CULTURAL MODELS OF GENDER IN SRI LANKA AND THE UNITED STATES

Ethnology Pub Date : 2002-06-22 DOI:10.2307/4153027
V. D. Munck, N. Dudley, Joseph Cardinale
{"title":"CULTURAL MODELS OF GENDER IN SRI LANKA AND THE UNITED STATES","authors":"V. D. Munck, N. Dudley, Joseph Cardinale","doi":"10.2307/4153027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sri Lankan cultural models of gender are compared with those in the United States. Nineteen questions were given to samples of Sinhala Buddhists, Sri Lankan Muslims, and U.S. residents. Most participants were interviewed about their answers. Consensus analysis was used to determine if there were distinctive cultural boundaries between Muslim, Sinhalese, and U.S. samples. This determined that Muslim and Sinhalese informants shared a more or less consistent cultural view of gender that was significantly different from that of the U.S. informants. Within the Sri Lankan sample, the greatest differences were between Sinhalese and Muslim females. The Sri Lankan sample engendered or dichotomized traits as specifically male or female much more than did the U.S. sample. In general, the Sri Lankan sample associated positive traits with males and negative traits with females. The results show that the Sri Lankan cultural model of gender is much more shaped by patriarchal precepts and practices than the U.S. model of gender. (Gender, cultural model, patriarchy, consensus analysis, Sri Lanka, United States) ********** This article describes and compares Sri Lankan and U.S. cultural models of gender. It seeks to shed light on two interrelated questions: 1) What do cultural models of gender look like? and 2) Are these models culturally distinct; that is, with a unique core, but with larger areas of overlap? The Sri Lanka data for this research came from de Munck's fieldwork there from June 1979 to February 1982. Almost all of that time was spent in the village of Kutali, located in the south-central Moneragala District. The comparison of Sri Lanka and the United States is opportunistic, taking advantage of de Munck's more than three years of research in Sri Lanka and the opportunity to apply the same (or very similar) data-collection methods in the United States. It is also an interesting and useful comparison as it treats three religious-ethnic groups: Buddhists, Muslims, and Judeo-Christians, as well as sample populations from Third World and First World cultures. It may be assumed that whatever core similarities exist between these respective populations are potentially cultural universals and unique traits may be limited to the respective cultures or similar cultures. The concern here is with understanding the pattern of thought-feeling complexes of members of the respective cultures and to consider if these complexes are shared across cultural boundaries. The theoretical orientation for this research is based on recent advances in cognitive anthropology and the cognitive sciences. It employs a version of Brumann's (1999:S1) definition of culture as \"designating the clusters of common concepts, emotions, and practices that arise when people interact regularly,\" without specific concern for the \"practices that arise\" and extending the notion of interacting regularly to include indirect interactions through the mass media and participation in the same social organizations and institutions. This study involves three different fields of interaction. At the theoretical level it draws on cognitive anthropology, methodologically it draws on cross-cultural research, and ethnographically the focus is on gender as conceptualized by Sri Lankans and people of the United States. These three fields are briefly discussed before the data-analysis section. CULTURAL MODELS A cultural model is an intersubjectively shared cognitive apparatus or schema that members of a culture draw on to orient themselves to themselves and to others, ad which they use to communicate. A cultural model is not the same as the model of a culture or of a cultural practice. There may be more than one cultural model for a specific cultural practice. For example, the two cultural models of marriage--for love and to raise a family--presume very different courtship phases and strategies, and rely on different criteria for selecting a spouse. …","PeriodicalId":81209,"journal":{"name":"Ethnology","volume":"41 1","pages":"225-261"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/4153027","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethnology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/4153027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

