Feminist Methodologies and the Pursuit of Feminine Knowledge - Term Paper Example

TOPIC An Exploration of Feminist Methodologies in Qualitative Research that Distinguish the Pursuit of Feminine Knowledge from Traditional (Male-Dominated) Approaches. INTRODUCTION An inquiry into the unique contributions of feminist approaches and methodologies to qualitative research requires a definition of feminine knowledge. The purpose of this essay is to define the concept of feminist methodology, specifically as it can be contrasted to traditional male-dominated methodologies. The epistemology of feminist knowledge is directed toward change in sociological perspectives to include feminist principles and concepts. This concept provides the basis for what has been termed “the feminist method”. The feminist method engages a mode of inquiry designed to provide knowledge for women that enhances and empowers women. In this context, feminist methodology enables knowledge and understanding that incorporates a praxis to facilitate change in the lives of women. The study of feminist methodology represents a refutation of gender bias, feminine devaluement, patriarchal attitudes and misrepresentations of the feminine experience and supports an understanding of feminine approaches to knowledge, experience and understanding (Harding, 1991). Feminist research employs a distinctive methodology to produce new knowledge that defines, supports and empowers women. Feminist epistemology is, therefore, grounded in the feminism as it provides a unique perspective about the feminine experience and women as the originators of research that contributes to the body of knowledge (Harding, 1982, 1991). The fundamental feminine experience provides the rationale for an exploration of the unique contributions of feminist methodologies to qualitative research and defines the role of women as creative researchers rather than simply the objects of research. IMPORTANT THEMES THAT DEFINE AND DISTINGUISH FEMINIST METHODOLOGIES The central role of the feminine experience is the primary distinction between masculine and feminine approaches to qualitative research. As such, the feminine experience has been defined as complex and multifaceted in regard to the diverse roles of women in society and the effects of societal values and experiences on the totality of their experiences as women. Ultimately, these experiences affect women’s approaches to learning and exploring and interacting with the world that constitutes the basis of their unique and different approach to methodology that distinguishes this methodology from the traditional male-dominated mode of inquiry. In this context, one’s approach to the methodologies of research represent socially constructed viewpoints that influence one’s choice of methodology as well as the interpretation of research and observation. (Bechhofer, 2000). This socially constructed viewpoint is an example of genderisation that infuses one’s approach to inquiry-based learning. The concept of genderisation further instructs the assessment of male versus female approaches to research methodologies as distinctive based upon these sociological influences. The diversity of societal, class and cultural influences on genderisation mean that there is no one strictly female or male sexist approach to inquiry, observation and interpretation but rather that a spectrum of viewpoints exists and may change over time as the socially constructed influences on genderised perspectives evolve and change (Bechhofer, 2000) . The question of the “feminist method” There are general themes, however, that have defined the emergence of feminist methodological approaches to qualitative inquiry. The question of whether or not a feminist methodology exists was explored by Harding (1987). As a result of the uniqueness and diversity of the individual experiences of women, Harding was reluctant to define a precise “feminist method” of research. Nevertheless, she acknowledges that feminist approaches to research represent dramatically different viewpoints from the genderised, androgenic empirical approaches to qualitative research that have characterized traditional research methodologies. Harding’s conception of a feminist method emphasizes the role of feminist research in exploring the feminine experience through the eyes of women in ways that empowers women and enhances our understanding of feminist values and experiences. Harding rejects the notion of a distinctive feminist method that precisely distinguishes feminist research from more traditional modes of inquiry. Rather, she supports a broader based perspective of issues that relate to research by women and about women in ways that illuminate the feminine experience and empower women to achieve personal fulfillment. Her conception of feminist research embodies the process that defines the course of discovery and enlightenment. In this context, Harding has defined method as a tool for obtaining information or evidence. Although women employ the traditional tools and techniques of research, Harding argues that women differ in their focus and the attention they bring to observations and details, particularly as they relate to women that may have been previously ignored. This difference in approach represents the basis of new methodologies that incorporate the feminist perspective. Moreover, these methodologies bring about changes in epistemology that reflect the feminist contribution. Harding defines this use of methodology as a process or mode of inquiry that generates knowledge, and that this is the basis of feminine epistemology, a knowledge the illuminates the lives of women and life experiences from a feminist perspective. Harding further argues that the changes in the social sciences that reflect feminist contributions and role s in society cannot be achieved simply by reviewing the historical contributions of women that have been previously neglected, but must also include additional components. Among these are a definition of research questions and problems that include a feminist perspective. The experiences of women are also critical components of the assessment process that attempts to explore relevant answers to research questions. The ultimate product of this process, according to Harding, is the development of modes of inquiry that reflect the diversity of women’s experiences and the cultural and political conditions which impact the lives of women. Thus, the feminist method involves the application of the principles of scientific inquiry to the study of issues that concern women, that are about women and that are conducted by women (or men) in ways that comprise a feminist methodology that facilitates the production of feminist epistemology. Harding (1993) defines the three basic elements of research methodology as listening, observing and examining data and records of human activity. These categories encompass interviews, oral histories, case studies, ethnography and other in-depth subject based assessments to acquire research data. Harding (1987a) states that methodology is a “bridge” that links theory and method in a processive model of interactive research. In this essential context, feminist perspectives infuse qualitative research methodologies with a unique perspective that is intrinsically linked to the feminine experience Feminist practice of social research Hesse-Biber (Hesse- Biber, & Yaiser, 2004) explores the themes of feminist methodologies as they inform the practice of sociological research. According to these researchers, the importance of the origins of research, the rationale that drives experimental design methodologies and interpretation are of paramount influence in driving the research process. These authors take a holistic approach in exploring the origins of research from a feminist perspective. The theoretical paradigms that drive the process of research comprise a central theme of their exploration of qualitative research methodologies. Moreover, the authors suggest that an understanding and acknowledgement of the theoretical basis for research is essential to epistemology. The very basic question of defining the process of creating new knowledge informs this assessment of feminist methodologies. In this context, frame of reference is a primary component that encompasses the origins of the research process. The issues of defining the limits of knowledge and the role of the knowledge-seeker are central elements of their process–based assessment of epistemology. Qualitative research is defined as an intrinsically distinguishable approach to the study of the nature of reality from positive quantitative approaches to research that define the research object as an immutable component of reality whose existence and characteristics have no relation to the observer. Qualitative research in contrast, represents an in-depth view of the nature of reality as it is informed by time and space and the context in which the observation is made, as well as the biases of subject and observer in the context of a changing social reality Qualitative research, therefore, is defined by the observer as well as by that which is observed. For this reason, these researchers believe that it is essential to incorporate the inclusive role of the feminist observer in any holistic assessment of the nature of social reality. The feminist approach differs from many traditional research paradigms in that it embraces the notion of reciprocity between the observer and the observed and incorporates this intrinsic subjectivity into a process-driven methodology This notion is also exemplified by hermeneutic approaches that include the researcher as an active participant in the discovery process. Hesse-Biber (Hesse- Biber, & Yaiser, 2004) emphasises the role of theory and epistemology in informing the methodologies of research. Hesse-Biber (Hesse- Biber, Leavy & Yaiser, 2004) refers to the triad of theory, method and epistemology as the research nexus, the components of which are directly interconnected. These process models of data collection comprise methodologies that are subject to unique methodologies as they are informed by feminist perspectives. Moreover, these researchers assert that the capacity to alter pre-existing methodologies is rooted in the theoretical perspective of the research, which in turn is based upon cognitive and social beliefs concerning the nature of reality (Hesse- Biber & Leckenby. 