2.2: Anthropology

Anthropology is defined as the “study of humanity,” (Östör, 1998). It is commonly concerned with aspects such as the biological history and evolution of human beings and their ancestors, archeology and fossil records, as well as the societies, cultures, and traditions of humans and their ancestors. When viewing, researching, and analyzing different cultures and social norms, it is important to do so with an open mind and an effort to remain objective. Core concepts learned in introductory courses are Ethnocentrism, a belief that one’s own culture is superior, and a judgment of other cultures in comparison to the anthropologist’s own culture (Ethnocentrism, nd). and Cultural Relativism which views the study of culture through its respective lens and on its own terms, rather than making judgements or using the standards of one’s own culture (Cultural Relativism, nd).Both help those studying anthropology consider how a researcher's cultural beliefs can shape how they undertake their study with some recommendations about the importance of understanding culture with greatercontext.Unfortunately, this expectation often falls short and Anthropologists may fall victim to their own ethnocentrism. Since academia is a Western dominated field, ethnocentrism causes other non-European societies and cultures to be viewed through a white, Eurocentric lens. Those other cultures are viewed as foreign, strange, or at their worst, subhuman.

In its nascent stages, the field of Cultural Anthropology frequently viewed the world through differences, and anthropologists were always North American or European in these early years of the discipline. Societies that did not mimic patterns of modernization like Western Europe and the United States were commonly labeled with terms such as tribal, traditional, preliterate, savage, or primitive (Mercier, 1999). These labels were applied frequently to small,non white populations, and allowed for the justification of the dehumanization of countless peoples, which led to further atrocities and genocides.

However, as time has progressed, society as a whole tends to view itself as more accepting and open. Anthropology prides itself as a field that practices Cultural Relativism. It is the premise that all cultures are equal and need to be viewed through their own unique perspective (Lewis, 2020). However, when accounting for factors such as Implicit Bias, this viewpoint is virtually impossible. As human beings will have unconscious ideas without being able to see that they help influence and guide our perspectives and studies. Furthermore,ethnocentric beliefs, prejudices and biases that are not uncovered and acknowledged by researchers appear to simplify the nuanced and intricate differences between cultures. This often leads to micro aggressions and other indignations through ignorance and a lack of social and cultural awareness.

This reader highlights in various sections how the disregard for BIPOC bodies on the part of academics has allowed for study, interrogation, and disregard of Black and Brown lives. A most grievous example of racism in the field is the study and use of Black, Indigenous, People of Color’s (BIPOC) bones without consent in Physical Anthropology courses. As an example, in 2021 both Princeton University and University of Pennsylvania were found to be using bones from a 1985 police fire bomb of a home that killed a Black child. These bones were used as material for courses at both institutions but these bones were essentially stolen from police property and used without consent from the family of the victim. University of Pennsylvania Anthropologist, Alan Mann was asked to help with the police identify remains from the 1985 fire and kept the bones for use in his courses and for some at Princeton University (Pilkington,2021). Princeton University has since issues this apology:

As anthropologists we acknowledge that American physical anthropology began as a racist science marked by support for,and participation in, eugenics. It defended slavery, played a role in supporting restrictive immigration laws, and was used to justify segregation,oppression and violence in the USA and beyond,” the department said in a statement. Physical anthropology has used, abused and disrespected bodies, bones and lives of indigenous and racialized communities under the guise of research and scholarship. We have a long way to go toward ensuring anthropology bends towards justice(Princeton University, 2021).

This type of cultural appropriation of human remains exemplifies the ways in which many anthropologists throughout history saw BIPOC as specimens to be examined and studied rather than seeing their humanity and treating them with dignity and respect.

Another example of how structural racism lives within Anthropology occurred in 2018,at the American Ethnological Society Conference. Keynote speaker Sherry Ortner had previously focused her work on questions of class, specifically among her predominantly white, Jewish peers in Newark, New Jersey (Parikh, 2018).In this presentation, Ortner presented her findings after studying police violence. Her research also led her to the idea of Purity and Danger, a concept first introduced by anthropologist Mary Douglas in her 1966 book of the same title. Per this concept, Douglas identifies a concern for purity lies at the heart of every society and that in white western societies, cis-gendered, able bodied, heterosexual white men are the template for purity in the United States, and all who deviate are impure others (Douglas, 1966, p.23).Ortner argued that a primarily white, primarily male police force perpetuates a law enforcement system that uses violence and abuse on women, people of color, LGBTQ people and people with disabilities to uphold the binary system of pure and impure described by Douglas. This allows for the oppression and mistreatment of those seen as impure.

Ortner primarily cited Douglas’ work, as well as Didier Fassin’s research on policing in urban France.However, when presenting a lecture on policing, race, gender, and patriarchy,Ortner failed to cite a single black scholar, nor did she cite any intersectional feminist research or literature. Her presentation even included the use of racial slurs and epithets while citing documents. When asked about how class may have a role to play, Ortner faltered and stumbled, stating that the possibilities were overwhelming her (Parikh, 2018).

Historically, Anthropology viewed race as a biological construct. Until the 1900’s,research was conducted through a white supremacist lens, and racial hierarchies were the norm. This began to transition when Franz Boas, a German American professor, began to teach and argue that race is a social construct, rather a biological one. Boas is commonly known as the father of modern Anthropology and Cultural Relativism (NPR, 2019). Despite Boas’ efforts in the 1900’s, ethnocentrism still runs rampant in Anthropology, as displayed by Ortner. Ortner continued using racial epithets throughout her presentation. Her choice of words and delivery often shocked and disturbed younger scholars, while older academics sat largely unfazed.Ortner was book ended by two speakers of color, and was followed by a roundtable discussion on social justice in anthropology. The discussion panel was focused on gender and racial inequality in education and strategies for “pursuing social justices in workplaces and research”(Parikh, 2018). The final keynote concluded with a speaker who quoted W. E. B. DuBois, who stated, “how does it feel to be a problem?” (Parikh, 2018).

Within the field of Anthropology, being concerned with differences between varying societies and cultures may be the starting off point, but there should also be a commitment to racial justice. Anthropology (and all disciplines for that matter), can shift focus to include an anti-racist lens as a means to strengthen their work. Rather than focus on free speech as a justification for offensive comments, a speaker may choose to focus on ethical and equitable speech. Rather than try to provoke students or audiences with provocative language and ideas,one can opt to be a purposeful educator. Institutions can seek to represent scholars of color as well as other underrepresented demographics in their hiring practices, and hold one another accountable for problematic behaviors and actions. Remember that in spite of the best intentions, there is still potential for a negative impact, and good intentions do not negate the effects of problematic actions.