In “Is Female to male as nature is to culture? Thoughts on Making Gender” Henrietta L. Moore analyses Sherry Ortner's position on the difficulties related to gender analysis and on those theoretical tools used by the anthropological thought of the feminists in the 70s. It is here highlighted the struggle of contextualizing her work with structuralism and universalism, the role of agency, and the question of female subordination: is there a universal dichotomy between man-female as there is between nature and culture?
According to Henrietta L. Moor, all researches made on those years were based on schemes fundamentally flawed: needless emphasis was put onto the differences between groups of women without taking into consideration the deeper …show more content…
Moore’s article is Howell Signe “Nature in culture or culture in nature? Chewong ideas of ‘humans’ & other species” where she attempts to demonstrate how the Chewong provide a counter-example to universalistic anthropological models that ‘we’ (for the purpose of this essay, it will take the meaning of ‘Euro-American’ humans) unconsciously tend to use while analysing the place of nature in the anthropological and social theory. There is no novelty in the subject, however the ethnographic case studies attempt to first understand if non-western society could provide us with new models for re-thinking nature-culture opposition, secondly if it could affect our ontological and cosmological traditional categories, and lastly to verify if the duality taken into consideration can potentially provide a new type of universal morality towards non-humans. This piece, together with the rest of “Nature & Society. Anthropological perspectives”, emphasises on the problem posed by the nature-culture dualism and attempts to provide means of access to the ecological …show more content…
The sociality between the Chewong is therefore founded on strong morality that is constantly in relationship between conscious and unconscious
According to Henrietta L. Moor, all researches made on those years were based on schemes fundamentally flawed: needless emphasis was put onto the differences between groups of women without taking into consideration the deeper …show more content…
Moore’s article is Howell Signe “Nature in culture or culture in nature? Chewong ideas of ‘humans’ & other species” where she attempts to demonstrate how the Chewong provide a counter-example to universalistic anthropological models that ‘we’ (for the purpose of this essay, it will take the meaning of ‘Euro-American’ humans) unconsciously tend to use while analysing the place of nature in the anthropological and social theory. There is no novelty in the subject, however the ethnographic case studies attempt to first understand if non-western society could provide us with new models for re-thinking nature-culture opposition, secondly if it could affect our ontological and cosmological traditional categories, and lastly to verify if the duality taken into consideration can potentially provide a new type of universal morality towards non-humans. This piece, together with the rest of “Nature & Society. Anthropological perspectives”, emphasises on the problem posed by the nature-culture dualism and attempts to provide means of access to the ecological …show more content…
The sociality between the Chewong is therefore founded on strong morality that is constantly in relationship between conscious and unconscious