Abstract

Sri Lankan cultural models of gender are compared with those in the United States. Nineteen questions were given to samples of Sinhala Buddhists, Sri Lankan Muslims, and U.S. residents. Most participants were interviewed about their answers. Consensus analysis was used to determine if there were distinctive cultural boundaries between Muslim, Sinhalese, and U.S. samples. This determined that Muslim and Sinhalese informants shared a more or less consistent cultural view of gender that was significantly different from that of the U.S. informants. Within the Sri Lankan sample, the greatest differences were between Sinhalese and Muslim females. The Sri Lankan sample engendered or dichotomized traits as specifically male or female much more than did the U.S. sample. In general, the Sri Lankan sample associated positive traits with males and negative traits with females. The results show that the Sri Lankan cultural model of gender is much more shaped by patriarchal precepts and practices than the U.S. model of gender. (Gender, cultural model, patriarchy, consensus analysis, Sri Lanka, United States) ********** This article describes and compares Sri Lankan and U.S. cultural models of gender. It seeks to shed light on two interrelated questions: 1) What do cultural models of gender look like? and 2) Are these models culturally distinct; that is, with a unique core, but with larger areas of overlap? The Sri Lanka data for this research came from de Munck's fieldwork there from June 1979 to February 1982. Almost all of that time was spent in the village of Kutali, located in the south-central Moneragala District. The comparison of Sri Lanka and the United States is opportunistic, taking advantage of de Munck's more than three years of research in Sri Lanka and the opportunity to apply the same (or very similar) data-collection methods in the United States. It is also an interesting and useful comparison as it treats three religious-ethnic groups: Buddhists, Muslims, and Judeo-Christians, as well as sample populations from Third World and First World cultures. It may be assumed that whatever core similarities exist between these respective populations are potentially cultural universals and unique traits may be limited to the respective cultures or similar cultures. The concern here is with understanding the pattern of thought-feeling complexes of members of the respective cultures and to consider if these complexes are shared across cultural boundaries. The theoretical orientation for this research is based on recent advances in cognitive anthropology and the cognitive sciences. It employs a version of Brumann's (1999:S1) definition of culture as "designating the clusters of common concepts, emotions, and practices that arise when people interact regularly," without specific concern for the "practices that arise" and extending the notion of interacting regularly to include indirect interactions through the mass media and participation in the same social organizations and institutions. This study involves three different fields of interaction. At the theoretical level it draws on cognitive anthropology, methodologically it draws on cross-cultural research, and ethnographically the focus is on gender as conceptualized by Sri Lankans and people of the United States. These three fields are briefly discussed before the data-analysis section. CULTURAL MODELS A cultural model is an intersubjectively shared cognitive apparatus or schema that members of a culture draw on to orient themselves to themselves and to others, ad which they use to communicate. A cultural model is not the same as the model of a culture or of a cultural practice. There may be more than one cultural model for a specific cultural practice. For example, the two cultural models of marriage--for love and to raise a family--presume very different courtship phases and strategies, and rely on different criteria for selecting a spouse. …
斯里兰卡和美国的性别文化模式
斯里兰卡的性别文化模式与美国的性别文化模式进行了比较。向僧伽罗佛教徒、斯里兰卡穆斯林和美国居民提供了19个问题。大多数参与者都接受了关于他们的答案的采访。共识分析用于确定穆斯林、僧伽罗人和美国人样本之间是否存在独特的文化界限。这决定了穆斯林和僧伽罗人对性别的文化观点或多或少是一致的,这与美国人的观点有很大不同。在斯里兰卡的样本中,最大的差异是在僧伽罗人和穆斯林女性之间。斯里兰卡的样本比美国的样本产生了更多的男性或女性的特征。总的来说,斯里兰卡样本将积极特征与男性联系起来,将消极特征与女性联系起来。结果表明,斯里兰卡的性别文化模式比美国的性别模式更受父权戒律和实践的影响。(性别,文化模式,父权制,共识分析,斯里兰卡,美国)**********本文描述并比较了斯里兰卡和美国的性别文化模式。它试图揭示两个相互关联的问题:1)性别的文化模式是什么样子的?2)这些模式是否具有文化差异;也就是说,有一个独特的核心,但有更大的重叠区域?这项研究的斯里兰卡数据来自de Munck从1979年6月到1982年2月在那里的田野调查。几乎所有的时间都是在位于Moneragala区中南部的Kutali村度过的。将斯里兰卡和美国进行比较是一种机会主义,利用了德蒙克在斯里兰卡三年多的研究,并有机会在美国采用相同(或非常相似)的数据收集方法。这也是一个有趣而有用的比较,因为它涉及了三个宗教族群:佛教徒、穆斯林和犹太-基督教徒,以及来自第三世界和第一世界文化的样本人口。可以假设,无论这些人群之间存在什么核心相似性,都可能是文化上的共性,而独特的特征可能仅限于各自的文化或相似的文化。这里关注的是理解各自文化成员的思想-感觉复合体的模式,并考虑这些复合体是否跨文化边界共享。本研究的理论取向是基于认知人类学和认知科学的最新进展。它采用了布鲁曼(1999:S1)对文化的定义的一个版本,即“指定人们经常互动时产生的共同概念、情感和实践的集群”,而不具体关注“产生的实践”,并将定期互动的概念扩展到包括通过大众媒体和参与同一社会组织和机构的间接互动。这项研究涉及三个不同的相互作用领域。在理论层面上,它借鉴了认知人类学,在方法上借鉴了跨文化研究,而在民族志上,它的重点是斯里兰卡人和美国人概念化的性别。在数据分析部分之前简要讨论了这三个字段。文化模式文化模式是一种主体间共享的认知装置或图式,一种文化的成员利用它来定位自己和他人,并利用它进行交流。文化模式与文化模式或文化实践模式是不同的。对于特定的文化实践,可能存在不止一种文化模式。例如,两种婚姻文化模式——为了爱情和养家——假设了非常不同的求爱阶段和策略,并依赖于不同的选择配偶的标准。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信