• @[email protected]OP
        link
        fedilink
        26
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Well, the theory is that persistence hunting was one of the main hunting strategies during a large portion of human evolution before ranged weapons were invented. So it may well have relevance for distribution of labor between men and women during most of human prehistory, and therefore our evolutionary psychology.

        • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet
          link
          fedilink
          English
          213 months ago

          Persistence hunting only worked in areas with wide open terrain, like the African or American plains. Prey in the jungle or heavily wooded areas can just disappear into the underbrush and be gone. It doesn’t matter how far you can walk at that point, because you’ll never find that animal again.

            • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet
              link
              fedilink
              English
              23 months ago

              You can’t keep a creature moving without rest if you have to stop to track it, and you can’t track over rock, hard soil, through water, and a variety of other terrains.

              • Romkslrqusz
                link
                fedilink
                33 months ago

                There will certainly be areas where the trail disappears, but tracking isn’t necessarily about locating every individual footfall.

                With an understanding of movement and behavior, one can make inferences about where the animal went to find and follow the next sign.

                Even moving over rock or packed soil, sign is left. You may not be able to perceive it yourself, but to someone who spends hours a day reading and studying the ground over the span of years, those subtle differences are perceptible.

                An animal will eventually reach a place to stop and rest, but with repeated interruption that rest won’t count for much.

                • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  13 months ago

                  I will acknowledge that things that seem impossible to me are probably easy for people who engage in those activities frequently. So, you’re probably right.

        • Hegar
          link
          fedilink
          103 months ago

          persistence hunting was one of the main hunting strategies during a large portion of human evolution before ranged weapons were invented

          How do ranged weapons invalidate persistence hunting?

          If you’re trying to chase down an animal till it’s exhausted, I think you’d want to be throwing stuff at it to injure or at least to keep it moving.

          Also, was there a time before ranged weapons? As soon as humans have weapons we have ranged weapons because we can throw. Atlatls and slings - tools to help you throw sticks and stones - wouldn’t have been developed if we weren’t already throwing sticks and stones at things.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            83 months ago

            How do ranged weapons invalidate persistence hunting?

            Even with a modern bow it’s still really difficult to sneak close enough to a deer to reliably make a kill shot. You’re not going to sneak close enough to poke it with a spear and with game that size, throwing rocks is not really an option either because that wont kill it. Something like axis deer is quick enough to even dodge a modern arrow.

            The reality is that the animal will notice you and it will out-sprint you as well but it wont outrun a human on a long distance. When the animal is exhausted and no more able to run, then you can then stick your spear in it.

            • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet
              link
              fedilink
              English
              23 months ago

              Even with a modern bow it’s still really difficult to sneak close enough to a deer to reliably make a kill shot.

              Which is why bow hunters typically scout ahead to determine where deer frequent, then hide and use calls and scents to get the deer to come to them.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        19
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        The OP article said the same thing, and like this article, it provides no evidence for the statement. I looked for some numbers, and for world bests, men had better performance in every category I found. The study linked below looked at speeds over decades and in every case men had better performance. Both men and women have improved over time, and as a percentage the difference is getting smaller, but in absolute difference it appears the same. It is an admittedly brief search, but I can’t find evidence in the form of measured times (not conjecture about estrogen) indicating at all that women perform better in ultra marathons. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3870311

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          13 months ago

          Those are athletes. To really know, you would need to use average people going for the same time/distance at more moderate speeds. While the fastest men are probably faster than the fastest women across most any distance, I doubt we have good data on average men and women going the same distances.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      223 months ago

      Speed of marathon doesn’t necessarily serve as a benchmark for endurance, does it? Endurance is a metric of how tired you get over time, no? A cheetah can run 1km waaaay faster than a human. Doesn’t mean that it has better endurance than humans.

      • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet
        link
        fedilink
        English
        213 months ago

        A marathon is a test of endurance. The faster you can complete it, the more endurance you have. Without endurance your body slows to a crawl over the vast distances covered during a marathon. A cheetah sprinting has nothing to do with endurance. They’re terrible endurance runners. Nobody’s saying sprinting speed is a test of endurance, but marathon speed absolutely is.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          53 months ago

          You’re adding parameters to say that women don’t have as much endurance as men. Have a race in which everyone has to run the same speed and see how long they can do it. That is true endurance. You can’t add parameters and say it’s a true test of a single one.

          • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet
            link
            fedilink
            English
            13 months ago

            Idk what to tell you. You’re arguing that a marathon isn’t a test of endurance, and the speed at which someone can complete it isn’t an indication of their overall strength and endurance. Okay then. You win. Have a nice day.

      • bjorney
        link
        fedilink
        53 months ago

        What (widely popular) race could possibly be a better metric of endurance than the marathon?

    • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet
      link
      fedilink
      English
      193 months ago

      An under-15 boy’s soccer team destroyed the US World Women’s Soccer Team. That’s just a random group of boys who aren’t anywhere near their peak, vs literally the best female soccer players in the country. The physical strength, speed, and endurance differences between biological males and females is undeniable. Anyone who says differently is being intellectually and probably emotionally dishonest with themselves. Also, this purported evidence that women were the hunters is a very small sample size out of all of our anthropological evidence. Sure, some women hunted, and some women fought. Some cultures probably demanded that more than others. That doesn’t mean that thousands of years worth of history and assumptions are wrong.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        43 months ago

        Of course, this match against the academy team was very informal and should not be a major cause for alarm. The U.S. surely wasn’t going all out, with the main goal being to get some minutes on the pitch, build chemistry when it comes to moving the ball around, improve defensive shape and get ready for Russia.

        Your anecdotal evidence is countered in the very article you posted

        • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 months ago

          Consider virtually every other sporting example in the history of sports that require speed, strength, and endurance for more examples.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            33 months ago

            the article you didn’t read goes into that, and ultra marathons show parity between the sexes.

            • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              There’s also this:

              https://lemmy.world/comment/12209418

              The fact that women perform at parity in ultra marathons doesn’t invalidate the very obvious differences in speed, strength, and stamina between biological males and females. Muscle and bone density alone account for a lot of that.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      73 months ago

      The fastest marathon time for men is 2 hours 1 minute and for women it is 2 hours 14 minutes.

      “Fastest” does not mean the best endurance. You would be looking at the “longest”.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      3
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      The fastest marathon time for men is 2 hours 1 minute and for women it is 2 hours 14 minutes.

      It’s an unacceptable leap in logic to infer (from that statement) anything about populations of men and women. You’ve picked only a single sample from each population and chosen that highly biased representative.