Post-qualitative research: critical contributions from poststructural feminism
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9584-2023v31n184032Keywords:
Feminism epistemology, Poststructural feminism, Post qualitative researchAbstract
The purpose of this article is to take a journey through the development of feminist epistemology, whose contributions to the social sciences have traveled from the exposure of the
androcentric bias of its research, the rejection of the notions of objectivity and neutrality of traditional empirical methods, to the display of the power-based systems that create and recreate the concepts used by science within a particular social and political system. Even though women were the main object of study of feminist epistemologies at first, its interest has shifted toward other subjects that have been left out, inquiring about the conditions of possibility that have maintained deeply unequal societies. Three feminist epistemological perspectives are reviewed here, with emphasis on feminist poststructuralism due to its contributions to post-Cartesian post-qualitative research.
Downloads
References
AGUILAR BARRIGA, Nani. “Una aproximación teórica a las olas del feminismo: la cuarta ola”. FEMERIS: Revista Multidisciplinar de Estudios de Género, v. 5, n. 2, p. 121–146, 2020.
AMORÓS, Celia. Feminismo y filosofía. Madrid, España: Editorial Síntesis, S.A., 2000.
BELLE, Deborah; DOUCET, Joanne. “Poverty, inequality, and discrimination as sources of depression among U.S. women”. Psychology of Women Quarterly, v. 27, n. 2, p. 101–113, 2003.
BUTLER, Judith. El género en disputa: el feminismo y la subversión de la identidad. Barcelona,
España: Ediciones Paidós Ibérica, 2007.
CAMPBELL, Rebecca; WASCO, Sharon M. “Feminist approaches to social science: Epistemological and methodological tenets”. American Journal of Community Psychology, v. 28, n. 6, p. 773–791, dez. 2000.
CASTRO-GÓMEZ, Santiago. La poscolonialidad explicada a los niños. Popayán: Editorial
Universidad del Cauca, 2005.
CRASNOW, Sharon. “Feminist philosophy of science: Values and objectivity”. Philosophy Compass, v. 8, n. 4, p. 413–423, abr. 2013.
CRENSHAW, Kimberle. “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence
against Women of Color”. Stanford Law Review, v. 43, n. 6, p. 1241, 1991.
CUBILLOS ALMENDRA, Javiera. “La importancia de la interseccionalidad para la investigación
feminista”. OXÍMORA Revista Internacional de Ética y Política, n. 7, p. 119–137, 2015.
DELEUZE, Giles. Lógica del sentido. Barcelona: Paidós, 2005.
DELEUZE, Giles. Dos regímenes de locos. Valencia: Pre-Textos, 2008.
DELEUZE, Giles; GUATTARI, Félix. ¿Qué es la filosofía? Barcelona: Anagrama, 1997.
DERRIDA, Jacques. Los espectros de Marx. El estado de la deuda, el trabajo del duelo y la nueva internacional. Madrid: Editorial Trotta, 1998.
FIRESTONE, Shulamith. La dialéctica del sexo. Barcelona: Editorial Kairós, 1976.
FOUCAULT, Michel. The History of Sexuality Volume I: An Introduction. New York: Pantheon Books, 1978. v. I
FOUCAULT, Michel. Microfísica del poder. Madrid: Las Ediciones de La Piqueta, 1979.
FOUCAULT, Michel. On the genealogy of ethics: an overview of work in progress. In: RAVINOW, Paul. (Ed.). The Foucault Reader. New York: Pantheon Books, 1984. p. 340–372.
GAVEY, Nicola. “Feminist postestructuralism and dircourse analysis: Contributions to Feminist
Psychology”. Psychology of Women Quarterly, v. 13, n. 4, p. 459–475, 25 dez. 1989.
HARAWAY, Donna. “Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective”. Feminist Studies, v. 14, n. 3, p. 575–599, 1988.
HARDING, Sandra. “After the Neutrality Ideal: Science, Politics, and “Strong Objectivity”. Social
Research, v. 59, n. 3, p. 567–587, 1992a.
HARDING, Sandra. Rethinking Standpoint Epistemology: What is ‘Strong Objectivity’?” The
Centennial Review, v. 36, n. 3, p. 437–470, 1992b.
HARDING, Sandra. “A Socially Relevant Philosophy of Science? Resources from Standpoint Theory’s Controversiality”. Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy, v. 19, n. 1, p. 25–47, 2004.
HEIN, Serge F. “Deleuze’s New Image of Thought: Challenging the Dogmatic Image of Thought in Qualitative Inquiry”. Qualitative Inquiry, v. 23, n. 9, p. 656–665, 22 nov. 2017.
JACKSON, Alecia Y. “Thinking Without Method”. Qualitative Inquiry, v. 23, n. 9, p. 666–674, 28 nov. 2017.
KUNTZ, Aaron M.; ST. PIERRE, Elizabeth A. “Proclaiming the New: An Introduction”. Qualitative Inquiry, v. 27, n. 5, p. 1–5, 2020.
