Comb Sisters & Seclusion

Featured Articles

Comb Sisters

Places Journal • 26 Nov 2024 • ~7000 words

Unwed women in China's Canton Delta found autonomy and sisterhood in gupouks, communal homes that emerged in tandem with the industrialization of silk-making.

“Combing Up” or “Self-Combing” represented the initiation of a Comb Sister: an unmarried, celibate, economically sufficient woman who lived communally with other women. Becoming a Comb Sister was a young woman’s only alternative to arranged marriage, though it was also a potent gesture of defiance, self-determination, and female solidarity. 2 Comb Sisters referred to themselves as a “sisterhood,” a word rarely used in rural Canton, and in this case uniquely apt. Comb Sisters assumed the role of family and community in each other’s lives.

What Can Architecture Teach Us About Gender?

The Great Gender Divergence • 27 Nov 2024 • ~5900 words

Alice Evans explores how cultural evolution can be traced through architecture, particularly around gender roles and female seclusion practices.

In societies where male honour depended on female seclusion, this was preserved through design. Today, I explore how architecture reveals the spread of purdah (female seclusion). Across North India, the Delhi Sultanate and Mughal Emperors built palaces with extensive women’s quarters (zenanas). Hindu nobles likewise added screened galleries and walled courtyards. Emulation secured patronage and prestige. The caste system provided a powerful vehicle for transmitting upper-caste customs nationwide, as entire jatis copied upper castes to gain status and social inclusion. But where Islamic influence was weaker, seclusion was not idealised - as shown by architecture, paintings, and contemporary urban female labour force participation.

Recommended Articles (7 Articles Today)

Prison And Crime: Much More Than You Wanted To Know

Astral Codex Ten • 27 Nov 2024 • ~13050 words

Scott Alexander dives into studies on incarceration and tries to find an answer to the question of whether longer prison sentences reduce crime or not.

Imagine a country which currently incarcerates zero people, trying to decide whether to move up to a policy of incarcerating one person. If you only incarcerate one person, it will be the baddest dude in the whole country. That guy really needs to be behind bars! And we’re not worried about turning him into a hardened criminal, because he’s already maximally bad. Here it’s obvious that benefits outweigh costs. Now imagine a country which incarcerates 50% of its population, trying to decide whether to move up to 50% + 1. At this point, you’re imprisoning someone who went a few miles over the speed limit. You gain no benefits from incapacitation (he wasn’t going to commit any crimes anyway), but you stand to lose a lot from aftereffects (he’s probably a totally normal law-abiding citizen, so there’s a very high risk of ruining his life and turning him into a more hardened criminal). Here it’s obvious that costs outweigh benefits.