Gender and Social Organization among the Mbuti - Research Paper Example

?Nets and Arrows: Gender and Social Organization Among the Mbuti One of the very controversial issues in the anthropological research on the Mbuti, foragers in the Ituri Forest, concerns subsistence, gender and social organization. It has to do with women’s participation in net hunting and archery hunting. In some areas, where the Mbuti live, net hunting is the mode of choice. In other areas, where the Mbuti live, archery hunting is the mode of choice. Women often participate in net hunting but rarely participate in archery hunting. The controversy involves the reasons for women’s participation in net hunting but rarely in archery hunting, the meaning of this and the connection to gender roles and social organization. This paper considers an economic explanation and an ecological one, along with an analysis of forest symbolism and a sociological analysis of honey collecting, to form the thesis of this paper: that the impact of hunting and honey-collection subsistence activities of the Mbuti, on gender and social organization, is mediated by forest symbolism that serves as a basis for their ideology, and that Forest symbolism and consequent social organization, of this hunter-gatherer society, shapes gender practices with respect to net and archery hunting, and also to honey collection. Five distinct theories are presented in this paper. The first, by Bailey and Aunger, is basically an economic theory. They argue that net hunting is participated in by women in areas where Mbuti find it to be more economically rewarding than working in the village gardens of agriculturalist outsiders. In archery hunting areas, this is not so. The second is Abruzzi’s, ecological theory about population pressure. Abruzzi argues that the net hunting and archery hunting division is an adaptive response to the invasion of Mbuti territory by non-Mbuti outsiders. The third theory, core to this paper, is from a fascinating descriptive analysis by Mosko. Mosko’s paper introduces a structuralist theory of forest symbolism and kinship representation, nothing overtly specific to net and archery hunting, but actually, it would appear, quite central to it. The symbolism of the forest, as conceived by the Mbuti, and described by Mosko, places men at the center, the hearth, the vaginal entry to and exit from the womb, and similarly as close as possible to the center of the forest, the sacred space where it is forbidden to disturb by hunting. It places women at the periphery, near the food baskets in huts, and similarly in labor contact with the agriculturalists, at the periphery of Mbuti territory. Having read the other two papers first, and later reading Mosko’s paper, the idea dawned (the fourth theory being the theory stated as the thesis of this paper) that the connection between gender and subsistence and social organization, as it pertains to net and archery hunting, actually has its roots in the forest symbolism of which Mosko spoke, although he did not apply it to that consideration. It follows to ask why, then, as so many anthropologists and ethnographers have asked before; why do women participate in net hunting but seldom to never in archery hunting? How might this unique, non-materialist way of looking at Mbuti social organization, from a more emic perspective of forest symbolism contribute to answering this question? The fifth theory considered in this paper is an ecological and sociological analysis of honey collection activities and norms. Ichikawa emphasized that honey collection, among net hunting Mbuti, is an activity that strengthens social organization, and that women and children participate in honey collection activities but do not, themselves, actually collect the honey, as that is done only by men. Inputting honey-collection information into consideration of the thesis of this paper, remaining sensitive to Mosko’s explanation of emic forest symbolism, the question of “why” might be more confidently answered. The impact of hunting and honey-collection subsistence activities of the Mbuti, on gender and social organization, are mediated by forest symbolism that serves as a basis for their ideology. We will turn now to a more in-depth consideration of the theories of Bailey and Aunger, and of Abruzzi, and then the symbolic mapping of Mosko and its implications, and then to Ichikawa’s observations of honey-collecting, and will conclude with the proposed theory that is the thesis of this paper. Much of the literature on net hunting and archery hunting Mbuti is focused on either applying or arguing away previous theories, until the theory field is open to their own theory. Mosko took a different approach, claiming that in nearly all studies of hunter-gatherer peoples, they have been cast in a "materialist" or radically "empiricist" mold, that is, with a decided epistemological (and sometimes ontological) bias towards objects and events ("patterns of behavior") as distinct from ideas and representations ("patternsfor behav-ior") ….. Part of the reason, then, that hunter-gatherers have been so irresistible is that they have been seen to embody dimensions of physical reality-patterns of behav-ior-that anthropologists happen to value intuitively as Westerners (Mosko, 1987). In other words, these researchers, even while collecting their data in the course of ethnographic fieldwork, have been seduced into an etic understanding of the situation, through researcher bias. This has distorted the interpretation of their findings and their conclusions. This paper will not make any attempt to banish the theories of others, but will rather attempt to add insight to the scholarly conversation about subsistence, gender and social organization, but drawing on the emic symbolism of “Forest”, described by Mosko, and the norms of another important subsistence gathering, honey. There may, in fact, be various factors contributing to the participation of women in subsistence hunting and gathering, and the influence of that participation on gender roles and social organization of the Mbuti community. Bailey and Aunger conducted field observations in four areas of Mbuti territory: two areas in which net hunting is practiced and two areas in which archery hunting is practiced. The two approaches to hunting are the main two used by the Mbuti pygmies who live in the Ituri rainforest in Zaire (Bailey & Aunger Jr., 1989). As mentioned above, women participate in net hunting, but rarely in archery hunting. Anthropologists are intrigued by this because they are interested in cultural diffusion they are interested in how ecological variables shape technology they are interested in how the hunting method used determines a certain social organization (Bailey & Aunger Jr., 1989). The Efe (pygmies living in the Northern and Eastern part of the Ituri) are archers, and hunt game with spears and with bows and arrows. The Aka (pygmies living in the Northwestern Ituri) are little known and not included in Bailey and Aunger’s study. South of the Aka, and Northwest, lives a net-hunting pygmy group, called the Tswa. The Mbuti live in the Central and Southern parts of the Ituri and they use net hunting like the Tswa. Bailey and Aunger focused on two areas of bow-hunting Efe, an area of net hunting Tswa and an area of net-hunting Mbuti (Bailey & Aunger Jr., 1989). Bailey and Aunger tested their hypothesis about the differential economic viability of women’s hunting in these areas. They found that net-hunting is more cost-effective (more calories per unit time) for women than doing garden work for agriculturalists; and that garden work is more cost effective than bow hunting, in the bow hunting areas (Bailey & Aunger Jr., 1989). This is apparently true, even though net-hunting and bow-hunting are of similar efficiency. Women in net hunting areas, then, spend substantial amounts of time increasing the meat gained in net hunting, while women in bow hunting areas spend substantial amounts of time working in village gardens of agriculturists, and rarely if ever spend time hunting (Bailey & Aunger Jr., 1989). Bailey and Aunger also checked the population density of the four areas of their study. They found that village population density was similar in both net and bow hunting areas, but what distinguished the two was ease of access to larger population areas where they could sell or trade their meat. The archers were much more isolated than, while the net-hunters have relatively easy access (Bailey & Aunger Jr., 1989). Furthermore, the size of agriculturalists’ gardens were much smaller in net-hunting areas than those in archer areas, which means there is more garden labor economic opportunity available to archer women than to net-hunting women (Bailey & Aunger Jr., 1989). Bailey and Aunger noted that their findings do not address why some areas have net-hunters and other areas have bow hunters. There is no support to understand, if it is assumed that archery came first, why net-hunting developed at all and, once introduced, why it did not develop everywhere (Bailey & Aunger Jr., 1989). Attributing the gender distinction to cost-benefit and differing alternative economic access to village gardens and dense population centers might be significant factors in the present moment, but give no historical justification at all. A suggestion offered by Bailey and Aunger is that the initial investment (in money and labor) discourages net-hunting by archer pygmies, while agriculturalist villagers may have put up the initial investment in nets, originally, to secure more meat (Bailey & Aunger Jr., 1989). This is questionable, however, since it appears that net-hunting and bow hunting are of similar effectiveness and of even less efficiency. Also, we must