Stability of Shifting Ground. Feminist Ethnography and Practice

• Authors: Deborah Blizzard , Wenda Bauchspies

Title variants

PL

Stabilność na ruchomym podłożu. Feministyczna etnografia i praktyka

• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

In this article the two authors problematize the moment of stabilization in doing fieldwork and writing ethnography from a feminist perspective. The paper begins with an introduction to the question: How do feminist science studies scholars reconcile a normative need to stabilize our research site to create knowledge within the shifting ground of “truth claims” that feminist practices acknowledge and document? The heart of the paper reflects on our experiences as feminist theorists, teachers, and ethnographers with vignettes from studies of high-risk pregnancies in the industrialized world, specifically the United States, and gender and everyday technologies in West Africa. Our goal is to theorize this instability in order to highlight the limits and benefits of working with consciousness and reflectivity in social contexts while challenging and enriching the vibrancy of our feminist theory and practice.

PL

W niniejszym artykule problematyzujemy etap stabilizacji w procesie badań w terenie i pisania etnografii z perspektywy feministycznej. Rozpoczynamy od postawienia następującego pytania: w jaki sposób badaczki z zakresu feministycznych badań nad nauką godzą normatywną potrzebę stabilizacji naszego obszaru badawczego z tworzeniem wiedzy w obrębie ruchomego podłoża „roszczeń do prawdy”, uznawanego i dokumentowanego przez praktyki feministyczne? Centralną kwestią tego artykułu jest refleksja nad naszymi doświadczeniami jako feministycznych teoretyczek, nauczycielek i etnografek prowadzących badania nad ciążami wysokiego ryzyka w krajach rozwiniętych, szczególnie w Stanach Zjednoczonych, oraz nad gender i codziennymi technologiami w Zachodniej Afryce. Naszym celem jest teoretyzowanie tej niestabilności w celu podkreślenia ograniczeń i korzyści pracowania ze świadomością i refleksyjnością w kontekstach społecznych przy jednoczesnym rzucaniu wyzwań i wzbogacaniu energii naszych feministycznych teorii i praktyki.

Keywords

EN

ethnography; fieldwork; engagement; feminist practice; reflectivity; ethnography; fieldwork; engagement; feminist practice; reflectivity

PL

badania terenowe; etnografia; praktyka feministyczna; refleksyjność; zaangażowanie

• Publisher: Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
• Journal: Praktyka Teoretyczna
• Year: 2013
• Volume: 10
• Issue: 4
• Pages: 113-134

Dates

published

2013-01-01

Contributors

author

Deborah Blizzard

• Department of Science, Technology and Society/Public Policy Rochester Institute of Technology

author

Wenda Bauchspies

• School of History, Technology, and Society Georgia Institute of Technology

References

• Agar, M. 1980. The Professional Stranger. New York.
• Barbercheck, M. 2001. ,,Mixed Messages: Men and Women in Advertisements in Science.” in Women, Science, and Technology: A Reader in Feminist Science Studies, ed. M. Wyer et al. New York.
• Bauchspies, W.K., J. Croissant, S.P. Restivo, 2006. Science, Technology, and Society: A Sociological Approach. Malden.
• Biagioli, M. 1999. The Science Studies Reader. New York.
• Bijker, W.E., T. P. Hughes, T.J. Pinch 1987. The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology. Cambridge.
• Blizzard, D. 2007. Looking Within: The Sociocultural Construction of Fetoscopy. Cambridge.
• Bowker, G.C., S.L. Star 1999. Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences. Cambridge.
• Casper, M.J. 1998. The Making of the Unborn Patient a Social Anatomy of Fetal Surgery. New Brunswick.
• Cole, C.M., et al., eds. 2007. Africa After Gender? Bloomington.
• Crasnow, S. 2013. ,,Feminist Philosophy of Science: Values and Objectivity.” Philosophy Compass 4: 413–423.
• DeVault, M.L. 1999. Liberating Method: Feminism and Social Research. Philadelphia.
• Feyerabend, P. 1975. Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge. London.
• Fleck, L. 1979. Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact. Transl., ed. T.J. Trenn, R.K. Merton. Chicago.
• Hale, C.R. 2006. ,,Activist Research vs. Cultural Critique: Indigenous Land Rights and the Contradictions of Politically Engaged Anthropology.” Cultural Anthropology 1: 96–120.
• Harding, S.G. 1991. Whose Science? Whose Knowledge?: Thinking from Women's Lives. Ithaca, NY.
• Harding, S.G. 2004. The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader: Intellectual and Political Controversies. New York.
• Hess, D.J. 1997. Science Studies: An Advanced Introduction. New York.
• Landsman, G.H. 1998. ,,Reconstructing Motherhood in the Age of "Perfect" Babies: Mothers of Infants and Toddlers with Disabilities.” Signs 1: 69–99.
• Layne, L.L. 1998. ,,Introduction.” Science, Technology, and Human Values 1: 4–23.
• Layne, L.L. 1999. ,,'I remember the day I shopped for your layette': Consumer Goods, Fetuses, and Feminism in the Context of Pregnancy Loss.” in Fetal Subjects, Feminists Positions, eds. L.M. Morgan, M.W. Michaels. Philadelphia.
• Lazreg, M. 2005. ,,Decolonizing Feminism.” in African Gender Studies: A Reader, ed. O. Oyéwùmí. New York.
• Nader, L. 1969. ,,Up the Anthropologist-Perspectives Gained from Studying Up.” in Reinventing Anthropology, ed. D. Hymes. New York.
• Nnaemeka, O. 2005. ,,Mapping African Feminisms.” in Readings in Gender in Africa, ed. A. Cornwall. Bloomington–Indianapolis.
• Oyéwùmí, O. 2005. ,,Visualizing the Body: Western Theories and African Subjects.” in African Gender Studies: A Reader, ed. O. Oyéwùmí. New York.
• Petchesky, R. 1987. ,,Fetal Images: The Power of Visual Culture in the Politics of Reproduction.” in Reproductive Technologies: Gender, Motherhood, and Medicine, ed. M. Stansworth. Minneapolis.
• Rapp, R. 1999. Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: The Social Impact of Amniocentesis in America. New York.
• Reinharz, S. 1992. Feminist Methods in Social Research. New York.
• Schumacher, J.A. 1989. Human Posture: The Nature of Inquiry. Albany.
• Sismondo, S. 2008. ,,Science and Technology Studies and An Engaged Program.” in: The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, eds. E.J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, J. Wajcman, Cambridge 2008.
• Taylor, J.S. 1993. ,,The Public Fetus and the Family Car: From Abortion Politics to a Volvo Advertisement.” Science as Culture 4: 601–618.
• Wittgenstein, L. 1953. Philosophical Investigations. Oxford.
• Wylie, A. 2004. ,,Why Standpoint Matters.” in The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader: Intellectual and Political Controversies, ed. S. Harding. New York.

Identifiers

DOI

10.14746/prt.2013.4.6