Were women not prodominantly care givers around the world for most of history? — Mr Phil O'Sophy

Women's Work: The First 20,000 Years: Women, Cloth, and Society in Early Times by Elizabeth Barber makes the case that women mastered the art and technology of fabric production because it was compatible with another task, child care. Fabric production, from raw material to finished cloth, could be done while caring for children without exposing them to unnecessary harm. Stone cutting, wood cutting, metal-making, plowing, herding, digging, hunting... -- all men's work -- was too risky for children to be close at hand.

The book is interesting for its treatment of both the social aspects and the fabric produced. Women in ancient Egypt could (did) produce linen cloth with 200+ threads per square inch which is about what ordinary sheets are today.

On the other hand, I am pretty sure there were lots of women doing agricultural work in the ancient world -- not because work roles were reversed, but because it was an 'all hands into the rice paddies and fields' necessity. That's still true today in places.

One also has to bear in mind that all work--domestic, raw materials production, and agriculture--was very hard work up until recently. Making bread? Women had to grind grain into coarse flour by hand, using heavy stones. Or they pounded raw material into usable mash.

The difference between women's and men's work was how much movement was involved, and risk. Taking an infant to the stone quarry, metal-making site, the forest (woodcutting), following herds, etc. is obviously not a good idea. Women's work tended to be more localized in the house or village. This localization allowed for safe work and child care in the same place.

Whether that's the case is the big question that is nowhere near answered - to what extent human sexual stereotypical behaviour is based on genes vs how they were raised. We can't learn much from other animals because those that are social enough to have a culture will have the same dilemma. We can learn from observing sexual differentiation of behaviour in non-social animals, but it's hard to draw any inferences from that to humans, since non-social animals are much more different from humans than the social ones (eg all the great apes are social (actually, I'm not sure about orang-utans. Are they social?)). — andrewk

Just think of the things that women can do that men can't and vice versa simply based on their anatomy. Many species have sexual dimorphisms where the size and shape of the bodies can vary between sexes and each one has their own possible behaviors bases on their design. It's obvious you don't know enough about biology and psychology by the claims you are making.

But even if it were to be conclusively demonstrated that genes make boys enjoy playing rugby more than girls, I would like to live in a world where girls are allowed to play rugby, and are not looked down on, or regarded as 'not a proper girl' for doing so. — andrewk

I never said that girls can't play rugby. The problem comes when a man thinks he is a woman and wants to play with the women. The problem is the result of the physical differences between men and women.

Thanks, that's helpful.

So when a person expresses masculine traits to the world they are expressing an aspect of their gender which is an aspect of their identity. But they can also express these traits to themselves: reflecting upon how, as a man, they feel that.... — Moliere

What are some examples of masculine traits?

Since nobody else has mentioned it, I'd remark that in the olden days gender was something words had; masculine, feminine and (in some languages) neuter. The modern meaning seems to date from 1963. So its not surprising we should be unsure what it means; whenever you get a new word various factions will fight over ownership.

Just think of the things that women can do that men can't and vice versa simply based on their anatomy. Many species have sexual dimorphisms where the size and shape of the bodies can vary between sexes and each one has their own possible behaviors bases on their design. — Harry Hindu

So?

What are some examples of masculine traits? — Roke

I think that's a tricky question -- not that I couldn't list things that come to mind, but I'd temper any such list by noting that traits are historically fluid. What counts as masculine changes depending on when, where, and who.

But, to use part of my little frame, I'd say that social impression (which, naturally, derives from my own upbringing and the particular sub-culture which that upbringing took place in) makes these sorts of traits masculine: Protective of the people you love, actively listen to your wife, earn enough money to support your family, make the first move in courtship, remain faithful to God, never give up, never complain, work hard

Some of these traits could been seen in the feminine as well. They are not mutually exclusive, per se (and I would say that my particular sub-culture is strongly structured around a binary of gender, where the two are treated very differently). But they are bound up in the identity as a man within this particular sub-group, rather than as bound up in a feminine identity. So it's not the traits, per se, which define the masculine and the feminine. In some sense identifying as a man is just as simple as that -- you are identified/identifiy within this particular gender, often but not exclusively bound up with sexuality, and finding what it means is actually a part of a journey (like a lot of parts of ones identity); there are general characteristics which we can talk about, but even within a particular category one is on a journey of discovery/creation of what it means to be said gender.

actually, I'm not sure about orang-utans. Are they social? — andrewk

Very! Have you tried chatting them up?