Connecting intersectionality and reflexivity: methodological approaches to social positionalities

Abstract

Intersectional approaches to social positionalities have stressed the interdependence between different kinds of social divisions as well as the relational nature of social categories. In empirical research practice, these complexities require a high level of methodological reflexivity. In this paper, I will show how different kinds of methodological reflexivity are connected to the concept of intersectionality. Reflexivity includes continuous attention and reflection upon the social practices of positioning and differentiation in the field (including the positioning of the researcher), as well as analytic reflection upon the importance of academic knowledge and processes for social and political struggles. Using empirical examples from fieldwork with West African migrants in Bremen, I will show how important insights into the processes of social categorymaking and the importance of locality and space for intersectional social positioning can be derived from reflexive analytic practices. Zusammenfassung: Intersektionale Konzepte zu sozialer Positionierung betonen die Interdependenz verschiedener Differenzlinien (wie Geschlecht, Klasse und Ethnizität) sowie die Relationalität sozialer Kategorien. In der empirischen Forschungspraxis stellt diese Komplexität hohe Anforderungen an die Reflexion der Feldforschung. In diesem Beitrag zeige ich, wie verschiedene Arten der methodologischen Reflexivität mit dem Konzept der Intersektionalität in Verbindung gebracht werden können. Reflexivität bedeutet hier die Analyse sozialer Praktiken der Positionierung und Unterscheidung im Feld-unter Einschluss der eigenen Praktiken der Feldforscherin-sowie die analytische Reflexion der Verbindungen zwischen akademischer Wissensproduktion und sozialen und politischen Kämpfen. Mit empirischen Beispielen aus meiner Forschung mit westafrikanischen Migranten in Bremen zeige ich, wie die analytische Reflexion von alltäglichen Erfahrungen beim Feldzugang zu wichtigen inhaltlichen Ergebnissen führt: sowohl im Hinblick auf machtvolle Prozesse der sozialen Kategorisierung als auch im Hinblick auf die Bedeutung von Ort und Raum für Konzepte der Intersektionalität.

Doubly Engaged Ethnography

“…From this perspective, fieldwork is “a dialogical process which is structured by the researcher and the participants” (England, 1994, p. 80). A doubly engaged approach requires ongoing methodological reflexivity as articulated by Carstensen-Egwuom (2014): “This means that an awareness of a (privileged) position before entering the field may be helpful, but a reflection upon experiences during fieldwork can show how such a position is negotiated, questioned, or challenged” (p. 269).…”

Intersectionality and Reflexivity: Narratives From a BME Female Researcher Inside the Hidden Social World of Prison Visits

“…Adopting an intersectional approach enabled me to understand the connection with feelings and power, similarly, to Carstensen-Egwuom (2014), she argued that her fieldnotes is a co-production of knowledge by interrogating the relationships, emotions and the power observed in the social field. My emotions documented allowed me to co-produce my knowledge that was central to conceptualizing the space I was present in.…”

“…I felt uncomfortable but also felt objectified that he would sexualize me in a professional environment which left me with an unproductive feeling toward my research. (Field notes, HMP Shawshank 6th November).The concept of intersectionality has led to an “entanglement of multiple axes of differentiation—economic, cultural and political” (Cartensen-Egwuom, 2014, p. 268); and therefore, both dialogues were influenced by my multiple layers of intersections-female, ethnic minority, researcher, having a London accent. In the second conversation, the officer treated me as a sexual object by using my boots as a basis to flirt.…”

“…Intersectional feminists drew on emotions to understand how women of color constructed their experiences to the responses identified in the field (See Best, 2003; Carstensen-Egwuom, 2014; Caretta & Joinken, 2017; McCorkel & Myers, 2003). Emotions are critical in analyzing the roles performed; challenges; and the celebrations occurred in conducting fieldwork.…”

Faith, values, and metaphysical positionality in qualitative research

“…Literature on positionality typically discusses the influence of key demographic or social identifiers and tends to focus almost exclusively on characteristics such as: gender (Chiswell & Wheeler, 2016;Kusek & Smiley, 2014), age (McGarry, 2016;Tarrant, 2014), ethnicity/race (Carter et al, 2014;Fisher, 2015), class (Ganga & Scott, 2006;Mellor et al, 2014), dis/ ability (Brown & Boardman, 2011;Tregaskis & Goodley, 2005), sexuality (De Feliciantonio, 2017;Kaspar & Landolt, 2016), and/or the intersections between these categories (Caretta & Jokinen, 2016;Carstensen-Egwuom, 2014;Muhammed et al, 2015). Perhaps surprisingly, religion tends not to feature explicitly in accounts of researcher positionality unless in direct association with participants' ethnic or racial affiliations (see e.g., Sanghera & Thapar-Bjorkert, 2008).…”