Queer theory and methods

The hysteria aroused in men like Davis and Hammersley by feminist methods is paralleled by the disquiet produced by critiques of old meth­ods and proposals for emancipatory methods coming from other ‘out­siders’. The rise of the new men’s studies, gay and lesbian studies, queer theory, and critical race theory has led many men to raise doubts about research epistemologies, methodology, and methods as they became engaged with investigations on men and masculinity, on gays, or on eth­nic minorities. Coffey (1999) addresses many of these issues, which also
featured strongly in Qualitative Studies in Education during the 1990s. Kong et al. (2002) discuss the relationships between the rise of feminist research practices, and the rise of queer theory and queer methodology. William Tierney, alone (1993) and with his colleague Patrick Dilley (1998, 2002), has explored how the formerly silenced, once given a nar­rative voice, produce challenges to traditional malestream methods which had silenced them. It is far beyond the scope of this book to explore all the ways in which feminist methods have created spaces for others to propose their challenges, but their opponents can certainly add that to the charge sheet.