LENZ TAGUCHI, Hillevi. “This Is Not a Photograph of a Fetus”: A Feminist Reconfiguration of the Concept of Posthumanism as the Ultrasoundfetusimage. Qualitative Inquiry, v. 23, n. 9, p. 699–710, 24 nov. 2017.
LENZ TAGUCHI, Hillevi; ST. PIERRE, Elizabeth A. “Using Concept as Method in Educational and Social Science Inquiry”. Qualitative Inquiry, v. 23, n. 9, p. 643–648, 5 nov. 2017.
LYOTARD, Jean-Francois. La condición postmoderna. Informe sobre el saber. Madrid: Ediciones
Cátedra, 1987.
MACLURE, Maggi. “Researching without representation? Language and materiality in postqualitative methodology”. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, v. 26, n. 6, p. 658–667, 2013.
MATURANA, Humberto; VARELA, Francisco. El árbol del conocimiento. Las bases biológicas del
entendimiento humano. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Lumen, 2003.
MILLETT, Kate. Política Sexual. Madrid: Ediciones Cátedra, 1995.
OLIVARES-AISING, Daniela; BARRERA, María del Valle. “Salud Mental Comunitaria: Equipos
psicosociales y políticas públicas en la intervención de personas con adicciones”.
Psicoperspectivas, v. 18, n. 2, 2019.
OLIVARES, Daniela; MORRISON, Rodolfo; YÁÑEZ, Randy; CARRASCO, Jimena. “¿Por qué puede
ser difícil comprender qué es la Terapia Ocupacional? Una propuesta teórica desde cuatro
perspectivas”. Revista Chilena de Terapia Ocupacional, v. 15, n. 1, p. 123–134, ago. 2015.
PALEČEK, Martin; RISJORD, Mark. “Relativism and the Ontological Turn within Anthropology”.
Philosophy of the Social Sciences, v. 43, n. 1, p. 3–23, 17 mar. 2013.
SCOTT, Joan. “The Evidence of Experience”. Critical Inquiry, v. 17, n. 4, p. 773–797, 1991.
ST. PIERRE, Elizabeth A. “Coming to Theory: Finding Foucault and Deleuze. In: WEILER, Katheleen. (Ed.). Feminist Engagements. Reading, Resisting and Revisioning Male Theorist en Education and Cultural Studies. New York: Routledge, 2001. p. 141–164.
ST. PIERRE, Elizabeth A. “Post Qualitative Research. The Critique and the Comming After”. In: DENZIN, Norman K.; LINCOLN, Yvonna S. (Eds.). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. 4th Ed. ed. Los Ángeles: SAGE Publications, 2011. p. 611–626.
ST. PIERRE, Elizabeth. A. “Another postmodern report on knowledge: Positivism and its others”. International Journal of Leadership in Education, v. 15, n. 4, p. 483–503, 2012.
ST. PIERRE, Elizabeth A. “The empirical and the new empiricisms”. Cultural Studies - Critical
Methodologies, v. 16, n. 2, p. 111–124, 2016a.
ST. PIERRE, Elizabeth A. “Deleuze and Guattari’s language for new empirical inquiry”. Educational Philosophy and Theory, v. 49, n. 11, p. 1080–1089, 19 set. 2016b.
ST. PIERRE, Elizabeth A. “Haecceity: Laying Out a Plane for Post Qualitative Inquiry”. Qualitative Inquiry, v. 23, n. 9, p. 686–698, 4 nov. 2017.
ST. PIERRE, Elizabeth A. “Post Qualitative Inquiry in an Ontology of Immanence”. Qualitative Inquiry, v. 25, n. 1, p. 3–16, 2018a.
ST. PIERRE, Elizabeth. A. “Writing Post Qualitative Inquiry”. Qualitative Inquiry, v. 24, n. 9, p. 603–608, 2018b.
ST. PIERRE, Elizbeth A. “Post qualitative inquiry, the refusal of method, and the risk of the new”. International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, 2019.
WEEDON, Chris. Feminist practice and poststructuralist theory. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell, 1987.
WIGGINTON, Britta; LAFRANCE, Michelle N. “Learning critical feminist research: A brief introduction to feminist epistemologies and methodologies”. Feminism and Psychology, p. 1–17, 3 set. 2019.
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Revista Estudos Feministas
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Revista Estudos Feministas is under the Creative Commons International 4.0 Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), that allows sharing the work with recognition of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
The license allows:
Sharing (copying and redistributing the material in any support or format) and/or adapting (remixing, transforming, and creating from the material) for any purpose, even if commercial.
The licensor cannot revoke these rights provided the terms of the license are respected. The terms are the following:
Attribution – you should give the appropriate credit, provide a link to the license and indicate if changes were made. This can be done in several ways without suggesting that the licensor has approved of the use.
Without additional restrictions – You cannot apply legal terms or technological measures that prevent others from doing something allowed by the license.
