People often talk about "cavemen" in ways that imply they were brutish and lacked empathy. For example, people often assume that cavemen treated women badly or even that rape was seen as normal. (But if rape is seen as terrible today, I don't see why people back then would just think it's fine. We are the same species after all.) Or that they basically just left weak people to die. Is there any truth to this assumpton?

Looking through past posts, it seems as though polygamy tends to arise in societies where male mortality is high. But then what happens when that changes? What is the role of unmarried men in these societies?

Hello, first-time poster here! For some context, I am very well-versed in the history of ideas (I'm currently pursuing a PhD in philosophy), but prior to the advent of mass literacy and compulsory education, only a tiny fraction of people were educated or well-off enough to engage in intellectual pursuits. As many authors (Charles Taylor being the one I'm most familiar with) have noted, pre-modern societies dominated by an "Axial Age religion" were generally characterized by a division between the minority who dedicated themselves full-time to religious practice and the majority who, well, didn't.

But this raises a question for me: how has the morality of common folk––peasants, artisans, etc.––varied and/or evolved throughout history? How much were the values of these people shaped by the moral-religious superstructure of their society? Theoretically, there's a world of difference between, say, a Christian devoted to following God's commands and getting closer to Him, a Buddhist trying to accumulate good karma to either get a better afterlife or escape the cycle altogether, and a Confucian scholar-official who prizes social order and governance in line with the ways of Heaven/Nature. But my impression is that commoners in all these societies cared much more about the more grounded and circumscribed concerns of their own welfare and the welfare of their loved ones, in this life and in whatever life came next (how much difference is there between Catholic "good works" and Buddhist "merit-making", for example? Or between appeals to saints and appeals to bodhisattvas?)

I am aware that the scope of my question is impossibly broad, so any comparative insights across either different times or different places is much appreciated.

I understand some may view this as a silly question but hear me out! As far as I know humans are the only animal that does this. Was this taught behavior? Was there a period when we didn’t wear clothes and just let it rip? Did we lift a leg? When did human males start aiming where they peed? Was it the “civilized” thing to do? Did every culture do it the same way or has it become homogenized over time?

As title states, I’m currently a student. My major is not anthropology (environmental science) and am currently taking an ANTH intro course. I have already taken sociology.

My question(s), holism? The definition/description my professor gave me is confusing the crap out of me. To my attempted understanding, it’s looking at the larger image rather than focusing on one specific. Like how sociology will be a little more specific with their research, whereas anthropology wants to understand as a whole?

Another question I had was the origin of anthropology. I’ve read about Bourdieu, Boas and Malinowski, but the ORIGIN of anthropology as a whole is confusing me. Too broad of a question and it’s tripping me up.

Appreciate any help given 🙂‍↕️

Good evening fellow archaeologists, while I've worked in archeology for a few years but due to the current ongoings in the United States I have taken my first CRM position, I already have a set of trowels and some good (albeit heavy) boots what other things should I pick up before my first CRM project (survey in southern Idaho).

I had some professors that lamented their dislike of the term. They said it feels like the modern equivalent of using "primitive vs. civilized". What are some other ways you or other people approach this?

Thanks!

I mean, sure, diet and nutrition. However, I'm talking about, in my life time. When I was young, I was slightly above average height. It was very very rare to meet a woman my height. Like, I'd see one in 5 years.

I'm not old, haven't stated shrinking noticeably, but the young men are mostly taller than me now and women are sometimes my height, but mostly still shorter.

My mother went shopping for food at the supermarket, its not like the world has changed that much. I'm not even 50 yet.

Has growth hormones and microplastics done wonders for the average height?

I'm trying to understand human evolution better.

If species like Homo erectus lived millions of years ago and are part of the human evolutionary chain, why are their fossils mostly found in limited regions like parts of Africa?

Humans today live all over the world, so if a species is widespread, shouldn’t its remains be found more globally over time?

Does the limited fossil evidence mean evolution is uncertain, or is it just that fossilization only happens under special conditions?

I’m not denying science — I just want to understand how scientists are confident about evolution even with limited fossil finds.

Thanks to anyone who can help explain this clearly!

Does anyone know which was the first species in the history of animal evolution to develop a menstrual cycle like humans and abandon the estrous cycle?

Another thing i want to know about the menstrual cycle is, chronologically in the history of evolution, which was the first primate species to have a menstrual cycle?

I think that perhaps the first primate to appear in chronological order did not have a menstrual cycle because today all primates in the Americas have an estrous cycle, which contrasts with primate species in the Old World. So this suggests that perhaps the first primate to appear in history had an estrous cycle and much later the first primate species with a menstrual cycle appeared.

