A study has compared the bones of Neolithic, Bronze Age, and Iron Age women to those of modern female athletes:
Grinding grain for hours a day gave prehistoric women stronger arms than today's elite female rowers, a study suggests. The discovery points to a "hidden history" of gruelling manual labour performed by women over millennia, say University of Cambridge researchers. The physical demands on prehistoric women may have been underestimated in the past, the study shows. In fact, women's work was a crucial driver of early farming economies.
"This is the first study to actually compare prehistoric female bones to those of living women," said lead researcher, Dr Alison Macintosh. "By interpreting women's bones in a female-specific context we can start to see how intensive, variable and laborious their behaviours were, hinting at a hidden history of women's work over thousands of years."
Also at Science Magazine, The Guardian, WUNC, and The Verge.
Prehistoric women's manual labor exceeded that of athletes through the first 5500 years of farming in Central Europe (open, DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aao3893) (DX)
Related: Divergence in Male and Female Manipulative Behaviors with the Intensification of Metallurgy in Central Europe (open, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0112116) (DX)
Lower limb skeletal biomechanics track long-term decline in mobility across ∼6150 years of agriculture in Central Europe (DOI: 10.1016/j.jas.2014.09.001) (DX)
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 02 2017, @09:04PM
These numbnuts could have gone throughout Africa in rural communities to see what gruelling manual labour women perform. Today. Like, right now.
I've been by fields where a row of women, often with babies strapped to their backs, were tilling the soil with mattocks. And singing chanties to keep their work in time.
And that was with steel tipped tools.
And no, I wouldn't want to be in a fistfight with those ladies. They had arms like wrestlers.
(Score: 2) by KiloByte on Saturday December 02 2017, @09:58PM
"Were" not needed. Crudla smash!
Ceterum censeo systemd esse delendam.
(Score: 5, Funny) by SomeGuy on Saturday December 02 2017, @09:59PM (5 children)
Studies are awesome, is there anything that they can't suggest?
(Score: -1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 02 2017, @10:21PM (4 children)
That's not allowed by the powers that be.
Only the manipulation of female genitalia can be deemed "mutilation", including a pin prick of just the labia to draw a drop of blood for ritual purposes.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday December 03 2017, @12:43AM (3 children)
The first and last vulva and vagina you ever got near were your mother's so I don't see the concern here. Here's an idea, how about we leave EVERYONE'S babymaking bits alone, huh? Regardless of sex?
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 5, Insightful) by KiloByte on Sunday December 03 2017, @04:27AM (2 children)
Please tell me, why did you insult the AC? Did he say anything wrong? He complained that only female genital mutilation is banned, while male mutilation is actively promoted (like, Bill G. dumping $150M into promoting genital cutting in Africa).
It would nice if there, you know, were equal rights wrt having our babymaking bits intact.
Ceterum censeo systemd esse delendam.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @05:05AM
Why don't you worry about your own parts, not those of others?
With apologies to RAH.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @06:56PM
FGM often includes complete removal of the clit, which is considerably worse than just having some of the foreskin removed. So I'd say banning FGM definitely should be a higher priority than banning male circumcision. But yes, I agree the latter should be banned too.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Virindi on Saturday December 02 2017, @10:16PM (10 children)
My guess is, all people worked themselves to the bone in those days, regardless of gender. Why is this about women in particular? Life was hard for everyone! Exceptions would be rare and be people like warlords and such.
This certainly was the case well into the modern era as well. On farms from prehistoric times all the way to the advent of industrial farming in the early 20th century, men and women on the farm both worked to exhaustion, just to keep up. Only the rich were ever afforded a break from constant hard labor.
(Score: 2) by Virindi on Saturday December 02 2017, @10:24PM
Note that I am talking more about the spin than the actual studies.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Thexalon on Saturday December 02 2017, @11:07PM (8 children)
Nope, that's more myth than fact.
For example, in the Middle Ages, the amount of labor a typical peasant owed to the local lord was often rather lower than taxes are now (about 60 days, or 1/6 of their time, rather than our 25-30% of income), and the Catholic Church had about 80 or so holy days that the peasants had off from work. So that's not quite like having weekends, but it wasn't like they were constantly working all the time either.
