Ernestine Friedl's Argument Analysis

Ernestine Friedl claimed that the status of women increases the more they are involved in primary subsistence and the public distribution of that subsidence. Before the validity of this argument can be assessed, it must be determined if the two conditions are met. The first condition, primary subsistence, can be assessed quantitatively. In the hunter/gatherer Kung society, men hunt, while women primarily gather. However, Kung women contribute more subsistence to the family and community, totaling 60-80 percent of all food consumed by weight. (Shostak 10) The 60-80 percent consists of nearly “105 species of wild plant foods, including nuts, beans, bulbs, and roots, leafy greens, tree nuts, berries, and an assortment of other vegetables and fruits.” (11) While men, those primarily responsible for hunting meat, contribute less subsistence to the community due to the lack of constant supply, individuals who gather nutrients have a relatively dependable supply.
The second condition is that women are the involved in the public distribution of the subsistence. Individuals in the Kung community do not own property in the same …show more content…
The impacts of the hunter/gatherer society framework, and Kung customs are evident when considering the status of women in that society. Friedl claims that as women become more involved in the first two conditions, their power and status increases. This statement is supported by the observations in the text. Although the meat that the men hunt is valued more in society, they collect less of it. Shostak recounted Nisa describing a hunger for meat even though she had plenty of vegetables, and always running for her father when he brought home meat. (13) Therefore the conclusion that as women become more involved in primary subsistence and distribution increases, their power and status increases, is supported by the near equal status of the Kung women to their male