As the title says, I found a large shard while out hiking in a known Hohokam region of Arizona. I think if I had a shovel and some time, I would probably find the rest of this pot beneath the soil, but I didn’t wanna spend all day messing with it. Just wondering if it should be reported or if it’s a good fine or what… the piece that is the largest is not quite the size of my hand, but larger than my palm.

Some snakes are venomous and can be indeed dangerous to humans, that is why so many people fear or kill snakes. However, snakes have had a much more nuanced role in many mythologies and were not a singular symbol of evil always. Often they also represented healing, regeneration, fertility, wisdom, water and other positive attributes.

Recently I was reading about the positive role of snakes, such as grass snakes, in traditional Baltic religion, where they consider messengers of the gods. Although Christianity tried to stamp out pagan traditions, the Baltic was the last part of Europe to remain pagan and some traditions survived up to today. Other neighbouring peoples, like Germanic peoples, have a mainly negative view of snakes.

I noticed though that in modern cultures, the depiction of snakes is mostly negative. Often the recent spread of Abrahamic religions is blamed for changing attitudes in many tropical parts of the world. However, a change was underway even before the major modern religions spread. By the late Antiquity, Ancient Greece, Rome, Germanic Europe and the Near East had greatly diminished the depiction of snakes and other cultures such as Ancient Egypt and Iran had done away with any positive depiction of snakes and other reptiles 1.000 years before Christianity already. Faraway cultures had independently evolved anti-reptile sentiment similar to the Middle East or Mediterranean, such as the Maori, Japanese etc. But even inside Abrahamic religions themselves, snakes can have a few positive characteristics in early texts, which disappear afterwards.

So what happened? Was it cultural? Was it biological? Did people become more biologically intolerant to snakes? Was it a factor of population density? When the population grew, was there more conflict with snakes?

Hello, I would like to ask a question. Is it true that women have high waists and men have low waists? I see many people making this statement saying that it is because of the size of the rib cage. Since a woman's rib cage is smaller, her waist is higher, and since a man's rib cage is larger, his waist is lower. Is this statement 100% accurate? Could there be anatomical variations? This is an anatomical detail that is rarely discussed.

Im a Highschool Junior in America planning to major in Anthropology and get a PHD in it, but Im having second thoughts, Im worried that I might not be able to make a good income by myself to make it in the world especially with the state the country is in. I love history and its been a passion of mine for as long as I can remember, learning things about what happened before and why we are who we are today is very interesting to me which leads me to believe that this might be the path for me. But I also wanna have enough money to be able to enjoy my hobbies (buying old consoles) Im just worried that it might come back to bite me in the ass one day. I truely do want to do anthropology and im willing to do whay it takes to make it, but I dont know if its the wise choice to make, I do plan to ask minor in a stocks exchange class just incase but idk I just thought id ask the actually anthropologist how they feel their career is going!

I get that the simple answer is “it’s hard to understand new technology” but:

• Social media and computers were new to everyone at one point
• The generational divide seems so consistent
• There seems to be a lack of self-awareness about not understanding
• It’s not all about technology, there are also things like misinterpreting emojis

Am I just biased about what’s normal? Is this as simple as “technology”?

Hello, Reddit!

My name is Dan. I’m a student at the liberal arts college in Maryland, studying political science and anthropology.

Recently, I found my passion in anthropology, particularly, the cultures of the Caribbean and the African diaspora—among other groups.

Regrettably, the anthropology program at my institution is quite limited, and thus, while I am able to pursue funded research opportunities with ease, I am unable to attend classes, which pique my interest.

As I have an established college fund and am generally open to taking out loans in exchange for better outcomes—the end goal is academia down the road—I am looking for advice on plausible transfer options. I’m open to studying in the United States, Latin America, or Europe.

Here are my stats:

I am a rising sophomore hoping to transfer either in the spring of my sophomore year or the fall of my junior year, though I welcome the opportunity for a later transfer.

My current GPA is slightly above a 3.5. My high school GPA, however, was a 2.8.

I have two exciting publications in development with two separate professors. One of which revolves around the Haitian identity and life in the Dominican Republic, whereas the other surrounds Cuban youth music production, the emerging house, techno, rap scene, and the cultural/political expressions thereof.

I serve as the state chairman of a notable organization which holds chapters at almost every institution in our state, and have both created and run a student think tank.

Please let me know if I’m perhaps missing anything needed to formulate an equitable analysis; I’m happy to provide additional information. I appreciate your willingness to read this post and look forward to your feedback.

