Strength theory

Part of a series on
Anthropology
Outline History
Types Archaeological Biological Cultural Linguistic Social
Archaeological Aerial Aviation Battlefield Biblical Bioarchaeological Environmental Ethnoarchaeological Experiential Feminist Forensic Maritime Paleoethnobotanical Zooarchaeological
Biological Anthrozoological Biocultural Evolutionary Forensic Molecular Neurological Nutritional Paleoanthropological Primatological
Social Cultural Applied Art Cognitive Cyborg Development Digital Ecological Environmental Economic Political economy Feminist Food Historical Institutional Kinship Legal Media Medical Museums Musical Political Psychological Public Religion Symbolic Transpersonal Urban Visual
Linguistic Anthropological Descriptive Ethnological Ethnopoetical Historical Semiotic Sociological
Research framework Anthropometry Ethnography cyber Ethnology Cross-cultural comparison Participant observation Holism Reflexivity Thick description Cultural relativism Ethnocentrism Emic and etic
Key concepts Culture Development Ethnicity Evolution sociocultural Gender Kinship and descent Meme Prehistory Race Society Value Colonialism / Postcolonialism
Key theories Actor–network theory Alliance theory Cross-cultural studies Cultural materialism Culture theory Diffusionism Feminism Historical particularism Boasian anthropology Functionalism Interpretive Performance studies Political economy Practice theory Structuralism Post-structuralism Systems theory
Lists Anthropologists by nationality Anthropology by year Bibliography Journals List of indigenous peoples Organizations
v t e

Strength theory, the strength hypothesis or strength differences is an idea in anthropology and gender studies. Scholars use it to explain why some cultures assign some forms of work to women and other forms of work to men. In a strength theory model, cultures give certain tasks to men because men are stronger.^[1][2][3]

Ember et al. give the examples of mining and hunting large animals, which are heavily male-dominated in many cultures. They note, however, that this does not explain why men would be assigned other tasks that do not require significant strength, such as trapping smaller animals. They and other scholars also note that there are cultures in which women do hunt large animals.^[1][4]

History[edit]

George P. Murdock was one of the first scholars to describe this theory formally and with evidence. He did so in Social Forces in 1937.^[5][2]

Criticism[edit]

Strength theory does not explain why societies do assign some very heavy work to women and not to men.^[2]

Anthropologist Ernestine Friedl, writing in 1975, noted that while the great majority of hunters in hunter-gathering societies are men, with no such society preferring female hunters, the overlap between the women ranking highest in "size, running ability, muscular strength, lung capacity, and hormone-based aggressiveness" and the weakest or average male hunters was too great for these traits alone to account for it.^[6]

See also[edit]

• Male expendability
• Economy-of-effort theory
• Division of labor
• Compatibility-with-childcare theory

References[edit]

This article relating to anthropology is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

• v
• t
• e