Afterword: Narratives of Possibility and Impossibility: What Unites Us and What Separates Us

Abstract

As a feminist researcher, I adopt the posture described in this Symposium by Kathleen Weiler of "mov[ing] uneasily between historical narrative and a self-conscious analysis of texts" (p. 652). This self-conscious analysis requires the researcher to acknowledge and make part of the research her/his race, ethnicity, class, gender, beliefs, assumptions, and ideology. As feminist scientist Sandra Harding explains, the researcher "must be placed within the frame of the picture that she/he attempts to paint" (1987, p. 9). The inclusion of the researcher's biases and experiences relevant to the research is not meant to be a therapeutic or healing device for the researcher, but is included as part of the body of knowledge that the reader must have if she/he is to arrive at "a contrary hypothesis about the influence of the researcher's presence on her/his analysis" (Harding, 1987, p. 9). As I analyze the articles in this Symposium, it is essential for the reader to know what parts of my identity had an impact on my reading of these texts, individually and as a whole, and the ways in which my history and ideology help, hinder, and mediate my analysis.