Scelza, Brooke; Prall, Sean; Starkweather, Kathrine. 2021. "The Role of Spousal Separation on Norms Related to Gender and Sexuality among Himba Pastoralists" Soc. Sci. 10, no. 5: 174. May 17 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10050174
Abstract: The gender-specific labor demands of arid pastoralism often lead to spousal separation. Men typically respond in one of two ways: engage in mate guarding tactics, or loosen restrictions on female sexuality. Among Himba pastoralists in northwest Namibia, the latter strategy is dominant. Rooted in a history of matriliny, Himba have strong norms promoting female sexual autonomy. We propose that these conditions, combined with a stochastic resource base, have led to women utilizing a combination of formal and informal partnerships to meet their needs and the needs of their children. Aspects of Himba socioecology also increase the costs of mate guarding for men and lower the costs of extra-pair paternity, further bolstering a concurrency strategy. Using a mix of quantitative and qualitative data, we show how spousal separation, female autonomy, and concurrency are linked, and suggest that in this harsh environment having a mix of formal and informal romantic partners may be less costly and more beneficial than a system of monogamous marriage.
Keywords: spousal separation; female autonomy; multiple mating
5. Discussion
Here we bring together data on various aspects of Himba lives and livelihoods in order to understand how the particular socioecological context of contemporary Himba life affects their marital and reproductive decision-making. In particular, we are interested in understanding why a normative system of concurrent partnerships and sexual autonomy for women exists in this pastoral system, instead of the more typical pattern of strong mate guarding and restrictions on women’s autonomy.
Like many pastoralists, Himba must contend with a stochastic resource base, moving livestock in response to seasonal rainfall patterns and with them, various members of the household. As Bollig describes, these ecological constraints greatly affect household composition:
Himba pastoralism depends on independent movements of livestock camps (ozohambo) and households (ozonganda). After a few weeks of heavy rain (usually January to March) the entire household herd gathers at the main homestead…. In an average year they stay together for three to four months while the major gardening work is done…. However, a cattle camp … will be established long before grazing resources become depleted…. Later, in July or August, male goats and sheep are separated from the household and either a separate small stock camp is established or the small stock herd joins the cattle camp…. At the height of the dry season, between September and December, a number of households shift all their remaining cattle to their cattle camp…
Depending on how many camps are established, and how many able-bodied adults are available for herding, various members of the household might be separated. Our data reflect the general pattern Bollig describes in that husbands and wives are most likely to be separated during the early dry season when the herd is split between the main household and the cattle camp.
Our data also point to a pathway from spousal separation to extra-pair paternity. We show both that spousal separation can lead to long periods of abstinence between spouses, and that sex with boyfriends is common enough to lead to extra-pair paternity. Although more than a quarter of respondents noted that it had been at least a month since they had had sex with their husband, sex with a nonmarital partner was reported to have occurred within the last month in 37% of cases. Several interlocutors mentioned spousal separation explicitly as the cause of their abstinence, noting that their partner was at the cattle post. Although these separations can be long, they do not necessarily indicate marital strife. As one woman who had been apart from her husband for many months explained, “You know you are divorced if you are in the same place and he doesn’t come to you. But if you are just in different places, then you are still together.”
Similarly, interlocutors also remarked that spousal separation is instrumental to maintaining relationships with non-marital partners. Although it is widely seen as normative to have lovers, there is a set of rules that all parties are expected to follow in conducting those relationships. Boyfriends arrive after dark and leave just before dawn, and they often try to determine ahead of time whether their partner is alone. With cell phones becoming increasingly common, this can often be accomplished directly between partners, but as one Himba man explains, others are often enlisted in the process: “I see her when her husband is not around. I can ask around, even kids you can ask, to see if the husband is around. In the evening I would go to a house of someone I know nearby and tell someone to let her know I’m there. Then I go there late at night to see her. We wake up early, before the roosters, and I leave to go back home.” For their part, husbands are expected to sleep away from home if they are out after dark (e.g., chasing a rogue cow after sunset). This reduces the chance that a husband and lover will mistakenly encounter each other.
