )agical ;ay to gain ;ealth= or ;itches :;ho )ake ,eo,le ill out of en0y of their ,ossessions=. 2t the sa)e ti)e, )en are not seen as ,erfect either. They are gi0en to co),etiti0eness and 0iolence. 4et ;o)enEs assu)ed ,ro,ensity to ,oison and *e;itch others is felt to *e )ore insidiously threatening than )enEs tendencies to co),ete and fight ;ith one another, ,ro*a*ly *ecause ,oisonings and ;itchcraft attacks are in0isi*le and un,redicta*le. 2t the social le0el, ;o)en ha0e t;o )aJor disad0antages co),ared ;ith )en: a nor) of 0irilocal residence, ;hich )eans that they )ust )o0e to their hus*andsE ho)es at )arriage, and the rules of inheritance ;hich gi0e all ,roducti0e ,ro,erty to )en. 2 *rief look at the Sher,a do)estic cycle ;ill illustrate the i),act of these rules on fe)ale e(,erience. The Sher,as li0e for the )ost ,art in nuclear fa)ilies ;hich :ideally, and generally in ,ractice= o;n all of their o;n ,roducti0e resourcesland and herds of dairy ani)alsand ;hich su,,ort the)sel0es largely *y the la*or of their o;n )e)*ers. .% 2ll the )e)*ers of the household *eco)e acti0e contri*utors to the su,,ort of the fa)ily fro) 0ery early ages. 8aughters as ;ell as sons ;ork hard in *oth agriculture and ani)al care, and are 0alua*le )e)*ers of the household econo)y. 8aughters, further, do )uch )ore do)estic ;ork than sons. 9ndeed, so)e ;o)en said that they ;ould rather ha0e daughters than sons, since daughters hel, their )others ;ith do)estic chores as ;ell as doing ,roducti0e la*or, ;hile sons Just sit around the house ?like kings.? These sorts of co))ents aside, ho;e0er, the fa)ily is a relati0ely tight and efficient social unit, ;ith a high degree of internal solidarity, until the children *egin a,,roaching )arriagea*le ages. Marriages are finaliIed relati0ely late, ;hen the children are in their )id to late t;enties. The lateness of )arriage :and the frictions that de0elo, around it= is ,artly related to the childrenEs i),ortance in their ,arentsE do)estic econo)y. But it is also connected ;ith ,ro*le)s created *y the in+ ,age1.'& Page .'# heritance syste): The trans)ission of ,ro,erty takes ,lace at this stage of the childrenEs li0es, rather than at the death:s= of the ,arent:s=. Thus ;hen each child )arries, he or she gets his or her final share of the fa)ily estate. Sons inherit the land and the herds, ;hile daughters inherit only )o0a*le goodsJe;elry and household effects. '0 Thus )en are the o;ners of the )eans of ,roduction, ;hile ;o)en are technically ,ro,ertyless.'. Marriages are generally arranged *y the ,arents. Sons ha0e little )ore say than daughters in arranged )arriages, and a son )ay *e Just as unha,,y, in a gi0en case, ;ith the chosen ;ife, as a daughter is ;ith a chosen hus*and.'' The rate of di0orce, ,ri)arily in the early stages of )arriage, is a*out $0 ,ercent :O,,itI .%# : .'"=. But it is the ;o)an ;ho )ust )o0e to her hus*andEs house after )arriage, and 0irtually e0ery young Sher,a ;o)an 9 kne; e(,ressed so)e a,,rehension a*out this )o0e. The nor) of 0irilocal residence ;orks so)e;hat differently in Phu)*u, the northern Sher,a area, and Solu, the southern one. 9n Solu, the 0illages are )ostly single+clan co))unities. Since a ;o)an )ust )arry a )an of a different clan, she must )o0e out of her natal 0illage, She )ust thus go and esta*lish herself a)ong relati0e strangers, ;ith little of the fa)ily su,,ort she had at ho)e.'$ -urther, since )en are 0ery geogra,hically )o*ile :for trade, and for ;age

la*or=, the ;o)an )ay *e left alone in this relati0ely strange ,lace for long ,eriods of ti)e. 9ndeed, in cases of arranged )arriages ;here the )an is unha,,y ;ith his ,arentsE choice of ;ife :or, in )any cases, ;here he si),ly feels that he is not ready to *e )arried=, he ;ill tend to stay a;ay as )uch as ,ossi*le. Gi0en nuclear fa)ily household organiIation, the young ;ifeand 9 kne; of Huite a fe; such casesfeels Huite isolated and unha,,y. :See also the *iogra,hical sketch of 2ni Chodon L2IiI .%!#: "&M=.'" 9n Phu)*u the situation a,,ears to *e different. Phu)*u 0illages are generally )ulti+clan co))unities, and the rates of local endoga)y :in+)arriage= are Huite high#$ ,ercent :0on -Srer+5ai)endorf .%#": "&"#= or !! ,ercent :3ang and 3ang .%!.: $=. 4et these figures reHuire so)e inter,retation. 9n one instance, for e(a),le, 0on -Srer+5ai)endorf took t;o adJacent 0illages as a single )arriage unit and calculated only one rate of endoga)y for the t;o together. 3ang and 3ang, ;ith their e0en higher rate, )ay ha0e done the sa)e thing for other ,arts of Phu)*u as ;ell. Such calculations see) Huite reasona*le, since Sher,as are in general Huite casual a*out long distances and 0ery difficult terrain. 4et in the conte(t of the issue of residence change at )arriage, the ,icture for ;o)en a,,ears rather ,age1.'# Page .'! different. 9 heard se0eral Phu)*u ;o)en ;ho )arried into 0illages adJacent to their natal ones e(,ress the sense that they ;ere )o0ing ?far a;ay.? The su*Jecti0e e(,erience of distance is thus transfor)ed in this conte(t. -urther, e0en though )any young Phu)*u ;o)en !ill re)ain in their natal 0illages, or relati0ely close, none can *e sure *efore )arriage that they ;ill not *e a)ong the '$ ,ercent :or $! ,ercent= ;ho ;ill in fact ha0e to )o0e further a;ay. 2lthough the statistics are not a0aila*le on ;hich girls are )ore likely to )o0e longer distances, in )ost instances for ;hich 9 ha0e s,ecific infor)ation, it is girls fro) higher+status fa)ilies. 2 higher+status girl is also )ore likely to *e shi,,ed off earlier to her hus*andEs 0illage, *ecause her fa)ily does not need her la*or, and does not need a long ti)e to ,ut together her do;ry. These ,oints are of ,articular rele0ance for the ,resent analysis, since )ost of the ;o)en in0ol0ed in the founding of 8e0uche :and indeed )ost ;o)en ;ho *eco)e nuns= ;ereGare fro) higher+status fa)ilies. /e(t co)e the ,ro*le)s of *earing and raising children. 9t )ay *e assu)ed that, in this re)ote area ;ith no )edical facilities *efore the .%#0s, there ;as considera*le risk to ;o)en in *earing children. /onetheless, 9 ne0er heard a Sher,a ;o)an e(,ress fear of dying in child*irth. <hat ;o)en do ;orry a*out, ho;e0er, is children dying, and such ;orries are Huite realistic. There is a .&. ,ercent rate of deaths of infants in the first year of life, and an o0erall ' . ,ercent rate of )ortality *efore adolescence :3ang and 3ang .%!.: "=. -inally, *oth ;o)en and )en al;ays e(,ress a great deal of concern a*out the a*ility to su,,ort the children adeHuately, e(ce,t in the ;ealthiest of fa)ilies :see also 0on -Srer+5ai)endorf .%!#: ." =. 4oung ,arents ;ith a nu)*er of s)all children )ust ;ork e(tre)ely hard. There are )ore )ouths to feed than ;orkers to ,roduce, and the reHuire)ents of child care cut into the ;ifeEs ,roducti0ity as ;ell. 2gain, the ,ro*le)s are intensified *y nuclear fa)ily residence :and the ideal of nuclear fa)ily autono)y=: the cou,le cannot e(,ect )uch hel, fro) others, ;ith either child care or ,roducti0e la*or. 4et des,ite the ideology of ;o)enEs lo;ness and associated *ad characteristics, and des,ite the rather hea0y social constraints Just sketched, Sher,a ;o)en hardly strike one as o,,ressed creatures. 9f one had no access to all the a*o0e infor)ation, and if one *ased oneEs assess)ent of Sher,a ;o)enEs status solely on *eha0ioral or interactional o*ser0ations, one ;ould ,ro*a*ly say that Sher,a ;o)en are the 0irtual eHuals of Sher,a ,age1.'! Page .' )en. 9n ordinary *eha0ior and interaction, Sher,a ;o)en are asserti0e, outgoing, self+assured, and enor)ously inde,endent. There is little se(+segregation in the society: there are no )enEs clu*s or coffee sho,s or ,laIas ;here )en alone congregate. 2l)ost all social life takes ,lace in ,ri0ate ho)es, ;here the ;ife is as acti0e in hosting a social e0ent as her hus*and is, if not )ore so. <hen hus*ands go off on trading e(,editions, or to do ;age ;ork, ;i0es )anage ho)e and land on their o;n for long ,eriods of ti)e, )aking financial decisions, organiIing and ,erfor)ing the la*or in0ol0ed, and generally taking care of the)sel0es and their fa)ilies. They are not seen as inco),etent, 0ulnera*le to ra,e or seduction, stu,id in ;orldly affairs, or in any other ;ay reHuiring s,ecial ,rotection and sheltering. :See, along these sa)e lines, 0on -Srer+5ai)endorf .%#": ..=

Su))ing u, the total situation of Sher,a ;o)en, then, it is clear that the co),onents are so)e;hat internally contradictory. <o)en are encouraged to *e co),etent, self+assured, inde,endent actors, *ut they are also he))ed in *y distincti0e structural constraints, and *urdened *y negati0e ideology. 9t ;ould *e i),ortant to try to understand the roots of this contradiction*oth in its indi0idual co),onents and its totality*ut such an undertaking ;ould carry us far *eyond the confines of the ,resent ,a,er. -or the )o)ent ;e )ay only suggest one ,oint of i))ediate rele0ance, na)ely, that high+status ;o)en )ight e(,erience the internal contradictions of the total fe)ale situation )ore dee,ly than other ;o)en. That is, they ;ould tend to ha0e ,articularly ,ositi0e self i)ages :indeed )any of the) ha0e ,ro*a*ly *een Huite s,oiled as children=, and )ight thus feel )uch )ore unJustly a*used than other ;o)en *y the social restrictions and negati0e ideology constraining ;o)en generally. The 8ecision to Beco)e a /un The central 0o; of )onasticis) is that of celi*acy. The ;o)an s;ears not to engage in se(ual relations nor to )arry. More generally, she is not su,,osed to engage in )ost of the ordinary ,ractices and relations of secular social life. E0en if she returns to reside in a secular household after taking the 0o;s :a ,ossi*le, and not infreHuently chosen, o,tion for nuns=, she is not su*Ject to the nor)al o*ligations of kinshi,, neigh*orly reci,rocity, social hos,itality, and the like, and is not su,,osed to *eco)e in0ol0ed in such acti0ities. 2 nun )ust also not engage in ,roducti0e la*or, as agricultural ;ork entails killing the tiny insects and ;or)s that li0e in the soil, and in any e0ent it :like )ost other nor)al acti0ities= takes ti)e and energy ,age1.' Page .'% a;ay fro) the full+ti)e ,ursuit of religion. -inally, ;hile there is no actual 0o; of ,o0erty, in general a nun is su,,osed to lead a si),le )aterial life. Se(, )arriage, fa)ily, ;ork, social e(change, )aterial goodsall of these are *oth generally distracting fro) concentration on religious ;ork, and :in 0arious ;ays= s,ecifically ini)ical to the long+ter) goal of such ;orkthe reduction of egotis) and of the cogniti0e and e)otional attach)ent to self. 9n taking the 0o;s of a nun, a ;o)an *reaks out of )ost of the disa*ilities of the fe)ale state. -ro) the nunEs ,oint of 0ie;, this EE*reaking out? is en0isioned in ter)s of setting herself on a lifelong course of religious action that can ulti)ately lead to re*irth as a )an. One nun :at Bigu nunnery, in Solu= e(,ressed the ho,e to *e reincarnated as a god, or at least as a hu)an, ,refera*ly a )an. ?2s a ;o)an one is al;ays inferior,? she argued, ?ho;e0er )uch one learns one is ne0er gi0en as )uch res,ect as a la)a. E0en corru,t la)as are still treated ;ith so)e res,ectC a )an can lead a sinful life, and yet later *eco)e a la)a and *e considered su,erior to any ;o)an.? :0on -Srer+5ai)endorf .%!#: ." = The nun thus ai)s for a *etter re*irth, through renunciation of sin and ,ursuit of )erit. 9n leading a si),le )aterial life, she can a0oid the sins of greed and en0y. 9n not doing agricultural ;ork, she a0oids the sins of killing ;or)s and insects. 9n not ha0ing children, she a0oids accruing their sins as ;ell as her o;n. 9n not )arrying and not entering into fa)ily and social life, she a0oids distractions and is a*le to ,ursue her de0otions and other )eritorious religious ;ork. -ro) a )ore analytic ,ers,ecti0e, ho;e0er, ;e can see that a nun gains a great deal not only to;ard i),ro0ing her ne(t life, *ut also in raising the Huality of her ,resent one. 9n relation to negati0e cultural 0ie;s of ;o)en, a nun is less likelyin theoryto *e endo;ed ;ith the un,leasant characteristics nor)ally attri*uted to ;o)en. By renouncing an interest in ;orldly goods, a nun can se,arate herself not only fro) the sins of greed and en0y, *ut also fro) the attri'utions of greediness and )aterialis) ,laced u,on ;o)en in the culture. 2nd *y renouncing nor)al social relations, she can esca,e the 0arious cultural charges of fe)ale social trou*le)aking: ,oisoning, ;itchcraft, and general )eddling. '& 9n relation to social and econo)ic disad0antages, ne(t, )onasticis) is again a rather neat ;ay out. -or one thing, the nunin shar, de,arture ,age1.'% Page .$0

fro) the ,ro,erty rulesgets her o;n real ,ro,erty fro) her fa)ily: a house. 9n addition, either so)e land is allocated for her su,,ort :;hichthe *est of all ;orldsshe does not ha0e to ;ork herself= or in any e0ent a ,ledge is )ade of )aterial su,,ort fro) her fa)ilyEs lands and herds. '# 9t )ay *e noted that nuns do not stress the acHuisition of ,ro,erty as an ad0antage of taking 0o;s, either *ecause this is not ,art of conscious )oti0ation, or *ecause it ;ould *e unsee)ly to e),hasiIe the acHuisition of ,ro,erty in the conte(t of the anti+)aterialistic ideology. <hat they do stress in ter)s of social )oti0ation is so)ething that is ,erfectly consistent ;ith religious ideologythe desire to a0oid )arriage. 9ndeed, fro) the ,oint of 0ie; of the ;o)en ;ith ;ho) 9 s,oke, this ;as the )ost salient )oti0e for *eco)ing a nun. <e ha0e seen that /ga;ang Sa)den ran a;ay fro) ho)e and took 0o;s *ecause her ,arents had arranged an unattracti0e )arriage for her. Other ;o)en, ;ho either e(,ressed a desire to *eco)e a nun, or had already taken 0o;s, also cited )any of the ,ro*le)s surrounding )arriage discussed a*o0ethe ,ossi*ility of ha0ing a ?*ad? hus*and, the ,ossi*ility of children dying, the ,ossi*ility of ha0ing to )o0e a;ay fro) their natal ho)es, so)eti)es great distances a;ay. Beco)ing a nun a0oids at least the ,ro*le)s of hus*ands and children, e0en if it does entail )o0ing a;ay fro) ho)e. But )o0ing a;ay fro) ho)e to Join a nunnery ;ould a,,ear to *e Huite a different story fro) )o0ing a;ay fro) ho)e in )arriage. 2 ;o)an gets to Join a co))unity of indi0iduals ;ho share )any of her goals and as,irations. There )ay *e an e(,ectation that such a co))unity ;ill ,ro0ide a conte(t of ,ersonal ;ar)th and su,,orti0eness. There is so)e suggestion in /ga;ang Sa)denEs te(t, for e(a),le, that she sought and found ?sisterhood? in this sense ;ith so)e of the other nuns. 6nfortunately, the data are not a0aila*le to indicate ;hether such e(,ectations are ;ides,read a)ong ;o)en conte),lating *eco)ing nuns, andGor ;hether, in ,ractice, such ?sisterly? su,,orti0eness actually crystalliIes. 9t )ay *e noted, ho;e0er, that *oth the ideology and the social organiIation of the celi*ate institutions :nunneries and )onasteries alike= do not encourage the for)ation of close ,ersonal ties a)ong the )e)*ers: ideologically, each indi0idual is there to ,ursue his or her o;n sal0ationC socially, each indi0idual li0es, eats, and slee,s alone, and ,erfor)s religious de0otions in her or his ,ri0ate house, e(ce,t ;hen engaged in collecti0e rituals. -urther, ;e noted in ,assing earlier that it is acce,ta*le for nuns :*ut not for )onks= to return to li0e ;ith a kins,erson *ack in the 0illage, and Huite a fe; in fact do this. The ,age1.$0 Page .$. su) of these ,oints, then, suggests that the idea of Joining a close and su,,orti0e co))unity ;hen one takes the 0o;s is either not en0isioned or not realiIed *y ;o)en ;ho *eco)e nuns. 9ndeed 9 sus,ect that ;hat the nun seeks and gets, in a ,ositi0e sense, fro) taking the 0o;s, is rather the chance to *e )ore fully autono)ous :see also 2IiI .%!#: "&=. <e ha0e already seen that Sher,a ;o)en are encouraged to *e Huite inde,endent, e0en ;hile they are constrained *y *oth the ordinary *onds of social life and the s,ecial constraints of ;o)anhood. 9n ?esca,ing? these 0arious *onds and constraints, ;hich constitute one+half of the :contradictory= situation of Sher,a ;o)anhood, the other halfthe autono)y and inde,endenceis in effect li*erated. 2lthough there are )any rules in a nunnery, there is al)ost no su,er0ision, and e0ery nun :like e0ery )onk in a )onastery= is res,onsi*le for her o;n )oral *eha0ior. -inally, it is i),ortant to translate all of the a*o0e ,oints into religious ter)s. Beco)ing a nun :or a )onk= offers the o,,ortunity of a )aJor transfor)ation of oneEs ,resent self, and oneEs future e(istences. Once ,ast the desire for ?esca,e? and inde,endence that ,ro*a*ly do)inates the initial decision to take the 0o;s, the nun can focus ;ithout distraction on *uilding )erit, reducing ego, and other )aJor Buddhist o*Jecti0es ;hich hold out the ,ro)ise of transcendence not only of ;o)anEs lot, *ut of the ,ainful hu)an condition as a ;hole. 9n the ,rocess, one gains social res,ect, security, and autono)y, *ut in theory such gains are Huite incidental to the s,iritual *enefits. 2n e(a),le of such a shift in ,ers,ecti0e can *e seen in the case of /ga;ang Sa)den, ;hose te(t on the founding of 8e0uche ;as gi0en a*o0e. 5er initial )oti0ation for *eco)ing a nun ;as fra)ed in ter)s of esca,ing an una,,ealing )arriageor )arriage in general. 4et ;hen 9 asked her ;hat the nunEs 0ocation is, she ans;ered in entirely s,iritual ter)s: ?/unEs ;ork is to ,ractice religion;hat else@ One is afraid of dying Land ha0ing a *ad re*irthM and so one )ust do religion all the ti)e.? '! The Huality of her religious faith and de0otion )ay *e seen in her re)ark that, at one ,oint in her life she ;as losing her sight, *ut she did nu)erous mani :re,etitions of the central )antra of Ti*etan Buddhis)= and her sight ;as restored. She neglected to )ention ;hat to her ;as incidental to her religious effortsa doctor ,erfor)ed a successful cataract o,eration on her eyes. 9n *eco)ing a nun, then, a ;o)an can resol0e )any of the ,ro*le)s of ;o)enEs li0es in Sher,a cultureshe can esca,e certain cultural stig)as,

,age1.$. Page .$' get around certain social and econo)ic restrictions, and feel herself to ha0e reduced certain )oral disa*ilities ;ith res,ect to ,resent ;ell+*eing and future re*irth. <o)en and So)e Men: 7elati0e Structural Position 2t this ,oint, ;e ha0e a,,roached the li)its of analysis ,ursued fro) the ,oint of 0ie; of fe)ale actors. 9n asking ;hy Sher,a ;o)en )ight *eco)e nuns, ;e ha0e *een forced to concentrate on the differences *et;een )en and ;o)en in Sher,a society. These differences are real enough. /onetheless, they are ,erha,s less dra)atic than they ha0e a,,eared, ,articularly if ;e co),are the ;o)en to certain categories of )en, rather than to ?)en? as a ;hole. My general ,oint here, to ;hich 9 ;ill return in the conclusions, is that analysis focused through a ,olariIed )aleGfe)ale distinction )ay ,roduce distortions at least as ,ro*le)atic as those ;hich ignore ;o)en and gender in the first ,lace. On the surface, the situation of Sher,a )en is )ore attracti0e than that of Sher,a ;o)en. Men are for)ally considered ?higher.? They do not ha0e to co,e ;ith the su,,osed )oral disad0antages of the fe)ale state, nor ;ith the assault on self+estee) ,osed *y the negati0e ideology surrounding ;o)en. /or do they face the ,ossi*ility of *eing sent to a distant 0illage, far fro) ho)e, at )arriage, ;here they ;ill ha0e to )ake their ;ay into the social syste) fro) scratch. ' They ;ill, ho;e0er, *e su*Ject to arranged )arriages Just as ;o)en are, ;ith the sa)e ,ros,ects of *eing ,laced in an unha,,y relationshi,. They ;ill, )oreo0er, *e faced ;ith the sa)e hea0y res,onsi*ility of su,,orting children. 9n addition, as the ,ro,erty o;ners, and des,ite the fact that their ;i0es ;ill do at least an eHual a)ount of ,roducti0e la*or, the )en :unlike the ;o)en= 0ie; the)sel0es as ha0ing the res,onsi*ility of su,,orting their s,ouses. /ot sur,risingly, then, )enEs )oti0es for *eco)ing )onks stress the a0oidance of )arriage )uch as ;o)enEs do, although their e),hasis tends to fall )ore on a0oiding the *urden of res,onsi*ility for su,,ort of fa)ily, than on so)e of the other un,leasantnesses of )arriage stressed *y ;o)en. But the analogies *et;een )enEs and ;o)enEs )oti0es go e0en further than this. <e ,ointed out earlier that one of the )ost salient differences *et;een )enEs and ;o)enEs social ,ositions is the fact that )en are the o;ners of all the ,roducti0e resourcesland and herds. 9n ,oint of fact, ho;e0er, there are certain )en ;ho are al)ost as disad0antaged as ;o)en ;ith res,ect to ,ro,erty)iddle sons. 2lthough all sons are su,,osed to get ,age1.$' Page .$$ eHual shares of the ,arentsE ,roducti0e estate, in ,ractice things do not al;ays ;ork out so neatly. 2s each son gets )arried, the father is su,,osed to *uild or other;ise ,ro0ide hi) ;ith a house, and gi0e hi) his share of the land and ani)als. Generally, the first son gets his full share, including the house, although he )ay ha0e to ;ait a relati0ely long ti)e to get it, since his )arriage co)es at a relati0ely early stage in his fatherEs econo)ic career. <ith later sons, on the other hand, ,ro0iding houses )ay *eco)e increasingly econo)ically difficult, and it is )iddle sons, )ore than any others, ;ho )ay find the)sel0es out in the cold. They )ay in theory ha0e land and herds to ;ork, *ut no ,lace to set u, a household. Only a youngest son :or an only son= has a relati0ely un,ro*le)atic ,ro,erty situation, since he ;ill inherit the ,arental house and the re)aining ,ortion of the ,roducti0e resources. /or sur,risingly, according to Sher,a ideology, it is )iddle sons ;ho should nor)ally *eco)e )onks. Only slightly )ore sur,risingly, social ,ractice confor)s Huite closely to ideology. The a0aila*le statistics on *irth order a)ong )onks run in the a,,ro,riate direction. 2t Teng*oche in .%&!, out of ten )onks re,orted on, se0en ;ere )iddle sons, one ;as an eldest, one a youngest, and one an only son :0on -Srer+5ai)endorf .%#": ."0=. 2t three other )onasteries :Tha)i, Takshindo, and Chi;ong= sur0eyed in .%#!# , of t;enty+t;o )onks for ;ho) data ;ere a0aila*le, ele0en ;ere )iddle sons, fi0e ;ere eldest, four ;ere youngest, and t;o ;ere only sons :7. Paul field notes=. '% <hat is *eing suggested here is that, at least in so)e conte(ts, gender in ,ure for) )ay *e a less useful :and )ore )isleading= analytic construct than so)ething like ?relati0e structural ,osition.? <o)enEs sense of the difficulties of )arriage, though different in so)e s,ecifics fro) )enEs, is not ;ithout strongly felt )ale analogues. More i),ortantly, Sher,a ;o)enEs for)ally ,rescri*ed e(clusion fro) ,ro,erty o;nershi, has its

non+nor)ati0e, *ut syste)atically re,roduced, ,arallels a)ong certain categories of )en. These )enEs structural disad0antages are hidden*y the culture, and *y us*y the use of a glo*al category of ?)ale,? associated ;ith general social su,eriority 0is+N+0is ;o)en. 9n other ;ords, in atte),ting to rectify )ale *ias in anthro,ological analysis, ;e sli, into a different sort of distortion, ;hich )ight *e la*eled :for lack of a *etter ter)= ?*ig )an *ias.? <e take the ,ri0ileges of certain )enleaders, or elites, or last+*orn sons, or ;hate0erand assu)e the) to a,,ly to )ale actors in general. <e thus o*scure :and there*y un;ittingly collude ;ith cultural ,age1.$$ Page .$" ideologies= ;hat )any )en ha0e in co))on ;ith ;o)en in general, or ;ith s,ecific sectors of ;o)en. 2gain, 9 ;ill return to the *roader i),lications of these ,oints in the conclusions. -or the )o)ent, ho;e0er, let us consider ho; a )ore structurally *ased, rather than gender+*ased, categoriIation of actors and their )oti0es )ight infor) our understanding of the founding of 8e0uche nunnery. 9nter,reting the -ounding of 8e0uche . . . and 2nother 3ook at Teng*oche <e *egan the ,a,er *y noting that, in accounts of the founding of Teng*oche )onastery, ,ro)inence is gi0en to the initiati0es of religious leaders and ;ealthy lay s,onsors. 9n accounts of the founding of 8e0uche nunnery, on the other hand, the ,ri)e )o0ers a,,ear to *e the young nuns the)sel0es. The e),hasis on the leaders in the Teng*oche stories, in turn, tends to gi0e the founding of the )onastery a distinctly ?,olitical? or ?,u*lic? cast. The founding of Teng*oche a,,ears as the outco)e of large+scale ,olitical+econo)ic changesthe 7ana cou, in Path)andu, the acti0ities of the British in 9ndia, the conseHuent enrich)ent and rise in ,o;er of local Sher,a elites ;ho in turn sought social legiti)ation through *uilding )onasteries. $0 The founding of 8e0uche, on the other hand, a,,ears as the ,roduct of )ore ?,ersonally? or ?,ri0atelyEE )oti0ated efforts on the ,art of a grou, of ;o)en seeking to a0oid certain s,ecifically fe)ale constraints. To *e sure, the large+scale ,olitical+econo)ic changes could *e added into the story, *ut ,ri)arily in facilitating roles: contri*uting to an o0erall rise in sur,lus in the Sher,a econo)y, and to the enrich)ent of the founding ;o)enEs fa)ilies, there*y ,ro0iding the resources to found the nunnery and su,,ort the nuns. But the changing ,olitical+econo)ic conditions do not a,,ear to ,lay a moti,ating role in the *uilding of 8e0uche nunnery, as they do in the account of the founding of Teng*oche. But let us look at the data again. 9n the first ,lace, it is Huite ,ossi*le to 0ie; the founding of Teng*oche in )uch the sa)e ter)s as the founding of 8e0uche. There is suggesti0e e0idence to the effect that the )onastery ;as as )uch a ,roduct of ?grass+roots? ,ressure on the ,art of certain young )onks, as 8e0uche ;as on the ,art of the young nuns. There ;as in fact a grou, of four young )onks in0ol0ed in the Teng*oche story, ;ho acted in so)e res,ects )uch as the nuns ;ho founded 8e0uche did. These )en had taken 0o;s in Ti*et, *ut then had returned to the Sher,a area, ;here they for)ed their o;n little co))unity under the tutelage of a higher+ranking ,age1.$" Page .$& la)a. E0entually, they *eca)e the first grou, of Teng*oche )onks. The anology *et;een the ,roto+ )onastery for)ation a)ong these )onks *efore the founding of Teng*oche, and the ,roto+nunnery for)ation a)ong the nuns :;ho, it ;ill *e recalled, li0ed and ,racticed religion together *efore the nunnery ;as founded= is )ost suggesti0e. 2nd in the case of a later+founded )onastery :Tha)i=, for ;hich ;e ha0e )uch )ore infor)ation, it is Huite clear that grass+roots efforts on the ,art of certain )onks ,layed a )aJor role in the ,rocess. The ,oint of all this is that the founding of Teng*oche )ay ha0e *een less of a ?*ig )an? initiated e0ent than a,,ears fro) the accounts ;e are gi0en. 4et if the founding of Teng*oche ;as less fully a ,roduct of the initiati0e of the *ig leaders, )oti0ated *y )acro+,olitical considerations, than ;ould a,,ear fro) the accounts, 9 ;ould also argue that the founding of 8e0uche, for its ,art, ;as )ore a )atter of ?,u*lic? ,olitics than ;ould a,,ear fro) the accounts. 9 ha0e already suggested, in considering ;hy Sher,a indi0iduals )ight take )onastic 0o;s, that a gender+*ased analysis )ight *e less useful than an analysis grounded in analogous structural disad0antages. The sa)e ,oint )ay no; *e a,,lied, mutatis mutandis, to the inter,retation of the foundings of the nunnery and the )onastery. The young nuns and )onks in0ol0ed in these e0ents, if si)ilarly disad0antaged :*y gender in one case and *irth order in the other=, ;ere also si)ilarly ad0antaged. 2s has *een noted, )ost of the) ;ere fro) relati0ely high+status fa)ilies. They ;ere thus, in effect, the collecti0e children of the class of )en ;hose ,olitical legiti)ation needs loo) so i),ortant in the founding of Teng*oche. But insofar as the young

,eo,leEs fathersE ,ositions ;ere changing, so too !ere theirs, a ,oint that ;ould ha0e *eco)e ,articularly a,,arent, to *oth ,arents and children, as the children a,,roached the stage of )arriage and ,ro,erty de0olution. 2lthough such arrange)ents are al;ays so)e;hat ,ro*le)atic, they )ay ha0e *een ,articularly so at this historical )o)ent, ;ith the fathersE ,ositions and estates only ne;ly esta*lished. 9t is ,ossi*le, then, that the young )onks and nuns shared so)e of their fathersE interests in founding the religious institutionscontri*uting to the consolidation of the ,restige of their fa)ilies, and ,ro0iding res,ected ,ositions for the)sel0es and future daughters and )iddle sons of this class ;ho )ight other;ise lose status andGor suffer econo)ic decline at the ,oint of )arriage and the di0ision of ,ro,erty. 9t is eHually ,ossi*le, ho;e0er, that the young nuns and )onks sa; the)sel0es as re'elling against the ,ressures co)ing do;n on the) as the second generation of the ne; elitethat they ,age1.$& Page .$# sa; the)sel0es as reJecting these ne; :or ne;ly intensified= ga)es of status and ,o;er. /ga;ang Sa)denEs history, for e(a),le, sho;s her to ha0e ,layed *oth sides of the fence: On the one hand she ran a;ay fro) ho)e and took nunEs 0o;s to a0oid an undesira*le )arriage arrange)ent. 9t is likely that this *etrothal ;as ,olitically )oti0ated, since the ,ros,ecti0e hus*anddescri*ed as ?;ealthy?already had a ;ife, and ,olygyny :;hich is 0ery rare in any case= only occurs a)ong ?*ig )en.? On the other hand, ;hen it ca)e ti)e to raise funds for the furnishing of the nunnery te),le, /ga;ang Sa)den turned to her t;o ,o;erful *rothers for hel,, and dre; u,on their influence and their contacts. One ;ay or the other :or *oth=, ho;e0er, the ,oint is this: the dyna)ics e0entuating in the foundings of 8e0uche and Teng*oche ;ere ,ro*a*ly ,retty )uch the sa)e. The t;o cases do not contrast, ;ith the founding of Teng*oche as )ore ?,olitically? )oti0ated, and the founding of 8e0uche as )oti0ated )ore *y ;o)enEs ?do)estic? concerns. 7ather, they shared the sa)e )oti0ating structure, ;hich )ay *e su))ariIed as the domestic fallout :on the second generation of a certain socioecono)ic sector= of )aJor changes in the pu'lic do)ain. That the actors in the dra)a ,ercei0ed the co))onalities of their ,ositions is ,erha,s 0isi*le in all the ,ersonal contri*utionsof )oney and la*or)ade *y the Teng*oche )onks to the founding of 8e0uche nunnery. Conclusions To the e(tent that ;o)en are e(cluded fro) ,ositions of leadershi, and ,u*lic initiati0e, ;e tend to think of the) as e(cluded fro) the ,u*lic do)ain. <e so)eti)es forget, ho;e0er, that )ost )en are e(cluded fro) leadershi, and ,u*lic initiati0e as ;ell, and so ;e succu)* to ;hat )ight *e called, not the )ale *ias, *ut the ?*ig )an *ias? in social science analysis. This *ias ,re0ents us fro) seeing the degree to ;hich )any )en are as disad0antaged as ;o)en ;ith res,ect to ,ro,erty, )arriage, and the like. 2t the sa)e ti)e, it also ,re0ents us fro) seeing that ;o)en, ho;e0er )uch their day+to+day li0es a,,ear i))ersed in do)estic concerns, syste)atically ,artici,ate in the larger social rankings of their natal and )arital fa)ilies, and so ,artici,ate in i),ortant ;ays in )acro+,olitical and econo)ic ,rocesses. This, 9 think, is ,art of ;hat 7osaldo ;as getting at in attacking the do)esticG,u*lic o,,osition as a de0ice for analyIing gender ,ro*le)s, and in attacking )ore generally the e),hasis on gender ?difference? in )uch of current fe)inist scholarshi,. ,age1.$# Page .$! 9f these ,oints are acce,ted, then ;e )ust seriously consider ;hether ;e create as )any ,ro*le)s as ;e sol0e *y insisting on ?;o)en? and ?)en? as *ounded analytic categories in and of the)sel0es. 8o ;e not in fact aggra0ate the 0ery ,ro*le) ;e seek to counterthe hege)ony of gender distinction as a *asis for organiIing social life and thought@ Se(is), of course, is real enough. 9t is still the case, in the )aterial Just discussed, that ;o)en are disad0antaged in 0arious ;ays si),ly *y 0irtue of *eing ;o)en, ;hile the sa)e is not true of )en. 9f it is this that ;e ;ish to understand, then of course ;e )ust look for ?difference.EE 4et an o0er+e),hasis on difference, regardless of conte(t, can create serious )ystifications in our analyses, *linding us to the disad0antages ;o)en share ;ith )any :if not indeed )ost= )en, and allo;ing us to s;ee, under the rug the )any real ad0antages that some ;o)en share ;ith some )en. There is, of course, *oth heuristic and ,ractical 0alue in utiliIing ,olariIed )aleGfe)ale categories. 5euristically, ;e gain the ca,acity to see the :ideal+ty,ical= genders as cultural constructs, and ;e *egin to ask Huestions a*out ho; and ;hy such constructs are organiIed the ;ay they are in different cultures and

historical ,eriods :e.g., Ortner and <hitehead .% .=. On the ,ractical le0el, further, there is ,erha,s no other ;ay to organiIe against se(is) than to try to get ;o)en together as !omen, regardless of other social differences. :That such an effort has not succeeded, and that the ;o)enEs )o0e)ent is essentially *ounded *y class and race, is not, ho;e0er, irrele0ant to the ,oint 9 a) )aking here=. Granting certain conte(ts of usefulness for o,erating ;ith ,ure fe)aleG)ale analytic o,,ositions, and ;ith ,ure ;o)enG)en ,olitical o,,ositions, ;e )ust at the sa)e ti)e *e a;are that there are real dangers in such a ,osition. S,ecifically, an e),hasis on ?;o)en? as an analytic category, ;hen ,ushed too hard, tends to )o0e in the direction of a 0ery ,ro*le)atic naturalis)another of Michelle 7osaldoEs ,oints. That is, there is a tendency to sli, fro) an ?as if? ,osture, in ;hich ;e isolate gender categories for heuristic :or ,olitical= reasons, to an assu),tion that ?;o)en? in so)e glo*al and sociologically unHualified sense really e(ist out there in the ;orld, as a natural class of o*Jects ;ith their o;n distincti0e attri*utes. This tendency, 9 think, is ,art of ;hat is *ehind certain ,ro*le)atic directions in current fe)inist theory, ;hich concentrate hea0ily on fe)ale ,hysiology, se(uality, and re,roducti0ity. Personally, 9 thought the ;hole ,oint of fe)inis) ;as to *ring a*out a situation in ;hich ;o)en ;ere not seen as a natural class of *eing, defined ,ri)arily *y their *odies. ,age1.$! Page .$ Then again, a )ore structurally *ased ,ers,ecti0e on gender relations, such as the one taken in this ,a,er, has its o;n ,ro*le)s. Most seriously, it threatens to lose gender and ;o)en as significant analytic categories in their o;n right, and to )erge the) ;ith, or dissol0e the) into, other structures of social ineHuality. Thus, for e(a),le, ;hile sho;ing the ,arallels of structural ad0antage and disad0antage *et;een Sher,a ;o)en and so)e Sher,a )en, 9 ;as ,ut in the ,osition of ,laying do;n *oth the ideology of )ale ,ri0ilege, and the actual )ale control of all significant leadershi, ,ositions. 6lti)ately, then, ;e ;ill ha0e to learn to tread that fine line *et;een reifying :and there*y ?naturaliIing?= the genders on the one hand, and, on the other, allo;ing the )aleGfe)ale distinction to disa,,ear *ack into the fog of gender+insensiti0e ?0aria*les? fro) ;hich it has only recently *een rescued. ,age1.$ Page .$%

# Gender 5ege)onies Back in the early se0enties, in the fresh years of the fe)inist )o0e)ent, anthro,ologists ;ere often asked a*out )atriarchies. <as it not the case, ,eo,le ;anted to kno;, that there ;ere societies in ;hich ;o)en had the kind of ,o;er and authority )en ha0e in our o;n society@ <ith a reasona*le degree of unani)ity, anthro,ologists said no. . <ell then, continued the Huestioners, ;erenEt there )atriarchies in the ,ast@ 5ere there ;as so)e;hat less unani)ity a)ong the anthro,ologists, *ut *y and large no ,rofessional scholar in the field ;as ;illing to )ake a strong clai) for any ,ast )atriarchies either. 2nd ho; a*out egalitarian societies@ 5ere the anthro,ological consensus fell a,art co),letely. The first round of res,onses to the egalitarianis) Huestion, or at least the first round to recei0e ;ides,read attention, consisted of se0eral articles ,u*lished in the .%!" 7osaldo and 3a),here collection, #oman$ Culture$ and Society. 9n our res,ecti0e essays, Michelle 7osaldo, /ancy Chodoro;, and 9 :this 0olu)e, ,,. '."'= all rather fir)ly said no, that )en ;ere in so)e ;ay or other ?the first se(? in all kno;n societies, that there ;ere no truly se( egalitarian societies in the ;orld. 3ater, in .% ., 5arriet <hitehead and 9 coedited a collection of articles on the cultural construction of gender and se(uality :Sexual Meanings=, and, seeing no reason at that ti)e to re0ise the uni0ersalist ,osition, ;e reaffir)ed it. But Huite a fe; anthro,ologists disagreed, and one or another of their re+ ,age1.$% Page ."0

actions to the uni0ersalist clai) has continued to a,,ear in ,rint since the ,u*lication of Sexual Meanings. 2t first 9 ;as not inclined to res,ond. 9 *elie0ed that interested andGor ske,tical readers could e0aluate the e0idence the)sel0es and that they ;ould arri0e at conclusions )atching those set forth in Sexual Meanings. 4et the critiHues ke,t )ounting, and e0entually it see)ed that 9 had to either defend or re0ise )y ,osition. The 8e*ate 3et us *egin *y sorting out so)e ter)inology. There see) to *e at least three se,ara*le di)ensions of the ,heno)enon of relati0e gender status. These three di)ensions )ay co0ary closely in a gi0en e),irical case, *ut they ;ill not necessarily do so, and to confuse the) is to create a ho,eless conce,tual )uddle. Part of the disagree)ent *et;een the uni0ersalists and the nonuni0ersalists deri0es fro) confusion o0er the le0el of discussion. There is first of all, then, the di)ension of relati0e ,restige, ' as in a clai) that )en are ?the first se(? and ;o)en are ?the second,? or that )en are ,ree)inent, or ha0e ?higher status,? or are accorded greater cultural 0alue of charis)a, or ha0e greater authority. 9n all of these state)ents, ;hat is at issue is a culturally affir)ed, relati0e e0aluation or ranking of the se(es, so)ething that is ,erha,s )ost co))only called ?status.? /othing is said here a*out the Huality of )ale+fe)ale relations, or a*out )ale and fe)ale *eha0iors. Uuite distinct fro) this issue is the Huestion of )ale do)inance and fe)ale su*ordination. These are ter)s descri*ing a ,articular kind of relationshi,, in ;hich )en e(ert control o0er ;o)enEs *eha0ior :;ith 0arying kinds and degrees of legiti)acyGauthority for doing so= and ;o)en find the)sel0es co),elled to confor) to )enEs de)ands. 2n e),hasis on fe)ale ?autono)y? ,ertains to this le0el of discussion, since autono)y is indeed :one= o*0erse of do)ination.$ 2gain, factors of do)inance and factors of ,restige )ay 0ary inde,endently of one another, and this has *een a )aJor source of confusion in the de*ate o0er the uni0ersality of ?)ale do)inance.? -inally, there is the Huestion of fe)ale ,o;er, ;hich again see)s to *e largely distinct. 5ere there is a ,resu),tion that neither greater )ale ,restige nor actual )ale do)inance, nor *oth, ho;e0er e(tre)e, could ;holly negate ;o)enEs ca,acity :again, ;ith 0arying kinds and degrees of legiti)acyGauthority= to control so)e s,heres of their o;n and othersE e(istences and to deter)ine so)e as,ects of their o;n and othersE *eha0ior. ?-e)ale ,age1."0 Page .". ,o;er? refers to these ca,acities and )ay *e considered to so)e e(tent as se,arate fro) the other t;o le0els. The first thing to note a*out the uni0ersalis) de*ate, then, is that the authors ;ho took the ,osition that gender asy))etry is uni0ersal ;ere talking essentially a*out ,restige and not a*out either )ale do)inance :;hich ;as taken to *e 0aria*le rather than uni0ersal= or fe)ale ,o;er :;hich ;as granted to *e ,resent in 0arying degrees in all cases=. /one of the authors e0er clai)ed that )en directly ?do)inate? ;o)en in any nor)al sense of the ter) in all kno;n cultures, nor did any of the) e0er clai) that uni0ersal )ale ,restige negates all fe)ale ,o;er. 2 reasona*le reading of the .%!" essays *y 7osaldo, Chodoro;, and Ortner, or of the introduction to Sexual Meanings, sho;s that the language ;as not ,ri)arily that of do)ination or ,o;er *ut rather of ,restige, charis)a, and status. The uni0ersalistsE clai), then, ;as that it ;as in so)e sense culturally acce,ted in e0ery kno;n society that )en ha0e greater ,restige andGor status, ;hether or not they e(ert do)inance o0er ;o)en and ;hether or not ;o)en ha0e a great deal of official or unofficial ,o;er. Broadly s,eaking, there ha0e *een t;o Huite different reactions to this ,osition. 9n one, it is agreed that e(,licit or tacit cultural assu),tions of )ale su,eriority are uni0ersal, *ut it is argued that these cultural assu),tions are undercut in ,ractice *y 0arious for)s of on+the+ground fe)ale ,o;er. 9n the other reaction, it is denied that )en ha0e culturally defined greater ,restige than ;o)en in all societies. 9 ;ill e(a)ine each of these ,ositions *riefly. The first 0ie; e),hasiIes the i),ortance of ?*alancing off? or ;eighing cultural attri*utions of )ale ,restige and status, on the one hand, and, on the other, the realities of ,ractical life in ;hich ;o)en ha0e a great deal of ,o;er and influence. 9n this 0ie;, e0en societies that )ay a,,ear at first glance to *e Huite asy))etrical )ay *e sho;n analytically to ha0e a certain ty,e of se( eHuality. Thus, Susan Carol 7ogers :.%!&= argues, using -rench ,easants as her e(a),le, that )en ha0e less ,o;er than they a,,ear to ha0e and ;o)en ha0e )ore, so that there is actually a *alanceC this *alance is )aintained *y ;hat she calls ?the )yth of )ale do)inance,? in ;hich *oth se(es sustain the for)al notion that )en are su,erior to ;o)en and ha0e greater ,restige and status :.%!&:!"#=. 3ater she says )ore directly that there is a ?,o;erG,restige *alance?

