Search results

The purpose of this paper is to understand how gay employees, as labeled deviants, cope with heterosexist harassment at work in an Asian culture of hegemonic heterosexual masculinity, using the modified labeling theory.

Using qualitative research approach, in-depth interviews were carried out with 16 self-identified gay employees.

Results revealed how the coping strategies of gay employees, in the face of harassment, are entwined with the labeling and stigma leading to diverse and complex coping strategies. Several broader coping strategies were thus identified based on whether the participants accepted the label of deviance and stigma and whether they were open about their sexuality. These broader coping strategies are support seeking, confrontation, inaction, quitting and, stigma and labeling avoidance strategies. Under these broader strategies, there were also sub strategies such as seeking social support, organizational support, legal support the support of the wise, as well as secrecy and social withdrawal.

These findings will advance the knowledge in coping strategies of heterosexist harassments at work as well as knowledge in harassment of gay employees, in hegemonic heterosexual cultures.

This paper aims to revisit the debate on the insider-outsider positionality of the researcher in conducting qualitative research by highlighting the challenges of researching sexual harassment and harassment among stigmatized or hidden groups of individuals in a culturally value-laden backdrop in South Asia.

The authors drew on a bricolage of methods to analyze and write this paper. First, the authors borrowed from the case study approach to select three research projects that would shed light on the argument raised in the study. Then, narratives, together with self and critical reflexivity were used to write reflective narratives, which served as data for this paper. Next, the authors used the thematic analysis method to analyze the reflective narratives. Finally, the authors drew from literature and the experiences to provide recommendations for the challenges thus identified.

The critical reflections highlight three overarching challenges the authors encountered as insider-outsiders in researching a sensitive topic among stigmatized/hidden groups in a value-laden cultural backdrop: 1) difficulty in recruitment, 2) internalized gender norms and 3) unconscious biases. Based on these challenges, the authors posit that what is pertinent is not whether a researcher is an insider, outsider or in-betweener per se, but how to maximize benefits and minimize pitfalls of being an insider or outsider and employing other means of overcoming the drawbacks. The authors also claim that being more sensitive to the culture, reflexive, flexible and experienced would help overcome challenges faced when conducting research of this nature as insiders-outsiders.

There appears to be little empirically derived inquiry on the insider-outsider positionality of the researchers at the intersection of sensitive topics, stigmatized participants and culture. Our reflections and suggestions address this lacuna while revisiting the simplistic use of insider-outsider dichotomy and proposing other means to overcome the drawbacks brought on by the researcher positionality.