Also, farming is a profession where there are bursts and lulls of activity based on seasonal cycles. In the spring, there's a big burst of work to plow and sow the fields. In the summer, you have to go out and check to ensure the plants are healthy, but that's far less labor intensive. In the fall, there's a big burst of work to harvest everything before the plants are dead and the food rots on the plant. And in the winter, your job was to sit inside and do seed prep work and processing (e.g. threshing). If you have animals to worry about, obviously those chores don't stop, but keeping a small number of, say, pigs, is mostly a matter of making sure they get some food and water periodically and make sure their waste is cleaned up if it's inside. The big burst of activity for animals is usually in the spring, when new young animals are usually born and you have to ensure that they're properly domesticated.
So no, it wasn't like everyone was constantly slaving away. In some ways, a typical dirt-poor person is worse off now than their counterpart from centuries ago.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Virindi on Saturday December 02 2017, @11:31PM (1 child)
Well that is certainly true.
But as you said, you don't get a break from animals.
"In some ways" is a pretty equivocal statement :)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @05:08AM
This, however, is not:
--R.A. Lafferty
(Score: 4, Interesting) by KiloByte on Sunday December 03 2017, @12:12AM (4 children)
You mean, medieval peasants had better smartphones and caviar and fine wine for food stamps?
Today, everyone (well, not in Eritrea...) can count on at least free shelter with breakfast, showers and periodically clothes — those living under the bridge are there on their own substance-influenced wish.
Just try to calculate how many days of your income are enough to get enough of cheapest food to last you through the year, including staying hungry during the hungry gap. No real house (just a barebones wooden cottage, or worse), no heating, electricity. No car. No entertainment of any kind, other than what costs you nothing but time. Oh, and if you're in Poland, you do get to buy booze — if you don't, it is poured out before your cottage and you need to pay anyway.
Ceterum censeo systemd esse delendam.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @02:34AM (2 children)
> Today, everyone (well, not in Eritrea...) can count on at least free shelter with breakfast, showers and periodically clothes — those living under the bridge are there on their own substance-influenced wish.
Maybe where you are. Here in Melbourne, Australia we have what appears to be a growing number of homeless people. Rather than drug-addicts the two most common categories are mentally ill and indigenous, I'd say. Whether some were alcoholics before or after they became homeless I don't know. The one thing I can say for sure is that our system has failed these people.
Would they have been better off back in the day? Maybe, there was more sense of community when the communities were smaller. Then again, maybe they wouldn't even have lived this long.
(Score: 2) by KiloByte on Sunday December 03 2017, @04:33AM (1 child)
But, do those homeless people die of starvation? Their standard of life might be not what one could wish for, but it's bad only compared to other people in the same country — they still live like kings compared to an average peasant from medieval Europe or even certain places on Earth today.
Ceterum censeo systemd esse delendam.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @05:10AM
You say it as if it were a bad thing.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday December 04 2017, @09:43PM
That's news to everyone who's ever actually worked with the homeless. Or even knows anyone who was or is homeless. Some are drunks and druggies, but quite a few aren't, and are instead ordinary people down on their luck. For example, one very good friend of mine lived out of her car in a Walmart parking lot for several months until somebody took pity on her and took her in - not an addict, not mentally ill, just someone with abusive parents and an abusive boyfriend and nowhere else to go.
And you might be thinking "But the government has programs that prevent that. You have Section 8, public housing, that sort of thing, right?" And you're right, those programs exist, and the homeless are better off because they exist. Where you're wrong is in thinking that they cover everybody. A common scenario: Somebody is qualified for assistance, fills out the forms, but in between sending in the forms and getting the voucher back they lose their home. So now they're homeless, and they can't get the letter with the voucher in it that would give them a home back. That kind of scenario means that government assistance does a lot more to appear like it's fixing the problem then actually fixing the problem.
