İçeriden Kürt Aktivist Bir Araştırmacının Gözüyle Feminist Konumlanma: Bilimsel Objektiviteye Meydan Okuma

Öz

Feminist araştırma süreçleri bilimsel bir araştırmanın, araştırmacının ilgi, istek, ihtiyaç ve korkularından bağımsız olarak düşünülemeyeceğini açıklıkla ortaya koydu. Buna bağlı olarak araştırma sorularının yanı sıra araştırmacının öznelliğinin ve kişisel deneyimlerinin araştırma sürecine etkisinin göz ardı edilemeyecek denli önemli olduğu görüldü. Feminist araştırma, metodolojik öncül olarak araştırılan kişileri “nesne” değil, “özne” olarak; araştırmacıyı da “objektif ve tarafsız” değil, “etkilenen ve konumlanmış” olarak tanımlar. Bu feminist konumlandırmanın araştırmaya yansıyan doğrudan etkileri söz konusudur. Bu çalışma, araştırma sürecinin yöntemsel ve kavramsal çerçevesini feminist epistemoloji ışığında değerlendirerek araştırmacının öznelliği ve özdüşünümselliğinin, saha deneyimleri ve elde edilen veriler üzerindeki etkilerini tartışmaktadır. Makale Almanya’daki Kürt Kadın Hareketi’nde yer alan kadın aktivistlerin güçlenme deneyimlerini incelediğim doktora çalışmamın saha araştırması esnasında yaşadığım deneyimler, gözlem protokolleri ve araştırma günlüklerine dayanmaktadır. Bu bağlamda araştırmacı ile araştırma konusu, araştırmacı ile araştırılan arasındaki ilişkide ortaya çıkan (yeni) bağlamları, gerilimleri, duygulanımları ve bunların araştırmaya etkisini irdelemektedir. Bu çerçevede “üçüncü göz” metaforu, hem araştırmacının hem de katılımcıların deneyimlerinin anlaşılması ve anlamlandırılması açısından kritik bir araç olarak öne çıkmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İçeriden araştırmacı
• Kürt Kadın Hareketi
• konumlandırılmış bilgi
• taraflılık
• duyarlılık ve özdüşünümsellik

Challenging Scientific Objectivity: Feminist Positioning Through the Lens of a Kurdish Activist “Insider” Researcher

Öz

Feminist research processes have demonstrated that scientific research cannot be considered independent of the researcher’s interests, desires, needs, and fears. Accordingly, in addition to the research questions, the impact of the researcher’s subjectivity and personal experiences on the research process transformed to be positioned as too important to be ignored. Feminist research practice, as a methodological premise, redefines those being studied as “subjects” rather than “objects” and positions the researcher as “affected and positioned” rather than “objective and neutral.” This feminist positioning has direct implications for research. This study evaluates the methodological and conceptual framework of the research process in the light of feminist epistemology and discusses the effects of the subjectivity and reflexivity of the researcher on the field experiences and the data obtained.In this context, this article examines the (new) contexts, tensions, and affective dynamics that emerge in the relationship between the researcher and the research subject, as well as between the researcher and the participants. Drawing on experiences, observation protocols, and research journals from the fieldwork conducted for my doctoral study, which focused on the empowerment experiences of women activists within the Kurdish Women’s Movement in Germany, and explores the impact of these factors on the research process. Within this framework, the “third eye” metaphor stands out as a critical tool for understanding and making sense of the experiences of both the researcher and the participants.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Insider researcher
• Kurdish Women
• situated knowledge
• partiality
• concernment and self-reflexivity

