4 Key Frameworks for Anti-Racist Anthropologists

Written by Amanda Zunner-Keating, Charlie Lanza by Health McIlvaine-Newsad, Emma Horio, Zoe Jensen, and Courtney Azari.

Chapter 4 Audio is available on Soundcloud.

4.1 Intersectionality

Kimberle Crenshaw is a legal scholar who realized that the legal field was failing to examine the complex realities faced by individuals who belonged to multiple marginalized identities. Specifically, when looking at cases of potential discrimination, legal scholars were likely to focus on a Black woman’s treatment based, first, on her race and then on her gender. Traditionally, the two identities were considered separately. Importantly, Crenshaw pointed out that both race and gender must be considered simultaneously because Black women are likely to face different types of experiences than white women or Black men. Crenshaw argues that legal scholars and social scientists must consider the way that identities intersect to create unique lived experiences. Crenshaw coined the term “intersectionality” and, now, we use this new framework to more effectively study society, culture, and the human experience.

Crenshaw’s framework is one among many perspectives adopted and utilized by anthropologists as our field evolves to better achieve anti-racist goals.

4.2 Johnetta Betsch Cole on anthropology for modern times

Written by Courtney Azari. Edited by Amanda Zunner-Keating. 

“Intersectionality” is an increasingly popular framework within which social scientists examine the human experience. But, this powerful framework has only entered our vernacular thanks to the work of many social scientists including anthropologist Johnetta Betsch Cole.

Throughout her career, Cole has transformed the field of anthropology by changing the ways that we think and the ways we approach our research. On the one hand, Cole established a more specific field of study by establishing the subfield of Black/African Diaspora Studies (Barnes 2018). At the same time, Cole pushes researchers to take a more holistic and complete approach by critically examining how race, gender, class, and sexuality all impact society and experience (ibid).

Upon reflecting on her own professional development, Cole recalled a moment in the 1970s when she asked an important question, “Where are the women in Black Studies, and where are the Black folks in Women’s Studies?” (ibid). Cole’s recognition that each field of study was limited in scope allowed her to develop a stronger theoretical framework within which to understand the power that identity and culture has upon society.

Johnnetta Betsch Cole is a pioneer in anthropology whose excellence in research and leadership brought her to serve as the first female and African American president of Spelman College and Director of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African Art.

In 1960 Cole traveled to Liberia with her husband Robert Cole “to work cooperatively on research that formed the basis of their dissertations…[to which] Cole [then] taught at the University of California, Los Angeles in 1964 while completing her dissertation, ‘Traditional and Wage Earning Labor in Liberia’” (Babers 2019). Dr. Cole’s publications closely examine the relationship between gender and race.

Her reader, “Anthropology for the Nineties” offers a collection of diverse and much-needed perspectives on human life that remain relevant to anyone studying culture today. Her 2003 book, “Gender Talk: The Struggle For Women’s Equality in African American Communities” was among the first to push for an intersectional approach toward the examination of the Black female experience. In “Gender Talk” Cole argues, that discussions surrounding race are primarily framed by the male experience and that by taking multiple identities into account, social scientists can more effectively understand individuals’ lived experiences.

Cole’s latest book, “Racism in American Public Life: A Call to Action,” Cole examines the role that institutions (higher education, museums, etc) play in perpetuating racist ideals and argues that social action can transform these institutions in a meaningful way. According to Cole, “anthropology, the discipline I was trained in and the lens through which I continue to view the world, can help us better understand key issues and problems in our everyday lives, including racism” (Cole, 2021). As many of us might overlook from time to time why something evolved in a certain way, as an anthropologist Cole strives to understand.

4.3 Faye Harrison on inclusive anthropology

Written by Emma Horio, Zoe Jensen, Lisa Valdez, and Amanda Zunner-Keating 

Anthropologists recognize the importance of examining power dynamics in any given institution, tradition, or social situation. Across all fields and areas of human life, the conceptions of reality that we know and experience are frequently designed and reinforced by groups with the most cultural power. When people or institutions are considered to be experts in a particular field, the designation typically reflects some amount of experience, trials, or training resulting in a position of authority (we see examples of this process in our medical professionals, religious leaders, politicians, etc.). Claims of expertise are questioned and critically examined by social scientists on a case-by-case basis.

The cultural concept of the “expert” is typically someone who has the power to define facts or develop public policy. While sometimes very successful in their work and sometimes not successful, experts play a central role in our society as they often have the power to drive cultural change. Anthropologists call this “the production of knowledge” whereby individuals, groups, or institutions are granted the authority to define what is “true” for the larger public. Of course, textbooks, articles, and publications are similarly examined by social scientists as claims of expertise that require critical examination. The way knowledge is produced impacts the lives of people and proves to be a fruitful area of anthropological research.

