w.nking as ethnographic field method

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by Woodchopper » Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:04 am

Thanks for that perspective Warumich.

I guess our social media bubbles are different as my first sight of the article was via it being shared on Twitter by social scientists (mainly not based in the UK) going WTF!!111!!!!

That debate was partly about people being surprised that the research could be carried out. For the others in this discussion, the background is that social research usually has to undergo lengthy ethical reviews which academics find pretty arduous. I can't see how the activities described in the article could have been approved. But it looks like they weren't anyway.

From my view of the discussion it seems that the academic Twitter discussion leaked out to the culture war discussion and got taken up by a Tory MP etc.

I was perhaps over hasty in criticizing the journal editor. Maybe its possible they and the reviewers couldn't grasp that the author was actually describing m.st.rbating to p.rnographic depictions of children. Yes, 'boys' can be used to refer to adults. In my experience the kind of material described in the article is notorious for being very dodgy and is illegal in the UK (and where I am and in other countries). But perhaps I'm guilty of projecting my knowledge onto others.

Just one thing. You write that " I also think I have a bit of a right to expect that papers I receive have been vetted by an ethics board first. And so do the editors." Yes, they should. But an article in which the author viewed child p.rn should surely contain some reference to research ethics. Though of course that would only be relevant if the reviewers and editors realized what the article was about.

Just to clarify, I don't have a problem in principle with m.st.rbation as a research method. For example, it might be needed to be accepted in some sub-cultures based upon sexual activity.

I also don't have an objection in principle to people doing research on child p.rn. But if they did there would need to be a lengthy process to ensure that the research followed ethical principles (and wouldn't result in in criminal prosecution). m.st.rbation would of course be a major red flag.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by Woodchopper » Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:06 am

Also, I agree that there are serious problems with peer review. Though that's probably best discussed in another thread.

User avatar
lpm
Junior Mod
Posts: 5944
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by lpm » Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:24 am

Hang on, doesn't Warumich's post boil down to "The status quo is terrible so my immediate reaction was to defend the status quo"? It's clearly self-contradictory.
⭐ Awarded gold star 4 November 2021

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by Woodchopper » Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:56 am

lpm wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:24 am
Hang on, doesn't Warumich's post boil down to "The status quo is terrible so my immediate reaction was to defend the status quo"? It's clearly self-contradictory.
Different kinds of terrible though.

Overworked academics aren’t able to work effectively rather than degenerate academics who are paid to sit around w.nking.

User avatar
warumich
Fuzzable
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:49 pm

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by warumich » Fri Aug 12, 2022 11:38 am

Thanks Chops! No I genuinely never heard of the genre before.
Woodchopper wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:04 am
Just one thing. You write that " I also think I have a bit of a right to expect that papers I receive have been vetted by an ethics board first. And so do the editors." Yes, they should. But an article in which the author viewed child p.rn should surely contain some reference to research ethics.
Fair point, yes. Ethics review would not necessarily be needed if the research doesn't involve any research participants or their data. However, any research that involves illegal activity would. I had a student once who wanted to do an autoethnography on squatting, which I advised her not to do.

Petra is absolutely right that the way we teach research ethics at university is terrible, and I include myself in this; I need to do better. Conceivably the author thought it doesn't involve actual participants so it's fine (though given the revelations on this person's past, I'm not really inclined to give him that benefit of the doubt). Supervisor should have caught this, but if this wasn't going to be part of the PhD and a stand alone paper, then maybe it wasn't even discussed. I'm certainly not under control of what my PhD students do in their own time, I see them maybe once a month to talk about their PhD work. If the supervisor was aware of this, then yes that's really bad.

Re funding which was something that was also discussed as part of the MP's tweet, the paper didn't iirc detail any outside funding, so people were right to think that this was not funded by taxpayer money. A lot of PhDs particularly in the social sciences are self funded. I'm generally a bit unhappy at the "taxpayer's money" trope people bring out at research they don't like (legal research that is, like my colleague's Kardashian stuff). My salary is now mostly paid by my students, that was the great coalition achievement, so even if you think research on Kim Kardashian is frivolous, the media studies students that kind of funded it will by and large not agree with this. It's conservative cakeism again, we're businesses with customers when it suits them, and public institutions when it doesn't. This is a side issue that I wanted to get off my chest, but maybe also helps explain some of the kneejerk reaction this got.