Our aim in this paper was not just to illustrate the correlation between spousal separation and a normalized system of concurrent partnerships, but also to understand why they co-occur. We believe there are three distinct, but interrelated, reasons why spousal separation is associated with sexual autonomy and concurrent partnerships among Himba: (1) Phylogenetic inertia sets the stage for norms promoting female autonomy, while also increasing the costs of mate guarding; (2) demographic and economic factors reduce the costs of lost paternity for men; and (3) the stochastic resource base makes concurrency a viable way for men and women to improve their fitness.
5.1. Phylogenetic Inertia
Himba arrived in Namibia via the Bantu expansion, and only became ethnically distinct from their close relatives, the Herero, in the last 100 years (Bollig 2006). Holden and Mace (2003) analyzed shifts in the inheritance structures and modes of production of Bantu groups as they moved across the continent, and depict a general pattern where the adoption of pastoral production led to a shift from matrilineal to patrilineal inheritance. Himba/Herero are unique in that they transfer livestock matrilaterally, and links to one’s matriclan are culturally and functionally important (Malan 1995; Gibson 1956). The Bantu language tree that Holden and Mace used to conduct their analysis shows that of the five groups Herero are most closely related to, one practices double descent similar to Herero, and the other four have matrilineal inheritance (Figure S3). Further back, Holden and Mace show that Herero are in the half of the phylogenetic tree with the majority of matrilineal Bantu populations.
Their deep history of matriliny helps to explain why norms promoting female autonomy are likely prominent among Himba. Early ethnographies of Herero describe many of the same sexual practices that exist today, including frequent divorce, high rates of nonmarital sex, acceptance of children born outside of marriage, and senior wives being included in the process of choosing a co-wife (Gibson 1959). Our data compliment these findings, showing that Himba women have relatively high freedom of movement, including lengthy visits unaccompanied by their husbands (Figure 3). These visits serve a dual purpose, keeping up relationships with natal kin, and allowing women opportunities to maintain concurrent relationships. Relatives can also serve as conduits for resource transfers. As one man described, “You cannot give it straight to the woman if she is married. You give ‘behind.’ You can send it [the gift] to her father or sister, then when she goes there she gets it and she can say it was given to her by her family.”
However, the picture of Himba autonomy is complex. Although they have more freedoms than women in many pastoral societies, the limits placed on them indicate that some mate guarding is occurring For example, husbands are most reticent about their wives traveling alone to a funeral or ceremony, which is commonly described by both men and women as being a place where lovers frequently meet. Intimate partner violence is not uncommon, and violence in response to extra-marital sex was second only to child neglect in its acceptability among men and had the highest acceptability rating among women. Women and men both linked sexual jealousy to IPV, and several of the women in our interviews mentioned being hit by their partners. One woman explained, “My husband is very jealous. He beats me because he loves me. He doesn’t tell me to leave. He just beats me.”
There are also complicated notions about non-marital partnerships at play, as evidenced by our vignette study. The majority of men stated that a married woman having a boyfriend is unacceptable, and almost every respondent reported that they knew about this happening. We see similar variation in the types of punishments men reported, ranging from nothing, to mild verbal warnings, to severe physical harm. Several of our respondents described a situation where a husband who found out about his wife’s boyfriend snuck into his compound at night (when he knew they would be together) and attacked and killed the boyfriend. We do not know that our interlocutors were all describing the same event or different ones as we did not ask people to give names when they told these stories, but regardless, this exemplifies how dangerous concurrency can be, even in this population where the practice is largely normalized. However, other men described much more measured responses. One reported, “The husband asked the boyfriend not to sleep with his wife. The boyfriend continued anyway. One day the husband met an agemate who told him the man was still sleeping with his wife. That night he didn’t come home. Later, he caught the boyfriend again. He called the community and they met and fined the boyfriend 10 cows.”