*et;een )enEs and ;o)enEs s,heres :.%!&:!"!=. Si)ilarly, Peggy Sanday, in her ;idely read and ;idely assigned "emale Po!er and Male %ominance :.% .=, argues for esta*lishing a category of societies ;ith ?se(ual eHuality.? Confining herself to ?the ,age1.". Page ."' le0el of secular ,olitics? :that is, ,o;er=, Sanday says that ?)ale su,re)acis) or se(ual asy))etry is not as ;ides,read as so)e anthro,ologists ha0e argued? :.% .: =. She then ,icks u, 7ogersEs notion of ?)ythical )ale do)inance,? in ;hich )en are gi0en a token sort of ,restige *ut ;o)en )ake )any of the i),ortant decisions, as ?a for) of *alanced se(ual o,,osition? :.% .:.# =. My o*Jections to this ,osition in the ,ast ha0e *een t;ofold: first, ,restige and ,o;er cannot *e ?*alanced? against one another. <eighing on+the+ground fe)ale ,o;er against )ale status and ,restige is like trying to add the ,ro0er*ial a,,les and oranges: ;ithout cultural ,restige, fe)ale ,o;er is not fully legiti)ate and can only *e e(ercised in hidden andGor distorted :?)ani,ulati0e?= ;ays. 2nd second, as these ,oints i),ly, 9 ha0e continued to consider the cultural assertionGacce,tance of )ale su,eriority to *e definiti0e. 9f )en in a gi0en society ha0e culturally stated higher status, then *y definition this is a ?)ale do)inant? or gender asy))etrical society, regardless of ho; )uch de facto ,o;er ;o)en )ay e(ert. 9t should *e noted that *oth 7ogers and Sanday agree ;ith the uni0ersal )ale do)inance ,osition at a certain le0el: they agree that cultural assertions of greater )ale ,restige are uni0ersal. 2s 7ogers asks :in so)e des,air= at the end of her 0ehe)ently argued ,a,er, ?<hy is it that )en al;ays see) to ,lay a do)inant role, if not actually, then at least )ythically@? :.%!&:!&$=. 9t is ,recisely on this ,oint, ho;e0er, that ,ro,onents of the second anti+uni0ersalist ,osition ;ould disagree. 9n this 0ie;, associated )ost ,ro)inently ;ith the ;ork of Eleanor 3eacock :.% .=, it is asserted that there are culturally defined egalitarian societies in the ;orld)ostly huntingGgathering societiesin ;hich greater )ale ,restige and status are not asserted or assu)ed in the first ,lace. 6ni0ersalists like )yself, <hitehead, etc., ignore or )isread those cases, not *ecause they fail to gi0e due ;eight to fe)ale ,o;er *ut *ecause they fail to see that these societies are ,ut together on Huite different :?egalitarian?= ,rinci,les. 3ike the other theorists, 3eacock ,ro)inently uses the ,hrase ?the )yth of )ale do)inance,? *ut she )eans *y that not so)e cultural ideology the nati0es endorse. 7ather it is a ?)yth? created *y analysts ;ho take the uni0ersalist ,osition. :See also Poe;e, ;ho called it ?an ethnological illusion? L.% 0:...M.= 3eacockEs argu)ents see) ,ro*le)atic in a nu)*er of ;ays. -or one thing, her e(,ectations of eHuality in si),le societies see) largely deri0ed fro) her theoretical fra)e;orka slightly u,dated 0ersion of EngelsEs no+ ,age1."' Page ."$ tions of ?,ri)iti0e co))unalis),? as set forth in The +rigin of the "amily$ Pri,ate Property$ and the Staterather than fro) any actual ethnogra,hic case:s=. -or another, she see)s to set u, her e(a)inations of cases in a sort of heads+9+;in+tails+you+lose ;ay, such that any instance of ineHuality in si),le societies could not *e indigenousC it has to *e a ,roduct of ca,italist ,enetration, o*ser0er *ias, or *oth. 9n ,oint of fact, )odern infor)ants in the grou, she uses as her ,ri)e e(a),le of gender egalitarianis) did say that )en ;ere su,erior, *ut she discounts these assertions as effects of long+ter) ca,italist ,enetration :3eacock .% 0=. 2t this ,oint ;e ha0e all reached an i),asse. There is no ,oint in trying to look for )ore or *etter cases, since ;hat is at issue is ,recisely the inter,retation of cases. But fresh inter,retations reHuire fresh theoretical ,ers,ecti0es, and these )ust *e considered ne(t. On the Mutual 9llu)ination of -e)inist Theory and Theories of Social Dalue :?Prestige?= <hiteheadEs and )y interest in Sexual Meanings ;as to arri0e at the )ost ,o;erful ;ays of inter,reting gender ideologies, of disco0ering the different logics that different cultures use in constructing their notions of )ale and fe)ale, se(uality and re,roduction. 9n addition, ;e sought to locate these as,ects of cultural thought and social ,ractice that see)ed to e(ert the strongest force in sha,ing those cultural logics. Our conclusion ;as that it ;as cultural notions and ,ractices related to ?,restige? that see)ed to ,ro0ide the )ost ,o;erful inter,reti0e keys for understanding the social and cultural ordering of gender, se(uality, and re,roduction cross+culturally. <e argued further that there is a si),le reason for this fact: it is *ecause

gender is itself centrally a ,restige syste)a syste) of discourses and ,ractices that constructs )ale and fe)ale not only in ter)s of differential roles and )eanings *ut also in ter)s of differential ,alue, differential ?,restige.? 9 ;ould still argue that ,restige is central to understanding the logic of gender discourse and ,ractices. 9 also think, ho;e0er, that there are li)itations to the conce,t that need to *e faced and o0erco)e. Thus it ;ill *e useful to look )ore closely at so)e ,ast uses of ?,restige? in social science discourse. 9t is Ma( <e*er ;ho, )ore than any other theorist, dra;s out the i),lications of the distinction *et;een ,restige categories and ,oliticalGecono)ic ones :<e*er .%& , .%! =. 9n the real) of class relations, he distinguishes *et;een classes and status grou,sC in the real) of ,olitics, he dis+ ,age1."$ Page ."" tinguishes *et;een ,o;er and authority. 9n *oth cases there is a category defined largely in ter)s of ?hard? social realities of so)e sort :econo)ic ,osition, ,olitical do)ination= and a category defined largely in ter)s of cultural 0alues of ;hat is socially ;orthy and )orally good. <e*erEs ulti)ate interests ;ere ,rocessual: he ;as concerned to o*ser0e ho; these ele)ents interact ;ith one another o0er ti)e. Thus he ;as interested :for e(a),le= in the decline of aristocracies that had high social status *ut little econo)ic ,o;er, and in the ;ays in ;hich a rising ,olitical grou, sought and gained cultural legiti)acy. But ;ith the ;aning of a historical ,ers,ecti0e in the social sciences, ;hat re)ains of <e*erEs ,rocessual )odel is si),ly a set of dualistically o,,osed categoriesstatus and class, ,restige and ,o;er;hich in turn *eco)e lined u, ;ith other dualis)sthe soft and the hard, <e*er 0s. Mar(, 9dealis) 0s. Materialis). The o,,ositional construction of the relationshi, *et;een ,restige and ,o;er in conte),orary social science is ,erha,s *est seen in 3ouis 8u)ontEs i),ortant *ook a*out the caste hierarchy in 9ndia, Homo Hierarchicus. 8u)ont argues that there is, ;ithin 9ndian culture itself, a radical s,lit *et;een ,restige and ,o;er. The Brah)ins ha0e no ,olitical ,o;er and, in )any regions, 0ery little econo)ic ,o;er as ;ell, yet Brah)ins ha0e ,ree)inence in ter)s of ,restige, and as a result their 0alues are the hege)onic 0alues of 9ndian society. Prestige and ,o;er are o,,osed and see)ingly ha0e little influence on each other. The ,o;er of the Pshatriya caste, fro) ;hich are dra;n the ;arriors and the rulers of ,olitical society, a,,ears )arginal and al)ost unreal in 8u)ontEs *ook. The o,,ositional construction of the relationshi, *et;een ,restige and ,o;er has in turn esta*lished a set of ,erennial and *y no; so)e;hat fruitless de*ates o0er ;hich ter) is the controlling ter) of the o,,osition. 8oes ,restige in effect ?neutraliIe? ,o;er, as in 8u)ontEs argu)ents a*out Brah)ins and Pshatriyas@ Or, on the other hand, is ,o;er the reality and ,restige si),ly the )yth, ,o;er the *ase and ,restige the :dis,ensa*le= su,erstructure@ Orto return to the )ale do)inance de*atecan there *e such a thing as a ?,o;erG,restige *alance? in ;hich )en ha0e ,restige *ut little ,o;er, ;hile ;o)en ha0e ,o;er *ut little ,restige@ 9n Sexual Meanings, <hitehead and 9 tended to;ard a 8u)ontian ,ers,ecti0e, e),hasiIing the cultural le0el of ,restige and gi0ing little syste)atic attention to the ,ractices of ,o;er. This no longer see)s an adeHuate ,ositionthe ?cultural le0el of ,restige? and ?the ,ractices of ,o;er? cannot *e di0orced fro) one another, as <e*er hi)self recogniIed, and as any+ ,age1."" Page ."& one concerned ;ith social ,ractice ;ould recogniIe today. " This ,a,er thus re,resents, in ,art, an atte),t to return to the historical dyna)is) of <e*erEs argu)ent, in ;hich one distinguishes *et;een ,o;er and ,restige not to eli)inate one or the other or to try to add the) together, *ut in order to see ho; they interact. But there are other di)ensions to rethinking the ,restige ,ro*le)atic as ;ell, in ter)s of reconce,tualiIing the ;ay in ;hich ?,restige? is socially ,resent. 9n Sexual Meanings <hitehead and 9 s,oke of ?,restige structures? and ?,restige syste)s,? ;ith the ter)s ?structure? and ?syste)EE intended to stress the ,oint that there is a kind of logic and order to cultural fra)e;orks of social e0aluation, a logic that is ,er0asi0ely e)*edded in language, ideology, institutions, and the ,ractices of social life. These ,oints are still i),ortant and are not *eing rescinded here. But the ter)s ?structure? and ?syste)? carry se0eral ,ro*le)atic i),lications. -or one thing, there is an i),lication of singularity and of totaliIation: a ?society? or a ?culture? a,,ears as a single ?syste)? or as ordered *y a single ?structure,? ;hich e)*races :or ,er0ades= 0irtually

e0ery as,ect of that social and cultural uni0erse. -or another, there is an i),lication of ahistoricity: syste)s or structures ,resu)a*ly )ust change, *ut the *asic )ode of syste)s analysis or structural analysis has *een to look for the synchronic integration of the ele)ents rather than for their transfor)ations o0er ti)e. 2nd third, there is an i),lication of functionality: syste)s or structures are either e(,licitly :in the case of Parsonian syste)s theory= or i),licitly :in the case of 3K0i+Straussian structuralis)= *eneficial to the ,eo,le ;ho li0e ;ithin the), socially functional andGor ?good to think,? and there is 0irtually no e(a)ination of the ;ays in ;hich they )ight articulate and indeed e)*ody ,olitically *iased arrange)ents. 9f for all these reasons, then, one ;ould greatly restrict the ter)inologies of syste) and structure, one finds oneself ;ith a real ,ro*le) of language. 9t ;ould not *e unreasona*le to s,eak of cultural ,restige orders as ?discourses?;hich indeed they aree(ce,t that ?discourse? has a largely linguistic connotation, ;hereas ,restige categories and e0aluations are e)*edded not only in language and sy)*olic re,resentation *ut also in ,ractices and in institutions. 7ay)ond <illia)sEs conce,t of ?hege)ony,? ada,ted fro) Gra)sci, is e(,licitly articulated against the tra,s of singularity, ahistoricity, and functionality associated ;ith earlier fra)e;orks. 2 cross *et;een the anthro,ological conce,t of culture and the Mar(ist conce,t of ideology, it e)*odies the ,er0asi0eness of culture and the *iased na+ ,age1."& Page ."# ture of ideology. 9t also ca,tures the co)*ination of e(,licit discursi0e e(,ression and ,ractical and institutional e)*eddedness *eing sought here: ?5ege)ony? goes *eyond ?culture,? as ,re0iously defined, in its insistence on relating the ?;hole social ,rocess? to s,ecific distri*utions of ,o;er and influence. To say that EE)en? define and sha,e their ;hole li0es is true only in a*straction. 9n any actual society there are s,ecific ineHualities in )eans and therefore in ca,acity to realiIe this ,rocess. . . . 9t is in LtheM recognition of the !holeness of the ,rocess that the conce,t of ?hege)ony? goes *eyond ?ideology.? <hat is decisi0e is not only the conscious syste) of ideas and *eliefs, *ut the ;hole li0ed social ,rocess as ,ractically organiIed *y s,ecific and do)inant )eanings and 0alues. :<illia)s .%!!: .0 %= <hile the ter) ?hege)ony? is not ,erfect either, and other theoretical languages ;ill ,ro*a*ly sli, in fro) ti)e to ti)e, it does carry )ost of the theoretical *enefits ;e need. My central argu)ent ;ill *e as follo;s: no society or culture is totally consistent. E0ery societyGculture has so)e a(es of )ale ,restige and so)e of fe)ale, so)e of gender eHuality, and so)e :so)eti)es )any= a(es of ,restige that ha0e nothing to do ;ith gender at all. The ,ro*le) in the ,ast has *een that all of us engaged in this de*ate ;ere trying to ,igeonhole each case :is it )ale do)inant or not@= either through data ,urification :e(,laining a;ay the incon0enient *its of infor)ation= or through trying to add u, the *its and arri0e at a score :add a ,oint for *alanced di0ision of la*or, su*tract a ,oint for ,re0alent ;ife *eating, etc.=. 9 ;ill argue here, ho;e0er, that the )ost interesting thing a*out any gi0en case is ,recisely the )ulti,licity of logics o,erating, of discourses *eing s,oken, of ,ractices of ,restige and ,o;er in ,lay. So)e of these are do)inant?hege)onic.? So)e are e(,licitly counterhege)onicsu*0ersi0e, challenging. Others are si),ly ?there,? ?other,? ?different,? ,resent *ecause they are ,roducts of i)agination that did not see) to threaten any ,articular set of arrange)ents. The analytic Huestion ;ill *e ,recisely that of the relationshi, *et;een the ele)ents, *oth at a gi0en )o)ent andideallyacross ti)e. 3ooked at in this ;ay, the 0ie; of the ethnogra,hic record on the Huestion of uni0ersal )ale do)inance does indeed a,,ear Huite different. There are clearly societies ;ith ;hat )ust *e descri*ed as egalitarian hege)onies. 2re there so)e ele)ents of e(clusi0e )ale authority in those societies@ Of course there are. 8oes that )ake those societies ?)ale do)inant?@ 9t ;ould *e a*surd to clai) that they do, although the Huestion of the real+ ,age1."# Page ."! tionshi, *et;een those ele)ents and the ,re0ailing hege)ony, *oth ;ithin and across ti)e, )ust *e looked at 0ery carefully and not e(,lained a;ay. -ro) this ,oint of 0ie; ;e are also ,re,ared to recogniIe so)e fe)ale+centered hege)onies, to ;hich the sa)e ca0eats ;ould a,,ly. & 2nd finally, ;e ;ould argue that the sa)e sort of a,,roach should *e taken ;ith res,ect to )ale do)inant hege)onies: are there counterhege)onies and ?loose ends? :of egalitarianis), and of fe)ale authority= in these syste)s@ Of course there are. Thus their relations to the hege)onic order ,ast, ,resent, and future )ust *e analyIed.#

9 ha0e found that 0ie;ing ,restige orders as hege)oniesthat is, as culturally do)inant and relati0ely dee,ly e)*edded *ut nonetheless historically e)ergent, ,olitically constructed, and nontotalisticis analytically Huite li*erating. 9t )eans that all the ,ieces of a gi0en ethnogra,hic instance do not ha0e either to fit together through heroic analytic efforts or to *e e(,lained a;ay. The loose ends, the contradictory *its, the disconnected sections can *e e(a)ined for their short+ and long+ter) interactions ;ith and i),lications for one another.! This does not )ean that e0erything has eHual analytic ;eight and ,lays the sa)e sort of role in the o0erall dyna)ic. There is an orderinga ?hege)ony? in the sense of a relati0e do)inance of so)e )eanings and ,ractices o0er others. 9t is *oth this ordering and its potential dis2ordering in ;hich 9 a) interested. Egalitarian Societies@ the 2nda)an 9slands Case 9t ;ill *e recalled that Eleanor 3eacock, a)ong others, argued that there are ;hat )ight *e called ?culturally egalitarian? societies in ;hich there is no indigenous ideology of asy))etrical gender ,restige, of greater )ale social 0alue and status. 9 said that this clai) re,resents a )ore serious challenge to the uni0ersalist clai) than the atte),ts to argue for a ,restigeG,o;er ?*alance,? since it ;orks fro) the sa)e ,re)ises as the uni0ersalist argu)ents: the insistence on the enco),assing status of ,restige 0aluationsin this case, egalitarian 0aluations. 9n the ,ast 9 ;as not con0inced *y the cases ,ut forth as e(a),les of such culturally egalitarian societies. They all see)ed to ha0e one or another fla; that allo;ed one to dis)iss the) as, in effect, tainted ;ith )ale do)inance. Thus, for e(a),le, in re0ie;ing the case of the Cro; 9ndians in an earlier ,a,er, 9 ,oint out that ;o)en see)ed to ha0e a ;ide range of rights of ,artici,ation, e0en to high offices in ?the ,u*lic do)ain? :Ortner .%!'C this 0olu)e, ,. '"=. 4et 9 fasten on so)e e0idence of )enstrual ,ollution and use this to reclassify the ,age1."! Page ." case as ?)ale do)inant.? 5o; ;ould such cases no; a,,ear, in light of the theoretical discussions Just ,resented@ The case 9 ha0e chosen for reconsideration of this Huestion is that of the 2nda)an 9slanders, ;ho ;ere *rought to )y attention as a rele0ant e(a),le *y Mary Plages in an outstanding 8art)outh College undergraduate thesis :.% 0=. The 2nda)an 9slanders ha0e the additional 0irtue of not ha0ing already *een che;ed o0er in the uni0ersal )ale do)inance de*ate, and so it see)s ,ossi*le to look at the) ;ith a relati0ely fresh eye. 2 fe; ;ords first a*out the nature of the sources. By far the *est study of the 2nda)an 9slanders ;as ,u*lished in . $ *y a British ad)inistrator calledrather char)ingly for the ,resent conte(tE. 5. Man. Man s,ent ele0en years in the 2nda)ans and descri*es hi)self as ha0ing acHuired ?a fair kno;ledge of the South 2nda)an dialect? :Man . $: #%=. 2. 7. 7adcliffe+Bro;n later ;orked in se0eral different ,arts of the area o0er a t;o+year ,eriod :.%0#.%0 = and is candid a*out his difficulties ;ith the language and his use of inter,reters :7adcliffe+Bro;n .%'': 0iii=. These t;o ;orks ,ro0ide the *ulk of the source )aterial for this discussion, ;ith so)e su,,le)entation fro) other sources. There are )any ,ro*le)s in using these sources. Man had certain 0ery o*0ious Christian *iases% and also ,ro*a*ly a 0ariety of ?ad)inistrati0e? *iases that are less i))ediately 0isi*le. 2s for 7adcliffe+Bro;n, it has *een argued ;ith reference to another conte(t that he acti0ely discri)inated against fe)ale colleaguesC this )ight i),ly significant )ale *ias in his ethnogra,hic ;ork as ;ell :7ohrlich+3ea0itt et al. .%!&=. 9n )y readings of their te(ts, 9 ha0e tried to ;ork against the grain of these *iases as )uch as ,ossi*le. The )aJor li)itation on doing so, 9 ha0e found, is the fact that neither author ,resents 0irtually any account of the ,eo,leEs o;n 0ie;s of ;hat things )eant. 9n general, )y strategy is to try to esta*lish )eaning conte(tually, ,utting *its of infor)ation together ;ith other *its to suggest ,articular lines of cultural ?thinking? or cultural 0aluation. 2fter a 0ery careful and self+critical reading of the source )aterial, then, 9 ha0e concluded that it is reasona*le to argue that the 2nda)an 9slanders :and ,ro*a*ly )any other ?si),le? societies= did indeed ha0e an egalitarian hege)ony, ;hich is to say that there ;as a 0ery strong cultural tendency to render )ale and fe)ale roles and statuses eHual and co),le)entary..0 This egalitarianis) ;as largely e)*edded in language and in ,ractices, rather than in for)al ideology. The first ,art of the discussion, then, ;ill *e to sketch the 0arious di)ensions of this ,ractical hege)ony. 9 ;ill then e(+ ,age1."

Page ."% a)ine certain ,atterns of )ale ,o;er andGor ,restige and consider their relationshi,s to the egalitarian order. 9t is i),ortant to note that the hege)ony of egalitarianis) is not )eant to *e seen as an ?ideology,? contrasted ;ith so)e ?reality? of do)ination and ineHuality lurking *eneath the surface. This is not a *ase+and+su,erstructure )odel. To say that the egalitarianis) is hege)onic is to say that it ,er0ades a 0ariety of do)ains andGor ?le0els? that, in a different fra)e;ork, )ight ha0e *een ,arceled out *et;een the ?*ase? and the ?su,erstructure.EE The rele0ant distinction concerns those )odes of social and cultural life that are ordered *y the hege)onic :here, egalitarian= assu),tions and those that are not enco),assedG,er0aded *y the) and are organiIed on different ,rinci,les. Patterns of *&ui,alence and *&uality Before starting the discussion, 9 )ust ;arn the reader that in ;hat follo;s 9 ,resent only a relati0ely sketchy and co),ressed account of the rele0ant ethnogra,hic infor)ation. 2nthro,ologists )ay ;ell find the discussions too sketchy :;hile lay readers )ay find the) too detailedT=. 9n general 9 ha0e tried not to ,ut in any unnecessary detail *ut *elie0e at the sa)e ti)e that no rele0ant infor)ation has *een o)itted. .. The 2nda)an 9slandersE di0ision of la*or, first, a,,ears to ha0e *een relati0ely *alanced)en hunted or fished, ;o)en gatheredC e0eryone see)s to ha0e done a lot of child tending. 9t also a,,ears relati0ely fle(i*le, such that ;o)en )ight go on collecti0e hunts, )en )ight do a lot of gathering in certain seasons, and *oth )en and ;o)en )ight Jointly gather honey :;hich is highly 0alued=. Both )en and ;o)en ;orked on hut *uilding, )en cutting and erecting ,osts, ;o)en collecting lea0es and ;ea0ing the )ats for the roofs. Men and ;o)en )ade their o;n res,ecti0e tools and artifacts. 2s noted a*o0e, the e(egesis is not a0aila*le that ;ould tell us ho; the ,eo,le the)sel0es assigned 0alue to these 0arious tasks. <e read these ite)s as ,ieces of an egalitarian ,icture ,artly *ecause they fit ;ith theoretical e(,ectations deri0ed fro) other cases :e.g., relati0ely infle(i*le di0isions of la*oras in Mediterranean societiessee) to go ;ith ?hard? gender distinctions and strong ?)ale do)inance? Lsee S;eet .%#!M=, and ,artly *ecause they fit ;ith further details of the 2nda)an case itself to *e ,resented here. 9 ask the readerEs ,atience as 9 try to *uild the case. One )ay also s,eak of a di0ision of la*or in social s,heres. Men )ade ,age1."% Page .&0 intergrou, feuds, *ut ;o)en ;ere the acti0e ,arties in )aking ,eace, and this ;as a 0ery ,ro)inent social and ritual role for the). Men co),osed and sang songs, and this ;as a source of )ale ,restige :;o)en for)ed the chorus=C *ut ;o)en alone did *ody scarification and *ody decoration, and this ;as a source of fe)ale ,restige. <o)en also )ade certain kinds of highly ,riIed necklaces fro) the *ones of the dead, and these ;ere al;ays in great de)and for )edicinal ,ur,oses, *eing *oth used and e(changed. Men di0ided and shared hunted )eat according to ,rescri*ed ,atterns. 9n ter)s of ritual treat)ent, young )en and ;o)en ;ere gi0en 0ery si)ilar initiations. Both ;ere su*Jected to si)ilar food ta*oos. Both ;ere said to *e in a state of ?hotness? or a,,arent ,ollution :largely to the)sel0es= during their res,ecti0e ,hases of seclusion. Socially, *oth ;ere accorded si)ilar freedo)s as adolescents, )o0ing out of their ,arentsE huts and into adolescent residences. .' Se(ual intercourse ;as said to ha0e *een ?,ro)iscuous? *efore )arriage, )arriages often *eing *rought a*out *y the *oy and girl for)ing their o;n attach)ent. So)e )arriages ;ere arranged, *ut the arrange)ents ;ere )ade *y all ,arents. There see)s to ha0e *een no Huestion of )en e(changing ;o)en. 9f there could *e said to ha0e *een any e(change of ,ersons at all, it ;as an ?e(change? of children in ;ides,read ,atterns of ado,tion and fosterage :often o,erating as child *etrothals=. Post)arital residence ;as o,tional for the cou,le, ;ho )ight choose to reside near either the ;ifeEs or the hus*andEs ,arents, or e0en else;here if they so chose. 2t the ;edding, *oth *ride and groo) ;ere lectured on fidelity. 2fter )arriage, there ;as an e(,licit single standard, and *oth hus*and and ;ife ;ere e(,ected to *e faithful to one another. 2n adulterous )an ;as said to lose ,restige in the co))unity..$ Concerning the *irth of children, in late stages of ,regnancy *oth hus*and and ;ife had to o*ser0e si)ilar or identical food ta*oos, lest the child, or the hus*and and ;ife the)sel0es, *eco)e ill. <ith the *irth of the first child, the cou,le )o0ed into full adult status. The egalitarianis) and le0el of affection of the hus*and+;ife relationshi, ;as ;orthy of s,ecial co))ent *y Man:

LOMne of the )ost striking features of their social relations is the )arked eHuality and affection ;hich su*sists *et;een hus*and and ;ifeC careful o*ser0ations e(tending o0er )any years ,ro0e that not only is the hus*andEs authority )ore or less no)inal, *ut that it is not at all an unco))on occurrence for 2nda)anese Benedicts to *e con+ ,age1.&0 Page .&. sidera*ly at the *eck and call of their *etter hal0esC in short, the consideration and res,ect ;ith ;hich ;o)en are treated )ight ;ith ad0antage *e e)ulated *y certain classes in our o;n land. :Man . $:$'!= Concerning co))unity influence or ?leadershi,,? the Huestion of eHui0alence gets a *it trickier, andde,ending on oneEs reading)en )ay see) to ha0e had a slight edge. Thus Man descri*es a syste) of ?chiefs? and s,ecifically says that ?fe)ales :like )inors= . . . cannot *e chiefs? :. $:.0%=. 5e goes on to say, ho;e0er, that EEfe)ales . . . ha0e a si)ilar ,osition relati0ely a)ong the ;o)en, to that held *y their hus*ands a)ong the )en of the tri*e? :i*id.=, and that ?chiefs . . . and their ;i0es are at li*erty to enJoy i))unity fro) the drudgery incidental to their )ode of life, all such acts *eing 0oluntarily ,erfor)ed for the) *y the young un)arried ,ersons li0ing under their headshi,? :i*id.=. Si)ilarly, 7adcliffe+Bro;n says that ?the affairs of the co))unity are regulated entirely *y the older )en and ;o)en? :.%'':""= and that ?L;Mo)en )ay occu,y a ,osition of influence si)ilar to that of the )en? :.%'':"#=. 9t ;ould see) that the rele0ant social unit for ,ur,oses of leadershi, is actually the senior cou,le, rather than the classic )ale ?chief.? 9 ;ill return to this ,oint later. -inally, one )ay look at the real) of the s,irits and the su,ernatural. The infor)ation here is ,articularly 0ague, contradictory, and confusing. 7adcliffe+Bro;n hi)self co),lains a*out it, although he is unsure as to ;hether the a,,arently ,oor Huality ;as the result of his o;n linguistic deficiencies or ;hether the confusions and contradictions are o*Jecti0ely ,resent in the culture. Ski,,ing all the details, ;e )ay say that the su,ernatural le0el, like the le0el of hu)an social relations, a,,ears to ha0e *een relati0ely *alanced. Su,ernatural *eings of *oth se(es ,layed significant, generally co),le)entary, and so)eti)es re0ersi*le roles. The )ost ,ro)inent di0inity ;as a figure of 0aria*le :*ut usually fe)ale= gender ;ho had as )uch ,o;er and authority as any )ale su,ernatural figure, if not )ore. 2gain, 9 ha0e *een a*le to ,resent only a sketchy account of the 2nda)an 9slandersE gender ,atterns, in turn deri0ed fro) less than ideal sources. /onetheless, 9 consider the ,icture that e)erges to *e reasona*ly descri*a*le as an egalitarian hege)ony in the sense that, although the 2nda)an 9slanders did not see) to ela*orate an ideology around it, there ;as a ,er0asi0e structuring of relations and ,ractices in an egalitarian direction. The )ain di)ensions of this ,icture are as follo;s: there see)s to ha0e *een *oth Huantitati0e and Hualitati0e *alance in assigned se( roles and fle(i*il+ ,age1.&. Page .&' ity in the enact)ent of se( roles. Men and ;o)en see) to ha0e *een e(,ectedGentitled to ,artici,ate eHually in all for)s of social relations :child care, ,roduction, e(change, leadershi,, intergrou, relations, etc.= and a,,ear to ha0e *een treated eHuallyor co),ara*lyin ritual. Both se(es had sources of ,ersonal creati0ity and ,restige that ;ere ad)ired *y the grou, as a ;hole. Most of the features that correlate ;ith strong )ale do)inance cross+culturally ;ere a*sent. There ;ere no hard+edged )ale and fe)ale ?s,heres,? no infle(i*le ,olicing of gender *oundaries, no radical asy))etries in the di0ision of la*or. -urther, there ;as no o*0ious ?)ale do)inance?: )en did not control ,roduction, did not control the )arriage syste), did not ha0e e(clusi0e access to leadershi,, and did not ha0e secret andGor )ale+only rituals. Men and ;o)en a,,ear to ha0e res,ected one another. Correlates of *&uality The 2nda)an 9sland society had se0eral features that ha0e *een re)arked on in earlier theoretical discussions as correlates :e0en, if one ;ere gi0en to such language, ?,redictors?= of egalitarian gender relations. The first is that gender does not a,,ear to ha0e *een the do)inant a(is or order of ,restige. 9n another conte(t, 9 ha0e argued that gender tends to *e constructed in a )ore egalitarian ;ay ;hen ,restige or social honor is allocated ,ri)arily on nongender groundson the *asis of age or hereditary rank, for e(a),le :Ortner .% .C this 0olu)e, ,. .0!=.

9n fact, as ;e ha0e seen, *oth Man and 7adcliffe+Bro;n ,ro0ide indications of an alternati0e, *asically gender+undifferentiated, ,restige hege)ony for the 2nda)an 9slanders: a ,attern of age+defined statuses and o*ligations. Buniors of *oth se(es o;ed res,ect, o*edience, gifts, and ser0ices to seniors, ;hile seniors o;ed lo0e, care, consideration, and ,rotection to Juniors. <e sa; the ,oint earlier, ;hen Man says that senior )en and ;o)en ;ere e(e),t fro) )ost ;ork, ;hich ;as done for the) *y Juniors. ." 7adcliffe+Bro;n descri*es the ,attern in si)ilar ;ays: ?There is no organiIed go0ern)ent in an 2nda)anese 0illage. The affairs of the co))unity are regulated entirely *y the older )en and ;o)en. The younger )e)*ers of the co))unity are *rought u, to ,ay res,ect to their elders and to su*)it to the) in )any ;ays. . . . The res,ect for seniors is sho;n in the e(istence of s,ecial ter)s of address ;hich )en and ;o)en use ;hen s,eaking to their elders? :7adcliffe+Bro;n .%'':"#=. The ;ides,read ,atterns of ?child e(change,? or ado,tion and fosterage, fit in ;ith these ,oints ,age1.&' Page .&$ as ;ell. The fact that ,arents e(changed children :*oth in general for)s of ado,tion and in child *etrothals=, ;hile )en did not ?e(change? ;o)en :as is the co))on construction of )any )arriage syste)s cross+ culturally=, indicates again that age and generation ;ere )ore significant a(es of authority than ;as gender. .& The second feature of 2nda)an society that ;as consistent ;ith the egalitarian gender hege)ony and that ;as forecast *y earlier theoriIing on the su*Ject ;as the 0irtual a*sence of ?genderiIation? of do)estic and ,u*lic do)ains. <e need to take a )o)ent here to say a fe; ;ords a*out the do)esticG,u*lic o,,osition. 9t ;ill *e recalled that Michelle 7osaldo :.%!"= s,eculates that se(ual asy))etry is grounded in the tendency for )en to occu,y the ?,u*lic? s,here of social life, ;hile ;o)en tend to o,erate largely ;ithin the ?do)estic? s,here. The reason for this differing ,re,onderance of the se(es in the t;o s,heres has to do ;ith the )other role: )othering acti0ities tend to restrict those ;ho do the))ostly ;o)ento the do)estic real), ;hereas )en, ;ho are not so restricted, are free to )ono,oliIe the real) of ,u*lic affairs. The 7osaldo fra)e;ork has *een su*Jected to se0eral critiHues, including one of her o;n :.% 0=. The issues are co),le(, and s,ace ,rohi*its addressing the) in any detailed ;ay here. 7osaldoEs o;n critiHue, ,icking u, on ,oints raised *y Syl0ia 4anagisako :.%!%=, is that *inary o,,ositions like do)esticG,u*lic necessarily carry cultural *aggage a*out the su,,osedly inherent differences *et;een ;o)en and )enC rather than o,ening u, the Huestion of the ,olitics of these ter)sof ho; those su,,osedly inherent differences got assigned to the genders in the first ,lacethe continuing analytic de,loy)ent of the o,,ositions si),ly carries along the old *aggage..# My 0ie; is that 7osaldo is so)e;hat hasty in dro,,ing a distinction that, as she says else;here in her article, is ?as telling as any e(,lanation yet ,ut forth? for uni0ersal )ale do)inance, at least as the Huestion ;as ,osed at the ti)e :.% 0:$%%=. 9 agree that the do)esticG,u*lic distinction as such )ay tend to ,resu,,ose certain gender differences that should not *e ,resu,,osed, *ut it also e)*odies so)e 0ery useful distinctions that should not, 9 think, *e thro;n out. 9n ,articular, 9 ;ould ,ick u, on a ,oint set out so)e;hat in ,assing in the 9ntroduction to Sexual Meanings. There <hitehead and 9 ,ro,osed that all the o,,ositions so freHuently used to characteriIe the i),licit logic *ehind the )aleGfe)ale s,litdo)esticG,u*lic, natureGculture, self+interestGsocial good, ,articularisticGuni0ersalisticcould *e resol0ed *y o*ser0ing that ?the s,here of social acti0ity ,re+ ,age1.&$ Page .&" do)inantly associated ;ith )ales enco),asses the s,here ,redo)inantly associated ;ith fe)ales and is, for that reason, culturally accorded higher 0alue? :Ortner and <hitehead .% .: =. The )ore general distinction thus is that of enco),assingGenco),assed :;hich carries no ,articular gender i),lication in itself=, and the central characteristics of this distinction ha0e to do ;ith such things as uni0ersalG,articular, collecti0e ;elfareGindi0idual interest, and so forth. 9n any gi0en culture, these a*stract distinctions, ;hich are a,,ro(i)ations of general social orientations rather than ,laces or things, ;ill nonetheless *e concretely e)*odied in ,laces andGor roles andGor ,ractices of the )undane ;orld, including Huite co))only, though not uni0ersally, the ,laces andGor ,ractices that ;e shorthand as the do)estic and the ,u*lic. .! 9n retaining a distinction like that *et;een sites of social life that are ?enco),assing?that )ake clai)s :often untrue= of o,erating in the interests of the ;holeand sites that are ?enco),assed?that o,erate ;ith res,ect to )ore local and ,articular interests9 do not ,ro,ose ra))ing it uncritically through e0ery ethnogra,hic and historical case. But, since it has *een sho;n empirically that such distinctions often link u, in co),le( and

,ro*le)atic ;ays ;ith the gender distinction, 9 retain it as a ,otentially ,o;erful ,oint of le0erage in looking at s,ecific cases and inHuiring a*out their dyna)ics. The ,oint is al;ays to ask ho; enco),assing and enco),assed sites and ,roJects of social life are distinguished, organiIed, and interrelated in a gi0en society, to inHuire into the underlying ,olitics of these distinctions and interrelations, to ask ;hether a gi0en culture does or does not fuse a gender o,,osition to these )ore a*stract di)ensions of social 0alue, and finally, and 0ery i),ortantly, to e(a)ine the ;ays in ;hich such fusions are used, contested, and so)eti)es effecti0ely shifted o0er ti)e. 7eturning then finally to the 2nda)an 9slanders and to the Huestion of the ;ays in ;hich the a,,arent egalitarianis) of the gender order )ight line u, ;ith ,rior theoretical e(,ectations, 9 said a )o)ent ago that there is a 0irtual a'sence of cultural genderiIation of do)estic and ,u*lic do)ains. 6sing here a co))onsense i)age of do)estic and ,u*lic, ;ith do)estic as the household and ,u*lic as associated ;ith *oth ,u*lic s,aces and trans+household acti0ities, ;e ha0e seen that )en and ;o)en ,artici,ated eHually, eHui0alently, and co),le)entarily in all the affairs related to the household :,ro0isioning and child care= and to the ,u*lic do)ain :singing in the ,laIa, *eing initiated, settling dis,utes, )aking ;arG,eace=. This a*sence of gender e(clusi0ity in *oth do)ains :or, as so)e )ight say, the a*+ ,age1.&" Page .&& sence of a do)ain s,lit, ,eriod= is ,recisely the situation in ;hich, according to 7osaldoEs original )odel, one ;ould e(,ect to find relati0e se( eHuality :7osaldo .%!": "0".=. The egalitarian hege)ony of 2nda)an society is thus *oth e),irically 0isi*le in the ethnogra,hies and consistent ;ith theoretical e(,ectations. But, as noted earlier, there ;ere a fe; ele)ents that stood outside this hege)ony. There ;ere in fact t;o ritual roles that ;ere i),licitly :in one case= and e(,licitly :in the other= reser0ed for )en. The first ;as the role of sha)an, in0ol0ed ,ri)arily ;ith controlling the ;eather and other s,iritcaused )isfortunes. The second ;as the role of the ritual ,erfor)ers ;ho released the initiates fro) their eating ta*oos at the end of the initiation rites. 9 ;ill e(a)ine each of the) *riefly, in ter)s of their relationshi, to the egalitarian hege)ony. *lements of (ne&uality Concerning the role of sha)an, Man says that they ;ere ?in0aria*ly of the )ale se(.? . Sha)ans ;ere thought to *e a*le to co))unicate ;ith the s,irits in0ol0ed in causing stor)s and illness. Man ,ortrays the sha)ans Huite negati0ely, as e(torting gifts and fa0ors fro) ,eo,le *ecause ,eo,le ;ere afraid of the sha)ansE su,ernatural ,o;ers: ?9t is thought that they can *ring trou*le, sickness, and death u,on those ;ho fail to e0ince their *elief in the) in so)e su*stantial for)C they thus generally )anage to o*tain the *est of e0erything, for it is considered foolhardy to deny the), and they do not scru,le to ask for any article to ;hich they )ay take a fancy? :. $: %#=. Man ,ortrays the) as in a sense a*using the kinds of authority that nor)ally ga0e elders the right to ask for and acce,t gifts ;ithout return: ?So)eti)es, o;ing to the )ulti,licity of these gifts, it is incon0enient to the Lsha)anM to take charge of the)C he then enters into an arrange)ent ;ith the donors that such articles as he does not at ,resent need shall *e a0aila*le for his use or a,,ro,riation ;hene0er he )ay reHuire the)? :. $: &$=. 9f there is truth to this ,ortrayal, then the sha)ans, though ,erfor)ing necessary functions of ;eather and illness control, 0iolated the hege)ony in se0eral res,ects: in their e(clusi0e )aleness, in their s,ecial ,o;ers for har)ing others, and in their e(,loitation of the seniorGJunior gifting relationshi,. The sha)ans thus tended to;ard a kind of do)inance that ;as not countenanced else;here in the culture. 9t is difficult to e0aluate the status of the sha)an ;ithin 2nda)an 9sland ,age1.&& Page .&# society. E0en assu)ing ManEs descri,tions to *e accurate :and, *ecause of his religious *iases, this assu),tion )ay not *e Justified=, ;e ha0e no idea ;hether these indi0iduals ;ere res,ected or si),ly feared. <e do kno; that )any cultures ha0e roles in0ol0ing the in0ersion of the cultureEs central 0alues. The classical inter,retation is that such roles confir) the hege)ony through its in0ersion, *y ,ro0iding a gli),se of the undesira*ility of alternati0es. This inter,retation )ay *e a,,lica*le here: if indeed, as Man i),lies, sha)ans ;ere not res,ected *ut si),ly feared, then their relationshi, to the egalitarian hege)ony )ay ha0e had this ?,er0erse? Huality, ,ro0iding the negati0e i)age of the uneHual :)ale do)inant, ,o;er do)inant= life.

One )ight also look at a see)ingly contradictory institutionG,ractice like this as a ,ossi*le node of historical transfor)ation. This ,oint ;ill *e )ore central to the discussion of the 5a;aiian case, ;here )uch *etter historical e0idence is a0aila*le, *ut the Huestion )ay *e raised in a s)all ;ay here: ;ere the e(,loitati0e sha)ans the ;a0e of the future for 2nda)an society@ 9nterestingly enough, it does not a,,ear that this ;as the case, at least not in any direct sense of their do)inance *eco)ing )ore institutionaliIed o0er ti)e. On the contrary, *et;een ManEs and 7adcliffe+Bro;nEs ti)es, the sha)ans d;indled in nu)*ers and e0idently lost so)e of their social standing: ?Most of the old Lsha)ansM are no; dead. 2)ongst the younger )en there are a fe; ;ho ,retend to the ,osition, *ut the recent intercourse ;ith foreigners has ,roduced a degree of ske,ticis) in such )atters? :7adcliffe+Bro;n .%'': .!#=. There ;as one other arena of syste)atic gender i)*alance: the ad)inistration of initiation rites. 9t ;as the senior )en ;ho decided ;hen the young initiates of either se( ;ere to *e released fro) the 0arious food ta*oos that they ;ere o*ser0ing, and it ;as the senior )en ;ho then handfed the first *its of these de+ta*ooed foods to the initiates. 9t is s,ecifically noted se0eral ti)es that only the senior )en, and not ;o)en, officiated, e0en in the case of a girlEs initiation :Man . $: .'%$& ,assi)C 7adcliffe+Bro;n .%'': %'.0# ,assi)=. Moreo0er, 7adcliffe+Bro;n calls these the )ost i),ortant rituals in the society, and this )akes sense on analytic grounds as ;ell, gi0en the centrality of the seniorGJunior a(is of social differentiation discussed earlier: the rituals ,layed a )aJor role in turning ?Juniors? into ?seniors.? The significance of feeding the initiates is not e(,lained, *ut cross+cultural ,atterns of this sort suggest an inter,retation: that the initiates ;ere *eing re*orn as adults, and that it ;as the senior )en ,age1.&# Page .&! ;ho ;ere sy)*olically clai)ing to deli0er the) into adulthood, as ;o)en deli0ered the) into the ;orld as infants in the first ,lace. 9n the ,ast, this is the sort of thing that ;ould ha0e led uni0ersalists to s;itch the 2nda)an 9slanders fro) the ?,ossi*ly egalitarian? *o( to the ?)ale+do)inant? *o(. But this is ,recisely the kind of )o0e that no longer see)s Justified. 5o; shall ;e think a*out the situation no;@ The egalitarianis) of 2nda)an 9sland society ;as, as 9 said, hege)onic in the sense that it ;as structurally ,er0asi0erea,,earing in )any conte(ts and in )any ,atterns of relations. The )ale ritual role, ;hile Huite i),ortant, ;as a )ore or less isolated ele)ent, not ;o0en into so)e larger ,attern. Such isolation or frag)entation is ,recisely ,art of not *eing in a hege)onic ,osition: ;e ha0e seen again and again that )en Hua )en had no s,ecial ,ri0ileges or sources of authority 0is+N+0is ;o)en in 0irtually any s,here of ordinary life in the society. Moreo0er, it is concei0a*le that the role of ritual re*irther ;as itself redefined in an egalitarian direction, gi0en the ,re0ailing hege)ony. 2lthough the cultural e(egesis necessary to esta*lish this ,oint ;ith any certainty is not a0aila*le, ;e are told that the initiation itself ;as not enough to render a *oy or girl a full adult, the transition to such status reHuiring, in addition, )arriage and the *irth of the first child. 9n other ;ords, the cultural ,osition )ay ha0e *een that ;o)en and )en had eHui0alent and co),le)entary roles in the social ,roduction of adults: ;o)en :as ;i0es= *ore the children that )ade *oth the)sel0es and their hus*ands ,arents and, hence, adults, ;hile )en did the rituals that acco),lished the sa)e thingC neither alone ;as sufficient to ,roduce a full adult ,erson. .% Thus, )ale ritual authority )ay ha0e *een not only isolated, 0is+N+0is the ,re0ailing hege)ony, it )ay actually ha0e *een reinter,reted so as to fit the hege)ony itself. 4et e0en if this inter,retation ;as held in the culture, the e(clusi0e role of senior )en in initiation rites could also ha0e *een a ,oint of cultural transfor)ation. <hile in theory anything can *e reinter,reted and can for) the *asis for significant cultural change, so)ething like this had ,o;erful transfor)ational ,otential ,recisely *ecause it ;as outside of, and in so)e sense challenging to, the hege)onic order: it a,,ears to ha0e accorded s,ecial authority to one grou, :senior )en= o0er all others, on grounds :gender ,lus seniority= other than the do)inant grounds :seniority alone= of social 0aluation. 9t had ,o;erful transfor)ational ,otential for another reason as ;ell: *ecause it ;as culturally defined as ?enco),assing,? ,erfor)ing acts seen as *eneficial to the ;ider social ;elfare, or in other ;ords *ecause it, ,age1.&! Page .& like the role of the sha)an, ;as situated in the ?,u*lic do)ain.? Thus one )ay ask, 8id the authority initially granted to senior )en in this li)ited :though i),ortant= role *eco)e )ore general@ 3ooking again at the fifty+year ,eriod *et;een ManEs and 7adcliffe+Bro;nEs o*ser0ations, the ans;er a,,ears to *e noC if

anything, 7adcliffe+Bro;nEs account ;ould see) to suggest a slight increase in egalitarianis) :co),are the Huotes a*out chiefs and their ;i0es ,resented earlier=. But here one reaches the li)its of the a0aila*le infor)ationC the 2nda)an 9slanders continued to decline de)ogra,hically after 7adcliffe+Bro;nEs study, '0 and in any e0ent the area ;as ne0er studied again in anything like the detail of the t;o accounts utiliIed here. 9n order to see ho; a ,otential ?node of transfor)ation? )ight *eco)e a real one, ;e )ust look at a case for ;hich high+Huality historical infor)ation is a0aila*le. 9 turn no; to eighteenth+century 5a;aii for an in0erse e(a),le: a case of a ?)ale do)inant? hege)ony sho;ing significant instances of fe)ale ,o;er and ,restige. Once again, 9 can only sketch the case, *ut 9 ho,e to ,ro0ide enough detail to esta*lish the argu)ent. 5istorical Transfor)ations: 2ncient 5a;aii Traditional 5a;aiian 9slands society, as o*ser0ed in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, a,,ears to ha0e *een a )ale do)inant hege)ony. L.%%# note: The 5a;aiian 9slands only ,artly confor) to the general )odel of ?Polynesia? set forth in ?7ank and Gender.? E0ery Polynesian society 0aries in so)e degree fro) that ideal ty,e, de,ending on location :Eastern 0s. <estern Polynesia=, degree of stratification :the 5a;aiian 9slands *eing at the )ost stratified, class+like end of the s,ectru)=, and )any other factors.M Male do)inance ;as ,er0asi0e in *oth for)al ideology and in the structuring of )any institutions. 9n ter)s of ideology, )en ;ere defined as sacred :)apu= and ;o)en as ,rofane or unsacred :noa=. There ;ere ta*oos against )en and ;o)en eating together, lest ;o)en offend the gods ;ith ;ho) )en ;ere in co))union. There ;ere thus se,arate )enEs and ;o)enEs eating houses. 4oung *oys ate ;ith the ;o)en, *ut at the age of nine they ;ere ritually transferred to the )enEs eating house and ne0er ate ;ith the ;o)en again. There ;ere also a large nu)*er of ?)ale? foods, ;hich ;ere ,art of the sacrificial offerings that )en shared ;ith the gods and ;hich ;o)en ;ere not allo;ed to eat. <o)en ;ere also not allo;ed in the te),les, ;here )ale ,riests )ade sacrifices to the gods on ;ho) the ;elfare of the society as a ;hole ;as said to de,end. Menstruation ;as ,age1.& Page .&% dee)ed ,olluting and offensi0e to )en and gods, and ;o)en had to retire to )enstrual huts during their ,eriods each )onth. /e(t, at the le0el of econo)ic and ,olitical institutions, ,ro,erty ;as generally inherited *y the oldest son. <hile daughters and younger sons had certain usufruct rights, they ;ere for)ally noninheriting. 9n ter)s of ,olitical leadershi,, )ost chiefs ;ere )enC at the sa)e ti)e, all )en ;ere )eta,horic ?chiefs? 0is+N+0is their households, ,erfor)ing the do)estic sacrifices that )aintained the ;ell+*eing of the household. 9n su), )ale do)inance in 5a;aiian society )ust *e considered hege)onic, in the sense that it ;as for)ally articulated as a cultural state)ent of greater ,restige, and in the sense that it ;as ,er0asi0e throughout a ;ide range of relations and ,ractices,u*lic and do)estic rituals, ,u*lic and do)estic authority. But there ;ere also significant arenas of ?eHuality? or ?eHui0alence? in traditional 5a;aiian society. The )ost nota*le of these concerned the tendency to allo; the first+*orn child, regardless of gender, to succeed to the chiefshi, at the 0ery highest and )ost sacred le0els of the aristocracy. Thus there ;ere a significant nu)*er of ruling fe)ale chiefs in the 5a;aiian royal genealogies. There ;as a si)ilar :though unfor)aliIed= tendency to;ard eHui0alence ;ith res,ect to ,ro,erty, inheritance, household headshi,, and related )atters, in a 0ariety of ;ays. <hile in general the first+*orn son ;as the fa0ored heir, ?land trans)ission to and through ;o)en ;as al;ays a ,ossi*ility? :3innekin .% &: .0$=, and ;o)en could and did act legiti)ately as heads of household: ?The ho)e ;as centered in the ,arent and ,ro0ider. The Ehead of fa)ilyE :ma)ua= could *e any relati0e, any age, se(, or e0en ado,ti0ehe or she is ,hysically and s,iritually the king+,ost of the house? :5andy and Pukui .%& : .!"=. E0idently daughters ;ere also allocated land to li0e and ;ork on as ,art of a general strategy to kee, daughters ;ith the fa)ily and to *ring in in+)arrying sons+in+la; :nor)ally nonsenior sons ;ho did not inherit land in their o;n fa)ilies= :3innekin .% &: .0&C 5andy and Pukui .%& : ""C Gold)an .%!0: '$!$ C Ortner .% ., this 0olu)e, ,,. # !.=. 9f the inheritance syste) tended to create a certain eHui0alence *et;een sons and daughters in the sense of gi0ing daughters ,ro,erty )ore often than one )ight e(,ect, it also created a certain eHui0alence *et;een sons and daughters in a negati0e sense as ;ell: )any noninheriting sons and daughters tended not to )arry, li0ing at ho)e ;ith their natal fa)ilies :as

,age1.&% Page .#0 de,endents of the inheriting si*ling= *ut li0ing li0es of great se(ual freedo). :Se(ual acti0eness, skill, etc., ;ere strongly 0alued culturally.= This a,,lied to *oth )en and ;o)en, and the 5a;aiians ;ere fa)ous a)ong Euro,eans, es,ecially )issionaries, for :as the )issionaries sa; it= not ha0ing an institution of )arriage at all :3innekin .% &: #.=. <hile it is not the case that the 5a;aiians had ?no )arriage,? )arriage ;as )ore likely to *e associated ;ith aristocratic status, ,ro,erty+inheriting status, or *oth. The effect of this ;as to gi0e )any ;o)en, like )any )en, great *eha0ioral freedo). Should an un)arried ;o)an in such a situation ha0e a child, her freedo) ;as not necessarily ha),ered, *ecause ha0ing a child out of ;edlock ;as not seriously fro;ned u,on: gi0ing a child a;ay in ado,tion ;as considered nor)al, and the ;o)anEs ,arents ;ere often ha,,y to ado,t the child. The 5a;aiian syste) thus dis,layed a dra)atic conJunction *et;een a )ale do)inant hege)ony and a series of areas in ;hich there ;as significant eHui0alence *et;een )en and ;o)enin inheritance, in chiefly succession, and in ?autono)y.? 2s in the case of the 2nda)an 9slanders, one )ay ask ;hat other features of 5a;aiian culture and society )ight *e e(,ected to *e found in conJunction ;ith these ,atterns on the *asis of ,rior theoretical discussions. These can *e located in relation to features of *oth the ,atterns of )ale do)inance and the ,atterns of eHuality. Concerning )ale do)inance, ;e see once again the rele0ance of the enco),assingGenco),assed o,,osition: )en occu,ied all the ,ositions that ;ere defined as integrating and sustaining the social orderthey ;ere the ,referred holders of the chiefshi,, the e(clusi0e ,ractitioners of the state rituals, and the e(clusi0e ,ractitioners of the do)estic rituals. '. The distinction ;as )ade not so )uch *et;een do)estic and ,u*lic :for although ;o)en ;ere largely e(cluded fro) ,u*lic affairs, )en ;ere 0ery acti0ely in0ol0ed in do)estic affairs= as *et;een sacred and ,rofane, *et;een arenas in ;hich connections ;ith the su,ernatural su,,orts of society ;ere )ade and those in ;hich they ;ere not. SacredG,rofane in turn ;as ,recisely the cultural idio) ;ithin ;hich the )aleGfe)ale o,,osition ;as cast: 5a;aiian )en ;ere )apu, 5a;aiian ;o)en ;ere noa.'' 2 second correlate of the )ale do)inant hege)ony that could *e theoretically antici,ated is the greater ela*oration of asy))etrical relations in general. 6nlike that of the 2nda)an 9slanders, 5a;aiian society ;as decidedly not an egalitarian social order, and its rankings ,ertained not only to )en and ;o)en *ut to the ela*oration of hierarchical distinctions ,age1.#0 Page .#. *et;een older and younger si*lings, descendants of older and younger si*lings, aristocrats and co))oners, chiefs and e0eryone else. <hile it is not necessarily the case that all for)s of ineHuality auto)atically a),lify one another :the relationshi, *et;een different for)s of ineHuality in ,articular ti)es and ,laces is al;ays an e),irical Huestion=, nonetheless it is clear that in the 5a;aiian case :and ,ro*a*ly a large nu)*er of societies that are si)ilarly ordered=, gender ineHuality and other for)s of ineHuality ;ere directly linked culturally: as Marshall Sahlins :.% .= in ,articular has e),hasiIed, )en ;ere to ;o)en as chiefs ;ere to co))oners. The effect of this linkage, in turn, ;as to acco),lish ,recisely ;hat ;as not acco),lished in 2nda)an 9slands culture: to turn a conte(t+s,ecific :;hich is not to say uni),ortant= role :like 2nda)an )ale leadershi, in the conte(t of one s,ecific stage of initiation rituals= into a general social ,rinci,le. Turning ne(t to the arenas of eHui0alence in 5a;aiian gender ,ractices, here too there are se0eral theoretically ,redicta*le correlates. The first is one that ;as encountered ;ith res,ect to the 2nda)an 9slanders, although here in a restricted rather than a general and hege)onic for). -or certain ,ur,oses :succession to the high chiefshi,=, an alternate ,rinci,le of ,restige ranking :here, *irth order= o0errode gender as a status ,rinci,le. This is not si),ly a structural ,oint *ut a,,arently a historical ,rogression: Gold)an argues on the *asis of chiefly genealogies that the 5a;aiians see) to ha0e shifted fro) the )ore EEtraditional? ,attern of )ale+only succession to a )ore ,urely seniority+*ased ,attern in a*out the fifteenth century. '$ One )ight add to this ,oint one other area in ;hich seniority see)s to ha0e *een a )ore i),ortant ordering ,rinci,le than gender and ;hich )ight ha0e ,ro0ided a cultural *asis for the ,olitical shift. The 5a;aiians had :and still ha0e= ;hat has co)e to *e called :e0en in other cultures= 5a;aiian kinshi, ter)inology, in ;hich the kinshi, ,ositions are di0ided ,ri)arily *y generation and in ;hich gender is only a secondary )odification. Thusand this is the )ost e(tre)e for) of thise0en the 5a;aiian ter)s for )other and father

;ere not initially distinguished *y gender. There ;as a single ter) to indicate ?,arent? that could *e )odified *y a gender )arker if necessary.'" 9 *egan this discussion *y descri*ing 5a;aii in the late eighteenth century as ha0ing a )ale do)inant hege)ony in ;hich there ;ere nonetheless significant arenas of gender eHui0alenceGeHuality. Male do)inance or, ,age1.#. Page .#' )ore ,recisely, )ale ,ree)inence, ;as linked largely to )enEs ?sacredness? and their conseHuent control of the ritual syste) that generated the ,rinci,les of order, 0alue, and authority for the society as a ;hole. 2s Daleri ,ut it, ?the relationshi, ;ith LtheM di0ine L;asM o*tained *y t;o different )eans: the sacrificial )eans, in ;hich )en do)inateLdM, and the genealogical )eans, ;hich L;asM eHually accessi*le to )en and ;o)en? :.% &: ..$=. 2nd in the traditional 5a;aiian order, at least at the ,oint of early descri,tion, ?sacrifice L;asM su,erior to genealogy? :.% &: .."=. '& 4et it )ay *e suggested that *y the ti)e of Euro,ean contact the relati0e hege)ony of ritual succession 0s. genealogical succession :or )ore ,recisely, a co)*ination of genealogy ,lus ritual, 0s. genealogy alone= is ,recisely ;hat ;as at issue.'# 5igh chiefs succeeded to office through a co)*ination of genealogical and ritual ,roceedings*orn to the right fa)ilies :*ut so ;ere their *rothers, half+*rothers, and cousins=, their rights to rule had nonetheless to *e confir)ed *y the ,riests through a,,ro,riate ritual ,ractices. But the gro;ing tendency seen in the genealogies, to let seniority o0erride gender and to let ;o)en succeed, suggests that the ,ure seniority :or ?genealogy?= ,rinci,le ;as a,,roaching near eHual status ;ith the genealogyGritual co)*ination, if only for certain :restricted *ut highly significant= ,ur,oses. The situation created )aJor contradictions. <o)en could succeed to the chiefshi, on the *asis of genealogical and *irth order criteria *ut then did not ha0e the necessary sacredness to enact all ,arts of the rituals that ;ent ;ith the office. Thus a certain fe)ale chief, ?ha0ing the su,re)e rank on the island of 5a;aii, had the right to enter state te),lesnor)ally ta*oo to ;o)ento consecrate hu)an sacrifices to the gods. But . . . it ;as still for*idden for her to eat a ,ortion of the offerings? :Daleri .% &: ..$=. These contradictions suggest that ;e are looking at a situation in ;hich the hege)ony had *een 0irtually *reached. The only thing :though not a s)all thing, *y any )eans= standing *et;een the e(isting situation and the full ,olitical eHui0alence of )en and ;o)en ;as the ritual syste), the syste) that conferred chiefshi, on so)e indi0iduals and not all their genealogically si)ilar :e0en su,erior= kin, the syste) that conferred )apu status on )en and noa status on ;o)en. Gender eHuality at this ,oint ;as )ore than an isolated ele)ent in the syste): it ;as a 0irtual counterhege)ony. 9t is in this conte(t that ;e )ay understand the fa)ous o0erthro; of the ritual syste) in 5a;aii. ,age1.#' Page .#$ The +,erthro! of the 7apu System in Ha!aii Ca,tain Ba)es Cook landed in the 5a;aiian 9slands in .!! , initiating <estern contact ;ith the area that continued and intensified, largely in the for) of co))erce, throughout and *eyond the ti)e ,eriod to *e discussed. Su*seHuently, there ;as also significant Christian )issionary acti0ity in the larger region. The 5a;aiians ;ere a;are of this in so)e ;ay, *ut there ;ere no actual )ission stations in the 5a;aiian 9slands until after the indigenously initiated o0erthro; of the )apus. '! The e0ents of the o0erthro;, in sketchy for), ;ere as follo;s: in . .%, Pa)eha)eha 9, the chiefGking ;ho had for the first ti)e succeeded in unifying )ost of the 5a;aiian 9slands under a single rule, died. 9t ;as nor)ally the case that ;hen a high chief died there ;as a ten+day ,eriod during ;hich all the ta*oos ;ere sus,ended: ;o)en and )en ate together, ;o)en entered the te),les, 0arious for)s of se(ual license :e.g., se(ual relations *et;een high+*orn ;o)en and lo;+*orn )en= ,re0ailed. 2t the sa)e ti)e, the heir to the chiefshi, ;as su,,osed to lea0e the island and se,arate hi)self *oth fro) the ,ollutions of the chiefly death and the license of the ,eo,le, returning at the end of the ten+day ,eriod ;hen he :or she= ;ould *e installed in the chiefshi, and ;ould, as his or her first chiefly act, reinstate the ta*oos. The ,eriod follo;ing Pa)eha)ehaEs death ;as no e(ce,tion in all these ,oints. The heir, 3iholiho, Pa)eha)ehaEs son *y his senior ;ife, ;as the designated successor, and he left the island for the ,rescri*ed ,eriod.

Pro*a*ly *ecause 3iholiho, according to )any sources, ;as *y te),era)ent a rather ina,,ro,riate successor, Pa)eha)eha had designated his fa0orite ;ife, Paahu)anu, to *e regent for so)e ,eriod of ti)e. :Earlier, Paahu)anu had ado,ted 3iholiho. She ;as thus the ado,ti0e )other of the successor as ;ell as the designated regent.= But Paahu)anu, it turns out, had rather )ore a)*itious things in )ind than a te),orary regentshi,. 8uring 3iholihoEs a*sence she ;orked out a Huite intentional sche)e to under)ine the )apu syste) *y enlisting so)e high+ranking )en to eat ,u*licly ;ith the high+ranking ;o)en at the feast cele*rating the return and installation of the heir. 2lso in0ol0ed in the sche)e ;as Pa)eha)ehaEs senior ;ife, 3iholihoEs *irth )other, a chiefly ;o)an of the 0ery highest ,ossi*le *irth rank. The t;o ;o)en succeeded in enlisting 3iholihoEs younger *rother to eat ;ith the), and Paahu)anu sent a )essage to 3iholiho asking hi) to Join as ;ell. On this occasion he did not do so, al+ ,age1.#$ Page .#" though he did nothing to sto, the younger *rother. Paahu)anu )ade an e(traordinary s,eech: Paahu)anu . . . ,resided o0er the installation of 3iholiho as Pa)eha)eha 99 so)e days later, taking the occasion to ,ronounce *efore the asse)*led 5a;aiian nota*les the ,ur,orted ;ill of the deceased Ping that she rule Jointly ;ith his heir. Paahu)anu also seiIed the o,,ortunity to ,roclai) that those ;ho ;ished to follo; the old ta*us )ight do so, ?*ut as for )e and )y ,eo,le, ;e intend to *e free fro) the ta*us. <e intend that the hus*andEs food and the ;ifeEs food shall *e cooked in the sa)e o0en, and that they shall eat out of the sa)e cala*ash. <e intend to eat ,ork and *ananas and coconuts Lsacrificial foods for)erly ,rohi*ited to ;o)enM, and to li0e as the ;hite ,eo,le do.? :Sahlins .% .: #$= On this occasion, ho;e0er, the *reach did not fully ?take,? ,erha,s *ecause not enough high+ranking )en ,artici,ated. Thus Paahu)anu continued to ;ork on *ringing a*out a )ore general and thoroughgoing transfor)ation of the status Huo. 3iholiho left the island again, for a*out fi0e )onths. There ;as to *e a )e)orial feast for Pa)eha)eha on 3iholihoEs return. 2gain Paaha)anu sent hi) a )essage to Join and eat ;ith the ;o)en at the feast. 9n this case he agreed, although e0idently at so)e cost to his ,eace of )ind: he and his friends ;ent on a t;o+day drinking *inge at sea, and Paahu)anu had to send out canoes to to; the) in to shore. There ;as another feast, and this ti)e 3iholiho, as ;ell as a high ,riest and se0eral other high+ranking aristocratic )en, Joined the ;o)en and ate ;ith the). ' /eedless to say, these changes did not go uno,,osed. The *rotherEs son of Pa)eha)eha 9, ;ho ;as the designated heir of the deceased kingEs god, 0iolently o,,osed the ,er)anent *reaching of the ta*oos. So)e ti)e after these e0ents, he rallied an ar)y, and there ;as a *attle. Both he and his ;ife, ;ho ;ent into *attle ;ith hi), ;ere killed, this fact see)ing ironically to signify that the gods ;ere on the side of those ;ho ;ished to o0erthro; the )apu syste). The result of these e0ents ;as the ,rofound and ,er0asi0e transfor)ation of 5a;aiian culture, affecting all as,ects of 5a;aiian life. <ith regard to the issue of gender, there ;ere long+ter) ,olitical and religiousGideological changes. On the ,olitical front, Paahu)anu sa; to the institutionaliIation of her ne; ,osition in the go0ern)ent, called )uhina?regent? or ?,ri)e )inister.? Paahu)anu e0idently defined it as a ?fe)ale? ,osition, and it ,age1.#" Page .#& ;as thus su*seHuently filled *y her fe)ale relati0es :her sisterEs daughter, and her half+sister= for the ne(t se0eral decades, that is, for as long as the chiefly syste) continued in the for) it had at the ti)e. The creation of this ,osition in turn in0ol0ed a )ore general reorganiIation ;ithin the go0ern)entC the high ,riests, ;ho as ,erfor)ers of the rituals had *een e(traordinarily ,o;erful under the old arrange)ents, ;ere )ade organiIationally su*ordinate to the )uhina. The su*ordination of the high ,riests, in turn, re,resented a co),lete shift in the status and 0alue structure of traditional 5a;aiian religion. The eating ta*oos, ;hich *oth re,resented and constituted the su,eriority of )en o0er ;o)en, ;ere in turn tightly linked u, ;ith ,arallel ta*oos re,resenting and constituting the su,eriority of chiefs to co))oners and gods to all 5a;aiians. The unra0eling of the first le0el ;as the unra0eling of the ;hole syste). Thus in the ;eeks and )onths follo;ing the e0ents recounted a*o0e, the high ,riest ;ho had *een in0ol0ed in the *reach of the eating ta*oos at the feast, as ;ell as other ,riests throughout the islands, ;ent on to desecrate the te),les and either to *urn the statues of the gods or thro;

the) into the sea. 9n ;hat a)ounted to an act of autoethnocide :;hich of course is ;hy it has attracted so )uch anthro,ological attention=, gods, chiefs, and )en ;ere desacraliIed, and )en and ;o)en :as ;ell as chiefs and co))oners= ;ere defined as eHual ;ithin the fra)e;ork of a disenchanted ;orld. (nterpreting the +,erthro! of the 7apus <hy ;ere so)e 5a;aiian ;o)en a*le to )ount this sort of challenge to their o;n gender ideology@ 2nd ;hy ;ere they a*le to succeed@ There ha0e *een )any atte),ts to ans;er these Huestions, and 9 can only su))ariIe the) *riefly here. Broadly s,eaking, the ans;ers fall into t;o general ca),s: ,lacing the causality in the 5a;aiiansE contact ;ith the <est 0s. ,lacing the causality in structures and ,rocesses internal to 5a;aiian society. Pro,onents of the second, ?internal? ca), in turn fall into t;o grou,s, those ;ho tend to e),hasiIe general ,oliticalGecono)icGreligious features of 5a;aiian societyGculture and those ;ho tend to e),hasiIe the factor of gender :;ithout necessarily ignoring the other di)ensions=. 7o*ert 7edfield )ost fir)ly takes the ,osition that the o0erthro; of the )apu syste) in 5a;aii )ust *e *la)ed largely on the i),act of e(ternal forces: ?;hen ;e ask if the refor) ;ould ha0e *een atte),ted had the ci0iliIation of the ;hite )an not co)e into the South Seas, ;e ask a Huestion ,age1.#& Page .## that is unans;era*le *ut that raises dou*ts that the refor) ;ould ha0e then *een atte),ted in the a*sence of influences fro) ci0iliIation? :7edfield .%&$: .' =. 7edfieldEs ,osition is not so )uch o,,osed as ignored. 9t ;as not until Marshall SahlinsEs recent study that a serious second look ;as taken at the i),act of <estern co))erce and religion on the e0ents under consideration here :.% .: #$=. 6nlike 7edfield, Sahlins does not o0erstate :and in so)e su*tle ;ay glorify= <estern i),act *ut considers, rather, the co),le( inter,lay *et;een <estern and 5a;aiian cultural dyna)ics. 9n the ,eriod *et;een 7edfieldEs and SahlinsEs discussions, the )aJority of anthro,ologists e),hasiIed the significance of internal factors, largely ,oliticalGecono)ic factors related to the ,rocesses of state )aking. '% 9n so)e *ut not all cases the authors s,ecifically o,,ose a gender inter,retation of the e0ents. M. C. <e**, for e(a),le, *egins his discussion ;ith a reference to the inter,retations of the historian 7. S. Puykendall :;ho in turn utiliIed firsthand accounts of the e0ents ,ro0ided *y Euro,eans resident in 5a;aii at the ti)e=: 7. S. Puykendall . . . suggests that the a*olition of the ta*oos ;as largely at the instigation of the t;o royal ;o)en, ;ho ;ould ha0e found the syste) es,ecially irkso)e and hu)iliating and ;ho ;ould ha0e *een successful *ecause un,unished *reaking of the ta*oos *y foreigners had ;eakened faith in the syste). . . . LPuykendallEsM solution follo;s the traditional history of 8a0id Palakaua. 4et one is loath to see so great a change as *eing caused essentially *y the ;hi) of a ,air of e0en 0ery ,o;erful ;o)en. :<e** .%#&: '&= This rather ,atroniIing Huote aside :not only ;ith res,ect to ;o)en *ut to a nati0e 5a;aiian historian=, <e** goes on to ,resent a Huite interesting argu)ent to the effect that 5a;aii ;as in the ,rocess of indigenous state for)ation, ;ith Pa)eha)eha unifying the islands under his chiefshi,, and that the sort of religious housecleaning seen in the a*olition of the )apus )ay go along ;ith the ,rocess of state for)ation. This is the case, he argued, *ecause so)e as,ects of religion and of other ?traditional? for)s of regulating succession and rene;ing legiti)acy in0ol0e relati0ely constraining ;ays of constructing ,o;er. Once states ha0e enough )ilitary ,o;er to hold the)sel0es together *y less ,ro*le)atic )eans, they tend to dee),hasiIe )any religiously *ased )odes of legiti)ation. Thus <e** ,oints out that in the course of the for)ation of the Aulu state, Shaku Aulu ?*roke the ,o;er of the traditional ;hich hunters LandM e(,elled all of the rain)akers e(ce,t for his o;n a,,ointees? :.%#&: .=. 2rgu)ents *y <il+ ,age1.## Page .#! lia) 8a0en,ort :.%#%=, Ste,hanie Seto 3e0in :.%# =, and B.3. -ischer :.%!0= si)ilarly e),hasiIe other ,ro*le)atic di)ensions of the relationshi, *et;een religion and ,olitics in a state+)aking ,rocess. 9 find )ost of these argu)ents to ha0e a great deal of ,ri)a facie ,lausi*ility. /onetheless, gi0en ;hat is kno;n a*out the contradictions in the 5a;aiian gender syste), a*out the interlock *et;een the gender syste) and the chiefly syste), and a*out the leading role of Paahu)anu and her co+;ife in the e0ents of . .%, 9 a) inclined to think that gender should ,lay a rather larger ,art in the inter,retation of the e0ents than it does in the argu)ents Just cited.

The gender line has in fact *een ,ursued *y a nu)*er of other scholars. 9 noted earlier that 7o*ert 7edfield e),hasiIes the i),act of <estern contact on the 5a;aiian situation. 7edfield goes on to say, ho;e0er, that certain features of the 5a;aiian situation itself ;ould ha0e rendered it 0ulnera*le to the challenge ,osed *y <estern 0alues and ,ractices. 2)ong these he ,ro)inently includes ?the inconsistencies *et;een the high ,osition of certain ;o)en in the syste) of ,olitical ,o;er and the lo; ,osition of these ;o)en as ;o)en, as e(,ressed in the ta*oos? :7edfield .%&$: .'%=. 9r0ing Gold)an also discusses these inconsistencies *ut e),hasiIes as ;ell the genealogical e0idence sho;ing a shift earlier in 5a;aiian history fro) )aleonly succession to first+*orn succession regardless of gender :Gold)an .%!0: '$!$ =. More than any other ;riter, Gold)an is ,re,ared to see the o0erthro; of the )apu syste) as a 0irtual fe)inist re0olution :related in turn to larger e0olutionary ,ossi*ilities inherent in Polynesian chiefdo)s=: Early 5a;aiian genealogies fa0ored the )ale line, and e0en after the tide had *egun to turn . . . )en ;ere still ,referred as high chiefs, a condition that fa0ored ,atrilineal succession. /e0ertheless, *ilateralis) and ;ith it the social and ritual eHuality of ;o)en had *eco)e o0er;hel)ingly ,o;erful forces. <e ha0e reason to assu)e that ;hen 3iholiho finally *roke the )apus that had se,arated )en and ;o)en in so)e ritual res,ects, his action ;as no )ere res,onse to Christian or to general ,olitical influences, *ut ;as indeed the cul)ination of an irresisti*le )o0e)ent to;ard se(ual eHuality. :Gold)an .%!0: '.".&= Most recently, Sahlins has )ade se0eral argu)ents concerning the significance of these e0ents. On the one hand, he tends to dee),hasiIe the role of Paahu)anu and her co+;ife Hua !omen in the o0erall ,rocess. 5e stresses instead the ;ay in ;hich Paahu)anu ;as a re,resentati0e of her kin grou, ;ho, as affinal :in+la;= relati0es of the king and thus not ,otential ri0als for succession, ;ould traditionally tend to *e entrusted *y the king ;ith ,age1.#! Page .# i),ortant regions to rule and i),ortant ad)inistrati0e functions. This grou, had thus *een gi0en *y the late Pa)eha)eha the choicest ,ro,erties in the kingdo) and had also *een entrusted *y hi) to ser0e as his liaison to the Euro,eans. By a co),le( logic that cannot *e re0ie;ed here, this grou, stood to gain in *oth ;ealth and status *y the a*olition of the ta*oos. 9n the conte(t of SahlinsEs argu)ent, Paahu)anuEs gender is not ,articularly rele0antC she is si),ly the s,okes,erson for her kin grou, ;ithin the councils of the king. 2t the sa)e ti)e, Sahlins introduces for the first ti)e significant infor)ation on the role of co))oner ;o)en in these e0ents, sho;ing that they *egan *reaking the eating )apus :and doing a lot of other things= ;ith English sailors fro) 0irtually the )o)ent Ca,tain Cook arri0ed. 9n this conte(t, Sahlins is Huite e(,licit in seeing the ;o)enEs *eha0ior de0elo,ing intoe0en if it did not *egin asa for) of resistance to their disa*ilities as *oth ;o)en and co))oners :Sahlins .% .: #$ and ,assi)=. 9t is no; ti)e to synthesiIe the 0arious ele)ents of this discussion. 9 a) looking at the 5a;aiian case *ecause it is an e(a),le of a not unco))on for) of gender syste)a )ale do)inant hege)ony ;ith significant areas of fe)ale ,o;er. 2lthough it is clear that these areas of fe)ale ,o;er cannot *e *alanced against hege)onic )ale ,restige so as to classify 5a;aiian society as ?egalitarian,? 9 a) saying that arenas of nonhege)onic ,o;er )ay *e the *ases of historical )o0es in a )ore egalitarian direction. The case of 5a;aii is ,erha,s the )ost dra)atic e(a),le of such a historical transfor)ation in the ethnogra,hic record. The Huestion is, <hat ;ere the forces that led the key actors to act on their contradictions rather than si),ly li0ing the), and ;hat ;ere the forces that *rought a*out the success of that effort@ Once again, 9 think it is critical that one arena of fe)ale ,o;er ;as in ?the ,u*lic do)ain,? that is, in ,ositions fro) ;hich state)ents and ,ractices of social enco),ass)ent, of uni0ersalistic concern, ;ere enacted. The legiti)ate ,resence of fe)ale chiefs in the 5a;aiian ,olitical arena, e0en though not fully sacred in 5a;aiian cultural ter)s, ,laced ;o)en in ,ositions fro) ;hich they attended to the affairs of ?society as a ;hole? :ho;e0er ideological such clai)s a*out the uni0ersalistic concerns of chiefs and ,riests )ight *e=. 2fter all, the fe)ale chiefs ;ere allo;ed to enter the te),les and to ,erfor) the highest sacrifices for the general ;elfare, e0en if they the)sel0es ;ere restricted fro) gaining the fullest *enefits fro) the). ,age1.# Page .#%

But 9 ;ould go *eyond this ,oint, *oth for the 5a;aiian case and for its *roader i),lications. Entry into ?the ,u*lic do)ain,? insofar as that do)ain :or certain restricted areas of it= is culturally defined as ?)ale,? )ay ha0e Huite the re0erse effect on fe)ale actors. 7ather than encouraging the) to ,ush for )ore generaliIed gender eHuality, it )ay encourage the) to actas the )odern charge often has it?like )en.? <hat is interesting a*out the 5a;aiian case is the degree to ;hich the elite ;o)en in0ol0ed in the o0erthro; of the ta*oos see)ed to ha0e sustained *oth a uni0ersalistic and a ,articularistic ,ers,ecti0e, to ha0e identified the)sel0es 'oth ;ith the enco),assing outlook of the )aleGchief and ;ith the enco),assed outlook of the fe)aleGco))oner. 9t ;as their a*ility to *ridge these le0els that see)s to ha0e *een one of the keys to their success. <hile it is difficult to esta*lish this ,oint ;ith great certainty fro) the scanty e0idence a0aila*le, 9 ;ill use the one little te(t at hand to try to sketch its outlines: the s,eech )ade *y Paahu)anu at the feast installing 3iholiho in the chiefshi,. 9f one asks first ;hether Paahu)anu ;as acting ,ri)arily as a re,resentati0e of her kinshi,G,olitical grou, or ?as a ;o)an,? clearly the ans;er is *oth. Thus she *egins *y saying, ?as for )e and )y ,eo,le, ;e intend to *e free fro) the ta*us,? and here the ?;e? )eans herself and her relati0es regardless of gender. 3ater, ho;e0er, she says, EE<e intend to eat ,ork and *ananas and coconuts,? and here the ?;e? can only )ean herself and other ;o)en, since only ;o)en ;ere de*arred fro) eating those foods ,re0iously. 2 si)ilar ,oint can *e )ade for the Huestion of ;hether Paahu)anu and the other chiefly ;o)en in0ol0ed ;ere si),ly re,resenting an elite ,ers,ecti0e or ;hether they ;ere re,resenting ,eo,le in general, regardless of rank. 2gainalthough the te(t is so)e;hat less clear herethe ans;er see)s to *e *oth. That is, although there is a s,ecification of ?)e and )y ,eo,le? in the early ,art of the s,eech, the general thrust of the te(t see)s directed at a )ore inclusi0e audience, ;ithout regard to rank. She )akes a 0ariety of none(clusi0e generaliIations: that ?those ;ho ;ish to follo; the old ta*us )ight do so?C that ?the hus*andEs food and the ;ifeEs food shall *e cooked in the sa)e o0en, and that they shall eat out of the sa)e cala*ash?C and that ;o)enclearly ;o)en of all ranks;ill eat the for)erly ta*ooed foods. The ;ay in ;hich the ta*oo *reaking at the feast ;as orchestrated dis,lays one )ore as,ect of the i),ulse to;ard *ridging on the ,art of Paahu)anu and her cocons,irators. The ;o)enEs ,lan in0ol0ed the successor to the high chiefshi, and other high+ranking )en getting u, fro) their ,laces ,age1.#% Page .!0 and going to eat ;ith the ;o)en, rather than the ;o)en Joining the )en. Se0eral things see) e)*edded in this construction of the e0ent. -irst, ;o)en had already ?in0aded? a 0ariety of ?)ale? do)ains, *oth legiti)ately :in the succession of fe)ale chiefs= and illegiti)ately :in all the interdining ;ith British sailors and the eating of ta*ooed foods that had already gone on=. 5a0ing the )en )o0e in the other direction ;ould ha0e *oth *alanced and eHualiIed the roles of the t;o ,arties. Perha,s )ore i),ortant, the )enEs co)ing to eat ;ith the ;o)en ,u*licly signified their consent, their 0oluntary Joining not Just in an act *ut in an idea. 9nsofar as Paahu)anu and the other ,lanners ;ere interested not si),ly in trading ,laces ;ith )en *ut in negating the o,,ositions and eHualiIing the relations that had *een inherently uneHual *efore then, the agree)ent of *oth )en and ;o)en to the changes sought ;as essential. Many things ?caused? the o0erthro; of the )apu syste) in 5a;aii. 9t is not )y intention to su*stitute a gender+re0olution inter,retation for all the others, *ut argua*ly so)ething like that took ,lace in con1unction !ith the )yriad other changes that 5a;aiians ;ere undergoing. Pursuing this inter,retation, 9 asked a*out the conditions that )ight ha0e fa0ored the gender+re0olution di)ension of the changes. One i),ortant factor, 9 think, ;as the ,resence of ;o)en in high office, in ?the ,u*lic do)ain.? This heightened the contradictions in the gender syste), ga0e so)e ;o)en *oth the o,,ortunity and :so)e of= the authority to create the all+i),ortant ,u*lic e0ent, and ga0e the) the clout to ride out the conseHuences after;ards. The fact that co))oner ;o)en ;ere also in0ol0ed in *reaking the ta*oos ;as e(tre)ely i),ortant as ;ell, *ut it is not clear ho; )uch effect this ;ould ha0e had on the for)al )apu syste) ;ithout the intentional ,u*lic actions of the elite ;o)en. 4et, su,,osing that these e0ents took ,lace ,artly *ecause of the ?,u*lic? ,ositioning of certain elite ;o)en, 9 ;ent on to argue that the ;o)enEs efforts ;ere not directed to;ard trading ,laces ;ith )en in a hierarchical syste), *ut to;ard destroying the *ases of hierarchythe )apu syste)and eHualiIing gender relations. Thus 9 tried to sho; that Paahu)anuEs ;ords and deeds )o0ed *ack and forth *et;een enco),assing and enco),assed ,ositions*et;een gender+neutral kinshi, interests and ;o)enEs interests, *et;een rank+neutral ;o)enEs interests and elite ;o)enEs interests, and *et;een an order in ;hich )enEs ,ositions ;ere enco),assing and an egalitarian order in ;hich enco),assing and enco),assed ,ositions ;ere not defined as gender+s,ecific.

,age1.!0 Page .!. <e )ay go on to ask ;hat ha,,ened later. Sahlins ,oints out that Paahu)anu su*seHuently con0erted to Cal0inist Protestantis) and ca)e under the influence of the notoriously strict 7e0erend 5ira) Bingha), ;ho) she called :using the ter) for)erly used for the high ,riests of the 5a;aiian religion= ?)y )ahuna nui.? She founded a large nu)*er of Protestant churches, and Sahlins characteriIes her as ?restoring the ta*us. Only this ti)e the ta*us at issue ;ere the unco),ro)ising restrictions of a fanatical Cal0inis)? :Sahlins .% .: #&=. 4et it ;ould *e Huite distorting to sto, the narrati0e here. 9n the )id+.%!0s Bocelyn 3innekin studied kinshi,, lando;nershi,, and status in a co))unity on Maui. She found that &0 ,ercent of the land ;as o;ned *y ;o)en and that the Protestant churches ;ere 0irtually e),ty of congregants. Clearly the )o0es to;ard eHuality that ;ere )ade in . .% ;ere ne0er totally re0ersed *y Paahu)anuEs con0ersion to Protestantis). 9ndeed, Protestantis) itself )ay ha0e *een under)ined o0er ti)e *y the )ore egalitarian hege)ony that ;as at least ,artly esta*lished in the ,eriod discussed here. Conclusions 9 *egan this ,a,er *y sorting out the clai)s and counterclai)s of the de*ate o0er uni0ersal )ale do)inance. 9n earlier ;ork )y ,osition had *een that )ale do)inance ;as uni0ersal at the le0el of cultural ideologies or cultural ,atterning, that all cultures ,osited, either in ideological assertions or in the ,atterning of ,ractices and institutions, the *elief that )en ;ere su,erior to ;o)enthat )en ha0e greater ,restige, or charis)a, or social 0alue. So)e authors countered that this ;as false si),ly at the le0el of cultural assertions and that there ;ere in fact culturally ?egalitarian? societies in the ;orld. Other authors argued that the clai) ;as false in a different ;ay: that although all cultures )ay sayGi),ly that )en are su,erior, in )any cultures ;o)en ha0e a great deal of ,o;er ;hich actually counter*alances these clai)s of )ale ,restige, thus ,roducing another kind of ?eHuality.? Both o,,osing ,ositions, 9 no; think, ha0e a certain kind of truth 0alue, though not e(actly in the for)s as stated. Critical to the refor)ulation is the necessity of acce,ting the idea that, although a gi0en ideology andGor a gi0en ,attern of ,ractices )ay *e hege)onic, it is ne0er total. Thus, ;ith res,ect to the Huestion of cultural egalitarianis), 9 ;ould no; agree that there are societies, like the 2nda)an 9slanders :and a significant nu)*er of others like the)=, that are hege)onically egalitarianC *ut this does not ,age1.!. Page .!' )ean that there are no di)ensions of ?)ale do)inance? to *e found in such societies or that the ele)ents of )ale do)inance )ust *e effects of e(ogenous forces. 9nstead, 9 tried to descri*e the sense in ;hich such nonhege)onic ele)ents can *e i),ortant yet, as it ;ere, contained, such that )ost areas of ordinary life a,,arently re)ained organiIed along otheregalitarianlines. 2s for the Huestion of ?)ythical )ale do)inance,? although 9 find the ,hrase ,ro*le)atic :it suggests that cultural )yths or ideologies are relati0ely tri0ial=, 9 ;ould nonetheless agree that one )ust al;ays look at 'oth the cultural ideology of ?,restige? and the on+the+ground ,ractices of ?,o;er.? 2t the sa)e ti)e, 9 ha0e argued that one )ust look at the relationshi, *et;een these EEle0els? not so )uch for ,ur,oses of classificationindeed this ;ill ne0er yield satisfactory resultsas for ,ur,oses of e(a)ining the historical dyna)ics of gi0en cases o0er ti)e. $0 The analysis of the 5a;aiian case is )eant to illustrate these ,oints. The case can *e taken as a reasona*le e(a),le of ?)ythical )ale do)inance,? in the sense that the core of )ale su,eriority ;as lodged in the cultural ?)yth? that )en ;ere )apuGsacred and ;o)en ;ere noaG,rofane. 4et the )yth did not e(ist at so)e ,urely cultural or ideological le0el as o,,osed to so)e on+the+ground reality. 7ather it ;as hege)onic, in the sense that a ;hole range of on+the+ground ,ractices ;ere ,redicated on its ,re)isesit ;as ,art of, in 7ay)ond <illia)sEs ter)s, a ?;hole li0ed social ,rocess? :.%!!: .0 %=. 2t the sa)e ti)e, as ;ith instances of )ale do)inance in the 2nda)an case, there ;ere other areas of ,ractice in ;hich the hege)ony did not ,re0ail, in ;hich ;o)en had significant a)ounts of ,o;er, authority, autono)y, and ,restige. Moreo0er, 9 ;as a*le to sho;, as 9 ;as una*le to do ;ith the 2nda)an )aterial, the ;ays in ;hich these arenas of nonhege)onic ,ractice *eca)e the *ases of a significant challenge to the hege)ony, in this case not only to ?)ale do)inance? *ut to the entire chiefly syste).

9 a) inclined to think :or at least to ho,e= that this a,,roach goes a long ;ay to;ard resol0ing the *y no; rather sterile de*ates o0er the uni0ersality of )ale do)inance. 9t allo;s us to *e hard+headed a*out the realities of ,o;er and status at a gi0en ethnogra,hic )o)ent yet at the sa)e ti)e to *e analytically fle(i*le a*out its long+ter) ,ossi*ilities. 5ege)onies are ,o;erful, and our first Jo* is to understand ho; they ;ork. But hege)onies are not eternal. There ;ill al;ays *e :for *oth *etter and ;orse= arenas of ,o;er and authority that lie outside the hege)ony and that )ay ser0e as *oth i)ages of and ,oints of le0erage for alternati0e arrange)ents. ,age1.!' Page .!$

! So, (s -e)ale to Male 2s /ature 9s to Culture@ The ,a,er ?9s -e)ale to Male as /ature 9s to Culture@? ;as )y first ,iece of fe)inist ;riting, and )y second ,rofessional ,u*lication. . 9t ;as ;ritten for the 7osaldo and 3a),here :.%!"= collection, #oman$ Culture and Society: The first three ,a,ers of the 0olu)eMichelle 7osaldoEs, /ancy Chodoro;Es, and )inerecei0ed a lot of attention, in good ,art *ecase they all took the ,osition that ?)ale do)inance? ;as uni0ersal, and then tried to offer so)e kind of :uni0ersal= e(,lanation for that ?fact.? The idea that )ale do)inance ;as uni0ersal ;as :)eant to *e= so)e;hat shocking to )any non+anthro,ologists, ;ho see)ed to think that although our o;n <estern society is ,atriarchal, EEthe anthro,ologists? ;ould ha0e so)e little stock of )ore reassuring cases of )atriarchy and egalitarianis) to *ring forth. The uni0ersal )ale do)inance ,osition also ;ent u, against the intellectual assu),tions of a certain ?Mar(ist? ;ing ;ithin anthro,ology, and thus ,layed into so)e ,ree(istingand already Huite heatedintellectual ,olitics ;ithin the disci,line. ?9s -e)ale to Male . . .? has continued to ha0e a life of its o;n, ;ell into the ,resent. On the one hand )any ,eo,le see)ed to ha0e found it ,ersuasi0e. On the other hand it attractedand still see)s to attracta great deal of 0ery intense criticis). 9 do not kno; ;hether 9 ;ould ;rite the sa)e ,a,er today, *ut 9 assu)e not, *oth *ecause the Huestions ha0e changed :uni0ersals are of less co),elling interest=, and *ecause ;hat ;ould see) satis+ ,age1.!$ Page .!" factory as ans;ers to those Huestions has changed :e(,osing an underlying logic see)s less satisfying than e(,osing the ,olitics of re,resentation in ,lay=. 4et the ,a,erEs role as theoretical lightning rod o0er ti)e re)ains interesting. To *orro; a ,hrase fro) 3K0i+Strauss, the ,a,er has *een good to think :3K0i+Strauss .%#$*=. 2 *rief tour through so)e of the criticis) of this ,a,er ;ill allo; )e then to reflect on so)e as,ects of *oth fe)inis) and anthro,ology as these ha0e :and ha0e not= e0ol0ed o0er the ,ast t;enty or so years. 9s Male 8o)inance 6ni0ersal@ This see)ingly si),le Huestion can *e constructed in a 0ariety of ;ays. 9t )ay take the for) of an e),irical Huestion: let us look around the ;orld and see if all cases ha0e this Huality. This, 9 think, is ho; 7osaldo, Chodoro;, and 9 treated it initially. <e looked around and the ans;er see)ed to *e yes. But the first round of reactions, as noted a*o0e, ca)e fro) ,eo,le co))itted to a certain Mar(ist e0olutionary ,aradig), es,ecially Eleanor 3eacock :.% .= ;orking fro) EngelsEs The +rigin of the "amily$ Pri,ate Property and the State: ' <ithin this ,aradig), early hu)an societies ;ere ,resu)ed to ha0e *een egalitarian, and factors of ineHuality ;ere introduced in conJunction ;ith the e)ergence of ,ri0ate ,ro,erty. Thus if e(a),les of egalitarian cases in the conte),orary ;orld could not *e found, it is not *ecause, in their ,ristine state, they did not e(ist. 9t is *ecause all societies ha0e already *een touched in one ;ay or another *y ca,italis), andGor *ecause anthro,ology has *een theoretically *linded *y ca,italist culture. E0en granting 3eacockEs ,oints a*out *oth ca,italist ,enetration and *ourgeois *linders, there ;ere si),ly too )any cases that could not *e ;orked into 3eacockEs ,icture. /onetheless at another le0el ;hat she and others ;ere saying is that recogniIing egalitarianis) is not as easy as it a,,ears, that it is a )atter of inter,retation. 9 ca)e to agree ;ith this ,osition, and in a recent ,a,er :?Gender 5ege)onies,? this 0olu)e= 9 argued that if one looks at certain cases fro) a certain theoretical angle, they look )ore egalitarian than

not. 9t is not that these societies lack traces of ?)ale do)inance,? *ut the ele)ents of ?)ale do)inance? are frag)entarythey are not ;o0en into a hege)onic order, are not central to so)e larger and )ore coherent discourse of )ale su,eriority, and are not central to so)e larger net;ork of )ale+only or )ale+su,erior ,ractices. My ,oint, in other ;ords, ;as to look again at so)e cultures at the rela+ ,age1.!" Page .!& ti0ely egalitarian end of the s,ectru). 9 ;anted to try to rethink the significance of culturally un)arked ele)ents of ?)ale do)inance? in such cases, to try to get a *etter feel for their relati0e ;eight ;ithin a cultureEs gender ,atterns. 9 felt that )y )istake earlier had *een to ,lay u, such ite)s too )uch, to seiIe u,on any indicator of )ale su,eriority, fe)ale ?,ollution,? etc., and la*el a ;hole culture ?)ale do)inant.? Behind )y rethinking are larger shifts in the conce,tualiIation of ?culture? in the field of anthro,ology as a ;hole, in the direction of seeing ?culturesEE as )ore disJuncti0e, contradictory, and inconsistent that 9 had *een trained to think. $ The case 9 focused on ;as the 2nda)an 9slanders, and 9 concluded that it ;as fair to 0ie; the) as ?egalitarian,? des,ite the ,resence of certain ite)s of s,ecial )ale ,ri0ilege and authority. 9 argued that, since these ite)s ;ere not ;o0en into a hege)onic order, they could not *e treated as ,er0asi0ely redefining the do)inant egalitarianis). 9nterestingly enough, Bane 2tkinson and 2nna Tsing ,u*lished ,a,ers at 0irtually the sa)e ti)e as ?Gender 5ege)onies,? taking u, si)ilar kinds of )aterials in si)ilar kinds of ;ays. 2tkinson e(a)ined gender relations a)ong the <ana of Central Sula;esi, and Tsing considered )aterial fro) the Meratus of Pali)antan, *oth ;ithin 9ndonesia. Their cases are *oth 0ery si)ilar to the 2nda)an e(a),le 9 had discussed. 9n all three cases there is a lack of for)al ideology a*out )ale su,eriorityC in all three cases there are e(tensi0e ,atterns of gender eHui0alence and eHualityC in all three cases there is a tendency not to use gender as a conce,tual or social organiIational ,rinci,le at all." Dery fe; things are li)ited to )en si),ly *ecause they are )en, or to ;o)en si),ly *ecause they are ;o)en. But in *oth cases so)e ,eo,le nonetheless co)e to occu,y, andGor to create for the)sel0es, ,ositions of influence and authority, and those ,eo,le tend ,redo)inantly to *e )en. <e three authors ;ind u, in slightly different ,laces ;ith res,ect to the egalitarianis) Huestion, although this see)s largely a function of the ;ay each author ,osed the ,ro*le) in the first ,lace. My agenda had *een to try to learn to ?see egalitarianis)?to see ho; so)e kinds of de facto )ale do)inance )ight re)ain isolated and, at a gi0en )o)ent in ti)e at least, not *asically challenge a ,re0ailing egalitarianis) in a culture. 2tkinson and Tsing, on the other hand, ;ere interested in seeing ho; )ale do)inance gets ,roduced and re,roduced, largely in an un)arked ;ay, in societies that re,resent the)sel0es as *asically egalitarian. Together, ho;e0er, the ,a,ers con0ey a suggestion that you can call such societies ?gender+egalitarian? if you ;ant, and you ;ould not e(actly *e ;rong, *ut the egalitarianis) is co),le(, inconsistent, andto so)e e(tentfragile. ,age1.!& Page .!# Picturing the E)ergence of Male 8o)inance These ,a,ers also raise another ,oint a*out the )ale do)inance issue, one that ;as not )uch de*ated at the ti)e of the ,u*lication of the 7osaldo and 3a),here 0olu)e, *ut that nonetheless see)s to )e i),ortant: ho; shall ;e i)agine the ,rocess of the e)ergence of )ale do)inance in hu)an societies@ Should ;e think of it as the ,roduct of )ale intentionality, so)e sort of ?;ill to ,o;er? e)erging fro) a ?natural? aggressi0eness@ Or should ;e think of itas 9 did in ?9s -e)ale to Male . . .?as a kind of side effect, an unintended conseHuence of social arrange)ents designed for other ,ur,oses@ The cases Just discussed sho; ho; tricky this Huestion is. On the one hand they can *e read as su,,orting )y original contention. <hether ;e call the) ?egalitarian? or not, these cases sho; that certain kinds of )ale ,ri0ilege e)erge in a de facto ;ay fro) certain relati0ely functionally defined arrange)ents. Men e)erge as ?leaders? and as figures of authority, 0is+N+0is *oth ;o)en and other )en, as a function of engaging in a 0ariety of ,ractices, only so)e of ;hich are ,redicated on ,o;er, including trade, e(change, kinshi, net;orking, ritual ,artici,ation, dis,ute resolution, and so forth. That is, )ale do)inance does not in fact see) to arise fro) so)e aggressi0e ?;ill to ,o;er,? *ut fro) the fact thatas Si)one de Beau0oir first suggested in .%"%)en as it ;ere lucked out: their do)estic res,onsi*ilities can *e constructed as )ore

e,isodic than ;o)enEs, and they are )ore free to tra0el, congregate, hang out, etc., and thus to do the ;ork of EEculture.? 9n a su*seHuent ,a,er, Collier and 7osaldo criticiIed the functionality of this argu)ent :.% .C see also 7osaldo .% 0=. 2lthough they did not argue that )en ?naturally? sought to do)inate ;o)en, they nonetheless e),hasiIed that )ale ,o;er relations, often grounded in 0iolence and threats of 0iolence, had to *e at the heart of understanding gender ineHuality. 9n general 9 shifted o0er to a )ore ,olitical ,ers,ecti0e in )y o;n ;ork as ;ell. 4et 9 retained a certain co))it)ent to the ?functionalist? argu)ent in the conte(t of the natureGculture ,a,er, that is, in the conte(t of the origin+of+)ale+do)inance story that is e)*edded in that ,a,er. <e see)ed to ha0e t;o choices: either to i)agine that )ale do)inance ca)e a*out as, in EngelsEs fa)ous ,hrase, ?the ;orld historical defeat of ;o)en? *y )en :.%!'=, or alternati0ely that it ca)e a*out as the unintended conseHuence of certain functional arrange)ents and other ,aths of least resistance. ,age1.!# Page .!! 9 ,referred the latter inter,retation, in ,art *ecause the ;ill to ,o;er ,osition ,resu)ed, e0en if it did not clearly declare, so)e kind of essentialiIed )ale aggression, and 9 thought essentialiIed characteristics ;ere e(actly ;hat fe)inists :at least so)e of us= ;ere trying to get a;ay fro). 4et it is clear fro) cross+cultural data :Sanday .% ., .%%0= that issues of greater )ale ,hysical siIe and strength, and ,erha,s greater )ale ?aggressi0eness? in so)e for), do )atter in )any cases, although in a ;ide 0ariety of not entirely ,redicta*le ;ays. The issue haunts conte),orary fe)inist ,olitics as ;ell, ;here one finds a fairly dee, s,lit *et;een ;hat 9 think of as the ?*ody fe)inists,? ;ho focus on ra,e and other for)s of 0iolence against ;o)en :e.g., Bro;n)iller .%!&C MacPinnon .% !=, as against the )ore socially and culturally oriented thinkers and acti0ists. 9 ;ould )ore fully ackno;ledge today, then, the challenge to ca,ture *odily issues in our understandings of gender asy))etry, *ut ;ithout essentialiIing either ;o)en or )en. 9s /atureGCulture 6ni0ersal@ The second *undle of argu)ents against ?9s -e)ale to Male as /ature 9s to Culture@? concerned its use of the natureGculture o,,osition to e(,lain :uni0ersal= )ale do)inance. 2gain there ;ere se0eral sets of issues here: 9s the natureGculture o,,osition truly uni0ersal@ 8oes it ha0e )ore or less the sa)e )eanings cross+ culturally@ 8oes an align)ent *et;een gender on the one hand and natureGculture on the other in fact e(,lain uni0ersal )ale do)inance@ 2nd e0en if it does not, is there still so)e significant sense in ;hich fe)ale is to )ale as nature is to culture@ Beneath these 0arious Huestions, there see)s to )e to *e one large Huestion that is of continuing rele0ance today: in this era of ,oststructuralis), does it still )ake sense to talk a*out ?structures,? and if so ;hat do ;e )ean *y the)@ 9n order to get to this Huestion, 9 ;ill first yield and set aside those ,arts of the argu)ent in ?9s -e)ale to Male . . .? that no; see) to )e ,ro*a*ly ;rong, or at the least, not 0ery useful. 2nd then 9 ;ill defend ;hat still see)s to )e right, ,artly in the s,irit of defending )yself, *ut largely9 ho,ein the s,irit of learning so)ething fro) all this. The *iggest su*stanti0e ?error? in the ,a,er )ay *e the )ain ,oint, that is, the ,oint that a linkage *et;een fe)ale and nature, )ale and culture ?e(,lains? )ale do)inance, ;hether uni0ersal or not. 7ather, an e(,lanation of uni0ersal or near+uni0ersal )ale do)inance see)s to )e largely e(,lica*le in ;ays Just discussed: as a result of so)e co),le( interaction of functional arrange)ents, ,o;er dyna)ics, and *odily effects. ,age1.!! Page .! The other *ig ,ro*le) surrounding the use of the natureGculture o,,osition concerns the see)ing attri*ution of uni0ersality to certain )eanings of ?nature? and ?culture.? 5ere 9 think it ;as )ore a )atter of too casual an e(,osition in the ,a,er than gross EEerror,? *ut the ,oint is ;ell taken. Thus, for e(a),le, e0en if the natureGculture relationshi, is a uni0ersal structure across cultures, it is not al;ays constructedas the ,a,er )ay see) to i),lyas a relationshi, of cultural ?do)inance? or e0en ?su,eriority? o0er nature. Moreo0er, ?nature? can *e a category of ,eace and *eauty, or of 0iolence and destruction, or of inertia and unres,onsi0eness, and so on and so forth, and of course ?culture? ;ill ha0e conco)itant 0ariations. Such 0ariation at the le0el of e(,licit cultural )eaningsune),hasiIed in the ,a,eris indeed crucial to 0ariation in the construction of gender and se(uality cross+culturallyC the argu)ent fro) the uni0ersality of the natureGculture o,,osition ;as in no ;ay )eant to suggest a si)ilar uni0ersality at the le0el of ?se(ual

)eanings.? & 2s these ,oints suggest, ho;e0er, there is still so)e sense in ;hich 9 ;ould argue, first, that the natureGculture o,,osition is a ;ides,read :if not uni0ersal= ?structure,? and second, that it is generally :if not uni0ersally= the case that fe)ale is indeed related to )ale as nature is to culture. This needs to *e ela*orated here. Pro*a*ly the )ost consistently articulated charge against ?9s -e)ale to Male . . .? is that an o,,osition *et;een nature and culture is si),ly not a uni0ersal o,,osition, that it therefore could not *e assu)ed to underlie either ?uni0ersal )ale do)inance? ora ,rioriany gi0en ethnogra,hic case. 2s ;ith the first takes on the uni0ersal )ale do)inance Huestion, the Huestion of the uni0ersality of so)e sort of natureGculture o,,osition ;as at first taken to *e an e),irical issue: does the o,,osition a,,ear in all cultures@ to ;hich the contri*utors to 0ature$ Culture and Gender , looking at *oth non+<estern e(a),les and ,re+nineteenth+ century <estern cultural history, ans;ered, ,retty )uch, no :MacCor)ack and Strathern .% 0=. The ,ro*le) here, as a nu)*er of o*ser0ers Huickly ,ointed out, ;as that )any of the contri*utors to the 0ature$ Culture and Gender 0olu)e funda)entally sideste,,ed the notion of ?structure,? ;hich 9 had used in a 3K0i+Straussian :e.g., .%#$a= sense, and ;hich has only a co),le( relationshi, to e),irical cultural ter)inologies and ideologies. That is, natureGculture as used in )y essay :or throughout 3K0i+StraussEs ;ork= is not an e),irical o*Ject that can *e found through ethnogra,hic scrutinyC it is an assu),tion of a relationshi, that underlies a 0ariety of ethnogra,hic ?surfaces.? 2n ,age1.! Page .!% early re0ie; *y Be0erley Bro;n :.% $= took the 0olu)e to task for this confusion, as did )ore recent essays *y Daleri :.%%0=, 5oskins :.%%0=, and PeletI :.%%#=. Si),ly finding an a*sence of ter)inological categories in a ,articular cultural case does not )ean that the structure is not thereC the structure is a ,atterning of relations that )ay e(ist ;ithout cultural la*eling. # But ;hat shall ;e )ean *y structure@ There ha0e *een )any definitions of the ter), and this is not the ,lace to re0ie; the state of structural theory in general. Part of the ,ro*le), 9 think, ;as 3K0i+StraussEs tendency to ,icture structures as *inary o,,ositions,! and also in factdes,ite disclai)ersto ,icture the) as sets of ter)s, ;ords. My o;n ;ay of thinking a*out structures, ho;e0er, is to think of the) as e(istential &uestions, e0en riddles, ;hich hu)anity e0ery;here )ust face. Of these, one of the )ost central is ho; to think a*out the confrontation *et;een hu)anity and nature, that is, *et;een hu)anity and ?;hat ha,,ens ;ithout the agency, or ;ithout the 0oluntary and intentional agency, of )an? :Mill . !", Huoted in Daleri .%%0: '##=, or *et;een hu)anity and, in Marilyn StrathernEs ter)s, those ,rocesses that ,roceed autono)ously in the ;orld, and ?that li)it the ,ossi*le? of hu)an action :Huoted in Daleri .%%0: '##=. /atureGculture in one or another s,ecifically <estern senseas a ?struggle? in ;hich ?)an? tries to ?do)inate? nature, as a confrontation ;ith a syste) that o*eys ?natural la;s,? and so forthis certainly not uni0ersal. E0en the idea that ?natureEE and ?culture? are t;o relati0ely distinct kinds of o*Jects is ,ro*a*ly not uni0ersal. But the pro'lem of the relationship *et;een ;hat hu)anity can do, and that ;hich sets li)its u,on those ,ossi*ilities, )ust *e a uni0ersal ,ro*le)to ;hich of course the solutions ;ill 0ary enor)ously, *oth cross+culturally and historically. /o; add gender into the eHuation. Gender difference, along ;ith natureGculture, is a ,o;erful Huestion. 2nd the gender relationshi, is al;ays at least in ,art situated on one natureGculture *orderthe *ody. <hat 9 think tends to ha,,en in )ost if not all cultures is that the t;o o,,ositions easily )o0e into a relationshi, of )utual )eta,horiIation: gender *eco)es a ,o;erful language for talking a*out the great e(istential Huestions of nature and culture, ;hile a language of nature and culture, ;hen and if it is articulated, can *eco)e a ,o;erful language for talking a*out gender, se(uality, and re,roduction, not to )ention ,o;er and hel,lessness, acti0ity and ,assi0ity, and so forth. The ,articular articulations of the relationshi, ;ill 0ary greatly across cultures, ;ith sur,rising and une(,ected shifts and ,age1.!% Page . 0 align)ents. But the chances that the t;o sets of issues ;ill *e interconnected in s,ecific cultural and historical conte(ts still see) to )e fairly high.