Lpm, I'm sorry I genuinely don't understand your point. The status quo can be good in some respects and bad in others, surely? Or am I missing something?
I've never had a signature, and it never did me any harm

User avatar
lpm
Junior Mod
Posts: 5944
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by lpm » Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:11 pm

Likewise, I genuinely don't understand your point.

When the status quo (journals, peer review, ethics teaching, or whatever) is bad, surely the instinctive response to a criticism or failure is to look to what you already know is bad.

That's what we normally do with simpler areas of life. If Newcastle Utd was bottom of the premier league, when it gets slammed for bad management by a Tory MP nobody sensible would think to attack back against the criticism and claim it's anti North East prejudice or something. We know the present state of Newcastle Utd is bad, so the first response is to compare our existing criticisms with the fresh criticism. To do anything else would be irrational tribal loyalty.

So why don't we do the same for more complex issues or culture war attacks? Why don't we instinctively respond with "that's a valid point and the existing status quo is not good enough but here's another angle to consider"?

As I said on another thread, I'm embarrassed by what "my side" instinctively defends and I'm frustrated by us always losing every battle thanks to being lured into charging head first into a solid shield wall.
⭐ Awarded gold star 4 November 2021

purplehaze
Fuzzable
Posts: 286
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:27 pm

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by purplehaze » Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:35 pm

It's very creepy. I've never voted Tory in my life but that doesn't mean I don't always reject what a Conservative MP might say. I thank him for highlighting this. What was Andersson's supervisor thinking?

https://twitter.com/brucousin/status/15 ... hxzyNz5dgw

And the link to Vice.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/xdpb7k/ ... g-boy-news

Trigger warning of course for child sexual abuse.

This publication cannot be condoned.

causan_dux
Sindis Poop
Posts: 60
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2020 10:07 am

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by causan_dux » Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:15 pm

Woodchopper wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:04 am

Just to clarify, I don't have a problem in principle with m.st.rbation as a research method. For example, it might be needed to be accepted in some sub-cultures based upon sexual activity.

I don't get this. Do you have something a bit more specific in mind? If there were a tribal coming-of-age celebration involving m.st.rbation that an anthropologist justifiably joined in, I wouldn't easily describe that as a "research method" and I wouldn't expect to pay much attention to their own response to the celebration.

User avatar
warumich
Fuzzable
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:49 pm

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by warumich » Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:23 pm

Well maybe there wasn't much coherence to a 4am insomnia post, but a couple of connected things.
lpm wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:11 pm
So why don't we do the same for more complex issues or culture war attacks? Why don't we instinctively respond with "that's a valid point and the existing status quo is not good enough but here's another angle to consider"?
my point was that, from the way the tweet was phrased, it wasn't pointing to a valid point of why this research was atrocious, there was nothing about the nature of the p.rn there. You can give a bad reason to condemn a bad paper. Maybe we've seen different tweets by different people, sorry I don't quite recall that MPs name. Maybe it was just badly phrased, but as I said for me the penny dropped only a bit later so maybe he should have led with that bit of information, not the fairly standard outrage that academics are studying m.st.rbation, on which point I agree with woodchopper.

The bit about peer review is maybe only tangentially related, but just to say that the system is creaking at the moment and in that environment a major disaster can happen at some point. That's not excusing the journal, reviewers or the editor(s) who should have been more vigilant.
lpm wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:11 pm
As I said on another thread, I'm embarrassed by what "my side" instinctively defends and I'm frustrated by us always losing every battle thanks to being lured into charging head first into a solid shield wall.
On this, I agree.
I've never had a signature, and it never did me any harm

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by Woodchopper » Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:28 pm

causan_dux wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:15 pm
Woodchopper wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:04 am

Just to clarify, I don't have a problem in principle with m.st.rbation as a research method. For example, it might be needed to be accepted in some sub-cultures based upon sexual activity.

I don't get this. Do you have something a bit more specific in mind? If there were a tribal coming-of-age celebration involving m.st.rbation that an anthropologist justifiably joined in, I wouldn't easily describe that as a "research method" and I wouldn't expect to pay much attention to their own response to the celebration.
Depends upon how you define method. For an example off the top of my head, someone wants to do research on a group of people regularly involved in group m.st.rbation as part of a specific fetish or kink, and needs to join in to be accepted.

User avatar
warumich
Fuzzable
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:49 pm

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by warumich » Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:34 pm

causan_dux wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:15 pm
Woodchopper wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:04 am

Just to clarify, I don't have a problem in principle with m.st.rbation as a research method. For example, it might be needed to be accepted in some sub-cultures based upon sexual activity.

