<story><title>Analysis of DNA uncovers a rough dating scene after the advent of agriculture</title><url>http://www.psmag.com/nature-and-technology/17-to-1-reproductive-success</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>swagasaurus-rex</author><text>I&amp;#x27;ve suspected as much would happen during the agricultural revolution, but I did not expect such a huge disparity.&lt;p&gt;If the 51% male&amp;#x2F;female ratio did not change, then 16 out of 17 males must have either been killed, enslaved, or been left frustrated. This would imply a highly patriarchal society where the local king and his cronies are the only ones fed, and to whom you would sell your daughters to. The only other explanation would be mass infanticide of males, but to see this in multiple regions is suspect.&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;It wasn&amp;#x27;t like there was a mass death of males. They were there, so what were they doing?&amp;quot; The article raises a very good question. In all places studied, agriculture must have favored a highly stratified society.</text></comment>
<story><title>Analysis of DNA uncovers a rough dating scene after the advent of agriculture</title><url>http://www.psmag.com/nature-and-technology/17-to-1-reproductive-success</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>seokranik</author><text>Since a lot of early civilizations seemed to be very slave heavy I wonder if that had anything to do with it. Agriculture requires more labour which leads to more slaving. Male slaves would work the fields with less of a chance for reproduction, and the landowners&amp;#x2F;slaveowners would have their pick of the female slaves.</text></comment>