Hunter gatherers social dynamic

It's the fair, egalitarian hierarchy. Nature knows no unjustful oppression.

>Theres literally no evidence that primitive humans were egalitarian, its all wishful thinking by leftist academics.
This alone is positive proof that humans aren't egalitarian. Now I don't know what this data is refering to, humans since agriculture and civilization or all the history of the human species, prehistoric times included as well.

Champazees ARE egalitarian. Just as much as hunter-gatherer in fact. Having a single alpha male chimp/a tribe chief is not comparable to the multi-strata-hierarchies modern societies have.

Women were rape toys that raised the young. Men did all the work because women were weak compared to them.

>egalitarian
>hierarchy
What did he mean by that?

>are humans more similar to war-like, aggressive chimpanzees or tame, peaceful bonobos with "make love not war" attitude

Well obviously we're capable of either, and lots of other things too. You can't reduce human behavior to some simple model.

Source?

>source: my ass

>You can't reduce human behavior to some simple model.
Yes you can because we are animals thus we have a genetic base behavior.

>Some tribes were extremely egalitarian, yes. I mean, there are several instances where the tribe actually believed that the more white stuff you shot into a woman, the stronger the baby would be. Thus, everyone had their turn with a pregnant woman, and the child was raised collectively, with no designated father.
At the same time, there's tribes where only one man is allowed to breed, and impregnates all the women, until someone can defeat him in combat, he reaches a certain age, or he steps down.

Sauce? I'm pretty certain you're wrong on those two assertions.

Aw dont be mad cupcake you wont be raped by a 13 year old in this time by just walking to the lake.

>Some tribes were extremely egalitarian, yes. I mean, there are several instances where the tribe actually believed that the more white stuff you shot into a woman, the stronger the baby would be. Thus, everyone had their turn with a pregnant woman, and the child was raised collectively, with no designated father.

This refers to the Yamomami of the Brazilian rainforest, if anyone's interested. They also have, or had, the highest murder rate in the entire world. Not suggesting a casual connection, or even correlation, just another factoid to indicate behavioral diversity in human that is not always intuitive.

This thread is full of garbage. Human societies have a large plasticity...within a limited range of combination. Many of the possibilities posted here have never been documented in any human society.

>Yes you can because we are animals thus we have a genetic base behavior

Our "genetic base behavior" is having complex and varied cultures. I know you autists like reductionism but there is a limit to how far you can rationally take it.

Studies on the Yamomami are all extremely controversial and contradictory, some stating the exact opposite of the others. They suffer from having been led by ideologically driven individuals suspected of having tainted their research.

Meaningless drivel.

>chimps have a strict male dominance hierarchy that relies on male aggression on females and alpha male agression against beta males
>egalitarian
How is that egalitarian?

The Yamomami definitely bust collective nuts into pregnant women. They also zip around the Amazon on speed boats with sawed-off shotguns.

>Our "genetic base behavior" is having complex and varied cultures
Wow you really dont know what a genetic base behavior is.

Models by definitions aren't equal to real things so you can reduce something to models only by loss of complexity and accuracy.

Egalitarianism is drivel, humans tribes lived in survival of the strongest, the most beautiful women were raped and the uglys were allowed to die. The strongest men bullied the weakest men and passed on their genes. There was no equality period.

Well, part of the problem is that 'Yamomami' really refers to a large group of indigenous peoples that aren't coexisting organized and have vault different lifestyles. It's a similar situation to Papuans. So anyone claiming that 'the Yamomami do x and y and z' can easily be contradicted by a different researcher looking at a different band it settlement.

Or maybe you don't?

see

> not raping all women
Standards of beauty was invented by weak people of modern times. In ancient times, if person was a rapable was you rape them. Fat or ugly, ten years old or old enough to be your grand-mother. Strong men didn't care about this shit.

Listen retard what is the one exact behavior that all humans share

VIOLENT

HEDONISTIC

CURIOUS

SOCIAL

CURIOUS

BEHAVIOR

You retarded fuck, all humans have this type of behavior on an instinctive level.

It's -relatively- egalitarian compared to societies with complex hierarchies.

Hunter-gatherers are generally considered egalitarian, yet they all follow the strongman model (no known exceptions). That strongman is clearly a leader above the rest of the tribe yet, due to the very nature of their economy, are not much wealthier and must lead by trying to reach a consensus. That's quite egalitarian compared to us.

Violent-Empathy is the one thing that stops a human around you from hitting you for fun, all humans have an instinctive craving for violence and the suffering of others.

