Both Mongolia and the Kazakh community have a long history of women's equality in education, government, medicine, and other fields. Girls and boys start riding horses at age five and help with herds and putting up gers. Women can compete in horse racing, archery, and wrestling. Eagle hunting is traditionally passed down among male relatives, but there are no religious or cultural prohibitions against a girl becoming an eagle hunter.
National Geographic magazine just lost my respect. Publishing a patriarchal slant on a culture which is clearly a more balanced and open society is pushing a lie and I am very disappointed. I can no longer have faith in their journalism.
As for these Eagle Huntresses I am happy to be educated on the practice and the continuation of ancient egalitarian hunting in a society we in the west know little about.
Was this a response to my comment? If so, clearly you misunderstood what I said. My comment was a reflection on the National Geographic magazine devaluing the balanced society the Mongolian culture represents. It was not a dis or a bashing of men at all, but a disappointment in the journalism which glossed over the contributions of women as accepted and valued members of an egalitarian society. The magazine wrote the article as if women in the hunt were an anomaly, which they are not.
Fair enough, though I don’t think it dismissed women’s contributions to society though in my view the obsession with egalitarianism has been a disaster for all societies and civilizations involved.
I have no “obsession” with egalitarianism, but simply noted that it is the way of the Mongolian peoples and it works for them. The magazine reduced women’s participation by claiming that the woman they were reporting on was the only woman in the field which was a blatant dismissal of all the other women who participate now and in the past.
Fair enough, I imagine there were others who did participate and can do it though the number isn't likely to be very high given that such things are usually male dominated interests.
Please reread the article. It discusses multiple women in the field and some up and coming girls studying to become masters in the art of hunting with eagles. Only the National Geographic published article claims that only one woman was trained in the field….. not true. You are correct in that there are not large numbers and that it is traditionally passed down to the sons, but there are no actual restrictions on whether one is male or female with the exception that the participant must be strong enough to support their bird.
This was a fascinating essay, I absolutely loved it! I must admit to being recently fascinated by Mongolian history (which has always been really interesting and cool).
I wonder if down the road I might be able to write at length about Eagle-Hunters using some of the info in this article and in some of the books out there on the topic!
National Geographic magazine just lost my respect. Publishing a patriarchal slant on a culture which is clearly a more balanced and open society is pushing a lie and I am very disappointed. I can no longer have faith in their journalism.
As for these Eagle Huntresses I am happy to be educated on the practice and the continuation of ancient egalitarian hunting in a society we in the west know little about.
I'm surprised you can spell Patriarchal. Who cares? A properly balanced society is one that does not oppress and spurn its men but embraces them.
This article was a brilliant one about Mongolian traditions which are a fascinating thing, if you do not like history then just say so.
Was this a response to my comment? If so, clearly you misunderstood what I said. My comment was a reflection on the National Geographic magazine devaluing the balanced society the Mongolian culture represents. It was not a dis or a bashing of men at all, but a disappointment in the journalism which glossed over the contributions of women as accepted and valued members of an egalitarian society. The magazine wrote the article as if women in the hunt were an anomaly, which they are not.
Fair enough, though I don’t think it dismissed women’s contributions to society though in my view the obsession with egalitarianism has been a disaster for all societies and civilizations involved.
I have no “obsession” with egalitarianism, but simply noted that it is the way of the Mongolian peoples and it works for them. The magazine reduced women’s participation by claiming that the woman they were reporting on was the only woman in the field which was a blatant dismissal of all the other women who participate now and in the past.
Fair enough, I imagine there were others who did participate and can do it though the number isn't likely to be very high given that such things are usually male dominated interests.
Please reread the article. It discusses multiple women in the field and some up and coming girls studying to become masters in the art of hunting with eagles. Only the National Geographic published article claims that only one woman was trained in the field….. not true. You are correct in that there are not large numbers and that it is traditionally passed down to the sons, but there are no actual restrictions on whether one is male or female with the exception that the participant must be strong enough to support their bird.
This was a fascinating essay, I absolutely loved it! I must admit to being recently fascinated by Mongolian history (which has always been really interesting and cool).
I wonder if down the road I might be able to write at length about Eagle-Hunters using some of the info in this article and in some of the books out there on the topic!
I do have a question, as I dont see any trees or perching structures where do eagles or other large birds rest or perch. Large rock structures?
This is great. Love birds of prey.