The chances see) to )e high, further, although less so ,erha,s than the chance of sheer interconnection, that the relationshi, *et;een the ter)s ;ill *e asy))etrical, and that *oth ;o)en and nature ;ill *e in so)e sense the )ore ,ro*le)atic categories. The logic that de Beau0oir first ,ut her finger onthat )en get to *e in the *usiness of trying to transcend s,ecies+*eing, ;hile ;o)en, seen as )ired in s,ecies+*eing, tend to drag )en do;nstill see)s to )e enor)ously ;ides,read, and hardly an in0ention of ?<estern culture.? -ro) a range of tri*al societies ;ith )ale+only rituals and ,ractices that ;ould *e s,oiled *y ;o)enEs gaIe, to so+called high religions, *oth <estern and non+<estern, that e(clude ;o)en fro) their higher ,ractices, the *asic logic sho;s u,. 2nd it is a logic grounded in a ,articular construction of the relationshi, *et;een nature and culture, the idea that culture )ust at least in ,art *e a*out the transcendence of nature. 9 think the final Huestion for this ,a,er is ,ro*a*ly, ?so ;hat@? <hile 9 do think there are such things as structures in the sense Just discussed, large e(istential Huestions that all hu)an *eings e0ery;here )ust co,e ;ith, 9 also think that the lin)age *et;een such structures and any set of social categorieslike fe)aleG)aleis a culturally and ,olitically constructed ,heno)enon. -ro) early on after the ,u*lication of ?9s -e)ale to Male . . . ,? )y interests lay )uch )ore in understanding the ,olitics of the construction of such linkages, than in the static ,arallelis) of the categories. 9n conclusion, then, 9 )ust say first that it is 0ery odd to ha0e ;ritten ;hat has e0idently *eco)e a ?classic?C 9 certainly did not set out to ;rite one in ad0ance. 9 and all the other authors in the t;o founding 0olu)es of fe)inist anthro,ology#oman$ Culture and Society :7osaldo and 3a),here .%!"= and To!ard an Anthropology of #omen :7eiter .%!&=*enefited enor)ously fro) the fact that the fe)inist )o0e)ent as a ,olitical )o0e)ent had created a 0irtually ready+)ade audience for the *ooks. 2nd the argu)ent in ?9s -e)ale to Male. . . . ,? ;ritten fro) the ,osition of a young, ;hite, )iddle+class fe)ale acade)ic, trying to figure out ho; to li0e a life as an e)*odied ;o)an ;hile launching a career as a dise)*odied )ind, e0idently touched so)ething in )any others si)ilarly ,ositioned in that era. ,age1. 0 Page . .

Borderland Politics and Erotics: Gender and Se(uality in 5i)alayan Mountaineering 9ntroduction The i)age of the ?*orderland? is a ,o;erful ,resence in conte),orary theory. Borderland thinking initially took sha,e ;ithin the theoriIing of ethnic and )inority studies, and e),hasiIed the construction of co),le(, hy*ridiIed identities for those ;ho )ust li0e ;ithin, yet are e(cluded fro), the do)inant cultural order :2nIaldua .% !C Behar .%%$=. 9n anthro,ology the idea of the *orderland has *een used ,articularly to rethink the o*Ject of anthro,ological studyto get a;ay fro) the study of su,,osedly *ounded and ti)eless ?cultures,? and to attend instead to sites of social friction and cultural encounter ;here culture is no longer an inert o*Ject *ut so)ething constantly under challenge and construction :7. 7osaldo .% %C Gu,ta and -erguson .%%'C 8a0is .%%"C -oley .%%&=. Borderland ;ork e),hasiIes the )o0e)ents of, and the encounters *et;een, ,eo,le, i)ages, and so forth across cultural and ,olitical s,aces :e.g., 2,,adurai .%%.C Cha)*ers .%%0C Clifford .%%'C 5annerI .%%'C Pratt .%%'=. <hile al;ays ,otentially transnational, or e0en glo*al, in sco,e, it isideallyat the sa)e ti)e local and ethnogra,hic :e.g., 7ouse .%%.C Pearney .%%.C Gu,ta and -erguson .%%'=, looking at real ,laces and asking ;hat kinds of things ha,,en on the ground ;hen ,eo,le ;ho started ,age1. . Page . ' fro) 0ery different ,laces :literally or )eta,horically or *oth= ;ind u, occu,ying the sa)e s,ace. . 9n a *orderlands ,ers,ecti0e the terrain of cultural encounters, of *order crossings, is ne0er neutral and ne0er le0el. 9t is ne0er neutral *ecause *orderlands are s,aces that so)e ,eo,le call ?ho)e? and define those entering it as Other, alien. ?5o)e? )ay or )ay not *e an ad0antage: the Others ;ho are entering )ay co)e as ,oor and terrified refugees or as ,o;erful conHuerors, *ut in any e0ent the s,ace fro) the outset

has different relationshi,s to the different ,arties in0ol0ed. Si)ilarly, the s,ace of *order crossings is ne0er ?le0el,? that is, it is al)ost al;ays a s,ace of uneHual ,o;er. The ,eo,le ;ho occu,y or enter this s,ace ha0e their o;n histories, ;hich ,roduce these ineHualities, and ;hich set the cultural and ,olitical ter)s ;ithin ;hich the encounters ;ill unfold. 9n addition, fe)inist theoriIing in0ites us to see encounters and transactions in the *orderlands as al;ays gendered and eroticiIed, *oth in ,ractice and in the i)agination. 5ere the ;ork of 2nn Stoler :e.g., .%%'= on the erotics of the colonial encounter is ,ath*reaking in o,ening u, the terrain. Stoler sho;s us that <estern categories of the Other, es,ecially racial categories, e)erge not only fro) an econo)y and a ,olitics of culture, *ut fro) an erotics of culture, in ;hich the ,arties in the *orderlands :in this case i),erial colonies= )eet as gendered *eings ;ith gendered fantasies, an(ieties, and desires :see also Bloo) .%%$C /andy .% $C 7afael n.d.=. -inally, ;hate0er else *orderlands ,olitics are a*outgender, race, classC )aterial resources and ,olitical ,o;erthey are al;ays also a*out ?culture.? The ter) ?culture? is currently under e(traordinary attack. Peo,le are ;riting ?against culture? :2*u+3ughod .%%'=, ?*eyond EcultureE? :Gu,ta and -erguson .%%'=, and considering ;hether ;e should EEforget culture? :Bright)an .%%&=. 2n e(traordinary te(tual struggle has *een taking ,lace *et;een Marshall Sahlins and Gananath O*eyeskere o0er SahlinsEs use of the idea of ?culture? in the conte(t of inter,reting 5a;aiian history :Sahlins .% ., .%%&C O*eyesekere .%%'=. 4et for all the ,ro*le)s ;ith the use of the culture conce,tthe tendency to use it in such a ;ay as to efface internal ,oliticsGdifferences, and to )ake others radically Otherit does )ore 0iolence to deny its ,resence and force in the social ,rocess than to kee, it in the ,icture. -or ?culture? in the *orderlands is *oth the grounds of negotiation and its o*Ject: it sets the ter)s of the encounters, *ut it is also ;hat is at stake. <hat is needed, then, is a sense of culture ;ithout Otherness. The idea ,age1. ' Page . $ that ,eo,le ha0e their o;n historically sedi)ented fra)es of reference, and co)e at e0ents ;ith their o;n ;ays of thinking and feeling, )eans that ,eo,le across cultures are different, *ut not necessarily radically Other. 2 ,erce,tion, a construction, of radical Otherness is a ,ossi*le outco)e of intercultural encounters, *ut it is not intrinsic to the idea that other ,eo,le are differentco)e fro) different histories and ,ractices and ;ays of *eing in the ;orld. The attri*utions and clai)s of difference :ho; )uch, ;hat kind, ho; significant= is one of the things u, for gra*s in the *orderlands, *ut difference and identity :or identities= are not the only cultural things under negotiation. 7ather, ;hole issues of )eaning and style, for)s of ,ractice and for)s of relationshi,, are in ,lay and in Huestion. 9n the ,resent ,a,er, ;hich is ,art of a larger ,roJect :Ortner n.d. *=, ;e enter one strange *orderlandthe s,ace of high altitude )ountaineering in the 5i)alayas, the highest )ountains of the ;orld. Since a*out the turn of the t;entieth century, <estern )ountaineers :and later )ountaineers fro) all ,arts of the glo*e= ha0e co)e to try to cli)* these )ountains. 5ere they ha0e encountered the Sher,as, an ethnic grou, of Ti*etan origin ;hose ho)e area is a region of /e,al close to Mount E0erest and so)e of the other highest 5i)alayan ,eaks. The Sher,as ha0e done ,ortering and other for)s of cli)*ing su,,ort for these e(,editions for nearly a century no;. Their role *egan as a 0ery su*ordinate one, in ;hich they ;ere 0ie;ed as little )ore than load+*earing ?coolies,? and in turn called the )ountaineers ?sahi*? :*oss, )aster=. But the ;ork often in0ol0es a 0ery close association o0er se0eral )onthsE ti)e, sharing food, tents, successes, failures, danger and death ;ith the )ountaineers, and this has led to ,ersonal closeness a)ong so)e sahi*s ' and Sher,as, a tendency to;ard eHualiIation of the sahi*GSher,a relationshi,and a good deal of re,resentation of and ,roJection onto Sher,as *y sahi*s that at the sa)e ti)e re0eals a lot a*out the sahi*s the)sel0es.$ 9n the larger ,roJect 9 a) concerned ;ith a 0ariety of di)ensions of e(,edition ,olitics and cultureauthority, resistance, )oney, death. But in one other ,a,er?8iscourses of Masculinity,? ;hich looks at the changing definitions of )anhood a)ong *oth the <esterners and the Sher,as :Ortner n.d. a=and this one, ;hich looks at the entry of ;o)en, and of fe)inist ideology, into the )ountaineering arena since the .%!0s9 focus on the gendered and erotic di)ensions of relations in this *orderland. 9 atte),t to lay *are ;hat 9 ;ill call, *orro;ing a ,hrase fro) an earlier fe)inist )anifesto :-irestone .%!0=, a ?dialectic of se(.? ,age1. $

Page . " Central to this discussion is the idea that ,eo,le co)e to encounters like this not only ;ith their o;n ,rior and ongoing cultures and histories, *ut ;ith their o;n ,rior and ongoing ,olitics :Ortner .%%&a=. Encounters *et;een <estern ;o)en and Sher,a )en are sha,ed not only *y <estern and Sher,a gender categories :although those are 0ery i),ortant=, *ut *y <estern and Sher,a gender politics, that is, ,olitics *et;een <estern ;o)en and )en, and *et;een Sher,a ;o)en and )en. 9t is these distinct ,olitics as ;ell as distinct ?cultures? that co)e into ,lay in the interactions *et;een <esterners and Sher,as, and that gi0e the ;hole ,rocess an e(traordinary dyna)is) and co),le(ity. 9t is this ?,olitics of ,olitics? ;ith res,ect to gender and se(ual relations that 9 a) calling a dialectic of se(. Gender 7adicalis) in 5i)alayan Mountaineering *efore the .%!0s 5i)alayan )ountaineering until the .%!0s ;as an o0er;hel)ingly )ale s,ort. 9t ;as engaged in al)ost :*ut not Huite= e(clusi0ely *y )en, *oth Sher,a and ?first ;orld?C it *uilt on )ale styles of interaction deri0ed fro) other all+)ale institutions, es,ecially the ar)yC and ;hile it ;as a*out )any thingsnature and nation, )ateriality and s,irituality, the )oral Huality of the inner self and the )eaning of lifeit ;as al;ays in ,art a*out )asculinity and )anhood. Gi0en this, any ;o)an ;ho engaged in :5i)alayan= )ountaineering ;as *y definition in so)e sense ;hat 9 ;ill call a ?gender radical.? To say that so)eone is a gender radical is to say that they are Huestioning or *reaking gender rules, although there are )any ;ays of doing this, and )any ideological fra)e;orks ;ithin ;hich it )ay *e done. The fe)inist )o0e)ent that took sha,e ,ri)arily in Euro,e and the 6nited States in the .%!0s is only one s,ecific historical e(a),le of gender radicialis), and it itself enco),asses a 0ariety of styles and ,ositions. 2t the sa)e ti)e it does notas )any )inority and Third <orld fe)inists ha0e argued :see Collins .%%0C Mohanty .%%.a, *=in fact enco),ass all for)s of gender radicalis) e0en in the <est, no less in other ,arts of the glo*e. 5i)alayan )ountaineering can *e *roken into ,eriodsfor ,resent ,ur,oses, ,re+<orld <ar 99, the ,ost+;ar ,eriod *et;een the .%&0s and e)ergence of the fe)inist )o0e)ent in the .%!0s, and the ,eriod fro) the .%!0s to the ,resent. 9n the ,re+;ar ,eriod, there are scattered e(a),les of indi0idual ;o)en, *oth ?)e)sahi*? and Sher,a, cli)*ing in the 5i)alayas. Most of the <estern ;o)en acti0e in this ,eriod ;ere e(,lorers like -anny Bullock <ork)an and, in a )ore s,iritual )ode, 2le(andra 8a0id+ ,age1. " Page . & /eel :Blu) .% 0: cha,. .=. But in .%$" a cli)*er na)ed 5ettie 8yhrenfurth reached the to, of Uueen Mary Peak :'", $!0E= in the Parakora) 5i)alaya as ,art of an e(,edition e(,loring and )a,,ing the Baltoro Glacier region :Blu) .% 0: #=. " 9t is )ore difficult to find traces in the ,re+;ar ,eriod of Sher,a ;o)en cli)*ing :*eyond ?local ,ortering,? i.e., carrying loads to the *ase of the )ountain=. But ;e note, for e(a),le, a figure called ?Eski)o /ell? ;ho e0idently cli)*ed at least ,art ;ay u, E0erest: 2nd there ;as Eski)o /ell. 9 had heard tre)endous stories of her efforts as a ,orter to E0erest in .%$$, ;hen she had *een the dri0ing force a)ong the Sher,as and her caustic tongue had s,urred the others on to carry to e0en greater heights. :Bourdillon .%&#: '0$=& The ,eriod *et;een the .%&0s and the .%!0s sa; an intensification of 5i)alayan )ountaineering in general, and a slightly )ore 0isi*le ,resence of ;o)en. 2)ong the )e)sahi*s ;e see, for e(a),le, ?the first e(,edition co),osed entirely of ;o)en e0er to e(,lore and cli)* in the high 5i)alaya? in .%&& :Backson and Stark .%&#=, the <o)enEs 9nternational E(,edition to Cho Oyu led *y the -rench cli)*er Claude Pogan in .%&% :Birkett and Peascod .% %C see also 3a)*ert and Pogan .%&#=, and the grou, of ;o)en led *y Bose,hine Scarr ;ho cli)*ed in the Pulu area in .%#. :Scarr .%##=. 2gain it is harder to find traces of Sher,a ;o)en cli)*ing, *ut ;e note, for e(a),le, t;o daughters and a niece of TenIing /orgay :;ho had reached the su))it of E0erest in .%&$=, cli)*ing ;ith Claude Pogan on Cho Oyu in .%&% :Birkett and Peascod .% %: '..=.# <ith such s)all nu)*ers and generally scant infor)ation it is difficult to generaliIe a*out the social ,ositioning of these ;o)en. 9n general, the )e)sahi*s ;ho cli)*ed in the 5i)alayas u, to the .%!0s ;ere ;estern Euro,ean and 2)erican,! allas far as one can see in the ,u*lished record;hite, and )ostlyas far as one can see*roadly )iddle class. Most see) to ha0e had at least so)e higher educationC )ost*ut not alle(,ressed so)e for) of a;areness or consciousness a*out *reaking *arriers for ;o)en in this Huintessentially )anEs ;orld. So)e ;ere )arried andGor in long+ter) relationshi,s ;ith )enC so)e of these

had childrenC and so)e ;ere un)arried. 2s a generaliIation it is ,ro*a*ly safe to say that these ;o)en ;ere ,art of the )ore li*eral :so)eti)es 0erging on *ohe)ian% or counter+cultural= edge of the )iddle classes, a characteriIation that ;ould hold true for the )ost ,art for the )en as ;ell. 2s for Sher,a ;o)en, there is e0en less infor)ation a0aila*le. They too ,age1. & Page . # ,ro*a*ly ca)e fro) the )iddling le0els of Sher,a societydaughters of ?*ig ,eo,le? ;ho ;ere gender radicals ;ould ha0e *een, at least in the ,re+.%!0s era, )ore likely to enter a nunnery than to Join a )ountaineering e(,edition, ;hile daughters of ?s)all ,eo,le? ;ould ha0e *een unlikely to ha0e the necessary contacts or confidence to achie0e any ,osition higher than local ,orter. .0 Concerning )arital status, ;e kno; nothing a*out ?Eski)o /ell,? *ut the ,resence of the daughter and nieces of TenIing /orgay on the .%&% Cho Oyu e(,edition signals a ,attern that has held true until 0ery recently: Sher,a ;o)en ha0e of necessity cli)*ed under the s,onsorshi, of, or in ,artnershi, ;ith, a related )ale, ;hether kins)an or hus*and. Sardarsthe Sher,a fore)en of e(,editions;ere, and still are, generally un;illing to take an unrelated ;o)an on a cli)*, and for ;o)en ;ho ;anted to cli)*, a relati0e or hus*and ;ho ;as a sardar ;as generally the only ;ay in. More on this as ;e enter )ore dee,ly into the culture and ,olitics of Sher,a gender relations. <e *egin ;ith the )en. Se( and Se(is) On a scale of gender ineHuality across ;orld cultures, the Sher,as are ,retty good. ?Pretty good? is not e(actly a scientific category, *ut then it is notoriously difficult to assign a score of degree of gender eHuality or ineHuality in a ,articular society. The Sher,as are not ?egalitarian,? and the culture is in )any ;ays *iased in fa0or of )ale ,ri0ilege of 0arious kinds :Ortner .% $, this 0olu)e=. 4et 9 ;ould not descri*e Sher,a )ale consciousness as organiIed in ter)s of ?)acho? or ?se(istEE ,rinci,les. 2lthough 9 de0elo, these ,oints )ore fully else;here :Ortner n.d. a=, let )e sketch the argu)ent *riefly here. 2t one le0el Sher,a se(ual culture is Huite *a;dy. 6n)arried )en and ;o)en ;ho are ,otential se(G)arriage ,artners interact ;ith one another in e(,licitly funnyGJokyGse(ual ;ays. Grou,s of young )en and ;o)en ;ho )eet on the trails )ay shout Huite o*scene things to one another, and they )ay e(change 0erses of )ade+u, o*scene songs... 2t ;eddings and funerals ;hen large nu)*ers of eligi*le young )en and ;o)en get together, there is al;ays a lot of se(ual Joking, teasing, chasing, laughing, tickling, etc., often cul)inating in se(ual trysts later that night. On the other hand, se( is hea0ily de0alued *y Buddhist ideology. <hile the Sher,as ;ere al;ays Buddhists, the )ore ascetic style of Buddhis) ;as only esta*lished a)ong the) starting in the early t;entieth century ;ith the foundings of the first Buddhist )onasteries in their )idst :Ortner ,age1. # Page . ! .% %=. <ith the continuing e(,ansion of )onasticis) o0er the ;hole of the t;entieth century, Sher,a society ;as su*Jected to hea0y and continuing doses of the )ore ascetic, anti+)aterialist, anti+se(ual Buddhist ideology. 2 good deal of the ,ost+)onastic refor)s focused on cleaning u, the *a;dier as,ects of Sher,a ,o,ular religion and e0eryday life :Ortner n.d. *=. By the ti)e 7o*ert Paul and 9 did field;ork a)ong the Sher,as in the )id .%#0s, the )ore asceticG)onastic Buddhist 0alues had clearly taken hold at least to so)e degree. The *a;dy side did not *y any )eans disa,,ear. But as Paul discusses in his dissertation, ;hile se( ;as certainly considered ,leasura*le, it also e(isted under a ,all of negati0e Buddhist ideas a*out sin, ,ollution, and the ;orldly drudgery it ,roduces in the for) of children ;ho )ust *e su,,orted *y hard ;ork :.%!0: ..0.!C note also co))ents *y the )onk 8orJe in Ortner .%!!=. Possi*ly *ecause of these Buddhist constraints, as ;ell as *ecause of funda)entally not+unres,ectful 0ie;s a*out ;o)en :Ortner .% $, this 0olu)e=, Sher,a )ale se(uality did not traditionally take a ,redatory, conHuest+style for) 0is+N+0is ;o)en. Men did not traditionally *oastas far as 9 kno;a*out se(ual conHuests, and did not seek to rack u, high se(ual scores. Occasionally one ca)e across a 8on Buan figure in the 0illages ;ho had *een )arried si( or se0en ti)es, *ut this ;as al;ays re)arked u,on negati0ely. 2s Paul co))ented, ?There is not, as in so )any other . . . cultures, a su*+culture of machismo, a scale *y ;hich . . .

)en co),ete or stri0e to achie0e in the field of seduction . . .? :.%!0: ...=. 9n addition it ;as )y i),ression as a fe)ale researcher that Sher,a )ale se(uality ;as al;ays li)ited *y Huestions of status and ,o;er. That is, 9 felt co),letely se(ually safe ;hile 9 ;as in the field, in large ,art *ecause of the general a*sence of ,redatoriness Just sketched, *ut alsono dou*t*ecause 9 ;as a ?)e)sahi*,? a high+status <estern ;o)an, and in a *road sensegi0en )y research ,er)its and so forthunder the ,rotection of the /e,al state as ;ell. .' O0er the course of the t;entieth century, that is, o0er *asically the sa)e ,eriod as the esta*lish)ent and s,read of high Buddhist )onasticis), Sher,a )enEs e(,erience on )ountaineering e(,editions ;as si)ilarly contradictory. 9n so)e res,ects, e(,editions i),osed a great deal of *odily disci,line on the Sher,asno drinking, no fighting, no se(. :One of )y infor)ants descri*ed e(,editions as *eing ?like )onasteries.?= On the other hand, fro) early on in e(,edition history, and ,articularly after <orld <ar 99, sahi*s and Sher,as de0elo,ed a ,attern of *a;dy Joking on e(,editions ,age1. ! Page . :Ortner n.d. a=. 2s far as 9 can tell, the ,attern actually originated ;ith the Sher,as, ;ho see)ed to ha0e used it to generate greater eHuality ;ith the sahi*s. 9t is )y i),ression, then, that for young Sher,a )en in0ol0ed in e(,edition ;ork a certain ;estern+style )achis)o)ore ,redatory, )ore disres,ectful of ;o)en*egan to *eco)e a )ore ,ossi*le for) of )asculinity. <hile )uch of the e0idence is a)*iguous and hard to read, it see)s that ?*a;dy? relations *et;een Sher,a )en and ;o)en, ;hich ;ere ,re0iously fairly )utual, )ay ha0e *egun to ti, in a )ore disres,ectful direction on the ,art of at least so)e Sher,a )en. Thus for e(a),le the British )ountaineer Chris Bonington, ;ho is generally astute in his o*ser0ations of Sher,as on e(,editions, descri*ed a situation in ;hich the Sher,as ;ere contri*uting )oney to a ,ost+e(,edition ,arty fund, *ased on the nu)*ers of :Sher,a= ;o)en they had sle,t ;ith :or *oasted of slee,ing ;ith= along the ;ay :Bonington .%!#: &=. 9 ;as also told that the Journalist To) 3aird has ;ritten :un,u*lished= a*out a recent gang ra,e of a Sher,a ;o)an *y so)e Sher,a )en. .$ This, if true, is Huite shocking, since ra,e in Sher,a society has *een 0irtually unkno;n. These frag)ents concerning shifts in Sher,a )ale attitudes to;ard Sher,a ;o)en are, as 9 said, Huite a)*iguous. On the other hand, the e0idence is rather stronger for a shift in the direction of a )ore <estern+style )achis)o ;ith res,ect to ?)e)sahi*s.? The general a*sence of disres,ect, as ;ell as the *oundaries of status, ;ere a,,arently so)e;hat ;eakened. 9n ,art this ;as the result of the kinds of )ale+)ale *a;dy incite)ent ,racticed *et;een sahi*s and Sher,as. But in ,art it ;as the result of another di)ension of ?*odily ,olitics? that )ust *e discussed here. Se( ;ith Me)sahi*s 2)ong other things the .%#0s counterculture in the 6nited States and Euro,e ,roduced the se(ual li*eration )o0e)ent. The se(ual li*eration )o0e)ent in turn ;ent in se0eral different directions, *ut one of the) ;as si),ly a general loosening of rules and inhi*itions a*out se(: se( outside of )arriage *eca)e )orally acce,ta*le, *asically good for you, and )eant to *e fun for all concerned. To a great e(tent, the dou*le standard in ;hich it ;as acce,ta*le for )en to *oth seek and enJoy se(, ;hile ;o)en should not *e o*ser0ed to *e doing )uch of either, ;as finally destroyed, or at the 0ery least de)oted fro) do)inant ideological status. ,age1. Page . % Se(ual li*eration intersected ;ith, *ut ;as not iso)or,hic ;ith, the ;o)enEs li*eration )o0e)ent. -e)inists in general ;ere se(ual li*erationists, *ut se(ual li*erationists ;ere not necessarily fe)inists, and for so)e ;o)en in0iting and enJoying se( ;as si),ly ,art of a )ore traditional gender ,ositioninggaining the attention of )en and ,ro0ing oneEs ,hysical attracti0eness. /e,al ;as actually one of the earliest sites of the counterculture in the )id+.%#0s, in ,art *ecause of the countercultural fascination ;ith ?the East? and in ,art *ecause )ariJuana and hashish ;ere legal there until recently. ." 2nd a,,arently dating fro) that ,eriod, ;estern ;o)en co)ing to /e,al on treks as ;ell as cli)*s,ro*a*ly )ore the for)er;ere in0iting and engaging in se( ;ith Sher,a )en. 9t is not kno;n for a

fact, of course, ;ho ;as soliciting ;ho), *ut the general 0ie; a)ong *oth ;estern o*ser0ers and Sher,as is that it ;as ,ri)arily the )e)sahi*sat least in the earlier years;ho initiated the encounters. <hile one )ay *e sus,icious of this 0ie; as another for) of *la)ing ;o)en, in fact it )akes sense on se0eral grounds: *ecause of the Sher,asE relati0ely unaggressi0e and un,redatory attitude to;ard se(C *ecause of the fact that )e)sahi*s ha0e generally not *een thought *y the) to *e ,articularly attracti0eC *ecause of the fact that )e)sahi*s ;ere definitionally :at least in the early years= high status and the Sher,as ;ere Huite careful a*out transgressions of status and ,o;erC and so forth. 9n any e0ent, ;hile for o*0ious reasons it is hard to get data on these sorts of ,heno)ena, the fact of se( *et;een Sher,as and )e)sahi*s on )any treks and on so)e cli)*ing e(,editions is ;idely kno;n in the streets of Path)andu :see also 2da)s .%%#: &#ff=. Ba)es -isher, dra;ing in ,art on 0on -Srer+5ai)endorf :.% "=, re,orts ?forty or so cases of )arriage *et;een <esterners and Sher,as, al)ost all relati0ely uneducated 0illagers fro) Solu or Phu)*u.& . . . and . . . )any )ore infor)al liaisons, ,ri)arily *et;een trekking sardars and their <estern fe)ale clientele? :.%%0: .'!=. 9n addition, *oth Sher,as and <estern o*ser0ers often discuss the se(ual goings+on fro) s,ecific e(,editions. <hat follo;s )ust of course *e classified as gossi,C 9 re,ort these things not as true stories :though they )ay indeed *e true= *ut as e(a),les of ;hat o*ser0ers *elie0e is going on. <ith res,ect to a certain <o)enEs E(,edition, for e(a),le, it ;as said that one of the ;o)en ;anted one of the Sher,as to go ho)e ;ith her, *ut he didnEt go. 9n addition it ;as said that the Sher,a leader of the e(,edition had a son ,age1. % Page .%0 *y one of the ;o)en, no; li0ing in 2)erica. The <esterner relaying these stories to )e ;as of the o,inion that it ;as the ;o)en ;ho )ade the ad0ances, the Sher,as *eing ?too shy.? /e(t, one of the Sher,a ;o)en cli)*ers 9 inter0ie;ed told )e the story of another <o)enEs E(,edition, fro) a different country: There ;as a ,ro*le) ;hen LMEsM son got together :had se(= ;ith the leader. 2fter the e(,edition succeeded, there ;as a *ig ,arty and the Sher,as got drunk. The father Lgot 0ery angry andM *roke all the tent ,oles. 5e said he ;ould ,ut it in the ,a,ers that Lcli)*ers of this nationalityM should ne0er co)e to /e,al again. The fatherEs reaction illustrates that the issue of young Sher,a )enEs se(ual connections ;ith )e)sahi*s is not un,ro*le)atic for other Sher,as. Sher,as in fact e(hi*it a range of attitudes a*out this. -or the )ost ,art there is a relati0ely )ild and *enign Jokiness a*out the ;hole thing. -or e(a),le, so)e Sher,as ;ere Huoted as Joking ;ith a ;riter a*out the 2nna,urna <o)enEs E(,edition of .%! : There is one other ;ay to go to foreign countries. There ;as one 2)erican <o)enEs E(,edition this year and so)e Sher,as they )arry Lactually, one )arried and one had a se(ual relationshi,M ;ith so)e of those ;o)en. /o; Sher,as say, ?-or <o)enEs E(,edition you not ha0e to ,ay, 9 ;ork for free.? <e *oth laughed. :3aird .% .: .'"= But at the less *enign end of the s,ectru) ;e hear a kind of conte),t for )e)sahi*s, cou,led ;ith a relati0ely calculating attitude a*out Sher,a+)e)sahi* relationshi,s, that 9 a) ,articularly calling attention to here. 9t is ;orth stressing that these attitudes are not *y any )eans characteristic of all Sher,a )en. /onetheless they re,resent an e)erging tendency that is clearly distur*ing to )any o*ser0ers, Sher,a as ;ell as <estern. The first e(a),le is fro) one of )y field tri,s, in this case ;ith a Granada tele0ision cre; to )ake a fil) a*out the Sher,as in .%!# :Ortner .%!!=. <hile fil)ing u, in one of the 0illages, 9 )et a young )ountaineering Sher,a ;ho had gotten in0ol0ed ;ith a S;iss ;o)an on a trek. 5e ;as su,,osed to follo; her *ack to S;itIerland ;here they ;ould get )arried. E0en at this early stage, ho;e0er, he see)ed a good deal less interested in her than she in hi). 3ater, 9 ;as 0isiting Sher,a friends in Path)andu ;hen this sa)e young )an, 7, ca)e into the house: 7 ca)e in ;ith his S;iss girlfriend0ery surly Lto;ard herMhe see)s to *e sick of her. SheEs lea0ing day after to)orro; and 9 said to ,age1.%0

Page .%. hi), you )ust *e sad. LOf course 9 ;as fishing to see ;hat he ;ould say.M 5e said, ;ell 9E0e got ,lenty of friends here. LThe ;o)an 9 ;as 0isiting, 7BM said to hi), *ut you canEt slee, ;ith your friends. 2nd he saidfast, ho,ing 9 ;ouldnEt understand;ell, thereEs ,lenty of ;o)en here Lto slee, ;ithM. More directly, here is a rather dreadful ?Joke? that ;as )aking the rounds in Path)andu in .%%0, attri*uted to ?a Sher,a?: 8id you hear the one a*out the Sher,a ;ho said trekking ;ork is 0ery easy@ 4ou only need one ;ord of English: ?yes.? Sher,a cli)* high@ ?yes.? Carry load@ ?yes.? Cook dinner@ EEyes.? Me)sahi* ;ants to fuck@ ?yes.? 9f this really is a Joke that originates ;ith ?a Sher,a,? it illustrates se0eral things: first, the ,erce,tion that )e)sahi*s ;ill initiate se(C second, that the Sher,a is not in a ,osition to refuseC and third, that a Sher,a in this ,osition )ay *eco)e callous to;ard and o,enly disres,ectful of ;o)en, or at least of )e)sahi*s. This ?)acho drift? in Sher,a )ale gender attitudes ;ould ,ut :so)e= Sher,a )en on a collision course ;ith fe)inist, and decidedly anti+)acho, e(,editions in the .%!0s. .%!0s -e)inis) 9n this *orderland of 5i)alayan )ountaineering, it should *e clear that gender *oundaries ;ere in so)e sense under challenge :and in other senses not= *oth ;ithin and across cultural *orders, e0en *efore the onset of fe)inis) as a ,olitical and cultural )o0e)ent in the .%!0s. But the rise of the fe)inist )o0e)ent had so)e dra)atic effects on 5i)alayan )ountaineering. 9t is ;orth ,ausing here to note that, fro) the ,ers,ecti0e of 5i)alayan )ountaineering, the .%!0s fe)inist )o0e)ent had a co),letely transnational Huality. <o)en fro) 0irtually e0ery ?first+;orld? country, including *y this ti)e 0irtually e0ery country in 2sia, ca)e into 5i)alayan cli)*ing ;ithin that decade. <e thus see a great deal )ore ethnicGnational di0ersity, although not necessarily class di0ersity)y general sense is that the ;o)en, ;hate0er their nationality, re)ain largely )iddle class. 9n any e0ent, fe)inis) ,roduced first of all a large influ( of ;o)en into 5i)alayan )ountaineering. /ot only did the ;o)en co)e, they conHuered. 9n .%!& Mt. E0erest ;as cli)*ed t;ice *y ;o)en, first 0ia the traditional southern route *y Bunko Ta*ei, ;ho ;as co+leader of a Ba,anese all+;o)enEs e(,edition :Birkett and Peascod .% %=, and second 0ia the ,age1.%. Page .%' north face *y Phantog, a Ti*etan ;o)an ;ho ;as ,art of a )i(ed+gender Chinese e(,edition :actually co),osed )ostly of ethnic Ti*etans= :Another Ascent . . . .%!&=. .# But the fe)inist )o0e)ent ;as a*out a lot )ore than )aking gains of this sort for ;o)en. Particularly for Euro+2)erican ;o)en, for ;ho) 9 ha0e the )ost data and ;hose ,oint of 0ie; 9 ;ill continue to e(,lore here, it ;as also a*out ,ro*le)atiIing ,resu),tions of )ale su,eriority and *oundaries of gender difference. 2t the 0ery least it took the for) of a heightened consciousness of, and sensiti0ity to, ?se(is).? Se(is) itself took a 0ariety of for)s in )ountaineering, so)e )ore and so)e less fa)iliar. GeneraliIed disres,ect and dis)issal *y fello; )ale cli)*ers ;as ,ro*a*ly the )ost co))on :see 7idge;ay .%!%: ..%ff, a*out 2rlene Blu)Es ,ro*le)s on the )i(ed 2)erican Bicentennial e(,editionC see also Bre)er+Pa), .% !C Gillette and 7eynolds .% &=. Beyond that there ;as )ore acti0e se(ual harass)ent: . . . this )orning Beff Lone of the -rench )enM called )e into the )ess tent ;here a little grou, of the) ;ere sitting. They had o*0iously Just *een s)oking Estrong cigarettesE ;ith the cook, and ;ere laughing raucously. ECo)e in, Bulie,E Beff encouraged, EGelaal Lthe Pakistani ,olice)anGguard ;ith the e(,editionM says he ;ants to f . . . youE . . . E<ell, ;hat do you say@E Beff, our su,,osedly res,onsi*le doctor, giggled. E9 ;ould say that it ;as ty,ical of you and your friends, you all see) to kee, your *rains in your *alls,E 9 retorted and ;alked out. :Tullis .% #: .&0= 2nd finally there ;as a Huestion of ?,aternalis),? ;hich ;as a ,articularly thorny issue a)ong ;o)en )ountaineers. There ;as the sense that, in cli)*ing as in other areas of life, )en ;ill tend to take o0er and this )ust *e resisted. Thus )any ;o)en argued against )i(ed+se( e(,editions, taking the ,osition that the only ;ay to )aintain leadershi, and inde,endence for ;o)en in )ountaineering is *y not cli)*ing ;ith )en altogether.

This ;as *y no )eans a fully shared ,osition. Many ;o)en ;ho ;ere in other ;ays gender+radical continued to cli)* in )i(ed grou,s andGor ;ith a strong )ale cli)*ing ,artner. Bulie Tullis, the English cli)*er ;ho told off a *unch of )en on /anga Par*at in the te(t Huoted Just a*o0e, nonetheless identified single+se( ;o)enEs e(,editions ;ith a kind of ?fe)inis)? that she ;as not interested in. She al;ays cli)*ed in )i(ed grou,s, often as the only ;o)an on the e(,edition, and she co))ented a*out an all+;o)en Polish e(,edition on P': ,age1.%' Page .%$ The four girls LsicM got on ;ell together and ;ere 0ery strong and e(tre)ely deter)ined in their cli)*ing, *ut 9 could ne0er see )yself as ,art of a ?fe)inist? e(,edition. :Tullis .% #: ''!= .! 2nd Bunko Ta*ei, one of the first t;o ;o)en to reach the su))it of E0erest, had no Hual)s a*out ackno;ledging that she relied hea0ily on her )ale Sher,a cli)*ing ,artner, 2ng Tshering. 2ng Tshering led the ;hole ;ay on the final su))it assault, kee,ing u, the )o)entu) :if one can talk a*out ?)o)entu)? at that altitude= for the effort :6ns;orth .% .: "#$C Birkett and Peascod .% %: %%...=. 4et for )any of the ;o)en, cli)*ing ;ithout )en is an e(hilarating e(,erience. They e(,ress a sense of ?li*eration,? a sense of *eing inde,endent, gro;n+u,, on oneEs o;n. 2s the great 2)erican cli)*er and leader 2rlene Blu) ,ut it, 9 had taken ,art in a ,re0ious all+;o)an e(,editionan ascent of Mt. McPinley in .%!0and it had *een )y )ost satisfying cli)* so far. . . . <e felt as though ;e ;ere cli)*ing our )ountain ?;ithout the gro;nu,s,? and ;e successfully handled so)e difficult ,ro*le)s. :Blu) .% 0: %= <e hear si)ilar senti)ents fro) Stacy 2llison, the first 2)erican ;o)an to reach the su))it of Mt. E0erest: Being together ga0e E0 and )e the energy to do ;hate0er ;e ;anted. <e had )ale friends, )ale teachers, )ale cli)*ing co),anions. <e didnEt a0oid cli)*ing ;ith )en, *ut cli)*ing together )eant ;e didnEt ha0e to rely on the), to ;orry one )ight Huestion our strength or our a*ility to cli)* ;here only )en had gone *efore. :2llison .%%$: "#=. 9n these cases :see also Bohnson, in Gardiner .%%0: %.=., ;hat is *eing resisted is not )en as se(ual ,artners, lo0ers, or hus*ands, *ut Huite s,ecifically )en in the )ode of ?,atriarchy,? )en+as+?fathers,? )en ;ho take o0er and )ake ;o)en feel childish..% The Huestion of ;hether to cli)* ;ith )en or not is relati0ely un,ro*le)atic if ;o)en cli)*ers can si),ly choose *et;een )i(ed+se( and all+;o)enEs e(,editions. But in the conte(t of 5i)alayan )ountaineering, ;ith its tradition of Sher,a su,,ort, the choice is not so si),le, as ;e )ay no; consider. ,age1.%$ Page .%" "eminism$ Sherpas$ and the Annapurna #omen4s *xpedition 9ntercultural relations in *orderlands are ne0er gender neutral. 2lthough Bunko Ta*ei ;as ha,,y to acce,t the Sher,a 2ng TsheringEs hel,, in fact one of the effects of the ;o)enEs )o0e)ent, co)*ined ;ith the se(ual li*eration )o0e)ent, ;as to ,ro*le)atiIe relationshi,s *et;een )e)sahi*s and Sher,as. Both )o0e)ents *rought to the forethough in different ;aysthe fact that ?the Sher,as,? hitherto seen as a relati0ely se(less category of function+,erfor)ing hu)an *eings, ;ere actually ME/. 9n the conte(t of all+)ale e(,editions, the fact that Sher,as ;ere of the )ale ,ersuasion ;as, as noted earlier, ,layed u,on *y *oth Sher,as and sahi*s for certain ,ur,oses. '0 2t the sa)e ti)e, contradictorily, the Sher,as )ay ;ell ha0e *een coded in so)e )eta,horical sense as fe)ale. <hile this is ,ro*a*ly true of )any for)s of <estern otheriIingthe <estern self is )ale, the ?Oriental? or ?Pri)iti0e? Other, regardless of gender, is fe)alein the Sher,a case the linkages ;ere ,erha,s )ore s,ecific. The Sher,asE Jo* could *e seen as *asically )othering the sahi*scooking, cleaning, carrying their loads, and occasionally e0en carrying the). 9ndeed it )ay *e in ,art for this reasonthat Sher,as ;ere coded fe)aleas ;ell as for their s)all siIe, that their ,hysical strength, s,eed, sta)ina, and o0erall ,hysical su,eriority ;ere so distur*ing to the sahi*s :Ortner n.d. *=.'.

9t took the ;o)en, then, to truly notice Sher,a )ale cli)*ersE )aleness. More ,recisely, one should say that it took this ,articular, historically sha,ed, cohort of ;o)en, ,roducers and ,roducts of *oth se(ual li*eration and fe)inist ,olitics, to construct Sher,as as ?)ale.? By ?construct? 9 )ean here not si),ly noticing that the Sher,as ;ere ,hysical )en, *ut endo;ing this )aleness ;ith a range of )eanings ;ith ,ractical and ,olitical i),lications. Thus on the one hand there ;as the ,attern discussed earlier: constructing Sher,a )en as se(ual )ales and getting in0ol0ed ;ith the) se(ually. But on the other hand there ;as the a),lification of fe)inist a;areness: constructing Sher,a )en as political )ales, in all the senses fe)inists ;ere trying to get a;ay fro) or change)en ;ho ;ould 0ie; the)sel0es as su,erior to ;o)en, ;ho ;ould ;ant to tell ;o)en ;hat to do, ;ho ;ould not *e ;illing to take orders fro) ;o)en leaders, and so on and so forth. Thus ;hen e(,licitly ?fe)inist? e(,editions ;ere ,ut together in the .%!0s, there ;as a real Huestion for so)e ;o)en a*out ;hether such e(,editions should take Sher,as at all. 9f the e(,edition ;as a ,age1.%" Page .%& success, *ut :Sher,a= )en had assisted, ;ould it still *e a success as a !omen4s e(,edition@ Both of these issuesse( ;ith Sher,as, and the Huestion of e(cluding )en fro) the cli)*ca)e together in the .%! 2nna,urna <o)enEs E(,edition, as descri*ed in ,ro*a*ly one of the )ost e(traordinary )ountaineering *ooks e0er ;ritten, 2rlene Blu)Es Annapurna: A #oman4s Place. 9 ;ant to trace so)e of the ;ays in ;hich this e(,edition )anifestedas *oth triu),h and tragedy ''the ,oints Just discussed. The e(,edition ;as organiIed *y 2rlene Blu), an e(,erienced cli)*er ;ho had ,re0iously ,artici,ated in the )i(ed+se( 2)erican Bicentennial Mount E0erest E(,edition, a)ong other cli)*s. 2t the ti)e she and so)e friends *egan to think a*out an all+;o)enEs cli)*, no ;o)an had e0er reached the to, of an o0er+ ,000+)eter ,eak.'$ The 2nna,urna <o)enEs E(,edition recei0ed enor)ous ,u*licity fro) the outset, at least in ,art *ecause of its dou*le+entendre slogan, ?2 <o)anEs Place 9s on To,,? ;hich ;as ,rinted on tens of thousands of T+shirts that ;ere sold :0ery successfully= to raise )oney for the e(,edition :Blu) .% 0=. The ,arty consisted of thirteen ;o)en, all 2)erican, ranging in ages fro) t;enty+one :2nnie <hitehouse= to fifty :Boan -irey=. The grou, co),rised the usual sociological )i( discussed earlier. Most of the ;o)en had so)e, and so)e had a lot, of higher education. Blu) herself has a Ph.8. in *ioche)istry, one of the ;o)en ;as a doctor, and so forth. There ;as also the usual )i( of )aritalGrelationshi,Gse(ual statusesso)e ;ere )arried, so)e in long+ter) relationshi,s ;ith )en, one ;as a )other, and the se(ualG)arital statuses of others ;as unclear. One as,ect of the ?fe)inis)? of the e(,edition ;as that the grou, had asked to ha0e it arranged that so)e Sher,a ;o)en *e *rought along to *e trained as ?sher,as? :here, a role ter) )eaning skilled high+altitude ,orters=. This ;as largely :though not co),letelysee *elo;= unheard of at the ti)e, and the Sher,a sardar :leader=, 3o,sang, ;as felt *y the ;o)en to *e resistant to the idea. 5e did, ho;e0er, hire t;o of his fe)ale relati0es to act as kitchen girls in the *ase ca),. But this a,,eared to *e Just the o,,osite of ;hat the 2)erican ;o)en ;anted, and ,roducedlike e0erything else a*out this star+crossed e(,editionirresolution and conflict. 9t is not clear fro) the *ook ;hat ha,,ened *ut, according to a Sher,a friend of )ine, one of the Sher,a ;o)en got se(ually in0ol0ed ;ith one of the Sher,a )en. 9n any e0ent Blu) ;ound u, firing the ;o)en, ;ho in turn ;ere 0ery angry. There ;as an ugly confrontation ;hich left Blu) 0ery shaken. ,age1.%& Page .%# 9n addition, right fro) the *eginning there ;as an inci,ient s,lit in the e(,edition o0er ;hether to use Sher,as or not. 2lison Chad;ick+OnysIkie;icI and so)e others ;ere in fa0or of not using Sher,as, echoing the the)e of inde,endence that ;e ha0e heard fro) so)e other ;o)en cli)*ers: The Sher,as ?)ay turn out to *e a *loody nuisance,? Chad;ick+OnysIkie;icI ;arned. ?This is a ;o)enEs cli)*, after all. <e donEt really need Sher,as. #e should do it on our o!n? :Blu) .% 0: '!, e),hasis added=. But they did take )ale Sher,as, and e0erything that e0eryone feared one ;ay or another did co)e to ,ass. 2lthough the e(,edition had a rule :?no ro)ance during the cli)*? L.% 0: $ $%M= 2nnie <hitehouse, the youngest )e)*er of the grou,, fell in lo0e ;ith and *egan slee,ing ;ith the Sher,a kitchen *oy. '" This is not terri*le in and of itself, *ut it did ,ut the Huestion of ?se( ;ith the )e)sahi*s? on the ta*le for the e(,edition as a ;hole.