It appears that Himba hold a dual notion of concurrency. On the one hand, they stated that informal partnerships are an integral part of their culture, socially acceptable, and very common. On the other hand, both men and women reported sexual jealousy and there are efforts to constrain spouses’ relationships with lovers, especially if they become too frequent and become a threat to the marital union. As one man summed it up, “You don’t want other people to sleep with your wife, but it’s the tradition.” There are several explanations for this tension. Although it may be socially advantageous for men not to buck the current system, individually they may be motivated to maintain as much paternity certainty as possible. Alternatively, as with many double descent systems, Himba may be in a state of disequilibrium, in the process of shifting their social structures from matriliny to patriliny (Scelza et al. 2019). We show here that older men are more likely to be accepting of women’s concurrency. Age also had a negative but non-significant effect on men’s beliefs about IPV, with older men less likely to believe IPV is acceptable under varying circumstances. These results could represent a generational shift, with more patrilineal, patriarchal norms becoming more prominent. Another possibility is that older men are less incentivized to mate guard because they are further along in their reproductive careers (Pazhoohi et al. 2016).
In addition to the direct impact of matriliny on female autonomy, the particular form of double descent that Himba practice, which involves largely matrilateral inheritance of cattle, impacts the costs and benefits of paternity certainty for men. When wealth can be aggregated and distributed, it can be used to generate fitness-related benefits such as bride-price payments and multiple wives via polygyny. This tends to benefit sons’ reproductive success more than daughters’, and has been used to explain the correlation between patriliny and pastoral production (Holden and Mace 2003). However, parents must balance the gains that their sons can accrue from inherited wealth with any costs of misallocated investment due to paternity uncertainty.
When cows are inherited matrilaterally, a different calculation becomes relevant. Paternity certainty pertains mainly to relatedness between siblings (as a man is giving to his sister’s son). Classic interpretations of the “paternity threshold model” of matrilineal inheritance require levels of paternity uncertainty that are highly unlikely, even in populations such as Himba where extra-pair paternity rates are the highest ever recorded (Greene 1978; but see Rogers 2013 for further discussion). However, when the paternity threshold is considered alongside other socioeconomic factors, stable strategies for this type of matrilineal inheritance can emerge. Fortunato (2012) shows that both polygyny and polyandry can make diagonal transfers (from uncle to nephew) beneficial to men’s fitness. With their combination of formal polygyny and informal polyandry, and a system of diagonal transfers of wealth, Himba may be a prime example of how high rates of extra-pair paternity, via women’s concurrency, can be fitness beneficial to men. If this combined system of polygyny and polyandry alongside matrilateral inheritance is beneficial to men, they may be more tolerant of spousal separation and less incentivized to spend time and energy on mate guarding.
5.2. Demography and Economics
There are several aspects of Himba sociodemography that affect the costs and benefits of spousal separation and potentially lost paternity. The first is the adult sex ratio. We previously reported that Himba have an ASR of 0.71 (i.e., 71 men for every 100 women, see Scelza et al. 2020c). This was the lowest ASR in that sample of 11 populations, as well as another cross-cultural study of ASR (Schacht et al. 2014). Although the reasons underlying the imbalance in this population are not well understood, a female-biased sex ratio appears to be a long-term trend. Reports from the early 20th century also show a surplus of adult women among Herero, with a sex ratio of 0.75, based on a sample of 16,201 individuals (Malcolm 1924). Gibson reported similar numbers in the 1959 (Gibson 1959), as did Harpending and Pennington in the 1990s (Harpending and Pennington 1991). The ratio of males to females affects the stability of partnerships. When there are more women than men in a population, men face lower costs to deserting their current partner because there are more alternatives in the population to choose from. In other populations this has led to female-biased sex ratios being associated with less monogamous behavior (Schacht and Mulder 2015; Schacht and Kramer 2016).
