Feminists really do count: the complexity of feminist methodologies

Hughes, Christina; Cohen, Rachel Lara

doi:10.1080/13645579.2010.482249

Cited by 27 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While this is tied to the epistemological base from which contributions have emerged, such as cultural and/or feminist studies, it belies recent attempts by activist scholars to argue that emancipatory research is not, and should not, be associated with a particular methodological approach, and that reflexive approaches to survey design and analysis can address the types of criticisms of the method levelled against it by researchers focused on social justice (e.g. Browne, 2010; Hughes and Cohen, 2010; Kwan and Schwanen, 2009). Beyond the dominance of qualitative approaches is a further concentration on textual analysis as a method within the qualitative tradition.…”

Section: Methods and Methodologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disability and sexuality: Desires and pleasures

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is an ongoing missing discourse of pleasure in studies of sexuality and disability, and considerations of sexual pleasures and sexual desire in the lives of people with disabilities play very little part in public discourse. This opening article analyzes some of the major theoretical influences and debates informing prevailing assumptions about disability and sexuality. An exposition of the theoretical and conceptual terrains that underpin and shape this special issue works to canvas a series of often disparate sites of contestation, and suggests that disabled and sexual embodied subjectivities are much more than ‘asexual’ or ‘hypersexual’ pathological constructions. The articles explore the ways in which the intersection of disability and sexuality involves an understanding of the interlocking discourses of normality, sexuality, able-bodiedness, heteronormativity and desire, which can shape possibilities for sex, sexuality, pleasure and intimacy for people with a disability. What will become evident is that a greater attention to the phenomenology of sexual embodiment, pleasure, desire, and the diverse meanings of intimacy and the erotic, can make significant contributions to social and scholarly analyses of disability and sexuality. The utilization of different methodological approaches that can attend to complexity and diversity in the experience of sex and sexuality further constitutes part of the critique of ableist narratives of the ‘normal’ desiring and desirable subject that cannot account for the intersubjective conditions in which embodied subjectivity is constructed and pleasure experienced.

show abstract

Section: Methods and Methodologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disability and sexuality: Desires and pleasures

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the other hand, there is a history of feminist critique of quantitative knowledge production, based in part on the privileging of quantitative methods, 10 in addition to critiques of science and objectivity more broadly (Haraway, 1988; Harding, 1986). Some feminists have rejected quantitative approaches, arguing that they conflict with feminist research goals (see Hughes and Cohen, 2012; Westmarland, 2001), and various early feminist methodology writings argued that qualitative methods were more suitable in understanding women’s experiences (Oakley, 1998). Although quantitative methods have not been rejected across the board, 11 there still exists a tension between the users of these two approaches.…”

Section: A Nuanced Feminist Approach To Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

UN Women’s feminist engagement with governance by indicators in the Millennium and Sustainable Development Goals

Taylor

2020

Global Social Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rise of evidence-based policy has brought with it an increase in the use of indicators and data-driven global projects. The United Nations System has used the indicator-based Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) projects to govern policy from above. Of particular interest in this article is how indicators are used to govern gender equality initiatives within the Goals. By using ‘governance by indicators’ as a framework for understanding global policy processes, we can better understand how the power of indicators can help or hinder progress towards gender equality depending on the extent to which it renders gendered concerns visible. Studying indicators in this forum also illuminates spaces of contestation, where policy actors can debate indicators and reshape meaning. Based on this framework, this article explores UN Women’s feminist critique of measurement and knowledge production in the MDGs and SDGs. Looking through their feminist lens applied to this form of knowledge production can yield a better understanding of the use of indicators in shaping evidence-based policy from the global level. In recognizing the value of quantification and data-driven evidence in policy, this article speaks to the tension between feminist critique of quantitative knowledge production and the feminist approach’s welcoming of multiple ways of knowing.

