Cows caused male chauvinism

[Shane Costello]

Cattle ownership made it a man's world (www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994220)

It appears that cattle herding set gender equality back a couple of millenia. Men with lot's of cows got the girls, procreated at a faster rate than their female counterparts, and were able to beat back other men who tired to steal their bovine babe magnets.

[Doubt]

Just think what those guys could have done with a sports car.

:D

[BillyTK]

What a load of bullocks!

:D

[arcticpenguin]

Moo!

[plindboe]

A typical example of confusing correlation and causation. This happens so often when people try to take conclusions from their study results, and is equally painful to behold each and every time. :mad: Stuff like this gives science a bad name.

It seems to me, from reading the article, that the researcher already firmly believed this theory before the study even began.

[CapelDodger]

The research is about Africa, not the world. Where do goats come into the picture, or sheep? Is the matriarchal tendency of the Arab world down to them not being goat-oriented?:confused:

[arcticpenguin]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
The research is about Africa, not the world. Where do goats come into the picture, or sheep? Is the matriarchal tendency of the Arab world down to them not being goat-oriented?:confused:
The sheep come into the picture when the convicts are shipped to Australia and there are not enough women to go around.

[CapelDodger]

from arcticpenguin:
... and there are not enough women to go around.
Enlighten me: when are there ever enough women to go round?

[c0rbin]

Enlighten me: when are there ever enough women to go round?

Just fly this plane into that building and you will see...

[Shane Costello]

Originally postee by Plindboe:
A typical example of confusing correlation and causation. This happens so often when people try to take conclusions from their study results, and is equally painful to behold each and every time. Stuff like this gives science a bad name.

It seems to me, from reading the article, that the researcher already firmly believed this theory before the study even began.

Without reading the original research, how can you draw this conclusion. You may well be right, I just don't see how you can be so sure from this second hand article alone.

Originally posted by CapelDodger:
Enlighten me: when are there ever enough women to go round?


When you own a lot of cows. :wink:

[BillyTK]

To be fair, the article notes that the researchers, "believe they have produced some of the firmest evidence yet to back the theory", which is a couple of steps short of claiming that their evidence proves the theory.

But it is an interesting theory, and one that can be (carefully) generalised to understand gender relationships and their origins in gendered patterns of ownership and transmission of property, although it doesn't explain why ownership became gendered in the first place. I've had a quick google for the journal article, but all I could find is this rather groovy german to english interpretation (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.wissenschaft.de/wissen/news/229238&prev=/search%3Fq%3DProceedings%2Bof%2Bthe%2BRoyal%2BSoci ety%2BB%2B(DOI%2B10.1098/rspb.2003.2535)%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DG) of the New Scientist article.

[plindboe]

Originally posted by Shane Costello
Without reading the original research, how can you draw this conclusion. You may well be right, I just don't see how you can be so sure from this second hand article alone.

The scientist must have suspected a correlation before the study took place, otherwise she wouldn't have made the study so specific. If she already believed in a correlation beforehand, it's quite probable that the theory was before the study as well. Some scientists don't start with the data, and then form a theory about them. Some start with the theory, and then try to collect data that affirms their theory. I suspect this could be such a case. I'm not "so sure" as you write, I just got that impression from reading the article, as you can see I stated in my first post.