Kadın, toplumsal cinsiyet ve cinsellik araştırmalarında araştırmacı ve katılımcı ilişkisi: yeni arayışlar ve yönelimler

Abstract

1990'larda gelisen postmodern-feminist ve sosyalist-feminist yaklasimlar, toplumsal cinsiyet ve cinsellik arastirmalarinda pozitivist ve niceliksel yaklasimlarin yetersizligi kadar arastirmaci-arastirilan iliskisinin de sorgulanmasini tartismaya acmistir. Bu makalenin amaci kadin, toplumsal cinsiyet ve cinsel yonelimle ilgili arastirmalarin metodolojilerinde arastirmaci ve katilimci iliskisini kuramsal ve uygulama boyutlari ile tartismaktir. Bu amacla yazarlarin tamamladiklari iki alan calismasinin metodolojik baxi unsurlari irdelenecektir.

Makalede ele alinan iki arastirmadan birincisi, kendi urettikleri tarimsal urunleri haftalik kent pazarinda satisa sunan koylu/uretici pazarci kadinlar uzerinedir. Calismada pazarci kadinlar acisindan pazarciliga baslama nedenleri, pazari onlar icin cekici kilan unsurlar ve pazarciligin sosyo-ekonomik degeri incelenmis ve pazar yerinin nasil bir kamusal alan oldugu anlasilmaya calisilmistir. Her iki tarafin da kadin olmasi, arastirmaci katilimci arasindaki iliskisinde bircok engelin asilmasini saglamasina karsin, arastirmacinin sosyal konumu pazarci kadinlarla arasinda kacinilmaz bir mesafeye neden olmustur. Bu arastirmada, ozellikle, ozel-kamusal alan ayriminin belirleyici oldugu kapali topluluklarda, kadinlarla yapilan arastirmalarda erkek arastirmacilarin bu duzeyde bir kabul gormesinin neredeyse imkansiz oldugu sonucuna varilabilir.

Ikinci arastirmada ise Turkiye ve Britanya'da finans sektorunde cinsiyete daylai firsat esitligi incelenmistir. Arastirma kadin ve erkek calisanlarin karsilastirilmasini, arastirmaci ile katilimcilar arasinda guc ve otorite farkliliklarini icermektedir. Bu arastirma boyunca, ikinci arastirmaci, erkek arastirmaci olarak feminist bir arastirma yurutmenin yararlari ve zorluklarini surekli sorgulamis ve kendi cinsiyetinin bu arastirmayi yapmasina engel olmayacagi sonucuna varmistir: Oncelikle, yurutulen arastirma hem kadin, hem de erkek katilimcilari kapsamaktadir. Dolayisiyla arashrmaci ve katilimci arasinda cinsiyet farki kacinilmazdir. ikinci arashrmacinin ulke ve kurum disindan, genc, Turkiyeli arastirmaci kimligi iki ulke ve kulturden gelen katilimcilar icin farkli anlamlar tasimaktadir. Bu arashrmadaki arastirma-arastirmaci-arastirilan iliskisi incelendiginde, ikinci arastirmacinin cinsiyetinin, sosyal sinifi, ve uzmanligi gibi etkenlerin katilimcilar, arastirma amaclari, surecleri ve sonuclari uzerinde sta tik degil, bilesik ve dinamik etkileri oldugu yorumu yapilabilir.

Makale, alan calismasinda arasrirmaci ve katilimci arasindaki iliskinin cinsiyetlerinin onemli birer rol aynadigini tartismaktadir. Ancak bu, statik bir rol degil, aksine toplumsal cinsiyetin anlami ile sekillenen dinamik bir roldur. Her iki arastirmada cia arastirmacilarin cinsiyetlerinin yani sira, kentli ve ogrenci olmalari, calisma ortami disindan gelmeleri, politik gorusleri, yaslari ve diger sosyo-ekonomik konumlari, katilimcilarla olan iliskilerini etkilemistir.

Sosyal bilimcilere dusen yaptiklari alan arastirmalarinda kendi toplumsal cinsiyetlerinin rolunu inkar etmek veya yok saymak yerine, kendi cinsiyetleri ve katilimcilarin cinsiyetlerinin arastirma surecleri, yontemleri, amaclarina ve sonuclarina olan dolayli ve dolaysiz etkilerini yazilarinda ortaya koymak ve katilimci, arastirma ve arastirmaci ucleminde toplumsal cinsiyetin etkisini toplumsal esitlik, kisisel hak ve ozgurluk ilkelerini goz onunde bulundurarak dengelemeye calismaktir.

In the 1990s, postmodern-feminist and socialist-feminist writers have started prablematising not only the inadequacy of positivist and qualitative approaches to research an gender and sexuality, but also the dynamics of the relationship between research, researcher and the 'researched' in these studies. The aim of this article is to discuss the relations between participants and researchers an theoretical and implementative dimensions in the methodology of research about gender, sexuality and sexual orientation. Towards this purpose, same methodological elements that are related with two research projects completed by the authors of the paper will be explored.

The first project that is investigated in this article is on women who sell their own agricultural products in a weekly town market. The research evaluates their reasons for coming to market, the factors that make the market place attractive to them, the socio-economic value of the marketing activity and what kind of public sphere the market place is. In the relationship between researcher and participants, obstacles were overcome because both parties are women, however, the difference in the social status of the researcher and the participants inevitably created a gap between them. The study concluded that in research with women participants and especially in closed/conservative communities where gender segregation of public and private space is evident, it would be almost impossible for a male researcher to gain this level of acceptance.

The second research project investigates opportunities regarding gender in the finance sectors in Britain and Turkey. This project contains comparisons between female and male workers, power and authority differences between researchers and participants. During this research, the second researcher who was male, questioned his position and pros and cons of his study and concluded that his gender was not an obstacle to do this research. Firstly, there were both male and female participants where gender difference between researcher and some participants was inevitable. The fact that the second researcher was young and from outside the country, had different significance for participants from two countries and cultures. When we looked at the relationship between the researchers, it can be concluded that his gender, social status, class and profession had a dynamic but not static effect on the processes, objectives, participants and outcomes of this project.

This paper argues that, during the field study, the gender of participants and researchers play an important role. This is not a static role but a dynamic role shaped by the social and cultural interpretation of gender. In both research projects, their outsider and student status, the researchers' urban origins, their political views, ages and other socio-economic attributes may have had as much influence an the relationship between them and the participants as their gender.

The responsibility of a social scientist is not to deny or ignore the role of his/her gender in the field, but to assess the direct and indirect impact of his/her gender as well as the participants' gender an the study's steps, methods and conclusions and to try to balance the impact of his/her gender, by upholding the principles of social equality, and of individual rights and liberties