Blogging Against (Dis)ablism Day: (Dis)ablism in Archaeology/Anthropology

2009-05-01T12:21:00.000-07:00

For Blogging Against Disablism Day 2009:

I’ve been thinking a lot about (dis)ability and (dis)ablism in relation to my field of study, anthropology.

I recently obtained a copy of a recent (2007) dissertation written by Meredith Fraser, entitled “Dis/abling Exclusion, Enabling Access: Identifying and Removing Barriers in Archaeological Practice for Persons with (Dis/)ablilities.” I’ve never subscribed to the “Indiana Jones” stereotype of archaeology (I’ve never seen the films, and basically view the character as far as I know it as something of an antiquarian looter, not an archaeologist), yet ableist stereotypes and perceptions of archaeology (which Fraser describes) nevertheless affected me. I remember telling my academic advisor during undergrad that “archaeology was out” as a specialization choice because of my back problems; I told him my body couldn’t handle the hours of excavation (to which he replied, “That’s what grad students are for! They dig while you sit in the shade.” And I replied, “But I have to be one of those grad students first.”).

So Holtorf’s (2005) statement (cited by Fraser) that stereotypes about archaeology affect recruitment and how people choose to specialize within the discipline, rings true. Applications for archaeological field schools (such as one that came through my inbox yesterday) stress that participants must be “physically fit” and ready for a lot of difficult work and long days. Talk about stereotypes and barriers to access (to be clear, there are less physically demanding areas of archaeology…perhaps less well known).

As it turned out, by the time I finished my undergrad degree, my back was doing significantly better and I actually was able to participate in an archaeological dig abroad (as long as I had my painkillers with me!). However, by then I was participating more as a physical anthropologist than an archaeologist.

Recognizing that all archaeologists, all human beings, experience changes in ability (part of the universalism model of (dis)ability), how much is lost as a result of exclusion?

Finally, not only does (dis)ablism affect people with (dis)abilities, it affects how we think about and interpret the past. If (dis)ablism in the present means (dis)ablism in our interpretation of the past, then (dis)ablism is perpetuated in the future. We’ve come all along way in regards to sexism and ageism, for example (though not far enough); gender and childhood have become popular topics in archaeology and anthropology today. Addressing (dis)ablism, and expanding our interpretations to include differences in ability in all dimensions, shouldn’t be left behind.

References and further reading:

Cross, Morag. 1999. Accessing the Inaccessible: Disability and Archaeology. Archaeological Review from Cambridge 15(2):7-30.

Fraser, Meredith A. 2007. Dis/abling Exclusion, Enabling Access: Identifying and Removing Barriers in Archaeological Practice for Persons with (Dis/)ablilities. PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropology, The American University.

Holtorf, Cornelius. 2005. From Stonehenge to Las Vegas – Archaeology as Popular Culture. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press.

Inclusive, Accessible, Archaeology. 2007.
http://www.hca.heacademy.ac.uk/access-archaeology/inclusive_accessible

Anthro, Etc.

Blogging Against (Dis)ablism Day: (Dis)ablism in Archaeology/Anthropology