Both the Presser article and the article by Gwendolyn Beetham and Justina Demetriades (Feminist research methodologies and development: overview and practical application) discuss the relationship between the researcher and the subject, and how this intersects with feminism.
Despite out best efforts, we do influence the way our questions are asked, and even how they are answered. Presser talks about how the men she interviewed would constantly try to assert their masculinity or even dominance over her through flirtations, or pretending they would take care of her in some ways. As a woman, this is an intimidating topic to think about. As just a regular woman, I have to deal with patriarchy all the time, but within my own research? Directed at me? Now that's a drag. But as Beetham and Demetriades point out, we cannot ignore these facts, but instead must face them with methodologies that challenge the claimed "gender blind" mentality.
It is interesting to sort of research research methods, and start to deconstruct how and why they might be gender biased (generally towards men). I look forward to the class's thoughts on how some methods are implicitly sexist, and how we can combat these.
It is very difficult to know how to employ feminist methods when the academy did not start out as feminist. While I would say methodology has certainly become more feminist - or at least feminist-friendly - over time, it's hard to know whether we are really just using "the master's tools." Sometimes it feels as if all methodology is contaminated, so perhaps reflexivity is the best we can do in the immediate.
ReplyDelete