Review: The Wild Adventures of Women in Anthropology
Anthropology was once built around freewheeling interactions with alien peoples in far-flung lands.

Today the stereotypical anthropologist sits all day philosophizing about the most basic human interactions while waiting for layers of ethics committees to approve any contact with real people. But anthropology was once a swashbuckling, adventurous field, built around freewheeling interactions with alien peoples in far-flung lands.
Ursula Graham Bower was one such early anthropologist—and boy did she swashbuckle. In 1937, she left Britain to visit a friend in the colonial government of India. Instead of finding a husband, as she was expected to do, Bower fell in love with Nagaland, a hilly and unruly frontier zone where her friend was stationed. She spent a decade doing full-time anthropological research there. Although Nagas had a strict gender hierarchy, Bower became an "honorary man" to them by showing off her rifle skills on the hunt.
Then Japan invaded the British Empire in 1942. Bower partnered with a Naga leader named Namkiabuing to form "V Force," a special operations unit that battled Japanese infiltrators. Everyone involved expected to die. The men of V Force went into battle wearing their funeral beads, and the Japanese army put a bounty on Bower's head. But she survived the war and became a celebrated author in Britain.
Intrepid Women: Adventures in Anthropology, a coffee table book published jointly by Oxford's Bodleian Libraries and Pitt Rivers Museum, is filled with characters like Bower. Mākareti was a Māori noblewoman who built up New Zealand's tourist industry and became a high-society celebrity in the 1900s before beginning serious academic work on Polynesian culture. Elsie McDougall was a widow who, with no academic training, became a world-class expert in indigenous Central American textiles and survived a 1935 shipwreck. These stories of a more adventurous time are illustrated with photos of strange and beautiful artifacts from the museum.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
in reviewing my decades of work experience, the most clownish person I worked with may well have been DT, with a degree in Anthropology. Nothing was true or false to DT, it was only humans acting (almost without reason) and coming up with stuff whose truth value escapes everyone but the anthropologist
"Today the stereotypical anthropologist sits all day philosophizing about the most basic human interactions while waiting for layers of ethics committees to approve any contact with real people."
Fucking "ethics experts", ha! Parasites!
In anthropology AND in psychology, you can't say "boo!" to anyone without the spermission of "ethics experts"! Yet if'n ye are putting on a TV show? Anything and everything goes! Especially in "reality" shows!
The takeaway is that ass a society, we infinitely treasure AMUSEMENT, yet we are also near-infinitely AFRAID of gathering (seemingly DANGEROUS) knowledge! Might as well STOP spending tax dollars for "education" and science (knowledge building), and spent shit ALL on amusements! All Powers to HolyWeird!
The "fix" here, then, to this problem of tyrannical "ethics experts" is to design the core of your anthropology or psychology experiment or data-gathering exercise, then use it as the core or kernel of a "reality show", run by HollyWeird. "Ethics experts" are thereby thwarted! If HollyWeird were to kick back to the data-seekers, say, 0.000057% of HollyWeird's profits, starving anthropologists and psychologists could be weaned of tax money, AND get an increase in pay ass well!
I wonder what the Canadian with an anthropology degree things of this.
Ha ha. No, I don't. I don't care about anything he has to say.
Ideas™ !
For real fun in the related field of archeology, read about Elizabeth Weiss, who has been cancelled multiple times for not embracing hyper-woke worship of "indigenous" politics.
Archaeology is a subset of Anthropology.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Weiss
From there...
"In April 2021, Weiss gave a presentation at the Society for American Archaeology virtual annual meeting titled "Has Creationism Crept Back into Archaeology?" She claimed during the presentation that NAGPRA gives control of scientific research to the religious beliefs of contemporary Native American communities."
In academia today, mainstream religion is generally sneered at. They bend over backwards to accommodate and humor Islam, fringe religions, cults, and Native American religions, though! Creationism is lauded ONLY when it is Native American!
Below is an excerpt from a book I read a long time ago. This crap has been going on for a long time.
Boy, you’d better be respectin’ yo’ ancestors properly, or we’ll be takin’ ya in! It’s a warning that anthropologist Rob Bonnichsen is all too familiar with.*33 See the 14 Oct ‘96 Time magazine science article, “Bones of Contention”, for example. I have a few bones to pick with our society’s anti-knowledge bias these days. Rob is a scientist who wanted to study a single hair found in an ancient Native American camp site (not a grave). The federal bureaucrats used the Native American Grave Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA, passed in 1990) to prevent him from studying this hair, this Sacred piece of Human Body Remains.