Consider, for example, when a government or charitable organization seeks to address poverty in a rural area: who should be considered the “expert” to design development plans? Should we turn to local community members to express their needs and ideas for economic development? Or, should we trust the analysis offered by foreign economists who may have never experienced the local culture? In most cases throughout modern history, the latter is offered the power to define policy and – increasingly – anthropologists have highlighted how problematic – and often, unsuccessful, foreign development projects actually are (for more, see: “Discourses of Development” by Grillo or “Malawi Versus the World Bank” by Patten).

The categorization of human beings based on race and gender is similarly defined and redefined by experts across all fields. And, these categories have, historically, been used to marginalize entire groups of people in order to maintain power for already-powerful groups. Race is the notion that people can be divided into distinct categories based on physical features and that these groups are unique in behavior and competence (American Anthropological Association 1998). As a result of scientific advancements, evidence now shows that humankind cannot be divided into “unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups” as physical variation lies on a spectrum (American Anthropological Association 1998). Similarly, gender refers to the socially constructed roles and norms assigned to people, usually based on a man-woman dichotomy (“Gender and Health” N.D.). This differs from sex which refers to the biological differences amongst individuals (“Gender and Health” N.D.). While neither race nor gender are biologically based, they are still very socially real and continue to affect how people are perceived and how they themselves view the world. Systems surrounding the concepts of race and gender, among others, are understood to come together to shape an individual’s unique worldview under the theory of intersectionality (Taylor 2019).

As many social scientists strive to produce knowledge in a manner that ensures a more equitable future, the historically white, cis-gender, male-dominated field of anthropology is working to reflect on, and correct, its biases to create a more inclusive discipline. Anthropologist Faye V. Harrison has long worked to confront social and academic prejudice as she studies race, class, gender, social inequality, and how these factors intersect. Harrison’s activism and advocacy has helped–and is still helping–to fundamentally change the power dynamics within anthropology to create an equal place for Black scholars. In centering the perspectives of marginalized groups, she has aided in the shift from seeing individuals and communities of color only as objects of study to seeing them as valuable contributors to the field because of their lived experiences, not despite them.

Much of Harrison’s research has been conducted in the Caribbean and draws from creative practices that aim to democratize the transmission of knowledge (Maddox-Wingfield 2020). In other words, Harrison’s work produces information that is more accessible to more people.

The voices of people of color, particularly those of Black women throughout the African diaspora, are emphasized in Harrison’s work (Smith 123). Intersectionality is asserted by Harrison’s idea that “Black women ‘[seem] always to live this sort of dual existence’” (Smith 2020, 124). Harrison draws upon ethnographic methods and ideas employed by other prominent Black women, namely Zora Neale Hurston and Katherine Dunham who analyzed communities through the lens of performance and theater, which are used to help “translate” the experiences of women of color (Smith 123).

A prominent activist in the field, Harrison’s works are active calls for change within anthropology. Some of her major publications include African-American Pioneers in Anthropology (co-authored with Ira E. Harrison) and Outsider Within: Reworking Anthropology in the Global Age (Harrison 2021, 3). Additionally, she is the editor of and a contributor to the books Resisting Racism: Global Perspectives on Race, Gender, and Human Rights and the American Anthropological Association’s Decolonizing Anthropology: Moving Further Toward an Anthropology for Liberation (Harrison 2021, 3).

“Decolonizing Anthropology”, closely examines colonial influences upon anthropology and society. The publication prompts readers to critically examine how these influences impact human lives and urges anthropologists to listen to scholars from marginalized groups as their voices provide valuable insight on power structures present in anthropology (Harrison 1991,1). Harrison asserts that:

“If anthropologists are to contribute to the study of race and its intersections with gender, class, and ethnicity, then they would benefit from revisiting and critically building upon a body of knowledge produced by anthropologists who were generally forced to work and struggle in an intellectual periphery.” (Harrison 1991, 4)

This collaborative effort is a call to action to include the work of historically underrepresented anthropologists in the dominant narrative of anthropology in order to transform anthropology from a “Western intellectual tradition” – i.e. a discipline that only values and validates European perspectives and schools of thought – to a discipline that showcases the views of a diverse world (Harrison 1991, v).

