Explore the vast range of titles available.

The article revisits the problematic relationship between feminist theory and praxis through the writings of Marysia Zalewski, one of the foremost feminist theorists of IR. Zalewski has dealt with this relationship through her work on methodology. In three sections, the article explores: (a) her engagement with standpoint theory through her interventions in feminist IR debates with ‘the mainstream’; (b) her adoption of feminist postmodernism, embracing a deconstructive posture and in particular the notion of ‘hauntings’ as a methodological device; and (c) the development of a distinctive methodological attitude that seeks to involve, rather than explain or instruct. Crucially, for Zalewski, theory and praxis/politics cannot be separated methodologically: languages of mastery and an attitude of ‘doing something’ are of one cloth. The paper ends with a reflection about how L. H. M. Ling's method of ‘chatting’ could be enacted in engagements that cross the social fields of academia and policy.

The present paper reflects a practical activity undertaken by the Nutrition Society's qualitative research network in October 2005. It reflects the structure of that exercise. First, there is an introduction to feminist methodology and methods. The informing premise is that feminist methodology is of particular interest to practitioners (professional and/or academic) engaged in occupations numerically dominated by women, such as nutritionists. A critical argument is made for a place for feminist methodology in related areas of social research. The discussion points to the differences that exist between various feminist commentators, although the central aims of feminist research are broadly shared. The paper comprises an overview of organizing concepts, discussion and questions posed to stimulate discussion on the design and process of research informed by feminist methodology. Issues arising from that discussion are summarized.

Background Indigenous Peoples living on the land known as Canada are comprised of First Nations, Inuit, and Métis people and because of the Government of Canada’s mandatory evacuation policy, those living in rural and remote regions of Ontario are required to travel to urban, tertiary care centres to give birth. When evaluating the risk of travelling for birth, Indigenous Peoples understand, evaluate, and conceptualise health risks differently than Eurocentric biomedical models of health. Also, the global COVID-19 pandemic changed how people perceived risks to their health. Our research goal was to better understand how Indigenous parturients living in rural and remote communities conceptualised the risks associated with evacuation for birth before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods To achieve this goal, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 11 parturients who travelled for birth during the pandemic and with 5 family members of those who were evacuated for birth. Results Participants conceptualised evacuation for birth as riskier during the COVID-19 pandemic and identified how the pandemic exacerbated existing risks of travelling for birth. In fact, Indigenous parturients noted the increased risk of contracting COVID-19 when travelling to urban centres for perinatal care, the impact of public health restrictions on increased isolation from family and community, the emotional impact of fear during the pandemic, and the decreased availability of quality healthcare. Conclusions Using Indigenous Feminist Methodology and Indigenous Feminist Theory, we critically analysed how mandatory evacuation for birth functions as a colonial tool and how conceptualizations of risk empowered Indigenous Peoples to make decisions that reduced risks to their health during the pandemic. With the results of this study, policy makers and governments can better understand how Indigenous Peoples conceptualise risks related to evacuation for birth before and during the pandemic, and prioritise further consultation with Indigenous Peoples to collaborate in the delivery of the health and care they need and desire.

The authors considered the capacious feeling that emerges from saying no to literacy practices, and the affective potential of saying no as a literacy practice. The authors highlight the affective possibilities of saying no to normative understandings of literacy, thinking with a series of vignettes in which children, young people, and teachers refused literacy practices in different ways. The authors use the term capacious to signal possibilities that are as yet unthought: a sense of broadening and opening out through enacting no. The authors examined how attention to affect ruptures humanist logics that inform normative approaches to literacy. Through attention to nonconscious, noncognitive, and transindividual bodily forces and capacities, affect deprivileges the human as the sole agent in an interaction, thus disrupting measurements of who counts as a literate subject and what counts as a literacy event. No is an affective moment. It can signal a pushback, an absence, or a silence. As a theoretical and methodological way of thinking/feeling with literacy, affect proposes problems rather than solutions, countering solutionfocused research in which the resistance is to be overcome, co-opted, or solved. Affect operates as a crack or a chink, a tiny ripple, a barely perceivable gesture, that can persist and, in doing so, hold open the possibility for alternative futures.

Why is feminist research carried out in international relations (IR)? What are the methodologies and methods that have been developed in order to carry out this research? Feminist Methodologies for International Relations offers students and scholars of IR, feminism, and global politics practical insight into the innovative methodologies and methods that have been developed - or adapted from other disciplinary contexts - in order to do feminist research for IR. Both timely and timeless, this volume makes a diverse range of feminist methodological reflections wholly accessible. Each of the twelve contributors discusses aspects of the relationships between ontology, epistemology, methodology, and method, and how they inform and shape their research. This important and original contribution to the field will both guide and stimulate new thinking.

