Re: Gender and archaeology

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: douglass st.christian: "Re: law and order -- a query to St. Christian (fwd)"
• Previous message: Nancy Bowles: "Re: Gendered archaeology, a comment"

> How do you identify genders in the past
> without simply recapitulating gender relationships assumed or projected by
> the analyst?
The answer is you can't. And you can't identify ANY of the things we
identify and analyze without recapitulating and projecting our own social
constructions. This is the post-processual critique, RIGHT!
But, if we are reflective and recognize what we are projecting and
attempt to get out of that bind by being open-minded and look AROUND our
research concerns as well as AT them, we will present more sophisticated
readings of what went on in the past.
I don't think gender is an anymore problematic site of inquiry than
anything we do in archaeology. Why does gender seem unapproachable? and
what can you say with archaeology, that won't illicit the same critique?

• Next message: douglass st.christian: "Re: law and order -- a query to St. Christian (fwd)"
• Previous message: Nancy Bowles: "Re: Gendered archaeology, a comment"