Within the book, Harrison specifically discusses the presence of racial, gender, and class inequalities in anthropology and how systems of white supremacy undermine anthropologists from marginalized groups. Just one example of this can be seen in the chapter, “The Politics of Canon Setting”, which describes how women and people of color are systematically excluded from anthropology, often because they are “not cited nor included in literature reviews” (Harrison 1991, 7). Harrison herself actively promotes marginalized voices in her research by including the contributions of Black anthropologists, Indigenous anthropologists, and anthropologists of color in her books and centering their voices in her own research. If there is a diverse body of work for anthropologists to learn from, they can create work relevant to a diverse group of humans and produce more holistic surveys of humanity, ultimately leading to “a heightened sense of intercultural and international solidarity” (AAA Admin 2012).

Faye Harrison’s work is revolutionizing anthropology by approaching the discipline from an actively anti-racist and feminist perspective in which she uplifts the contributions of women and anthropolgists of color in a white, male-dominated environment. Her standards for inclusion set precedents that foster diversity and are utterly vital to modern anthropology. In order to have an accurate picture of humanity, we must listen to a diverse chorus of human voices.

4.4 Irma McClaurin established Black feminist anthropology

Written by Health McIlvaine-Newsad and Amanda Zunner-Keating.

Irma McClaurin coined the term “Black Feminist Anthropology” as she developed a new methodology for anthropological scholarship. This movement within anthropology frames cultural issues in a way that fully embraces the intersection of both anti-racist scholarship and feminist scholarship (two fields that have an unfortunate history of being mutually exclusive). In McClaurin’s view, this new approach to anthropology is a form of knowledge production that better represents the communities it strives to examine. McClaurin calls her work a “Black feminist anthropological intervention.”

In the same way that McClaurin recognized a severe lack of overlap between anti-racist and feminist anthropologies, she also shines a light on the lack of representation including Black women in archival records. The omission of these stories is a glaring problem that must be addressed. In order to address this lack of representation in scholarship, McClaurin has launched a Black Feminist Archive designed to capture the stories and realities of Black women throughout history. This project is essential in anthropology because – by collecting and archiving – the voices and experiences of Black women will be available for future scholars to engage with.

McClaurin explains, “Our stories, our voices, our lives, are too often disregarded, marginalized and left on the cutting floors of films, the editing screens of books, while archivists have ignored us. This archive will be a game-changer by preserving and showcasing the intellectual and activist contributions of Black Feminists for all eternity.”

Irma McClaurin considers herself to be a “born-again” activist anthropologist. She began her training in 1987 as a bio-cultural anthropologist at age 37. At the time she had completed an MFA in English (1976) and published a substantial amount of poetry. In 1989 she earned the MA in Anthropology.

In 1996, Rutgers University Press published McClaurin’s ethnography, “Women of Belize: Gender and Change”, noted for its unusual writing style and the centrality and celebration of women’s voices. This emphasis on centering Black women’s lives in the anthropological canon was evident in the publication of “Black Feminist Anthropology: Theory, Politics, Praxis and Poetics” — again published by Rutgers in 2001. As renowned Black anthropologist Johnnetta Betsch Cole noted in her foreword, “no one has ever put these three words together: Black, anthropology, feminist.” In doing so, McClaurin established a new genre of Black feminist anthropology, which had not existed before, but now resonates and has influenced works like Black Feminist Archaeology and others.

4.5 St Clair Drake on vindicationism

Written by Amanda Zunner-Keating. Edited by Lisa Valdez. 

St. Clair Drake interrogated and transformed the ways that anthropologists establish “knowledge” throughout his esteemed career in anthropology. Drake left his mark on political and social activism in both the United States and West Africa, while encouraging other social scientists to do the same. He was a prolific writer whose works pushed the boundaries between anthropology and social thought while offering essential new perspectives on historical evidence and story-telling.

Drake coined the term “vindicationism.” Vindicationism is scholarship designed to address historical omissions of the contributions and achievements from members of the African Diaspora (Drake 1990; Foster 2008). This type of work is intended to address the negative psychological and political impacts that a lack of historically-accurate representation has had upon this community.

This approach toward cultural research questions and re-examines the mainstream narratives that establish and perpetuate dangerous hierarchies of race, gender, and beyond. In Drake’s view, good scholarship inevitably leads to transformative social action (Baber 1999). In other words, the scholar cannot uncover unequal social systems without also taking practical action to address inequality and injustice. Through his meaningful research, publications, and mentorship, Drake had a profound influence on the field of anthropology and upon future generations of anti-racist scholars and activists.