I don't get this. Do you have something a bit more specific in mind? If there were a tribal coming-of-age celebration involving m.st.rbation that an anthropologist justifiably joined in, I wouldn't easily describe that as a "research method" and I wouldn't expect to pay much attention to their own response to the celebration.

We don't tend to talk about it because there is a huge stigma attached to m.st.rbation, but most people engage in it, and it's a big part of life probably not just in our, but in all societies. That makes it a valid topic for anthropological research.
Engaging in an activity that you research and keeping a field diary of your thoughts and experiences is a perfectly valid research methodology. Put the two together, and voila.


eta, it is obviously not a valid methodology if you're researching illegal activities, but that makes for an ethical, not a methodological issue.
I've never had a signature, and it never did me any harm

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by Woodchopper » Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:45 pm

warumich wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:34 pm
causan_dux wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:15 pm
Woodchopper wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:04 am

Just to clarify, I don't have a problem in principle with m.st.rbation as a research method. For example, it might be needed to be accepted in some sub-cultures based upon sexual activity.

I don't get this. Do you have something a bit more specific in mind? If there were a tribal coming-of-age celebration involving m.st.rbation that an anthropologist justifiably joined in, I wouldn't easily describe that as a "research method" and I wouldn't expect to pay much attention to their own response to the celebration.

We don't tend to talk about it because there is a huge stigma attached to m.st.rbation, but most people engage in it, and it's a big part of life probably not just in our, but in all societies. That makes it a valid topic for anthropological research.
Engaging in an activity that you research and keeping a field diary of your thoughts and experiences is a perfectly valid research methodology. Put the two together, and voila.


eta, it is obviously not a valid methodology if you're researching illegal activities, but that makes for an ethical, not a methodological issue.
Better answer than mine.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 10137
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by Bird on a Fire » Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:51 pm

Woodchopper wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:56 am
lpm wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:24 am
Hang on, doesn't Warumich's post boil down to "The status quo is terrible so my immediate reaction was to defend the status quo"? It's clearly self-contradictory.
Different kinds of terrible though.

Overworked academics aren’t able to work effectively rather than degenerate academics who are paid to sit around w.nking.
Yes, I understood warumich as saying that, given the well-known systemic issues undermining the effectiveness of peer reviews, we shouldn't rush to condemn individual editors and reviewers. It may have been reasonable for each of them to expect that other parts of the creaking system did their jobs. That's not a defence of how publishing and reviewing is currently structured.

(Hope that's at least close, warumich ;) Thanks for the perspective from someone in the field.)

The status quo is very bad, but there's a collective action problem where the people most in need of change are least empowered to effect it, and vice versa.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

User avatar
warumich
Fuzzable
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:49 pm

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by warumich » Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:00 pm

Yes, much more succinctly put than I managed, thanks Boaf
I've never had a signature, and it never did me any harm

causan_dux
Sindis Poop
Posts: 60
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2020 10:07 am

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by causan_dux » Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:38 pm

warumich wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:34 pm
causan_dux wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:15 pm
Woodchopper wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:04 am

Just to clarify, I don't have a problem in principle with m.st.rbation as a research method. For example, it might be needed to be accepted in some sub-cultures based upon sexual activity.

I don't get this. Do you have something a bit more specific in mind? If there were a tribal coming-of-age celebration involving m.st.rbation that an anthropologist justifiably joined in, I wouldn't easily describe that as a "research method" and I wouldn't expect to pay much attention to their own response to the celebration.

We don't tend to talk about it because there is a huge stigma attached to m.st.rbation, but most people engage in it, and it's a big part of life probably not just in our, but in all societies. That makes it a valid topic for anthropological research.
Engaging in an activity that you research and keeping a field diary of your thoughts and experiences is a perfectly valid research methodology. Put the two together, and voila.
Not really my point. m.st.rbation has been pretty well studied in both the academic and popular literature. And one individual's reports on their own isolated activities are usually of marginal interest at best.

But your "Put the two together, and voila." is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.

How do you know, if you have inserted yourself as a researcher into Woodchopper's posited group of kink masturbators, that your masturbatory experience compares in any way with that of the other members? If they are amenable to study, then study them. If they are not, then your own experiences mean next to nothing. Added to which, you also have to guard against your very presence affecting their conduct.

egbert26
Clardic Fug
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2019 10:05 pm

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by egbert26 » Fri Aug 12, 2022 3:29 pm

Apologies Warumich, I should have used the word 'assume' rather than 'pretend' when referring to the reactions of academics to this paper.

