Anatomical Collections as the Anthropological Other: Some Considerations

Watkins, Rachel

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-71114-0_3

Cited by 25 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…we have yet to scrutinize the juxtaposition between forensic anthropologists' access to whiteness versus that of many of the decedents who comprise our casework. Here, we echo Watkins (2018Watkins ( , 2020 by stating that failing to specifically interrogate the normalization of BIPOC as forensic cases with mostly white people as the case analysts is one major reason for our myopia when it comes to the effect our ancestry estimations have on society. Therefore, we add to our challenge a call for research into how our role as elite scientists with access to most if not all of the privileges conferred by whiteness has normalized and otherized BIPOC and impoverished white people as forensic cases, and how this very act of normalization has affected our research questions (Clancy & Davis, 2019) about ancestry and their application.…”

Section: Justice Justice Thou Shalt Pursuementioning

confidence: 91%

Uncloaking a Lost Cause: Decolonizing ancestry estimation in the United States

DiGangi

Bethard

2021

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the professionalization of US-based forensic anthropology in the 1970s, ancestry estimation has been included as a standard part of the biological profile, because practitioners have assumed it necessary to achieve identifications in medicolegal contexts. Simultaneously, forensic anthropologists have not fully considered the racist context of the criminal justice system in the United States related to the treatment of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color; nor have we considered that ancestry estimation might actually hinder identification efforts because of entrenched racial biases.Despite ongoing criticisms from mainstream biological anthropology that ancestry estimation perpetuates race science, forensic anthropologists have continued the practice. Recent years have seen the prolific development of retooled typological approaches with 21st century statistical prowess to include methods for estimating ancestry from cranial morphoscopic traits, despite no evidence that these traits reflect microevolutionary processes or are suitable genetic proxies for population structure; and such approaches have failed to critically evaluate the societal consequences for perpetuating the biological race concept. Around the country, these methods are enculturated in every aspect of the discipline ranging from university classrooms, to the board-certification examination marking the culmination of training, to standard operating procedures adopted by forensic anthropology laboratories.Here, we use critical race theory to interrogate the approaches utilized to estimate ancestry to include a critique of the continued use of morphoscopic traits, and we assert that the practice of ancestry estimation contributes to white supremacy. Based on the lack of scientific support that these traits reflect evolutionary history, and the inability to disentangle skeletal-based ancestry estimates from supporting the biological validity of race, we urge all forensic anthropologists to abolish the practice of ancestry estimation.

show abstract

Section: Justice Justice Thou Shalt Pursuementioning

confidence: 91%

Uncloaking a Lost Cause: Decolonizing ancestry estimation in the United States

DiGangi

Bethard

2021

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, de la Cova (2019, 2020), Watkins (Watkins, 2018;Watkins & Muller, 2015), and others (Hunt & Albanese, 2004;Muller et al, 2016) acknowledge the marginalized individuals who comprise the key American anatomical collections upon which biological anthropology has built its reporting standards. While bioarchaeological interpretation will never be comprehensive, since we "face bones, not people" (Fahlander, 2012, p. 139 (Bowleg, 2012;Hinze et al, 2012).…”

Section: Bioarchaeology and Intersectionalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These aspects qualify as additional intersections that must be considered when examining past and historical groups. For example, de la Cova (2019, 2020), Watkins (Watkins, 2018; Watkins & Muller, 2015), and others (Hunt & Albanese, 2004; Muller et al, 2016) acknowledge the marginalized individuals who comprise the key American anatomical collections upon which biological anthropology has built its reporting standards. While bioarchaeological interpretation will never be comprehensive, since we “face bones, not people” (Fahlander, 2012, p. 139), an intersectional approach allows for a better acknowledgement of the inherent complexity of lived lives.…”

Section: Bioarchaeology and Intersectionalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Intersectionality and trauma analysis in bioarchaeology

Mant

Cova

Brickley

2021

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intersectionality, the theory named by Kimberlé Crenshaw, outlines how multiple elements of an individual's social identity overlap to create and preserve societal inequalities and discrimination. Recently bioarchaeology's engagement with intersectionality has become increasingly explicit, as the field recognizes the lived experience of multiple axes of an individual's identity. Evidence of trauma can remain observable in an individual's skeleton for years, making it an ideal subject of study for intersectional analyses in bioarchaeology. Using contrasting case studies of two individuals who died in hospitals and were unclaimed after death, we explore the theoretical and methodological application of intersectionality to investigations of accidental and interpersonal trauma. Differences in identities and structural inequalities affect bone quality and health outcomes. As we demonstrate, a broken bone is the intersecting result of biological, histomorphological, sociocultural, and behavioral factors. This approach allows for a better acknowledgement of the inherent complexity of past lives, elevating and amplifying previously silenced voices. In this way, intersectionality in bioarchaeology demands social justice.

show abstract

“…Race, class, gender, sex, and geographic location all matter. Indeed, there is a substantial body of work that calls for considering positionality when studying movements, and argues that knowledge production needs to come with and from the community (see Bejarano et al, 2019;Collins, 2015;Conway, 2017;Dalsheim, 2017;Escobar, 2008;Markoff, 2003;Mohanty, 2003;Santos, 2004;Vieira, 2015;Watkins, 2018). As Belinda Robnett (1996) writes, "it is equally important to analyze the different movement experiences as determined by one's race, class, and gender" (p. 1663).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constructing Another World: Solidarity and the Right to Water

Schroering¹

2021

SSJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Globally, one in eight people lacks access to potable water; more people die from unsafe drinking water than from all forms of violence, including war. A substantial body of research documents that the privatization of water – led by global financial institutions working in collusion with governments and corporations – does not lead to more people gaining access to safe water. In fact, the opposite is true: privatization leads to both higher cost and lower quality water. For the past century, the dominant focus of transnational organizing has been “from the West to the rest,” and the frequent attention to movements in the global North has led to the neglect of transnational linkages between movements. Drawing on fieldwork conducted on three right to water movements that span three continents (North America, South America, and Africa), this paper examines effortsto reclaim the water commons,and how struggles have been driven by grassroots movements demanding that democracy, transparency, and the human right to water are prioritized over corporate profit. As feminist scholars have pointed out, the “standpoint” offered by marginalized actors offers important insights into the operation of systems of power and the strategies of survival and resistance that less powerful actors adopt in order to survive and thrive. This paper explores how transnational movements around water and other basic rights engage with and learn from each other.

show abstract

Anatomical Collections as the Anthropological Other: Some Considerations

Cited by 25 publications

References 32 publications

Uncloaking a Lost Cause: Decolonizing ancestry estimation in the United States

Uncloaking a Lost Cause: Decolonizing ancestry estimation in the United States

Intersectionality and trauma analysis in bioarchaeology

Constructing Another World: Solidarity and the Right to Water

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About