Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Introduction
When one hears the term ‘Feminist research’ many images come to mind
including protests and general man hating women. However this is most likely
associated with the modifier ‘Feminist’ and not research at all. The field of
qualitative research involves observing society and individuals beyond the numbers
and beyond statistics. There are many different approaches to qualitative research all
with the main goal of finding a better understanding of society through observation
and analysis. The reference to ‘Feminist research’ is in regards to the statement that
‘Feminist research is research by women, about women, for women’ and it is this
statement that will be the focus of this paper.
The exclusive nature of this statement is what I take issue with when it comes
to the tenets of sociological research with special attention paid to the field of
qualitative research. The qualitative approach which at times is challenged for its
direct involvement with research subjects / participants and the observed borderless
interaction between researcher and researched does not define itself as a sociological
form of analysis that requires certain immutable characteristics (biological sex) to be
involved in research. However, there is a belief especially within ‘Feminist
Standpoint epistemology’ which is a subset of ‘Feminist research’ that holds that to
have the ‘Feminist’ standpoint is not merely having perspective but to actually have
experienced the “intellectual and political struggle necessary to see nature and social
life from the point of view of that disdained activity which produces women’s social
experiences”(Kemp & Squire 1997, pg 169). The question remains if ‘Feminist
research’ is truly only the domain for women and if the researcher must be
biologically female to produce valid results. I would suggest that the answer to this
proposition is a resounding NO.
This paper will first address approaches/types of ‘Feminism’ in order to
understand the rationale behind an exclusive field of research. The focus will then
shift to a discussion of the variance in ‘Feminist research’ looking at both ‘Feminist
empiricism’ and ‘Feminist Standpoint epistemology’ as means of approaching
qualitative sociological research. I will then share My Story of barriers to access in
the process of forming my MSc dissertation topic and the obstacles that remain due to
my own biological sex with a comparison to research on ‘Gay Dads’ by Gillian
Dunne. Finally the paper will address the fractured nature of ‘Feminist’ movement
1
Candidate No 0138037
including but not limited to the sociological approaches mentioned above in order to
illustrate that the field of ‘Feminist research’ is not a field that must be conducted BY
women, about women, for women but in the fact it can be conducted BY people,
about women, for the betterment of society as a whole.
What is Feminism?
This is a question that could be the topic of its own paper. However, the focus
of this paper is the role ‘Feminism’ plays in sociological research and the various
types of ‘Feminism’ which would contribute to the belief that one must have the
immutable biological sex of female to conduct, analyze, and report research about
women that is considered valid and without the bias of the pre-existing male
patriarchy that is said to permeate the whole of science which includes sociological
research.
The types of ‘Feminism’ I shall discuss are Liberal feminism, Cultural
feminism, Socialist feminism, and Radical feminism with final discussion of
Postmodern feminism that itself questions the structure of the ‘Feminist’ movement
and methods (Etaugh & Bridges 2006, pp. 3-5).
Liberal feminism “is the belief that women and men should have the same
political, legal, economic, and educational rights and opportunities (Henley et al.,
1998; Ens & Sinacore, 2001)”(Etaugh & Bridges 2006). Furthermore Liberal
feminists view the differences between men and women as a function of unequal
opportunities (Etaugh & Bridges 2006). Would this type of feminism conclude that
‘Feminist research is by women, about women, for women’? It would appear that this
statement does not mesh well with the position of Liberal feminism since the goal is
to equalize opportunity and rights for both men and women therefore this type would
not advocate the research is exclusive to the biological sex of female.
Cultural feminism “reflects ‘the belief that women and men are different and
that more respect should be given to women’s special qualities, such as nurturance,
concern about others, and cooperativeness (Ens & Sincore, 2001; Henley et al.,
1998)’”(Etaugh & Bridge 2006). This approach to feminism honors the interpersonal
skills associated with women and seeks to address the destructive nature of masculine
traits (Etaugh & Bridge 2006). Would Cultural feminism support the statement that is
the focus of this paper? Well Cultural feminism would seek to empower women
2
Candidate No 0138037
3
Candidate No 0138037
The reality is that most of ‘Feminist research’ is qualitative in nature and utilizes the
interaction between the researcher and the researched as well as involvement in the
research process to empower. Support for this statement is found in the following
description of the way women learn:
4
Candidate No 0138037
understanding another person’s ideas was to develop empathy and share the
experiences that led the person to form those ideas (Hill Collins 1990, pg.