2004). Feminist methodology versus traditional, androgenic approaches to research One of the most significant attributes of traditional male-dominated approaches to qualitative research is its almost total exclusion of women’s efforts to contribute to art and sciences until very recent years (Kemp & Squires, 1997). This patriarchal viewpoint encompasses the fundamental notion that the female either cannot and/or should not be a part of productive society (Smith, 1987). This viewpoint is most clearly represented in the “traditional” cultural designation of women as supporters of men’s efforts and responsible for caring for home and family as their primary role in society. This patriarchal perspective was even more repressive of women who attempted to expand beyond these boundaries and societal limitations to contribute directly to the arts and sciences (Benston, 1989) The writings of women were not published, the scientific contributions of women were largely ignored, and, most importantly, barriers to education and opportunities to contribute to society were responsible for the silencing of the female in society (Roberts, 1981). This male-dominated paradigm necessitated the emergence of the feminist movement. Moreover, the male-dominated traditionalist approach is the primary frame of reference against which diverse feminist methodologies are assessed (Westcott, 1979, 1990). Among these are a perspective that explores the effects of objectification of women by a longstanding patriarchal culture and the resulting fragmentation of the feminine identity (Millet, 1990). Another involves an assessment of the contributions of women in the arts, sciences, government and other areas that that have occurred in the context of feminine repression over the past several centuries. Yet another theme involves an exploration of the unique experiences of women in their roles as mothers, daughters, and sisters as they reflect the uniquely female experience. Moreover, the commonality of the feminine experience as a “sisterhood” is explored also through the lens of class, race, cultural and ethnic differences that generate a diversity of feminist perspectives that must be recognized in an inclusive assessment of feminist experience. Harding (1993) emphasises the multi-faceted nature of feminist methodologies that reflect the uniqueness of individual feminine experiences as defined by race, ethnicity, culture and social class. Moreover, this author stresses the political aspects of research that define modes of inquiry and their assessment. Thus, the evaluation of feminist approaches to research must be contextualised to reflect the influences of the prevailing theoretical and sociological paradigms (Pearce, 2004). The political climate that has served as the backdrop for the development of feminist methodologies of qualitative research has evolved in the context of women’s political struggle for equality in a male-dominated society (Hartsock, 1987). This has had a powerful influence on the development of the feminist epistemology paradigm. Among the most significant forms of feminist thought to emerge is the Euro-centric approach that may include Marxist, socialist and liberal ideologies (Reinharz, 1992). Another feminist perspective encompasses the Afri-centric feminisms that incorporate the experiences of black women into a conceptual framework of feminism (Collins, 1990, 1991). Thus, the nature of the “oppressor” may vary in its specifics, but all feminist methodologies share a common goal of empowering women as they incorporate a feminist knowledge base into the foundations and fabric of society (Millman & Kanter, 1975). Another important theme of feminist methodologies involves the recognition that androgenic-centered research produces an outcome that distorts cultural perceptions of human experience. Harding (1987b) argues that this incomplete and distorted viewpoint renders the results of research intrinsically flawed and requiring a more universal approach that incorporates feminist methodologies. Buitelaar (2006) has argued that sources of knowledge ultimately become sources of power in society, and that the failure to establish an inclusive research framework generates a flawed perception of reality that results directly in feminine oppression expands this notion to emphasise a holistic approach that underscores the universality of being and the interdependence of all life forms that must be reflected in rational approaches to epistemology. In this context, the inclusion of feminist methodologies into a cultural framework results directly in the empowerment of women in society. The restructuring of the research paradigm to incorporate feminist methodologies requires an overhaul of the male-centered cognitive authority that places ultimate power to control the processes