The game of historical telephone leads to inevitable inaccuracies which we all understand. What’s particularly gross is when people use preferred elements of history as permission to serve themselves. There is a hint of condescension with many hunters who take their daughters and wives hunting for shows and videos. “Watch me as I turn this woman into a provider too.”
Jeff- That is excellently articulated. I agree on the condecension point too; its quite patronizing in these media examples you mention. The irony is that (I'm willing to wager) that the women are likely just as much providers (or more) than the man hunters "mentoring" them; earning a paycheck, food shopping, cooking/cleaning, etc.
Jesse, as always, another great essay. I had to sit with it for a day or two. One of the queries I have been wrestling with is more modern and that is how gender roles shifted and changed. It happened around the WWI and WWII, as rural was shifting towards urban, and manifests in the societal practices of today. I believe historically the truth is that there existed more gender cooperation than simply "roles." Working together verses separation of responsibilities.
I know many, many great female hunters. She practices skills, she learns and trains, she kills, she field dresses, she hauls. This isn't new but it is a dynamic that feels quieted.
When I taught hunting workshops, they were female only invitations. Why I was asked? My example, I had taught orienteering workshops where the attending women, and men, would look at the male regardless that I was the instructor. Again, social learning.
Those war periods were so fundamental to industry and home life. I'll enjoy contemplating that. And to your point about only looking at the male instructor: classic in terms of that social learning, as you say. I see it with my wife and now, unfortunately, my daughter.
You have such a unique and grounding perspective, Jesse—I always walk away with something unexpected to consider. This was a great reminder of how the often quiet, consistent work gets overlooked, even when it’s what holds everything together.
And I can't help but say here, too—I've always admired and enjoyed your photography, but I’m especially loving the recent Notes you’ve shared. Still thinking about the orchid.
Great essay, Jesse! When thousands of studies of sex differences are combined and analyzed (meta-analysis), most of our cultural stereotypes about the differences between men and women are not supported. This is especially true regarding matters of intelligence, skills and abilities. But when did science ever change anyone's mind?!
The game of historical telephone leads to inevitable inaccuracies which we all understand. What’s particularly gross is when people use preferred elements of history as permission to serve themselves. There is a hint of condescension with many hunters who take their daughters and wives hunting for shows and videos. “Watch me as I turn this woman into a provider too.”
Jeff- That is excellently articulated. I agree on the condecension point too; its quite patronizing in these media examples you mention. The irony is that (I'm willing to wager) that the women are likely just as much providers (or more) than the man hunters "mentoring" them; earning a paycheck, food shopping, cooking/cleaning, etc.
Jesse, as always, another great essay. I had to sit with it for a day or two. One of the queries I have been wrestling with is more modern and that is how gender roles shifted and changed. It happened around the WWI and WWII, as rural was shifting towards urban, and manifests in the societal practices of today. I believe historically the truth is that there existed more gender cooperation than simply "roles." Working together verses separation of responsibilities.
I know many, many great female hunters. She practices skills, she learns and trains, she kills, she field dresses, she hauls. This isn't new but it is a dynamic that feels quieted.
When I taught hunting workshops, they were female only invitations. Why I was asked? My example, I had taught orienteering workshops where the attending women, and men, would look at the male regardless that I was the instructor. Again, social learning.
Those war periods were so fundamental to industry and home life. I'll enjoy contemplating that. And to your point about only looking at the male instructor: classic in terms of that social learning, as you say. I see it with my wife and now, unfortunately, my daughter.
One thing about mentorship is its ability to give weight to who has the knowledge and experience. It is a form of learned confidence.
You have such a unique and grounding perspective, Jesse—I always walk away with something unexpected to consider. This was a great reminder of how the often quiet, consistent work gets overlooked, even when it’s what holds everything together.
And I can't help but say here, too—I've always admired and enjoyed your photography, but I’m especially loving the recent Notes you’ve shared. Still thinking about the orchid.
Thank you, Erin. That's a great framing- the quiet, consistent work.
I'm glad you enjoyed the orchid. It was a cool find. I had no idea they grew around Vermont. Apparently, they occur throughout the northeast.
Great essay, Jesse! When thousands of studies of sex differences are combined and analyzed (meta-analysis), most of our cultural stereotypes about the differences between men and women are not supported. This is especially true regarding matters of intelligence, skills and abilities. But when did science ever change anyone's mind?!
REF: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/psychology/gender-similarities-hypothesis
Thanks, Baird. This is a rich topic of inquiry; I need to restrain myself from getting stuck in the rabbit hole!
Thank you for questioning/correcting the historical record. In a bit of synchronicity, I posted on this very theme yesterday in "I Call Myself a Huntress." https://deborahleeluskin.substack.com/p/i-call-myself-a-huntress
What a coincidence! Thank you for sharing, Deborah. I can’t wait to read it.