Ansary makes the distinction between tools and machines, saying that "tools help us humans do stuff; machines do stuff and we humans help them do it." (p. 311) He started us off on this journey in the early chapters talking about the importance of tools, language, and environment. Now he is bringing it back around and pointing out that "people working for a mechanized industrial manufacturing operation had to subordinate their biological selves to the logic of the machine." (p. 319) He briefly discusses in this section the way early gender roles were formed based on a division of labor - who was able to be out hunting for food and who was needed to tend small children closer to home, for example. Then he says that "as the machine proliferated, the material neccessities that had once tied women to hearth and home no longer applied...In fact, with the rise of the machine, there was no biological reason to favor men over women in almost any human endeavor." (p.330) As families moved to towns to get work, larger kinship groups gave way to smaller nuclear families. Changes such as the availability of many mass-produced items meant that women no longer had to make so many things by hand at home, so they had more time to become interested in or involved in what was happening out in the wider social world. New industries created new jobs for women - sales clerks, typists, switchboard operators, etc. And all those women earning money and competing with men in the workplace caused more social changes. It wasn't just an industrial revolution - the changes affected all areas of life. 

I was intrigued by his idea that dealing with the intrusion of machines into life is like dealing with another culture, or that the machine can used as a metaphor for the way people think about themselves and society. The examples he shares make sense; Freud thinking of the psyche as "a sort of hydraulic system" and today people thinking more of "human psyches in terms of programming" (p. 322) shows that we do make those comparisons or think in those images. Just think of some of the phrases we use - we say someone is blowing a gasket when they get angry, they are holding up the works when they cause a delay, information we can't understand does not compute, etc. I was getting a few echoes of "Mr. Roboto" as I read this section.

In Section V of The Invention of Yesterday, "The Machine" symbolizes the mechanization and industrialization of society, impacting gender roles and social organization significantly. As technology advances, traditional gender roles may shift, leading to changes in how individuals are expected to function within society. The division of labor between men and women could be redefined, challenging long-held notions of masculinity and femininity. The introduction of machines into various aspects of life can alter social structures, potentially creating new hierarchies based on technological proficiency rather than traditional gender norms. "The Machine" serves as a powerful metaphor for the evolving landscape of gender dynamics and societal organization in an increasingly mechanized world.

Ansary makes some very interesting claims that the 'machine' has essentially destroyed gender lines allowing for greater participation of women into the public sphere which had been dominated by men for centuries. While I agree with his basic claim, this statement does not allow for differences within countries or between nations whose greater narrative still does not allow for women to enter the public sphere alone or without male companions. Much of the Muslim world, Iran in particular, has retrenched into an earlier narrative where women are denied greater acceptance in society including education, freedom of movement, freedom of expression ( including choice of clothing, for example) and freedom of emplyment. 

I agree with his statement that the emergence of women into the political sphere was momentous; unfortunately not all women are included in that equation.

The "Machine" changes through time.  On page 218 it was manpower on plantations as labor units.  It soon changed to hourly labor units in factories.  This change in machinery led to many different isms:  communism, socialism,  industrialism, consumerism, nationalism and sexism.  Society changed when the "machine" changed.

One of the most obvious changes was the way man related to acadian rhythm of life.  Working in factories changed how we saw day and night and the invention of electricity changed how we related to others and we were no longer subjugated to the sun and moon.  This organization of people created countries with operating manuals and treaties, also known as Constitutions.  These constitutions led to the beliefs of life, liberty and fraternity. The ripple effect created classes besides the rich and poor - the middle class. The industrialism created mass migrations and created the need for individuals to be hired outside of working at home.

The machine is what keeps society rolling and functioning. Even the construct of humanity can be construed as a machine. 

The machine changed the construct of societal rules based on where women's work was seen as pertinent to life and important to daily survival. No longer did the roles of women deem the survival of the family and local tribe.  The machine changed women's roles to be less tangible (pg 329) and roles that were deemed to be "woman's work" was trivialized.  Women's rules were not very public anymore but those few who broke through the mold proved women were more than capable of successfully participating in the "man's world".

The machine also inadvertently opened the way for suffragists. Women were no longer going to be seen as weak or lesser.  The machine also created a new consumerism in such greats at the Bon Marche' and Macy's.  Women now had more time to shop which created a new subculture of employment.  

The industrialism led to communism (Marxism and Leninism) due to the poor remaining poor and the rich getting richer.  Karl Marx believed that all industry should be publicly owned, with no private ownership. Nationalism sprung up with pride in the country, fascism to fight against communism and these isms led us into the first world wars.

The machine changed society as we knew it and continues to redefine society and gender roles.  The changing roles and societal constructs will evolve as the machine, itself, changes.  

I tend to think in lists and bullet points.

Inventions (machines) created jobs.
- Telephone exchange subscription service: Telephone switchboard operators
- Newspapers: Reporters
- Machines: Factory workers
   - Machine installers and machine servicers
   - Machine designers
   - Industrial societies: accountants, clerks, human resource managers, secretaries, teachers,
     salesmen, cashiers, clerks, advertising and marketing specialists, lawyers
    
The beginning of factories and how “Once factories came into play, all the parts of the operation had to start working at that same moment, stop at the same time, eat at the same place, and get back to work at the same minute.” This is also a time where start seeing societal gender norms. “Family members who did the cooking were those who kept the home, and they were traditionally women because, whatever else they did, childcare had to be one of their main functions.” (P. 319)

