Practising Gender at Work: Further Thoughts on Reflexivity

In an effort to make visible the subtle and seldom acknowledged aspects of gendering dynamics, Martin focuses on unreflexive practices that both communicate and constitute gender in paid work settings. She reviews the distinction between practices that are culturally available to ‘do gender’ and the literal practising of gender that is constituted through interaction. While acknowledging that agency is involved in any practicing of gender, she considers how intentionality and agency intersect, arguing that people in powerful positions routinely practise gender without being reflexive about it. Defining practising as emergent, directional, temporal, rapid, immediate and indeterminate, Martin shows how these qualities affect men as well as women in unexpected and often harmful ways. She concludes with a call for innovative ways to ‘catch gender in practice’ and for attention to reflexivity's role in the ongoing constitution of gender at work.     

Reconceptualizing reflexivity and dissonance in professional and personal domains

Debates around 'reflexivity' and the construction of the gendered self within late modernity have occupied the attention of both 'reflexive modernization' theorists ( Beck, Giddens and Lash 1994 ; Beck and Beck-Gernsheim 1996 ; Giddens 1991, 1992 ) as well as gender and feminist theorists. While theorists such as Beck and Giddens have been preoccupied with establishing the connection between reflexivity and the construction of the 'non-gendered' self, gender and feminist theorists have sought to amplify the debate by exploring the intersecting nexus of contemporary theorizing, more fully within this context. This paper explores the theoretical underpinnings of these debates and their application to specific professional and personal domains. I consider three case studies to assess these issues as outlined in my own work, Brooks 2006 , and in the work of Wajcman and Martin 2002 , and McDowell 1997 , which draw on empirical research and explore changes to gender identity within professional and personal domains. I conclude that there is little evidence in the research presented here of any systematic reconfiguring of gender identities leading to a detraditionalization of gender as suggested by the 'reflexive modernization' theorists.     

Reflexivity, its Meanings and Relevance for Social Work: A Critical Review of the Literature

The concept of ‘reflexivity’ has become increasinglysignificant in social work literature in relation to socialwork education, theory and practice. However, our reading ofthe literature indicates that there is a lack of clarity aboutthe concept in terms of who is being exhorted to be ‘reflexive’,when and how. This article addresses these questions througha critical review of social work literature since the 1990sthat discusses the concept of ‘reflexivity’. Giventhat many authors seem to use the concepts of ‘reflexivity’and ‘(critical) reflection’ interchangeably, wealso apply this analysis to ‘reflection’ and ‘criticalreflection’. This article raises important questions abouthow the concepts of ‘reflexivity’, ‘criticalreflection’ and ‘reflectivity’ are definedand the different consequences such definitions might have forsocial work education, theory and practice.     

Reflexivity and affectivity

The goal of this paper is to explore the reflexivity of the writer in the writing of organizational studies. The self‐reflexive move that tries to account for and/or to understand researcher reflexivity questions the epistemological and ethical prerequisites to the text. Malcolm Ashmore’s (1989 Ashmore, M. 1989. The reflexivity thesis: Wrighting the sociology of scientific knowledge, London: University of Chicago Press.  [Google Scholar]) exploration of the writer’s reflexivity has long been both a key point of reference and (perhaps) a dead‐end. The theme of the writer’s or the subject’s reflexivity – i.e. her/his role, place or ethics in the text – needs constant inquiry. Michel Henry’s life philosophy, I believe, is a source for such exploration. Henry has analyzed human affectivity as the ground to awareness, sensitivity and aliveness. His phenomenology of life, which is not a phenomenology of perception, will be examined here. For Henry, the basic human affectivity that makes consciousness and the text possible is transcendent. He asserts that the text or the work is primarily self‐creating and not the representational choice of the subject or author. His critique of representation will be evaluated here on the hand of his exemplar: Vasily Kandinsky. And I will argue for a reversal of Henry’s position, in the direction of not‐transcendent affectivity, making use of my exemplar: the Flemish writer Dimitri Verhulst.     

The ‘animal‐advocacy agenda’: exploring sociology for non‐human animals

This paper focuses on sociology and the study of human non‐human animal relations. Using as a catalyst referees' comments on a previous paper about experiments using non‐human animal subjects, in this present paper three problematics are identified and discussed. These problematics centre on the ‘acceptable’ content of sociological inquiry, the ‘permissibility’ of advocacy‐oriented sociology, and the ‘admissibility’ of non‐human animal‐advocacy to advocacy‐oriented sociology. The three problematics are explored through the lens of reflexive and critical sociology. Two central questions are raised: first, should sociology include the study of non‐human animals and secondly, can sociology advocate for non‐human animals? The paper concludes with an affirmative response to both of these questions. The paper ends by stressing that sociology has so much to offer the study of human non‐human animal relations. Professional sociologists have a key role to play in enabling this work to move from margins to centre in published sociology.     