Hedonistic-Humans do the things they do for pleasure whether its temporay or permanent, even scientist research stuff because it gives them pleasure.

Curious-Like monkey humans are curious of things they dont understand

Social-this is a no brainer

see

>the most beautiful women were raped and the uglys were allowed to die.

Wrong genetic studies show that, unlike men, women generally all managed to procreate.

You literally pulled this out of your ass. Name one group that follows this model. Provide a source.

Yes meaning average women outnumbered uglies in the past.

Ancient jews.

unl.edu/rhames/courses/current/readings/boehm.pdf

darwinstudents.blogspot.hu/2009/06/comparison-of-sexuality-of-humans.html
Chimps:
>larger extent of sexual dimorphism
>aggressive
>patriarchal
>sex solely for reproduction
Bonobos:
>peaceful
>smaller extent of sexual dimorphism
>female dominant
>sex for social inteaction, bonding and pleasure as well as reproduction

Seems like humans are exactly inbetween chimps and bonobos.
Also, it says some other interesting stuff.
>In conclusion, Humans, The common Chimpanzee and Bonobos, despite being derived from a common ancestry have very some very different social behaviours concerning sexuality. Out of the three species Bonobos and Humans arguably have the more similar behaviours as their community as a whole largely revolves around a sexual concept. Sexuality moulds the way Bonobos interact with eachother as it does within human society. Even the way the act is carried out greatly resembles that of humans. The only major difference is that humans usually maintain a single partner throughout life, and tends to only reproduce with that partner, whereas the primates have multiple partners. Also as soon as the primate reaches physical maturity, they are then expose to sexual activities, whereas this is not necessarily the case in homo sapiens.

>The only major difference is that humans usually maintain a single partner throughout life
Bullshit, humans in the lithic eras were polygamist that fucked anything they saw.

>mfw this was true but not anymore
We are facing eugenics on a hystorical scale.

proof?

>lithic eras
But that ceased to be the case after food production and the first civilizations which were all monogamous, presumably to stimulate
beta males to work by providing them a certain chance of reproduction.

That paper directly contradicts your claim. Do you know what the term 'reverse' even means?

>when I look at our closest evolutionary relative, the chimpanzees.
You shouldn't do that.

Read the fucking paper you retard. It says exactly what i say.

>humans in the lithic eras

The lithic era (stage in fact) was only in South-America.

>All this "it serves the alpha male" crap...
Turns out, among apes and some other primates, particularly among larger tribes, the omega males, especially older ones, actually reproduce more often than the alphas.

This has to do with the competition among the strong males leading to conflicts, which both the females and the less-than beta males retreat from - together.

So while Chad is constantly beating down the competing Chads, and banging his favorite girl, old Eugene is having a daily orgie with the dozen girls who are just sick of Chad's shit.

Wish I had the study on hand, it was kinda interesting.

Suffice to say, comparing primate behavior to human behavior is dicey, at best, as their social structures are varied wildly as well and our common ancestor is long extinct (and, in all likelihood, had a social structure just as distinct).

Where does it say there is a 'strongman'? That's start I was objecting to. Whereto the strongman?

Franz de Waal writes extensively on primate behavior. Any of his books will at least partially corroborate your claim.

>this thread is full of garbage
Welcome to Veeky Forums

>Can Veeky Forums tell me what was the male-female dynamic among hunter-gatherers?
Depends on the tribe my nigger. There is far more variation in culture between hunter gatherers than between agricultural peoples. The possibilities are endless. Some are patriarchal, some matriarchal, some egalitarian but strictly segregated and others more egalitarian as we would understand it. Some are extremely violent, some are almost completely lacking in the concept of violence. Some are strictly monogamous, some have fluid monogamous relationships, some are polygamous and some just share sex around.

The vast majority of human diversity with regards to culture and probably genetics is found within a handful of irrelevant spearchuckers. Really makes you think.

>Egalitarianism is drivel, humans tribes lived in survival of the strongest, the most beautiful women were raped and the uglys were allowed to die. The strongest men bullied the weakest men and passed on their genes. There was no equality period.
so full of shit lmao. stop trying to politicise anthropology

That is an extremely basic foundation on top of which a ridiculously large number of cultures can be built. For example, all cultures do things for hedonistic reasons, but one culture might find week long ketamine binges satisfies them, another might find a week long fast in solitude satisfies them.

wtf I love old people now

Yeah, it does. Provided that you are right, does all this diversity mean all that much, if patriarchal food producing civilizations can simply steamroll and eradicate all these hunter-gatherers any time they want almost effortlessly? Evolution on a societal level only allows civilizations to exist at this point. Uf hunter gatherers face a civilized society, they have two choices: they either adopt civilization or go extinct. This points to the conclusion that civilzed, non-egalitarian patriarchal societies with hierarchy are the only viable option.