by which knowledge and understanding are acquired in the domination of an andro-centric culture (Millet, 1990). Thus, the development of feminist methodologies encompasses a revolutionary component that exceeds the domains of inclusion and requires a fundamental change in the cognitive seat of power. This theme reflects the imbalance of power in the traditional male-dominated culture and associates political change with processes that incorporate feminist methodologies into a research paradigm that sustains epistemology (Millet, 1990). In this context, the feminist methodologies are inclusive of issues of knowledge and its origins as illuminated by political and sociological reflections that have traditionally influenced its cognitive base (Green & LeBihan, 1996). Another important theme that relates specifically to feminist methodologies to qualitative research and distinguishes them from andro-centered approaches, involves the choice of research subject (Hubbard, 1988). Feminist based research includes a greater emphasis on issues that concern women, often in the context of economic, political and social issues that affect and define the position of women in society (Bat-Ami, 1993; (Lofland, 1975; Christiansen-Ruffman, 1989). Women researchers bring a unique feminine perspective to these areas of qualitative research, part of which is reflected in their common experiences as women. The theoretical perspectives that form the underpinnings of such studies and the generalised perspectives and conclusions of qualitative research that generate new knowledge and form the basis of new theoretical perspectives are also uniquely enriched by feminist contributions (Berman, 1989). This constitutes the basis of inductive reasoning and ground theory that comprise essential components of qualitative research (Eagleton, 1996; Haraway, 1988). From a theoretical perspective, the feminist movement has challenged the traditional andro-centered research paradigm that has involved a dichotomous split between researcher and subject that is intrinisically hierarchical (Bechhofer, 2000; Keller, 1982). The feminist perspective involves an assessment of the commonality between researcher and subject, to generate a more inclusive concept of research to include the unique perspective of the researcher as it informs the process and methodology of research (Maynard & Purvis, 1994). This concept has been defined as “feminine objectivity” and takes into account the impossibility of complete objectivity on the part of the researcher (Code, 1981, 1991, 1993). In this context, Harding (1987 a & b; 1993) argues that subjectivity and objectivity are not mutually exclusive parameters. Moreover, the term “strong objectivity” invokes the need for reflexivity or an assessment of the role of the researcher in the ongoing research process as an essential component of feminist methodologies (Harding, 1993; Wilkinson, 1988). This theoretical position challenges the traditional approach to research that explores only the tools and methods utilized in the research study, but does not engage the multi-faceted process that defines the choice of research or the intrinsic components of research design (Addelson, 1991; Gergen, 1988). The rational/emotional dichotomy that is exemplified in traditional positivist research approaches is also rejected by feminist methodologies (Jaggar, 1992). In addition to suggesting that a complete separation of emotional perspectives from rational research endeavors, the feminist perspective engages the notion that emotional factors may be important in considering the focus of research endeavors (Alcoff, 1989; (Longino, 1991 &1993). . Feminist perspectives on qualitative research argue that one of the important goals of feminist research is the empowerment of women and the genesis of social improvement (Duran, 1991). Thus, the choice of research may be positively influenced by the emotional desire to enhance conduct research that enhances the lives of women (Bhavnani, 1993). The traditional approach to sociological research studies emphasizes the value-less or value-neutral basis of the research inquiry; this concept is rejected by prominent feminist methodological approaches to qualitative research (Acker, Barry & Esseveld, 1983). The “feminist standpoint epistemology” developed by Smith (1987) and Hartsock (1987) may be defined as a feminist methodology rooted in the hierarchical social construction of society. These hierarchies are defined as standpoints that reflect a viewpoint that originates from one position in the social hierarchy (Sprague, 2005). In this context, feminist standpoint is created by the social position in society that traditionally has placed males on a higher social standing. This hierarchical positioning means that one of the unique components of the feminine experience derives fro this standpoint perspective. The Afro-centric feminist standpoint was introduced by Collins (1990, 1991) and reflects the unique standpoint of women who are also African-American. Thus, the methodologies of epistemology are informed by a