Modern anthropologists and students of anthropology are encouraged to move away from the colonial tradition of “speaking for the other.” When we study a community to which we do not belong, the danger of oversimplifying or misrepresenting the lived experiences of our informants persists. Postmodern anthropologists like St. Clair Drake overcome the power imbalance between anthropologist and informant by putting an emphasis on the informant’s own expertise and perspective. Drake focused on amplifying the voices of historically marginalized communities as Willie L Baber wrote in his memory, “An approximation of total knowledge is impossible if data derived from the experiences of any known group are unavailable.” In other words, the social sciences cannot ever claim to possess an empirical, holistic understanding of the human experience as long as the voices of historically marginalized groups are not brought to the forefront of the conversation in their own terms.

In the preface of his work, “Black Folk Here and There volume 2,” Drake embraces the importance of his own perspective when he writes that he, “consciously and deliberately makes whatever sacrifice of academic ‘objectivity’ is needed to present this subject from a Black perspective” (Drake 1990). As anthropologists are humans studying humanity, today’s cultural anthropologists and students of anthropology are encouraged to recognize, admit, address, and incorporate their own perspectives in their publications in this same manner.

St. Clair Drake’s “Black Folk Here and There” is a 2 part book that examines the construction of Blackness symbolically, religiously, and historically across cultures and across time. The work offers an exhaustive interrogation of prejudicial notions that are — largely — defined, established, and maintained by academia. Drake’s cross-cultural and historical examination of racism established the groundwork for modern scholars and activists — across all disciplines — to engage in meaningful critical analysis of race and racism today.

Drake conducted field research across the world. In the 1930s and 1940s, Drake collected data and interviews within Black neighborhoods in Chicago (Baber 1990) and published “Black Metropolis.” By extensively examining mixed-race identities, access to political or professional positions, and access to cultural areas of entertainment, Drake’s work offered a clear picture of racism and segregation of the time (Bonilla-Silva and Baiocchi 2008).

Drake, and his co-author Cayton, made the profound observation that physically integrated communities still remained socially segregated as opportunity and privilege were made available differently to each racial group (Berry 2008).

As was true through his career, Drake prioritized the pursuit of diverse knowledge over academic tradition by embracing the then-controversial ideas of Marxism and Black nationalism in his publication (Baber 1990). Throughout Drake’s career, he faced pushback from academics who refused to admit the importance of what we now call “native anthropology” (Bolles 2001), and yet — in spite of resistance — he persisted in trailblazing a new approach to anthropological research.

St. Clair Drake also dedicated much of his life to the independence and Pan-African movements across the African continent and diaspora. As an early scholar to establish his scope of research as the African Diaspora, Drake wrote that his research, “involves the concept of a ‘homeland’ and various situations outside of it into which individuals have migrated and where persisting ‘diaspora communities’ survive” (Drake 1997 from McClaurin 2001).

Drake conducted research on the colonial struggle in Liberia in 1954. From 1958–1961, Drake served as the head of Sociology at the University of Ghana (Baber 1990) and he spent many years in that country working with the founding government of post-colonial Ghana.

4.6 Louis Eugene King’s cultural vindicationism

Written by Charlie Lanza. Edited by Heather McIlvaine Newsad, Lisa Valdez, and Amanda Zunner-Keating.

Anthropologists today recognize the power that anthropology has to shine a light on systematic oppression while simultaneously offering practical solutions through applied anthropology. All who pursue this line of anthropological study owe a debt of gratitude to Louis Eugene King who first blazed that trial (in spite of great resistance).

Anthropologist, Louis Eugene King, similarly saw anthropology as an opportunity to achieve “cultural vindication” (research used to correct harmful stereotypes). King was far ahead of this time: he was the first Black Ph.D. candidate at Columbia University, he studied under Franz Boas, and he established the idea of “cultural vindication” in the 1930s. Facing both the racism and extreme financial challenges of the Great Depression, King still managed to pursue meaningful anthropological research that offers a helpful perspective on the role of anthropology today.

King is widely considered to be the first anthropologist to study African American communities (Harrison 1999). At that time, it was more popular to study Native Americans, based on the commonly held racist belief that they were more “advanced” and that people from the African diaspora (ibid).

One of Louis Eugene King’s major contributions to the literature was to debunk the idea that the innate intelligence of people could be determined by a universal metric. In his dissertation, “The Negro Life in Rural Community,” he challenged the prevalent, bigoted misconception white anthropologists popularized that Black people in the northern regions were “smarter” than those in the south. From 1927 to 1931, he conducted his research in West Virginia, which was the northernmost state still considered “southern.” King’s groundbreaking argument was that the results of an “intelligence test” could not be considered valid without considering the cultural context and environment of the test subject. An objective test of innate intelligence would have to take these factors into account.