While many academics are sceptical about the 'impact agenda', it may offer the potential to re-value feminist and participatory approaches to the co-production of knowledge. Drawing on my experiences of developing a UK Research Excellence Framework (REF) impact case study based on research on young caregiving in the UK, Tanzania and Uganda, I explore the dilemmas and tensions of balancing an ethic of care and participatory praxis with research management demands to evidence 'impact' in the neoliberal academy. The participatory dissemination process enabled young people to identify their support needs, which translated into policy and practice recommendations and in turn, produced 'impact'. It also revealed a paradox of action-oriented research: this approach may bring greater emotional investment of the participants in the project in potentially negative as well as positive ways, resulting in disenchantment that the research did not lead to tangible outcomes at local level. Participatory praxis may also pose ethical dilemmas for researchers who have responsibilities to care for both 'proximate' and 'distant' others. The 'more than research' relationship I developed with practitioners was motivated by my ethic of care rather than by the demands of the audit culture. Furthermore, my research and the impacts cited emerged slowly and incrementally from a series of small grants in an unplanned, serendipitous way at different scales, which may be difficult to fit within institutional audits of 'impact'. Given the growing pressures on academics, it seems ever more important to embody an ethic of care in university settings, as well as in the 'field'. We need to join the call for 'slow scholarship' and advocate a re-valuing of feminist and participatory action research approaches, which may have most impact at local level, in order to achieve meaningful shifts in the impact agenda and more broadly, the academy.

In this study, I reflect upon my belly dance research that I have been conducting since the last three years in three different countries and five different cities, with women having various experiences. To be able to analyze the effect of this research on myself as a researcher, I construct a chronological narrative which first focuses on my corporeality and my relation with dance before this research. I continue to investigate my personal experiences as dancer-researcher, dramaturg, dance student etc. in the research process without creating dualities between artistic and scientific research or corporeal and intellectual experiences. My personal experiences constitute my primary resources in this study. I also discuss some secondary sources on feminist methodology and different women’s belly dance experiences. I make an analysis on the basis of some principles of feminist methodology like situated knowledge, self-reflexivity, the focus on women’s experiences, working with women for empowerment. I also reflect upon the effect of the research on myself as the researcher, especially the change in my corporeal expression in daily life and within performance contexts. To analyze my personal experience in a wider context, I relate this change in my corporeality with academic belly dance literature which discuss other women’s belly dance experiences in various historical and geographical contexts.

In diesem Artikel stützen wir uns auf den feministischen Kommunitarismus, um eine Kritik an dem vorherrschenden neoliberalen Modell der Zusammenarbeit in der qualitativen Sozialforschung zu entwickeln. Wir argumentieren, dass feministische Theorien und Praktiken über Gemeinschaftsbildung und politischen Aktivismus das Potenzial haben, die stark institutionalisierte, individualistische und managerialistische Kultur von Zusammenarbeit zu überwinden. Feministische Einsichten können Wissenschaftler*innen helfen, sich in der kollaborativen Forschung zurechtzufinden und Schlüsselfragen wie Reflexivität, Konsensbildung, Wissensvalidierung und Gruppensolidarität anzugehen. Wir nutzen unsere eigene Arbeit im Feministischen Forschungskollektiv und im WomenWeLove-Projekt, um eine alternative Orientierung und einen kollektiven Weg zur Verwirklichung einer transformativen Forschung vorzustellen. Diese feministische Intervention gegen die neoliberale Forschungskultur trägt zu laufenden Überlegungen darüber bei, wie wir mithilfe der qualitativen Sozialforschung Wissen produzieren und warum wir dies in der gegenwärtigen historischen Situation tun sollten. Sie erweitert unsere Vorstellungen von der Verantwortung der Forschenden und schafft neue Möglichkeiten für Widerstand und Emanzipation.

This article highlights Marysia Zalewski's scholarship as reflective and generative of the multifarious sources and contributions of feminist IR and its ‘scavenger methodologies’, which seek to centre subjects, processes, and practices historically excluded, ignored, and minimised. The productive depth of her scholarship is evident in the uniqueness of each article in this collection, all of which distinctly document the uses to which Zalewski's writings can be uniquely put. Each of the articles performs a ‘turning operation’ of sorts on the elementals of feminist IR (gender/women/power/difference) and brings further elaborations of masculinities, sexualities, silences as well as screams, that shift and change what is taken to be feminist research/method – at each point disordering our sensibilities and our assumptions as to what we do when we do feminist work.

Researching violence, especially within homes, families or closed community spaces, is often challenging. PhotoVOICE 2.0 is an innovative technology-assisted adaptation of the participatory arts-based research (PABR) method, Photovoice. It was developed and piloted in 2018 by the authors to conduct research on the ways the Anglican Mothers’ Union in Zambia contributes to and/or resists violence against women and violence against children. This article discusses the methodological underpinnings and origins of this method and offers an overview of its implementation in Zambia. Several key insights emerge regarding how PhotoVOICE 2.0 enables feminist, participatory arts-based research, including that it empowers local community co-researchers and amplifies the voices of insiders to the specific institution being researched in ways that can support feminist research aims for social transformation. The technological component of the method centers PABR methods throughout the whole research process. The article concludes by emphasizing the extraordinary disruptive power of the PhotoVOICE 2.0 method in subverting existing hierarchies of knowledge and control and highlighting its continued evolution in new settings.