Reflexive habits: dating and rationalized conduct in New York and Berlin

This paper builds on the work of Norbert Elias to examine how conduct varies across cultural contexts. We compare courtship practices in New York and Berlin and ask how people act during the course of ‘getting together’ with a sexual or romantic partner. Drawing on interviews in both contexts, we find that conduct associated with the practice of ‘dating’ among New York respondents is more rationalized as indicated by a greater awareness of timing, a greater degree of intentionality and planning and a greater tendency to psychologize self and others. Berlin respondents report observations of themselves and others in less detail and tend to describe themselves as passive objects of the impersonal forces of love. Whereas conduct associated with dating is more reflexive in some ways, these forms of reflexive conduct are not themselves fully conscious or the object of reflection but have in turn become taken for granted and habitual. These findings challenge us to conceptualize habitus in a manner that does not reproduce the opposition between habit and reflexivity but allows us to use the concept as a tool to capture variations in how self‐monitoring and habit are combined in modes of conduct.     

民族志书写的自反性与真实性

在民族志书写的后现代转向中,实验民族志以其书写的实践反驳了传统科学民族志的绝对客观性的虚假立场,这样的一种书写姿态是一种以实践者本身为实践对象的自反性（reflexivity）客观立场。在这种立场的统摄下,民族志文本书写对于真实性的定位逐渐脱离传统的科学民族志书写的真实性,实验民族志作者借助话语表述的真实态度传达着其对客体真实性的理解。此种意义下的真实性有更多地向文学领域真实性靠拢的可能性。与此同时,在民族志书写的小说化倾向中,客体的存在更可能意味着向词语召唤的功能。     

社会科学知识的"反身性"——兼与自然科学知识反身性的比较

社会科学知识与自然科学知识都具有反身性.但两者的反身性有很大的不同,前者不仅影响知识研究的方向和效应,还可能改变理论命题本身;而后者更多的是对知识运用效应的反思,研究内容相对独立于社会的主观渗透.造成这种差异的原因在于社会变量的渗入程度和研究对象的各自特性.     

Carnal Connections: On Embodiment,Apprenticeship, and Membership

This article responds to the special issue of Qualitative Sociology devoted to the author's book, Body and Soul: Notebooks of an Apprentice Boxer (vol. 28, no. 3, summer 2005). Four themes are tackled: the positioning of the inquirer and the question of social acceptance and membership; the dynamics of embodiment(s) and the variable role of race as a structural, interactional, and dispositional property; the functioning of the boxing gym as miniature civilizing and masculinizing machine; apprenticeship as a mode of knowledge transmissioin and technique for social inquiry, the scope of carnal sociology, and the textual work needed to convey the full-color texture and allure of the social world. This leads to clarifying the conceptual, empirical, and rhetorical makeup of Body and Soul in relation to its triple intent: to elucidate the workings of a sociocultural competency residing in prediscursive capacities; to deploy and develop the concept of habitus as operant philosophy of action and methodological guide; and to offer a brief for a sociology not of the body (as social product) but from the body (as social spring and vector of knowledge), exemplifying a way of doing and writing ethnography that takes full epistemic advantage of the visceral nature of social life. Response to the special issue of Qualitative Sociology on Body and Soul, vol. 28, no. 2, Summer 2005.     

Qualitative archiving: engaging with epistemological misgivings

In this article it is argued that epistemological concerns about the archiving of qualitative data are mis‐directed. Almost all interpretive data makes either an implicit or explicit claim to knowledge in a broader context than the research project on which it is based. The ability to re‐interpret these data in the light of changing broader contexts is entirely consistent with the project of interpretive and constructivist epistemologies which frame reality as socially constructed and contextually contingent. The increasing reflexivity of qualitative research can only assist the future researcher, providing it serves its aims of articulating and deepening the understanding of the original research environment and the motives of researcher and participant. The decision to re‐interpret data should be one based on professional skill rather than epistemological barriers. Qualitative researchers should view the project as one for the long term, rather than as a short‐term threat to the validity of their primary analysis. These arguments are made separately from ongoing debates about the ethical and confidentiality concerns of qualitative archiving.