>Provided that you are right, does all this diversity mean all that much, if patriarchal food producing civilizations can simply steamroll and eradicate all these hunter-gatherers any time they want almost effortlessly?
exactly. Agriculture wins every single time because it has superior production. Likewise an industrial society will always beat an agricultural and so on. There's nothing anyone can do to stop this.

>This points to the conclusion that civilzed, non-egalitarian patriarchal societies with hierarchy are the only viable option.
It's entirely possible for an advanced civilization to become dominant under that model, and in that state, settle into a more egalitarian society. Provided it isn't confronted with a stronger foe from that point on, it can, in turn, share its magnanimity with lesser civilizations and tribes it doesn't feel to be a threat, thus preserving them. (Which, more or less, is the state of things now, and why some primitive cultures continue to exist and be preserved to the degree which they are.)

So no, non-egalitarian patriarchal societies with hierarchy are not the only viable option, it's just very likely to show up as an option at one point or another. More likely (and arguably, historically), it's simply a stage.

Though, as a CISgendered male patriarch, I'd kinda like to deny this fact.

Alpha males are the best
its basically merit based, which is egalitarian

Presumably he means equal opportunity but not equal outcome, meritocracy. You'll have leaders and followers, but as a product of their actions/capabilities rather than the 'order of things'.

Can't speak for chimps though.

There are a lot of different dynamics to Hunter Gatherer tribes.

My favorite is the Etoro of Papua New Guinea. We studied them in a couple classes for my anthropology courses.

The women generally did all the chores/daily work. They maintained the fires, cook, gather, and raise the children (the only raise the boys until they're 7, and then the boys go and live with their father in a special hut). From the time of about 11 and up the women can be taken as wives. Generally they do not penetrate the girl until she has her first period. They will just use their mouth to take the man's semen until the young girls first period.

The men generally build homes, hunt, and slaughter neighboring tribes in order to take more women to marry. The men are taken at the age of 7 to live in a special hut with the other boys. The older boys rape the younger in order to give them semen, which the Etoro believe makes them stronger. They believe the semen is man's life force and when he gets old and dies he's run out of semen. The men are trained to kill/hunt/fish/butcher/make tools. The way the Etoro wage war is by getting boners, waving said boners at the enemy, turning the bones in their nose upwards, and slaying the other men with their bows. They then proceed to carry off the girls which will all be married soon regardless of age.

They are a large percentage of the island's population.

Among hunter-gatherers today there is a great deal of variety, but top leadership and warfare are mostly dominated by males.

>Wikipedia says they are/were egalitarian for the most part which really doesn't make sense to me when I look at our closest evolutionary relative, the chimpanzees
Bonobos are lead by females, are fairly egalitarian and are as close to us as we are to chimpanzees. Bonobos even look more like us as they have longer legs, more slender bodies. Don't base your argument on chimpanzee behavior any more than you would base it on bonobo behavior as they are equally genetically related to us.

Utopian heaven... pfffff

Chimpazees are not egalitarian. They have very strong social hierarchies. They are very political animals.

New Guineans are agriculturalists you retard.

>They are a large percentage of the island's population.
>In 2009, the National Geographic Society reported an estimate that there were fewer than 1668 speakers of the Etoro/Edolo language

>It's entirely possible for an advanced civilization to settle into a more egalitarian society
communism has failed and the welfare state is about to fail right now, so nah, not really
>hare its magnanimity with lesser civilizations and tribes it doesn't feel to be a threat, thus preserving them
and by doing so, it crushes and assimilates them

>They are a large percentage of the island's population.
are you fucking retarded?

I'm aware of bonobos as well It seems that humans share some common traits with both bonobos and chimpanzees.

There are dozens of distinct ethnographic groups on Papua New Guinea, with wildly different 'production' bases, depending on region.

I remember watching something about the Sambian tribe in New Guinea where they took the little boys off to be raped by the men. I know you're supposed to approach stuff like that with cultural relativism in mind, but the more I learned about these people the more I realized it's perfectly fine to draw a line in the sand based off of one's metaphysics/moral philosophy.

youtube.com/watch?v=tA8eRnmOIBI&index=1&list=PLEqf8pU7tcmaT6qWbtN-AcIQ6LBo0JYz6