←back to thread

430 points mhb | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.194s | source
Show context
PeterHolzwarth ◴[] No.46179223[source]
"A woman's work is never done."

In our agrarian past, the cultural division of labor at the time said that men worked the field, women ran the home. And that later job was brutal, never-ending, and consumed all waking hours until the day she died.

Men broke their backs in the field, women consumed their lives doing the ceaseless work that never ended, every waking moment. (And occasionally helped out in the field, too).

Running a family was a brutal two-person job -- and the kids had to dive in to help out the second they could lift something heavier than a couple pounds.

We forget so easily that for the entire history of our species - up until just recently - simply staying alive and somewhat warm and minimally fed was a hundred-hour-a-week job for mom and dad.

There are important downsides, but the Green Revolution - and dare I say it, the industrial revolution - was truly transformative for our species.

replies(26): >>46179343 #>>46179376 #>>46179422 #>>46179481 #>>46179798 #>>46179855 #>>46179919 #>>46180233 #>>46180355 #>>46180599 #>>46180969 #>>46181092 #>>46181124 #>>46181414 #>>46181875 #>>46181896 #>>46181937 #>>46181950 #>>46182147 #>>46182207 #>>46182381 #>>46183157 #>>46183746 #>>46184169 #>>46184908 #>>46186251 #
Etheryte ◴[] No.46180355[source]
A small nitpick that doesn't take away from the rest of your comment: staying alive and fed was not necessarily a laborious activity for hunter-gatherers living in good climates [0]. It's our expansion into less hospitable environments that made it so.

> Woodburn offers this “very rough approximation” of subsistence-labor requirements: “Over the year as a whole, probably an average of less than two hours a day is spent obtaining food.”

> Reports on hunters and gatherers of the ethnological present--specifically on those in marginal environments--suggest a mean of three to five hours per adult worker per day in food production.

[0] https://fifthestate.anarchistlibraries.net/library/370-fall-...

replies(4): >>46180566 #>>46180937 #>>46181040 #>>46181048 #
acessoproibido ◴[] No.46180937[source]
So if we go back much further life was super chill and romantic? I dont buy it tbh, it feels to me just as unrealistic.
replies(1): >>46180980 #
Etheryte ◴[] No.46180980[source]
Not necessarily back, but to the right environments. As quoted above, we see the same today in isolated tribes that live off of hunting and foraging. All of this also doesn't account for the lack of all other modern convenience such as medicine, hygiene, etc. So it isn't about chill and romantic, but rather the time commitment specifically.
replies(1): >>46181001 #
watwut ◴[] No.46181001[source]
Those tribes work a lot if you count food processing, cleaning, creating and maintaining tools, shelters, childcare and so on and so forth.

It looks like they work only a little if you count only pure hunting attempts, the most food rich seasons and ignore the rest.

replies(2): >>46181045 #>>46182178 #
1. al_borland ◴[] No.46182178[source]
Without modern entertainment devices, or even books, what else are they going to do? Some “work” could have a lot of crossover into hobby. Some people enjoy cooking, making tools, spending time with kids, etc. They need to do something to pass the time. The stuff is also for a clear purpose. Making a tool to solve a problem right in front of you feels different than performing a seemingly arbitrary task everyday because a boss says so.