Celia Kitzinger

Doing Feminist Conversation Analysis

This article argues for, and offers empirical demonstration of, the value of conversation analysis (CA) for feminist research. It counters three key criticisms of CA as anti-feminist: the alleged incompatibility of CA’s social theory with feminism; the purported difficulty of reconciling analysts’ and participants’ concerns; and CA’s apparent obsession with the minutiae of talk rather than socio-political reality. It demonstrates the potential of CA for advances in lesbian/feminist research through two examples: developing a feminist approach to date rape and sexual refusal; and an ongoing CA study of talk in which people ‘come out’ as lesbian, gay, bisexual or as having (had) same-sex sexual experiences. These examples are used to illustrate that it is precisely the features of CA criticized as anti-feminist which can be used productively in doing feminist conversation analysis.

Surprise as an Interactional Achievement: Reaction Tokens in Conversation.

The expression of surprise—at something unexpected—is a key form of emotional display. Focusing on displays of surprise performed by means of reaction tokens (akin to Goffmans “response cries”), such as wow, gosh, oh my god, ooh!, phew, we use an ethnomethodological, conversation-analytic approach to analyze surprise in talk-in-interaction. Our key contribution is to detach the psychology of surprise from its social expression by showing how co-conversationalists collaborate to bring off an interactionally achieved performance of surprise. Far from being a visceral eruption of emotion, the production of a surprise token is often prepared for several turns in advance. We also show how surprise can be recycled on an occasion subsequent to its initial production, and how surprise displays may be delayed by silence, ritualized disbelief, and other repair initiations. Finally, we consider some of the uses of surprise as an interactional resource, including its role in the reflection and reproduction of culture.

Attitudes towards lesbians and gay men and support for lesbian and gay human rights among psychology students

Abstract A questionnaire comprising two scales, the short form of the Attitudes Towards Lesbians and Gay Men Scale (ATLG-S; Herek, 1984) and the newly devised Support for Lesbian and Gay Human Rights Scale (SLGHR) were administered to 226 students taking undergraduate psychology courses at universities in the United Kingdom, to assess their attitudes towards lesbians and gay men, and their level of support for lesbian and gay human rights. The results indicated that whilst only a small percentage of respondents expressed negative attitudes towards lesbians and gay men on the ATLG-S, the sample as a whole did not overwhelmingly support lesbian and gay human rights. The lack of support for lesbian and gay human rights is discussed in relation to its implications for psychology students as future practitioners and policymakers.

An open letter to The BMJ editors on qualitative research

Seventy six senior academics from 11 countries invite The BMJ ’s editors to reconsider their policy of rejecting qualitative research on the grounds of low priority. They challenge the journal to develop a proactive, scholarly, and pluralist approach to research that aligns with its stated mission

‘We’re not Living on Planet Lesbian’: Constructions of Male Role Models in Debates about Lesbian Families

The notion that children (especially boys) need male role models has been used in the past to attack lesbian parents in custody cases, and more recently in debates about donor insemination, adoption and fostering. We are interested in how lesbian parents and their supporters respond to arguments about the necessity of male role models. We analyse data from popular television talk shows and television documentaries using a discursive approach and identify common strategies used by lesbian parents to deal with the argument that their children are ‘missing out’ because of a deficit in their family structure. We then consider the responses of opponents of lesbian parenting to these strategies. What these responses reveal is that lesbian parents and their opponents construct and work with very different definitions of male role models. We show that the contributions both of opponents of lesbian parenting and of lesbian parents themselves to media debates attend to and sustain traditional understandings of gender and sexual development.

“Snatch,” “Hole,” or “Honey‐pot”? Semantic categories and the problem of nonspecificity in female genital slang

Two questionnaire studies on female genital slang (FGTs) are presented. Study One explored semantic categories in 317 different FGTs (and 351 different male genital terms [MGTs]) collected from 156 females and 125 males. Data were coded into 17 categories, and tested for sex differences. More FGTs were coded standard slang, euphemism, space, receptacle, abjection, hair, animal, or money. More MGTs were coded personification, gender identity, edibility, danger, or nonsense. Study Two used 49 FGTs to investigate the extent to which slang provides a consistent specific vocabulary for female genitals. The 251 respondents commented on 5 terms each. Respondents absolutely agreed on meaning for only 4% of terms. The implications of both findings for womens genital experiences and sexuality are discussed.

Anonymising interview data: challenges and compromise in practice

Anonymising qualitative research data can be challenging, especially in highly sensitive contexts such as catastrophic brain injury and end-of-life decision-making. Using examples from in-depth interviews with family members of people in vegetative and minimally conscious states, this article discusses the issues we faced in trying to maximise participant anonymity alongside maintaining the integrity of our data. We discuss how we developed elaborate, context-sensitive strategies to try to preserve the richness of the interview material wherever possible while also protecting participants. This discussion of the practical and ethical details of anonymising is designed to add to the largely theoretical literature on this topic and to be of illustrative use to other researchers confronting similar dilemmas.

Memory in Interaction: An Analysis of Repeat Calls to a Home Birth Helpline

Drawing on a corpus of 80 calls to a Home Birth helpline, we use conversation analysis to analyze how callers and call takers display to one another that they are talking for a second or subsequent time. We focus in particular on the role of memory in these interactions. We show how caller and call taker are oriented to remembering at the beginning of calls as displayed in what we call the recognition-solicit pre-sequence, how participants are oriented to issues of forgetting and remembering during the course of repeat calls, and how remembering and forgetting are made manifest in interaction. Our analysis shows how the human capacity to remember and propensity to forget have reverberating implications in calling for help.

Telling it straight? Dictionary definitions of women's genitals

Feminist concerns about the social representation of sex, sexuality, and sexual organs have included analyses of their representation both in dictionaries and in medical texts. Drawing on feminist and social constructionist work, we analysed entries for ‘clitoris’ and ‘vagina’, using entries for ‘penis’ as a comparison, in 12 medical and 16 English language dictionaries. Both ‘vagina’ and ‘clitoris’ were overwhelmingly defined by their location in a female body, whereas the penis was defined in terms of function. Description of sex/sexuality was frequently omitted from both vaginal and clitoral definitions, and womens genitals continue to be defined in relation to an implicit penile norm. Three assumptions informed these definitions – that female sexuality is passive (and male sexuality active), that womens genitals are ‘absence’ (and men’s are ‘presence’), and that genitals are used for heterosexual sex – explicitly coitus. We suggest that these definitions present, as natural biological fact, common sense sexist and heterosexist assumptions about female and male bodies and sexualities.

Talk about sexual miscommunication

Abstract Underpinned by the influential literature on gender differences in communication (e.g., Tannen, 1991), miscommunication theory claims that sexual violence is a problem that can be solved through better communication skills: this theory is used not only by social scientists, but also by young women talking about their experiences of sexual coercion. This paper draws on young womens accounts of miscommunication, not as supporting evidence for miscommunication theory, but to explore the functional utility of miscommunication theory as a participant resource. We argue that sexual miscommunication theory is useful for women attempting to sustain heterosexual relationships because it: (a) avoids blaming men; (b) gives women a sense of control; and (c) obscures institutionalised gender power relations. This paper raises questions about the uncritical validation of womens experiences and about the ways in which, both as analysts and as feminists, we theorise the experiences of the women we study.