The Sher,as ;ere 0ery conscious of the relationshi, *et;een 2nnie and 4eshi and a,,arently couldnEt understand ;hy the rest of us ;ere not si)ilarly inclined. Marie co),lained that the Sher,as ke,t looking at her in a ;ay that )ade her feel 0ery unco)forta*le. :.% 0: .!%= E0idently another )e)*er of the e(,edition later got in0ol0ed ;ith a Pa)i :*lacks)ithGuntoucha*le= ,orter, ;hich the Sher,a telling )e the story :in .%%0= found to *e co),letely *eyond his co),rehension. The collecti0e take on the e(,edition a)ong large sectors of the Sher,a co))unity ;as that ?the ;hole e(,edition ;as looking for hus*ands? :a ,olite Sher,a ;ay of saying they ;ere looking for se(=. The fallout of this ca)e later, ;hen the e(,edition *egan to *reak do;n in 0arious ;ays. So)e of the ;o)en ;ere clearly hostile to the Sher,as, and so)e of the Sher,as in turn *egan to engage in a for) of se(ual harass)ent: ?Besides, theyEre getting a;fully o*no(ious,? 3iI added. ?They kee, ,ointing at us and giggling all the ti)e. 9 kno; theyEre )aking o*scene co))ents.? ?5o; do you kno;@? 9 LBlu)M asked. ?<ell, for one thing, they kee, dra;ing ,hallic sy)*ols in the sno;,? 3iI said. ?2nd ;hen Dera <. asked the) to sto,, they Just said, E;eti Lthe ?a*o)ina*le sno;)an?M )ake ,ictures in sno;not Sher,as.E? :.% 0:..0= ,age1.%# Page .%! More generally the ;o)en felt either disres,ected :as in this and other Lless se(ualiIedM incidents= or ,atroniIed :e.g., .% 0: ..., .#%, .!.=. 2nd ;hile all the ;o)en felt to so)e degree these ,ro*le)s ;ith the Sher,as as )en, there ;as still the s,lit *et;een those ;ho thought it ;ould *e enough of an achie0e)ent for ;o)en if they reached the to, of 2nna,urna, e0en ;ith Sher,a su,,ort, and those ;ho did not. 9n the end the *itter conditions on the u,,er reaches of the )ountain, co)*ined ;ith Sher,a insistence, ,roduced a first su))it ,arty co),osed of t;o )e)sahi*s and t;o Sher,as. They ;ere successful. /or)ally if one ,arty reaches the to, the entire e(,edition is dee)ed a success. 5o;e0er, on )ost e(,editions, )ale or fe)ale, other )e)*ers ;ould like a shot at the to,, and this ;as no e(ce,tion. 7e)aining in the second ,arty ;ere 2lison Chad;ick+OnysIkie;icI and Dera <atson. Chad;ick+ OnysIkie;icI, it ;ill *e recalled, ;as one of the )ost 0ociferous in arguing that if one goes to the su))it ;ith Sher,a su,,ort, it 0irtually does not count as a success for ;o)en. There ;as one re)aining Sher,a ;ho )ight ha0e acco),anied this grou, to the su))it, *ut he ca)e do;n ;ith altitude sickness on the final day :Blu) had had dou*ts a*out hi) all along= and ;ent do;n. Blu) tried to talk Chad;ick+OnysIkie;icI and <atson out of shooting for the su))it ;ith no Sher,a su,,ort *ut they took off any;ay. They ne0er ca)e *ack. The deaths of 2lison Chad;ick+OnysIkie;icI and Dera <atson see) al)ost a ,ara*le of the ,itfalls of the ;o)enEs )o0e)ent, a Just+so story that concludes ;ith so)e 0ersion of ?you canEt fool )other nature.? 2t one le0el this is an a*surd inter,retation. 8eath on the )ountains res,ects neither gender :hundreds of )en die= nor ideology: Bulie Tullis, ;ho al;ays cli)*ed ;ith )en and ;ho ne0er thought of herself as a fe)inist, died of altitude sickness on P'. 2t another le0el, ho;e0er, one )ust conclude that the deaths of *oth )ale and fe)ale cli)*ers are the effect of ;hat 9 earlier called *odily ,olitics, a risking of the *ody in the na)e of :the honor of= the gendered self. The 2nna,urna ;o)enEs e(,edition is also a terri*le and ,erfect e(a),le of a *orderlands encounter. T;o grou,s )eet, co)ing fro) t;o cultures, t;o histories, t;o ,olitics. 2)erican ;o)en co)e fro) a history of *oth <estern ,ri0ilege and <estern se(is), riding :e0en )aking= a ;a0e of li*eratory ,olitical energy. Sher,a )en co)e fro) a history of *oth gender ,ri0ilege and ?Third+<orld? do)ination, as ;ell as )any decades of ,artici,ation in ?)acho? e(,editions. The t;o grou,s*oth in this case ;ell ,age1.%! Page .% )eaning, though that is not al;ays true in the *orderlands;ind u, in al)ost ,er,etual conflict, and the tragic deaths of t;o cli)*ers a,,ear as, and )ust to so)e e(tent *e taken as, the ,roduct of this ,olitical conflict.

Sher,a <o)en in the T;entieth Century 9 noted earlier that the fe)inist )o0e)ent that *egan in the .%!0s ;ent glo*al 0ery Huickly, so Huickly in fact that one *egins to ;onder a*out seeing its origins as Euro+2)erican in the first ,lace. Thus des,ite the failure of the 2nna,urna <o)enEs E(,editionEs atte),t in .%! to recruit Sher,a ;o)en as ?sher,as,? in fact *y that year so)e nu)*er of Sher,a ;o)en had already entered the )ountaineering stage. 9n order to understand ;here they ;ere co)ing fro), ;e need to return to Huestions of Sher,a gender culture and ,olitics. Sher,a gender culture is in )any ;ays disad0antageous to ;o)en :)uch of the follo;ing is condensed fro) Ortner .% $, this 0olu)e=. The ideology fa0ors )en as ?higher?C )en are 0ie;ed as ca,a*le of greater s,irituality, and as less )ired in selfish and ;orldly sorts of concerns. 9n addition, )enstruation is said to *e offensi0e to the gods, and har)ful to )ale s,irituality. -e)alehood is thus a *ad re*irthC a ;o)an ;ho ;orks hard on her s,iritual i),ro0e)ent ;ill ho,e to *e re*orn as a )an. 9n the ,ractical real), girls ;ere generally gi0en less education than *oys :-isher .%%0: !%=, not only *ecause of ,reJudice, *ut *ecause )others felt they needed their daughtersE hel, at ho)e. 9n addition, the structural rules of the society fa0ored )enresidence after )arriage in the traditional 0illage setting ;as 0irilocal, ;ith the ;o)an ha0ing to )o0e to her hus*andEs 0illage or ho)estead, and )en inherited and o;ned )ost of the real ,ro,erty in the society, land and herds. Men also did the trading, the source of )aJor ;ealth, and )en occu,ied such fe; ,olitical ,ositions as e(isted in the society. 2t the sa)e ti)e one ;ould not descri*e this as a hea0ily se(ist or )ale+do)inant society. There is 0irtually no se(+segregation in secular life, no arenas in ;hich )en regularly congregate and ,artici,ate si),ly as )en. Dirtually all econo)ic ,roduction and social life takes ,lace in households. The do)estic grou,, nor)ally coter)inous ;ith the nuclear fa)ily, is a 0ery tight unit. 5us*ands are defined as ha0ing ulti)ate authority in the hus*and+;ife relationshi,, *ut as econo)ic ,roducers, and as social actors :es,ecially as co+hosts= 0is+N+0is the rest of the co))unity, hus*ands and ;i0es are tightly interlocked ,artners :Ortner .%! C March .%!%=. ,age1.% Page .%% <ithin this cultural and institutional conte(t, Sher,a ;o)enEs o;n ,osition ;as, not sur,risingly, Huite contradictory. On the one hand there is a *undle of ideology a*out ;o)en as ;eak, self+indulgent, unrelia*le, and so forth :Ortner .% $, this 0olu)eC March .%!%=. On the other hand there is no ideology or ,ractice of s,ecial ,rotection for ;o)en. Sher,a ;o)en are encouraged to *e outgoing and inde,endent actors ;ho can take care of the)sel0es and o,erate in al)ost any ca,acity in the ;orld. '& 9n ,articular they are seen as ca,a*le do)estic )anagers ;ho )ay *e left to o,erate the household as an econo)ic enter,rise for long ,eriods of ti)e, ;hile hus*ands are a;ay on e(tended trading e(,editions :a traditional ,art of the Sher,a econo)y= or cli)*ing e(,editions. 2fter the .%&0s an increasing nu)*er of Sher,a fa)ilies *egan settling ,er)anently in Path)andu. The )o0es had )ulti,le effects on ;o)en. Because of the ,re0alence in the ca,ital of 5indu )odels of fa)ily, and also *ecause of the a*sence of agricultural ;ork, Sher,a ;o)en found the)sel0es )ore confined to the ho)e than they ;ould ha0e *een in the 0illage. Contradictions a*out the inde,endence and autono)y of ;o)en ;ere thus heightened in this conte(t.'# 2t the sa)e ti)e, daughters ;ere )uch )ore likely to get a full education in the city than they ;ere in the 0illages. My data suggest that, interestingly enough, it ;as often Sher,a fathers ;ho ,ushed harder for educating daughters, ,artly *ecause it ;ould *e useful to the fa)ily econo)y, *ut also *ecause it ;ould stand the daughter in good stead in her o;n life. But Sher,a )others in the city also had fe;er o*Jections to their daughters going to school, as the ;ork of a Path)andu house;ife is )uch less de)anding than that of a 0illage householder. 9n .%!% a 0illage ;o)an told )e that she had to kee, her terri*ly *right and li0ely daughter at ho)e to hel, her, though her hus*and, an e(,edition Sher,a, really ;anted the t;o daughters to go to school. 2nd in the fil) ?Sher,as,? the )ountaineering sardar Ming)a TenIing talks a*out educating all of his children, girls as ;ell as *oys. 5e says he does not kno; ;hat they ;ill do later on, *ut education ;ill stand all of the) in good stead :Ortner .%!!=. 2s of )y last 0isit in .%%0, one of his daughters ;as a nurse in a Path)andu hos,ital, one ;as a *ilingual secretary for the -rench e)*assy in Path)andu,'! and one ;as a student in a ,ri0ate school in 8arJeeling.

One should also )ention in this conte(t a gender ?eHualiIation? la; ,ut on the *ooks in /e,al in the )id+.%!0s: -or e0ery eight )ale district leaders, there had to *e one ;o)an.' 9n the 0illage ;here 9 did )y original ,age1.%% Page '00 field;ork, the daughter of one of the *ig )en of the 0illage ;as a,,ointed. 2s 9 ;rote in )y fieldnotes in .%!#: C.-. Lthe fatherM stressed the ;o)anEs li* LsicM as,ects of all this. So does he think itEs a good thing@ 4es. <hy@ Because *efore if he didnEt ha0e a son, and only daughters, ;ho ;ould inherit the ,ro,erty@ /o;, his daughters can inherit. . . . Before )en ;ere che :higherGsenior= and ;o)en tua :lo;erGJunior=, *ut no; theyEre chi)parang :eHualGidentical=. 2nd ;hile it ;as and is hardly true that Sher,a )en and ;o)en, or the )ale and fe)ale citiIens of /e,al )ore generally, are chi)parang, clearly a la; like this did not go do;n ;ithout so)e i),act. Behind a nu)*er of these de0elo,)ents for Sher,a ;o)en is a *roader kind of econo)ic and cultural ,rag)atis) a)ong the Sher,as that links u, ;ith as,ects of Sher,a gender ideology sketched a*o0e. <hile there are certain ,reJudices a*out ;o)en, )ost of the) do not ha0e i),lications for ;o)enEs freedo) of )o0e)ent, or their assu)ed a*ility to learn, e(cel, and )ake )oney if they can. Thus ;hen conditions o,ened u, for 0arious kinds of ,ersonal ad0ance)ent for ;o)en, ;o)en the)sel0es ;ere ,redis,osed to take ad0antage of the), and ?their culture? :;hether in the hands of hus*ands, ,arents, ?)en,? or ;hate0er= ;as not dis,osed to hold the) *ack. Sher,a 7eligion and -e)ale 9nde,endence There is one other )aJor arena of Sher,a society in ;hich ;o)enEs inde,endence ;as gi0en a )aJor *oost o0er the course of the t;entieth century: religion. The Sher,as are and al;ays ha0e *een Ti*etan Buddhists, *ut ,rior to the t;entieth century there ;ere no full+ti)e )onasteries in the region. 2 )o0e)ent to u,grade Sher,a Buddhis) *egan in the late nineteenth centuryC the first full+ti)e residential celi*ate )ale )onastery ;as founded in .%.#, and the second ;as founded in .%'" :see Ortner .% %=. The )onks in turn e)*arked on a ca),aign to clean u, and raise the le0el of s,irituality in ,o,ular religious ,ractice. One as,ect of this ;as the institution :or e(,ansion= of a ritual called /yungne, in ;hich lay ,eo,le e)*ark on e(tended fasting, silence, and ,rayer, and *eco)e, as the Sher,as say, )onks for a day. The /yungne ritual is su,,osed to *ring its ,ractitioners an es,ecially high le0el of religious )erit, ?,oints? to;ard a *etter re*irth. ,age1'00 Page '0. The ritual in turn is said to ha0e *een *rought to the ;orld *y a fe)ale *odhisatt0a called Gelung)a Pal)a. The story of Gelung)a Pal)a is told e0ery year during the ritual, and is ;ell kno;n, at least in its general outlines, to )ost Sher,as. 9n the story, a young ,rincess is unha,,y ;ith all the sins co))itted in her fatherEs kingdo). She resol0es not to )arry, and ;hen she learns of )arriage arrange)ents *eing )ade on her *ehalf, she runs a;ay fro) ho)e and takes 0o;s of celi*acy. She *eco)es a *rilliant and learned religious ,ractitioner, and is a,,ointed to the ,osition of head of a )ale )onastery. But she *eco)es ill and the )onks, thinking she is ha0ing a *a*y, thro; her out of the )onastery. She ;anders a*out for )any years achie0ing greater and greater le0els of s,irituality, until finally she *eco)es a *odhisatt0a. She goes to the hea0en of the god CherenIi, ;ho sends her *ack to the ;orld ;ith the te(t of the /yungne ritual, to *ring enlighten)ent to the ignorant and suffering creatures ;ho re)ain in the ;orld :see Ortner .%! : cha,. $=. The Gelung)a Pal)a story ;as gi0en a good *it of ,ro)inence in the course of the )onastic clean+u, ca),aign and the annual o*ser0ance of /yungne that ;as one of its )anifestations. The story )ust *e taken in turn as ,art of the conte(t for the founding the first Sher,a nunnery, 8e0uche, in .%' . 8e0uche ;as founded *y a grou, of young ;o)en fro) EE*ig? or high+status fa)ilies, ;ho ran a;ay fro) ho)e ;ithout ,arental consent, took 0o;s at a )onastery across the *order :and across the 5i)alayasT= in Ti*et, and then returned to study and e0entually found the nunnery in their ho)e Sher,a region :Ortner .% $, this 0olu)e=. The ;o)en kne; that their ,arents ;ould not *e ha,,y a*out their running a;ay fro) ho)e and, in at least so)e cases, foiling )arriage arrange)ents already in the ;orks. But they ho,ed as ;ell that the legiti)acy and cultural 0alue of the act ;as such that the ,arents ;ould acce,t it as a fait acco),li and *ack the) u, in

the endC this is indeed ;hat ha,,ened :Ortner .% %: cha,. %=. Other nunneries :like other )onasteries= ;ere su*seHuently founded. -e)ale )onasticis) in turn a,,arently had a consciousness+raising effect for so)e ;o)en a*out the ,ri0ileges of )en and the constraints on ;o)en in Sher,a society. -or e(a),le, one nun co))ented: ?2s a ;o)an one is al;ays inferior . . . ho;e0er )uch one learns one is ne0er gi0en as )uch res,ect as a la)a Lthe Buddhist religious s,ecialistM. E0en corru,t la)as are still treated ;ith so)e res,ectC a )an can lead a sinful life, and yet later *eco)e a la)a and *e considered su,erior to any ;o)an.? :Huoted in 0on -Srer+5ai)endorf .%!#: ." = ,age1'0. Page '0' Other young ;o)en of )y acHuaintance at least toyed ;ith the idea of *eco)ing nunsC the idea that there ;ere alternati0es to )arriage ga0e the) a sense of o,tions. They )ight get )arried in the end *ut this no longer had the status of ine0ita*ility and naturalness it other;ise ;ould ha0e had. 9n )uch the sa)e ,eriod, o,,ortunities for ;age la*or o,ened u, in 8arJeeling, under the ?de0elo,)ent? efforts of the British raJ in 9ndia. 5ere again, ;o)en ran a;ay fro) ho)e to take u, these o,,ortunities. They did so in s)aller nu)*ers than the )en, *ut there is no Huestion that they did so. The general fra)ing of the ,rocess ;as si)ilar to that of *eco)ing a nun: that oneEs ,arents ;ould not let one do it if they kne;, *ut that they ;ould ratify it and go along after the fact. <hereas running a;ay to Join a nunnery ;as so)ething largely engaged in *y ;o)en fro) ;ealthier fa)ilies, running a;ay to ;ork in 8arJeeling or Path)andu ;as done )ore *y ;o)en fro) ,oorer :*ut also Huite )iddling= fa)ilies. -inally, then, ;e return to the entry of Sher,a ;o)en into )ountaineering in the .%!0s and thereafter. The changing culture and ,olitics of Sher,a gender relations Just discussed ;ill enter into this story in a nu)*er of ;ays. Sher,a <o)en Mountaineers There ;as :and still is= resistance on the ,art of )any Sher,a )en to ha0ing Sher,a ;o)en Join e(,editions. The Huestion of ;o)en )enstruating on the )ountain :this a,,lies to )e)sahi*s as ;ell= is ;orriso)e, as offending the gods ;hose fa0or )any Sher,as still *elie0e is i),ortant to the success of the e(,edition. :The status of this ?*elief? a)ong conte),orary Sher,as ;ill *e discussed in another conte(t, *ut there is no dou*t that for )any indi0iduals it is ,heno)enologically real.= One sardar in the early .%%0s told )e the story of the .%!% -rench 8haulagiri e(,edition on ;hich one Sher,a died and the -rench leader lost *oth hands and feet to frost*ite. The leader and his girlfriend, according to this account, stayed too long at high altitude *ecause the ;o)an ;as ?,ersonally sick.? '% This sardar felt that the ;o)an should not ha0e *een cli)*ing ;ith her ,eriod and that she caused )uch )isfortune as a result. Many Sher,a sardars also feel that ;o)en as ?sher,as? a)ong the )ale ?sher,as? ;ill cause discord and conflict a)ong the )en. Most still say they ;ould not hire ;o)en, and it is the sardar ;ho is in charge of the hiring. 2s early as .%!! a Sher,a ;o)an Joked in the fil) ?Sher,as? that her ,age1'0' Page '0$ hus*and has had )any chances to go on )ountaineering e(,editions and no; itEs her turn. /e(t year, she says ;ith a t;inkle in her eye, sheEs going to E0erest :Ortner .%!!=. 9n .%%0 9 asked this ;o)an;ho ne0er did go cli)*ing;hat she thought of Sher,a ;o)en cli)*ing: She said )any ;o)en ;ant to go *ut they donEt get the chance. 5er second daughter ;ould like to cli)*, *ut ,ro*a*ly sardars ;onEt gi0e her Jo*s. Sardars feel that ;o)en are ;eak, ;onEt carry, and also if you )i( *oys and girls youEll ha0e ,ro*le)s. 4et there ;ere al;ays e(ce,tions to these ,oints, and the e(ce,tions )ulti,lied o0er ti)e. -ro) early on, as Sher,as ;ished to kee, )ountaineering Jo*s ;ithin the Sher,a co))unity in general and their o;n fa)ilies in ,articular, it *eca)e the ,ractice to use Sher,a ;o)en, and e0en children and old ,eo,le, as ?local ,orters? :;ho carried su,,lies to the *ase of the )ountain= if not actual cli)*ers. So)e;hat later, ;o)en *egan )o0ing into the kitchen Jo*scooks and kitchen hel,ers. <e sa; that 3o,sang recruited so)e of his fe)ale relati0es into these Jo*s, and although the 2nna,urna )e)sahi*s e0idently took this to *e

?traditional? ;o)enEs ;ork, and essentially non+li*eratory, in fact e(,edition cooking had *een, like all e(,edition Jo*s, )enEs ;ork. 9t is a ste, u, fro) local ,orteringit ,ays a *it )ore, it gets one onto the )ountain ,ro,er, and for )any )en it ;as and is the route to )ore skilled ?sher,a? ;ork in )ountaineering. -or ;o)en, too, as ;e shall see, it could ser0e this function. Starting in the .%!0s, then, so)e ;o)en did indeed seek to get in0ol0ed in the )ore difficult, dangerous, *ut also )ore highly ,aid and ,restigious role of ?sher,a,? in0ol0ing high+altitude ,ortering and e(,edition su,,ort. 2nd )ost recently so)e ;o)en, as ;ell as so)e Sher,a )en, sought si),ly to *e )ountaineers in their o;n right, ;ith or ;ithout sahi* ,artners. 5o; shall ;e understand this history@ <e cannot assu)e that Sher,a ;o)en enter high+altitude )ountaineering for the sa)e )oti0es as ?first ;orld? ;o)en :Mohanty .%%.a, *=. But ;e also cannot assu)e that their )oti0es are entirely differentC that ;ould si),ly reinscri*e the hard selfGother *oundary. 7ather ;e need, as 9 said earlier, a sense of ?culture? ;ithout Otherness, and a sense that difference co)es as )uch fro) different histories and ,olitics as fro) different ?cultures.? 9n order to see this 9 ;ill e(a)ine the only )aterial currently a0aila*le on Sher,a ;o)en )ountaineers: inter0ie;s ;ith t;o of the) that 9 conducted in .%%0, as ;ell as 0ari+ ,age1'0$ Page '0" ous second+hand accounts a*out a third ;o)an, ;ho *eca)e the su*Ject of intense ,u*lic de*ate in /e,al follo;ing her success and death on Mt. E0erest in .%%$. $0 Ang Hrita The first of the ;o)en 9 inter0ie;ed is called 2ng 5rita, fro) Pang*oche 0illage in Phu)*u :the u,,er Sher,a 0alley=. 9n .%!# or so she and t;o other Sher,a ;o)en ;ent for a training course at the /e,al Mountaineering 2ssociation. 2ll three of the) ,assed the course, and thus *egan her career. One of her early e(,editions ;as the Joint 9talian+/e,ali E0erest e(,edition in .% 0. She had conflict ;ith the /e,ali co+leader of the e(,edition: She and Lone of the other ;o)enM ;anted to go all the ;ay to the su))it *ut the /e,ali LleaderM didnEt su,,ort her. The leader ;as an officer in the /e,al ar)y. She got to Ca), ' *ut the )en ;ouldnEt su,,ort the). They ;ent as far as Just *elo; Ca), $ ;ithout the leaderEs authoriIation. The leader got 0ery angry, said ;hy did you go ;ithout ,er)ission@ 5e didnEt gi0e her a chance. 9n .% ., she cli)*ed ;ith a Ba,anese e(,edition to 3angtang 7i, and reached ca), $. She had a chance to go to the su))it *ut at that ti)e recei0ed ;ord that her *rother had *een killed on 2nna,urna, and the 3iaison Officer told her not to go *ecause she ;as u,set a*out her *rother. She ,artici,ated in at least four )ore cli)*s, of ;hich the last ;as the Ba,anese ;o)enEs e(,edition to Changla 5i)al in .% $. She concluded the inter0ie; *y saying that she ;ould still like to cli)* *ut a,,arently had no other chances. 2ng 5rita ;as Huite shy throughout the inter0ie;, and did not offer any general reflections on ;o)en cli)*ing. 5o;e0er, a fe; ,oints )ay *e noted here. -irst, although she ne0er )entioned it, 9 kno; fro) other sources that she ;as )arried to a sardar, or Sher,a e(,edition leader, in her younger years, and all of her cli)*s ;ere on e(,editions on ;hich he ;as the sardar.$. 9n fact, in all three cases 9 ;ill discuss, the ;o)en cli)*ed ;ith their hus*ands. Partly this ;as *ecause, as noted earlier, )en as sardars ;ould not take unrelated ;o)en on cli)*s. But there )ay *e so)ething else at ;ork, to ;hich 9 ;ill return shortly. Second, it is ;orth noting that 2ng 5ritaEs confrontation ;ith the /e,ali co+leader of the e(,edition took a distincti0e for): She did not argue or ,age1'0" Page '0& talk *ackC she si),ly ,ushed the li)its ;ith her *eha0ior :cli)*ing to ca), $ ;ithout ,er)ission= and ho,ed to create a fait acco),li. This is ,erha,s another 0ariant of running a;ay to a nunnery or to 8arJeeling, and ho,ing or assu)ing that others ;ill go along ;ith it after the fact. 0yimi

The second ;o)an cli)*er 9 inter0ie;ed is called 2ng /yi)i :or Just /yi)i=, $' fro) Ahung 0illage in Solu :the lo;er Sher,a 0alley=. 5er hus*and, 5lak,a /or*u, is a sardar. They )et in .%!! ;hen she ;as si(teen, and ;ere )arried shortly thereafter. She *egan trekking ;ith hi) and enJoyed it 0ery )uch, and they ha0e o,erated ,retty )uch as a tea) e0er since. 5er first real e(,edition ;as the -rench e(,edition to 2)a 8a*la) in .%!%. This ;as 5lak,a /or*uEs first e(,edition as a sardar. She ;as the second cook, ;hich ;as a *it daunting as there ;ere t;enty+one -rench )e)*ers, *ut she did it. The e(,edition ;as successful and she is still friends ;ith so)e of the -rench ;o)en of the grou,. She ;as the cook again on the -renchG/e,al Police Joint e(,edition to 8haulagiri, and again on the .% $ -rench e(,edition to 2)a 8a*la). 9n the interi) she also led )any trekking grou,s, and ;as in those conte(ts herself the sardar. 9n .% " she Joined a -rench e(,edition to /u,tse, and in this case for the first ti)e she actually reached the su))it. 5ereEs ho; she tells the story.$$ 2t first she ;as not a sher,a. But the -rench offered so)e training and then chose four *oys and her. :The leader had asked her if she ;as interested and she had said yes.= 2fter a*out four days of training she asked the leader and the 3iaison Officer Lif she could goM, and they said, ;eEll see ho; you do, if you do ;ell you can go to the su))it. 2t that ti)e there ;as no insurance for her *ecause she ;asnEt su,,osed to *e a sher,a. 2nd she didnEt really *eco)e a sher,a, they Just let her go. She said the cli)*ing ;as not *ad until after a*out !,000 )eters :the )ountain is !, #& )eters high=. They ;ere cli)*ing ;ithout su,,le)entary o(ygen, ;hich )akes it )uch )ore difficult. So)eti)es she *eca)e afraid ;hen it ;as 0ery stee,. 9t took t;el0e days round+tri, fro) Base Ca), to the su))it and *ack. There ;ere four ,eo,le in the first grou,one )e)*er and three Sher,as including herself and her hus*and 5lak,a /or*u. 5er hus*and ke,t telling her to go do;n, she only had single *oots, he said her ,arents ;ould *e angry ;ith hi) if she had an accident. E0en Just *elo; ,age1'0& Page '0# the su))it he said go do;nshe got a little angry ;ith hi). But each ti)e he said go do;n she said, ?Just a little )ore.? 2nd she )ade it to the to,. /yi)i had o*0iously thought a great deal a*out the i),lications of ;hat she had done and ;hy. <hen 9 asked her ;hy she *egan cli)*ing, she said that *ecause she isnEt educated, she isnEt eHui,,ed to do )uch else, and itEs i),ortant to do something ;ith oneEs life. $" She said other ;o)en are eHually strongif they ;anted to they could do it too, *ut they donEt try, or their fa)ilies ;onEt let the). She re,eated this dual the)e of ho; others hold ;o)en *ack, *ut also ;o)en the)sel0es are too ti)id: ThereEs a ,ro*le) for Sher,a ;o)en *ecause if they go out and do things ,eo,le think *adly of the). Peo,le are ?0ery conser0ati0e.? 2lso ;o)enEs ,sychology is a ,ro*le)they are too retiring. She doesnEt care ;hat other ,eo,le thinkshe lets it go in one ear and out the other :;hich she illustrated gra,hically ;ith a gesture=. Other;ise youEll ne0er do anything. /yi)iEs story illustrates a nu)*er of things. <e hear in it the sa)e kind of inde,endence that ;e heard fro) 2ng 5ritaa sense of ca,a*ility and autono)y that 9 think is characteristic of Sher,a ;o)en in general. <e also see in /yi)iEs story the sa)e silent *ut acti0e resistance that ;e ha0e co)e to recogniIe as so)ething like a cultural scri,t for Sher,a ;o)en: she didnEt argue ;ith her hus*and ;hen he told her to go *ack, *ut she Just ke,t cli)*ing. But let us focus here for a )o)ent on /yi)iEs ,artnershi, ;ith her hus*and. 9t ;ill *e recalled that there ;ere a 0ariety of ;ays in ;hich )ountaineering ;as desta*iliIing the Sher,a gender syste). 4oung )en ;ere *eing encouraged in a kind of )achis)o that had not *een co))on in the culture. ?Me)sahi*s? offered )any attractions u, to and including )arriage and long+ter) residence in Euro,e and the 6nited States. 2t the 0ery least there ;as a tendency for at least so)e )en to stay a;ay, *oth on e(,editions and in Path)andu, for longer and longer ,eriods of ti)e, and to ha0e 0ery attenuated ties ;ith their fa)ilies *ack in the 0illages. /yi)iEs 0ery co))itted ,artnershi, ;ith her hus*and then could *e read as an acti0e )o0e against these de0elo,)ents in Sher,a gender relations. <e ;ill see in the ne(t case too that Pasang 3ha)u and her hus*and ;orked in a literal ,artnershi, ;ith one another. /ot only did they cli)* together, they ;ere ,artners ;ith so)e other relati0es in the o;nershi, of a

,age1'0# Page '0! trekking agency. 2ll of this contrasts rather shar,ly ;ith the sense for so)e <estern fe)inists of the need to cli)* ;ithout )en in order to feel inde,endent. 4et far fro) *eing ?traditional,? as it )ight a,,ear in the <estern conte(t, Sher,a ;o)enEs ,attern of cli)*ing ;ith their hus*ands )ay *e read as gender+radical in this historical )o)entC that is, it )ay *e read as an atte),t to ;ork against so)e of the cree,ing )achis)o of the young generation of )en, and to :re+=esta*lish )ore )utually res,ectful gender relations. /yi)i ;as ,ro*a*ly the )ost fa)ous of the s)all nu)*er of Sher,a ;o)en )ountaineers in the .%!0s and .% 0s. She ;as in0ited to Euro,e ;here she cli)*ed Mont Blanc, and she and her hus*and )ade a fil) a*out Sher,as and 5i)alayan )ountaineering ;ith a -rench fil))aker. But as she told )e in the inter0ie;, she still ;anted to cli)* Mt. E0erest. 9f she ;ere to do soalthough she didnEt say thisshe ;ould *e the first Sher,a ;o)an to achie0e that distinction, and eHually i),ortant fro) the ,oint of 0ie; of ethnic and national ,olitics, the first /e,ali :in the sense of citiIenshi,= ;o)an to do so. But that ;as not to *e. 9nstead the ;o)an called Pasang 3ha)u reached the to, in .%%$ as ,art of an e(,edition ;hich she herself organiIed and led. She also died, along ;ith another Sher,a, on the ;ay do;n fro) the su))it. The Pasang -hamu Story The story of these e0entsthe narrati0e of ;hat ha,,ened and of ,eo,leEs )oti0ationsis tre)endously contested. The follo;ing 0ersion, ;hich is also consistent ;ith )ost ,u*lished accounts, co)es fro) a con0ersation ;ith so)e Sher,a friendsa hus*and and ;ife;ho ;ere 0isiting ;ith )e in 2nn 2r*or shortly after Pasang 3ha)uEs funeral. Pasang 3ha)u, a nati0e of Pankong)a 0illage in the Pharak region of Solu+Phu)*u, $& had cli)*ed as a ?sher,a? on a nu)*er of ,re0ious e(,editions ;ith the -rench. 9n .%%. she had *een on a -rench E0erest e(,edition, and had reached the south col, *ut then the leader did not choose her for the su))it ,arty and she had *een angry. She su*seHuently ;ent on another E0erest e(,edition *ut it ;as cancelled *ecause of *ad ;eather. So she ;as deter)ined to )ake it to the to,. 9n .%%$, an 9ndian ;o)enEs e(,edition ;as *eing ,lanned. The organiIers contacted Pasang 3ha)u, *ut she ;anted to *e na)ed co+leader :;ith the 9ndian leader= ;ith a guaranteed shot at the to,. The 9ndians ;ould not agree, so Pasang 3ha)u refused. They then asked /yi)i, ;ho agreed. 2c+ ,age1'0! Page '0 cording to this infor)ant, as ;ell as to a nu)*er of ,u*lished sources, Pasang 3ha)u and /yi)i ;ere 0ery chana, co),etiti0e. $# Mean;hile Pasang 3ha)u deter)ined to go ahead. She for)ed a /e,al <o)enEs E(,edition ;ith herself as the leader, and t;o other ;o)en, 3hak,uti Sher,a and /anda 7ai, as )e)*ers. She a,,lied to the go0ern)ent for a ;ai0er of fee :as a citiIen of /e,al= *ut for co),le( reasons ;hich *eca)e the su*Ject of de*ate later, the go0ern)ent refused. So she ;ent a*out fund+raising herself. She needed V&0,000,$! ;hich is no; the fee for E0erest. She got San Miguel BeerG/e,al to ,ut u, half, and she raised the other half *y the sale of T+shirts and the like. So they ;ent. She took fi0e )ale Sher,as, including her hus*and, an e(,erienced cli)*ing Sher,a. She and four )en reached the su))it, not including her hus*and. :5er hus*and ;anted to go, *ut they agreed that it ;as *etter for their three s)all children if they not go together.= Then *ad ;eather started co)ing in. They all *i0ouacked$ at the south su))it one night. Then t;o Sher,as ca)e do;n to get hel,, *ut the ;eather totally closed in. They had no radios and no ;ay to get *ack u,. <ithin a day or t;o she sent do;n another Sher,a for hel,. She died ;ith one )ale Sher,a :Sona) Tsering=, ;hose *ody ;as ne0er found, only his rucksack. There ;ere no further co))unications. They think he stayed ;ith her till she died, then tried to get do;n *ut fell. 5er *ody ;asnEt found for t;enty+one days. Pasang 3ha)u *eca)e a tre)endous heroine. <hile she ;as )issing, the situation ;as a front+,age story in the ,a,ers, day after day. 2,,eals ;ere ,ut out to ,ray for her safety. <hen it ;as confir)ed that she had died, the go0ern)ent announced that it ;as a;arding her the /e,al Tara a;ard, of ;hich only t;o had *een gi0en *efore, one to the first ethnic Sher,a and /e,ali citiIen$% to reach the to, of E0erest, TenIing /orgay. 5er *ody ;as *rought all the ;ay *ack fro) Just *elo; the su))it of E0erest to Path)andu :itself a 0ery

difficult and co),letely un,recedented feat=, and she ;as cre)ated in the national stadiu), ;ith a national flag o0er her coffin, and tens of thousands of ,eo,le in attendance. Pasang 3ha)uEs intentions, )oti0es, and self+re,resentations are al)ost i),ossi*le to reco0er, at least fro) the kinds of re,orting that ha0e a,,eared thus far. Se0eral re,orters ,ortray her as highly co),etiti0e and self+,ro)oting, ;hile others res,ond not so )uch ;ith a counter+,ortrait as ;ith charges that this descri,tion is se(ist and ethnically or nationally ,age1'0 Page '0% ,reJudiced. "0 She certainly )ust ha0e *een a ,erson of i),ressi0e dri0e, energy, and ,ersuasi0eness. 2nd it is i),ortant to re)e)*er that she not only died on Mt. E0erestC she raised the )oney, organiIed the e(,edition, and cli)*ed to the to, of it first. There are )any things going on in the Pasang 3ha)u story that cannot *e e(,lored in detail here. There is the :alleged= ri0alry ;ith /yi)i, ;hich connects ;ith certain Sher,a cultural sche)as of co),etition usually in0ol0ing )en :Ortner .% %=.". There are the echoes of the 2nna,urna <o)enEs E(,edition, in0ol0ing e0erything fro) the entre,reneurial sale of T+shirts to the e(cessi0ely risky *odily ,olitics. There are di0isions of o,inion and feeling o0er ;hether Pasang 3ha)u as a )other of three s)all children should ha0e *een taking such risks."' 2nd there is the ,lay of transnational ca,ital in the *ackground, ;ith the s,onsorshi, of San Miguel BeerG/e,al. 2gain, 9 can only attend to a s)all nu)*er of ,oints. The first concerns a Huestion that arises here )ore clearly than it did in the other ;o)enEs stories: the intert;ining of gender and ethnicGnational issues. This issue deser0es )ore attention than 9 can gi0e it here. The intert;ining of gender ;ith other ,olitical issues and identities is a )aJor ,oint of difference *et;een 0arious for)s of ?first ;orld? fe)inis) on the one hand, and 0arious for)s of )inority andGor ?third ;orld? fe)inis) on the other :Mohanty .%%.a, *C Bohnson+Odi) .%%.=. 9n any e0ent it is clear in the Pasang 3ha)u case that Huestions of gender ;ere fro) the 0ery *eginning tied u, ;ith Huestions of Sher,a ethnic ,olitics 0is+N+0is the do)inant /e,ali state, and ;ith Huestions of Sher,a+/e,ali nationalist solidarity 0is+N+0is largerGstrongerG)ore ?)odern? nations. 9n so)e conte(ts, Pasang 3ha)u ;ould Join the t;o discourses. Thus, for e(a),le, ;hen she had the falling out ;ith the -rench cli)*er in .%%0, she ?;ent ,u*lic accusing Lhi) ofM discri)ination against a ;o)an and a nati0e cli)*er? :7isal .%%$: "$=. But in conte(ts ;here the gender issue ;as eHualiIed, for e(a),le in her conflict ;ith the 9ndian <o)enEs E(,edition, Pasang 3ha)u fra)ed the issue ,urely as a national one: ?She felt that since the Joint 0enture ;as en0isioned at a national le0el and ,atronised *y the Pri)e Ministers of the t;o countries, the Huestion of co+leadershi, ;as 0ery i),ortant? :Sangroula .%%$: !=. The counter,oint *et;een fra)es of gender and of nation continued in the Journalis) follo;ing her death. <hen a /e,ali Journalist suggested that the heroiIation of Pasang 3ha)u ,age1'0% Page '.0 had *een greatly *lo;n out of ,ro,ortion :7isal .%%$=, the angry res,onses fro) letter ;riters s;itched *ack and forth *et;een charges of ?se(is)? :2charya .%%$= and charges of national di0isi0eness :Shar)a .%%$=. The second ,oint on ;hich 9 ;ill co))ent *riefly here is that, as in the other t;o cases, Pasang 3ha)u cli)*ed ;ith her hus*and. /ot only did they cli)* together, they ;ere *usiness ,artners as ;ell. 9 suggested earlier that it ;ould *e at least ,lausi*le to suggest that Sher,a ;o)en cli)* ;ith their hus*ands not only *ecause they cannot get cli)*ing Jo*s ;ithout the), *ut *ecause it is ,art of a )ore acti0e and intentionaliIed )o0e to reesta*lish so)e solidarity and relati0e eHuality ;ith Sher,a )en. This of course )ay see) to *eg the Huestion of ;hy they ;ant to cli)* in the first ,lace, to ;hich se0eral ans;ers ha0e already *een suggested: that they co)e fro) a tradition of inde,endence that had *een enhanced *y 0arious religious changes o0er the course of the t;entieth centuryC that they had *een chafing in the )ore house;ifely role they ;ere forced to take u, in Path)anduC that cli)*ing is *oth ;ell ,aying and charis)atic in /e,alC that, gi0en the role of touris) and cli)*ing in the /e,al econo)y, for young ,eo,le ;ithout for)al education :and e0en to so)e e(tent ;ith it= cli)*ing is 0irtually the only ga)e in to;nC and so forth.

/one of these ,oints, of course, e(clude the ,ossi*ility of the one 9 a) suggesting here: that cli)*ing ;ith oneEs hus*and is an act of gender+radical ,olitics in this conte(t, an atte),t to inter0ene in, and counteract, a situation of gro;ing ineHuality. 2nd in fact it is )y i),ression, though only at this ,oint an i),ression, that the 0arious as,ects of Sher,a ;o)enEs gender ,olitics see) to *e ,aying off. -ollo;ing a ,eriod in ;hich Sher,a society see)ed to *e s,litting *et;een )en in the cities getting caught u, in the national and transnational s;irl, and ;o)en in the 0illages re)aining ?*ack;ard? and ?traditional,? the nu)*er of hus*andG;ife tea)s in this story is at least suggesti0e of a shift. "$ 2long ;ith this shift )ay co)e a certain self+a;areness. -or e(a),le, at the conclusion of the con0ersation in 2nn 2r*or, the discussion )o0ed fro) Pasang 3ha)uEs death to gender ,olitics )ore generally: 9 asked, do you think )ore Sher,a ;o)en ;ill cli)*, *ecause in )y inter0ie;s ;ith sardars )ost of the) said they ;ouldnEt take a ;o)an, it causes trou*le on the e(,edition. 2nd 7inIi Lnot his real na)eM said yes, )ost ,eo,le do not feel co)forta*le taking so)eone elseEs ;ife on an e(,edition. ,age1'.0 Page '.. 2nd he also said, you kno;, ;e Sher,as are still kind of EE)ale do)inant.? 9 said ;ell yes, *ut the Sher,as see) to )e relati0ely egalitarian co),ared to so)e of the 5indu grou,s. 2nd he said yes, our ;i0es donEt ha0e to ;ait till ;e finish eating. 2nd 9 said, or ;ash their hus*andsE feet. 2nd he said yeah, a Sher,a ;ife ;ould Just say, ;ash the) yourselfT 2nd ;e all cracked u,. Brief Conclusions: Politics and Meaning in and Beyond the Borderlands This ,a,er has told se0eral different, *ut interrelated, stories. The first is a historical narrati0e a*out gender radicalis) and *orderland encounters in a ,articular corner of the ;orld o0er )uch of the t;entieth century. 9t has traced out ;hat 9 called earlier a ?dialectic of se(,? in ;hich ?first+;orld? ;o)en, Sher,a )en, and Sher,a ;o)en ha0e co)e together in different ;ays at different ti)es, *ringing ;ith the) their o;n histories, ,olitics, and cultures. "" They ha0e caused one another ,leasure and ,ain, they ha0e ,ro*a*ly changed one another as ,ersons, and they ha0e shared in and contri*uted to a transnational gender re0olution that is still going on. The second story is )ethodological and theoretical. 9t Joins a line of discussion in anthro,ology that asks ho; the ethnogra,hic enter,rise is refigured ;hen one focuses on *orderlands rather than on ?cultures.? Borderland analysis has so)e ,o;erful ad0antages o0er earlier kinds of ethnogra,hic ;ork. -irst, it gets around so)e of the ,ro*le)s of the classic ethnogra,hythe treat)ent of cultures as ti)eless integrated ;holes. 9n addition, it e),hasiIes relations of difference, ,o;er and struggle, an e),hasis that is *oth i),ortant in itself, and that ,roduces a )uch )ore dra)atic story. -urther, it ,laces ?us? and ?the)? ;ithin the sa)e fra)e, and su*Jects all ,arties to the sa)e analytic scrutiny. 2nd finally :though there are no dou*t other reasons= in its co),le( intert;ining of )ulti,le and continuing histories it co)es closer to ca,turing the co),le(ity and the ne0er+finished nature of the real ;orld. But the ,itfalls of a *orderlands ,ers,ecti0e )ust also *e noted. <e lose )any things that ;ere 0alua*le in earlier kinds of ethnogra,hic ;ork. 9n ,articular, ;e lose a sense that ,eo,le ha0e their o;n ;orlds *eyond the *orderlands, ;orlds of shared :e0en if ,artially so= )eanings, ;orlds of local in0ention and creati0ity, local ,olitics :good and *ad=, shared history, and so on and so forth. Much of this is ,roduced and re,roduced, in turn, ,age1'.. Page '.' through the s)all and routine ,ractices and struggles of e0eryday life, accounts of ;hich ;ere also )ore ,ro)inent in classic ethnogra,hies, and ;hich tend to get lost in the heightened dra)a of *orderlands narrati0es. This is not to try to rein0ent ?culture? as ;e kne; itit is *y no; ,erha,s a s,oiled category. 2nd the 5i)alayan case re,resents a relati0ely ?easy? kind of *orderland, one ;here ,eo,le get to go ho)e after the e(,editions :although they do not there*y lea0e it entirely *ehind*ut that is another story=. But 9 ;ould argue that there is al!ays a ho)e *eyond the *orderland, e0en for ,eo,le ;ho are forced to li0e ;ith do)inant Others e0ery day of their li0es. -or e0en in these situations, the )aking and kee,ing of so)e kind of cultural s,ace, so)e kind of ;orld of shared for)s of relationshi, and shared )eanings, is ,recisely one

of the things that is at stake in the struggle. The )ost ,o;erful of the ne; ethnogra,hies ;ill *e those that can )o0e *et;een, and recogniIe the authenticity of, *oth kinds of ;orlds. ,age1'.' Page '.$

/otes One Making Gender Many thanks to /ancy Chodoro;, 3ouise 3a),here, Budith Stacey, 2*igail Ste;art, Ti)othy 8. Taylor, and Marya DanEt 5ul for e(cellent and ,roducti0e readings of a )uch earlier and 0ery different :*ecause of the)T= 0ersion of this introduction. 9 ,resented a 0ersion of this essay to the -innish 2nthro,ological Society as the Ed;ard <ester)arck Me)orial 3ectureC 9 had li0ely and useful con0ersations a*out it ;ith -innish students and colleagues, and es,ecially ;ith Professor Bukka Siikala. S,ecial )ention )ust also *e )ade of the e(cellent discussions in )y graduate se)inar on ?Practice Theory? at the 6ni0ersity of California, Berkeley :S,ring .%%#= ;here the students ,ushed )e to think harder at e0ery turn. 2nd finally, thanks to Ti) Taylor again for yet )ore readings and, as e0er, for ongoing su,,ort. .. 9t ;as not until .% ! that 7. <. Connell ,u*lished Gender and Po!er , linking ,ractice theory and fe)inist theory. 9 regret not doing )ore ;ith ConnellEs *ook in the ,resent essay. 9 found it in )any ;ays insightful and useful. But although it clai)s to *e ;orking ;ithin a ,ractice theory ,ers,ecti0e, it is largely ?o*Jecti0ist,? and does not sustain the co))it)ent to )o0ing *et;een o*Jecti0e and su*Jecti0e ,ers,ecti0es that is the strength of full+fledged ,ractice theories. '. -or fe)inist anthro,ology see, e.g., 3innekin .%%0, Ong .% !, Po0inelli .%%$, Stacey .%%0, Tsing .%%$. $. <ithout engaging in any kind of dee, self+analysis here, 9 ;ill say that 9 ha0e found this strange )yself, after the fact. 9t is dou*ly strange in that it ,age1'.$ Page '." ;as ,recisely through fe)inist scholarshi, that 9 ca)e to )o0e a;ay fro) )y earlier training and to try to ;ork out, first on )y o;n, and then through the disco0ery of the likes of Bourdieu et al., so)e kind of ,ractice ,ers,ecti0e. ". -or e(tensi0e discussions of ,o;er and ,ractice, see 8irks, Eley, and Ortner .%%". &. 8e Certeau is an a,,arent e(ce,tion to this ,oint. 9 do not deal ;ith hi) )uch in this essay *ecause, des,ite the title of his *ook :The Practice of *,eryday -ife=, 9 do not see hi) as a theorist of ,ractice in the *road sense defined *y the ;ork of Bourdieu, Giddens, and Sahlins. <hile 9 like his ;ork, 9 see hi) largely as a ?resistance? theorist, not ,articularly interested in the ;ays in ;hich ,ractice either re,roduces or transfor)s enduring ?structures.? #. 9n his a,,endi( titled ?On the <rath of Cook,? Sahlins focuses on the e0ents surrounding the re)o0al of a ;ooden fence fro) a te),le co),ound *y so)e of CookEs sailors. O*eyesekere uses sources that sho; that so)e 5a;aiians ;ere Huite u,set *y this e0ent and took it as sacrilegious, and Sahlins s,ends )ost of the a,,endi( dis)issing O*eyesekereEs key sources. 2side fro) the fact that 9 found SahlinsEs discussion in this conte(t relati0ely un,ersuasi0e, it does not actually address the larger ,ortrait of the gro;ing ?;rath of Cook? constructed *y O*eyesekere fro) other sources that Sahlins else;here treats as relia*le. !. The issue of gender in Grimms4 "airy Tales is no; the su*Ject of a li0ely and gro;ing *ody of literature. See BarIelai .%%0, Ai,es .%%$, and es,ecially Bottighei)er .% !. . 9n one 0ersion of ?3ittle 7ed 7iding 5ood,? the girl and her grand)other get u, on the roof and successfully kill the ;olf and turn hi) into sausage. 9n ?The Se0en 7a0ens,? the girl goes to seek her *rothers, and finds and rescues the) ;ith great resourcefulness, 0irtually unassisted. 9n ?5ansel and Gretel,? as noted, it is Gretel ;ho kills the ;itch. 9n EEThe 7o**er Bridegroo),? the girl is hel,ed *y an old ;o)an and *et;een the t;o of the) they *ring a*out the e(ecution of the ro**er and his *and. 2nd in

?-unde0ogel,? the girl acti0ely and resourcefully sa0es her *rother fro) a ;icked old ;o)an. %. ?S;eetheart 7oland? is a 0ariant of a tale called ?-unde0ogel.? Other e(a),les in this ,attern ;ould include ?The T;el0e Brothers? and ?The Si( S;ans? :0ariants of each other and of ?The Se0en 7a0ens?=. 9n all of these, the heroine sets out on a Huest to rescue her *rothers. But des,ite her good intentions, she causes her *rothers da)age as a result of her acti0ities to sa0e the), and goes through a se0en+year ,eriod of co),lete silence and sole)nity :including in one case )aking shirts for her *rothers and in the ,age1'." Page '.& other case si),ly s,inning for se0en years= *efore getting )arried at the end. .0. See 2hearn :.%%&= and PratI :n.d.= on the negati0ity of fe)ale agency in a /e,alese and an 2frican case res,ecti0ely. ... 9 cannot resist a footnote a*out ;hat a,,ears to *e a cultural configuration often found a)ong -rench intellectuals: an unshaka*le o,,osition to theoretical notions of intentionality and agency on the one hand, co)*ined ;ith a tendency to;ard e(traordinary authorial agency on the other. .'. GeertI used the ,hrase ?serious ga)es? in ?Blurred Genres? :.% $: '$= as ,art of a discussion that o0erla,s in so)e ;ays ;ith the one de0elo,ed in this ,a,er. One is re)inded as ;ell of his ,hrase ?dee, ,lay? in the cockfight ,a,er :.%!$=. .$. Sahlins :.% .= gets in trou*le ;ith O*eyesekere for his ?cos)ological dra)as,? although 9 did not in fact read hi) as O*eyesekere did, as i),lying a rigid ,re+scri,ting of life. 9 used a si)ilar notion in High Religion :.% %=, ;hich 9 called ?cultural sche)as.? But 9 also discussed in that conte(t the 0aria*ility of ;ays in ;hich actors )ay hold, or *e held *y, such sche)as :.% %: .'#+'%=. .". 9 find the idea of narrati0e to *e a 0ery ,o;erful intellecutal tool, and ha0e tentati0ely e(,lored so)e of its theoretical i),lications in an un,u*lished ,a,er :Ortner .%%0*=. Pieces of the discussion a*out the ru,turing of agency in the ,resent essay co)e fro) that ,a,er, *ut the rest of it see)ed too un;orked out to *e ,u*lished. .&. My later ;ork on Polynesian gender data indicated that the e)ergence of any kind of ?stratification,? institutionaliIed ineHuality, ;as enough of a factor, and one did not need the full a,,aratus of the ?state? to )ake the argu)ent. .#. The original title ;as ?Gender and Se(uality in 5ierarchical Societies: The Case of Polynesia and So)e Co),arati0e 9),lications.? .!. Originally entitled ?The -ounding of the -irst Sher,a /unnery, and the Pro*le) of E<o)enE as an 2nalytic Category.? . . See for e(a),le Trinh T. Minh+haEs de)oniIation of ?anthro,ology? :.% %=. TrinhEs discussion is unfortunately *oth e(cessi0e and out of date :her )ain target is Malino;ski=, *ut 9 cannot discuss it in any detail here. T;o 9s -e)ale to Male 2s /ature 9s to Culture@ Preface .%%#: 9n a*out .%!., Michelle Ai)*alist 7osaldo and 3ouise 3a),here sent out a note to a nu)*er of ;o)en anthro,ologists, in0iting the) to ;rite so)ething for a conte),lated 0olu)e on9E) not sure ;hat they called it:)ay*e= ?the anthro,ology of ;o)en.? They also called a ,age1'.& Page '.# )eeting in one of their roo)s at the ne(t 2)erican 2nthro,ological 2ssociation )eetings, and 9 can still ,icture the scene,eo,le sitting on *eds and on the floor and standing around along the ;alls. 2nd 9 said it sounds like a good idea, *ut 9 donEt kno; anything a*out ;o)en, and Shelly said, neither does anyone else. 9 canEt re)e)*er ho; the rest of the con0ersation unfolded *ut although 9 had *een )eaning to refuse 9 ;ound u, agreeing. Shelly ;as 0ery ,ersuasi0e.

