V. long thread alert: #UX #Feminism (& to some extent, #equality and #ResearchOps)
In the past few days, I’ve been asking about the linkages between the UX version of democratising of research & the critical theorists' on the democratisation of research. https://twitter.com/BrigetteMetzler/status/1313400392760258562?s=20
I’ve learned a lot and have enough resources to write a book, thank you, friends & friends of friends. Twitter is actually a cool space.
Earlier today, I upset a friend because my questions were unclear. I promised a long answer! https://twitter.com/katetowsey/status/1314327631114895360?s=20
This is a thread in 6 parts – three main concepts, my conclusions, questions, & citations at the end. I number and alpha the tweets. Numbers are tweets in thread, alpha is the theme.
Yes, I totally nerded out on this & just wish I had a @visakanv level ability on the threads...
1a. Firstly, ALL work needs other work to happen. This is the concept of ‘productive work’ vs ‘reproductive work’. Reproductive is the stuff that supports productive work. (Crompton, 1999) (Fraser, 2007)
2a. Reproductive work is generally considered low value and the productive work is high value. Reproductive work is carried largely by women. Don’t forget, I’m not talking about babies here, see tweet above.
3a. At a macro level, this can be seen between paid and unpaid work.*
*just so many issues with this (Antonopoulos, 2009) (Hirway, 2015)
4a. When UX researchers talk about the democratisation of research, they talk about what to keep and what to let go, they talk about low value/high value work. Skilled vs unskilled. There's a reasonable concern over devaluing the craft (Sirjani, 2020) (Saha Mitra, S., 2020).
5a. this isn’t necessarily a bad idea – it reframes our thinking on managing scale and turns a critical eye towards the emotional inertia. There are potential implications that aren’t obvious. In the end, I’m hoping we can embrace these ideas whilst also extending them.
6b. (new theme alert!)
There is a connection between how we value reproductive work and ReOps, but there SHOULDN'T be. (I think this was the confusion earlier in the day: https://twitter.com/katetowsey/status/1314327631114895360?s=20)
(I’ve talked about this in the past: https://twitter.com/BrigetteMetzler/status/1164117751088025600?s=20)
7b.This is because there are people who think of ops as a pathway to research, ignoring the immensely strategic potential of ops.
8.b You can see this where there are Ops jobs advertised at the ‘associate’ level under research. This reframes ops as low value work.* (thankfully, this is changing!)
*I think is this is caused by the reproductive/productive work paradigm...I’ve been gnawing on this for a while
9.c (new theme alert!)
The democratisation of research in feminist/critical theory frames the democratisation of research as emancipatory – decolonised, less paternalistic. There’s a v. important concept of agency.
10.c This kind of democratisation is about power & agency (I think). It is a force for dismantling power imbalances, & hands agency to marginalised communities to “challenge, rather than reproduce, structural inequalities” cc @schock (Costanza-Chock, 2020) (Kara, 2018)
11.D (conclusions)
How do these intersect? This is my enquiry.

The democratisation of research for both UX and feminists seems to be about how we manage power and agency.

(I can only assume this is a simplistic view and many apologies to anyone cringing rn)
12. D. This is what I think I know:

1. All work carries reproductive work (the stuff that supports us to be productive).
2. We undervalue reproductive work
13. D (cont)
3. The ‘organisation’ of research is often considered the purview of Ops, but this is an incomplete understanding of Ops - I don’t want to deal with that in this thread, just need to acknowledge the misunderstanding.
14. D.
3. (cont) It is also the stuff we _could_ look to give away when we ‘democratise’ research – handing to ‘associate’ researchers, or people who do research.
15. E. Questions/provocations that come up in my mind:

To what extent does this embed power imbalances in research?
To what extent does this create a dual class – the ‘expert’ and ‘non-expert’?
I admit to my own feeling that experts should be doing the difficult stuff…
16. E.
What can we learn from feminist critique of the researcher/researched that we can apply to do better as we work to democratise research?
17. F Citations:
Antonopoulos, R. (2009). The unpaid care work - paid work connection. Geneva: International Labour Office. Retrieved from http://ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---integration/documents/publication/wcms_119142.pdf
19. F. Citations:
Crompton, R. (Ed.). (1999). Restructuring Gender Relations and Employment: The Decline of the Male Breadwinner. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20. F. Citations:
Fraser, N. (2007). Feminist Politics in the Age of Recognition: A Two-Dimensional Approach to Gender Justice. Studies in Social Justice, 23-35. Retrieved from http://journals.library.brocku.ca/index.php/SSJ/article/view/979
21. F Citations:
Hirway, I. (2015). Unpaid Work and the Economy: Linkages and Their Implications. New York: Levy Economics Institute. Retrieved from http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_838.pdf 
22. F Citations:
Kara, H. (2018). Democratizing Research in Practice. In R. Iphofen, & M. Tolich (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Ethics (pp. 103-113). ProQuest eBook Central: SAGE Publications.
All in all, thanks folks for letting me imagine out loud. I apologise if it has provoked difficult thoughts or feelings! I hope to dig away at this until some more useful thoughts emerge. Let me know if any arrive for you from this stupidly long thread -if anyone read this far ;)
You can follow @BrigetteMetzler.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: