Having also heard the Mead controversy (I also alluded to it in a recent post), I thought it might be interesting to compare notes about studies, "facts," etc., about ethnicity which were held to be true but later dismissed. (I'm looking for Mead controversy sources...) One that immediately comes to mind, as discussed in Janet Hyde's Half the Human Experience, my text for Psychology of Women: The belief that menstruating women in American Indian tribes were isolated because they were "contaminated." This belief was described by Stephens in 1961. (Stephens, W.N. (1961). A cross-cultural study of menstrual taboos. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 64, 385-416.) "Firsthand accounts from Indian writers provide a different interpretation: Menstruating women were not shunned as unclean, but rather were considered extremely powerful, with tremendous capacities for destruction. Women's spiritual forces were thought to be especially strong during menstruation, and women were generally thought to possess powers so great that they could counteract or weaken men's powers." (quote from Hyde) Source: LaFramboise, Teresa D., Heyle, Anneliese M., & Ozer, Emily J. (1990). Changing and diverse roles of women in American Indian culture. Sex Roles, 22, 455-476.) Beth Benoit University of Massachusetts Lowell >>>---------- From: Stephen Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: TIPS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Rites of passage and anthropological accuracy Date: Wed, Mar 8, 2000, 10:46 AM On Wed, 8 Mar 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: |
Title: Ethnic urban legends (Was: Rites of passage and anthropological accuracy)