According to the author's Twitter account, he started his PhD in Sep 2021. On his website, he said that prior to this, he was studying for an MA in Berlin over 2 years. While in Tokyo at a shotacon event where he was selling his doujinishi, he met a scholar who was 'very interested' in his research. He later contacted her while he was writing his final thesis and she agreed to be his supervisor. He applied for, and was granted, funding.

His research could have been based on data collected during his MA, rather than his PhD but as they were in contact back in Feb 2020 it could explain why she got a mention in his paper. I would be interested to know just how much she knew about the nature of his work prior to agreeing to be his supervisor.
It's what happens when they try to apply IATBMCTT with their willies...

User avatar
warumich
Fuzzable
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:49 pm

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by warumich » Fri Aug 12, 2022 4:19 pm

causan_dux wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:38 pm
Not really my point. m.st.rbation has been pretty well studied in both the academic and popular literature. And one individual's reports on their own isolated activities are usually of marginal interest at best.

But your "Put the two together, and voila." is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.

How do you know, if you have inserted yourself as a researcher into Woodchopper's posited group of kink masturbators, that your masturbatory experience compares in any way with that of the other members? If they are amenable to study, then study them. If they are not, then your own experiences mean next to nothing. Added to which, you also have to guard against your very presence affecting their conduct.
Well one paper using only one methodology is not going to be more than an incremental contribution to our knowledge on a subject, I don't think anyone in anthropology has ever pretended otherwise.
All social science methods have their pros and cons, you zeroed in on the cons of autoethnography, but on the other hand it is also able to do things other methods can't - an in-depth personal account of a situation is not something you can get from a survey, or even a series of fairly in depth interviews, or a non-participant observation study. A survey on the other hand can be representative of the population, but it won't be able to go into any specific depth on people's experiences and thoughts. So for knowledge to advance you need to triangulate different studies with different research designs on different types of people. That's exactly the reason why the topic has been "pretty well studied", because there's always more you can do.

egbert, thanks for coming back on this, no worries!
I've never had a signature, and it never did me any harm

User avatar
warumich
Fuzzable
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:49 pm

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by warumich » Fri Aug 12, 2022 4:40 pm

I should add, if it's not clear, but I carry no particular can for w.nking research, I'm currently working on the slightly less exciting area of improvisational science theatre (why yes it's a bit niche).

But the criticism you have seems to apply to all autoethnographic research, so it would need a bit of defense. There was a fantastic book written recently, sorry I cannot remember the name or title, by a sociologist who worked as a truck driver for a few years. I suppose you'd get a perspective on what the life of a truck driver is like that you won't if the researcher had simply interviewed 40 people, or run a few focus groups. Or even sent a questionnaire to 1000 truck drivers. On the other hand, you'd only get one person's views and experiences.
I've never had a signature, and it never did me any harm

User avatar
bob sterman
Dorkwood
Posts: 1123
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:25 pm
Location: Location Location

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by bob sterman » Sun Aug 14, 2022 7:02 am

So the journal have taken down the article, posting this notice...
Due to ethical concerns surrounding this article and the social harm being caused by the publication of this work, the publishers have now agreed with the Journal Editors and have decided to remove the article while this investigation is ongoing in accordance with COPE guidelines.
Not sure COPE guidelines are fully settled in this area...

https://publicationethics.org/case/ethi ... imentation

User avatar
bob sterman
Dorkwood
Posts: 1123
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:25 pm
Location: Location Location

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by bob sterman » Sun Aug 14, 2022 7:14 am

warumich wrote:
Fri Aug 12, 2022 4:40 pm
There was a fantastic book written recently, sorry I cannot remember the name or title, by a sociologist who worked as a truck driver for a few years. I suppose you'd get a perspective on what the life of a truck driver is like that you won't if the researcher had simply interviewed 40 people, or run a few focus groups. Or even sent a questionnaire to 1000 truck drivers. On the other hand, you'd only get one person's views and experiences.
Perhaps you mean this book...

https://www.steveviscelli.com/book

Allo V Psycho
Catbabel
Posts: 734
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:18 am

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by Allo V Psycho » Sun Aug 14, 2022 7:53 am

I've supervised participant observation research, and the ethics approval had to address a wide range of issues. It also wasn't a deception study - the researcher was declared to the other participants as a researcher. If it had been a deception study in which the observer concealed that information, then ethical approval is much harder to achieve, but still essential.