210).
The statement may only cover a small group of women however this notion of
knowledge through interaction is continually repeated throughout the literature on
‘Feminist research’ by such people as Sandra Harding and Carol Gilligan.
The philosophical foundation of ‘Feminist research’ is split however between
empiricism and standpoint epistemology with some debate about the presence of
postmodernism. This paper will look specifically on the debate between Feminist
empiricism (which appears to accept biological males as contributors) and Feminist
Standpoint epistemology (which does not directly state but implies that such a
standpoint is not merely a perspective but something more) as applied to Qualitative
research.
‘Feminist empiricism’ looks to balance the scientific nature of inquiry with the
political movement that is Feminism. Clearly when one thinks of the process of
research or scientific inquiry it is believed that bias or a political motivation should be
excluded from such a process. ‘Feminist’ empiricists hold to the belief that the
problem in research in the presence of social biases which lead to sexist and
androcentric claims in research (Kemp & Squires 1997, pg. 166). The solution to
remove these biases is a strict adherence to the scientific process as suggested by
Sandra Harding:
Feminist empiricists argue that sexist and androcentric biases are eliminable
by stricter adherence to the existing methodological norms of the scientific
inquiry; it is ‘bad science’ or ‘bad sociology’, etc, which is responsible for
these biases in the results of research. (Kemp & Squires 1997, pg. 166)
With this premise Feminist empiricism seeks to utilize the existing framework and
process of the scientific method to bring about social change through the researchers
as well as what is researched. This does not mean to ignore the political nature of the
Women’s movement but to acknowledge that the movement brings about increased
access for women researchers and encourages more work by feminist researchers
(both male and female) who are able to identify more accurately the biases present in
sociological research over a sexist male (Kemp & Squires 1997, pg. 166). Clearly
‘Feminist empiricism’ would not embrace the notion the ‘Feminist research’ is
research only BY women as it would inherently see such an approach in violation of
5
Candidate No 0138037
6
Candidate No 0138037
Reading the following statement does seem to imply that there is truly a barrier to
social research surrounding biological sex.
However unlike my experiences, Gillian Dunne seems to have had an easier
time with access when it came to researching ‘Gay Dads’. Dr. Dunne elaborates that
through a ‘Feminist approach’ which involved interaction with a limited number of
7
Candidate No 0138037
None of the sample appeared to be surprised that a woman had initiated and
was conducting research [on gay fathers], although I suspect some of the
North American respondents originally assumed I was a man (the name Gil is
a man’s name there). (Dunne 1999, pg. 11)
It seems evident from the above discussion that there may be a barrier that is unique
to the interchange between lesbians (assumed to be more ‘Radical feminist’) and a
man than the interchange between a woman and gay men.
The resolution of this issue is still pending however, it is my belief that along
with the response to this question about the essentialism or exclusivity of ‘Feminist
research’ that the barriers to access and knowledge can be removed and a ‘Feminist
empiricism’ can be embraced in which male feminists do not have to endure the
barriers that women have faced. However a ‘Feminist standpoint” epistemology
might suggest that it is through this struggle alone that one can gain the standpoint
necessary to do research. The question then remains can a biological male use the
‘Feminist standpoint’ or would it remain only a perspective, even with engagement in
the intellectual and political struggle experienced by women.
Internal Struggles:
‘Feminist Standpoints’ in every flavor & ‘Emancipatory’ research
What remains in the analysis of ‘Feminist research’ is the appearance of
variations on the proposed ‘Feminist standpoint’ which is attacked as being a
representation of white, middle-class, suburban women and limited in its ability to be
a voice for all women. The most ardent speaker on this matter is Patricia Hill Collins
who has suggested the creation of an ‘Afrocentric feminist’ epistemology. The basis
8
Candidate No 0138037
for this position is that the experience of Black women is not included in the
established ‘Feminist standpoint’ because the experiences of a Black female are
inherently unique and not experienced by white females (Truman, Mertens &
Humphries 2000, pg. 8). Hill Collins conceptualizes this stance:
Black feminist thought …reflects the interest and standpoint of its creators.