This ,a,er ;as one ,art res,onse to early fe)inists inside and outside of acade)ia hunting for e(a),les of ?)atriarchal? or ?egalitarian? culturesC one ,art a,,ro,riation of the hot theory of the day, the structuralis) of Claude 3K0i+StraussC and one ,art ,ersonal )editation on the ,itfalls of inha*iting a fe)ale *ody. 9t ca)e together al)ost full+*lo;n in )y head, and )ost of it ;as ;ritten Huite fe0erishly in one sitting. The ,a,er ;as first ,u*lished in .%!' :"eminist Studies .:'=: &$.= and then again in .%!" in the 7osaldo and 3a),here 0olu)e. O0er ti)e, it took on a life of its o;n, so)ething that ;as at first gratifying, and su*seHuently *oth fascinating and ,ro*le)atic. 9 address so)e of the criticis)s the ,a,er has attracted in ?So, (s -e)ale to Male as /ature is to Culture@? and ?Gender 5ege)onies? later in this 0olu)e. Preface .%!": The first 0ersion of this ,a,er ;as ,resented in Octo*er .%!' as a lecture in the course ?<o)en: Myth and 7eality? at Sarah 3a;rence College. 9 recei0ed hel,ful co))ents fro) the students and fro) )y co+teachers in the course: Boan Pelly Gadol, E0a Pollisch, and Gerda 3erner. 2 short account ;as deli0ered at the 2)erican 2nthro,ological 2ssociation )eetings in Toronto, /o0e)*er .%!'. Mean;hile, 9 recei0ed e(cellent critical co))ents fro) Paren Blu, 7o*ert Paul, Michelle 7osaldo, 8a0id Schneider, and Terence Turner, and the ,resent 0ersion of the ,a,er, in ;hich the thrust of the argu)ent has *een rather significantly changed, ;as ;ritten in res,onse to those co))ents. 9, of course, retain res,onsi*ility for its final for). The ,a,er is dedicated to Si)one de Beau0oir, ;hose *ook The Second Sex :.%&$=, first ,u*lished in -rench in .%"%, re)ains in )y o,inion the *est single co),rehensi0e understanding of ?the ;o)an ,ro*le).? .. 9t is true of course that yin, the fe)ale ,rinci,le, has a negati0e 0alence. /onetheless, there is an a*solute co),le)entarity of yin and yang in Taois), a recognition that the ;orld reHuires the eHual o,eration and interaction of *oth ,rinci,les for its sur0i0al. '. So)e anthro,ologists )ight consider this ty,e of e0idence :social+structural arrange)ents that e(clude ;o)en, e(,licitly or de facto, fro) certain grou,s, roles, or statuses= to *e a su*ty,e of the second ty,e of e0i+ ,age1'.# Page '.! dence :sy)*olic for)ulations of inferiority=. 9 ;ould not disagree ;ith this 0ie;, although )ost social anthro,ologists ;ould ,ro*a*ly se,arate the t;o ty,es. $. <hile ;e are on the su*Ject of inJustices of 0arious kinds, ;e )ight note that 3o;ie secretly *ought this doll, the )ost sacred o*Ject in the tri*al re,ertoire, fro) its custodian, the ;ido; of <rinkled+face. She asked V"00 for it, *ut this ,rice ;as ?far *eyond L3o;ieEsM )eans,? and he finally got it for V 0 :3o;ie .%&#: $00=. ". <ith all due res,ect to 3K0i+Strauss :.%#%a, *, and ,assi)=. &. Se)antic theory uses the conce,t of )oti0ation of )eaning, ;hich enco),asses 0arious ;ays in ;hich a )eaning )ay *e assigned to a sy)*ol *ecause of certain o*Jecti0e ,ro,erties of that sy)*ol, rather than *y ar*itrary association. 9n a sense, this entire ,a,er is an inHuiry into the )oti0ation of the )eaning of ;o)an as a sy)*ol, asking ;hy ;o)an )ay *e unconsciously assigned the significance of *eing closer to nature. -or a concise state)ent on the 0arious ty,es of )oti0ation of )eaning, see 6ll)an :.%#$=. #. 2 situation that often ser0es to )ake her )ore childlike herself. !. 8a0id M. Schneider :,ersonal co))unication= is ,re,ared to argue that the incest ta*oo is not uni0ersal, on the *asis of )aterial fro) Oceania. 3et us say at this ,oint, then, that it is 0irtually uni0ersal. . 9 re)e)*er ha0ing )y first )ale teacher in the fifth grade, and 9 re)e)*er *eing e(cited a*out thatit ;as so)eho; )ore gro;n+u,. %. /o*ody see)s to care )uch a*out sororicidea ,oint that ought to *e in0estigated. .0. 9ngha)Es discussion is rather a)*iguous itself, since ;o)en are also associated ;ith ani)als: ?The contrasts )anGani)al and )anG;o)an are e0idently si)ilar . . . hunting is the )eans of acHuiring ;o)en as ;ell as ani)als? :.%!.: .0%&=. 2 careful reading of the data suggests that *oth ;o)en and ani)als are )ediators *et;een nature and culture in this tradition.

Three The Dirgin and the State Preface .%%#: 9 did )y graduate training at the 6ni0ersity of Chicago in the .%#0s, ;ith Clifford GeertI as )y ad0isor. My intellectual interests ;ere dee,ly sha,ed *y this *ackground, in the sense that 9 ;as co))itted :and still a)= to a hu)anistic, inter,reti0e anthro,ology concerned ;ith elucidating Huestions of culture, )eaning, and 0alue. ?The Dirgin and the State? ;as ;ritten as a Jo* talk for the 6ni0ersity of Michigan, ;hich had *een a hot*ed of ?)aterialist? anthro,ology in the si(ties. Si(ties ,age1'.! Page '. )aterialist anthro,ology ;as *oth e(tre)ely hostile to ?culture,? and hea0ily in0ested in ?scientific? e(,lanation as o,,osed to ?hu)anistic? inter,retation. By the )id+.%!0s, ho;e0er, )aterialist anthro,ology had changed Huite a *it. 9t had *eco)e *oth )ore interested in issues of ?culture,? and )ore Mar(ist, in a criticalG,olitical rather than econo)istic sense. 2t the sa)e ti)e, through )y fe)inist ;ork 9 had *eco)e )ore *roadly ,oliticiIed. 9 also *eca)e dissatisfied ;ith ,urely ?cultural? inter,retations, and felt the need to ?ground? the) in so)e kind of socialG,olitical Ghistorical reality. This ,a,er ;as )y first effort to take a )ore ?)aterialist,? or at least )ore socially and historically grounded, ,oint of 0ie;. The fact that it is done ;ithin a fra)e;ork of social e0olution?the rise of the stateEE9 think )ust ha0e *een influenced *y the fact that 9 ;as ;riting it for a 6ni0ersity of Michigan audience, still i)agined fro) )y graduate school years at Chicago as the technoGecoG)aterialist e0il e),ire of 3eslie <hite et al. 9 ne0er did anything Huite like it again. But 9 did get the Jo*. The ,a,er ;as first ,u*lished in Michigan %iscussions in Anthropology in .%!#, and su*seHuently in "eminist Studies in Octo*er .%! . Preface .%! : This ,a,er ;as ;ritten as an infor)al talk. 9t ;as )y first sta* in thinking a*out the ,ro*le) and is highly s,eculati0e. 9t is really designed to generate and orient further thought and research)y o;n and othersE. .. -or a 3atin 2)erican e(a),le, see <atson .%!'. -or the Mediterranean, see Ca),*ell .%!"C Peristiany .%##C and B. Schneider .%!.. -or the Middle East and South 2sia, see 5ayes .%!&, Pa,anek .%!$, Gough .%&&, 4al)an .%#$. -or classical 2thens, see Slater .%# . -or China, see Stacey .%!&. The ethnogra,hic references for this ,a,er are in no ;ay definiti0e or co),rehensi0e. They are taken fro) the sources that ;ere at hand during ;riting. -or )ost areas )entioned in the ,a,er, there is a large *ody of literature concerning se(ual ideology and fe)ale sociose(ual control. '. -or so)e general considerations, see also -reud .%&! and /e)ecek .%& . $. -or an e0en )ore grueso)e case, see 5ayes .%!& on infi*ulation, or Pharaonic circu)cision, in the Sudan. ". 9 a) referring ,ri)arily to ;hat anthro,ologists call ?,ri)ary? :or ?archaic?= states, )anifesting the no0el social+e0olutionary de0elo,)ent of s,ecialiIed centraliIed decision )aking and *ureaucratiIed ad)inistration. See <right .%!! and 7a,, .%!!. &. Shore :.% .= descri*es a si)ilar ,attern for Sa)oa, ;hich ;ould ,erha,s *e characteriIed as a ?,re+state? society, *ut not *y )uch: 9t has a highly de0elo,ed syste) of hierarchical social differentiation. L.%%# note: ,age1'. Page '.% ShoreEs e(a),le is re,resentati0e of )any other ,arts of Polynesiasee ?7ank and Gender? :this 0olu)e=. 9t *eca)e clear to )e later that the issue ;as stratification, institutionaliIed ineHuality, as such, ;ith or ;ithout state+ty,e ad)inistrati0e and )ilitary structures.M #. Engels of course related the ?defeat? of ;o)en to the rise of the state :.%!'=, *ut )y inter,retation of this relationshi, is Huite different fro) his. See also 7eich .%!. for a rather *iIarre, if ,ro0ocati0e, discussion of these issues. !. The ,attern is also found throughout )ost of 3atin 2)erica, ,resu)a*ly i),orted *y the 9*erian e),ires.

. 9t see)s that the 9ncas had celi*ate )ale and fe)ale ,riesthoods :0on 5agen .%&!=, *ut ;e do not kno; ;hether an ideal of chastity for ;o)en ;as general. 2s for the 2Itecs, Daillant :.%&0= states that ;o)en ;ere su,,osed to *e chaste at )arriage, *ut he does not ela*orate on this ,oint. %. 9 )ust tack on here one of the )ore interesting ,oints raised in discussion after 9 ,resented this ,a,er as a talk. 9n )any ?tri*al? societies, se(ual acti0ity *egins at a 0ery early age :for e(a),le, Ti;i )en of 2ustralia stretch the 0aginas of their child ;i0es ;ith their fingers until the ;i0es are gro;n enough to engage in full+scale se(ual intercourse Lsee Goodale .%!.M.= 9t is concei0a*le then that fe)ales in such societies ne0er really de0elo, hy)ens at all. 2s ,re)arital chastity is enforced for ;o)en to a later age, ho;e0er, the hy)en ;ould ha0e a chance to gro; and harden, and ;ould ha0e to *e *roken )ore dra)atically at first intercourse. The suggestion is, then, that the hy)en itself e)erges ,hysiologically ;ith the de0elo,)ent of se(ual ,urity codes, and thus ,resu)a*ly ;ith the rise of the state. -our 7ank and Gender Preface .%%#: This ,a,er ;as originally entitled ?Gender and Se(uality in 5ierarchical Societies: The Case of Polynesia and So)e Co),arati0e 9),lications,? and ;as ;ritten for inclusion in the 0olu)e that 5arriet <hitehead and 9 co+edited, Sexual Meanings: The Cultural Construction of Gender and Sexuality :.% .=. 9t ;as directly ins,ired *y Bane Collier and Michelle 7osaldoEs ,a,er, ?Politics and Gender in Si),le Societies,? also ;ritten for that 0olu)e. 2lthough 9 ;as then and still a) co))itted to an inter,reti0e a,,roach to culture, that is, to a sense of culture as a set of sy)*olic constructs or ?re,resentations,? 9 ;as looking for a ;ay out of the relati0ely aesthetic a,,roach to inter,retation 9 had acHuired to that ,oint. Bane and ShellyEs ,a,er ;as ;ritten first, dra;ing on the -rench ?structural Mar(ists? of that eraGodelier, Terray, Meillassou(. 9 ;as i),ressed ;ith their a*ility to )ake sense of cultural re,resentations not Just as )eaningful co),onents of a ,eo,leEs EE;orld0ie;? and ?0alue syste),? *ut as e)erg+ ,age1'.% Page ''0 ing fro) the )icro+,olitics of life in a ,articular culture. 9 *asically took their a,,roach, )ade so)e )odifications, and tried it out )yself on a *ody of data fro) traditional Polynesia. 9 ackno;ledge )y de*t to the) no;, )ore than 9 did in Sexual Meanings. 9 also realiIe no;, in retros,ect, that it ;as )y first real )o0e into ?,ractice theory.? 9 had no na)e for it and ;as not yet reading any of the literature ;e no; associate ;ith it: Bourdieu, de Certeau, Giddens, Sahlins. But in setting u, the analysis in ter)s of the Huestion, ?;hat do actors :in this kind of syste)= ;ant@? and in defining ,eo,leEs desires and the li)itations on their desires as essentially ,olitical, 9 ;as launched. The *asic fra)e of the analysis is not really 0ery different fro) ;hat 9 later de0elo,, ;ith )uch )ore theoretical tri))ing, in )y historical )onogra,h on the Sher,as, High Religion :.% %=. .. On the *asis of an earlier draft of this essay, 9 solicited and *enefited enor)ously fro) the generous criticis) of Polynesianists: 9r0ing Gold)an, Bradd Shore, and Dern Carroll, to all of ;ho) 9 a) e(tre)ely grateful. 9 ho,e that the )ost egregious errors ha0e *een ;eeded out. 2lthough it is con0entional to assu)e res,onsi*ility for all errors that re)ain, 9 do so )ore than con0entionally. 9 ha0e ne0er done field;ork in the area, and 9 re)ain acutely a;are of )y o;n no0icehood in relation to this fascinating *ody of data. 9 also ;ish to thank the follo;ing friends for their 0ery detailed suggestions and criticis)s: Bane Collier, Sal0atore Cucchiari, 7ay)ond Pelly, Bohn Pirk,atrick, Michelle 7osaldo, 8a0id Schneider and 5arriet <hitehead. -inally, 9 a) also )ost a,,reciati0e of the co))ents and reactions of 2letta Biersack, /ancy Chodoro;, Peith 5art, 3eslee /adelson, /iara Sudarkasa, and Susan Contratto. Marshall Sahlins kindly sent )e the )anuscri,t of his forthco)ing ;ork L.% .M, Historical Metaphors. This ,a,er is dedicated to the )e)ory of Margaret Mead. '. The rank syste) throughout Polynesia is *y no; 0irtually defunct. 9 ;ill ho;e0er use the ?ethnogra,hic ,resent? tense in the essay as if it ;ere still o,erating. $. The ter)s are fro) Gold)anEs :.%!0= classification of Polynesian societies, according to an e0olutionary sche)e that ;ill not *e central to the ,resent essay, and that 9 ;ill thus not discuss here. 9t need only *e understood that the ?traditional? societies are the least co),le( in ter)s of organiIation of the rank syste), the ?stratified? are the )ost co),le(, and the ?o,en? societies for) a )iddle category.

Sahlins :.%& = also ;orks ;ith an e0olutionary sche)e, although he does not la*el the le0els :Cha,ter 9, ,assi)=. 2lthough his theoretical ,re+ ,age1''0 Page ''. su,,ositions and interests are radically different fro) Gold)anEs, the outco)e of his classification is si)ilar. 9 ,resent here the t;o sche)es for the readerEs reference. Gold)an :.%!0: '.=: ?Traditional?Puka,uka, Ontong Ba0a, Tokelau, Tiko,ia, -utuna, Tongare0a, 60ea, Maori, Manihiki+7akahanga. ?+pen?Mangaia, Easter 9sland, MarHuesas, Sa)oa, /iueC ?Stratified?5a;aii, Tonga, Society 9slands :Tahiti=, Mangare0a. Sahlins :.%& : ..+.'=: Group (((Puka,uka, Ontong Ba0a, TokelauC Group (('Tiko,ia, -utuna, MarHuesasC Group ((aMangaia, Easter 9sland, 60ea, Mangare0aC Group (5a;aii, Tonga, Tahiti, Sa)oa. ". The discussion in this section is dra;n ,ri)arily fro) Gold)an :.%!0= and Sahlins :.%& =, further infor)ed *y the general ethnogra,hic literature on Polynesia as listed in the 3iterature Cited. The descri,tion of the social organiIation, as ;ell as of the se(Ggender syste) that follo;s, is a co),osite, an ?ideal ty,e,? to ;hich ,ro*a*ly no single Polynesian society ,erfectly confor)s. 9 a) a;are of the ;ide range of 0ariations throughout the area, *ut 9 ha0e chosen to ignore the) in the interest of esta*lishing a general set of relations *et;een rank and gender o0er the area as a ;hole. The )erit of this a,,roach )ust *e Judged not only *y the ,ersuasi0eness of the ,resent essay, *ut *y the degree to ;hich it ,ro0es 0alua*le for future analysts in constructing hy,otheses to account for the 0ariations. &. The ,atterns are clearer if one kee,s in )ind that the kin grou, ulti)ately o;ns the land, rather than indi0iduals. 9ndi0idual o;nershi, thus de,ends on the kinshi, affiliation of the indi0idual. #. 9n so)e cases :see note .0= the head of the unit has e(clusi0e or ,redo)inant control o0er the dis,osition of the unitEs ,ro,erty. 5ence one could run the analysis of si*ling ri0alry in ter)s of econo)ic co),etition or conflict, rather than in ter)s of ,restige and succession. The results ;ould *e si)ilar, *ut in cultural ter)s less accurate, *ecause ,ro,erty ?o;nershi,? :or control=, like ,olitical ,o;er, is a *y+,roduct of status ,osition. 9t is not in any )eaningful sense a source of status :a,art fro) the fact that )ore land can su,,ort )ore kinGfollo;ers= and it is certainly not a culturally 0alued end in itself. !. Dariations *et;een <estern and Eastern Polynesia ;ith res,ect to kinshi,, )arriage, and gender ,atterns are e(tre)ely interesting. 9n this essay, ho;e0er, 9 ha0e li)ited discussion to ,atterns that a,,ear o0er the area as a ;hole, ;ith only )inor e(ce,tions. -or the readerEs reference on this ,oint, here is Gold)anEs classification of Eastern and <estern societies :.%!0: ((0iiC see also Burro;s .%"0=: *astern: Maori, Manihiki+7akahanga, ,age1''. Page ''' Tongare0a, Mangaia, Easter, the MarHuesas, Mangare0a, the Society 9slands :Tahiti=, the 5a;aiian 9slandsC #estern: the Sa)oan 9slands, Tonga, 60ea, -utuna, the Tokelaus, Tiko,ia, Puka,uka, /iue, Ontong Ba0a. . Brother+sister )arriage is also noted for 7arotonga :Suggs .%##: .!!=. %. Parallel cousin )arriage, *et;een children of sa)e+se( si*lings, is re,orted for the aristocracy in Mangare0a :Buck .%$ : .$'=. Se0eral other accounts re,ort )arriage ;ith ?cousins,? ;ithout distinguishing *et;een cross and ,arallel: Suggs .%##: ..0C Oli0er .%!": !#"C 5andy and Pukui .%& : .0%. .0. 9n the MarHuesas only the senior child inherits :3inton .%$%: .&"=C in Mangare0a :Buck .%$ : .#$= and in Tonga :Pae,,ler .%!.: .! = only the senior son inherits. /ote ho;e0er that in none of these cases are ;o)en categorically disinherited as against )enC the category of noninheritors includes Junior )ales as ;ell as fe)ales. ... There are t;o additional )eans of intentionally and controlla*ly enlarging the grou,: ado,tion and ,olygyny. Both are ;idely ,racticed, the latter )ainly *y the aristocracy. S,ace li)itations ,rohi*it discussing the differential ad0antages and disad0antages of each here.

.'. SistersE daughters ;ould *e es,ecially ,o;erful sy)*ols in the ,rocess under discussion. They re,resent the ?hold? on kins;o)en across t;o generations. Most sacred )aids, as ;ell as the tamaha :the ?fa0ored? and highest ranking kins;o)an of the Tongan chief= are su,,osed to *e sistersE daughters, although as in Sa)oa they are often daughters, and so)eti)es e0en sisters. .$. E(ce,t for the 0ery highest ;ife of the Tui Manua, the highest chief :Mead .%$0: . "=. .". 2 Sa)oan )an ;ho is caught and *randed as a slee, cra;ler, ho;e0er, a,,ears as sha)eful, and ?no girls ;ill e0er take Lhi)M seriously? :Mead .%$0: #'=. .&. 9t a,,ears that in Tahiti ;o)en )ay ha0e also occasionally done it to )en :Oli0er .%!": $#&=. .#. Because 0irginity is )ore strongly enforced for chiefly daughtersGold)an calls it a ?,ri0ilege of rank? :.%!0: &#"=it has s,ecial aristocratic associations as ;ell. This ,ro*a*ly gi0es added s,ice to deflo;ering 0irgins, in that a )an ;ould *e sy)*olically asserting chiefly status in getting to any 0irgin. .!. The argu)ent has clear -reudian o0ertones. They see) to )e ;holly a,,ro,riate to the case at hand, ;hich is Huite ?,atriarchal? in the classical sense. GoughEs -reudian inter,retation of /ayar girlsE ,u*erty rites :.%&&= ,age1''' Page ''$ see)s to )e si)ilarly a,,ro,riate to the /ayar case, 4al)anEs ,ointed co))ents on it not;ithstanding :.%#$=. . . 9 o)it fro) the discussion chiefly ra,e of lo;er+status ;o)en, ;hich is also not unco))on, es,ecially in the ?stratified? societies :e.g., Gifford .%'%: !', . "C Mariner 9 . '!: '$.C Malo .%0$: '&&=. Essentially it is ,arallel to :though not e(actly legiti)ately ,art of= chiefly rights of a,,ro,riation andGor dis,osition of goods and ser0ices in his do)ain. .%. The e(ce,tion is ra,e of high+status ;o)en *y lo;+status )en. This is e0ery;here se0erely ,enaliIed. '0. Bradd Shore :.% .= suggests that )uch of Sa)oan ra,e )ay *e e(,lained *y the fact that all ;o)en are seen ,ri)arily as ?sisters,? and there is difficulty in transfor)ing a nonse(ual into a se(ual relationshi,. 9 agree that Polynesian ;o)en are seen ,ri)arily as ?sisters,? and ShoreEs suggestion ;ould not *e inco),ati*le ;ith )any of the inter,retations of the ,resent essay. Dern Carroll :.%!#= has suggested that ra,e is ?no *ig deal? to ;o)en of /ukuoro, a Polynesian outlier in Micronesia ;here Carroll did research. Gi0en the discussion Just ,resented in the te(t, it ;ould )ake sense that e0en Polynesian ;o)en )ight find ra,e less ,sychologically trau)atic, though not necessarily )ore )orally acce,ta*le, than in our o;n culture. L.%%# addendu). E0er since the ,u*lication of this article, 9 ;ish 9 had ;ritten this section on ra,e differently. The ;ay in ;hich the conclusion to the section is ;ritten )ay sound :9 fear= as if 9 a) *la)ing girls and ;o)en for trans)itting infla))atory se(ual )essages to )en, and hence for getting ra,ed. 9 certainly )eant no such thingC Just the o,,osite. 9 ;as arguing that girls and ;o)en ;ithin this cultural fra)e;ork ha0e *een culturally ?set u,.? Moreo0er, the ;ay in ;hich the .% . footnote is ;ritten )ay sound as if 9 a) suggesting that Polynesian ;o)en do not )ind *eing ra,ed. 9 a) not in any ;ay ;hatsoe0er suggesting this, *ut 9 do su,,ose that the cultural conte(t )ight affect the degree to ;hich, and the ;ay in ;hich, the girl or ;o)an )ight *e ,sychologically trau)atiIed or suffer long+ter) e)otional da)age fro) the e(,erience.M '.. 9t does occasionally ha,,en that a lo;er )an )arries a higher ;o)an, ,ro*a*ly ;hen a chief intentionally )arries a daughter do;n;ard in order to forge a clientshi,. This is not allo;ed to interfere ;ith the nor)ati0e su,eriority and authority of the hus*and ;ithin the household :see, e.g., Gifford .%'%: .#=. ''. 9nstitutionaliIed ?*ond friendshi,s,? found in )any Polynesian societies, ,erfor) )any of the sa)e functions :-irth .%#!: .0 +.& ,assi)C ,age1''$

Page ''" Suggs .%##: .$.C 5andy .%'$: %C Mead .%"%: " C Oli0er .%!": '&, ""=. '$. 9n Sa)oa this ?ta*u? on ,u*lic interaction *et;een ,eo,le in a se(ual relationshi, a,,lies to )arried cou,les, *ut not to adolescents. The ta*u against ,u*lic interaction *et;een hus*ands and ;i0es is said to *e al)ost as strong as that against *rother+sister interaction :Mead .%"%: $=. '". Much of the follo;ing account is dra;n fro) 5andyEs Polynesian Religion :.%'!=. 5andy ,resents an account of an ideal+ty,e Polynesian religion for ;hich he dra;s hea0ily on the Maori case, and it a,,ears that he )akes )any unfounded generaliIations for the area as a ;hole. But Polynesian religion is *y and large not ;ell docu)ented. 2 careful sur0ey of the a0aila*le frag)ents, as ;ell as a s,ecification of 0ariations, is *eyond the sco,e of the ,resent essay. '&. The 5a;aiians had an Earth Mother goddessC they ;ere a,,arently the only ,eo,le in the area ;ho did :5andy and Pukui .%& : ''=. '#. But a Tongan ;ife of a high chief does *ring in )any of her kin as de,endents and hel,ers in her hus*andEs household :Gifford .%'%: .!, $#=. She )ay also *ring her younger sisters as secondary ;i0es or concu*ines for her hus*and. '!. 2)ong the Maori only ;i0es could cut their hus*andsE hair :Best 99 .%'": &$$=. 9t is not clear ;hat an un)arried )an ;ould do for a haircut. ' . -irth re,orts little adultery for Tiko,ia :.%#$: .. =. 2dultery in )odern Mangaia is said to *e ?relati0ely rare? *ut also ?hea0ily folkloriIed? :Marshall .%!.: ."#=. 2dultery in Tonga is also re,orted as ?rare? :Gold)an .%!0: &#&=, *ut here and there throughout MarinerEs )ar0elous first+hand account of eighteenth+ century Tongan society, largely of high+ranking ,eo,le, *oth )en and ;o)en allude to and Joke a*out their e(tra)arital lo0e affairs :see 9: ..#, 99: "%=. '%. Oli0er :.%!": 0"= re,orts ?u(oriousness? for Tahiti, ;hich is stronger than ?a)ia*ility.? Marshall says that Mangaian hus*ands and ;i0es are not 0ery social or con0ersational ;ith one another, and that the hus*and+;ife relationshi, is )ostly se(ual and econo)ic :.%!.: ."0=. 5e later says ho;e0er that ?o0er the long ter) hus*ands and ;i0es de0elo, e)otional attach)ent? :.%!.: .&%=. $0. Throughout the area there are no for)al ?di0orce? )echanis)s. 8i0orce is effected si),ly *y se,aration. $.. Mead re,orts Jealousy to *e rare in *oth se(es in Sa)oa :.%"%: # , %!=. $'. Married ;o)en get general ?deference? in Tiko,ia :-irth .%#$: .''= and are ?res,ected? as a category in Tonga :Mariner . '!: ,assi)=. ,age1''" Page ''& This does not negate their su*ordination to their hus*ands in the do)estic conte(t. $$. -irth says that Tiko,ian girls ;ant to )arry )ore than *oys, to get out fro) under the hea0y control of their fathers :.%&!: "$"=. This )oti0e ;ould clearly *e ,ossi*le for girls throughout the area, although it is not re,orted else;here. 2t any rate, gi0en the relati0ely lo; ,resu)ed )oti0ation of girls to )arry, it is clear that a girlEs *est *et ;hen she does )arry ;ould *e to reside u(orilocally, ;here she ;ould retain on a day+to+day *asis her status and ,rerogati0es as a kins;o)an. Thus her interests ;ould coincide ;ith her kins)enEs interest in kee,ing her :and her children= ;ith the grou,. $". 9n the conte(t of these suggestions, intense ;ifely Jealousy is less e(,lica*le than the Jealousy of hus*ands. 9t is re,orted rare in Tahiti :Oli0er .%!": '#= and also in Sa)oa :;here, ho;e0er, Jealousy in general is raresee note $.=. But in so)e ,laces it is re,orted to *e intense e.g., -irth .%#$: .'0=, so)eti)es leading to suicide :Best 9 .%'": "!&C Buck .%$ : "!'= or to fatal neglect of children :Marshall .%!.: ." =. The solution to this ,uIIle ;ould lie in assu)ing that ;o)en ha0e Huite as )uch ,ride as )en in Polynesian societies, ,artly *ecause they are raised as 0alua*le ,ersons, and ,artly *ecause ,ride is a 0ery generally culti0ated e)otion in these status+conscious syste)s. <o)enEs Jealousy )ay thus *e ,arallel to )enEs at the

le0el of ,ersonal feeling, e0en if it is not culturally su,,orted and encouraged as )enEs is. $&. 9n Sa)oa, too, only high+rank ;o)en had *irth feasts, *ut these ;ere descri*ed as *eing for the )other :Mead .%"%: ..$=. $#. 8es,ite the high rates of a*ortion and infanticide, and of gi0ing children u, to others in fosterage and ado,tion, Polynesians are generally re,orted to *e fond of children :see 3oe* .%'#: &C 5enry .%' : '!"C 5andy and Pukui .%& : "#, !., .#"+##=. 9t )ay *e suggested that, *ecause childrenEs inde,endence of ,arents is culturally encouraged, their loyalty and lo0e )ust *e courted and ;ooed. This ,erha,s accounts for the great indulgence and affection they are e0idently sho;n. $!. Gold)an considers that the status of ;o)en in Polynesia ;as higher in the )ore co),le( societies than in the ?traditional? ones :.%!0: &&"=. $ . Pollution *eliefs and ,ractices surrounding ;o)en 0ary significantly *et;een <estern and Eastern Polynesia. Co),arati0e analysis on this ,oint ;ould *e e(tre)ely i),ortant. $%. This )eans a)ong other things that so)e ;o)en, like so)e )en, are in all hierarchies of ,ery high status, and occasionally :though far less often than )en= succeed to highest offices. The ?Hueens? and other fe)ale ,ara+ ,age1''& Page ''# )ounts that surface here and there in the ethnogra,hic literature are not ,roducts of ?)atriarchies,? *ut of syste)s organiIed along the lines discussed in this essay. "0. There are ,resu)ed historical links *et;een Polynesia and Southeast 2sia. Their languages *elong to the sa)e )acro+fa)ily :Gold)an .%!0: ((0=. ".. Dirginity also e(,resses continuing )ale do)inance !ithin the :nongender+defined= ?strata,? *ecause it is largely )aintained *y )ale control of kins;o)en. "'. 9 a) hardly suggesting that Christian and Buddhist )onasticis) e0ol0ed in order to fulfill this function. /or)ally 9 gi0e religion rather )ore serious treat)ent in its o;n ter)s. See, e.g., )y )onogra,h on Sher,a ritual and religion :.%! =. -i0e The Pro*le) of ?<o)en? 2s an 2nalytic Category Preface .%%#: This ,a,er ;as originally entitled ?The -ounding of the -irst Sher,a /unnery, and the Pro*le) of E<o)enE as an 2nalytic Category.? 9t ;as ;ritten for an anni0ersary 0olu)e co))e)orating the founding of the <o)enEs Studies Progra) at the 6ni0ersity of Michigan, and ;as ne0er really ,u*lished e(ce,t in an in+house ,roduction of the <o)enEs Studies Progra) :D. Patraka and 3. Tilly, eds., "eminist Re2<isions: #hat Has Been and Might Be, .% $=. The ,a,er contains a nu)*er of intellectual firsts for )e. -irst, as noted at the o,ening of the ,a,er, it ;as )y first atte),t to co)*ine fe)inist theoriIing ;ith )y o;n Sher,a ethnogra,hy. 9 had *egun field;ork a)ong the Sher,as in the )id .%#0s ;ith a focus on religion. Uuestions of gender ;ere not for the )ost ,art on the ta*le in acade)iaC the fe)inist re0olution had yet to *reak. Thus at that stage of )y young, ,re+,rofessional life 9 ;as deter)ined to get the res,ect of )y ,rofessors *y studying the ?*ig :i),licitly )ale= issues? :religion ;as 0ery *ig at that ,oint= and not ?fe)ale issues? :;o)en and do)estic life ;ere often studied in that era *y the )ale anthro,ologistEs ;ife=. /onetheless, as a result of o*eying the rule of ;riting e0erything do;n in the fieldC and as a result too of ;orking ;ith 7o*ert Paul ;ho, *ecause of his -reudian interests, did in fact study childrearing and other ?fe)ale issues,? 9 had *uilt u, a s)all stock of o*ser0ations on ;o)en and gender a)ong the Sher,as that 9 ;as a*le to use for this ,a,er. The second first in the ,a,er is the focus on ;o)en. 9 had al;ays *een concerned ;ith ?gender as a cultural syste).? 9 could ne0er understand ho; one could study ;o)en ;ithout understanding first the o0erarching set of )eanings that defined fe)ale and )ale, ;o)en and )en, in the first ,lace. 9 ;ould still strongly argue for that ,osition. But ;ith )y gro;ing in+ ,age1''#

Page ''! terest in ,ractice theory, it see)ed that one needed to look at real gendered agents in relation to the cultural orderat the ;ays in ;hich the cultural categories *oth facilitated and constrained agency, and at the ;ays in ;hich agents faithfully enacted or radically stretched the cultural categories. This ;as the *eginning of such an effort. 4et e0en as 9 tried to see ;o)en as agents in this ,a,er, 9 argued for the i),ortance of realiIing that ?;o)en? did not constitute a unified su*Ject. The ,a,er thus linked u, ;ith 0arious e)erging ,ositions in fe)inist theory;ith a ,oststructuralist argu)ent against the notion of the unified su*Ject, ;ith the argu)ent against inter,retations grounded in *inary :gender= o,,ositions, and ;ith the )ore general shift to insisting on the linkage *et;een gender and other for)s of ineHuality. Preface .% $: The field;ork for the larger ,roJect on the history of Sher,a )onastic institutions :of ;hich the founding of 8e0uche is one ,art= ;as conducted in .%!%, su,,orted *y the /ational Science -oundation and the 6ni0ersity of Michigan. This ,a,er ;as ;ritten at the Center for 2d0anced Study in the Beha0ioral Sciences :Stanford, California=, ;ith su,,ort fro) the Center :/S- Grant WB/ '0#$0"= and fro) the Guggenhei) -oundation. 9 a) grateful to all these agencies. 9 also ;ish to thank Bar*ara 2IiI, /ancy Chodoro;, 7ay)ond Pelly, Pathryn March, and 3ouise Tilly for critical co))ents and suggestions. .. 9 )ean no disres,ect in talking of ?religious e),ire *uilding.? To s,read and i),ro0e Buddhist ,ractices *ya)ong other things*uilding )onasteries, is to ,erfor) acts of great )erit and 0irtue. '. The )or!a are either ;ido;ed or di0orced lay;o)en, or for)er nuns ;ho had *roken their 0o;s *y getting se(ually in0ol0ed ;ith )enoften, in the case of the 8e0uche )or!a, ;ith Teng*oche )onks. The nuns and the )or!a di0ide all donations eHually a)ong the)sel0es, e(ce,t that on one holiday :/yungne= the nuns do )ore e(tensi0e ritual ;ork, and so kee, a larger share. 9n addition, there is a ritual that ;as endo;ed *y the high reincarnate la)a in0ol0ed in the founding of Teng*oche )onastery, that should only *e ,erfor)ed *y the fully ordained nunsC therefore only they are fed *y the nunnery on that occasion. The general ter) for nun, *oth in address and reference, is ani. 5o;e0er in *oth )onasteries and nunneries, the fully ordained )e)*ers :tso!a= are contrasted ;ith the ?,eri,heral ones? :)or!a=. $. There is an i),ortant )yth a*out a fe)ale gelung ?long ago,? that is kno;n to all Sher,as, and that ser0es as a ,recedent for /yungne, an i),ortant ascetic ritual for lay ,eo,le :March .%!%: '!!+! C Ortner .%! : &.=. ". 3ands o;ned *y the nunnery as a ;hole are rented out to tenants, ;ho ,age1''! Page '' ;ork the land and gi0e *ack a share of the ,roduce. The transactions are handled *y the nyermu. &. The house is ,ri0ate ,ro,erty, and )ay *e ,assed on to another )e)*er of the nunEs fa)ily ;ho )ay enter the nunnery at a later date. Should the nun die ;ith no fa)ily )e)*er to re,lace her, the house re0erts to her nearest )ale kin ;ho )ay sell it, or hold it for a future nun in the fa)ily if they ;ish. 9f the nun *reaks her 0o;s, ho;e0er, the house isin theoryconfiscated *y the nunnery as a cor,oration, ;hich )ay then sell it to a ne; nun. #. Each nun contri*utes so)e tso foods for the ritual, ,aying for her contri*utions fro) interest on an endo;)ent ,ro0ided *y the ,re0ious head la)a of Teng*oche )onastery. Teng*oche )onks do the sa)e ritual on the t;enty+fifth of each )onth. :The dates are *ased on the Ti*etan calendar.= !. The endo;)ent for the annual o*ser0ance of yerne ;as ,ro0ided *y a sister+in+la; :@= of one of the ;ealthy s,onsors of *oth Teng*oche and 8e0uche, Par)a 3a)a. The endo;)ent ;as in the for) of cash, to *e lent out at interest, and the interest ;as to su,,ort the ritual. But no; the ,rinci,al is gone. Peo,le *orro;ed, no*ody ,aid *ackC the nun telling )e this added ruefully that she still has all the ,ro)issory notes. /o; each ani su,,orts herself for the yerne ,eriod, reduced to a*out se0en days. . /ga;ang Sa)den ;as on her se0enth hus*and in .%&" :0on -Srer+5ai)endorf .%#": ' $=. This nu)*er of s,ouses is Huite high for any Sher,a, )ale or fe)ale. The fact that /ga;ang Sa)den *roke her 0o;s, ho;e0er, is not unusual. The 0o;s are taken for life, *ut there is an esti)ated &0 ,ercent rate of ?falling? for *oth nuns and )onks.

%. They ;ere descri*ed to )e as ongchermu, a ter) )eaning ,o;erful, *ut in an illegiti)ate, strong+)an sort of ;ay. The infor)ant on this ,oint said that ?they took e0eryoneEs )oney.? .0. Polygyny is relati0ely rare in Sher,a societyaround ' ,ercent :3ang and 3ang .%!.: $C 0on -Srer+ 5ai)endorf .%#": # C O,,itI .%# : .''=. ... 7u)*u )onastery is :usually= s,elled 7ong+,hug in Ti*etan. 9n general, 9 a) s,elling nati0e ter)s throughout the ,a,er )ore or less as they are ,ronounced *y the Sher,as. Most of the ter)s ha0e Ti*etan s,ellings, ;hich 9 a) not ,ro0iding, as the ,ri)ary audience is not assu)ed to *e area s,ecialists. .'. There ;ere ten altogether: 2)a 8igi, /ga;ang Sa)den, 2ni Ahin*a :the elder=, 2ni Ae,a, /ga;ang PonJok, and /ga;ang 8iki, all of Phu)Jung 0illageC /ga;ang Ong)u and /ga;ang Chokar of /auJeC 2ni Tarchin of AhungC and 2ni /ga;ang Aang)u fro) a 0illage in the Pharak area. .$. The letter of authoriIation fro) the higher religious authority is a standard ,art of the ,rocess of launching any religious institution. ,age1'' Page ''% .". EEAatul 7i),oche? is one of se0eral na)es for the head la)a of 7u)*u )onastery. 5e is also referred to as the 7i)*i Sangye, the 8Iarong 3a)a, or the 8Iarong tul)u :reincarnate=. 5is ,ersonal religious na)e ;as /ga;ang TenIing /or*u. 2gain 9 ;ill not ,ro0ide Ti*etan s,ellings here, although they ;ill *e ,ro0ided in the )onogra,h :Ortner .% %=. .&. Peo,le traditionally *ring the clothes of a ne;ly deceased fa)ily )e)*er to a )onastery as gifts, and the head la)a redistri*utes the) as he sees fit. .#. The )ain e(,ense of any construction ,roJect is the cost of feeding all the ;orkers ;ho, as in this case, 0olunteer, or in the case of ,ri0ate house+*uilding, contri*ute la*or as ,art of reci,rocal kinshi, o*ligations. The ;orkers do not get ,aid :or ,erha,s only a token a)ount= *ut they )ust *e fed throughout their ti)e on the ,roJect. .!. 9ndeed, one 8e0uche nun did suggest that the i),etus for *uilding the nunnery had co)e fro) 3a)a Gulu, the head of Teng*oche )onastery: ?3a)a Gulu said the nuns needed a ,lace.? . . -or a fe; sources on the ,osition of ;o)en in classical Buddhis), see 8. Paul .%!%C 5orner .%$0C and March n.d. -or a fe; sources on ;o)en in Ti*etan Buddhis), see March .%!%C and Miller .% 0. .%. There are certain la*or e(change )echanis)s *et;een fa)ilies, and ;ealthy fa)ilies )ay also ha0e access to :non+Sher,a= ;age la*orers. By and large, ho;e0er, )ost fa)ilies do their o;n ;ork. '0. Occasionally, in a ;ealthy fa)ily, a daughter ;ill *e gi0en a field andGor an ani)al or t;o. March :,ersonal co))unication= says that cattle are Huite co))only ,art of Solu do;riesC )y i),ression is that the gi0ing of an occasional field see)s only to take ,lace in Phu)*u, ;here local endoga)y is )uch )ore freHuent. /onetheless, girls are not nor)ati0ely entitled to such ,roducti0e resources, and ;hether any gi0en girl gets the) or not is u, to her father. '.. 9n rare cases, a ;o)an )ay choose to re)ain single, and yet not to *eco)e a nun. Then her father )ay set her u, ;ith a s)all house and so)e land to for) an inde,endent household. But again, such an arrange)ent de,ends on the dis,osition of the indi0idual father. ''. /o;adays, this ,attern is changing. E0en in the ,ast, ho;e0er, the young ,eo,lees,ecially sonsoften had some 0eto ,o;er o0er an arranged )arriage. 9ndeed, in so)e cases the ,arentsE ?arrange)ents? ;ere )erely ratifications of a relationshi, already initiated *y the girl and *oy. /onetheless, the general nor) and ,ractice ;as for the ,arents to arrange childrenEs )arriages. '$. March :.%!.: . .= found that '& ,ercent of Solu ;o)en )arry into their )othersE natal 0illages, and another '$ ,ercent )arry sons of ;o)en ;ho had *een *orn in, *ut )arried out of, their o;n natal 0illages. But ,age1''%

Page '$0 :a= no girl can *e assured of such a )arriage in ad0ance, and :*= e0en if, as in these cases, the girl has kin ;here she )arries, the ne; 0illage is still a ne; social syste) to ;hich she )ust ada,t. '". 9n esta*lished )arriages, Sher,a ;o)en do not a,,ear to )ind their hus*andsE long a*sences. 9n ne;er )arriages, ho;e0er, these a*sences see) )ore ,ro*le)atic, ,artlyone )ay inter,ret*ecause the ;ife is insecure in the ne; 0illage, and ,artly *ecause :in se0eral cases that 9 kne; )ore directly= the ;ife ;as uncertain a*out the hus*andEs co))it)ent to co)e *ack. '&. She is ,ro*a*ly, ho;e0er, still gamchu, although ,erha,s less so than lay;o)en. :There is another for) of ,ollutioncalled thip;hich 9 ha0e not e),hasiIed in this ,a,er. Certain fe)ale secretions)enstrual and child*irth *loodcreate thip, *ut then so do certain )ale e(u0iae, and )any generically hu)an ones. On *alance, thip, unlike gamchu, is not es,ecially se(+linked Lsee Ortner .%!$aM.= '#. The founding nun, /ga;ang Sa)den, ;as a,,arently a*le to )aintain so)e sort of econo)ic inde,endence e0en after *reaking her 0o;s, since she continued to gi0e religious donations in her o;n na)e. Possi*ly her ,arents andGor her *rothers allo;ed her to kee, the resources she had *een allotted at the ti)e she *eca)e a nun, e0en after she left the nunnery. 9t ;ould *e interesting to kno; ;hether this ;asGis ,ossi*le for other for)er nuns. '!. 8es,ite her se0en hus*ands :see note = /ga;ang Sa)den a,,arently re)ained, and continued to 'e considered 'y others, a de0outly religious and highly )eritorious indi0idual. <ith one of her hus*ands, she ;orked out an arrange)ent for e(changing ,eriods of religious retreat, ;herein each ;ould ,ro0ide for the needs of the other ;hile the other ;as in seclusion. 2s noted a*o0e, she also continued to )ake su*stantial donations to religious institutions :0on -Srer+5ai)endorf .%#": ' '+ $=. ' . 9n so)e cases, ;here the ;ife has no *rothers, a )an )ay )o0e at )arriage to her house and take o0er her fatherEs ,ro,erty. '%. Many of the a,,arent e(ce,tions can *e accounted for. So)e of the ?only sons? are illegiti)ate sons of nuns. So)e of the other e(ce,tions are fro) ,oor fa)ilies ;here there is little or no ,ro,erty to di0ide. :They are likely to *eco)e ser0ants of the head la)a or of another )onk.= -inally, e0en in *etter+off fa)ilies, an eldest or youngest son )ay insist u,on a )onastic calling and e0entually get his ;ay, or alternati0ely )ay *e considered *y the ,arents to *e too stu,id or i),ractical for ;orldly affairs and thus *e sent to the )onastery. $0. The argu)ents here are drastically o0er+si),lified. The full account )ay *e found in Ortner .% %. ,age1'$0 Page '$. Si( Gender 5ege)onies Preface .%%#: This ,a,er ;as )y first )aJor atte),t to look *ack at so)e of the de*ates generated *y )y o;n and Michelle 7osaldoEs ,a,ers in #oman$ Culture$ and Society, including the de*ate o0er ;hether or not ?)ale do)inance? is uni0ersal, and the de*ate o0er Michelle 7osaldoEs use of the do)esticG,u*lic o,,osition to e(,lain uni0ersal )ale do)inance. By this ti)e so)e of the nastier tones in the de*ate had faded *ack, as fe)inist anthro,ology and fe)inist scholarshi, shifted to ne; terrains. 2t the sa)e ti)e, ne; theoretical tools had *eco)e a0aila*le7ay)ond <illia)sEs ada,tation of Gra)sciEs notion of ?hege)ony,? the further de0elo,)ent of ,ractice+*ased a,,roaches, the greater anthro,ological use of historical ,ers,ecti0esthat allo;ed )e to reo,en the Huestion in ;hat see)ed to *e useful ;ays. Preface .%%0: This ,a,er has had a 0ery long history. 2n early 0ersion ;as drafted Jointly *y 5arriet <hitehead and )e for a sy),osiu) on the occasion of the Bryn Ma;r College centennial in .% & :;e ;ere once u,on a ti)e class)ates at Bryn Ma;r=. There ;ere se0eral Joint re0ised drafts, and then se0eral indi0idually authored drafts. The ,resent 0ersion, ;hile indi0idually authored *y )e, *uilds hea0ily on all those earlier efforts. 9t is no e(aggeration to say that ;ithout 5arrietEs contri*utions, at )any le0els, this ,a,er ;ould not e(ist. 9n addition, 9 ;ish to thank 7uth Behar, /ancy Chodoro;, Sal Cucchiari, Carol 8elaney, 7ay)ond Pelly, Bruce Pnauft, 7ichard 3e,,ert, Bruce 3incoln, Bocelyn 3innekin, Michael PeletI, and 2**y Ste;art for e(tre)ely hel,ful co))ents and criticis)s. Michael PeletI also ,ro0ided )e ;ith an e(tended *riefing, and se0eral re,rints, on the ;o)en+centered gender syste)s of Malaysia and Su)atra, for ;hich 9 a) e(tre)ely grateful. 7achael Cohen ;as kind enough to redo the references for )e, in addition to

doing her usual e(,ert Jo* of technical ,roduction of the )anuscri,t. 9 thank her. .. Parla Poe;e :.% 0= has recently used the ter) )atriarchy as a synony) for )atrifocality, *ut this is not co))on usage. '. E0ery author tends to ha0e his or her fa0orite 0oca*ulary for these things. -or 0arious reasons, ?status? )ight ha0e *een ,refera*le to ?,restige,? if only *ecause ,restige tends to lend itself to an i)age of accu)ulationas in BourdieuEs notion of ?sy)*olic ca,italEE :.%!!, .% "=;hich is often ina,,ro,riate to ,articular cases. But *ecause Sexual Meanings *egan ;ith ?,restige,? and *ecause this ,a,er ;as ,resented at a conference on ,restige, 9 ha0e stuck ;ith the ter). -or a useful o0er0ie; of 0arious a,,roaches to ,restige, see 5atch :.% %=. $. The issue of fe)ale autono)y has *een e),hasiIed *y Eleanor 3eacock in Myths of Male %ominance :.% .=. ,age1'$. Page '$' ". See Ortner :.% "= for a discussion of ?,ractice theory,? an u)*rella ter) for a range of ;ork in 0arious disci,lines that focuses on the relationshi, *et;een the actions of actors and the ordering of society and culture. &. 9n an earlier draft of this ,a,er, 9 e(a)ined the case of 2tJeh as a case of a ?fe)ale+centered? hege)ony. The general sha,e of the argu)ent ;as si)ilar to the 2nda)an discussion :*elo;=, and since there ;ere s,ace restrictions, 9 decided to lea0e it out. 7eaders interested in this case )ay consult Siegel :.%#%=, Tanner :.%!"=, and Baya;ardena :.%!!a, *=. 2n e0en stronger ?fe)ale+centered? hege)ony has *een descri*ed recently *y Michael PeletI for /egeri Se)*ilan :in the sa)e general region as 2tJeh=see PeletI :.% !a, *C .% =. #. 2 nice e(a),le of this a,,roach )ay *e seen in a recent article :.% %= *y 7ena 3eder)an. !. The o0erall logic of the argu)ent here is si)ilar in so)e ;ays to PellyEs argu)ents a*out structural contradictions in Etoro social structure :Pelly .%!!=. . 7ay)ond Pelly has *rought to )y attention the fact that 7o*ert 3o;ie :.%'0= )entioned the 2nda)an 9slanders as one of t;o e(a),les of egalitarian societies in the ethnogra,hic record :the other ;as the Toda=. 3o;ie ;as Jousting ;ith the earlier generation of e0olutionists :e.g., Bachofen .%#! L. #.M=, ;ho had ,ostulated :a)ong other things= an e0olutionary stage of ?,ri)iti0e )atriarchy.? %. 7adcliffe+Bro;n discusses these :.%'': .!'+!"=. .0. 3est this change of ,ers,ecti0e *e )isunderstood, it is ;orth stating that 9 a) not acce,ting the 0ie; that all si),le societies ;ere once egalitarian. 9 assu)e that si),le societies ha0e al;ays e(hi*ited, as they continue to e(hi*it, a range of gender status ,atterns, fro) e(tre)e )ale do)inance to relati0e egalitarianis). ... 9 ha0e also ado,ted the strategy of not citing s,ecific ,ages in the t;o sources. 9 a) not entirely co)forta*le ;ith this choice, *ut the alternati0e ;as to ha0e one or )ore citations attached to e0ery sentence. 8irect Huotations are of course ,ro0ided ;ith full citations. .'. Man re,orts *oth )ale and fe)ale *achelor residences :Man . $: .0 =, *ut the fe)ale residences had disa,,eared *y 7adcliffe+Bro;nEs ti)e :7adcliffe+Bro;n .%'': $"=. .$. 7adcliffe+Bro;n )akes an a)*iguous state)ent a*out hus*ands ha0ing had the right to ?,unish? their ;i0es for adultery :7adcliffe+Bro;n .%'': &0=, ;ith the ;ife not *eing descri*ed as ha0ing the sa)e right. This ;ould see) to indicate a )ore asy))etrical situation, *ut 7adcliffe+Bro;n also notes that a )an ;as constrained fro) ,unishing his ;ife too se0erely, *ecause of fear of retri*ution fro) the ;ifeEs kin, so that the ,un+ ,age1'$'