I served on COPE for a while.With regard to Bob's point, many cases that came for discussion were about something 'not settled in the guidelines' - researchers are extremely creative at finding the gaps. If I was still on COPE, and based on the information I have at the moment, I would regard the journal as being at fault. If their defence is that they are unable to read articles they publish because of the pressure of work, then they should not be describing themselves as a peer reviewed journal (which Qualitative Research does). I would expect that any paper accepted for publication would have been read informally by a sub-editor or member of the Editorial Board in order to assign it to the correct referees*, then by two referees who should read it with attention, and make substantive comments on it, and then again by the sub editor in close detail, to review the points made by the referees, and consider any amendments proposed. The most common outcome for research papers, in my experience, is that minor or major changes should be made - this is the entire point of peer review. If this process, or something like it, was not followed, then the journal could be described as mis-selling itself to library subscribers. The idea that nobody had read the article carefully before it was published is, in my opinion, unacceptable. If an editorial board member and two referees did read the article properly and still accepted it, then in my opinion that is unacceptable too, based on what I have read about it. (It is gone now, so I can't read it myself).

*or decline it outright, which is common for most journals without page charges, who currently receive many more articles than they can publish or even can review.

User avatar
bob sterman
Dorkwood
Posts: 1123
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:25 pm
Location: Location Location

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by bob sterman » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:42 am

Allo V Psycho wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 7:53 am
I served on COPE for a while.With regard to Bob's point, many cases that came for discussion were about something 'not settled in the guidelines' - researchers are extremely creative at finding the gaps. If I was still on COPE, and based on the information I have at the moment, I would regard the journal as being at fault. If their defence is that they are unable to read articles they publish because of the pressure of work, then they should not be describing themselves as a peer reviewed journal (which Qualitative Research does). I would expect that any paper accepted for publication would have been read informally by a sub-editor or member of the Editorial Board in order to assign it to the correct referees*, then by two referees who should read it with attention, and make substantive comments on it, and then again by the sub editor in close detail, to review the points made by the referees, and consider any amendments proposed. The most common outcome for research papers, in my experience, is that minor or major changes should be made - this is the entire point of peer review. If this process, or something like it, was not followed, then the journal could be described as mis-selling itself to library subscribers. The idea that nobody had read the article carefully before it was published is, in my opinion, unacceptable. If an editorial board member and two referees did read the article properly and still accepted it, then in my opinion that is unacceptable too, based on what I have read about it. (It is gone now, so I can't read it myself).
Agree completely. I don't think there's a reasonable excuse for reviewers/editors not spotting the problems here.

The focus of the material was clear from the abstract and the article itself contained sexually explicit material - which should alone have prompted very careful consideration of whether it merited publication.

Putting aside the ethics and legality of the actions of the author - in some jurisdictions there could even be legal issues with the publication of the text of the article.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by Woodchopper » Wed Aug 24, 2022 8:34 pm

The journal has retracted the paper: https://journals.sagepub.com/pb-assets/ ... 173431.pdf

The retraction notice states that the article was “conducted without institutional ethical oversight.” I assume this means that the author wrote and submitted the article without informing his supervisor or other members of the department. If so he should get the proverbial book thrown at him. Someone shouldn’t be able to avoid ethical review by writing in secret.

The retraction also states that the paper was reviewed by two reviewers with methodological and subject experience. It doesn’t mention them raising any ethical issues.

It also states that the editors did not fulfil their responsibilities to undertake an ethical review and additional scrutiny prior to publication.

The retraction refers to a ‘note’ rather than to an ‘article’. Reading between the lines it looks like less attention was given to notes. If so that’s probably something that the authors regret.

tom p
After Pie
Posts: 1876
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by tom p » Thu Aug 25, 2022 10:15 am

As a tangent, people have mentioned victims here (and in Dr Petra's twitter thread), but also described shota as being self-published comics. Now, comics are usually drawings rather than photographs, so I'm confused as to who might be a victim of a bloke w.nking over some drawings.

I have absolutely zero knowledge of what shota is, and very little inclination to google it, for fear of inadvertently accessing illegal, and very unwanted, imagery, but is it just drawings or might there be photographs or similar? If it is just drawings, apart from the concern for the mental wellbeing of the researcher & the use of material that is illegal in some the universtiy's country, what would be the real need for ethical approval (again, I understand very little about the ethical approval for such research)

monkey
After Pie
Posts: 1906
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: w.nking as ethnographic field method

Post by monkey » Thu Aug 25, 2022 11:58 am

Statement from Manchester - clicky

The investigation is ongoing, but it seems the student was doing thing independently.

Post Reply