According to Brisolara and Seigart (2007) one question that feminists must answer when defending feminist work is “of what use are your finding if they are not generalizable to other similar situations?” (p. 288). While positivist research is used to normalize, feminist research is used to uncover the hidden knowledge of oppressed or silenced people. Hesse-Biber (2007) describes feminist research as:
In some ways, the origins of feminist research’s epistemological and methodological focus draws on these insights and struggles; feminist empiricism, standpoint theories, post-modernism, and transnational perspectives all recognize the importance of women’s lived experiences with the goal of unearthing subjugated knowledge. Each perspective forges links between feminism and activism, between the academy and women’s everyday lives. (p. 3).
Instead of generalizing conclusions, this type of research is interested in different ways of knowing, what constitutes knowledge, and knowledge for whom.
Feminists value multiple ways of knowing. “Knowing, for feminists, is an interactive process that occurs within relationships.” (Brisolara and Seigart, 2007, p. 284). Fine (2007) discusses these relationships that were forged in her research about education in prisons. As the researchers and insiders developed relationships based on the research, the “underground knowledges” (p. 617) were unearthed and brought to center. By creating equal research-insider relationships Fine did not tell the insider’s story. She allowed the insiders to tell their own stories, valuing multiple ways of knowing.
In feminist research, knowledge is considered to be “culturally, socially, and temporally contingent.” (Brisolara and Seigart, 2007, p. 285). Feminist researchers begin their inquiries where they are situated. Instead of trying to be objective, or value-free, they “confess” their positions as related to the research. They maintain a state of reflexivity, constantly analyzing how they are impacting and impacted by the research. The knowledge produced by the research constructs meaning from the observed phenomenon.
Brisolara and Seigart (2007) find that at the heart of feminist research is action. Action comes from understanding the power structures and how they play on groups. Agency and activism are derived from these understandings of power. An example of how research can be used to promote agency or activism is in Mollie V. Blackburn’s chapter “Agency in Borderland Discourses.” Blackburn (2004) suggests there are acts agency and acts of activism. In her argument, she writes that agency is a “mechanism for survival” (pg. 196) and that activism is a “social movement.” (pg. 196). She suggests that the Black, gay youth at the center used language to assert their agency. The language, Gaybonics, created a group identity that some Black, gay youth used to connect with one another, combat bullying, and exclude other gay youth. By using Gaybonics, the youths created a sense of self so that they understood whom they were in environments that may not be conducive to difference. Blackburn suggests this sense of self allows for acts of agency. Activism goes a step farther than agency to create change in a situation. For example, activism is when a person uses discourse to create understanding between two people who are at odds with one another. Agency allows people to assert themselves as unique, while activism allows people to work to change oppression.
How does a person’s knowledge of their oppression affect them? In Blackburn’s writing she seems to suggest that the students understand that they are oppressed because of their race and their sexuality. Because of this knowledge, they create a language to express their differences so that they can be themselves. Is this an example of working to the change the structures of oppression? I don’t think so. It seems to be more of a way of coping with the oppression they face because of their race and sexuality. So while they may not be activists, they show agency because they do not conform to the status quo and pretend to be something they are not. Also they create a language that disrupts the dominant discourse. The words in their language have different meanings than in the dominant discourse. These different meanings provide a tension between the two groups that can lead to discourse that can create opportunities for change.
Maybe agency is like a seed that grows into a tree. Agency starts with knowledge of the structures of oppression, then the person has changes in discourse, and finally to specific actions to promote change. Knowledge of oppression starts the process. While activism shows agency, understandings and coping mechanisms that people create so they can survive oppressive situations also show agency. As their knowledge grows and they understand more about their situation they can move their agency outside of themselves to create changes in society.
Feminist research is interested in changing the oppressive structures therefore; generalizing conclusions will not be helpful to this end. By creating knowledge from sites of oppression, unique creation of knowledge will help to transform the sites of oppression.
No comments:
Post a Comment