Page '$$ ish)ent generally a)ounted to no )ore than ?0iolent ;ords? :.%'': &0=. 9n another ,lace he says that ?0ery often the hus*and see)s to condone the adultery of his ;ife? :.%'': !0=, see)ingly canceling out his other co))ents. .". See also 7adcliffe+Bro;n .%'': ! . .&. Cucchiari has suggested that ,atterns of child e(change tend to *e associated ;ith greater gender egalitarianis), insofar as they stand in, as it ;ere, for e(change of ;o)en :Cucchiari .% .=. -or the larger theoretical argu)ents on ?the e(change of ;o)en,? see 7u*in :.%!&=. .#. <ithout directly addressing the 7osaldo article, Boan Scott :.% = )akes si)ilar co))ents a*out the analytic use of *inary o,,ositions in gender analysis :e.g., .% : "$=. .!. 2nna 4eat)an, in a 0ery interesting essay :.% "=, )akes si)ilar argu)ents a*out the generality of the uni0ersalis)G,articularis) distinction and a*out the intrinsically greater social and cultural 0alue of uni0ersalistic orientations. My ,osition ,arallels hers Huite closely on this ,oint. But she chooses to continue to use the do)esticG,u*lic ter)inology, ;hereas 9 ha0e chosen to su*ordinate it to the enco),assingGenco),assed ter)inology, for the reasons e(,lained. . . Man . $: %#. 7adcliffe+Bro;n says that his infor)ants clai)ed that ;o)en )ight occasionally take u, the role *ut that sha)ans nor)ally ;ere )en :7adcliffe+Bro;n .%'': .!#=. .%. Birth does not a,,ear to ha0e *een ritualiIed. This does not, ho;e0er, esta*lish anything one ;ay or another, since e0en in the initiation rites the re*irthing ;as not re,resented as an i)itation of the ,hysical act of *irth *ut as feeding the ?ne;*orn? initiate. '0. By the .%!0s, al)ost none of the indigenous ,o,ulation ;as left :Singh .%! : '!=. '.. 9n the case of households headed *y fe)ales, the do)estic rituals ;ere ,resu)a*ly ,erfor)ed *y the ;o)anEs *rother. ''. Collier and 4anagisako :.% %= ha0e recently critiHued the sacredG,rofane distinction in ter)s si)ilar to the earlier critiHue of the do)esticG,u*lic o,,osition. <hile it is indeed the case that these ter)s )ay carry certain kinds of ,ro*le)atic cultural *aggage, the analytic effort here is to de+construct the)to unco0er the ;ays in ;hich they ,lay a role in constituting a gi0en order of gender relations, and the ;ays in ;hich their gender clai)s )ay *e culturally su*0erted o0er ti)e. '$. Gold)an .%!0: '.'. Gold)an see)s to link the e)ergence of a )ore ,urely seniority+*ased syste) of succession to the shift fro) a so+called ?traditional? rank syste) *ased on 0arious for)s of sanctity to a so+called ?stratified? syste) )ore akin to a class structure. This ;ould suggest then ,age1'$$ Page '$" that ;o)enEs status impro,ed ;ith a shift fro) rank to class, so)ething that ;ould not ha0e *een ,redicted *y )any theories of ;o)enEs status. The ;hole Huestion ;ould ha0e to *e in0estigated )uch )ore closely on a co),arati0e *asis, *ut it illustrates ;ell the co),le(ities of the relationshi, that )ay o*tain *et;een gender asy))etry and other for)s of asy))etry. '". 2nother theoretically ,redicted correlate of the relati0e eHuality of 5a;aiian )en and ;o)en relates to the relati0e hege)ony of kinshi,+centered definitions of gender o0er )arital ones. The argu)ents ;ere de0elo,ed in Ortner .% . :this 0olu)e=, *ut are too co),le( to *e su))ariIed here. '&. 9 a) a;are of the de*ates o0er DaleriEs account :Charlot .% !C Daleri .% !=. 9 a) not co),etent to e0aluate all the details, *ut DaleriEs account does not see) to )e ;ildly out of line ;ith other literature on ancient 5a;aii. '#. 9n a 0ery interesting article, *ut one ;hich is occasionally difficult to follo;, Ste,hanie Seto 3e0in )akes a si)ilar argu)ent :.%# =. Daleri also indicates so)e lines of historical analysis in his .% ' article. '!. The infor)ation on these e0ents a,,ears to *e of 0ery high Hualityit is e(tre)ely detailed, and there is significant agree)ent a*out ;hat ha,,ened a)ong the 0arious chroniclers. 9 rely here on secondary sources, as cited throughout this section.

' . 3iholihoEs dee, disco)fort ;as still e0ident to o*ser0ers: ?2fter the guests ;ere seated and had *egun to eat the king took t;o or three turns around each ta*le as if to see ;hat ,assed at each and then suddenly, and ;ithout any ,re0ious ;arning to any *ut those in the secret, seated hi)self in a 0acant chair at the ;o)enEs ta*le, and *egan to eat 0oraciously, *ut ;as e0idently )uch ,ertur*ed? :Puykendall .%$ : # =. '%. Proe*er :.%" : "0"= ;as an e(ce,tion. 5e argued that the o0erthro; of the )apu syste) in 5a;aii ;as a case of ?cultural fatigue.? 5is ,osition did not gain )any su,,orters. $0. 2lthough 9 lu),ed together Susan Carol 7ogers :.%!&= and Peggy Sanday :.% .= in the earlier discussion, 7ogers does tend to take a )ore historically dyna)ic 0ie;, at least for ,art of her argu)ent. Se0en So, (s -e)ale to Male 2s /ature 9s to Culture@ Pre,ared for the ,anel, ?-ro) the 2nthro,ology of <o)en to the Gendering of 2nthro,ology,? organiIed *y 3ouise 3a),here and 7ayna 7a,, at the 2)erican 2nthro,ological 2ssociation annual )eetings, /o0e)*er .%%&, <ashington, 8.C. .. Many thanks for e(cellent co))ents to /ancy Chodoro;, 3ouise ,age1'$" Page '$& 3a),here, Budith Stacey, 2*igail Ste;art, Marilyn Strathern, Ti)othy 8. Taylor, Marya DanEt 5ul, and 5arriet <hitehead. '. There ;as another line of argu)ent against the uni0ersal )ale do)inance ,osition, re,resented in ,art *y Sanday :.% .=. The 0arious ,ositions are discussed relati0ely fully in ?Gender 5ege)onies? :this 0olu)e=. $. <hen 9 ;as in graduate school at the 6ni0ersity of Chicago, for e(a),le, the introductory graduate core course ;as called ?Syste)s.? 9 think it still is, *ut in the .%#0s the title ;as genuinely descri,ti0e of the content of the course. ". Maria 3e,o;sky :.%%$= has ,u*lished a full+length )onogra,hic study of the ,eo,le of Danatinai, ;ho) she sho;s to ha0e a 0ery si)ilar configuration. &. These ,oints of cultural 0ariation ;ere at the heart of Ortner and <hitehead .% .. #. Marilyn StrathernEs *rilliant essay, ?/o /ature, /o Culture . . .? :.% 0=, ;as a )aJor e(ce,tion to these charges against 0ature$ Culture and Gender as a ;hole. 2)ong other things, Strathern s,ecifically recogniIed that the structure could *e ,resent ;ithout cultural la*eling, and interrogated a range of cultural data for this kind of indirect structural ,resence, 5er conclusion that the linkage did not hold for the 5agen case ;as Huite ,ersuasi0e. !. The ,ro*le) of *inary o,,ositions in relation to the nature, culture, and gender de*ate has *een discussed *y 7osaldo :.% 0= and )ore recently *y Tsing :.%%0=. Both argue that analysis *ased on *inary o,,ositions ,roduces essentialiIed 0ie;s of the categoriesC *oth use this argu)ent to launch an alternati0e, ,olitics+ of+)eaning, kind of a,,roach. . See again Sexual Meanings :Ortner and <hitehead .% .=, as ;ell as the ,a,ers in this 0olu)e. Eight Borderland Politics and Erotics This ,a,er is *ased on reading large a)ounts of e(,edition literature, as ;ell as long+ter) ethnogra,hic and oral history field;ork a)ong the Sher,as. The )ost recent stint of field;ork ;as in 2ugust .%%0, in0ol0ing intensi0e inter0ie;ing of )ountaineering Sher,as, )ale and fe)ale, in Path)andu. Su,,ort for that tri, ca)e fro) the 5orace 7ackha) School of Graduate Studies at the 6ni0ersity of Michigan, to ;hich 9 a) 0ery grateful. -or 0alua*le co))ents on this ,a,er 9 ;ish to thank Dincanne 2da)s, 3aura 2hearn, /ancy Chodoro;, Coralynn 8a0is, Bi) -isher, Peter 5. 5ansen, 3iisa Malkki, 2*igail Ste;art, and Ti) Taylor. 9 a) also inde*ted to an e(cellent discussion at the 8e,art)ent of 2nthro,ology, Princeton ,age1'$&

Page '$# 6ni0ersity, ;here Dincanne 2da)s, 5ildred GeertI, 7ena 3eder)an, and )any others )ade i),ortant ,oints. .. 9n a *road sense, )uch of the recent ;ork *y historians and anthro,ologists on the intercultural dyna)ics of colonialis) and ,ost+colonialis), as ;ell as a*out such ;orld historical cultural encounters as the Euro,ean ?disco0ery?Gin0asion of the <estern he)is,here :e.g., Green*latt .%%$= or the Pacific :e.g., Sahlins .% .=, is ,art of this trend to;ard a *orderlands ,ers,ecti0e. '. Starting in the .%!0s, the Sher,as generally sto,,ed using the hierarchical ter) ?sahi*? for the international )ountaineers. But the ter) is handy for 0arious reasons, including the fact of signalling the continuing ineHuality of the relationshi,, and 9 ;ill continue to use it here. $. The international )ountaineersE 0ie; of this relationshi, is chronicled in a 0ast and fascinating e(,edition literature ;hich is )y )ain source for the ?sahi*? side of this ,a,er. <ith the e(ce,tion of TenIing /orgayEs 0ery 0alua*le auto*iogra,hies :.%&&, .%!!=, the Sher,as ha0e thus far not ;ritten *ooks descri*ing e(,editions fro) their o;n ,ers,ecti0es. The Sher,a side is thus asse)*led fro) )y o;n inter0ie;s and other ethnogra,hic ;ork, as ;ell as re,resentations of Sher,asE ;ords and 0ie;s as found in other ethnogra,hies, Journalistic accounts, and the e(,edition literature. ". 9n that sa)e era, an 2)erican na)ed EliIa*eth Pno;lton ;ent along as a non+cli)*ing )e)*er ;ith the all+)ale Ger)an+2)erican e(,edition to /anga Par*at. Pno;lton ;as an e(,erienced cli)*er ;ho had ?)ade )any ascents,? *ut Joined this e(,edition ?to handle the English+s,eaking ne;s,a,er ;ork? :Pno;lton .%$$:.&=. &. 2ccording to the fla, of her *ook, Bennifer Bourdillon ?s,ent )any ;eeks entirely alone a)ong the Sher,asthe first ;hite ;o)an e0er to do so.? 5er hus*and To) ;as at that ti)e cli)*ing on Cho Oyu. #. Pogan ;as killed along ;ith three )ale Sher,as in an a0alanche on this e(,edition. !. <o)en fro) other ,arts of Euro,e, and 0irtually all of 2sia, ha0e *eco)e strong ,resences in 5i)alayan )ountaineering since the .%!0s. So)e of the) ;ill )ake a,,earances later in this ,a,er. . E(,licit state)ents a*out se(ual orientation are not )ade until 0ery recently, and then only in ,assing, in the )ainstrea) literature :see da Sil0a .%%': ?9ntroduction?C OE/eill .%%'=. %. -or a 0ery *ohe)ian e(a),le, see Moffatt .%#.. G;en Moffatt cli)*ed in Euro,e in the late .%"0s and the .%&0s. .0. -or )ore on ?*ig ,eo,le? and ?s)all ,eo,le? in Sher,a society, see Ortner .%! and .% %. -or )ore on nunneries, see Ortner .% $ :this 0olu)e= and .% %: cha,. %.

,age1'$# Page '$! ... So)e of these ;ere recorded *y the ;riter and long+ti)e /e,al resident To) 3aird, ;ho ;as kind enough to send )e so)e of his un,u*lished )aterials on this. .'. 9 ;as also ,art of a )arried cou,le the first ti)e 9 ;as in the field. This certainly had an effect. <hen 9 ;ent *ack as an un)arried ;o)an on )y second tri,, there ;as a definite rise in the le0el of flirtation. /onetheless 9 still felt co),letely ,hysically safe. My *iggest fears ;ere of *eing *itten *y a dog :;hich did ha,,en once=, and of falling off so)e of the )ore terrifying *ridges. .$. Ba)es -isher, ,ersonal co))unication. 2s far as 9 kno;, 3aird has not ,u*lished this account. 9 ha0e tried to contact hi) for confir)ation *ut ha0e *een una*le to do so. .". 9 ha0e *een una*le to get fir) infor)ation on the legal de0elo,)ents in /e,al relating to )ariJuana and hashish. 2ccording to one infor)ant, ;ho ans;ered )y Huery on the <e* :.%%#=, ?hashish and )ariJuana ;ere outla;ed in /e,al in the s,ring of .%!$.? 2ccording to another infor)ant, ?only the sale of )ariJuana and hashish is outla;ed, not ,ossession or consu),tion.? .&. -or a re)arka*le first+,erson account of one of these )arriages, see 8onna M. Sher,a :.%%"=. .#. /ineteen se0enty+fi0e ;as in fact 9nternational <o)enEs 4ear. Bunko Ta*ei later said she did not realiIe it at the ti)e. The in0ention of things like ?9nternational <o)enEs 4ear? *y glo*al agencies like the 6nited /ations clearly has, at least in a case like this, )ore effect than )ight cynically *e e(,ected. .!. Bi) Curran is 0ery uncharita*le a*out Tullis: he calls her a ?house;ife? ;ho ?hero+;orshi,,ed? her )ale cli)*ing ,artner, and sees her as ha0ing *een a)*itious *eyond her a*ilities :.% !:&.=. . . 9 ;ent to a ;o)enEs college, and in retros,ect 9 think it ;as for essentially these kinds of reasons. Perha,s this is the ,lace to thank Bryn Ma;r College, ;ithout ;hich 9 a) Huite sure 9 ;ould not *e doing ;hat 9 a) doing today. .%. 9n so)e cases there are )ore distur*ing issues in0ol0ed than ,ersonal inde,endence and freedo) to *e the *est. T;o )aJor ;o)en cli)*ers, Cherie Bre)er+Pa), and Stacy 2llison, descri*e leading li0es of out;ard gender radicalis) :including, in 2llisonEs case, getting to the to, of Mt. E0erest=, yet enduring dee,ly a*usi0e relationshi,s ;ith )en in their ,ri0ate li0es :Bre)er+Pa), .% !C 2llison .%%$=. '0. There ;as no dou*t a certain a)ount of )ale ho)oeroticis), if not actual ho)ose(ual relations, *et;een sahi*s and Sher,as, *ut none of this is ;ritten a*out. Most of the cases 9 a) a;are ofall at the le0el of gos+ ,age1'$! Page '$ si,are fro) the older generation of British ar)y officers ;ho stayed in /e,al after <orld <ar 99. 5o)ose(ual relations see) not to *e ,racticed a)ong Sher,a )en, as far as 7o*ert Paul :.%!0= or 9 could ascertain in earlier field;ork. But there is fairly ;ell+docu)ented )ale ho)ose(uality in so)e Ti*etan )onasteries :Goldstein .%#"=. '.. On ?orientalis),? see of course Said :.%! = and the no; 0ast literature on this su*Ject. 2lthough )any non+<estern Others are coded ?fe)ale,? )any others areas /andy :.% $= has discussedhy,er)asculiniIed. 9n the /e,al conte(t, the Gurkhas stand in this ,osition, ty,ed as disci,lined soldiers and ferocious ;arriors. The issues here are 0ery co),le(, and ;ill *e discussed )ore fully in Ortner n.d. *. ''. ?Triu),h and tragedy? is a standard co)*ination in )ountaineering. See Curran .% !. '$. By the ti)e the e(,edition took ,lace in .%! , ho;e0er, E0erest ;ould ha0e *een t;ice cli)*ed *y ;o)en, as noted earlier. '". They e0entually got )arried.

'&. Ba)es -isher :.%%0:.&"= re,orted a ,ro*le) of getting Sher,a ;o)en to gi0e ?serious res,onses? to a Huestionnaire ad)inistered *y a Sher,a research assistant. 2t issue here, 9 think, *eyond ngot.a or ?sha)e,? is the Huestion of ;ho ?has kno;ledge,EE and es,ecially the kind of kno;ledge *eing asked for in a Huestionnaire. 2t issue too )ay *e the gender of the research assistant and other )atters. One ;ould need to kno; )ore to e0aluate this o*ser0ation. '#. Thanks to Dincanne 2da)s for e),hasiIing this ,oint to )e. '!. She no; s,ends ,art of each year in S;itIerland, ;here her Sher,a hus*and is a cli)*ing and ski instructor. ' . This according to a Sher,a 0illager. 9 ha0e tried to learn )ore ,recisely ;hat the la; actually says, *ut ha0e *een una*le to do so. 2nd *y no;, in fact, it has *een changed again. '%. The ;ords he used in Sher,a ;ere metsenga ten, ;hich translates literally as *eing ?dirty.? 2nother indi0idual ,resent translated it into English as ?,ersonally sick.? $0. There are other Sher,a ;o)en ;ho cli)*ed in this ,eriod as ;ell, *ut a*out ;ho) little is kno;n. There ;as, for e(a),le, 2ng Maya, descri*ed as the younger sister of an e(,edition Sher,a, and another unna)ed ;o)an, *oth of ;ho) ,assed the )ountaineering course ;ith 2ng 5rita :)entioned in 2ng 5ritaEs inter0ie; *elo;=. -or a )ore recent, and fairly fully de0elo,ed, account of a Sher,a ;o)an trek leader, see Mitten .%%':'0&ff. $.. 2t the ti)e of the inter0ie; she and the sardar hus*and ;ere di+ ,age1'$ Page '$% 0orced. She had re)arried, and ;as running a tea sho, on the road *et;een Path)andu and Baudha. $'. ?2ng? is a di)inuti0e )arker :)eaning ?child? or EEyoung?=. 9t gets attached to )ost childrenEs na)es, and ;ith so)e ,eo,le it sticks for the rest of their li0es. 9t should also *e noted that /yi)i, as a )e)*er of the 3a)a clan, ;ould *e called ?/yi)i 3a)a? rather than /yi)i Sher,a. -or )ore on the distincti0eness of the 3a)a clan, see Ortner .%! . $$. There ;as no ta,ed transcri,t. The indented te(ts are 0er*ati) Huotes fro) the fieldnotes, ;hile the rest of the story is su))ariIed fro) the fieldnotes. $". /yi)i )ay not *e ?educated,? *ut she s,eaks at least four languages fluentlySher,a, /e,ali, -rench, and English. The inter0ie; ;as in English. $&. Pasang 3ha)uEs 0illage of origin did not a,,ear in any of the ,u*lished accounts. This infor)ation ca)e fro) Dincanne 2da)s :,ersonal co))unication=: 2da)s discusses Pasang 3ha)u as a ,ersonal friend, and as a ,u*lic+cultural ,heno)enon, e(tensi0ely :2da)s .%%# ,assi)=. $#. 9t a,,ears that the 9ndian <o)enEs E(,edition, and /yi)i 3a)a, did reach the su))it of E0erest. This ;ent 0irtually unre,orted. $!. 2da)s gi0es the figure as V$ ,000 :.%%#: &=. Either ;ay it is not a negligi*le a)ount of )oney. $ . Sle,t out in the o,en, or in a sno; ca0e. Cli)*ing on the u,,er reaches of E0erest is so difficult that )ost cli)*ers lea0e anything they can s,are *ehind, including tents. $%. TenIingEs citiIenshi, ;as contested. 5e actually li0ed in 8arJeeling, 9ndia, and *oth /e,al and 9ndia clai)ed hi). 5e hi)self ;as u,set *y de)ands that he declare his citiIenshi, for one or the other country e(clusi0ely :TenIing .%&&=. "0. See the de*ates in Himal: 7isal .%%$C Shar)a .%%$C 2charya .%%$C 3ie*er)an .%%$a, *C Sher,a+Padgett .%%$C and Sangroula .%%$. ".. 2ccording to Dincanne 2da)s :,ersonal co))unication=, Pasang 3ha)u and 3hak,uti Sher,a ;ere said to ha0e *een 0ery co),etiti0e as ;ell.

"'. 3aura 2hearn, then a doctoral candidate in anthro,ology at the 6ni0ersity of Michigan, ;as in the field in a Magar 0illage at the ti)e of the /e,al <o)enEs E(,edition. She ;rote in a letter to )e: ?9tEs *een interesting for )e to talk to /e,ali ;o)en a*out PasangEs death: all the :educated= Path)andu ;o)en 9E0e s,oken ;ith strongly su,,ort PasangEs efforts and see) ins,ired *y her achie0e)ent, des,ite the tragedy that follo;ed it. <o)en in )y o;n /e,ali fa)ily :educated as ;ell as uneducated=, ho;+ ,age1'$% Page '"0 e0er, consider PasangEs desire to cli)* )ountains at *est folly, and at ;orst, es,ecially ;hen considering her three children, cri)inal? :letter dated '& May, .%%$=. "$. 2 fa)ous historical hus*and+;ife *usiness ,artnershi, is that of Sangye, the founder of Chi;ong )onastery, and his ;ife, in the early decades of the t;entieth century :Ortner .% %=. -or an e(a),le of a Sher,a hus*and ;ho su,,orted his ;ife cli)*ing, ;ritten fro) a )ale ,oint of 0ie;, see TenIing /orgay a*out his relationshi, ;ith his third ;ife :TenIing .%!!: $%=. "". /eedless to say, ?first+;orld? )en are a large ,art of the story too, *ut that is a different essay. See Ortner n.d. a. ,age1'"0 Page '".

3iterature Cited 2*u+3ughod, 3ila. .%%'. ?<riting against Culture.? 9n Recapturing Anthropology: #or)ing in the Present$ edited *y 7. G. -o(. Santa -e: School of 2)erican 7esearch Press. 2charya, Ma)ta. .%%$. ?2 True 5eroine.? Himal #:"= :BulyG2ugust=: &. 2da)s, Dincanne. .%%#. Tigers of the Sno! =and other <irtual Sherpas>: An *thnography of Himalayan *ncounters: Princeton: Princeton 6ni0ersity Press. 2hearn, 3aura. .%%&. ?2ltering 2gency: Changing Conce,tions of 2genti0e -orces in Marriage a)ong Magars in /e,al.? Panel on ?2gency,? 222 )eetings, <ashington, 8.C. 2lcoff, 3inda. .%%" L.% M. ?Cultural -e)inis) 0s. Post+Structuralis): The 9dentity Crisis in -e)inist Theory.? 9n 8irks, Eley, and Ortner, o,. cit. 2llison, Stacy, ;ith Peter Carlin. .%%$. Beyond the -imits: A #oman4s Triumph on *,erest. Boston: 3ittle, Bro;n. Another Ascent to the #orld4s Highest Pea)?omolangma: .%!&. Peking: -oreign 3anguages Press. 2nIaldua, Gloria. .% !. Borderlands -a "rontera: San -rancisco: S,instersG2unt 3ute. 2,,adurai, 2rJun. .%%.. ?Glo*al Ethnosca,es: /otes and Uueries for a Transnational 2nthro,ology.? 9n Recapturing Anthropology: #or)ing in the Present$ edited *y 7. G. -o(. Santa -e: School of 2)erican 7esearch Press. 2tkinson, Bane. .%%0. ?5o; Gender Makes a 8ifference in <ana Society.? 9n 2tkinson and Errington, o,. cit. 2tkinson, Bane, and Shelly Errington, eds. .%%0. Po!er and %ifference: Gender in (sland Southeast Asia: Stanford: Stanford 6ni0ersity Press. ,age1'".

Page '"' 2IiI, Bar*ara /. .%!#. ?2ni Chodon: Portrait of a Buddhist /un.? -o)a ':"$+"#. . .%! . Ti'etan "rontier "amilies: 8urha), /.C.: Carolina 2cade)ic Press. Bachofen, B.B. .%#! L. #.M. Myth$ Religion$ and Mother Right: Translated *y 7al,h Mannhei). Princeton: Princeton 6ni0ersity Press. Bakan, 8a0id. .%##. The %uality of Human *xistence: Boston: Beacon Press. BarIelai, Shuli. .%%0. ?7eading ESno; <hiteE: The MotherEs Story.? Signs .&:.=:&.&+$". Baudrillard, Bean. .% . Selected #ritings: Edited *y Mark Poster. Stanford: Stanford 6ni0ersity Press.

Beaglehole, Ernest. .%".. Pangai$ a <illage in Tonga: <ellington, /e; Aealand: Polynesian Society. Beaglehole, Ernest, and Pearl Beaglehole. .%$ . *thnology of Pu)apu)a: Bernice P. Bisho, Museu) Bulletin .&0. 5onolulu: Bisho, Museu). Behar, 7uth. .%%$. Translated #oman: Crossing the Border !ith *speran.a4s Story: Boston: Beacon Press. Best, Elsdon. .%'". The Maori: ' 0ols. <ellington, /e; Aealand: Board of Maori Ethnological 7esearch. Biersack, 2letta. .%!". ?Matrilaterality in Patrilineal Syste)s: The Tongan Case.? Curl BeHuest PriIe Essay .%!", un,u*lished. Birkett, Bill, and Bill Peascod. .% %. #omen Clim'ing: 6@@ ;ears of Achie,ement: Seattle: The Mountaineers. Bloch, Maurice, and Bean 5. Bloch. .% 0. ?<o)an and the 8ialectics of /ature in Eighteenth+Century -rench Thought.? 9n MacCor)ack and Strathern, o,. cit. Bloo), 3isa. .%%$. Gender on (ce: American (deologies of Polar *xpeditions: Minnea,olis: 6ni0ersity of Minnesota Press. Blu), 2rlene. .% 0. Annapurna: A #oman4s Place: San -rancisco: Sierra Clu* Books. Bonington, Chris. .%!#. *,erest the Hard #ay: /e; 4ork: 7ando) 5ouse. Bottighei)er, 7uth B. .% !. Grimms4 Bad Girls and Bold Boys: The Moral and Social <ision of the Tales: /e; 5a0en: 4ale 6ni0ersity Press. Bourdieu, Pierre, .%! L.%!'M. +utline of a Theory of Practice: Translated *y 7ichard /ice. Ca)*ridge: Ca)*ridge 6ni0ersity Press. . .% ". %istinction: A Social Criti&ue of the Audgement of Taste: Translated *y 7ichard /ice. Ca)*ridge, Mass.: 5ar0ard 6ni0ersity Press. . .%%0. The -ogic of Practice: Translated *y 7ichard /ice. Stanford: Stanford 6ni0ersity Press. Bourdillon, Bennifer. .%&#. <isit to the Sherpas: 3ondon: Collins. Bre)er+Pa),, Cherie. .% !. -i,ing on the *dge: 3ayton, 6tah: Gi**s M. S)ith. Bright)an, 7o*ert. .%%&. ?-orget Culture: 7e,lace)ent, Transcendence, 7ele(ification.? Cultural Anthropology .0:"=:&0%+"#. Brook, Elaine. .% &. ?Sher,as: The Other Mountaineers.? Mountain .0.:$#+$%. . .% !. The #indhorse: /e; 4ork: 8odd, Mead F Co),any. Bro;n, Be0erley. .% $. ?8is,lacing the 8ifference.? m f :!%+ %. Bro;n)iller, Susan. .%!&. Against +ur #ill: Men$ #omen$ and Rape: /e; 4ork: Si)on and Schuster. ,age1'"'

Page '"$ Buck, Peter. .%$'. *thnology of Tongare,a: Bernice P. Bisho, Museu) Bulletin %'. 5onolulu: Bisho, Museu). . .%$ . *thnology of Mangare,a: Bernice P. Bisho, Museu) Bulletin .&!. 5onolulu: Bisho, Museu). . .%$%. Anthropology and Religion: /e; 5a0en: 4ale 6ni0ersity Press. Burro;s, Ed;in G. .%"0. ?Culture 2reas in Polynesia.? Aournal of the Polynesian Society "%:$"%+#$. Butler, Budith, and Boan <. Scott. .%%'. "eminists Theori.e the Political: /e; 4ork and 3ondon: 7outledge. Ca),*ell, Bose,h P. .%!". Honour$ "amily$ and Patronage: O(ford: O(ford 6ni0ersity Press. Carlson, 7ae. .%!.. ?Se( 8ifferences in Ego -unctioning: E(,loratory Studies of 2gency and Co))union,? Aournal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, $!:'#!+!!. Carroll, Dern, ed. .%!0. Adoption in *astern +ceania: 5onolulu: 6ni0ersity of 5a;aii Press. . .%!#. ?7a,e on /ukuoro: 2 Cultural 2nalysis.? Michigan %iscussions in Anthropology . :<inter=: .$"+"!. Cha)*ers, 9ain. .%%0. Border %ialogues: Aourneys in Postmodernity: 3ondon: 7outledge. Charlot, Bohn. .% !. 7e0ie; of D. Daleri, 7ingship and Sacrifice: Pacific Studies .0:'=:.0!+"!. Chodoro;, /ancy B. .%!". ?-a)ily Structure and -e)inine Personality.? 9n 7osaldo and 3a),here, o,. cit. Ci,riani, 3idio. .%##. The Andaman (slanders: Translated *y 8. T. Co( and 3. Cole. 3ondon: <eidenfeld and /icolson. Clifford, Ba)es. .%%'. ?Tra0eling Cultures.? 9n Cultural Studies, edited *y 3. Gross*erg, C. /elson, and P. Treichler. 3ondon: 7outledge. Collier, Bane -., and Michelle A. 7osaldo. .% .. ?Politics and Gender in Si),le Societies.? 9n Ortner and <hitehead, o,. cit. Collier, Bane -., and Syl0ia 4anagisako. .% %. ?Theory in 2nthro,ology since -e)inist Practice.? Criti&ue of Anthropology %:'=:'!+$!. Collins, Patricia 5ill, .%%0. Blac) "eminist Thought: 7no!ledge$ Consciousness$ and the Politics of *mpo!erment: /e; 4ork and 3ondon: 7outledge. Connell, 7. <. .% !. Gender and Po!er: Society$ the Person and Sexual Politics: Stanford: Stanford 6ni0ersity Press. Cucchiari, Sal0atore. .% .. ?The Gender 7e0olution and the Transition fro) Bise(ual 5orde to Patrilocal Band: The Origins of Gender 5ierarchy.? 9n Ortner and <hitehead, o,. cit. Curran, Bi). .% !. 76: Trumph and Tragedy: Boston: 5oughton Mifflin. 8anielsson, Bengt. .%&#. -o,e in the South Seas: /e; 4ork: 7eynal. da Sil0a, 7achel, ed. .%%'. -eading +ut: #omen Clim'ers Reaching for the Top: Seattle: Seal Press. 8a0en,ort, <illia). .%#%. ?The E5a;aiian Cultural 7e0olutionE: So)e Political and Econo)ic Considerations.? American Anthropologist !.:.=:.+'0. ,age1'"$ Page '"" 8a0is, Coralynn. .%%". ?Cross+Cultural Encounters: Borderland Sel0es and Ethnogra,hic 5o)es.? Manuscri,t. de Beau0oir, Si)one. .%&$ L.%"%M. The Second Sex: Translated *y 5. M. Parshley. /e; 4ork: Pno,f.

de Certeau, Michel. .% ". The Practice of *,eryday -ife: Translated *y S. 7endall. Berkeley: 6ni0ersity of California Press. 8irks, /icholas B., Geoff Eley, and Sherry B. Ortner, eds. .%%". Culture Po!er History: A Reader in Contemporary Social Theory: Princeton: Princeton 6ni0ersity Press. 8ouglas, Mary. .%##. Purity and %anger: /e; 4ork and <ashington, 8.C.: Praeger. 8u)ont, 3ouis. .%!0. Homo Hierarchicus: The Caste System and (ts (mplications: Translated *y Mark Sains*ury. Chicago: 6ni0ersity of Chicago Press. *ncyclopaedia Britannica: .%!". ?5are).? .&th ed. ":%0!. Engels, -riedrich. .%!' L.%"'M. The +rigin of the "amily$ Pri,ate Property$ and the State: Edited *y Eleanor 3eacock. /e; 4ork: 9nternational Pu*lishers. -erguson, Ba)es, and 2khil Gu,ta, eds. .%%'. Space$ (dentity$ and the Politics of %ifference: The)e issue, Cultural Anthropology !:.= :-e*ruary=. -irestone, Shula)ith. .%!'. The %ialectic of Sex: The Case for "eminist Re,olution: /e; 4ork: Banta) Books. -irth, 7ay)ond. .%"0. ?The 2nalysis of Mana: 2n E),irical 2,,roach.? Aournal of the Polynesian Society "%:" $+&.0. . .%&!. #e$ the Ti)opia: 'd ed. 3ondon: George 2llen and 6n;in. . .%#$. #e$ the Ti)opia: 2*ridged. Boston: Beacon Press. . .%#!. Ti)opia Ritual and Belief: Boston: Beacon Press. . .%!0. ?Si*ling Ter)s in Polynesia.? Aournal of the Polynesian Society !%:'!'+ !. . .%!&. Primiti,e Polynesian *conomy: /e; 4ork: /orton. -ischer, B. 3. .%!0. ?Political -actors in the O0erthro; of the 5a;aiian Ta*oo Syste).? Acta *thnographica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae .%:.#.+#!. -isher, Ba)es -. .%%0. Sherpas: Reflections on Change in Himalayan 0epal: Berkeley: 6ni0ersity of California Press. -oley, 8ouglas E. .%%&. The Heartland Chronicles: Philadel,hia: 6ni0ersity of Pennsyl0ania Press. -orster, Bohn. .%#0. ?The 5a;aiian -a)ily Syste) of 5ana, Maui, .%&!.? Aournal of the Polynesian Society #%:%'+.0$. -reud, Sig)und. .%&!. ?The Ta*oo of Dirginity.? Standard *dition ..: .%$+'0 . 3ondon: 5ogarth Press. Gardiner, Ste0e. .%%0. #hy ( Clim': Personal (nsight of Top Clim'ers: 5arris*urg, Pa.: Stack,ole Books. GeertI, Clifford. .%!$. ?8ee, Play: /otes on the Balinese Cockfight.? 9n his The (nterpretation of Cultures. /e; 4ork: Basic Books. . .% $. ?Blurred Genres: The 7efiguration of Social Thought.? 9n his -ocal 7no!ledge: "urther *ssays in (nterpreti,e Anthropology. /e; 4ork: Basic Books. ,age1'"" Page '"& Giddens, 2nthony. .%!%. Central Pro'lems in Social Theory: Action$ Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis: Berkeley: 6ni0ersity of California Press. Gifford, Ed;ard <. .%'%. Tongan Society: Bernice P. Bisho, Museu) Bulletin #.. 5onolulu: Bisho, Museu).

Gillette, /ed, and Ban 7eynolds. .% &. *,erest Grand Circle: A Clim'ing and S)iing Ad,enture through 0epal and Ti'et: Seattle: The Mountaineers. Gold)an, 9r0ing. .%&&. ?Status 7i0alry and Cultural E0olution in Polynesia.? American Anthropologist &!:# 0+%!. . .%!0. Ancient Polynesian Society: Chicago: 6ni0ersity of Chicago Press. Goldstein, Mel0in C. .%#". ?2 Study of the -da' -da'.? Central Asiatic Aournal %:.'$+".. Goodale, Bane. .%!.. Ti!i #i,es: Seattle and 3ondon: 6ni0ersity of <ashington Press. Goody, Back. .%!$. ?Bride;ealth and 8o;ry in 2frica and Eurasia.? 9n Bride!ealth and %o!ry, edited *y B. Goody and S.B. Ta)*iah. Ca)*ridge: Ca)*ridge 6ni0ersity Press. Gough, Pathleen. .%&&. ?-e)ale 9nitiation 7ites on the Mala*ar Coast.? Aournal of the Royal Anthropological (nstitute &:"&+ 0. . .%#.. ?/ayar: Central Perala,? and ?/ayar: /orth Perala.? 9n Matrilineal 7inship, edited *y 8. Schneider and P. Gough. Berkeley and 3os 2ngeles: 6ni0ersity of California Press. Green*latt, Ste,hen, ed. .%%$. 0e! #orld *ncounters: Berkeley: 6ni0ersity of California Press. Grimms4 "airy Tales: .%"&. Translated *y Mrs. E. D. 3ucas, 3. Crane, and M. Ed;ards. /e; 4ork: Grosset and 8unla,. Gu,ta, 2khil, and Ba)es -erguson. .%%'. ?Beyond ECultureE: S,ace, 9dentity, and the Politics of 8ifference.? Cultural Anthropology !:.=:#+'$. 5andy, E.S. Craighill. .%'$. The 0ati,e Culture in the Mar&uesas: Bernice P. Bisho, Museu) Bulletin %. 5onolulu: Bisho, Museu). . .%'!. Polynesian Religion: Bernice P. Bisho, Museu) Bulletin $". 5onolulu: Bisho, Museu). 5andy, E.S. Craighill and Mary Pa;ena Pukui. .%& . The Polynesian "amily System in 7a24u Ha!ai4i: <ellington, /e; Aealand: The Polynesian Society. 5annerI, 6lf. .%%'. ?The Glo*al Ecu)ene.? 9n his Cultural Complexity: Studies in the Social +rgani.ation of Meaning. /e; 4ork: Colu)*ia 6ni0ersity Press. 5atch, El0in. .% %. ?Theories of Social 5onor.? American Anthropologist %.:'=:$".+&$. 5ayes, 7ose Oldfield. .%!&. ?-e)ale Genital Mutilation, -ertility Control, <o)enEs 7oles, and the Patrilineage in Modern Sudan.? American *thnologist ':#.!+$$. 5echt, Bulia. .%!!. ?The Culture of Gender in Puka,uka: Male, -e)ale, and the Maya)itanga ESacred Maid.E? Aournal of the Polynesian Society #:. $+'0#. 5enry, Teuira. .%' . Ancient Tahiti: Bernice P. Bisho, Museu) Bulletin " . 5onolulu: Bisho, Museu). ,age1'"& Page '"# 5ocart, 2. M. .%.&. ?Chieftainshi, and the SisterEs Son in the Pacific.? American Anthropologist .!:#$.+"#. 5og*in, 5. 9. .%$.. ?The Se(ual 3ife of the /ati0es of Ontong Ba0a.? Aournal of the Polynesian Society "0:'$+$". 5oo,er, 2ntony. .%!#. ?EEating BloodE: Tahitian Conce,ts of 9ncest.? Aournal of the Polynesian Society &:''!+".. 5orner, 9saline Ble;. .%$0. #omen under Primiti,e Buddhism: -ay!omen and Alms!omen: 3ondon: G. 7outledge and Sons.

5oskins, Banet. .%%0. ?8ou*ling 8eities, 8escent, and Personhood: 2n E(,loration of Podi Gender Categories.? 9n 2tkinson and Errington, o,. cit. 5unts)an, Budith, and 2ntony 5oo,er. .%!&. ?Male and -e)ale in Tokelau Culture.? Aournal of the Polynesian Society ":".&+$0. . .%!#. ?The E8esecrationE of Tokelau Pinshi,.? Aournal of the Polynesian Society &:'&!+!$. 9ngha), Bohn M. .%!.. ?2re the SirionO 7a; or Cooked@? American Anthropologist, !$:.0%'+%%. Backson, Monica, and EliIa*eth Stark. .%&#. Tents in the Clouds: The "irst #omen4s Himalayan *xpedition: 3ondon: Collins. Ba)eson, -redric. .% ". ?Post)odernis), or the Cultural 3ogic of 3ate Ca,italis).? 0e! -eft Re,ie! ."#:&$+%$. BanMoha)ed, 2*dul 7., and 8a0id 3loyd. .% !. ?9ntroduction: Minority 8iscourse<hat 9s to Be 8one@? Cultural Criti&ue ! :-all=: &+. . Baya;ardena, Chandra. .%!!a. ?<o)en and Pinshi, in 2cheh Besar, /orthern Su)atra.? *thnology .#:.=:'.+$ . . .%!!*. ?2chenese Marriage Custo)s.? (ndonesia '$:.&!+!$. Bohnson+Odi), Cheryl. .%%.. ?Co))on The)es, 8ifferent Conte(ts: Third <orld <o)en and -e)inis).? 9n Third #orld #omen and the Politics of "eminism, edited *y C. T. Mohanty et al. Bloo)ington, 9nd.: 9ndiana 6ni0ersity Press. Pae,,ler, 2drienne. .%!.. ?7ank in Tonga.? *thnology .0:.!"+%$. Pearney, Michael. .%%.. ?Borders and Boundaries of State and Self at the End of E),ire.? Aournal of Historical Sociology ":.=:&'+!". Pelly, 7ay)ond C. .%!!. *toro Social Structure: A Study in Structural Contradiction: 2nn 2r*or: 6ni0ersity of Michigan Press. Pirk,atrick, Bohn T. .%!%. ?The MarHuesan /otion of the Person.? 6n,u*lished Ph.8. dissertation, 8e,art)ent of 2nthro,ology, 6ni0ersity of Chicago. Plages, Mary. .% 0. ?Pyro+-e)inis): Thoughts on the Cultural Control of -ire and <o)en.? B.2. thesis, 8art)outh College. Pno;lton, EliIa*eth. .%$$. The 0a)ed Mountain: /e; 4ork: G. P. Putna)Es Sons. . .% %. ?The -inal 2ttack.? 9n Mountain Aourneys: Stories of Clim'ers and Their Clim's, edited *y Ba)es P. Der)eulen. <oodstock, /.4.: O0erlook Press. PratI, Corinne 2. n.d. ?-orging 6nions and /egotiating 2)*i0alence: Personhood and Co),le( 2gency in Okiek Marriage 2rrange)ent.? -orthco)ing in African Philosophy and Cultural (n&uiry, edited *y 8. Masolo and 9. Par,. Bloo)ington: 9ndiana 6ni0ersity Press. ,age1'"# Page '"! Proe*er, 2. 3. .%" . Anthropology: /e; 4ork: 5arcourt, Brace, and Co. Puykendall, 7al,h S. .%$ . The Ha!aiian 7ingdom, 0ol. .: .!! +. &%. 5onolulu: 6ni0ersity of 5a;aii Press. 3aird, Tho)as. .% .. ?Mountains as Gods, Mountains as Goals.? Co2*,olution ?uarterly $.:..#+'%. 3a)*ert, 7ay)ond, and Claude Pogan. .%&#. #hite "ury: Translated *y S. Styles. 3ondon: 5urst and Blackett.

3ang, S. 8. 7., and 2nn 3ang. .%!.. ?The Punde 5os,ital and a 8e)ogra,hic Sur0ey of the 6,,er Phu)*u, /e,al.? 0e! Bealand Medical Aournal !":"!0= :Buly=: .+!. 3each, Ed)und. .%!0. ?2 CritiHue of 4al)anEs 9nter,retation of Sinhalese GirlEs Pu*erty Cere)ony.? 9n Cchanges et Communications, edited *y B. Pouillon and P. Maranda. The 5ague: Mouton. 3eacock, Eleanor. .% 0. ?Montagnais <o)en and the Besuit Progra) for ColoniIation.? 9n #omen and Coloni.ation: Anthropological Perspecti,es, edited *y M. Etienne and E. 3eacock. /e; 4ork: Praeger. . .% .. Myths of Male %ominance: Collected Articles on #omen Cross2Culturally: /e; 4ork: Monthly 7e0ie; Press. 3eder)an, 7ena. .% %. ?Contested Order: Gender and Society in the Southern /e; Guinea 5ighlands.? American *thnologist .#:'=:'$0+"!. 3e,o;sky, Maria. .%%$. "ruit of the Motherland: Gender in an *galitarian Society: /e; 4ork: Colu)*ia 6ni0ersity Press. 3e0in, Ste,hanie Seto. .%# . ?The O0erthro; of the 7apu Syste) in 5a;aii.? Aournal of the Polynesian Society !!:"=:"0'+$0. 3K0i+Strauss, Claude. .%#0. ?The -a)ily.? 9n Man$ Culture and Society, edited *y 5. Sha,iro. /e; 4ork: O(ford 6ni0ersity Press. . .%#$a. Structural Anthropology: Translated *y C. Baco*son and B. G. Schoe,f. /e; 4ork: Basic Books. . .%#$*. Totemism: Translated *y 7. /eedha). Boston: Beacon Press. . .%#%a. The *lementary Structures of 7inship: Translated *y B. 5. Bell and B. 7. 0on Stur)er. Edited *y 7. /eedha). Boston: Beacon Press. . .%#%*. The Ra! and the Coo)ed: Translated *y B. and 8. <eight)an. /e; 4ork: 5ar,er F 7o;. 3e0y, 7o*ert 9. .%!$. Tahitians: Mind and *xperience in the Society (slands: Chicago: 6ni0ersity of Chicago Press. 3ie*er)an, Marcia 7. .%%.. ?2 Trek of OneEs O;n in /e,al.? Tra0el section, 0e! ;or) Times, Sunday, Buly ' . . .%%$a. ?Scott, 2)undsen, and Pasang 3ha)u.? Himal #:"= :BulyG2ugust=: !#. . .%%$*. ?Marcia 3ie*er)an 7es,onds.? Himal #:&= :Se,te)*erGOcto*er=: !. 3i)On, BosK. .%%.. ?7e,resentation, Ethnicity, and the Precursory Ethnogra,hy: /otes of a /ati0e 2nthro,ologist.? 9n 7ichard G. -o(, ed., Recapturing Anthropology: #or)ing in the Present: Santa -e: School of 2)erican 7esearch Press. ,age1'"! Page '" 3innekin, Bocelyn. .% &. Children of the -and: *xchange and Status in a Ha!aiian Community: /e; Bruns;ick, /.B.: 7utgers 6ni0ersity Press. . .%%0. Sacred ?ueens and #omen of Conse&uence: Ran)$ Gender$ and Colonialism in the Ha!aiian (slands: 2nn 2r*or: 6ni0ersity of Michigan Press. 3inton, 7al,h. .%$%. ?MarHuesan Culture.? 9n The (ndi,idual and His Society, edited *y 2. Pardiner. /e; 4ork: Colu)*ia 6ni0ersity Press. 3oe*, E. M. .%'#. History and Traditions of 0iue: Bernice P. Bisho, Museu) Bulletin $'. 5onolulu: Bisho, Museu). 3o;ie, 7o*ert 5. .%'0. Primiti,e Society: /e; 4ork: Boni and 3i0eright.