As for homeless shelters, the really big problem with most shelters is that they typically refuse to house men and teenage boys with women and children, which means that going into a shelter frequently involves splitting up the family with no guarantee that they'll ever see each other again, and not infrequently leaving the teenage boys without a parent around. That's changing somewhat, because the shelter organizations recognize the problem, but still an issue.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Sunday December 03 2017, @12:57PM
Sorry but your education on agriculture is off by a few centuries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-field_system [wikipedia.org]
Similar to your description, from early Mesopotamia until the dusk of Rome you had the Two-field system where you planted once a year. But from around 800ad Europeans were planting twice to three times a year.
compiling...
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 02 2017, @11:08PM
You might also want to wear a middle ages armor and sword, just to have an idea.
BTW, 40 years ago if not sooner, people around here decided to halve the weight of cement sacks.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Snotnose on Sunday December 03 2017, @12:50AM (3 children)
Have you ever ground spices in a mortar/pestle? Have you ever kneaded dough for more than a couple minutes? Have you ever washed clothes by beating them against rocks for 20 minutes? Have you ever carried water for 20 minutes?
Ok, I've only done the first two and let me tell you, it gets exhausting fast. Real fast.
Why am I not surprised the average prehistoric woman could kick my ass 9 ways to sunday. Her husband? 81 ways to sunday. Her 2 month old kid? 50/50.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:03AM (2 children)
Hmm ... I'd like to option the broadcast rights to that one.
(Score: 2) by Snotnose on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:10AM (1 child)
That would suck for me. If I lose I'm a global laughingstock. If I win I go to jail for beating up a 2 month old kid. I'd rather be Matt Laur.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:17AM
"You heard me, I won't be in for the rest of the week. . . . I told you, my baby beat me up. . . . Oh, it is _not_ the worst excuse I ever thought up." - Homer Simpson
(Score: 3, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:04AM
Back in the day, men didn't rape women. When a woman needed an itch scratched, she pointed, and told one man or another, "Get over here, NOW!" That's what the women's libbers really want to return to. When that hulking brute said "FUCK ME!" no sane man would argue. Well, not unless he could really run fast, but that's why women developed those long legs!
(Score: 2) by idiot_king on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:11AM (4 children)
Just proves, of course, that the chauvinistic modern oppression of women as the "weaker" sex is completely and utterly debunked yet again.
I hope I have daughters someday so that I can show them this and by extension show them anything is possible. Anything to get away from the white-patriarchal-capitalistic machine...
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:21AM
"Really, daddy? Women aren't weaker?"
"Yes, dear. Now start your homework, it'll be a couple hours before din--"
Some time later ...
"What happened? Did I pass out?"
"No, honey, your precious daughter hit you in the head and took your car keys."
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @04:09AM (1 child)
The men were even stronger.
Women have the advantage in tolerance of pain and blood loss. They sometimes, rarely, beat men in very long distance running.
A pretty ordinary man can beat all the female olympic athletes. It's only about the 90th percentile man.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday December 04 2017, @09:56PM
An average guy can run 100 meters in about 13 seconds. A female Olympic sprinter can run the same distance in no more than 11.3 seconds, with the world record at 10.5 seconds. Similar kinds of numbers exist for lots of other Olympic sports: swimming, distance running, weight lifting, etc.
This idea that professional female athletes wouldn't be able to kick your butt is just plain silly. And if you don't believe me, walk up to any female UFC fighter you like and challenge her to a fight (or even just try to punch her).
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Rivenaleem on Monday December 04 2017, @10:46AM
Well, that's under the assumption that you make your daughters grind grain for some undetermined number of hours a day.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:29AM (2 children)
Am glad that women aren't quite so strong any more.
I'd hate to have my dick ripped off or my balls crushed to pulp while getting a handjob.
Just sayin'.
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:53AM (1 child)
You can't get a hand job because you're unemployable. Now, beat it, punk, and let the working women work.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @03:29AM
Isn't it time for your booty bump [tweaker.org]?
(Score: 2) by Appalbarry on Sunday December 03 2017, @05:28AM
Her name was Bertha. Bertha Butt.
She was one of the Butt Sisters...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @03:37PM
I see what you did there.