Germanic customary law subjugated women yet guaranteed them property rights

Evidence

Like the Greek epikleros, woman is the instrument and not the bearer through which the domain is transmitted; that does not emancipate her; in a way she is absorbed by the fief, she is part of the real property. The domain is no longer the family’s thing as it was for Roman gens: it is the lord’s property, and the woman also belongs to the lord. He is the one who chooses a spouse for her; when she has children, she gives them to him rather than to her husband: they will be vassals who will defend his property. She is therefore a slave of the domain and of its master through the “protection” of a husband who was imposed on her: few periods of history seem harsher for woman’s lot. — Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, 207 (#expands, via linked claim)

Pre-colonial Africa had traditional and communal institutions and philosophical sources of knowledge that both acknowledged and respected the rights of women. As such, women were better placed in terms of the recognition and value that they received from society, the contributions they made to development on various social, economic and religious fronts, and the protection that they received from gendered insecurities and threats. — Frans Dokman, Beyond Bantu Philosophy_…, 942 (#contradicts, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: The advent of private property converted woman from sacred being into owned property — Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, 167; In feudalism woman functioned as property transmitting land to men — Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, 207; Biblical-era women were property bound to male kin and taboo-burdened (+1 more)

Broader Connections