Tragically, from letters and other records of the time, we know that Louis Eugene King was initially denied his Ph.D. in anthropology because his brilliant mind was simply not embraced by an institution that still functioned within a framework of white superiority. In spite of receiving influential backing from Franz Boas, King’s reputation was still impacted by the prejudicial worldview of other professors from that institution at the time. Specifically, because he wrote his dissertation in the middle of the Great Depression, King’s lack of funding to create and distribute 27 copies of the dissertation — a requirement for receiving a doctorate in anthropology — impeded him from receiving his well-deserved Ph.D. Had King not been denied his PhD. he would have been the first African American Anthropologist to earn that title.

In 1934, King was briefly employed as the first Black historian at Gettysburg National Military Park but was eventually let go based on lack of funds. Then, in 1942, he held a pick and shovel job at the Naval Supply Depot in Pennsylvania. When he tried to quit, dissatisfied with the job given his education and ability, the commanding officer persuaded him to stay on as a management analyst. Soon after, the officer realized that King had never received his Ph.D. despite completing his dissertation. King explained the situation to him, and the officer contacted Columbia University on his behalf and had a secretary create three copies of King’s dissertation, the new requirement. Thirty years after his fieldwork and dissertation, in 1965, King finally received his doctorate from Columbia.

We can look at the life and achievements of Louis Eugene King as an example of how the cultural circumstances surrounding an anthropologist can impact access to opportunity. As modern anthropologists and anthropology students strive to uncover meaningful work from anthropologists who have been systematically marginalized, we can consider the discrimination faced by King and how he turned his unique understanding of prejudice into a new framework within which future anthropologists could pursue study.

Chapter 4 Bibliography

• Babers, M. (2020, June 07). JOHNNETTA BETSCH COLE (1936- ). Retrieved January 11, 2021, from https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/johnnetta-betsch-cole-1936/
• Baber, Willie L. “St. Clair Drake: Scholar and Activist.” African-American Pioneers in Anthropology, edited by Faye Venetia Harrison and Ira E. Harrison, University of Illinois Press, 1999, pp. 191–212.
• Baiocchi, Gianpaolo. “Anything But Racism: How Sociologists Limit the Significance of Racism.” White Logic, White Methods: Racism and Methodology, by Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, Rowman & Littlefield, 2008, pp. 137–151.
• Barnes, Riché, “Johnetta Betsch Cole: Eradicating Multiple Systems of Oppression.” The Second Generation of African American Pioneers in Anthropology, University of Illinois Press, 2018.
• Berry, Brent. “Indices of Racial Residential Segregation.” White Logic, White Methods: Racism and Methodology, by Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, Rowman & Littlefield, 2008, pp. 203–215.
• Cole, Johnnetta Betsch. Racism in American Public Life: A Call to Action. United States, University of Virginia Press, 2021.
• Crenshaw, Kimberlé. “The Urgency of Intersectionality.” TED, https://www.ted.com/talks/kimberle_crenshaw_the_urgency_of_intersectionality?language=en.
• Drake, St. Clair. Black Folk Here and There: an Essay in History and Anthropology. Center for Afro-American Studies, Univ. of California, 1990.
• Foster, Kevin Michael. “Vindicationist Politics: A Foundation and Point of Departure for an African Diaspora Studies Program.” Transforming Anthropology, vol. 6, no. 1-2, 1997, pp. 2–9., https://doi.org/10.1525/tran.1997.6.1-2.2.
• Harrison, Faye V. Curriculum Vitae.2017. https://anthro.illinois.edu/sites/default/files/cv/fvharrsn_CV.pdf
• Harrison, Faye V. et al. “Decolonizing Anthropology: Moving Further Toward an Anthropology for Liberation.” edited by Faye V. Harrison, 1991. American Anthropological Association,Harrison, Faye V. et al.  “Resisting Racism and Xenophobia: Global Perspectives on Race, Gender, and
• Human Rights.” Reference & Research Book News, vol. 21, no. 1, Feb. 2006. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A141645042/AONE?u=cclc_pierce&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=c19824de.
• Irma McClaurin, PhD, http://irmamcclaurin.com/works/black-feminist-archive/.
• McClaurin, Irma. Black Feminist Anthropology: Theory, Politics, Praxis, and Poetics. Rutgers University Press, 2001.
• McClaurin, Irma. “Theorizing A Black Feminist Self.” Black Feminist Anthropology: Theory, Politics, Praxis, and Poetics, edited by Irma McClaurin, Rutgers Univ. Press, 2001, pp. 49–76.
• Weiss, Margot. Society for the Anthropology of North America, www.sananet.org/travel-grants/who-was-st-clair-drake/.