1002:2024:4.2
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| 1002:2024:4.2 [2024/08/20 01:06] – [Kinship as a system of groups, and kinship as a system of exchange] Ryan Schram (admin) | 1002:2024:4.2 [2024/08/20 21:39] (current) – [Classical anthropological theories of kinship are just Western cultural assumptions] Ryan Schram (admin) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
| * Auhelawa people say that members of a matrilineal descent group have “one blood” because children inherit their blood from their mothers. | * Auhelawa people say that members of a matrilineal descent group have “one blood” because children inherit their blood from their mothers. | ||
| - | * Users of 23andMe say that people who are relatives have similar DNA, because you inherit DNA from your parents. | + | * Users of 23andMe say that people who are relatives have "similar DNA," |
| ===== Sexual symbolism is not the only way people talk about kinship ===== | ===== Sexual symbolism is not the only way people talk about kinship ===== | ||
| - | In fact, many societies have forms of kinship that have nothing to do with heterosexual conjugality. | + | In fact, many other societies have forms of kinship that have nothing to do with heterosexual conjugality, even if they use metaphor of "blood." |
| * Nuer “ghost marriages” (or “woman marriage”) allow women to be treated as husbands, and as fathers for purposes of patrilineal descent (Evans-Pritchard 1951, 108–9; see also O’Brien 1977; Krige 1974). | * Nuer “ghost marriages” (or “woman marriage”) allow women to be treated as husbands, and as fathers for purposes of patrilineal descent (Evans-Pritchard 1951, 108–9; see also O’Brien 1977; Krige 1974). | ||
| Line 75: | Line 75: | ||
| In many societies people speak of kinship as a natural fact in their “blood, | In many societies people speak of kinship as a natural fact in their “blood, | ||
| + | |||
| + | Other societies think of kinship in terms of something else altogether. They don't assume kinship is essential or fixed. | ||
| ===== Why did early anthropologists ignore all these exceptions? ===== | ===== Why did early anthropologists ignore all these exceptions? ===== | ||
| Line 97: | Line 99: | ||
| He questioned the assumptions that underlie the classical conception of kinship in anthropology. | He questioned the assumptions that underlie the classical conception of kinship in anthropology. | ||
| - | To reveal the biases in older model of kinship, he wrote an “ethnography” of his own society”: | + | To reveal the biases in older model of kinship, he wrote an “ethnography” of his own society: |
| - | * //American Kinship: A Cultural Account// ([1968] 1980) is a study of how white, middle people in the US categorize their relatives. | + | * //American Kinship: A Cultural Account// ([1968] 1980) is a study of how white, middle-class |
| * Schneider and his colleagues were mostly products of this culture, and applied its assumptions to other societies they studied. | * Schneider and his colleagues were mostly products of this culture, and applied its assumptions to other societies they studied. | ||
1002/2024/4.2.1724141185.txt.gz · Last modified: 2024/08/20 01:06 by Ryan Schram (admin)