I read on Wikipedia (not on the Stoicism page) that the Stoics accepted women into their ranks, can anyone corroborate
If you'd prefer, we can see how female Olympic athletes compare to male high school students across a variety of track and field events. Or we can look at research into the muscle mass and bodily strength of men and women. Or we can simply ask ourselves why so few societies employed female soldiers in any significant numbers, when doing so would have doubled the size of their manpower pool.Some anecdotes of women losing sports competitions is a genuinely inane thing to assess female combat capabilities from.
The statistics we have suggest that a comparatively large number of Scythian noblewomen were buried with weapons. Saying that they therefore rode into battle with the men, or that the Scythians had gender equality, goes beyond what the statistics say.Right, so the statistics we have suggest that the Scythians were substantially more integrated than modern Americans.
Those are also inane ways to assess female combat strength. I will also note that the presentation in your first link is deceptive--the difference between the high school finalists and male Olympic athletes in the 2016 100 meter dash is about half a second. Running specifically is a poor example because males are slightly taller on average, and no one is going to be sprinting well weighed down with military equipment.If you'd prefer, we can see how female Olympic athletes compare to male high school students across a variety of track and field events. Or we can look at research into the muscle mass and bodily strength of men and women.
Your argument is circular. You're attempting to argue that female Scythians weren't in combat in significant numbers because few societies employed female soldiers in any significant numbers. But you'd raise the same objections to any evidence of female soldiers. So the evidence that there weren't female soldiers is... that there weren't female soldiers.Or we can simply ask ourselves why so few societies employed female soldiers in any significant numbers, when doing so would have doubled the size of their manpower pool.
So you're completely ignoring the multiple quotes from the study I cited proving that Scythian females were engaging in combat (and you're assuming they're all noblewomen for... some reason), then? How quickly you ignore inconvenient facts.The statistics we have suggest that a comparatively large number of Scythian noblewomen were buried with weapons. Saying that they therefore rode into battle with the men, or that the Scythians had gender equality, goes beyond what the statistics say.
The Spartans did. A Spartan man would only have his name inscribed on his tombstone if he died in battle. A Spartan woman who died in childbirth got the same honor.Maybe they could equate childbirth with fighting in war, back then it was just as dangerous.
it depends a lot on the situation, paraguay had the vast majority of its male population killed and did not allow women in the army in the long run.maybe something like the dahomey all-female army arises independently. If theres a society where a majority of men die off it seems a possibility. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahomey_Amazons
They did not, this is an old misinterpretation of a steleThe Spartans did
for this to happen, the greek culture has to change so much that the culture ceases to be greek to become something else.Perhaps some cities would need to develop/adopt matrilineality. With men's heir is his sister's children. That would make woman more precious since slave woman couldn't be integrated into society.
the idea of this race is to strengthen the individual, while nobody will run with the same speed as they would without the weight, to say that it is a wrong way to evaluate is dishonest. There's nothing wrong with women not having the physical capabilities of a man, it's just a fact of life.no one is going to be sprinting well weighed down with military equipment.
The most recent case that I remember is from the USA, but in this case it was more political than anything else.There's a reason that actual militaries have been lifting prohibitions on front line combat service recently.
yes it is unfortunateThere have been a lot of societies in which women couldn't do all sorts of things they are actually very competent at.
Wouldn't that in itself be proof?Your argument is circular. You're attempting to argue that female Scythians weren't in combat in significant numbers because few societies employed female soldiers in any significant numbers. But you'd raise the same objections to any evidence of female soldiers. So the evidence that there weren't female soldiers is... that there weren't female soldiers.
There is also some anatomical evidence from Pyzyrak sites could prove that female had directly participated in the warfare, and they have become the victims of cruelSo you're completely ignoring the multiple quotes from the study I cited proving that Scythian females were engaging in combat
Women consistently perform worse than men in activities requiring strength and endurance, and the difference usually isn't even close. Strength and endurance are important in battle. Therefore, etc.Those are also inane ways to assess female combat strength. I will also note that the presentation in your first link is deceptive--the difference between the high school finalists and male Olympic athletes in the 2016 100 meter dash is about half a second. Running specifically is a poor example because males are slightly taller on average, and no one is going to be sprinting well weighed down with military equipment.
Yes, politics. At any rate, it's not that including women increases effectiveness:There's a reason that actual militaries have been lifting prohibitions on front line combat service recently.
It's highly unlikely that so many societies, which differed in so many other respects, would all happen to be sexist in the exact same way. Particularly given that many of them were continually engaged in fairly brutal struggles for survival, when even the smallest advantage could make the difference between victory and defeat.You are also, of course, ignoring the existence of sexism as a factor influencing those societies.