They can’t protect us from the neighborhood thugs, but hair-splitting bureaucrats can sure protect us from a mad scientist who might study a hair! Worse yet, think about the anti-knowledge bias here: Every day, no doubt, hunters, campers, hikers, lumberjacks, and farmers are unknowingly desecrating these precious hairs of Native American Ancestors, randomly strewn about out in the great outdoors. It’s only when we know what we’re doing that we can be punished under these laws! And woe even more to those who should be seeking yet more knowledge!
Under NAGPRA, museums which own Native American grave artifacts, Holy Relics such as “corn pollen, ritual stones and eagle feathers” in special “medicine bundles” and such, are required to return them to Native American tribes.*34 However, if they appease the Native Americans by paying Native American Medicine Men to come in and periodically pray over these artifacts, appeasing the Ancestor Spirits that dwell in the corn silk, and such, then they can keep their artifacts for a little while longer.
“...traditional Navajos believe the bundles are living objects and can suffer if mistreated...”, so they “...must be periodically allowed to breathe by having medicine men remove the items and hold a special ceremony.” “Officials at most Southwestern museums have budgets set aside to pay for these ceremonies.”*34
All this, despite the fact that the museums bought the medicine bundles fair and square, on the open market. Role reversal time! Can I sell you my old TV, then decide that my Ancestor Spirits dwell therein, and get Congress to pass a law that requires you to either give it back to me, or pay me to pray over your TV now and then? Whatever happened to property rights (economic freedom), common sense, separation of church and state, and rationality, anyway? Prepare for NADGRAB and the petroleum police, the GRABBOIDS!
Native Americans are far and away today’s most “politically correct” minority, and “sensitive” people don’t ask any questions whatsoever, with respect to policies regarding them. Certainly not questions like “Does this make any sense? Is this really helping anyone? What harms can result from treating people differently, according to what group they belong to?”
We’re all in favor of everyone being equal, we say. Then we turn around and pass special policies for special people. Native Americans are often exempt from paying taxes when they sell cigarettes and gasoline!*35 And of course they get special gambling permits. Oh, but the law says they’re sovereign nations, so we can’t be making them pay sales taxes. That would be infringing on their sovereignty, unlike when the government gives them welfare benefits. But don’t worry; they’re supposed to pay sales taxes when they sell to non-Amerinds! What’s next, sales taxes proportional to the customer’s Amerind bloodlines?! Talk about unenforceable, crazy laws!
Then there’s also the Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990. You may not sell your arts or crafts in the U.S. if they’re labeled as Native American or American Indian unless you’re a member of a state or federally recognized tribe. Gotta protect those “genuine” Indian artists and craftspersons from “impostors”!!! So even if you’re a full-blooded Native who doesn’t want to affiliate with any tribe, or if you’re a Canadian Native, then, tough luck! And once more, role reversal time: Congress passes the Caucasian Arts and Crafts Act of 2003, with similar provisions. Gotta protect the artists and consumers from impostors. Reactions? What will the do-gooders say?
It really, truly is as bad as I portray it, sad to say. Purchasing Native American artwork is now yet another category of, you don’t really own it just because you bought it fair and square. You can only own something if you can afford several buckets full of slimy lawyers. Steve Diamant spend 15 years buying his collection of 200 Native American artifacts, buying them from museum shops, reservation trading posts, Indian craftsmen, and so on.*36 He returned home one day to find lawmen, including “Hopi Rangers”, rummaging through all of his belongings. They took his 200 items; he’s now got about 15 of them back, almost a year later, after spending $45,000 in legal fees!
It really was quite the comical affair, if you can bring yourself to laugh at thugs stealing things from people, with government assistance. One confiscated item of “cultural patrimony” was a domestic turkey feather spray-painted to look like an eagle feather. When the time came for all the various sorts of certified Native Americans to split the loot, they didn’t even know which things belonged to whom! “Navajos have claimed Rio Grande Pueblo material as Navajo cultural patrimony,” Diamant said. “Jemez likewise have claimed Zia material, and Hopi have claimed Jemez material.”*36
NAGPRA was deliberately written to be vague about what is and isn’t “cultural patrimony”, because if the material was specifically described, collectors would know was is then the very most precious, and target it! Nor will the tribes “certify” art for sale as NOT being “cultural patrimony”. This would interfere with their ability to sell things, decide that they’re “patrimony”, seize them back, and then re-sell them again. There have been unproven allegations that exactly this is happening. A deliberately vague set of laws here is facilitating thievery by some small subset of lazy, greedy scum among Native Americans. If you thought “Indian giver” was a derogatory label, wait till “Indian seller” gets around!