hierarchical society in which placement is determined by gender, race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Our understanding of reality and the processes utilised to enhance this understanding may be greatly affected by the absence of many standpoints in the domain of epistemology. This theoretical framework is related to the concept of “feminine ethnograpghy”. Abu-Lughod (1990) has argued that the unique position in society occupied by women represents a composite perspective of many diverse elements of anthropological classification that constitute a unique perspective that has the capacity to make a unique and essential contribution to qualitative research. CONCLUSION The emergence of feminist methodologies in qualitative research in the social sciences is distinctive in many ways from traditional, male-dominated approaches to research. This inclusive, multi-faceted philosophy has generated a new definition of research to encompass the input of all members of society to create a holistic representation of the nature and diversity of human experience. Arising from the feminist movement to overcome the suppression and outright rejection of women’s contributions to research and social justice, feminist methodologies address the theoretical and social perspectives that inform the development and utilisation of processes designed to explore the nature of reality (Code, 1993). The result of this exploration has produced a research paradigm that is inclusive of the unique perspectives of women as researchers who inform the theoretical foundations of research inquiry. Moreover, the feminist approach has expanded our understanding of the lives of women as revealed by an increased emphasis on women’s issues as a legitimate object of research study (Farganis, 1989). Finally, one of the stated goals of the feminist perspective is to utilise the feminine contributions to research to uplift and empower the lives of women. References Abu-Lughod, L. 1990. Can there be a feminist ethnography? Women and performance: a journal of feminist theory, 5(1): pp.7-27. Acker J., Barry, K. & Esseveld, E. 1983. Objectivity and truth: problems in doing feminist research. Women’s studies international forum 6(4): pp. 423-435. Addelson, Kathryn Pyne. 1991. The man of professional wisdom. In: Beyond methodology: feminist scholarship as lived research. M.M. Fonow & J.A. Cook, eds. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press, pp. 16-34. Alcoff, Linda. 1989. Justifying feminist social science. In: Feminism & Science. N. Tuana, ed. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press, pp. 85-103. Bat-Ami Bar On. 1993. Marginality and epistemic privilege. In: Feminist Epistemologies. L. Alcoff and E. Potter, eds. New York: Routledge, pp. 83-100. Bechhofer, F. 2000. Principles of research design in the social sciences, New York: Routledge. Benston, Margaret. 1989. Feminism and the critique of scientific method. In: Feminism: from pressure to politics, A. Miles and G. Finn, eds. 57-76.Montreal: Black Rose Books. Berman, Ruth. 1989. From Aristotles dualism to materialist dialectics: feminist transformation of science and society. In Gender/body/knowledge, A.M. Jaggar and S.R. Bordo, eds. New Brunswick NJ: Rutgers University Press, pp. 224-255. Bhavnani, Kum-Kum. 1993. Tracing the contours: feminist research and feminist objectivity. Womens studies international forum 16: 95-104. Buitelaar, M. 2006. “I am the ultimate challenge”: Accounts of intersectionality in the life-story of a well-known daughter of moroccan migrants workers in the Netherlands. European journal of women’s studies, 13(3): pp. 259-276. Christiansen-Ruffman, Linda. 1989. Inherited biases within feminism: The "patricentric syndrome" and the "either/or syndrome" in sociology. In: Feminism: from pressure to politics. A. Miles and G. Finn, eds. Montreal: Black Rose Books, pp. 123-146. Code, Lorraine B. 1981. Is the sex of the knower epistemologically significant? Metaphilosophy 12: 267-276. Code, Lorraine B. 1991. What can she know? Feminist theory and the construction of knowledge. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press. Code, Lorraine B. 1993. Taking subjectivity into account. In: Feminist epistemologies, L. Alcoff & E. Potter, eds. New York: Routledge, pp. 15-48. Collins, Patricia Hill. 1990. Black feminist thought: knowledge, consciousness, and the Politics of empowerment. New York: Routledge. Collins, Patricia Hill. 1991. Learning from the outsider within: the sociological significance of black feminist thought. In: Beyond methodology: feminist scholarship as lived research, M.M. Fonow & J.A. Cook, eds. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press, pp. 35-59. Duran, Jane. 1991. Toward a feminist epistemology. Savage MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Eagleton, M. 1996. Working with feminist criticism. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers. Farganis, Sondra. 1989. Feminism and the reconstruction of social science. In: Gender/body/ knowledge. A.M. Jaggar and S.R. Bordo, eds. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, pp. 207-223. Gergen, Kenneth J. 1988. Feminist critiques of science and the challenge of social epistemology. In: Feminist Thought and the Structure of Knowledge. M.M. Gergen, ed. New York: New York University Press, pp. 27-48. Green, K. & LeBihan, J. 1996. Critical theory and practice: a coursebook. London and New York: Routledge., Chapman & Hall, Inc. Haraway D. 1988. Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the priviledge of partial perspective. Feminist studies 14 (3): pp. 575-599. Harding, Sandra. 1982. Is gender a variable in conceptions of rationality? A survey of issues. Dialectica, 36: 226-241. Harding, S.1987a. Introduction. Is there a feminist method? In Harding, S.G. Feminism and methodology : social science issues. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. pp.1-15. Harding, S. 1987b. Conclusion: epistemological questions. In: Feminism & methodology: social science issues, S. Harding, ed. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, pp. 181-190. Harding, S. 1991. Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from womens lives. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press. Harding, S. 1993. Rethinking standpoint epistemology: "What is strong objectivity? In: Feminist epistemologies, L. Alcoff and E. Potter, eds. New York: Routledge, pp. 49-82. Hartsock, Nancy C.M. 1987. The feminist standpoint: developing the ground for a specifically feminist historical materialism. In: Feminism & methodology:social science issues, S. Harding, ed. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press, pp.157-180. Hesse- Biber, S. N., Leavy P. & Yaiser, P. 2004. Feminists approaches to research as a process. reconceptualizing epistemology, methodology, and method. In: Hesse-Biber, Leavy P. eds. Feminist perspectives on social research. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp.3-27 Hesse- Biber S.N. & Leckenby. 2004. How Feminists Practice Social Research. In:. Feminist perspectives on social research., Hesse-Biber, Leavy P., eds. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.209-227. Hubbard, Ruth. 1988. Some thoughts about the masculinity of the natural sciences. In: Feminist thought and the structure of knowledge. M.M. Gergen, ed. New York: New York University Press, pp. 1-15. Jaggar A. 1992. Love and knowledge: emotion in feminist epistemology. In: Women, knowledge and reality, Garry A. & Pearsall M., eds. New York: Routledge, Chapman & Hall Inc. Reprint. pp. 129 – 155. Keller, Evelyn Fox. 1982. Feminism and science. In: Women, knowledge, and reality, A. Garry and M. Pearsall, eds. New York: Routledge, pp. 175-188. Kemp, S. & Squires, J. 1997. Feminisms. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lofland, Lyn H. 1975. The "Thereness" of women: a selective review of urban sociology. In: Another voice: feminist perspectives on social life and Social science. M. Millman and R.M. Kanter, eds. New York: Anchor Books, pp. 144-170. Longino, Helen E. 1987. Can there be a feminist science? In: Women, knowledge,and reality.A. Garry and M. Pearsall, eds. New York: Routledge, pp.203-216. Longino, Helen E. 1993. Subjects, power, and knowledge: description and prescription in feminist philosophies of science. In: Feminist epistemologies. L. Alcoff and E. Potter, eds. New York: Routledge, pp. 101-120. Maynard, M. & Purvis, J. 1994. Researching women’s lives from a feminist perspective. London: Taylor & Francis. Millet, K. 1990. Sexual politics. New York: Simon & Schuster. Millman, Marcia & Kanter, Rosabeth. 1975. Editorial Introduction. In: Another voice: feminist perspectives on social life and social science, M. Millman and R.M. Kanter, eds. New York: Anchor Books, pp. vii-xvii. Pearce, L. 2004. The rhetorics of feminism: readings in contemporary cultural theory and the popular press. London & New York: Routledge. Reinharz, S. 1992. Feminist methods in social research. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Roberts, H. 1981. Doing feminist research. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Smith, Dorothy E. 1987. Womens perspective as a radical critique of sociology. In: Feminism & methodology: social science issues. S. Harding, ed. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press, pp. 84-96. Sprague, J. 2005. Feminist methodologies for critical research: bridging differences, New York: Altamira. Stacey, Judith & Thorne, Barrie. 1985. The missing feminist revolution in sociology. Social problems 32: 301-316. Stanley, L. & Wise, S. 1990. Method, methodology and epistemology in feminist research processes. In: Feminist praxis. Stanley L. ed. London: Routledge. pp20-60. Westkott, M. 1979. Feminist criticism of the social sciences. Harvard Educational Review 49(4): pp. 422-430. Westkott, Marcia. 1990. Feminist criticism of the social sciences. In: Feminist research methods: exemplary readings in the social sciences. J.M. Nielsen, ed. Boulder CO: Westview Press, pp. 58-68. Wilkinson, S. 1988. The role of reflexivity in feminist psychology. Women’s studies international forum, 11: pp. 493-502. . Read More