As I said above, the study proved no such thing.So you're completely ignoring the multiple quotes from the study I cited proving that Scythian females were engaging in combat
The graves cited included large numbers of grave goods, which is generally a sign that the occupant was a high-status individual.(and you're assuming they're all noblewomen for... some reason)
If there is some kind of "public officials can vote, regardless of other restrictions" tradition, and "members of the priesthood" count as public officials (which they did in e.g. Rome), I suppose you could extend that to "priestesses count as public officials, ergo they can vote".Can we table the warrior women debate for the time being? Its detracting from the main point of the thread; which is creating a greek polis that grants political right to at least some groups of women. There are more paths to this than military service; wealth/property has been mentioned and explored some, but a religious reason has not been yet.
Going off of that, would it be possible to have a female priesthood which exerts strong influence on the state? It wouldn't be legal equality, but it would empower women in the polis to have more rights, I think.If there is some kind of "public officials can vote, regardless of other restrictions" tradition, and "members of the priesthood" count as public officials (which they did in e.g. Rome), I suppose you could extend that to "priestesses count as public officials, ergo they can vote".
Many things are possible. There have been plenty of societies with female priests that influenced the state (Egypt, Rome), property being passed down through the mother's line, and (yes, even if @Fabius Maximus wants to deny current archaeology) female warriors. That these things happened cannot reasonably be disputed--I think our best way to come up with a less sexist Athens is to ask why those elements either weren't present in Athens, or why they weren't effective at letting women carve out more of a role in the polis.Going off of that, would it be possible to have a female priesthood which exerts strong influence on the state? It wouldn't be legal equality, but it would empower women in the polis to have more rights, I think.
having an exclusive group that has more freedom because of its religious importance does not mean that the rest have that freedom. Specific cases do not make general norms. To be honest, I don't think any pre-modern civilization will have women being equal to men. You have powerful women or groups of women, but having women as a whole have the same equality as men is almost impossible. Now having a religious group (like artemis hunters or something along those lines) is possible but it won't make it equal for everyone. To be honest, it makes sense for the group to prevent women as a whole from gaining more political power, thus having a monopoly.Going off of that, would it be possible to have a female priesthood which exerts strong influence on the state? It wouldn't be legal equality, but it would empower women in the polis to have more rights, I think.
That is grossly misrepresenting what they have been saying, and your continued aggressiveness amd attacks on their character is not helpful to the discussion at hand. Please stopyes, even if @Fabius Maximus wants to deny current archaeology
ok, but they are not the exception, not the rule. a woman priest having influence does not make women as a whole have influence
Matrilineality is rare, very rare. You have in Europe that I remember Sparta and Scotland and that's it. In Asia you have about 3 or 4 cases in Africa the same thing (America too). They are rare cases that are remembered for their uniqueness., property being passed down through the mother's line
again they are not the norm and occur in some societies under extreme pressure (such as dahomey). Now queens or or a few high ranking females is more common (but still relatively rare, being usually remembered for this factor and little else, Boudica is an example of that poor warrior and strategist who is remembered for being a warrior queen)female warriors
perhaps lack of need, as a whole in cases women have more space in society comes from the need for more manpower in a generational way.a less sexist Athens is to ask why those elements either weren't present in Athens, or why they weren't effective at letting women carve out more of a role in the polis.
Hence why I think the more valuable question is, "How can these roles be leveraged to carve out more of a place for women in Athenian society?" not "Can they exist?" The answer to the latter is clearly yes.ok, but they are not the exception, not the rule. a woman priest having influence does not make women as a whole have influence
Nearly 20% of human societies in the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample are matrilineal. It isn't the majority, but it isn't very rare. I would also like to say that this result came up in the first page of Googling "matrilineality."Matrilineality is rare, very rare. You have in Europe that I remember Sparta and Scotland and that's it. In Asia you have about 3 or 4 cases in Africa the same thing (America too). They are rare cases that are remembered for their uniqueness.
Dude, he said Scythian women did not engage in combat despite forensic evidence indicating that female skeletons with head wounds got them from right-handed opponents during active fighting, and that other female skeletons had bone wounds from warding off blows with their left arm while attacking with their right. I quoted that material. If this forensic evidence was present in a male skeleton no one would blink before declaring it clear proof that they were a warrior; it's a huge double standard. There are few better sources of evidence of a skeleton being of a warrior.That is grossly misrepresenting what they have been saying, and your continued aggressiveness amd attacks on their character is not helpful to the discussion at hand. Please stop