Ansary talks about how machines changed
- Our sense of time
- Local vs. universal time
Rising use of mechanical clocks so that all workers started and ended their day at the same time as well as took lunch. Employees working in shifts
- How people’s logic had to change to deal with machines vs. dealing with other people.
When dealing with people we can demand, persuade, discuss, etc. but you can’t tell a machine what to do.
- Great migration of whole family groups moving to cities for factory jobs.
Instead of the family clan staying together when they moved to the city they had to separate and find jobs in different industries.
- Women in the work force.
Women were among those who were moving into cities, trying to get jobs tending to machinery. Even if women didn’t get some of the jobs they were itching to get out into society and mingle with other people, not just sit home all day. When stores like Macy’s started popping up women got jobs as salesclerks.
- The emergence of the nation-state.
“Nation-states were to empires as empires were to civilizations” (P. 347)

 The machine references not just individual machines created during this time frame, but the overall idea of the machine and the impact industrial growth of the time has on the world.  One of the things I found most fascinating was the machine does give women in some areas a new role- creating materials, etc.  I also think that the invention of the factory leads to other defined roles for both genders.  When men are further called away from the family unit (no longer able to set their own hours, come home for the midday meal), women are defined by their original role, caring for and raising the children and preserving food for the family.  These traditional roles probably originated from the needs of the family unit, or lack thereof, prior to being placed as restrictions for a women’s expected role.  

The “machine” in this text refers to the time in human development when we began using technological advantages in our everyday lives.  Dealing with machines is very different from dealing with unpredictable humans.  Machines changed our lives from how we understand the world  around us to how our bodies sense time.  For example, in 1787 former British colonists designed a new form of government.  They looked at it’s an “ engineer might go about constructing a new machine.”

Gender roles were decided as a means of survival in th beginning.  Women took care of the children as a natural extension of giving birth.  Men gravitated toward things outside the family.  This division of labor provided survival so it continued.  The more the division of labor led to division between the sexes which in turn led to men’s roles appearing more important than the repetitive nature of women’s roles.  Men left the home while women stayed in the home.  

In today’s world machines are taking over more and more of the work load.  Looking back on where we have been reminds us that we will continue to change.  The only question is what direction will these these changes take us.

"The Machine" presents the advancement in society. There are changes in the workforce. The type of work and societal makeup have impacted the growth. During the Industrial Revolution, men did more hard labor, factory work, warehouse, while women did more domestic work. Gender roles have been subject to inequalities in pay, employment disparities, and education differences. 

Ansary’s idea of the machine centers around a sustainable process that humans contribute maintenance towards (311). In the section Ansary focuses on physical machines, human institutions as machines, and how these machines influenced human institutions in similar and different ways. Looking at the invention of the mechanical clock Ansary argues that the structure of the factory day itself would not have been possible without this physical invention (318). Wages earned at the factory could then be accumulated by an individual, used to purchase durable goods, and passed down to future generations. Oftentimes the wage earners were men given the biological necessities that women can provide for children. This gave men a financial and legal status outside the home that was unavailable to women, thereby elevating men within a structure of power in industrialized societies (329). 

As a matter of affecting social organization, Ansary claims that the prevalence of physical machines fostered an “Operating manual” in the creation of social institutions like the U.S. Constitution (323). Ansary contrasts this with a “treaty” style constitution which in his view amounts to a “treaty among all interests competing for advantage at the moment the constitution is created.” I’m fascinated by this idea, but I think there’s a complexity that Ansary is missing in his analysis of the U.S. Constitution (323). Under Ansary’s definition of a treaty constitution, we should look for: 1) Competing interests and 2) “provisions [that] become mostly irrelevant as the story moves forward and conditions change.” 

Competing Interests - At the time of ratification there was an understood agreement between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists that in exchange for the adoption of the U.S. Constitution (Operating Manual), there would also be an adoption of a “Bill of Rights” (Treaty) which would explain the privileges of the people over the Federal Government. The whole of the 10th Amendment reads like a treaty between the Federal and State governments. The Constitution has 4 temporally separate amendments about who can vote because, inherent in a democracy that can change its Constitution, we’ve gone in waves of deciding who can share power. 

Irrelevant Provisions - I would argue that the 3rd Amendment is the prime example of treaty intentions that have become irrelevant as the story moves beyond the first-founding generation. The 18th Amendment’s prohibition of alcohol gained irrelevance with the 21st. 

Lastly, I’d argue we see the blend of the U.S. Constitution as a treaty and operating manual when it is fully reborn with the adoption of the 13th, 15th, and most importantly the 14th Amendment. The 14th Amendment has whole sections (2 and 4*) which are irrelevant today and sections steeped in competition (1 and 3). I’ll end my post with a quote from Representative Thaddeus Stevens from his House floor speech on the adoption of the 14th amendment (the last sentence hangs in my classroom) that I think shows the “Competing Interests” nature of the 14th amendment.

"Believing then, that this is the best proposition that can be made effectual, I accept it. I shall not be driven by clamor or denunciation to throw away a great good because it is not perfect. I will take all I can get in the cause of humanity and leave it to be perfected by better men in better times. It may be that time will not come while I am here to enjoy the glorious triumph; but that it will come is as certain as that there is a just God."

--In a speech about the 14th Amendment (May 8, 1866)

I was intrigued by Ansary's thoughts on the changing role of women as "the machine" began to change gender expectations.  His idea that, "as the machine proliferated, the material necessities that had once tied women to hearth and home no longer applied.  Women who went to work in the public arena were not threatening the safety of the children or the survival of the kinship cluster.  No one had to keep the home fires burning because the first one home could simply turn on the heat."  This change in the expectation of what women should and could do was groundbreaking.