It is quite popular amongst qualitative feminist researchers nowadays to include so-called “positioning papers” within their research. These papers give an account of the researcher’s relationship, both personal and otherwise, to their research subject in order to increase the transparency and accountability of their research project. The reason they are included is because feminist theory believes that all knowledge begins from “standpoints” that are situated depending on a person/group’s position within society. (1) From this perspective, research becomes knowledge produced from the socially situated “standpoint” of the researcher.As such, providing context about their own connection to the material (ie. what motivates them, what goals they have, how they are emotionally invested in their research) helps readers better assess the knowledge that they generate.
While my fellow classmates and I are not qualitative researchers in a formal sense, we will be doing at least some qualitative research – over the next few months, we will be recording and analyzing our observations of social life on this blog, particularly in relation to issues of social identity.(2) Therefore, I would like to start with a small positioning paper of sorts where I will give a brief account of how I came to see the world through the lens of the social – in other words, how individual and group behaviours are shaped by norms and interactions that originate from society at large.(3)
It began with the rather unexpected discovery that I was attracted to men. In my first year at university, I happened across a football game on television – I suppose most of us would call it soccer. It is ironic because I have no interest in sports at all, yet to this day I remember that it was a Spanish team; that a goal had just been scored; that he had dark hair and tanned skin; that his shirt rode up when he leapt in exhilaration. Over the next few weeks and months, a deep sense of confusion set in – not that this desire existed, but that it was somehow lacking. Not in passion, authenticity, moral value or any of those other stereotypical notions. Rather, what it was lacking in was information – the kind that told you what you wanted, what to anticipate, and what to look for. You see, I had been attracted to girls before. Those sentiments always came with what I realized was an immense bundle of pre-packaged knowledge that told you what a boy and girl should do (hold hands, date); what wanting each other meant (having sex); what they could expect (roses, a family). Together, these strands of knowledge form a veritable guidebook that leads you through every aspect and every stage of your desire – from the awkward fumbling of first times to late-night walks in the moonlight, it tells you what to expect and how to expect it. Most importantly, it tells you what desire actually means. Without it, desire is just a sudden reaction to external stimuli, little more than a shot in the dark. And that was all I had.
Gradually, I came to realize that it made no sense if sexuality is innate, as most believe, that I should have so much knowledge available to my heterosexual inclinations and so little attached to my homosexual ones. The only plausible alternative? That society is the actual source of our sexual knowledge, that it plays a dominant role in shaping our desires. As I became increasingly conscious of this fact and as it began to infuse my worldview on an intuitive level, I gained the ability to observe my own sexual development. I was able to “track” changes over time, making note of how new experiences and ideas that I came across had an effect on my preferences and expectations. Gradually, a whole new world became available to me as I applied what I understood about my sexual identity to other aspects of social life: gender, employment, politics, etc. With the aid of coursework, I continued my avid exploration of this new lens in increasing detail – what are the ramifications of economic marginalization, of education policy, of homeless ordinances? Nowadays, I can hardly look at an issue without wondering about its social origins and what kinds of implications it might have. This is the perspective that I bring to the table – an understanding of the sociological perspective that is intimately connected to me on both personal and intellectual levels and one that I likely will not tire of exploring anytime soon.
1) Bowell, T. “Feminist Standpoint Theory.” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Sept. 2014. <http://www.iep.utm.edu/fem-stan/#H4>.
This website offers a more in-depth explanation of feminist standpoint theory and its relationship to qualitative research and knowledge production in general.
2) “What Is Qualitative Research?” Qualitative Research Consultants Association. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Sept. 2014. <http://www.qrca.org/?page=whatisqualresearch>.
A quick, easy-to-understand explanation of what qualitative research is.
3) Flores, Laura. “What Is Social Constructionism.” Oakes College – University of Santa Cruz. N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Sept. 2014. <http://oakes.ucsc.edu/academics/Core%20Course/oakes-core-awards-2012/laura-flores.html>.
This link explains the “sociological perspective” by using examples of social inequality from the areas of gender, sex, class, and race. It is very useful for those new to the idea of social constructionism.