Anthropologist Profiles: Deborah Tannen

Deborah Tannen (Head Shot by Steven Voss)

There are a series of scholars and researchers who have made an important contribution to the fields of anthropology, and one of the most influential and well known is Dr. Deborah Tannen, University Professor at Georgetown University.  She is a sociolinguist whose work on gender and language has greatly affected not only academics but also personal, professional, and family communication.  Her research on the cultural language differences focuses largely on American culture but within the framework of distinguishing linguistic patterns among men and women and among regionally different speakers.  She has always been particularly interested in not just what is said but how it is said.  Her work, which has been widely published for both academic and popular audiences, has brought attention to linguistic style differences, which refers to a person's speaking patterns and the culturally taught signals that aid in interpreting meaning among speakers and listeners.  Through Tannen's most popular work,You Just Don't Understand: Women and Men in Conversation, audiences realized the stark differences in how men and women are taught to communicate and how specifically that affects interpersonal communication.  Her work on gendered communication within the workplace has also been instrumental in improving the acknowledgement of women's contributions to the professional world by aiding men in realizing that women's communication styles often cause them to be overlooked in favor of men.  Tannen has recently moved on to studying language and communication within families, which is sure to improve relationships within families among those who listen and heed her words.

References

DeborahTannen.com. Bio. 2018. Electronic. 20 December 2019.

Georgetown University. Deborah Tannen Biographical Information. n.d. Electronic. 20 December 2019.

Tannen, Deborah. "The Power of Talk: Who Gets Heard and Why." Harvard Business Review September-October 1995. Electronic.

Memoirs of a Geiko: Inside “Geisha” Culture

Figure 1: Geiko Masaki (Photo: Christina Liao)

Japanese culture is rich in history, beliefs, material culture, and more, and it is popular globally, particularly among many Americans who are happy to consume Japanese anime, manga, food, and even fashion.  One aspect of Japanese culture that is quite popular but often misunderstood is its “geisha” or more respectfully geiko culture (Figure 1).  This blog post will discuss what a geiko is both in the past and today, dispelling many of the rumors and misconceptions about the culture.

The term geiko refers to a female entertainer who undergoes years of training to learn the artforms associated with the geiko culture.  Outside of Japan geikos are often referred to as “geishas”, which is not a wholly correct term, because it glosses over the complexities of the culture, as well as often confuses geikos with prostitution, which is not the historical or modern classification of the profession.  Therefore, it is more accurate to say geiko over geisha. 

Geiko culture is characterized as an artform that requires years of training.  Geikos are trained in etiquette, dance, music (song and playing instruments), voice training and pronunciation, and more.  The ultimate goal of a geiko is to provide a sophisticated form of entertainment for those who employ her services.  Traditionally, women would often secure a patron of the arts, known as a danna, to financially assist her in fulfilling the training of becoming a geiko.  This relationship also leads to some confusion because the danna is often confused as a john or pimp, but there is no intimate relationship between the geiko and the danna.  While the relationship is confusing to many, particularly as the danna seemingly received no benefit for paying for the geiko’s education and training, it could be that this was a form of status symbol to show a danna’s wealth as he could take on this financial burden.

Women interested in becoming a geiko had several stages training to fulfill, each of which instilled discipline into the girls.  The first stage was one of strict obedience where the young girls were maids and had to follow all instructions provided to them by the older and established geiko, including aiding them in dressing and undressing, preparing for bed, prepare for parties, clean the ochaya, etc.  These young girls also received training on how to act, speak, and entertain as a maiko (term referring to an apprentice geiko) and then later as an established geiko.  The second stage of the training was the formalized education to become a geiko.  Here there was a greater focus on the requirements of becoming a geiko and the girls dedicated more time to entertaining, learning how to properly put on make up and clothing, etc.  Upon completion of this training (which typically last six months) the girls would become a maiko, and as they reached adulthood they would graduate to being a geiko.

Geikos and maikos appear physically different from other members of society as the geikos and maikos take on specific traditional dress associated with their age/level of training.  Both must paint their faces and specific parts of their bodies white, and their eyes are accentuated with dark black eye makeup.  Geikos and maikos wear lip stick but in different styles to differentiate each from the other.  They both wear several layers of undergarments and kimonos, the latter of which are secured with an obi (sash).  The obi is also different between geikos and maikos, further differentiating them.  Also, while both wear their hair up in intricate and complex hair styles, geikos are the only ones allowed to wear wigs, whereas maikos are prohibited from such options. 

Ultimately, geiko culture is one of high art and fashion.  They are meant to represent the ultimate standard of femininity in Japanese culture.  They take their jobs very seriously as they devout much of their time to it.  To be a geiko means giving up many modern conveniences, such as free time, cell phones, television, and family.  Typically, a modern geiko is only allowed two days off a month, and they are only allowed to visit their family two or three times a year.  They also cannot make until they retire.  All of this, again, demonstrates their commitment to their art and symbolism of femininity in Japanese culture, and while there are fewer geikos today as compared to the past the tradition continues among the most dedicated of Japanese women, who provide their entertainment services to only those who are invited to experience this unique part of Japanese culture.