consider that net-hunting is more labor intensive (Bailey & Aunger Jr., 1989). We turn our attention now to Abruzzi’s research on the Mbuti. Abruzzi argues that the distribution of net-hunting and bow hunting represents differential response to habitat by non-Mbuti populations (Abruzzi, 1979). He also points out some interesting information. Net-hunters have larger camps (from seven to thirty families) and do communal hunting, while archers live in smaller groups and hunt individually, with preferably three others for support. These are very different approaches to hunting, with very different consequences for social organization (Abruzzi, 1979). There is also a differing effect on gender. Women, and sometimes also the children, beat the underbrush to chase animals into the men’s nets. The productivity of the hunt depends upon the labor of women. On the other hand, in archer areas, women rarely go on hunts and, when they do, it is to help carry home the meat, only. Most interestingly, when net-hunters live in archer camps, or when archers live in net-hunting camps, they participate in the style alternative to their own, yet maintain their own style when returning to their own area (Abruzzi, 1979). Abruzzi argues that the reason for net-hunting is basically the required intensification of hunting practice that responds to increasing population infringement on diminishing resources which, in the interest of survival, demands a more socially organized cooperative adaptation (Abruzzi, 1979). This is questionable, however, because both methods of hunting are equally effective and net-hunting, in fact, is more labor intensive (Abruzzi, 1979, Bailey & Aunger Jr., 1989). Furthermore, much of the Mbuti diet comes from the gardens of those encroaching populations which provide excellent cost-benefit advantage for garden labor, in archer areas, and excellent market access advantage in net-hunting areas (Bailey & Aunger Jr., 1989). Mosko did an analysis of a very different type, and also about an entirely different anthropological controversy, superficially unrelated to net-hunting and bow-hunting. He was interested in kinship systems among Mbuti. Apparently the Mbuti have a rather complicated and confusing, inconsistent way of organizing kinship. This has led anthropologists to think that the Mbuti care nothing about kinship system categories, when in fact, this misunderstanding, like the women-in-hunting controversy, is a result of etic views being applied to emic experience. Mosko emphasized how critical it is to understand Mboti experience from an understanding of Mboti ideology, rather than from a materialist Western worldview. This is surely a sensible suggestion! Furthermore, it can be aptly applied to the women-as-hunters controversy, in that the quest for material goods and food cannot be the only or even necessarily the primary consideration of the Mboti. Surely they must have their own, probably non-Western ideas and priorities. Perhaps those ideas and priorities have been invisible to those coming from a materialist worldview. Mosko gave a descriptive analysis of the relation between Mboti understanding of “Forest”, and how this is reflected in social organization. The Forest is all encompassing and the central organizing absolute of Mbuti culture. It is variously described as "father" and "mother," "friend" (or "sibling") and "lover," the "great provider," the "chief, the lawgiver, the leader and the final arbitra-tor," "God," "Godhead," "Deity," "God of the Hunt," and "God of the Forest (Mosko, 1987, p. 898) Marriage, conception and the development of the child in the womb are all accomplished with the life-giving energies, songs and participation of the Forest, and the child is born to the family, and ritually re-born to the Forest (Mosko, 1987). Throughout one’s life, the Mbuti imagine themselves in the quiet center of a womb-like sphere, with noise at the periphery, and the risk of disorientation (Mosko, 1987). The Mbuti worldview involves multiple conceptions of spheres, not only around themselves and each other but also associated with the hut, fire, vagina, stomach, and the Forest itself (Mosko, 1987). This notion of spheres is, in fact, the central organizing principle of their community, their foraging territory, and their relationship to larger bands of Mbuti (Mosko, 1987). Just as their personal sphere is quiet in the center, with noise at the periphery, the Forest has a center no-man’s land in which it is forbidden to hunt, and the community spherical space where one can hunt, and a periphery which contains the noise of outsiders (Mosko, 1987). Mbuti camps are always within 30 km of the periphery of their spherical territory, and are also arranged in a spherical pattern, with the hearth, representing the quiet center of the camp sphere. Each hut, also, is a sphere, with the family hearth defining the center and the periphery used for storage of food baskets (Mosko, 1987). Men generally hunt within the territorial sphere of the Forest and reserve the center as sacred space. They discuss important matters, often spiritual matters, around the camp hearth (center) and also sleep there, while women stay in the huts, which are located at the periphery of the camp (Mosko, 1987). Men’s space in the hut is the hut hearth, while women’s space is the periphery. Also, there is a spherical organization of the band, with a central hearth where ritual activities are performed by the men, while women remain at the periphery (Mosko, 1987). The fire in the camp or band hearth is communal, contributed to from the fires of each hut’s hearth, as the sub-band hearth is communal, contributed to from the hearths of each band (Mosko, 1987). The hearth (band and sub-band, camp and hut) is identified with “fire” and with “vagina”, just as the central point of the Forest is (the sacred space) also identified in these terms (Mosko, 1987). Mosko mentions what this allocation of idealized spheres mean for the organization of the society. He does not specifically note, however, the meaning of the implications for women. A consideration of this ideology leads us to see that, however much “equality” is noted by anthropologists, in studies of the Mbuti, men are apparently, from the emic worldview, at the center of each sphere, controlling entry and exit and activity of the vagina, in a mytho-spiritual sense. Women are at the periphery, distanced from the center, the control of the activity of the vagina. We shall turn our attention, briefly, to another research study, superficially unrelated to hunting, but detailing gendered behavior with another foraging activity of the Mbuti, the gathering of honey from trees in the forest. Mbuti stay more than a month in the forest depending almost solely on honey. According to the Mbuti, honey is their real food, and because of honey they feel strong attachment to the forest (Ichikawa, 1981). The Mbuti make a honey camp in the forest. The men go out in the early morning to locate the hives, while women stay in camp. In daylight hours, the men return with their families to actually collect the honey and distribute it to helpers and others (Ichikawa, 1981). Even if women locate a honey hive, still they do not collect it themselves but have a man do it for them (Ichikawa, 1981). Honey is collected in small groups (like bow-hunting) but is distributed among the larger group and even to members of another band. A primary function of honey gathering is the management and balancing of social relations through gifting, informal exchanges, and the fostering of unity by using small group gathering teams to deal with conflict and prevent separation from the band (Ichikawa, 1981). To bring this paper full-circle, it would appear that men are in control of the center of the various spheres (sub band hearth, band hearth, camp hearth, hut hearth). These centers all reflect the sacred space at the center of the Forest, literally and metaphorically. Women’s space is at the periphery, away from the center, at the potentially disorienting parts, away from the fire, dissociated from the vagina, the center of birth, the center of Forest, the center of ceremony. They are relegated to the periphery in hunting also. They beat the bushes to frighten the animals into the center of men’s nets, and may carry meat bow-hunted by men, but do not themselves kill the animals. They have more involvement in laboring in the gardens of villagers also, which is on the periphery. They depend on men for honey, a deep gift of the Forest and the means by which conflict is resolved, social relations managed, and unity promoted. My conclusion is that the thesis of this paper is indicated. For the foraging Mbuti, the impact of hunting and honey-collection subsistence activities, on gender and social organization, is mediated by forest symbolism that serves as a basis for their ideology, and that Forest symbolism and consequent social organization, of this hunter-gatherer society, shapes gender practices with respect to net and archery hunting, and also to honey collection. References Abruzzi, W. S. (1979). Population pressure and subsistence strategies among the Mbuti pygmies. Human Ecology, Vol. 7:2 , 183-189. Bailey, R. C., & Aunger Jr., R. (1989). Net hunters vs. archers: Variation in women's subsistence strategies in the Ituri forest. Human Ecology, Vol. 17:3 , 273-297. Ichikawa, M. (1981). Ecological and sociological importance of honey to the Mbuti net hunters, Eastern Zaire. Retrieved November 9, 2011, from African Study Monographs: http://www.content.imamu.edu.sa/Scholars/it/net/mitsuo%20ichikawa.pdf Mosko, M. S. (1987). The symbols of "Forest": A structural analysis of Mbutu culture and social organization. American Anthropologist, New Series. Bol. 89:4 , 896-913. Read More