… Because elite white men and their representative control structures of
knowledge validation, white male interests pervade the thematic content of
traditional scholarship. Black women’s experiences … have been rountinely
distorted in or excluded from traditional academic discourse. (Hill Collins
1990, pg. 201)
Furthermore, Hill Collins suggests that a Black feminist can merge and work between
a ‘Feminist standpoint’ and ‘Afrocentric feminist’ standpoint but the two are unique
standpoints. However the question remains if there is a unique standpoint for all
varieties of Feminist does this not cause a weakening within the Women’s movement
and undermine the traditional ‘Feminist standpoint’.
The next significant discussion comes from the ‘emancipatory’ research
paradigm which includes not only ‘Feminist research’ but also any research which
seeks to bring a voice to the oppressed (Truman, Mertens & Humphries 2000).
‘Feminist research’ is seen as emancipatory in its nature however the true nature of
this empowerment is again questioned by both Black and Third-World women who
see ‘Feminist research’ as plagued by universalist and imperialist assumptions
(Truman, Mertens & Humphries 2000, pg. 8). This calls into question what “Feminist
research’ is empowering if there is not recognition of positions such as Afrocentric,
lesbian, and disabled feminists. This question remains to be resolved with reference
to the current ‘Feminist standpoint’. In Hearing voices, Clare Woodward describes
her ‘Feminist’ perspective that is brought to the table when conducting her
‘emancipatory’ research into victims of childhood sexual abuse (Truman, Mertens &
Humphries 2000, pp. 40-44). Woodward uses qualitative methods of review applied
to letter written by survivors of CSA in light of her ‘Feminist’ perspective and
discusses the researcher- researched relationship and that bringing emotion and
empathy to reading the letters was essential. Furthermore, Woodward discusses the
use of ‘conscious subjectivity’ instead of pure objectivity to convey the nature of her
research (Truman, Mertens & Humphries 2000, pg. 42). The belief is that recognition
of the experiences of the researcher will assist and not hinder analysis of the research
participants. The most startling reality of this research into CSA is that 12% of the
9
Candidate No 0138037
respondents were men and therefore this boldly challenges that ‘Feminist research’ is
about women and more acutely that the results are for women and not society as a
whole.
Conclusion
The analysis above has challenged the statement that ‘Feminist research is
research by women, about women, for women’ by reviewing six prevalent types of
feminism and the degree to which they adhere to the statement, looking at the
philosophical foundations of ‘Feminist research’ to discover if essentialism is truly
present, sharing a personal narrative in order to illuminate the reality in social
research currently, and discussing the movement to recognize multiple ‘Feminist
standpoints’ based on the unique experiences of all women. Through this critical
analysis it should be evident that besides the tenets of ‘Radical feminism’ where men
are the oppressors of women and appropriately excluded from ‘Feminist research’
because of an inability to share in the ‘Feminist standpoint’ the other forms of
‘Feminism’ and ‘Feminist empiricism’ recognize the contributions of all members of
society, even biological males.
I would state that my research into the impact of the British family law on the
lesbian mother will continue undaunted and that such work is important. Not because
I seek to re-establish the androcentric and sexist attitudes of men in reference to
lesbian mothers but on the other hand work through the process of ‘emancipatory’
research to bring a voice to those that would otherwise go unheard.
10
Candidate No 0138037
Bibliography
Articles:
Books:
2. Berg, B. L. 2006, Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences, 6th edition,
Pearson Education, New York
5. Hill Collins, P. 1990, Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the
Politics of Empowerment, Routledge, New York
6. Murphy, P.F. ed. 2004, Feminism & Masculinities, Oxford University Press, New
York
10. Kemp, S. & Squires, J eds. 1997, Feminisms, Oxford University Press, New York
11. Truman, C., Mertens, D. & Humphries, B. eds. 2000, Research and Inequality,
UCL Press, London
11