Understanding S. Ortner's Argument on Women's Devaluation

The question asks to identify the scholar who argued that women's perceived devaluation stems from their association with reproductive capacities and nature, positioning them as 'irrelevant' in contrast to the valued domain of 'culture'. This is a key concept in feminist anthropology and social theory.

S. Ortner's Core Argument

Scholar S. Ortner is most famously associated with this line of reasoning. In her influential 1974 essay, "Is Female to Male as Nature Is to Culture?", Ortner proposed that across many cultures, women are symbolically equated with nature (associated with the body, reproduction, domesticity, and the cyclical), while men are equated with culture (associated with the mind, technology, public life, and transcendence).

Ortner argued that this symbolic system frequently establishes a hierarchy where culture is considered superior to, or separate from, nature. Because women are symbolically placed on the side of nature, they are consequently devalued within these patriarchal cultural frameworks. Her argument suggests this devaluation is not accidental but embedded within fundamental cultural and symbolic structures linked to gender and reproduction.

Analysis of Other Options

While the other scholars mentioned have made significant contributions to gender studies and anthropology, their specific arguments don't align as directly with the precise formulation presented in the question:

• C. MacCormack: Carol MacCormack's research often explored gender, power, and symbolic systems, including aspects related to nature and culture, but Ortner's specific thesis is the most direct answer to the question's focus on reproductive capacity and universal devaluation.
• L. Jordanova: Ludmilla Jordanova has worked on the history and philosophy of science, focusing on concepts like the body, gender, and nature. While relevant to the broader topic, her work doesn't center on the specific nature-culture binary argument for female devaluation as Ortner's does.
• M. Strathern: Marilyn Strathern's anthropological work, particularly concerning Melanesian societies, offers deep insights into gender, personhood, and social relations. Her focus is often more ethnographic and less on constructing a universal symbolic argument based on the nature-culture divide in the way Ortner did.

Conclusion

Based on the specific argument concerning reproductive capacities linking women to nature and leading to their universal devaluation, S. Ortner is the scholar who forcefully articulated this perspective.