54
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 52:
Line 52: + +
→Recent edit
::Because they're <big>Vikings</big>? You modern-day Scandinavians might have gone soft but back then.... More seriously in the past gender-roles where more fixed. It might not be <i>proved</i> that women used them in this instance, but it seems a reasonable assumption. --[[User:Toffeeman|Toffeeman]] 09:30, 7 August 2008 (EDT)
::Because they're <big>Vikings</big>? You modern-day Scandinavians might have gone soft but back then.... More seriously in the past gender-roles where more fixed. It might not be <i>proved</i> that women used them in this instance, but it seems a reasonable assumption. --[[User:Toffeeman|Toffeeman]] 09:30, 7 August 2008 (EDT)
:::I don't know. The question of gender roles is quite complex, and very culture-dependent. In many cases, what we might consider 'traditional' gender roles date only a couple of centuries back at most, and projecting those backwards on past societies is problematic. In any case, common sense would suggest that clothes would need mending whether or not there were any women around to take care of it. --[[User:AKjeldsen|AKjeldsen]] 11:08, 7 August 2008 (EDT)