show abstract

“…Den foreslåede sammenhaeng mellem metodologi og køn er saerligt blevet behandlet i visse grene af feministisk teori og kritik (Hughes & Cohen, 2010;Ward & Grant, 1985), herunder saerligt med henvisning til de såkaldte standpunktsteorier, der var udbredte i 1980'erne og 1990'erne (Harding, 1992). Omend den samlede litteratur ikke kan reducereres til enkelte positioner eller analyser, så er der en gennemgående tendens til at analysere applikationen af videnskabelige metoder i et kønsperspektiv.…”

Section: Kønnede Metoderunclassified

“…Den første hypotese, vi tester, er hvorvidt kvinders specialer indeholder mere kvalitativ metodologi end maends specialer. Som diskuteret tidligere baserer vi denne antagelse på tidligere forskning, som har vist signifikante kønsforskelle i publikationen af kvalitative studier (Grant et al, 1987;Plowman & Smith, 2011), samt feministiske argumenter for brugen af kvalitativ forskning (Griffin & Phoenix, 1994;Hughes & Cohen, 2010). Ud af de 50 topics fra modellen kan saerligt ét kobles direkte til kvalitativ metodologi -topic 29, hvis 100 mest sandsynlige termer er visualiserede som ordsky i figur 3.…”

Section: Køn Og Kvalitativ Metodeunclassified

Køn og metodevalg blandt samfundsvidenskabelige specialeskrivende

Munksgaard

Enghoff²

2018

DKSOC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Feministisk teori og forskning har argumenteret for to sammenhænge mellem køn og forskningsmetoder: Kvinder benytter oftere kvalitative metoder, og køn påvirker valget af forskningsområder. Tidligere forskning baseret på fagfællebedømte publikationer understøtter disse foreslåede sammenhænge, men anerkender bias som følge af homogeniserende mekanismer såsom akademisk professionalisering og fagfællebedømmelse. Vi komplementerer disse studier gennem en analyse af de »nedre lag af akademisk produktion«, specifikt 1.103 socialvidenskabelige specialer, hvilket giver en alternativ vinkel på studiet af køn og forskningsdesign. Vi benytter nylige innovationer indenfor digital tekstanalyse og estimerer en structural topic model for at modellere korpussets latente tematiske struktur. Ud fra denne model tester vi empirisk de foreslåede sammenhænge mellem køn, forskningsmetoder og forskningsområder. Vi finder, at de kvindelige specialestuderende er mere tilbøjelige til at benytte kvalitative metoder, og at nogle forskningsområder er kønnede. Topic modelling bliver demonstreret som et effektivt redskab til at analysere akademiske tekster. ENGELSK ABSTRACT: Rasmus Munksgaard and Oskar Enghoff: Gender and choice of method among social science masters students Feminist theory and research have argued that gender and research methods are related in two ways: women are more likely to employ qualitative methods, and gender affects choice of research area. While previous research on peer-reviewed publications supports these claims, the authors acknowledge that the data is biased due to the homogenizing mechanisms of academic professionalization and peer-review. We complement these previous studies with an analysis of ”lower-level academic production”, specifically 1,103 master’s theses, providing an alternate angle to the study of gender and research design. We employ recent innovations in digital text analysis, and estimate a structural topic model of the corpora to model the latent thematic structure. Using this model, we test the proposed links between gender, research methods and research area. We find that female students are more likely to employ qualitative methods than men, and that some research areas are gendered. Topic modeling is shown to be an efficient tool in the analysis of academic texts. Keywords: Digital methods, academic production, topic modelling, gender.

show abstract

Feminists really do count: the complexity of feminist methodologies

Cited by 27 publications

References 14 publications

Disability and sexuality: Desires and pleasures

Disability and sexuality: Desires and pleasures

UN Women’s feminist engagement with governance by indicators in the Millennium and Sustainable Development Goals

Køn og metodevalg blandt samfundsvidenskabelige specialeskrivende

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About