Kaynakça

1. Abels, Gabriele, Maria Behrens. “ExpertInnen-Interviews in der Politikwissenschaft. Eine sekundäranalytische Reflexion über geschlechter-theoretische und politikfeldanalytische Effekte”, Experteninterviews, ed. Alexander Bogner, Beate Littig, Wolfgang Menz (Wiesbaden: Springer VS, 2009), 159–179.
2. Abu-Lughod, Lila. “Gegen Kultur Schreiben”, Wechselnde Blicke. Frauenforschung in Internationaler Perspektive, ed. Inse Lenz, Andrea Germer, Brigitte Hasenjürgen (Opladen: Leske + Budrich, 1996), 14–46. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-663-11818-3_2.
3. Althoff, Martina, Mechthild Bereswill, Birgit Riegraf (ed.). Feministische Methodologien und Methoden (Wiesbaden: Springer VS, 2001).
4. Althoff, Martina, Magdalena Apel, Mechthild Bereswill, Julia Gruhlich, Birgit Riegraf (ed.). Feministische Methodologien und Methoden (Wiesbaden: Springer VS 2017).
5. Behrens, Maria. “Quantitative und qualitative Methoden in der Politikfeldanalyse”, Lehrbuch der Politikfeldanalyse, ed. Klaus Schubert, Nil C. Bandelow (München: Oldenbourg 2003), 205–238.
6. Brandmaier, Maximiliane. “Qualitative Interviewforschung im Kontext mehrerer Sprachen – Reflexion als Schlüssel zum Verstehen”, Resonanzen. E-Journal für biopsychosoziale Dialoge in Psychotherapie, Supervision und Beratung 3.2, (2015), 131–143. https://www.resonanzen-journal.org/index.php/resonanzen/article/view/377 Boylorn, Robin M. “As seen on TV: An autoethnographic reflection on race and reality television”, Critical Studies in Media Communication, 25(4), (2008), 413–433.
7. Callaway, Helen. “Ethnography and experience: Gender implications in fieldwork and texts”, Anthropology and autobiography, ed. Judith Okely, Helen Callaway (New York: Routledge 1992), 29–48.
8. Deniz, Ayla. “A Position Discussion on Intersecting Identities: Notes from a Woman Researcher Meeting with Russian Migrant Women Living in Turkey”, fe dergi 9(1), (2017), 12–26. https://doi.org/10.1501/Fe0001_0000000174

9. Denzin, Norman K. “Mother and Mickey”, The South Atlantic Quarterly, 105(2), (2006), 391–395. https://doi.org/10.1215/00382876-105-2-391
10. Denzin, Norman K, Yvonna S. Lincoln (ed.). Turning points in qualitative research: tying knots in a handkerchief (Oxford: Altamira 2003).
11. Dirik, Dilar. “Understanding the Resistance. Researching Kurdish Movements in Europa—While Doing No Harm”, The Sociological Review (2021). https://thesociologicalreview.org/magazine/november-2021/methods-and-methodology/understanding-the-resistance/.
12. Ellis, Carolyn, Tony E. Adams, Arthur P. Bochner. “Autoethnografie”, Handbuch Qualitative Forschung in der Psychologie, ed. Günter Mey, Katja Mruck (Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften 2010), 345–357.
13. England, Kim V. L. Getting Personal: Reflexivity, Positionality, and Feminist Research (1994). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0033-0124.1994.00080.x
14. Enzenhofer, Edith, Katharina. Resch. “Übersetzungsprozesse und deren Qualitätssicherung in der qualitativen Sozialforschung”, Forum: Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 12(2), (2011). http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1102106
15. George, Miriam. “Ethical Lessons Learned from Conducting Refugee Based Research in an Indian Refugee Camp”, Journal of Human Rights Practice, 7(3), (2015), 451–465.
16. Graneß, Anke, Martina Kopf, Magdalena Andrea Kraus. Feministische Theorie aus Afrika, Asien und Lateinamerika: eine Einführung (Wien: Facultas 2019).
17. Hagemann-White, Carol, Barbara Kavemann, Johanna Kootz, Ute Weinmann, Carola C. Wildt, Roswitha Burgard, Ursula Scheu. “Hilfen für mißhandelte Frauen” 1981, Feministische Methodologien und Methoden. Traditionen, Konzepte, Erörterungen, ed. Martina Althoff, Magdalena Apel, Mechthild Bereswill, Julia Gruhlich, Birgit Riegraf (Wiesbaden: Springer VS, 2017), 137–145.
18. Haraway, Donna. “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective”, Feminist Studies, 14(3), (Autumn, 1988), 575–599. https://doi.org/10.2307/3178066
19. Haraway, Donna. “Situiertes Wissen. Die Wissenschaftsfrage im Feminismus und das Privileg einer partialen Perspektive”, Dis/Kontinuitäten: Feministische Theorie, ed. Sabine Hark (Opladen: Leske + Budrich, 2001), 281–298.
20. Hamann, Christof, Magdalana Kißling. “Going native”, Handbuch Postkolonialismus und Literatur, ed. Dirk Göttsche, Axel Dunker, Gabriele Dürbeck (Stuttgart: J.B. Metzler, 2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-476-05386-2_25
21. Harding, Sandra. The Science Question in Feminism 1986 (german: Feministische Wissenschaftstheorie. Zum Verhältnis von Wissenschaft und sozialem Geschlecht), (Hamburg: Argument Verlag, 1990).
22. Hervik, Peter. “Shared Reasoning in the Field: Reflexivity Beyond the Author.” Social Experience and Anthropological Knowledge, ed. Kirsten Hastrup, Peter Hervik (New York and London: Routledge, 1994), 59–75.
23. Jasim, Dastan. “Antikurdischer Rassismus: Eine Praxis ohne Gehör”, (2020). www.ozgurpolitika.com/haberi-antikurdischer-rassismus-eine-praxis-ohne-gehor-146367.
24. Krause, Ulrike. “Ethische Überlegungen zur Feldforschung. Impulse für die Untersuchung konfliktbedingter Flucht”, CCS Working Papers 20 (2016). https://doi.org/10.17192/es2019.0015
25. Kurdische Gemeinde Deutschland. Von Kurdistan bis Deutschland—Fachtagung gegen antikurdischen Rassismus. Research report (2022). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BalYig1SGp0.
26. Lamnek, Siegfried. Qualitative Sozialforschung (München 1989).
27. Melucci, Alberto. Challenging Codes. Collective Action in the Information Age (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press 1996).
28. Mies, Maria. “Methodische Postulate zur Frauenforschung-dargestellt am Beispiel der Gewalt gegen Frauen”, Beiträge zur feministischen Theorie und Praxis, 1(1), (1978), 41–63.
29. Mies, Maria. “Frauenforschung oder feministische Forschung?”, Beiträge zur feministischen Theorie und Praxis, 11(7), (1984), 40–60.
30. Milligan, Lizzi. “Insider - Outsider - Inbetweener? Researcher Positioning, Participative Methods and Cross-Cultural Educational Research”, A Journal of Comparative and International Education 46(2), (2016), 235–250.
31. Mohanty, Chandra Talpade. “Under Westerns Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses”, On Humanism and the University I: The Discourse of Humanism, Boundary 2, 12(3), (Spring - Autumn, 1984), 333–358.
32. Mohanty, Chandra Talpade. Feminism without Borders: Decolonizing Theory, Practicing Solidarity (Duke University Press, 2003).https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv11smp7t
33. Ommert, Alexandra. Queer-feministische Freiräume – Ladyfest-Aktivismus zwischen Ein- und Ausschlüssen (Bielefeld: transcript, 2016).
34. Pillow, Wanda. “Confession, catharsis or cure? Rethinking the uses of reflexivity as a methodological power in qualitative research”. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 16(2), (2003), 175–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/0951839032000060635
35. Saka, Burcu, Okay Bensoy. “Handan Çağlayan’la söyleşi: Görünmeyenlerin Görünmeyenleri: Kürt Kadın Kim(?)liği”, (2008). https://www.academia.edu/820584/
36. Scalbert-Yücel, Clémence, Marie Le Ray. “Knowledge, ideology and power. Deconstructing Kurdish Studies”, European Journal of Turkish Studies 5, (2006). https://doi.org/10.4000/ejts.777
37. Temple, Bogusia, Rosalind Edwards. “Interpreters/Translators and Cross-Language Research: Reflexivity and Border Crossings”, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), (2002), 1–12. http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/1_2Final/html/temple.html
38. Unvar, Sultan. “Antikurdischer Rassismus-Institutionell, strukturell und auf individueller Ebene”, (2020). https://www.ozgurpolitika.com/haberi-antikurdischer-rassismus-institutionell-strukturell-und-auf-individueller-ebene-5584