Queering  Research.  Cri0cal  research  methodologies  from  Peer  to  Peer  

David  Berná,  Eva  M.  Herrero,  Fernándo  Villaamil,  Ariel  Jerez.  Facultad  de  Ciencias  Polí0cas  y  Sociología  Universidad  Complutense  de  Madrid  

To  Stablish  

Why  we  are  in  this?  •  Personal  background:  Work  experience  with  excluded  

groups  (Roma,  baSered  women,  pros0tutes,  transsexuals,  lesbians  and  gays,  minori0zed  social  movements,  indigenous,  etc).  These  works  broke  something  inside  us  and  aroused  in  us  a  certain  emo0onal  and  poli0cal  sensi0vity.  

•  Theore0cal  background:  Queer  Theory,  Postcolonial  Studies  and  poststructuralist  philosophy.  

•  Social  and  Poli0cal  Context,  Local  and  Na0onal.  Global  crisis  not  only  economic  but  also  cultural  and  intellectual.  

•  Personal  Situa0on:  I’m  Fagot,  I’m  women,….  this  is  my  way  for  think  and  live,  all  live,  to  may  scien0fic  work,  and  we  don’t  want  to  be  normal  in  any  aspect  of  our  lives.  

Theore0cal  Support    

Queer  studies  are  an  space  of  academic  research  and  produc0ons    result  and  accomplice   of   LGBT   (Lesbian,  Gay,   Bisexual   and   Transgender)   struggles   that  became   at   1990s.   Queer   posi0on   implies   an   academic   cri0cal   posi0on   that  ques0ons   understandings   of   gender   and   sexuality,   iden0ty   poli0cs   and  hegemonic   discourses   on   heteronorma0vity.   But   specially   it   ques0ons  mechanisms  of  truth  produc0on.  Queer  studies  usually  are  joined  with  cri0cal  research  paradigms  like  feminism  and  post-­‐colonial  studies.  in  fact,  the  queer  posi0on  results  from  lgtbq  people  being  thrown    out  from  feminist,  migrant  and  ethnic  ac0vist  spaces  in  America.    

Are   commonly   known   queer   theore0cal   produc0ons,   usually   philosophical.  But  queer  work  have  also  been  made  methodological  knowledge  produc0on.  These  are  less  known,  but  their  importance  is  crucial.  

And  before  this,  in  our  discussions,  the  following  challenges  arise  to  overcoming,  or  at  least  call  into  

ques0on  

•  1.   Colonial   Heritage   of   Social   Research   /   Know   to   domes0cate   /     Know     to  demonstrate  the  inferiority  /    Know    to  s0gma0ze  

•  2.  Academic  arrogance  product  of  the  indolent  ra0onality  (Santos  2005).  Scien0fic  knowledge  is  always  higher  than  that  produced  by  the  subjects  in  their  daily  life.  

•  3.  Cogni0ve  fic0on  of  Produc0on  of  truth  /  Objec0vity  /  Posi0vism  

•  4.  Rela0ons  of  Power-­‐Knowledge.  Desubjec0vize  and  transform  subjets  to  objects.  

•  5.   Assume   that   science   is   subjec0ve,   situated   and   produced   by   men,   white,  heterosexual  and  middle  and  upper  classes.(  Donna  Haraway  )  

A  bit  of  History  

 -­‐Great  technological,  scien0fic,  ideological,  social  and  poli0cal  changes  occurred  in  the  eighteenth  and  nineteenth  centuries.    -­‐These  were  part  of  a  re-­‐ar0cula0on  of  reality  which  led  to  new  regimes  of  power.  Foucault:  Power  disciplinarian  who  cares  life  of  popula0ons.  Before  regimes  to  manage  death,  allowing  life,  but  never  will  care  (New  geopoli0cal  and  economic  system:  capitalism  and  na0on-­‐state).    -­‐That  life  care  Foucault  will  call  biopoli0cal  regime  Power,  which  take  care  of  life.  disciplining,  taming  and  controlling  the  subjec0vity  of  individuals  =  Construc0on  of  subjects  by  Regimes  of  Power..  -­‐And  how  was  done  this?  

 -­‐Alliance  between  producers  of  knowledge,  poli0cal  structures  and  disciplinary  ins0tu0ons  (hospital,  factory,  school)  

 -­‐Change  in  veridic0on  regimes.  God  is  banished  and  the  man  took  center.  The  belief  is  replaced  by  Reason.  

 -­‐A  speech  was  imposed:  The  posi0vist-­‐ra0onalist  prism  is  the  only  one  capable  of  crea0ng  knowledge  through  hypothe0cal-­‐deduc0ve  method.  

 -­‐  Modern  science  is  the  only  way  to  know  the  reality  and  correct  the  mistakes  of  individuals  and  communi0es.  Only  through  the  Scien0fic  Objec0vity  (Stengers,  1993).    

And  them,  What  are  we  do?  Our  Methodological  propousal  

     

Dialogic  interview/  Peer  to  Peer  Dialogues  

Cualita0ve  Interview  

The   interview   is   defined   as   a   conversa0on  between   two   or   more   people   in   a   par0cular  place   for   a   specific   purpose.   Technically   it   is   a  scien0fic   research   method   that   uses   verbal  communica0on  to  collect   informa0on  regarding  a   specific   purpose   (Grawitz,   1984:   188;   Aktouf,  1992:   91;   Mayer   and   Ouellet,   1991:   308).   The  researcher   asks   ques0ons   and   the   interviewee  answers   their   ques0ons.   He   describes   his  experiences,  opinions,  aspira0ons,  etc.  

