Feminist Methodology 2

Joey Sprague. 2005. Feminist Methodologies for Critical Researchers: Bridging Differences. New York: Altamira Press. ISBN 0-7591-0903-6

Sprague book was so fascinating to me and I could find most of my concerns and criticisms about methodology in her book. I was so absorbed to this book that I really felt I wrote it! I say it to show how much this book discussed about my mental involvements regarding to methodology in Social Science in general. I also was engrossed by her critical approach to the methodology as a whole. I mean that she presented everything in a logical manner while simultaneously she kept her critical discussions about all mentioned issues.

I will present the interesting quotes of the chapters we supposed to read and discuss about my reactions in italics.

… I discovered an answer to my question in the sociology of knowledge, and in its analysis of the way social structure influences the contests and form of common sense and culture, and thus our understanding of ourselves and the world. (Sprague, p 4)

This is an approach in the discussion of the necessity of paying attention to the methodology which I have never encountered in the previous many text books in the field of social methodologies. I think starting from the sociology of knowledge and talking about how much important we consider to the process of knowledge production is a cute and shrewd justification for why methodology is sustainable to draw researchers’ attention. It is persuading and cogent to me to accept her arguments.

The notion of the public and the private as distinct spheres of social life is possible to maintain only at a high level of abstraction… Feminist were the first to show that the personal is not just the social; it is political. (Sprague, p 9)

I think this issue is very considerable to me especially since I am interested in working on the social and personal impact of new technologies, this discussion can be useful. Binary of public and private is suitably can be studies in the user of cell phones, chat rooms, bloggers and etc. I wish I could find more material regarding to the issue. Specifily the last part of the quotation is more important to me which she mentioned the personal is political which I was eager to know more from a feminist perspective which unfortunately she didn’t talk about it much. This feminism claim can be applied in the studying in the functions of new technologies in everyday lives. I am strongly thinking that I can use of this idea in the analysis of Iranian women blogs contents.

Research questions are more likely to explore the deficiencies of those in disadvantaged social positions than of those with social power… (p 10)

I think it is one of the noticeable problems of the social sciences methodology. Although it is claimed that the final goal of any social research is making a better world for living and emphasis on the consideration into the marginalized groups, I think it is one of the weaknesses of social research as a whole. I think it is not right necessarily, working on social problems, crimes and difficulties eventuate in solving current problems and present suitable solutions for equality. Where is the share of the good affairs? And true processes? Why social sciences just focus on the sadness instead of the happiness? Why there is an inclination in social science to mourn for bad aspects of social life instead of rejoice at the prospective individuals, their pattern of success and influential plans for social change?! I think it is an interesting topic should be discussed and really the current social science methodology needs a huge paradigm shift!

..... dichotomies hide social relations that allow members of one social category to benefit at the expense of those in another… They are ways of constructing social relationships that facilitate social domination. (15)

It’s very interesting which I didn’t pay attention to before. Her examples are very good can explain the subject. It’s very considerable issue and I should keep in mind!

What distinguishes critical from uncritical research is not the method used, but how the method is used, both technically and politically. (27)

This is a claim which is questionable to me. It is not totally clear what is the exact purpose of the author by “how the method is used”. How really the methods should be used in order to be labeled as “critical” or “feminist”? It seems it is something that cannot be explain easily and is interpreted on the researcher own experience in the social research. Furthermore, I am really eager to contemplate more on the adverb of “politically” and know more about it which again unfortunately Sprague didn’t describe it in details and didn’t represent the signified matters.

….. interviewees responded very differently depending on the race/ethnicity of the interviewer. (124)

It is a very fascinating observation. I got surprised to read this part. I said bravo to the author to mention to this practical and basic point which maybe seems unimportant but in a deep review very significant and valuable which has the capability to change the results of the research totally!


“Increasing the researcher/researched connection” was one of my favorite parts of the chapter 5 of Sprague book. I read this part word by word enthusiastically!
Feminists have tried to make the relationship which research subjects more reciprocal, they have used their emotions, and they have drawn on their own biographies to increase empathy and understanding. (134)
I have always thought about the status of emotions and what I call “the sixth sense” in the process of social research and especially at the end of the research when we want to interpret the gathered data and information. I have believed that there should be a room for researcher perception and sixth sense which none of the steps of the expected methods mention about! I was surprised that feminists are using emotions as analytic guides and I am very curious to know more about it, the examples, process and etc.

…..emotions are not purely private experiences. “Emotions result from applying personal interpretations of collectively-created rules to the situations in which we find ourselves. (135)

How many people subscribe to the top-ranked journal, American Sociological Review, and how few actually read it? There also the one about how often readers skip the methods section when reading quantitative papers. (p 21)

It is an interesting point! Really, how many people read journal articles? The total amount of time which all readers put on a certain paper in a high-ranked journal is equal to the amount of time which the author put to prepare and publish the paper?! I don’t think so! Doesn’t the academia should review the academic criteria for promoting the rank of the university’s instructors?!