Catheters, Slurs, and Pickup Lines: Professional Intimacy in Hospital Nursing

Appendix A: Why I Define My Research as Feminist

I am a feminist, but I do not consider this identity sufficient to define my research as feminist or to label me a feminist researcher.1 I define my research as feminist not simply because I chose to conduct participatory research that highlights diverse experiences or because I hope that people outside of the academy find my work relevant to their lives. I do so because three historically feminist ideals ground my work: safety, accountability, and empowerment. In my effort to protect the participants, I maintained confidential data while remaining sensitive to the vulnerabilities and fears of all the participants, including my own. My research was accountable, not just because I reported back to participants but also because I chose topics that affect everyday individuals and groups. My research was empowering because it listened to and strategized with nurses. These conversations highlighted the intelligence and strength of hospital nurses and revealed and challenged institutional social inequalities. I bridged theory and praxis by choosing my location, in part, because hospitals in this rapidly growing region needed research on nursing. I used institutional ethnography that focused my research on the lived experiences of nurses to help nurses positively change their work environment.2 I used standpoint theory and prioritized the concerns of participants throughout the study. My data collection, analysis, and dissemination included plans that responded to the needs of my participants—as identified by the participants themselves. I constantly considered how meanings of whiteness, masculinity, Appendix A Why I Define My Research as Feminist 168 appendix a femininity, skin color, and citizenship affect intimate labor and influenced the research process. Did these choices make this research feminist and me a feminist researcher? I am not sure. Many scholars before me warn against assumptions of relying on feminist identity and banking on shared motivations between participants and researchers. For example, Judith Stacey reminds us that intimate encounters in ethnography can lead to exploitation.3 And Kathleen Blee tells us that the “you know what I mean” that sometimes occurs between women can lead to conceptual confusion.4 Moreover, in Dorothy Smith’s own words, standpoint and intersectionality theories are not in and of themselves feminist. Standpoint theories, at times, run counter to mainstream feminist research.5 I continue to have three ambitions for this project. First, I hope that I have revealed the value in providing professional intimate care in nursing. Second, I hope to show that intersectionality is necessary for rigorous research on gender.6 Third, I hope that nurses use this research to garner improvements in their work conditions that will facilitate the labor of professional intimacy. In this section, I explain the methodological and conceptual trajectory that shaped my research. I changed the focus from sexual harassment to intimacy in professional nursing, largely in response to nurses’ understandings of their own experiences. I detail issues of entrée, participant protection, and ethics. I discuss my data collection, analysis, and dissemination. I conclude with final thoughts about why I think this project is feminist research. Pilot Study My first lesson in conducting research for this project involved checking my feminist biases at the door. The research in this book was inspired by a pilot study I conducted in graduate school. For this pilot, I compared waitresses’ and nurses’ experiences and definitions of sexual harassment. Based on the research literature and my own thoughts about the function of sexual harassment , I expected nurses and waitresses to have similar descriptions of sexual harassment on the job. Instead, I found that while both groups described what they considered uncomfortable or inappropriate sexual situations as part of their work, waitresses labeled these sexual harassment and nurses did not.7 While at first I struggled with understanding how nurses were not sexually harassed by patients, I eventually practiced self-reflexivity and listened to nurses’ meanings of nonsexual harassment. I listened, even when their statements seemed antithetical to my feminist ideas. I considered other explanations for sexualized behaviors from patients, and this direction in analysis was appendix a 169 fruitful. I found that this difference results from work norms about intimacy, perceptions of clients’ intentions, and levels of power in the workplace.8 I conducted twenty-one in-depth interviews for this study. In 1994 I interviewed ten waitresses who were diverse by race, sexual orientation, and age. I purposively sampled waitresses from three types of restaurants—with differing price of meals, atmosphere, and...