Another factor that must be considered is the value of child labor. When children contribute to household production, they offset some of their own costs, mitigating potential losses to men if they care for children who are not their biological offspring. Although we do not present data on child labor here, our previous findings lend support to this idea. Himba men have been shown to bias their investments in biological versus non-biological children, in what appears to be a functional response to their productive value (Prall and Scelza 2020b). Girls, who Himba resoundingly praise as being valuable laborers, have poorer anthropometric outcomes when they are believed to be omoka (non-biological offspring). Our data support the idea that this may be because girls have to work harder to “earn their keep” in this situation. One Himba woman said to us, “Sometimes when the child starts to grow up, the child will be working very hard and the husband might start to like that child, even more than his own child.” On the other hand, Himba boys, whose labor is generally considered to be less valuable, are more likely to be fostered out when they are believed to be omoka. One woman explained, “When the husband talks about that child, he hates him. When he sees him he tells you to take that child to your parents.” In this case, it seems that men may be lowering their own investment costs when paternity certainty is low and the net cost of the child is greater.
5.3. Benefits of Concurrency
Our data show that women can benefit directly from having multiple partners. Women with both husbands and boyfriends have greater food security than those who have partners of only a single type. Although it is difficult to identify a causal pathway from concurrency to greater food security, the mix of data we present serves to illuminate how husbands and lovers support women in different ways. Husbands tend to be more reliable partners, giving gifts more often and in greater quantities than boyfriends. Boyfriends are less likely to provide food or livestock than husbands, but more likely to give cash. Women have noted that this is useful because cash can be given discreetly, and can be used for a wide variety of purposes, including for food, medical care, or transportation. These data show that the bond between spouses is strong—women rely on their husbands as their primary sources of support, and husbands largely fulfill that role. Boyfriends, on the other hand, are less socially obligated to give, and so there is more variability in the frequency of their giving, and in fact, whether he gives her anything of note at all.
Our qualitative data reveal an important aspect of resource transfer patterns that did not show up in our quantitative data. Multiple women reported that boyfriends are called upon in critical times, either when there is an inordinately large expense, or when their husband is not available to help. One woman explained, “They [her friends] could tell him [her boyfriend] that I needed something, so he would know…. If he saw I was having a problem he would give something to me to help, because we have been together so long…. My child was sick and my friend went to tell [the boyfriend] and he came to me and gave me N$1000.” These rare events are unlikely to show up in the recall data described above, which is better suited for describing general transfer patterns. In addition, the safety net of knowing that you could ask if you needed something is also an important aspect of resource security, and one that would not be picked up in our quantitative data. As one woman stated, “He’s never given me anything but I love him. I know if I asked he would give me something.”
Boyfriends, therefore, help in ways that can be either complementary or supplementary. This may be particularly critical when spousal separation is common because there are long periods of time (particularly historically when cars and cell phones were less common) when husbands may be unable to help. If a child is sick, or an unexpected food shortage arises, boyfriends can step in. One woman stated, “If you are tired of asking the husband, you can ask the boyfriend. It’s good to have both to ask,” while another said, “You need to eat two times. From the husband and the boyfriend.”
It should be noted that where this trickles down to affect the well-being of a couple’s children, both the husband’s and the wife’s fitness can be positively affected by concurrency. This creates a system of generalized reciprocity for men. Husbands invest in their wives’ children, only some of which are his biological offspring—which comes at a cost. However, help comes in toward those children from his wives’ informal partners. In addition, a man may be providing some investment toward children he has with his lovers, but the majority of investment in those children comes from their social father. Formal modeling and more specific empirical data would be needed to know whether this results in a net benefit for most men, but our data point toward this being a stable response in a system with a stochastic resource base and high mate guarding costs. Men can accrue the kinds of standard gains to fitness that are predicted through sexual selection theory, and any paternity loss that occurs in their marriage is buffered by support from other men.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment