Advertisement

Qualitative Sociology

, 34:483 | Cite as

Going Back and Giving Back: The Ethics of Staying in the Field

  • Leila J. Rupp
  • Verta Taylor
Article

Abstract

This article analyzes the benefits and ethical dilemmas of going back and continuing to write about the troupe of drag queens featured in our book, Drag Queens at the 801 Cabaret. The benefits include providing the drag queens the opportunity to revise and add to the stories we told about them and, through deepening friendships, changing the balance of power among us. Challenges include dealing with responses to the book, including those of family members, and conflicts over the royalties we shared with the troupe. Despite the pitfalls, going back contributes to public sociology by continuing conversations about research findings.

Keywords

Fieldwork Ethics Ethnography 

References

  1. Baca Zinn, M. (2001). Insider field research in minority communities. In R. M. Emerson (Ed.), Contemporary field research (2nd ed., pp. 159–166). Prospect Heights: Waveland Press.Google Scholar
  2. Barton, B. (2011). My auto/ethnographic dilemma: Who owns the story? Qualitative Sociology, 34(3).Google Scholar
  3. Barton, B. (forthcoming). Pray the gay away. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Blee, K. M. (1998). White-knuckle research: Emotional dynamics in fieldwork with racist activists. Qualitative Sociology, 21, 381–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blee, K. M. (2003). Inside organized racism: Women in the hate movement. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bolton, R. (1995). Tricks, friends, and lovers: Erotic encounters in the field. In D. Kulick & M. Willson (Eds.), Taboo: Sex, identity and erotic subjectivity in anthropological fieldwork (pp. 106–126). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Chapkis, W. (2010). Productive tensions: Ethnographic engagement, complexity, and contradiction. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 39, 483–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Currier, A. (2011). Representing gender and sexual dissidence in southern Africa. Qualitative Sociology, 34. Google Scholar
  9. Duneier, M. (1994). Sidewalk. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
  10. Duneier, M. (2001). On the evolution of sidewalk. In R. M. Emerson (Ed.), Contemporary field research (2nd ed., pp. 167–187). Prospect Heights: Waveland Press.Google Scholar
  11. Einwohner, R. (2011). Ethical considerations on the use of archived testimonies in Holocaust research: Beyond the IRB exemption. Qualitative Sociology, 34(3).Google Scholar
  12. Ellis, C. (1995). Emotional and ethical quagmires in returning to the field. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 24, 68–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ellis, C. (2007). Telling secrets, revealing lives: Relational ethics in research with intimate others. Qualitative Inquiry, 13, 3–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gallmeier, C. P. (1991). Leaving, revisiting, and staying in touch: Neglected issues in field research. In W. B. Shaffir & R. A. Stebbins (Eds.), Experiencing fieldwork: An inside view of qualitative research (pp. 224–231). Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  15. Giddens, A., Duneier, M., & Appelbaum, R. (2006). Introduction to sociology (6th ed.). New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  16. Gonzalez, J. (2004). Kings, queens hold audience at MCC. Daily Nexus, 84/130, 1.Google Scholar
  17. González-López, G. (2011). Mindful ethics: Comments on an informant-centered practices in sociological research. Qualitative Sociology, 34.Google Scholar
  18. Goode, E. (2002). Sexual involvement and social research in a fat civil rights organization. Qualitative Sociology, 25, 501–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Guillemin, M., & Gillam, L. (2004). Ethics, reflexivity, and “ethically important moments” in research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10, 261–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Huisman, K. (2008). “Does this mean you’re not going to come visit me anymore?” An inquiry into an ethics of reciprocity and positionality in feminist ethnographic research. Sociological Inquiry, 10, 372–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Irwin, K. (2006). Into the dark heart of ethnography: The lived ethics and inequality of intimate field relationships. Qualitative Sociology, 29, 155–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kaplan, R. M. (1991). Gone fishing, be back later: Ending and resuming research among fishermen. In W. B. Shaffir & R. A. Stebbins (Eds.), Experiencing fieldwork: An inside view of qualitative research (pp. 232–237). Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. Kulick, D. (1995). The sexual life of anthropologists: Erotic subjectivity and ethnographic work. In D. Kulick & M. Willson (Eds.), Taboo: Sex, identity and erotic subjectivity in anthropological fieldwork (pp. 1–21). New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Murray, S. O. (1996). Male homosexuality in Guatemala: Possible insights and certain confusions from sleeping with the natives. In E. Lewin & W. L. Leap (Eds.), Out in the field: Reflections of lesbian and gay anthropologists (pp. 236–260). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  25. Naples, N. A. (2004). The outsider phenomenon. In S. H. Hesse-Biber & M. L. Yaiser (Eds.), Feminist perspectives on social research (pp. 373–381). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Newton, E. (1996). My best informant’s dress: The erotic equation in fieldwork. In E. Lewin & W. L. Leap (Eds.), Out in the field: Reflections of lesbian and gay anthropologists (pp. 212–235). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  27. O’Brien, J. (2010). Seldom told tales from the field: Guest editor’s introduction to the special issue. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 39, 41–82.Google Scholar
  28. Punch, M. (1986). The politics and ethics of fieldwork. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  29. Rubenstein, S. L. (2004). Fieldwork and the erotic economy on the colonial frontier. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 29, 1041–1071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rupp, L. J. (2006). When women’s studies isn’t about women: Writing about drag queens. In C. Berkin, J. L. Pinch, & C. S. Appel (Eds.), Looking forward, looking back (pp. 55–67). Saddle River: Pearson.Google Scholar
  31. Rupp, L. J., & Taylor, V. (2003). Drag queens at the 801 cabaret. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  32. Rupp, L. J., & Taylor, V. (2005). The 801 girls talk about Drag queens at the 801 cabaret, July 5, 2004, edited interview. Sexualities, 8, 99–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rupp, L. J., Taylor, V., & Shapiro, E. I. (2010). Drag queens and drag kings: The difference gender makes. Sexualities, 13, 275–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Smith, M.K. (1997). Participant observation and informal education. The encyclopaedia of informal education. Retrieved from www.infed.org/research/participant_observation.htm.
  35. Stacey, J. (1988). Can there be a feminist ethnography? Women’s Studies International Forum, 11, 21–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Stebbins, R. A. (1991). Do we ever leave the field? Notes on secondary fieldwork involvements. In W. B. Shaffir & R. A. Stebbins (Eds.), Experiencing fieldwork: An inside view of qualitative research (pp. 248–255). Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  37. Stein, A. (2010). Sex, truths, and audiotape: Anonymity and the ethics of exposure in public ethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 39, 554–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Taylor, S. J. (1991). Leaving the field: Research, relationships, and responsibilities. In W. B. Shaffir & R. A. Stebbins (Eds.), Experiencing fieldwork: An inside view of qualitative research (pp. 238–247). Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  39. Taylor, V. & Rupp, L.J. (2003). Le performance dell’identità: la cultura come forma di protesta. In L. Leonini (Ed.), Identità e movimenti sociali in una società planetaria: In ricordo di Alberto Melucci (pp. 136–181). Milan: Edizioni Angelo Guerini e Associati.Google Scholar
  40. Taylor, V., & Rupp, L. J. (2004). Chicks with dicks, men in dresses: What it means to be a drag queen. Journal of Homosexuality, 46, 113–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Taylor, V., & Rupp, L. J. (2005a). Crossing boundaries in participatory action research: Performing protest with drag queens. In D. Croteau, W. Hoynes, & C. Ryan (Eds.), Rhyming hope and history: Activism and social movement scholarship (pp. 239–264). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  42. Taylor, V., & Rupp, L. J. (2005b). When the girls are men: Negotiating gender and sexual dynamics in a study of drag queens. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30, 2115–2139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Taylor, V., & Rupp, L. J. (2006). Learning from drag queens. Contexts, 5(Summer), 12–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Taylor, V., & Rupp, L. J. (2011). Chapter. In S. Fenstermaker & N. Jones (Eds.), Sociologists backstage: Answers to 10 questions about what they do (pp. 217–230). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. Taylor, V., Rupp, L. J., & Gamson, J. (2004). Performing protest: Drag shows as tactical repertoire of the gay and lesbian movement. Research in Social Movements, Conflicts, and Change, 25, 105–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wolf, D. R. (1991). High-risk methodology: Reflections on leaving an outlaw society. In W. B. Shaffir & R. A. Stebbins (Eds.), Experiencing fieldwork: An inside view of qualitative research (pp. 211–223). Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Feminist StudiesUniversity of CaliforniaSanta Barbara, Santa BarbaraUSA
  2. 2.Department of Sociology, Department of Feminist StudiesUniversity of CaliforniaSanta Barbara, Santa BarbaraUSA

Personalised recommendations