Reflecting on feminist research: From a shared experience to collaborative learning

Introduction

As two feminists passionate about human rights and from Addis Ababa, a cosmopolitan city, we have been engaging in ongoing conversations about online gender-based violence (OGBV). We have been actively involved in various women’s rights campaigns for several years, having participated in online feminist dialogues and contributed to research and archiving efforts. In recent years, we have observed and experienced the various feminist issues we raise being repeatedly misrepresented, while also facing online harassment and threats. This has become a trend in which social media platforms are shifting from spaces of shared experience and advocacy to sites of danger, with limited legal measures to protect users. 

Online hate speech and instances of OGBV target not only feminist individuals but also the LGBTQIA+ community. In August 2023, an organised hate campaign against LGBTQIA+ individuals spread on social media, particularly on TikTok. Religious leaders, anti-gender groups, TikTok influencers and individuals were seen posting videos calling for mob justice, issuing death threats and advocating for harsher laws against the community. 

Having witnessed the profound impact of OGBV on the LGBTQIA+ community and rights advocates, we recognised the urgent need to document both its harmful effects and the community’s resistance to it. To address this, we conducted ongoing research to highlight the OGBV experienced by LGBTQIA+ individuals and their coping mechanisms. Our study revealed the harsh realities of the daily violence they endure, as well as their remarkable resistance in the face of such adversity.

Some of the questions we continuously challenged one another with during the research process include, how does the broader social, cultural and political environment in Ethiopia influence our research? How do we balance the need for transparency and representation with the responsibility to protect participants? How do we ensure that our participants have access to this research?

While the two of us share common experiences as feminists with similar backgrounds, this research reflection highlights our differences, whether in perspective, methodology or emotional response. We also highlight the challenges we faced and the collaborative learning along the way.

Having witnessed the profound impact of OGBV on the LGBTQIA+ community and rights advocates, we recognised the urgent need to document both its harmful effects and the community’s resistance to it.

Building trust with the study participants and positionality

We share common experiences as vocal feminist advocates actively engaged in feminist gatherings, online advocacy spaces and social groups, including digital campaigns. Our visibility in the digital space and outspoken stance on human rights issues have made us targets of significant backlash and ongoing harassment. This hostility has deeply affected our engagement on social media, particularly on Twitter (now known as X), where we have had to navigate challenges to our activism and online presence.

This experience has given us a certain level of familiarity with the context and key actors involved. Research indicates that such familiarity offers several advantages in qualitative studies, including easier access to participants, quicker rapport-building and more nuanced, responsible data collection. It also enhances the depth of data interpretation by situating findings within a broader social, political and historical context.[1]

While our positionality made it relatively easier to build trust with study participants, discussing LGBTQIA+ issues with feminist advocates remained a significant challenge. The lack of a unified stance on LGBTQIA+ rights within Ethiopian feminist spaces limited our ability to fully leverage our connections within the feminist community. Understanding that trust is fundamental to ethical and effective research, we engaged in critical socioanalysis to reflect on how our positionality and identities influence our work.[2] Consequently, we strategically divided interview roles based on our level of engagement and trust. One of us conducted interviews with LGBTQIA+ individuals, while the other spoke with feminist advocates.

In addition, we have both worked in the development sector, which brought us the opportunity to travel across Ethiopia and learn about different cultures and understand the climate better. Our experience in community engagement and travel has also given us insight into the country’s complexity. This understanding helped us tailor our data collection tools and communication styles, and we adapted our approach to geographical and linguistic contexts. This allowed us to gain the trust of study participants and engage with them better.

Research indicates that such familiarity offers several advantages in qualitative studies, including easier access to participants, quicker rapport-building and more nuanced, responsible data collection.

