Your last paragraph I disagree with, because basically every non hunter gatherer human society has some gender roles, and birthing people are generally assigned to what we'd call a woman. So they're not saying "this person have birth, therefore gender" "this society had gender and this person have birth, therefore they had a feminine gender role in their society" which is safe bet and does describe part of someone's social identity.
And it's only recently archeologists have started considering describing someone's assigned versus personal gender. Obviously archeologists that work with groups like the Filipino aboriginal people that had multiple gender identities are more aware of this, but most archeologists work on long dead groups they can assert their gender ideas over, or groups with a similar binary of gender. Lots of archeologists are not queer or too attuned to queer theory, although some definitely are and it's changing. Just getting some of them to acknowledge that there's a history of plucking history away from different peoples was an uphill battle.
There are some very good archeologists, and it's a field that breaks some brainworms about history, economics, and race, but at the end of the day it's still a reflection of the culture it comes from. Plus, taxing outdoor work for low pay with a high academic requirement means most of the people who get into it come from privilege, although not all.
Your last paragraph I disagree with, because basically every non hunter gatherer human society has some gender roles, and birthing people are generally assigned to what we'd call a woman. So they're not saying "this person have birth, therefore gender" "this society had gender and this person have birth, therefore they had a feminine gender role in their society" which is safe bet and does describe part of someone's social identity.
And it's only recently archeologists have started considering describing someone's assigned versus personal gender. Obviously archeologists that work with groups like the Filipino aboriginal people that had multiple gender identities are more aware of this, but most archeologists work on long dead groups they can assert their gender ideas over, or groups with a similar binary of gender. Lots of archeologists are not queer or too attuned to queer theory, although some definitely are and it's changing. Just getting some of them to acknowledge that there's a history of plucking history away from different peoples was an uphill battle.
I guess I was too generous to archaeologists, good that they're at least starting to consider this stuff now.
There are some very good archeologists, and it's a field that breaks some brainworms about history, economics, and race, but at the end of the day it's still a reflection of the culture it comes from. Plus, taxing outdoor work for low pay with a high academic requirement means most of the people who get into it come from privilege, although not all.