The researcher’s erotic subjectivities: epistemological and ethical challenges

Abstract

This paper aims to deepen the conversation about the potential relevance and importance of including reflection on the desire and sexuality of the researcher in research outputs. We critically scrutinise the exceptionalisation of sexual(ised) interactions in research: why is sexual(ised) contact between researchers and participants considered unethical or problematic, and what are the consequences of the avoidance of-and/or the (self-)censorship with regard to discussing-intimacy in the field? This discussion leads us to argue for an alternative ethical approach than that prescribed by institutional ethical protocols. The ethical approach that we envision is based on the premise that knowledge production never occurs apart from our bodies and that a research relationship is not fundamentally different from any other human relationship. What we propose is a relational research ethics that creates space for discussing openly and in dialogue with others the (potential) consequences of our actions as researchers/human beings within relationships of shifting power asymmetry.

“Oops, I didn’t know we couldn’t talk about sex”: Sex researchers talking back to the erotophobic academy using the researcher’s erotic subjectivitiesGuest editorial themed section ‘the researcher’s erotic subjectivities’

“…Whose vulnerabilities? Both issues mentioned above require the rethinking of institutional ethical guidelines which should be based on a relational ethics of care (De Graeve and De Craene, 2019;Di Feliciantonio, 2021). In this editorial, I also aim to look at ethical frictions beyond the more formal and institutional structures.…”

“…By including this context in my writings, I not only include experiences from my professional and personal life but I also include the people around me who cocreate this context, whether it is my colleagues, friends, people in the field, co-producers of knowledge, distant acquaintances, those in powerful positions in the department we work at, reviewers, etc. Also in later writings, some of my encounters and lived experiences made it into public accounts, for example, in my doctoral thesis (De Craene, 2020), or in the reflections of an animated and at times uncomfortable discussion a panel on the researcher’s erotic subjectivities generated (De Graeve and De Craene, 2019). The many self-citations in this paragraph are no secret way to boost my H-index, but are included here only to show that my colleague was right: I do tend to write papers about what happens in my professional and personal life, and the very comment to warn my other colleague on social media indeed made it into this paper, ironically.…”

Eroticization of the body, reflexivity, and qualitative methodology in criminology: An Omerta

“…This interrogation remains relevant, even essential. New voices have continued this conversation within these disciplines (De Graeve and De Craene 2019), as well as in sociology (Clair 2016;Hanson and Richard 2019), highlighting two issues, which are at once different in nature, and intimately linked. I intend to (re)open this discussion in regard to the field of criminology, as these issues also affect the discipline and its ethnographers.…”

Photo Documentation While Brown: Fear and Data Collection in (white male) USA

“…Studies also show that fears about reputation and disciplinary expectations can lead to silencing of sexual harassment and violence (De Graeve & De Craene, 2019; Hanson & Richards, 2017). For criminology, these disciplinary expectations include the view of sexuality as deviant (for a review, see Grenier, 2021).…”

“…For criminology, these disciplinary expectations include the view of sexuality as deviant (for a review, see Grenier, 2021). This focus creates distance between the researcher and the study participants such that researchers are viewed as asexual (Grenier, 2021) and discussing their sexuality is seen as problematic (De Graeve & De Craene, 2019). This assumed distance, in turns, makes it difficult to acknowledge the sexual violence experienced by criminologists—particularly female criminologists—during the research process (e.g., Ball, 2021; Grenier, 2021; Stanko, 1992; Waters et al, 2020).…”