Anthropology is a discipline of inquiry, of peeling back layers to reveal the structures that shape human experience. Yet, in a classroom filled with those trained to question, certain tensions remain untouched. The discussion began with DNA tests; the way they have reshaped identity, reinforcing racial categories even as anthropology has long argued that race is a social construct. The 2020 Census reflected this shift, expanding its racial classifications as individuals, guided by genetic reports, began to see themselves through the lens of percentages. It was an engaging discussion, one that traced the intersections of science and culture. But when I brought up another layer; how forensic anthropology and bioarchaeology have long been divided, how systemic biases once kept forensic anthropology out of certain spaces, the conversation was redirected. As if those fractures within our own field were less pressing, or perhaps, too uncomfortable to acknowledge.
This moment encapsulated a deeper issue within academia: the reluctance to tackle difficult conversations that expose the fractures within anthropology itself. If we, as anthropologists, are equipped with the best tools to understand people, then we should also be equipped to engage in the uncomfortable but necessary discourse that will push the field forward. The recent boycott of the American Anthropological Association (AAA) conference in Tampa is another example. An event meant to foster intellectual exchange was abandoned by some in response to political and social concerns. While the rationale behind the boycott is understandable, it also highlights a paradox: anthropology champions engagement with real-world issues, yet it sometimes retreats from its own spaces of discourse. Similarly, the historical exclusion of forensic anthropology from certain bioarchaeology-focused conferences speaks to a bias in the pedagogical structure of the field, one that perpetuates outdated notions of what “counts” as anthropology. If progress is the goal, then the way we teach, discuss, and define anthropology in academic spaces must evolve. A truly applied anthropologist is not just someone who studies the world but someone who participates in it, navigating biases, within society and within our own institutions to ensure that anthropology remains relevant, responsive, and, above all, impactful.
