________________________________________________________________________________
Certainly the myth of the young female warrior is nothing new. It’s a common trope in modern media (Mulan, Hunger Games, etc...) but it’s origin lies much deeper in the human psyche. It’s a typical Jungian archetype.
There certainly were many instances of the archetype through the ages (Johan of Arc comes to mind).
Was it the norm though? Probably not.
She may be an exception. Exceptional people exist.
Honest question: do evopsych people have _any_ evidence for the males-as-hunters/females-as-gatherers thing from prehistory? The only argument I've heard was "well most present-day hunter-gatherer societies are like this" which is incredibly weak (not _all_ such societies are like this, and they also evolved along with modern society and probably weren't frozen in time for 10000 years). So am I missing anything or is this one of those famed _inferences to the best explanation_ evopsych people are known for?
That's not "incredibly weak" evidence. If all existing hunter gatherers which hunt big game across the globe are like this, and if that applies irrespective of their level of contact with the larger global culture, that points to the cultural trait having ancient origins, from before when the ancestors of today's humans diverged, or the trait being so in tune with basic human physiology that it consistently re-emerges across human populations when they adopt hunter gatherer lifestyles.
Either one would predict that prehistoric hunter gatherer groups had a similar division of labor across genders.
> Honest question:
People who start with "honest question" usually are not being honest.
> The only argument I've heard was "well most present-day hunter-gatherer societies are like this"
Not most. All of them as far as I know. And that isn't the only argument. It's human physiology. Men are built to fight/hunt/etc. We can swing swords harder, throw spears further, pull bow strings further, run faster, etc. Not to mention our closest kin, the chimps, also have have male hunting parties. So it's highly likely, this structure has been around for millions of years, even before we became humans.
> which is incredibly weak
How the hell is that weak? It's absolutely conclusive.
> (not all such societies are like this, and they also evolved along with modern society and probably weren't frozen in time for 10000 years)
Well then find such societies. Go find a hunter-as-female/male-as-gatherer society. Just because you wish it were true doesn't make it so. On the one side, we have a mountain of evidence. On your side, nothing.
The hunters in hunter-gatherer societies also served as "warriors" to protect the family/tribe/territory. So a female-as-hunter tribe/society wouldn't last long in the "wild", if they ever existed.
Modern weapons make it easy for women to hunt, but even today, it's primarily the males that hunt.
Why create a throwaway for this question? That's what I find the most bizarre.