Intersectionality and trauma analysis in bioarchaeology

Abstract

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.

Sketchbook archaeology: Bodies multiple and the archives they create

“…"Human remains," they write, "stand in stark contrast to most all other historical resources: they have not been created or manufactured by humans; they are humans" (Grauer and Miller, 2017: 41). This kind of statement is not unusual in skeletal studies, even with a resurgence of interest in how to integrate "disparate things" (Mant and Holland, 2016;Mant et al, 2021;Robb et al, 2019). Still the problem remains, as Lucas (2012) points out, that the ontological status of our material sources-the many tissues and types-persist in our studies unexamined.…”

“…Since this time, bioarchaeologists have been busy drawing social theory into their work (e.g., Agarwal and Glencross, 2011; Baadsgaard et al, 2017; Cheverko et al, 2020; Crandall and Martin, 2014; Geller, 2021; Gowland and Knüsel, 2006; Watkins, 2021), along with other documents and material sources (e.g., Hosek and Robb, 2019; Hosek et al, 2021; Lans, 2021; Mant and Holland, 2016; Mant et al, 2021; Mitchell, 2017; Novak, 2020; Perry, 2007; Roberts, 2011; Watkins and Muller, 2015). For many bioarchaeologists, and like their archaeologist counterparts, there is a clear sense that these things are not part of the osteological record.…”

Twenty‐first century bioarchaeology: Taking stock and moving forward

“…Intersectionality has become increasingly visible in bioarchaeology, emphasizing knowledge gained by conceptualizing interacting, mutually constituted identities within individuals and groups (for summaries see, e.g., DeWitte & Yaussey, 2020; Yaussy, 2022). Case studies to date include work by Yaussy (2019), Byrnes (2017), Mant et al (2021), Torres‐Rouff and Knudson (2017), and Knudson et al (2020).…”

“…Temporal depth and cross‐cultural insights should emerge from these investigations in a manner significant for 21st‐century interventions, as they also enlighten our perspectives upon past lives. The work of Mant et al (2021), for example, in comparing case studies of two unclaimed individuals from different geographical and temporal contexts using a cross‐disciplinary, intersectional perspective highlights the importance of theoretically informed intersectional and osteobiographical approaches.…”

Beyond Mortality

“…The physiological stress response elicited by exposure to stigma can slow recovery and increase a person's chances of developing complications such as secondary or additional infections, while psychosocial stress can have serious mental health impacts (Brewis et al 2020). Stigma associated with an infectious disease and/or its sequelae can also reinforce existing stereotypes and heighten discrimination when concentrated in already marginalized groups; such intersectional stigma can lead to the compounding of suffering (Brewis et al 2020; for discussion of intersectional analysis in bioarchaeology, see Mant et al 2021 andYaussy 2019). Furthermore, visible and impairing sequelae following infection with a contagious disease can also increase suffering by bringing discrimination and the stigma of disability and difference into the mix.…”