. .%&# L.%$&M. The Cro! (ndians: /e; 4ork: 5olt, 7inehart, and <inston. 3utI, Catherine. .%%0. ?The Erasure of <o)enEs <riting in Sociocultural 2nthro,ology.? American *thnologist .!:"=: #..+'!. 3yotard, Bean+-ranXois. .% ". The Postmodern Condition: Minnea,olis: 6ni0ersity of Minnesota Press. MacCor)ack, Carol, and Marilyn Strathern, eds. .% 0. 0ature$ Culture and Gender . Ca)*ridge: Ca)*ridge 6ni0ersity Press. MacPinnon, Catharine 2. .% !. "eminism 3nmodified: %iscourses on -ife and -a!: Ca)*ridge, Mass.: 5ar0ard 6ni0ersity Press. Malo, 8a0id. .%0$ L. % M. Ha!aiian Anti&uities: Translated *y /. B. E)erson. 5onolulu: 5a;aiian GaIette. Man, E. 5. . $. ?On the 2*original 9nha*itants of the 2nda)an 9slands.? Aournal of the Anthropological (nstitute .': Part .: #%+..#C Part ': ..!+!&C Part $: $'!+"$". March, Pathryn S. .%!%. ?The 9nter)ediacy of <o)en: -e)ale Gender Sy)*olis) and the Social Position of <o)en a)ong Ta)angs and Sher,as of 5ighland /e,al.? 6n,u*lished Ph.8. dissertation, 8e,art)ent of 2nthro,ology, Cornell 6ni0ersity. . n.d. ?Theriigaathaa and Theragaathaa: 2 Co),arison of 9)agery 6sed *y <o)en and Men 7ecluses in Their Early Buddhist Poetry.? Manuscri,t. Mariner, <illia). . '!. An Account of the 0ati,es of the Tonga (slands: ' 0ols. Co),iled *y Bohn Martin. Edin*urgh: Consta*le. Marshall, 8onald S. .%!.. ?Se(ual Beha0ior on Mangaia.? 9n Human Sexual Beha,ior , edited *y 8. S. Marshall and 7. C. Suggs. /e; 4ork and 3ondon: Basic Books. Mead, Margaret. .%$0. The Social +rgani.ation of Manu4a: Bernice P. Bisho, Museu) Bulletin !#. 5onolulu: Bisho, Museu). . .%"%. Coming of Age in Samoa: /e; 4ork: /e; 2)erican 3i*rary. Miller, Beatrice 8. .% 0. ?Die;s of <o)enEs 7oles in Buddhist Ti*et.? 9n Studies in the History of Buddhism, edited *y 2. P. /arain. 8elhi: B. 7. Pu*lishing Cor,. Mishkin, Bernard. .%#.. ?The Maori of /e; Aealand.? 9n Cooperation and Competition among Primiti,e Peoples, edited *y M. Mead. Boston: Beacon Press. Mitten, 8enise. .%%'. ?The 2)erican Tea).? 9n da Sil0a, o,. cit. Moffatt, G;en. .%#.. Space Belo! My "eet: Ca)*ridge, Mass.: 5oughton Mifflin. Mohanty, Chandra T. .%%.a L.% "M. ?6nder <estern Eyes: -e)inist Scholarshi, ,age1'" Page '"% and Colonial 8iscourses.EE 9n Third #orld #omen and the Politics of "eminism, edited *y C. T. Mohanty et al. Bloo)ington, 9nd.: 9ndiana 6ni0ersity Press. . .%%.*. ?9ntroduction: Cartogra,hies of Struggle: Third <orld <o)en and the Politics of -e)inis).? 9n Third #orld #omen and the Politics of "eminism, edited *y C. T. Mohanty et al. Bloo)ington, 9nd.: 9ndiana 6ni0ersity Press. /andy, 2shis. .% $. The (ntimate *nemy: -oss and Reco,ery of the Self under Colonialism: /e; 8elhi: O(ford 6ni0ersity Press. /e)ecek, Ottokar. .%& . <irginity: Pre20uptial Rites and Rituals: /e; 4ork: Philoso,hical 3i*rary.

O*eyesekere, Gananath. .%%'. The Apotheosis of Captain Coo): *uropean Mythma)ing in the Pacific: Princeton: Princeton 6ni0ersity Press. Oli0er, 8ouglas. .%!". Ancient Tahitian Society: $ 0ols. 5onolulu: 6ni0ersity Press of 5a;aii. OE/eill, Maureen. .%%'. ?Uueen of 2ll She Sur0eys.? 9n da Sil0a, o,. cit. Ong, 2ih;a. .% !. Spirits of Resistance and Capitalist %iscipline: "actory #omen in Malaysia: 2l*any: S6/4 Press. O,,itI, Michael. .%# . Geschichte und So.ialordnung der Sherpa: 9nns*ruck and Munich: 6ni0ersitYts0erlag <agner. Ortner, Sherry B. .%!0. ?-ood for Thought: 2 Pey Sy)*ol in Sher,a Culture.? 6n,u*lished Ph.8. dissertation, 8e,art)ent of 2nthro,ology, 6ni0ersity of Chicago. . .%!'. ?9s -e)ale to Male as /ature 9s to Culture@? "eminist Studies .:'=:&+$.. 7e0ised and re,rinted in 7osaldo and 3a),here, o,. cit. . .%!$a. ?Sher,a Purity.? American Anthropologist !&:"%+#$. . .%!$*. ?On Pey Sy)*ols.? American Anthropologist !&:.$$ +"#. . .%!". ?Purification Beliefs and Practices,? *ncyclopaedia Britannica, .&th edition, .&:'% +$0". . .%!#. ?The Dirgin and the State.? Michigan %iscussions in Anthropology ':.+.#C re,rinted .%! in "eminist Studies ":$= :Octo*er=: .%+$!. . .%!!. Sherpas :fil)=. Produced *y 3eslie <oodhead. Manchester: Granada Tele0ision. -il). . .%! . Sherpas through Their Rituals: Ca)*ridge and /e; 4ork: Ca)*ridge 6ni0ersity Press. . .% .. ?Gender and Se(uality in 5ierarchical Societies: The Case of Polynesia and So)e Co),arati0e 9),lications.? 9n Ortner and <hitehead, o,. cit. . .% $. ?The -ounding of the -irst Sher,a /unnery, and the Pro*le) of E<o)enE as an 2nalytic Category.? 9n "eminist Re2<isions: #hat Has Been and Might Be, edited *y D. Patraka and 3. Tilly. 2nn 2r*or: 6ni0ersity of Michigan <o)enEs Studies Progra). . .% ". ?Theory in 2nthro,ology since the Si(ties.? Comparati,e Studies in Society and History '#:.=:.'#+##. . .% %. High Religion: A Cultural and Political History of Sherpa Buddhism: Princeton: Princeton 6ni0ersity Press. ,age1'"% Page '&0 . .%%0a. ?Gender 5ege)onies.? Cultural Criti&ue ." :<inter=:$&+ 0. . .%%0*. ?/arrati0ity in 5istory, Culture, and 3i0es.? Presented at the 222 )eetings, /e; Orleans. Manuscri,t. . .%%&a. ?7esistance and the Pro*le) of Ethnogra,hic 7efusal.? Comparati,e Studies in Society and History $!:.= :Banuary=: .!$+%$. . .%%&*. ?So, (s -e)ale to Male as /ature 9s to Culture@? Presented at the 222 )eetings, <ashington, 8.C. . n.d.a. ?8iscourses of Masculinity: Sher,as and ESahi*sE in 5i)alayan Mountaineering.? Manuscri,t. . n.d.*. Sex and %eath on Mount *,erest: Manuscri,t. Ortner, Sherry B., and 5arriet <hitehead, eds. .% .. Sexual Meanings: The Cultural Construction of Gender and Sexuality: Ca)*ridge and /e; 4ork: Ca)*ridge 6ni0ersity Press.

Pa,anek, 5annah. .%!$. ?Purdah: Se,arate <orlds and Sy)*olic Shelter,? Comparati,e Studies in Society and History .&:'% +$'&. Paul, 8iana 4. .%!%. #omen in Buddhism: Berkeley: 2sian 5u)anities Press. Paul, 7o*ert 2. .%!0. ?Sher,as and Their 7eligion.? 6n,u*lished Ph.8. dissertation, 8e,art)ent of 2nthro,ology, 6ni0ersity of Chicago. PeletI, Michael. .% !a. ?-e)ale 5eirshi, and the 2utono)y of <o)en in /egeri Se)*ilan, <est Malaysia.? Research in *conomic Anthropology :#.+.0.. . .% !*. ?The E(change of Men in .%th+Century /egeri Se)*ilan :Malaya=.? American *thnologist .":$=:""%+#%. . .% . A Share of the Har,est: 7inship$ Property$ and Social History among the Malays of Rem'au: Berkeley: 6ni0ersity of California Press. . .%%#. Reason and Passion: Representations of Gender in a Malay Society: Berkeley: 6ni0ersity of California Press. Peristiany, B. G., ed. .%##. Honour and Shame: The <alues of Mediterranean Society: Chicago: 6ni0ersity of Chicago Press. Pitt+7i0ers, Bulian. .%#.. People of the Sierra: Chicago: 6ni0ersity of Chicago Press. . .%##. ?5onour and Social Status.? 9n Peristiany, o,. cit. . .%!!. The "ate of Schechem or the Politics of Sex: Ca)*ridge: Ca)*ridge 6ni0ersity Press. Poe;e, Parla O. .% 0. ?6ni0ersal Male 8o)inance: 2n Ethnological 9llusion.? %ialectical Anthropology &:'=:...+'&. Po0inelli, EliIa*eth 2. .%%$. -a'or4s -ot: The Po!er$ History$ and Culture of A'original Action: Chicago: 6ni0ersity of Chicago Press. Pratt, Mary 3ouise. .%%'. (mperial *yes: Tra,el #riting and Transculturation: 3ondon and /e; 4ork: 7outledge. Pro,,, D. 9. .%# . Morphology of the "ol)tale: Translated *y 3. Scott. 2ustin: 6ni0ersity of Te(as Press. 7adcliffe+Bro;n, 2. 7. .%''. The Andaman (slanders: Ca)*ridge: Ca)*ridge 6ni0ersity Press. 7afael, Dicente. n.d. ?Colonial 8o)esticity: <hite <o)en and 6nited States 7ule in the Phili,,ines.? Manuscri,t. ,age1'&0 Page '&. 7a,,, 7ayna. .%!!. ?Gender and Class: 2n 2rchaeology of Pno;ledge Concerning the Origin of the State.? %ialectical Anthropology ':$0%+.#. 7edfield, 7o*ert. .%&$. The Primiti,e #orld and (ts Transformations: 9thaca, /. 4.: Cornell 6ni0ersity Press. 7eich, <ilhel). .%!.. The (n,asion of Compulsory Sex2Morality: /e; 4ork: -arrar, Straus and Girou(. 7eiter, 7ayna 7., ed. .%!&. To!ard an Anthropology of #omen: /e; 4ork: Monthly 7e0ie; Press. 7idge;ay, 7ick. .%!%. The Boldest %ream: The Story of T!el,e #ho Clim'ed Mount *,erest: /e; 4ork and 3ondon: 5arcourt Brace Bo0ano0ich. 7isal, 8i,esh. .%%$. ?Pasang 3ha)u.? Himal #:$= :MayGBune=: "'+"$. 7ogers, Garth. .%!!. ?The -atherEs Sister 9s Black: 2 Consideration of -e)ale 7ank and Po;er in Tonga.? Aournal of the Polynesian Society #:.&!+ '.

7ogers, Susan Carol. .%!&. ?-e)ale -or)s of Po;er and the Myth of Male 8o)inance.? American *thnologist ':"=:!'!+&!. 7ohrlich+3ea0itt, 7u*y, Bar*ara Sykes, and EliIa*eth <eatherford. .%!&. ?2*original <o)en: Male and -e)ale 2nthro,ological Pers,ecti0es.? 9n 7eiter, o,. cit. 7osaldo, Michelle A. .%!". ?<o)an, Culture and Society: 2 Theoretical O0er0ie;.? 9n 7osaldo and 3a),here, o,. cit. . .% 0. ?The 6se and 2*use of 2nthro,ology: 7eflections on -e)inis) and Cross+Cultural 6nderstanding.? Signs &:$= :S,ring=: $ %+".!. 7osaldo, Michelle A., and 3ouise 3a),here, eds. .%!". #oman$ Culture and Society: Stanford: Stanford 6ni0ersity Press. 7osaldo, 7enato, .% %. ?Border Crossings.? 9n his Culture and Truth: The Rema)ing of Social Analysis: Boston: Beacon Press. 7ouse, 7oger, .%%.. ?Me(ican Migration and the Social S,ace of Post)odernis),? %iaspora .:.=: +'$. 7u*in, Gayle. .%!&. ?The Traffic in <o)en: /otes on the EPolitical Econo)yE of Se(.? 9n 7eiter, o,. cit. Sahlins, Marshall. .%& . Social Stratification in Polynesia: Seattle: 6ni0ersity of <ashington Press. . .%#$. ?Poor Man, 7ich Man, Big+Man, Chief: Political Ty,es in Melanesia and Polynesia.? Comparati,e Studies in Society and History &:' &+$0$. . .% .. Historical Metaphors and Mythical Realities: Structure in the *arly History of the Sand!ich (slands 7ingdom: 2nn 2r*or: 6ni0ersity of Michigan Press. . .% &. (slands of History: Chicago: 6ni0ersity of Chicago Press. . .%%&. Ho! /0ati,es/ Thin): A'out Captain Coo)$ for *xample: Chicago: 6ni0ersity of Chicago Press. Said, Ed;ard. .%! . +rientalism: /e; 4ork: Pantheon Books. Sanday, Peggy 7ee0es. .% .. "emale Po!er and Male %ominance: +n the +rigins of Sexual (ne&uality: /e; 4ork: Ca)*ridge 6ni0ersity Press. . .%%0. "raternity Gang Rape: Sex$ Brotherhood$ and Pri,ilege on Campus: /e; 4ork: /e; 4ork 6ni0ersity Press. ,age1'&. Page '&' Sangroula, 4u*araJ. .%%$. ?2 /ational 5eroine.? Himal #:&= :Se,te)*erGOcto*er=: !. Sartre, Bean+Paul. .%# . Search for a Method: Translated *y 5. E. Barnes. /e; 4ork: Dintage Books. Scarr, Bose,hine. .%##. "our Miles High: 3ondon: Dictor GollancI. Schneider, 8a0id M. .%# . American 7inship: A Cultural Account: Engle;ood Cliffs, /e; Bersey: Prentice+5all. . .%!#. ?The Meaning of 9ncest.? Aournal of the Polynesian Society &:."%+#%. Schneider, Bane. .%!.. ?Of Digilance and Dirgins: 5onor, Sha)e, and 2ccess to 7esources in Mediterranean Society,? *thnology .0:.=:.+'". Scott, 8oug. .% ". ?5i)alayan Cli)*ing: Part One of a Personal 7e0ie;.? Mountain .00:'#+$#. . .% &. ?5i)alayan Cli)*ing: Part T;o of a Personal 7e0ie;.? Mountain .0.:'#+$'.

Scott, Boan <. .% #. ?Gender: 2 6seful Category of 5istorical 2nalysis.? American Historical Re,ie! %.:&=:.0&$+!&C re,rinted in her Gender and the Politics of History: /e; 4ork: Colu)*ia 6ni0ersity Press, .% . Shar)a, Prayag 7aJ. .%%$. ?8onEt Belittle Pasang 3ha)u.? Himal #:"= :BulyG2ugust=: &. Sher,a, 8onna M. .%%". -i,ing in the Middle: Sherpas of the Mid2Range Himalayas: Pros,ect 5eights, 9ll.: <a0eland Press. Sher,a+Padgett, 3inda M. .%%$. ?8e0astating <ords.? Himal #:&= :Se,te)*erGOcto*er=: &+#. Shore, Bradd. .%!#. ?9ncest Prohi*itions and the 3ogic of Po;er in Sa)oa.? Aournal of the Polynesian Society &:'!&+%#. . .% .. ?Se(uality and Gender in Sa)oa: Conce,tions and Missed Conce,tions.? 9n Ortner and <hitehead, o,. cit. Siegel, Ba)es T. .%#%. The Rope of God: Berkeley and 3os 2ngeles: 6ni0ersity of California Press. Singh, /. 9H*al. .%! . The Andaman Story: /e; 8elhi: Dikas. Siu, 7. G. 5. .%# . The Man of Many ?ualities: Ca)*ridge, Mass.: M9T Press. Slater, Phili,. .%# . The Glory of Hera: Boston: Beacon Press. S,i0ak, Gayatri Chakra0orty. .% . ?Can the Su*altern S,eak@? 9n Marxism and the (nterpretation of Culture$ edited *y C. /elson and 3. Gross*erg. 6r*ana, 9ll.: 6ni0ersity of 9llinois Press. Stacey, Budith. .%!&. ?<hen Patriarchy Po;to;s: The Significance of the Chinese -a)ily 7e0olution for -e)inist Theory.? "eminist Studies ':'G$=:#"+..'. . .%%0. Bra,e 0e! "amilies: Stories of %omestic 3phea,al in -ate T!entieth2Century America: /e; 4ork: Basic Books. Stein, 7. 2. .%!'. Ti'etan Ci,ili.ation: Translated *y B. E. S. 8ri0er. Stanford: Stanford 6ni0ersity Press. Stoler, 2nn. .%%'. ?Se(ual 2ffronts and 7acial -rontiers: Euro,ean 9dentities and the Cultural Politics of E(clusion in Colonial Southeast 2sia.? Comparati,e Studies in Society and History $":$=:&."+&'. ,age1'&' Page '&$ Strathern, Marilyn. .% 0. ?/o /ature, /o Culture: The 5agen Case.? 9n MacCor)ack and Strathern, o,. cit. . .% .. ?Self 9nterest and the Social Good: So)e 9),lications of 5agen Gender 9)agery.? 9n Ortner and <hitehead, o,. cit. Suggs, 7o*ert C. .%##. Mar&uesan Sexual Beha,ior: /e; 4ork: 5arcourt, Brace and <orld. . .%!.. ?Se( and Personality in the MarHuesas: 2 8iscussion of the 3inton+Pardiner 7e,ort.? 9n Human Sexual Beha,ior, edited *y 8. S. Marshall and 7. C. Suggs. /e; 4ork and 3ondon: Basic Books. S;eet, 3ouise, ed. .%#!. Appearance and Reality: Status and Roles of #omen in Mediterranean Societies: S,ecial 9ssue of Anthropological ?uarterly "0:$=. Ta)*iah, Stanley B. .%!$. ?8o;ry and Bride;ealth and the Pro,erty 7ights of <o)en in South 2sia.? 9n Bride!ealth and %o!ry, edited *y B. Goody and S. B. Ta)*iah. Ca)*ridge: Ca)*ridge 6ni0ersity Press. Tanner, /ancy. .%!". ?Matrifocality in 9ndonesia and 2frica and a)ong Black 2)ericans.? 9n 7osaldo and 3a),here, o,. cit. TenIing /orgay. .%&&. :TenIing of E0erest ;ith Ba)es 7a)say 6ll)an=. Tiger of the Sno!s: /e; 4ork: G. P. Putna)Es Sons.

. .%!!. :TenIing /orgay Sher,a=. After *,erest: An Auto'iography: 2s told to )alcol) Barnes. 3ondon: George 2llen F 6n;in. Tho),son, E. P. .%##. The Ma)ing of the *nglish #or)ing Class: /e; 4ork: Dintage. Trinh T. Minh+ha. .% %. ?The 3anguage of /ati0is): 2nthro,ology as a Scientific Con0ersation of Man ;ith Man.? 9n her #oman$ 0ati,e$ +ther: #riting Postcoloniality and "eminism: Bloo)ington: 9ndiana 6ni0ersity Press. Tsing, 2nna 3o;enhau,t. .%%0. ?Gender and Perfor)ance in Meratus 8is,ute Settle)ent.? 9n 2tkinson and Errington, o,. cit. . .%%$. (n the Realm of the %iamond ?ueen: Marginality in an +ut2of2the2#ay Place: Princeton: Princeton 6ni0ersity Press. Tullis, Bulie. .% #. Clouds from Both Sides: 3ondon: Grafton Books. Turner, Dictor. .%#!. The "orest of Sym'ols: 9thaca: Cornell 6ni0ersity Press. 6ll)an, Ste,hen. .%#$. ?Se)antic 6ni0ersals.? 9n 3ni,ersals of -anguage, edited *y Bose,h 5. Green*erg. Ca)*ridge, Mass.: M9T Press. 6ns;orth, <alt. .% .. *,erest: A Mountaineering History: Boston: 5oughton Mifflin. Daillant, George. .%&0. The A.tecs of Mexico: Balti)ore: Penguin. Daleri, Dalerio. .% '. ?The Transfor)ation of a Transfor)ation: 2 Structural Essay on an 2s,ect of 5a;aiian 5istory L. 0%+. .%M.? Social Analysis .0:$+".. . .% &. 7ingship and Sacrifice: Ritual and Society in Ancient Ha!aii: Translated *y Paula <issing. Chicago: 6ni0ersity of Chicago Press. . .% !. ?7es,onse Lto CharlotM.? Pacific Studies .0:'=:." +'.". . .%%0. ?Both /ature and Culture: 7eflections on Menstrual and Parturitional Ta*oos in 5uaulu :Sera)=.? 9n 2tkinson and Errington, o,. cit. 0an Genne,, 2rnold. .%#0. Rites of Passage: Translated *y M. B. DiIedo) and G. 3. Caffee. Chicago: 6ni0ersity of Chicago Press. ,age1'&$ Page '&" Dayda, 2. P. .%#.. ?3o0e in the Polynesian 2tolls.? Man #.:'0"+&. 0on -Srer+5ai)endorf, Christo,h. .%#". The Sherpas of 0epal: Berkeley and 3os 2ngeles: 6ni0ersity of California Press. . .%!&. Himalayan Traders: /e; 4ork: St. MartinEs Press. . .%!#. ?2 /unnery in /e,al.? 7ailash ":.'.+&". . .% ". The Sherpas Transformed: Social Change in a Buddhist Society of 0epal: /e; 8elhi: Sterling Pu*lishers. 0on 5agen, Dictor <. .%&!. The Realm of the (ncas: /e; 4ork: /e; 2)erican 3i*rary. <atson, 3a;rence. .%!'. ?Se(ual SocialiIation in GuaJiro Society.? *thnology ..:.&0+&#. <e**, M. C. .%#&. ?The 2*olition of the Ta*oo Syste) in 5a;aii.? Aournal of the Polynesian Society !":'.+$%. <e*er, Ma(. .%& . "rom Max #e'er: *ssays in Sociology: Translated and edited *y 5. 5. Gerth and C. <right Mills. /e; 4ork: O(ford 6ni0ersity Press.

. .%! . *conomy and Society: An +utline of (nterpreti,e Sociology: Edited *y Guenther 7oth and Claus <ittich. Translated *y E,hrai) -ischoff et al. Berkeley: 6ni0ersity of California Press. <illia)s, 7ay)ond. .%!!. Marxism and -iterature: O(ford: O(ford 6ni0ersity Press. <illis, Paul. .% .. -earning to -a'or: Ho! #or)ing Class 7ids Get #or)ing Class Ao's: /e; 4ork: Colu)*ia 6ni0ersity Press. <right, 5enry. .%!!. ?7ecent 7esearch on the Origin of the State.? Annual Re,ie! of Anthropology #:$!%+%!. 4al)an, /ur. .%#$. ?On the Purity of <o)en in the Castes of Ceylon and Mala*ar.? Aournal of the Royal Anthropological (nstitute %$:'&+& . 4anagisako, Syl0ia. .%!%. ?-a)ily and 5ousehold: The 2nalysis of 8o)estic Grou,s.? Annual Re,ie! of Anthropology: Palo 2lto, Calif.: 2nnual 7e0ie; Press. 4eat)an, 2nna. .% ". ?Gender and the 8ifferentiation of Social 3ife into Pu*lic and 8o)estic 8o)ains.? Social Analysis .&:$0+"%. Ai,es, Back. .%%$. The Trials and Tri'ulations of -ittle Red Riding Hood: /e; 4ork: 7outledge. ,age1'&" Page '&&

9nde( 2 2ctors, .+' 2dolescence, !!+ 0, '+ $, #+ %C and *rothers, #+ !C ,eer grou,s, #+ C as reinforcing structure, re,roduction in, %'+%$. See also BrothersC Sisters 2gency, $+.'C and e(clusion of su*Ject, !+ C fe)ale, +.., .#+.!C and ,ractice theory, #+!C and social *eing, .0C structures of, .$ 2llison, Stacy, .%$ Ancient Polynesian Society :Gold)an=, #0 2nda)an 9slanders, .#!, .!., .!'C di0ision of la*or, ."%+&0C C

as egalitarian, ."!+"%C as gender+undifferentiated, .&'+&&C ineHualities, .&&+& C initiation rites, .&0, .&#+& C religion, ."%+&0C sha)ans, .&&+&#C social roles, .&.+&' 2ng 5rita, '0"+&, '0# 2ng Tshering, .%$ 2ni Chodon, .'# 2ni Tarchin, .'' Annapurna: A #oman4s Place :Blu)=, .%& 2nthro,ology: econo)ic a,,roaches, "&+"#C functionalist, "#C Mar(ist, .#&, .##C )ethodology, .", ''+'$, #., .$$, .$#C ,sychoanalytic a,,roaches, ""+"& Apotheosis of Captain Coo): *uropean Mythma)ing in the Pacific$ The :O*eyesekere=, &+# 2ristocracy: and chiefshi,, #$+#", ##C and co))oners, #%+!0C and hereditary ,urity, #0C Juniors in, # C and )arriage, %#, .#0. See also Pinshi, syste) 2tkinson, Bane M., .#! B Best, Elsdon, #" Binary o,,ositions, .', .!.C do)esticG,u*lic, $'+$$, .&$+&&C enco),assingGenco),assed, .&", .#0C )indG*ody, &$C structureGantistructure, " +"%

Bingha), 5ira), .!. Biological deter)inis), '"+'& Blu), 2rlene, .%', .%$, .%& Bodily ,olitics, .%!, '0% Body: and dualis)s, &$C functions of fe)ale, ' +$0C as natureGculture *order, .!.C and social role, $.+$' Bonington, Chris, . Borderlands, . +.%, . .+ 'C and *ody, .!.C and classic ethnogra,hy, '..+.'C ,age1'&& Page '&# intercultural relations in, .%", .%!+% C and Otherness, . ' Bourdieu, Pierre, ", .! Brah)ins, "!, &0, &&, ."". See also 9ndia Bride!ealth and %o!ry :Goody, Ta)*iah=, #', .0&+.$ Brothers: and adolescent se(uality, #+ !C elder+to+younger ri0alry, &+ #, .0'C and hierarchical relations, #+ Junior si*lings, $+%0, ..'+.$C )arriage of, "+ &C and ,ro,erty, #!, !.+!'C and re,roduction, $+ ", !C senior si*lings, $+ #, .0'C unity of, !., ". See also 2dolescenceC Bunior si*lingsC Sisters Bro;n, Be0erley, .!. Buddhis), .#+.!, '', ..!, . #+ !, '00+'0.. See also 8e0uche nunneryC Monasticis)C 7eligionC Sher,asC Teng*oche )onastery C

Butler, Budith, $ C Ca,italis), ", &, .## Carlson, 7ae, $&+$! Caste syste), ""+"&, #0, ."". See also 5ierarchical societies Chad;ick+OnysIkie;icI, 2lison, .%#, .%! Chiefshi,: and aristocracy, #$+#", ##C and cou,les, .&.C in egalitarian societies, .&.C and fatherhood, %#+%!, %%+.00C fe)ale succession to, ##+#!, .&%, .#', .# +#%C in 5a;aii, .&%C and )aintenance of descent line, !#+!!C and mana, %.C and o;nershi,, ##C ritual 0s. genealogical succession to, .#.+#'C succession ,rinci,le, ##+#!C and ;ell+*eing of descent grou,, !0 Children, $.+$', $&+$#, $% China, '', &&, .0 , ... Chodoro;, /ancy B., $&, .$%, .#& Christianity, .#', .!0+!. Class, #", ."$+"" Collier, Bane -., .# Colonialis), . ' Co))oners: ad0ance)ent of, #%+!0C and Junior si*lings, &, !C !are or tutua class, #"+#& Connell, 7. <., .! Constructionis)s, .+' Cook, Ba)es, &+#, .#$, .# Cro; 9ndians, '", ."!

Culture, .#!C and *orderlands, .!., . ', .%", .%!+% C categories of, .!0C erotics of, . 'C as generic, '$C and hu)an consciousness, '#C ideology of, ''+'$, .#.C as origin of cultureGnature s,lit, $ C as su,erior to nature, '#+'!C as transcendence, .!'C 0s. nature, '&+'#. See also /ature 8 8a0en,ort, <illia), .##+#! 8a0id+/eel, 2le(andra, . "+ & 8e Beau0oir, Si)one, .$+.", ' +'%, $0, .# , .!' 8escent grou,, #$+#"C ad0ance)ent of, # +#%C and chiefshi,, !0, !#+!!C cognatic, #!, #%+!., .0 +.$C and do;ry, ..0C )aintenance of, !!C as ,olitical *ase, !0. See also 5ierarchical societies 8e0uche nunnery, .#+.!, .. +'0, '0.+'C collecti0e acti0ity, ..%C construction of, .''+'$C econo)ics ;ithin, ..%+'0C founding of, .'0+'"C )or!a, ..%C offices ;ithin, ..%C rituals, .'0C social *ackground of nuns, .'0+'.C ;o)enEs initiati0e in, .'$+'".

See also Teng*oche )onastery 8ialectic of se(, .%, . $+ ", '.. 8ifference, ..#, .$#+$ 8iffusion, &. 8iscourse, ."& 8o)esticG,u*lic o,,osition, $'+$$, .&$+&& 8o)estic unit, $% 8ouglas, Mary, " 8o;ry, .0&+.$C and descent rules, ..0C and social status, .0&+ 8u)ont, 3ouis, #0, #$, ."" 8yhrenfurth, 5ettie, . & ,age1'&# Page '&! E Egalitarianis), .$%C anthro,ological de*ate a*out, .$%+"$C as culturally defined, ."'+"$C ele)ents of ineHuality in, .&&+& C and hege)ony, ."#+" , .!.C ideology of, ." C and initiation rites, .&0, .&#+& C and )ale do)inance, ."#+" C and )arriage, .&0+&.C and ,restige syste), .&'C and religion, .&.C residences, &0C ritual in, .&., .&&+& C and social roles, .&0+&'. See also 2nda)an 9slandersC 5a;aii *lementary Structures of 7inship$ The :3K0i+Strauss=, $' Engels, -riedrich, &", ."'+"$, .##, .#

Eski)o /ell, . &, . # E0ent :0s. structure=, & E(istentialis), .$+." -e)ale inheritance, .0#+.$C and cognaticGendoga)ous )arriage, .0%+.0C and social status, .0#+ -e)ale ,o;er, ."0+"'C and )ale do)inance, .&%+#0, .# +!0 "emale Po!er and Male %ominance :Sanday=, .".+"' -e)ale su*ordination: and cultural ideology, ''+'$C e(,licit 0s. i),licit, '$+'"C and social+structural arrange)ents, ''+'$, .#!C and sy)*olis), '$, &0C as uni0ersal :or not=, '$+'" -e)inis): first ;orld 0s. third ;orld, '0%C and 5i)alayan )ountaineering, .%.+%$C and se(ual li*eration, . theory, $+". See also <o)en "eminists Theori.e the Political :Butler, Scott=, $ -irestone, Shula)ith, .% -ischer, B. 3., .#! -isher, Ba)es -., . % -unctionalis), ', "#, .# G Ga)es. See Serious ga)es Gelung)a Pal)a, '0. Gender radicalis), . "+ # Gender status: categories 0s. ,olitics, . "C +%.C

contradictions in, .##+#!C as cultural construct, .$!+$ C and ethnicGnational issues, '0%+.0C and fe)ale ,o;er, .".+"'C as ga)e, .%C in hierarchical syste)s, .0!+ , ..0+..C and natureGculture o,,osition, .!.+!'C and ,restige syste), ."$C and ,u*lic do)ain, .&$C relati0e, ."0+".C and social organiIation, .#!C undifferentiated, .&'+&& Giddens, 2nthony, "+&, ..+.', .! Gold)an, 9r0ing, #0, # , !', .#., .#! Goody, Back, #', .0&+.$, ..' Gough, Pathleen, "", &" Gra)sci, 2ntonio, ."& Grimms4 "airy Tales$ %+.0 5 5a;aii, &+#, . , !', .& +!.C eHui0alence in, .&%C fe)ale ,o;er in, .&%+#0, .# +!0C ideology of )ale do)inance, .& C inheritance in, .& +&%C internal contradictions in, .#&+#!C )apu :ritual= syste) in, .#$+!., .!'C )uhina :regent= office, .#"+#&C ,olitical ,o;er in, .#!+# C sacred :)apu=G,rofane :noa= in, .& , .#0, .#., .!'C <estern influence on, .#", .#&+# 5ege)ony, .#, . C counterhege)ony, ."#+"!, .#', .!'C cultural links, .#.C egalitarian, ."#+" , .!.C

fe)ale+centered, ."!. See also Male do)inanceC Prestige syste) 5ierarchical societies, #0+#.C and caste syste), #0, .""C as enco),assing, #0+#., .0", .&", .&!+& C and gender eHuality, .0!+ , ...C holis) in, #0+#.C and isolation, .&!C Junior si*lings as link ;ith co))oners, &, !C )ale+fa0oring *ias in, .0 C o,en, # C se(Ggender co),le( in, #'C stratified, #$+##, .0&+#C as structurally ,er0asi0e, .&!C traditional, #$, #"C and transfor)ation, .&!+& C 0irginity in, ...+.$. See also 8escent grou,C Pinshi, syste)C PolynesiaC Prestige syste) 5i)alayan )ountaineering, . +.%, ..!, ,age1'&! Page '& . $C 2)erican Bicentennial e(,edition, .%', .%&C 2nna,urna <o)enEs E(,edition, .%0, .%"+% , '0%C and fe)inis), .%.+%$C gender radicalis) in, . "+ #C hus*andG;ife tea)s in, '0&+#, '0 , '.0C 9ndian <o)enEs E(,edition, '0%C Ba,anese all+;o)enEs e(,edition, .%.C )e)sahi*s, .%, . &, . !+%.C /e,al Mountaineering 2ssociation, '0"C /e,al <o)enEs E(,edition, '0 C and .%!0s fe)inis), .%.+%$C ,aternalis) in, .%'+%$C

Polish all+;o)enEs e(,edition, .%'+%$C ,re+.%!0, . "+ #C ,re+;ar ,eriod, . "+ #C sahi*s, . , .#0, . 'C sardars, . #, '0', '0$, '0&, '.0C se(is) in, .%'C and se(uality, . +%.C

sher,as :,orters=, .%&, '0'C Sher,a ;o)en in, . &+ #, '0'+..C and social ,osition, . &C <o)enEs 9nternational E(,edition, . & Historical Metaphors and Mythical Realities :Sahlins=, &+# 5lak,a /or*u, '0& Homo Hierarchicus :8u)ont=, ."" Ho! /0ati,es/ Thin): A'out Captain Coo)$ for *xample :Sahlins=, # 9 9deology: cultural, .#0+#.C of egalitarianis), ." C of )ale su,eriority, .& , .#!C negati0e, .'"+'&, .'!+'%, .$', .% +%%C and ,restige syste), .#0+#., .!.+!'C of ,urity, "$+"", &!+& C and su*ordination of ;o)en, ''+'$ 9ndia, #0, .0 +%, ..., .."C Brah)ins, "!, &0, &&, .""C /ayar grou,, "". See also 8o;ry 9nheritance: *ilateral, #%C do;ry, .0#+.$C fe)ale, .0#+.$C in 5a;aii, .& +&%C and )arriage, !", ..0C

in Polynesia, ##+#!C and state, .0#C syste)s of, #!, .0%+.0. See also Pro,erty 9nter)ediacy, ' , $0, $", $!+".C as a)*iguous, $%, ".C in0ersions of, "0C and )ediation, $ +$%, ".C and social control, $%C and transcendence, $ B BanMoha)ed, 2*dul 7., +% Bunior si*lings, # , $+%0, ..'+."C as disru,ti0e, %+%0C as link ;ith co))oners, &, !C )arriage of, "+ &, %+%0C and se(uality, #+ %, %'+%$. See also Brothers P Paahu)anu, .#$+#&, .#!+# , .#%, .!0, .!. Pa)eha)eha 9, .#$, .#", .##, .# Pa)eha)eha 99. See 3iholiho Par)a 3a)a of Ahung, .'' Pinshi, syste): aristocracy, #$+#", ##C and *inding ,rocess, !0+!.C *rothers in, $+ %C *rotherGsister relationshi,, !.+!$C cognatic+endoga)ous, #!, #%, !0+!., .0 +.$C co))oners in, #"+#&C descent grou,s, #$+#"C father+daughter relationshi,, !$+!&C 5a;aiian ter)inology, .#.C

kins;o)en in, !0+!., .0$+.&C ,atrilinealGe(oga)ous, .0 +.$C ,riority of, ...C si*ling a(is in, !.+!'C sisters and daughters in, !.+ $C ty,es of, .0 . See also 2ristocracyC BrothersC 5ierarchical societiesC PolynesiaC Prestige syste)C Sisters Plages, Mary, ." Puan 4in, '' Puykendall, 7. S., .## 3 3a*or, di0ision of, &., .$'+$$, ."%+&0 3aird, To), . 3a)a Gulu, .'.+'' 3eacock, Eleanor, ."'+"$ 3e0in, Ste,hanie Seto, .#! 3K0i+Strauss, Claude, $0, $', $$, $", & , .##C 0ie; of structure, .!. 3iholiho :Pa)eha)eha 99=, .#$+#", .#!, .#% 3i)On, BosK E., 3ineage, "&+"# 3innekin, Bocelyn, .!. 3loyd, 8a0id, +% 3o,sang, '0$ ,age1'& Page '&% M Making :0s. constructing=, .+', +.. Ma)ing of the *nglish #or)ing Class$ The :Tho),son=, ' Male. See Men Male do)inance, .#C and egalitarian hege)ony, ."#+" C e)ergence of, .# +#%C

fe)ale ,o;er ;ithin, ."0, .&%+#0, .# +#%C ideology of, .& , .#.+#'C inter,retations of, .&!+& C ,o;erG,restige *alance in, .".+"', .""C as uni0ersal :or not=, .#&+#!, .!.+!'C and 0iolence, .# +#%. See also 5ege)onyC Men MaleGfe)ale relations, "#+"!, .$!C and cultural links, #'C in ,re+state societies, " Man, E. 5., ." , .&0+&., .&&, .&# Marriage: adultery, %&+% C and aristocracy, %#C *et;een cousins, !$C *rother+sister, !', !$C *y ca,ture, ! +!%, 'C changes in ,atterns, &&C and class for)ation, #"C cognaticGendoga)ous, #!, #%+!., .0 +.$C dee),hasis on, ..0C and di0orce, %&, %%, ..0, .'!C and do)estic status, %#+%!C do;ry, &#, .0&+.$C econo)ics of, &#+&!, %"C egalitarian, .&0+&.C *y elo,e)ent, ! +!%C endoga)ous, #", #!, !0, .0&+#, .0 +.$, .'#C e(oga)ous, $', !0, .0 +.$C in 5a;aii, .&%+#0C hus*and as chief, %#+%!C hy,erga)ous, .&, &&+&#, %!C hy,oga)ous, C

incor,orati0e, !0C

of Junior *rothers, "+ &C )ale interest in, %#+% , .00C and )ale suicide, %!C ,atrilinealGe(oga)ous, .0 +.$C in ,restate societies, " , "%+&0C and ,u*lic status, %#+%!C residence ,atterns, !", ", .'#+'!, .&0, .% C and se(ual de,endence, %"+%&C se(ual Jealousy, %!+% C Sher,a, .'#+'!C and ty,e of ,ro,erty accession, .0%+.0C 0ertical alliance, &&+&#C as ;eak *ond, !, %$+%&C ;ifehood as de)otion in, % +%%C and ;o)enEs se(ual freedo), %&, % +%%. See also 9nheritanceC Se(uality Me)sahi*s, .%, . &, . !+%. Men: and a*straction, $&, $#+$!C destructi0eness of, '%C do)estication of, &0, &$+&&C )ythology of, .!.+!'C as transcending life, '%. See also Male do)inance Menstruation, . , '", ' , ."!, .& +&%, .% , '0' Methodology, ."C *ig )an *ias, #., .$$, .$#C direct o*ser0ation, ''+'$C le0els of, ''+'$C ty,es of data, '$ Ming)a TenIing, .%% Monasticis), .#+.!, ..$, ..", ..!, . #+ !, '00C ad0antages of to ;o)en, .'%+$'C and co))unity, .$0+$.C

and ,ro,erty rules, .'%+$0C reHuire)ents of, .' +$'C and social re*ellion, .$&+$#. See also Buddhis)C 8e0uche nunneryC Sher,asC Teng*oche )onastery Motherhood, .00+.0', .&$C as co))oner status, .0.C and deter)ination of status, #!, lo; status of, .0., .0". See also Parenthood Mountaineering. See 5i)alayan )ountaineering / /arrati0es, .$ /ature: *ody as *order of, .!.C categories of, .!0C culture in o,,osition to, '&+'!, $ , .#%, .!.C de0aluation of, '&+'#C ;o)en as closer to, '!. See also Culture 0ature$ Culture$ and Gender :MacCor)ack, Strathern=, .!0 /ayar grou,, "" /e,al. See Sher,as /e; Guinea, "%, .0" /ga;ang Sa)den, .'0+'$, .$., .$# /unneries. See 8e0uche nunneryC Monasticis) /yi)i :2ng /yi)i=, '0&+% /yungne ritual, '00+'0. O O*eyesekere, Gananath, &+#, . ' O*ser0ation, ''+'$ ,age1'&% Page '#0 +rigin of the "amily$ Pri,ate Property and the State :Engels=, ."$, .## C

Otherness, . '+ $, '0$, '.'C as fe)ale, .%" P Parenthood, %%+.0&C ado,tion and fosterage, .0.+', .&'+&$C dee),hasis on, %%C fatherhood, !$+!&, %#, %%+.00, .0'C infanticide, %', .00C and kin grou,, %%C )otherhood, .00+.0', .0", .&$C Sher,a, .'!C socialiIation of children, $.+$', $&+$#, $%C and state, &$+&&. See also MotherhoodC 7e,roduction Particularis), $&+$# Pasang 3ha)u, '0#+.. Patriarchy, .&, &0, &$+&& Paul, 7o*ert 2., . ! Personalis), $&+$# Phantog, .%' Poe;e, Parla, ."' Pollution, .0", .#!C and e(clusion of ;o)en, "%C and folk tales, .'"+'&C in 5a;aii, .#$C internal and e(ternal, "&C )enstruation as, . , '", ' , ."!, .& +&%, .% , '0'C and ,urity ideology, '#, "$+""C Sher,a, .'"+'&C ;o)en as cause of, " . See also Purity Polynesia, .&+.#, . , #.C adolescence in, !!+ 0, '+ $, #+ %, %'+%$C arioi society, %, %'C

*eautification of ;o)en in, 0+ .C descent ,rinci,les, #!+!., !!, .0 C econo)ics, #&+##C e)otional detach)ent in, !, %&C e),hasis on )ale se(uality, ..$+."C inheritance ,atterns in, #!C Junior )ale si*lings, ..$+."C mana :hereditary ,urity= in, #0, #&, ., %0+%.C Mangaia, !', !#, 0, 'C Mangare0a, !#, ., %#+%!C Maori, #", #&, #%, ., ', &+ #, MarHuesas, !$, ., ', %, %!C ,arenthood in, %%+.0&C ,olitics, #&C ,re)arital se(ual acti0ity in, !!+ 0C ,riority of kinshi, in, ...C religion, #&, %0+%.C rules of *reeding in, #!C Sa)oa, !&+!#, ! +!%, ', %, %#, .0&C Tahiti, ., ', &+ #, %, %'C tapu :,ersonal sacredness=, #&C Tiko,ia, ! , !%, ', ", %'C Tonga, !%, 0, ', &+ #, %, %&C 0iolence in, .0". See also 5a;aiiC 5ierarchical societiesC Pinshi, syste)C MarriageC Prestige syste) Post)odernis)G,ost)odernity, !+ , .0+.. Poststructuralis), !, , .0+.. Po;er, "+#C fe)ale, ."0+"', .&%+#0, .# Practice theory, '+"C and agency, #+!C and reco0ery of su*Ject, ..+.'C su*altern, .!+.% Prestige syste): + %, %'C

ad0ance)ent of status in, #', # C and age, .&'+&$C and *alance, .".+"'C continuous ranking in, #$+#"C and cultural ideology, #., .#0+#., .!.+!'C and egalitarian society, .&'C as enco),assing, #0+#., .0", .&", .&!+& C gender as, ."$C goals of social action in, #'C )aintenance of status in, #', # C )ani,ulation of ;o)en in, # C )other as deter)inant of status in, #!, C

and ,oliticalGecono)ic categories, ."$+""C and ,o;er, ."$+$&C and se(Ggender syste), &%C and singularity, ."&C structure and function, #'+#!C and uni0ersalis), .".. See also 5ege)onyC 5ierarchical societiesC Pinshi, syste)C Polynesia Processual )odel, ."" ProductionGre,roduction, .+', .! ProJects, .$+.", '0, '% Pro,erty: and *rothers, #!, !.+!'C and do)estication of )en, &$+&&C Mar(ist analysis of, ."$, .##C and )onasticis), .'%+$0C Polynesian o;nershi, ,atterns, ##+#!, !.+!'C Sher,a o;nershi, ,atterns, .$'+$$C usufructary rights to, ##+#!, !". See also 9nheritance Pro,,, D. 9., % Pu*lic do)ain, ."!, .& C do)esticG,u*lic o,,osition, $'+$$, .&$+&&C

genderiIation of, .&$C ,resence of ;o)en in, .# +!0C Sher,a, .$# Purity: and actual 0s. ideal status, &#+&!C ,age1'#0 Page '#. and caste, ""+"&C and econo)ics, "&C and lineage, "&+"#C mana, #0, #&, ., %0+%.C ,atterns of, "$+""C and ,olitics, "&C and ,re+state societies, "!C and religion, &.+&$C and state cos)ology, &'+&$C te),orary 0s. ,er)anent, &'. See also PollutionC Dirginity 7 7adcliffe+Bro;n, 2. 7., ." , .&., .&# 7ank. See 5ierarchical societiesC Prestige syste) 7edfield, 7o*ert, .#&+##, .#! 7eligion: in egalitarian societies, .&.C and fe)ale inde,endence, '00+'..C 5a;aiian, .#"+#&C initiation rituals, .&0, .&#+& C Polynesian, #&, %0+%.C and ,urity, '#, &.+&$C reincarnation, .'%, '0.C and se(uality, %0+%., ..', .."C sha)ans, .&&+&#C and state, "!, .##+#!.

See also Buddhis)C 8e0uche nunneryC Monasticis)C Ta*oosC Teng*oche )onastery 7e,roduction, %0+%$, %#C adolescent, %'+%$C legiti)acy, %', .00. See also MarriageC ParenthoodC Se(uality 7itual. See 7eligion 7ogers, Susan Carol, ."., ."' 7osaldo, Michelle A., "%, .$%, .&$, .&&C 0ie; of do)esticG,u*lic o,,osition, $', .$#+$!C 0ie; of )ale do)inance, ..#+.!, .#&, .# 7u)*u )onastery, .'. S Sahi*s, . , .#0, . ' Sahlins, Marshall, &+#, ..+.', .#., .##, .#!+# , .!. Sanday, Peggy, .".+"' Sartre, Bean+Paul, '0 Scarr, Bose,hine, . & Schneider, Bane, "&+"#, && Scott, Boan <., $ Second Sex$ The :de Beau0oir=, .$+." Serious ga)es, .'+.#C gender as, .%C and )ethodology, ."C )ulti,licity of, .%C and social organiIation, .'+.$C ;o)enEs, .#+.! Se(uality: *a;dy Joking, . #+ C

incest ta*oo, $', !$, %C and Junior si*lings, #+ %, %'+%$C and )onasticis), .' +'%C ,rostitution, .C ra,e, !%+ 0, '+ $C se( as theft, !!+ 0C

and Sher,as, . #+

slee, cra;ling, ! , ', %. See also 2dolescenceC MarriageC PolynesiaC 7e,roductionC Dirginity Sexual Meanings :Ortner, <hitehead=, .$%+"., .""+"&, .&$ Sher,as, .#+.%, ..#C *eha0ioral eHuality a)ong, .'!+' , .$., .%%C do)estic grou,s, .% C and fe)ale inde,endence, '00+'..C gender eHualiIation la;, .%%+'00C gender ideology of, .'"+'&, .'!+'%, .$', .% +%%C and 9ndian+5i)alayan ,olitics, .. , .$"+$&C Phu)*u region, .. , .'#+'!C )arriage, .'#+'!C )enEs role, .$'+$"C as ,olitical )ales, . +%., .%"+%!C

,ro,erty o;nershi,, .$'+$$C religion of, ..!C se(uality of, . #+ C as se(ual ,artners, .%", .%#C t;entieth+century ;o)en, .% +'00C ;o)en as )ountaineers, . &+ #, '0'+..C ;o)enEs ,osition a)ong, .'"+' . See also Buddhis)C 8e0uche nunneryC 5i)alayan )ountaineeringC Teng*oche )onastery EESher,as? :fil)=, .%%, '0'+$ Sisters, !.+ $, % C res,ect for, !.+!$C sister a0oidance co),le(, !'+!". See also 2dolescenceC Brothers Social )o*ility, .& Society: inconsistency of, ."#C le0els of, $$C organiIation of, .'+.$ Sri 3anka, .0%

State, ."+.&C cos)ology, &'+&$C and do)estication of )en, &0, &$+&&C for)ation of, .##+#!C and inheritance, .0#C and ,urity, &'+&$C and religion, "!, .##+#!. See also Dirginity Status: as conce,t, .0'+"C le0els of, ."0+". Stoler, 2nn 3., . ' ,age1'#.