This study tests an ecological-economic theory of female contribution to subsistence, focusing on subsistence type as a potential correlate. In an exploratory analysis, 28 independent variables (not all listed below) are examined. The relationship between female contribution to subsistence and female status is also examined.

This book explores the factors that affect sexual inequality. The author first focuses on the symbolic representations of a culture's "sex-role plan," or how male and female power is scripted in different societies. The author then tests the relationships bewteen sexual inequality and variables like subsistence strategy, division of labor, and menstrual and sex taboos. The bases of female power and the rise of male dominance are also discussed.

This study tests an ecological-economic theory of female contribution to subsistence, focusing on subsistence type as a potential correlate. In an exploratory analysis, 28 independent variables (not all listed below) are examined. The relationship between female contribution to subsistence and female status is also examined.

This study tests an ecological-economic theory of female contribution to subsistence, focusing on subsistence type as a potential correlate. In an exploratory analysis, 28 independent variables (not all listed below) are examined. The relationship between female contribution to subsistence and female status is also examined.

This article offers an analysis of the rape of women cross-culturally, positing that rape is present under certain cultural circumstances. The author tests for correlations between rape and aspects of sexual repression, group violence, childrearing, and ideologies of male dominance. There are significant associations between male sexual violence and other types of violence, as well as between rape and ideologies of male dominance.

This study explores the research question: What socio-ecological factors are conducive to women’s hunting? Using life history theory and behavioral ecology as a base, the authors pose four hypotheses. The first hypothesis is that women will hunt when there are fewer conflicts with childcare. The second hypothesis is that women will hunt when there are fewer cultural restrictions regarding the use of hunting technology. The third hypothesis is that women will hunt when there are low-risk game within range of camp, dogs are used in hunting, or hunting is in groups. Lastly, the fourth hypothesis suggests that women will hunt when they play essential roles on informational tasks. There is enough evidence to support the third and fourth hypotheses. The study also shows that there is considerable evidence that women hunt cross-culturally.

The authors critique Anderson et al. (2023) article, "The Myth of Man the Hunter: Women’s contribution to the hunt across ethnographic contexts." The latter article is an ethnographic study showing that women hunt in 79% of foraging societies in their sample. The aim was to demystify the idea that only men have had a role in hunting and to question the stereotypes of labor. Venkataraman et al. (2024) critiqued Anderson et al.'s statements, as empirical evidence shows the existence of gendered divisions among hunter-gatherers. To test its veracity, they reproduced the original study, finding sample selection bias and coding errors. Lastly, they agree with Anderson et al.'s intention to dispel the false notion that forager women are unable to hunt, but they emphasize the existence of gendered divisions of labor in the ethnographic record.

This paper examines ritual surrounding the female reproductive cycle and its relationship with female power. Data support two patterns: female pollution ritual tends to take place in relatively complex societies with low female contribution to subsistence, low female status, unilineal kinship and extended families; male productive ritual, on the other hand, tends to take place in societies with higher female contribution to subsistence, higher female status, cognatic kinship and small families.

The authors critique Anderson et al. (2023) article, "The Myth of Man the Hunter: Women’s contribution to the hunt across ethnographic contexts." The latter article is an ethnographic study showing that women hunt in 79% of foraging societies in their sample. The aim was to demystify the idea that only men have had a role in hunting and to question the stereotypes of labor. Venkataraman et al. (2024) critiqued Anderson et al.'s statements, as empirical evidence shows the existence of gendered divisions among hunter-gatherers. To test its veracity, they reproduced the original study, finding sample selection bias and coding errors. Lastly, they agree with Anderson et al.'s intention to dispel the false notion that forager women are unable to hunt, but they emphasize the existence of gendered divisions of labor in the ethnographic record.

This manuscript examines the relationship between contribution to subsistence and residence localization. This relationship is explored separately for both genders in both agricultural and non-agricultural societies. Results indicate that the relationship is positive for males in non-agricultural societies and negative for females in agricultural societies. Tests on community size, marginality, and endogamy are also conducted.