Works Cited

Asian Art Museum. An Introduction to Japanese Geisha. 2012. Electronic. 20 December 2019.

Geisha. (2017, May 24). New World Encyclopedia, . Retrieved 16:42, December 20, 2019 from //www.newworldencyclopedia.org/p/index.php?title=Geisha&oldid=1004897.

Liao, Christina. "An Inside Peek at Kyoto’s Secretive Geisha Culture." Vogue 21 May 2017. Electronic.

Determining Sex in a Human Skeleton

The fields of forensic anthropology and bioarchaeology are popular among various groups, largely because of their polarized presence on various television shows.  These fields seek to understand who an individual is based on their skeletal and limited soft tissue remains, which make it difficult or impossible for medical examiners or other experts to easily make such identifications.  Forensic anthropologists and bioarchaeologists use a suite of methods to identify individuals, and in today’s blog post a discussion on the optimal methods for identifying sex will be discussed.

The term sex refers to the biological characteristics that establish an individual as either male or female.  There are ideal characteristics, referred to as primary sexual characteristics, associated with being male versus female, such as male have a penis and females having a uterus.  There are also other characteristics, known as secondary sexual characteristics, associated with sex, which can include the presence or absence of breasts/mammary glands and tissues, overall body size, the presence or absence of facial hair, and more.  As previously discussed on the blog we often see a blurring of those ideas in that individuals do not always meet these idealized characterizations and sometimes “men” and “women” share several of these traits to some degree.  Within the fields that focus on skeletal biology there is a recognition of these factors as there is a sliding scale for identifying sex in the skeleton.  This scale ranges numerically on a scale from 1 to 5 with one representing “definitive female” and 5 representing “definitive male” and numbers 2 and 4 designating “likely female” and “like male” respectively.  The number 3 indicates that the skeletal remains are too ambiguous to classify as either male or female.  This does not mean that the individual is devoid of a sex.  It just means that the skeletal remains are not formed in a way that can provide greater insights, which could be the result of damage to the skeletal remains, immaturity of the skeleton (as juveniles and adolescents cannot be accurate assessed for sexual characteristics), or some other factor is at play that obscures analysis.

Figure 1: Sex Differences in the Pelvis

The pelvis and skull are the best skeletal elements to assess for sex of an individual as they provide the most diagnostic evidence.  Generally, women have a wider pelvis than men (note, this is not always the case, particularly in the advent of medical technologies that allow for narrow hipped women to birth children).  When examining the pelvis there are three areas that are examined, which include the pubis, illium, and ischium (Figure 1).  The pubis is examined for the size the ventral arc (or ridge), the depth of the subpubic concavity, and the size of the ischiopubic ramus ridge.  The illium and ischium are examined for the width of the greater sciatic notch, and the illium’s preauricular sulcus is examined based on its size.  Women are typically characterized as having larger sized features as compared to men, meaning the greater the size of these five characteristics the greater the likelihood that the pelvis is that of a female. 

On the other hand, men typically have larger facial features than women (again, we are seeing a trend against this as women are sexually selecting men with finer features), and when examining the cranial features it is expected that males will show more robusticity in the cranium as compared to females.  The skull has several areas that are examined (Figure 2), including those in the face, sizes, and back of the skull.  Characteristics that are focused on include supraorbital margins and ridges (of the eyes), the mental eminence (the chin), mastoid process (behind the ears), and the nuchal crest (of the back of the skull).  Many of these features are actually visible to some extent to the naked eye of living individuals or are accessible through touching (note, please do not touch others without their permission). 

Figure 2: Sex Differences in the Skull

It is with these analyses that information related to sex of an individual as based on their skeletal features can be assessed, which is useful in forensic studies in creating a victim profile and in bioarchaeological studies to create demographic profiles.  Ultimately, these methods are based on idealized standards, and typically no one individual meets all of the idealized qualities.  Case in point, I, a female, have a robust chin that would be scored as more masculine than feminine, but I have a diminutive nuchal crest, which would be scored as definitively female.  The presence of the masculine chin does not negate my status as a female or woman, but it does demonstrate the difficulties in determining sex in skeletal remains.  Ultimately, though, these methods are necessary for the purposes of related study in either forensic or bioarcheological research, and researchers recognize and acknowledge the limitations with these methods and diligently work to hone their individual skills as well as create more refined methods to aid in identification.

Bibliography

Buikstra, J., & Ubelaker, D. H. (1994). Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains: Proceedings of a Seminar at the Field Museum of Natural History. Arkansas Archeological Survey.

White, T., & Folkens, P. (2005). The Human Bone Manual. Academic Press.