One of the challenges we encountered in this research was the absence of a common queer language. In many cases, participants were unable to express their experiences using specific terms, as the language simply doesn’t exist or is underdeveloped. Instead, they shared their experiences through personal stories. These stories, rather than words, became a powerful means of communication. This process made us reflect on our own positionality. Our access to education, activism, transnational queer discourses, travel and our exposure to up-to-date information gave us linguistic and discourse privilege that many participants did not have. Recognising this imbalance, we chose to meet study participants with openness, and to learn about their experiences as expressed in their own words. This experience taught us the value of listening to lived experiences, recognising that sometimes words cannot fully capture the depth of one's reality. We also learned that researchers must engage in ongoing self-reflection to understand how their identities, experiences and perspectives influence their interactions with participants and the research itself.

Methodological dilemma: Navigating the protection of LGBTQIA+ individuals and the need for thick data on violence

Thick data is essential for producing meaningful qualitative research that captures the lived experiences of study participants. Some scholars refer to this as experiential data.[3] When planning our data collection, we critically reflected on key aspects, including data collection tools, sampling strategies and the setting in which this data collection would take place. Through continuous discussions, we conducted in-depth interviews, key informant interviews and document reviews, engaging members of the LGBTQIA+ community and rights advocates.

Throughout the study, safeguarding the dignity and protection of research participants was our fundamental guiding principle. Given the sensitive nature of our research topic, we prioritised privacy and confidentiality by ensuring that participants’ views remained confidential, respecting their right to decline any questions they were uncomfortable answering and allowing them to withdraw from the study at any stage without pressure. Participants were fully informed about the study’s objectives and the measures taken to protect their confidentiality before consenting to take part. LGBTQIA+ activists were engaged to provide critical feedback on the tools and process of the study. Even though the process was demanding, we conducted the data collection ourselves to ensure high ethical standards and data quality.

Various scholars emphasise the need for a systematic review of research instruments and methods when studying violence.[4] In line with this, we made several amendments across different stages of our research process. Initially, we believed that conducting focus group discussions (FGDs) would generate thick data by creating a safe environment for peer discussions. However, after engaging with LGBTQIA+ activists and considering Ethiopia’s current political climate, we realised that FGDs could pose potential risks to participants.

While in-person data collection often yields rich insights, safeguarding participants’ welfare remained our top priority.[5] As a result, we opted for in-depth interviews conducted online. This methodological shift underscored the importance of adaptability in research design, particularly when working with vulnerable populations. Conducting online in-depth interviews not only minimised risk, but also provided participants with the freedom to share their experiences in a setting of their choosing.

Our findings reinforce the idea that some methods, though useful, are not always appropriate – especially in contexts where privacy and safety concerns are paramount.

Our findings reinforce the idea that some methods, though useful, are not always appropriate – especially in contexts where privacy and safety concerns are paramount. From this experience, we learned the critical role of ethical reflexivity in qualitative research and the need to continuously reassess methodologies to ensure they align with both ethical considerations and the needs of participants.

Additionally, we deliberated over certain data, considering whether to include it based on our experiences. One of us emphasised producing rich, contextual data, while the other consistently reminded us to be mindful of the narratives. Ultimately, we made a conscious decision to exclude some data to prevent potential harm. This choice highlights the ethical responsibility of researchers to prioritise participant welfare over the pursuit of data richness. It also underscores the importance of ongoing, collaborative reflection, allowing us to recognise both our expertise and the gaps in our understanding.

Beyond data: The emotional impact of documenting violence

While we express this research took an emotional toll on us as researchers, we first want to acknowledge the far greater psychological and emotional burden placed on the study participants. As survivors of ongoing OGBV, LGBTQIA+ individuals face relentless attacks through organised campaigns, disinformation and other forms of digital violence.

As researchers, it was emotionally overwhelming to consistently listen to, read and watch violent content. The emotional strain was heightened by the graphic nature of the materials we encountered, particularly videos and posts of hatred and dehumanisation. For one of us, this brought up deep feelings of anger and frustration, while the other struggled with feelings of sadness and helplessness. As both of us grew up in religious spaces, it was even more difficult to witness videos where religious leaders incited violence against LGBTQIA+ communities. This experience added a layer of emotional complexity to the research, as we were constantly navigating our own emotions while engaging with painful, often traumatic data.

Through the process, we learned the emotional impact of conducting such research and the importance of providing researcher care in qualitative studies. Studies also show that the emotional challenges researchers face when studying violence are usually neglected, with no support mechanisms to help them navigate these experiences.[6] To cope, we adopted different strategies. One of us found it helpful to compartmentalise emotions during data collection, focusing primarily on the research itself to maintain distance. The other, however, needed to debrief and process the content regularly, seeking emotional support from trusted friends. Despite these differences, we both recognised the need for self-care and emotional resilience throughout the research process.

Studies also show that the emotional challenges researchers face when studying violence are usually neglected, with no support mechanisms to help them navigate these experiences.

On this note, research ethics committees (RECs) could play a greater role during the ethics review process. Just as RECs assess the prevention of harm to participants and provide guidance on appropriate support, it is equally important to extend similar care to researchers working on sensitive topics. This support could be integrated into the REC framework or addressed through an alternative institutional risk management system. However, this study was disadvantaged in this regard, as we didn’t apply for REC due to the restrictive environment.

Feminist politics in knowledge production and dissemination

Discussions around OGBV in Ethiopia are often centred around gay men and emphasise urban contexts. Hence, we tried to ensure that the perspectives of women and non-binary individuals, who are typically marginalised in these conversations, were included. We also tried to represent both urban and rural communities, acknowledging the unique challenges faced by rural populations. This process helped us to reflect on the conceptualisation of gender and who matters in the discourse.

Participants are often left without access to research findings, as dissemination can be costly or limited to English, excluding those who speak other languages. One key aspect of our research is that we are translating our findings into Amharic, Ethiopia's official language, and plan to expand this translation work to other languages. This allows participants and the wider LGBTQIA+ community to have access to our research and engage with their own stories. In line with Connell’s “Southern theory”, our approach challenges the dominance of Western-centric knowledge and recognises the importance of including diverse perspectives in the production and dissemination of knowledge.[7] By translating our findings into Amharic, we are not only providing access but also contributing to a broader dialogue that considers the unique histories and experiences of the global South.

Our research challenges traditional, often dominant, forms of knowledge building by incorporating storytelling and visual art methods that are frequently overlooked in more conventional research. And this process has been collaborative, with participants engaging in the creative aspects of archiving queer resistance. This collaborative approach allows participants to actively shape our research and makes certain that their voices and experiences remain central to the knowledge production process.

Whenever possible, we believe it is important to prioritise the people who participate in research as its first audience, as their voices and experiences are at the heart of the work.

This approach reflects an ongoing challenge to the global inequalities in knowledge production and aims to create space for Southern voices and encourage new ways of learning and knowledge-sharing. In addition to the translations, we have included some direct quotes in the participants’ own languages, acknowledging that translation often fails to capture the depth and nuance of lived experiences. Who are we trying to reach with this process? Who is the intended audience, and what language will resonate with them? These are some of the questions we continuously ask one another. Whenever possible, we believe it is important to prioritise the people who participate in research as its first audience, as their voices and experiences are at the heart of the work.

This research marks just the beginning of a much broader conversation on the intersection of gender, sexuality and OGBV. As we write this article, OGBV continues to be rampant, with horrific instances unfolding in real time. Just recently, we came across a gruesome TikTok video of a man, alleged to be gay, being brutally attacked. These acts of violence highlight the urgency of our work and the need to further explore how social media platforms can be held accountable for the violence they perpetuate. As this conversation continues to evolve, we remain committed to amplifying the voices of those affected and contributing to a collective movement for justice and accountability.

--

Acknowledgments 

We extend our heartfelt gratitude to community members for their trust, vulnerability and invaluable time. Your openness has been a source of strength for this research. We also thank the activists on the ground for their unwavering support and dedication. To those whose names we cannot mention, your behind-the-scenes efforts in gathering secondary data and assisting in various capacities have been instrumental in shaping this work. Thank you.