From a cross-cultural perspective the equation between
public leadership and dominance is questionable. What does
one mean by ‘dominance’? Does it indicate coercion? Or
control over ‘the most valued’? ‘Political’ systems may be
about both, either, or conceivably neither. The idea of
‘control’ would be a bothersome one for many peoples, as
for instance among many native peoples of Amazonia where
all members of a community are fond of their personal
autonomy and notably allergic to any obvious expression of
control or coercion. The conception of political power as a
coercive force, while it may be a Western fixation, is not a
universal. It is very unusual for an Amazonian leader to give
an order. If many peoples do not view political power as a
coercive force, nor as the most valued domain, then the leap
from ‘the political’ to ‘domination’ (as coercion), and from
there to ‘domination of women’, is a shaky one. As Marilyn
Strathern has remarked, the notions of ‘the political’ and
‘political personhood’ are cultural obsessions of our own, a
bias long reflected in anthropological constructs.
* coercion: 강제 ** autonomy: 자율 *** anthropological: 인류학의.
It is (A) _________ to understand political power in other
cultures through our own notion of it because ideas of
political power are not (B) __________ across cultures.