Collecting Native American trinkets, then, is a hazardous hobby. Even contracting with the artist is no guarantee. “...seized items included new kachinas commissioned and purchased directly from Hopi carvers.”*36 Penalties for violating deliberately vaguely crafted laws? Up to a year in the slammer, a $100,000 fine, and confiscation of artifacts. Second offense, 5 years, $250,000. And that’s not throwing in penalties for trafficking in endangered species, eitherremember, your Native Artisan might have thrown a few Yellow-Bellied Slime-Tailed Greater Southern Turd Slug eggs into his creation.
So you want to buy Native American trinkets, now? Not I! See how counterproductive stupid government meddling gets, when we allow Congressmen to have self-righteous snits with other peoples’ affairs and property? When will they deputize me as a “Caucasian Ranger”, so that I can go and seize the art you contracted with blah-blah down the street to carve for you? If my taste runs to Native American-style art (I hope that’s allowed, even though I’m not a Certified Native), then can I at least safely buy some Certified Genuine Imitation Pseudo-Native Non-Art by a Certified Non-Native Non-Artisan? Would our masters allow this?
Wait, there’s more: a seemingly Caucasian skeleton, 9,300 years old, is found in the state of Washington. An extremely rare, intriguing, and irreplaceable find, it must be buried within 30 days, without further study, to appease the Ancestor Spirits. We double our population every forty years or so, placing great stress on a global environment of unknown stability and dynamics. Given a chance to gather precious information about human biological and cultural adaptations to environmental stress and changes, the environment of the past, genetics, population dynamics, and more, much of it very likely bearing on what we need to do as a species to survive, what do we do? Do we try to gain knowledge and understanding? Or do we Appease The Ancestor Spirits? Should the Europeans have just buried the 8,000 year old Ice Man that they found in the Italian Alps? Will other nations leave U.S. science behind? Shall we return to the Middle Ages, when the study of bodies was forbidden?
Although Nagas had a strict gender hierarchy, Bower became an "honorary man" to them by showing off her rifle skills on the hunt.
I've been repeatedly assured that the traditional notion that men are more natural hunters and that women aren't similarly physically equipped is a modern, Western, Patriarchal fabrication.
Obviously some British man taught the Nagas how to behave in a properly-oriented gender hierarchy before Bower arrived with a rifle, obviously designed and manufactured by women, in a woman-owned company, and given and taught to her by a woman, to show them what's what.
Was her gun painted pink?
Well behaved women seldom make history, but strong women who don't need no man have to be omitted, otherwise history would be an insufferable, dumpster fire of narrative fiction not worth saving and/or passing on.
In the context of your other sarcastic comments I can't tell if this one is meant to be sarcastic or not. From Hatshepsut to Catherine the Great to Golda Meir to Margaret Thatcher there have been lots of strong women (I'm not saying 'good' just 'strong'). Whether they 'needed a man' or not is pretty irrelevant. Lots of strong men needed women who they leaned on for emotional support if nothing else. John Adams is a good example.
Let us not forget the intrepidity of sometime American Anthropological Association & AAAS President Margaret Mead, who in 1964 bravely threatened to flunk any Columbia anthropology student who voted for Goldwater, as doing so would signify their failure to learn what she was trying to teach.
She married Bateston the originator of the galactically misused "Double Bind" theory.
Reminds me of Steven Pinker, a rather moronic guy, who married the even more moronic lady Rebecca Goldstein.
The only woman archeologist anyone will ever remember or care about is Lara Croft.
Now THAT is a Crofty, Toasty, Posty Pussy-Post that ye have just now cumposted! I am ON to ya! Your tomb has just been raided!
Anthropology is a pseudoscience, even with the more objective standards for ethnographic documentation that are more or less followed these days. The controversy over Margaret Mead's "Coming of Age in Samoa" and Derek Freeman's refutation illustrates this succinctly. Another illustration from a course I took on Medical Anthropology concerned a study of the actual diet of villagers in India versus the religiously approved vegetarian diet: spoiler alert - most of the villagers covertly ate meat fairly frequently when the elders weren't around to check on them. Who knows what the villagers actually said to the ethnographer, or whether they were making fun of her, pulling her leg and feeding her what she wanted to hear?