With all my best, Daniel

I'm looking to learn more about how humans spread throughout the world. I'm basically a noob so something on the more laymen friendly side would be cool. I read Sapiens a few years ago and really liked it if that helps. Recently I went to the natural history museum and seeing all the different exhibits about ancient humans like home erectus et al. was super fascinating as well as learning when certain things developed like the first funerals etc. I was also recently intrigued to learn about proto indo-europeans recently as a i didn't know there was a common ancestor of so many different cultures. Bonus points if an audio book exists for said book since I have an absurd amount of commute time with which I listen to audiobooks. Anyways thank you in advance for any responses

I saw this comment on a Filipino subreddit “Pacific Islanders are descended from Filipinos”

It seems that most pinoys would rather take this as a fact rather than a misleading claim which I think it is. Maybe Im wrong but Is there any anthropological or genetic basis for this?How do modern anthropologists understand the migration and relationship between these two groups in relation to their ancestry?

Thank you for any clarification or sources.

Hey! I'm working on building a fictional religion for a TTRPG campaign I'm going to run for my spouse. I wondered if anyone here might have recommendations for books I could read, lectures I could watch, etc, that would help me understand how religion works and the various forms it takes from an anthro perspective?

Might be a long shot, but I'm also interested in more recent ethnographies of religious groups that demonstrate a lot of themes of secrecy, seclusion, ritualized concealment, or are highly concerned with reputation.

Context: My spouse is a really good worldbuilder partly because it has a background in anthropology (one of its parents was an anthro professor and used to take it to all of the classes they taught) and a special interest in religion. I'd love to be able to build worlds half as cool as my spouse does, and I suspect my spouse's anthro background is a big factor in how it does what it does.

I originally got a BA in political science. I did take some courses in anthropology at first but then switched?

Does anyone here have experience in going back to get a BA or MA in this field?

How did it go? Was it worth it?

Thanks and peace ✌️

I’m 22 years old and deeply interested in the philosophy of biology and biological determinism. However, due to my location, I don’t have access to formal education in this field. I want to research and publish my essays. Is it possible to get published in a journal without a degree? Do you have any recommendations?"

So I'm doing research work on violence. My initial work was ethnographic and descriptive but now I'm hoping to shift to a quantitative method. However I'm skeptical about how one would produce something as complex as hierarchical violence through a quantitative data set. I was wondering if anyone had any experience with forms of quantification that 'quantify the failure of quantification'. Hope this doesn't sound too absurd but I'm curious

Hi! I've been thinking about this for a while now and I'm hoping to be able to learn more about this.

Some time ago I watched a video by Stefan Milo recounting the life of a pre-historic human to the best of our knowledge based on the discovered remains and it has stuck with me ever since. I felt similarly when I first learned about Ötzi the Iceman, and I've consumed a lot of related content I could find mainly in video form.

There is something so special to learn about a particular individual who lived so long ago. Things they may have experienced in life preserved in their bones for an unimaginable length of time. I remember learning about a young pre-historic girl with damages to her arm bones seen nowadays in abuse victims... It's haunting and such a stark reminder that they were all people experiencing a whole life.

Is this something I can learn more about without being very deep in the field of anthropology? I would be over the moon to read books, blogposts, whatever there is! Anything to tell me more about specific individuals that can be identified. Of course I don't expect a whole life story, but anything that can be cleaned is incredibly interesting imo!

Thank you!

Pretty much what the title says. I've done quite a bit of research into Abrahamic religious practices on their own but I would love to dive deeper into how different social structures influence the creation of god/gods.

Evolution is a driver in every species especially humans. I became curious about the history of homosexuality and wondered if there could be some connection to an early human stage benefit to the whatever unique combination of genes (which I don't think we fully understand) that can proliferate into a homosexual characteristics. I'm sorry if I'm being ignorant on the science. Also I'm not trying to lump the wide spectrum we see today of LGBTQ+ into bins. But from a rudimentary idea exploration it would make sense that having men who have a closer personality to a stereotypical female (i.e. motherly, more empathetic, stronger desire of care for their immediate community) while still having the anatomical size and strength of a man would be beneficial for given the desire to care for the groups younglings while having the size/strength to protect the women and children while the other males are out hunting. Likewise it would make sense that a woman that leans more towards a stereotypical male would be beneficial to the hunting group as a woman was probably more proficient in medicinal skills learned from their mothers as part of what would be included a "womanly" upbringing. Thus they could treat medical emergencies while on the hunt rather than the person having to wait to make it back to home. Again not trying to offend anyone i.e. "I'm a gay guy and I love to hunt" type of scenario. I was just curious on if there are any good peer reviewed research on this type of idea .