How  we  define  the  Dialogic  interview/Peer  to  peer  dialog  

 A   face-­‐to-­‐face   situa0on   (Mayer   and   Ouellet,   1991:   308;   Taylor   and  Bogdan,  1996),  where  reciprocal  exchange  occurs   through  the  use  of  verbal  and  body  language.  All  those  present  occupy  the  informant  /  interviewer  roles.  All  ask  and  be  asked.  The  informant  is  not  a  representa0ve  of  a  par0cular  social  group.  It  is  present  from  its  par0cularity.  From  this  posi0on  they  converse.  In   this   interrela0onship,   the   reality   is   reconstructed   from   the  connec0ons  between  subjects  present  on  common  experiences.  The  direc0on  of   informa0on  depend  on   the   real  experiences  of  both  individuals  and  not  the  research  objec0ves.  This  can  be  a  problem  or  an  advantage.    

How  we  do  it?  I  

First  steps:  •  Sample:  24  youngs  in  couples.  •  Sample  Selec0on:  Youngs  arround    19  and  25  years  old,  with  lgtbq  iden00es  or  non  heterosituated  prac0ce  who  live  in  madrid.    

•  Selec0on  methodologies:  Snowball(Beaud,  1983:187).  

How  we  do  it?II:    Nego0a0on  

•  Nego0a0on  of  Topic.  •  Nego0a0on  of  Partner.  •  Nego0a0on  of  Dura0on.  •  Nego0a0on  of  physical  space.  •  Nego0a0on  of  archive  support.  

Nego0a0on  of  Interview  Partner  •  The  use  of  the  snowball  recruiment  technique  facilitated  the  pairing:  –  Some  of  the  youth  were  already  known  directly.  Others  were  friends  of  friends.  So  there  was  already  a  prior  trust  and  security.  

–  In  cases  where  they  did  not  know.  We  told  them  superficially  who  could  be  (Studies,  age,  orienta0on  expressed  desire  ac0vism,  friends)  poten0al  candidates  and  they  chose).  

–  In  two  cases  expressed  the  need  to  do  it  with  a  stranger  /  a.  They  expressed  feeling  more  comfortable  with  strangers.  

Nego0a0on  of  topic  •  Distendid  dialogue  with  young  people  individually  about  their  situa0on  and  the  situa0on  of  young  LGBTIQ  from  their  point  of  view.  This  was  guided  by  a  set  of  topics  that  the  team  thought  that  might  interest  and  coincided  with  the  interests  raised  in  the  research  hypothesis.  

•  The  topics  selected  for  interview  were  those  in  which  the  young  put  more  interest  and  engaged  more  0me  to  talk.  

•  We  then  performed  an  outline  /  guide  with  the  selected  topics.  This  paper  scheme  was  provided  on  the  day  of  the  interview.  

Nego0a0on  of  archive  support.    

•  Not  all  media  (video,  sound,  etc.)  represent  the  same  interference  in  the  development  of  the  interviews.  Write,  record  video  or  audio,  condi0on  differently  the  dynamics  developed  in  communica0on.  

•  Finally  all  chose  the  audio  recorder.  Previously  we  thought  that  this  medium  was  the  least  invasive  means.  We  give  when  we  express  this  approach  op0ons.  (Perhaps  we  influence,  yes,  but  do  not  forget  that  we  do  not  pursue  objec0vity)  

Development  •  Scheme  were  provided  to  them  with  the  main  topics  and  variables  that  had  been  nego0ated.  

•  A  tape  recorder  were  provided  •  Water,  soda  or  beer  were  provided,  depending  the  space  (Faculty,  park  or  bar)    

•  Researchers  leave  and  return  when  young  no0fied  them  by  mobile  

•  During  that  0me  the  young  begin  with  scheme,  but  as  0me  progresses  the  forks  are  diverse.  In  some  cases  girded  the  scheme,  but  in  others  the  conversa0on  took  a  different  tack.  

What  is  the  outcome?  •  Recordings  of  1.5  to  two  hours  •  Conversa0ons  among  young,  looking  for  connec0ons  and  reflect  on  the  differences.  

•  Informa0on  on  experiences,  expecta0ons,  thoughts,  desires  

•  Episodes  of  listening,  empathy  and  support  each  other  with  narra0ves  of  painful  or  difficult  situa0ons.  Dialogic  interview  transcends  the  aim  of  obtaining  informa0on.  

•  Young  created  jointly  narra0ves  about  their  life  history.  A  common  language.  

And  arer…  

•  Dialogic  Analysis  •  Dialogic  Wri0ng  

Strengths  

•  The  researcher  does  not  interfere  or  limit  the  expression  of  informants.  

•  The  expression  of  emo0ons,  the  result  of  the  encounter  between  two  people  with  shared  experiences,  can  be  much  higher.  

•  The  course  of  the  interview  is  free  and  not  determined  by  the  interests  of  researchers.  

•  Are  present  other  languages  and  other  logics,  absolutely  different  that  research  logic  and  prac0ce  suppose.  

Problems  and  risks  -­‐One  of  the  informants  can  dominate  the  conversa0on  to  their  own  interests  or  needs  For  example,  a  member  poli0cized  condi0ons  speeches  and  headed  towards  poli0cal  speeches,  away  from  their  own  experience  and  expression  of  emo0ons    -­‐There  are  issues  that  they  do  not  speak.  Although  these  issues  were  rated  as  important.  For  example:  Girls  have  never  talked  about  their  experiences  of  child  homophobia.  However,  the  boys  expressed  an  infant  experiences  homophobia  in  full.  This  raises  research  ques0ons.  For  either  of  them  if  they  have  suffered  homophobia  and  also  do  not  have  or  have  not  suffered  due  to  differences  in  norma0ve  gender  system.  Both  op0ons  involve  both  a  problem  and  a  poten0al  analysis.