Implicit and explicit barriers to building a culture of belonging persist in U.S. forensic anthropology. These barriers create and exacerbate vulnerabilities, especially among marginalized groups, that need to be addressed. The lack of diversity in U.S. forensic anthropology is well documented. At the same time, there has been a significant upswing in academic programs focusing on forensic anthropology at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. However, to be successful and promote retention, these programs must address the pervasive structural barriers that continue to impede diversity. Major impediments include the hierarchical structure, illusion of objectivity, racial and cis-gender-biased methodologies, and belonging uncertainty. At all levels, peer engagement and active, constructive mentorship may both semantically and structurally allow for a bridge between the past and the future. Pedagogy and professional practices in forensic anthropology must be modernized and restructured to promote learning environments that foster belonging and engagement.

The experience of disparity—relative to race, ethnicity, gender, age, socioeconomic status, disability, sexual orientation, and others—in higher education is deeply connected to legacies of structural harm and stratification. The presence and impact of this harm in education cannot be understated and is important to recognize when considering what our classrooms look like and why. Contending with instances of disparity in higher education and professional spaces extends beyond just valuing diversity in recruitment—gathering a diverse student group and/or workforce without actionable avenues for inclusion and equity in retention (not fostering, supporting, or valuing a tangibly safe space) is a way in which harm and systemic barriers are perpetuated. This commentary applies across disciplines, though this paper deals with specific examples within and discussion of forensic anthropology education within the United States. To work toward the mitigation of systemic barriers and instances of exclusion within forensic anthropology, a number of things need to be addressed, such as (but not limited to) critically engaging with notions of objectivity in theoretical and educational discussions and the performed depersonalization of reflexivity within the subfield. Relevant to the theory around materialization, understanding how these instances and concepts impact how forensic practice is done is important in wanting to ameliorate education for marginalized and/or vulnerable people (students, practitioners, etc.) within the subfield. How the subfield and its central concepts are conceptualized, and then disseminated, matters for the actualization of inclusive spaces and the alleviating of barriers within the discipline.