After reading these chapters, I began to understand the importance of participant observation in ethnographic research. I think Murchison’s suggestion of finding a regular meeting to attend is particularly salient for research on a college campus, as many affinity/interest groups host open weekly meetings. Another really important point the author makes is establishing one’s identity and being transparent during these types of encounters. On one hand, you want the meeting to feel authentic, not changing tones of topics simply due to your presence there. On the other hand, you want to be truthful in your motivation for being there. It seems like a very difficult line to toe, and something I will be constantly thinking through during the course of my own research. What is the best way to go about establishing one’s identity, particularly in the context of sensitive or secretive research questions?
One potential research topic that really interests me is the dating experience of LGBTQ+ students vs that of straight students on Vanderbilt’s campus. Although Vanderbilt itself may seem like an accepting place in which all students can freely be themselves, it is important to think about the greater context of attending school in Tennessee, a southern, conservative state. I recognize that this is a very sensitive subject for many students, which may pose difficulties when attempting to gather information. This makes choosing interview questions and locations all the more challenging, but important. In addition, I was thinking about attending weekly Lambda meetings as part of my participant observations. It is also important not to tokenize students that are freely open with their identities. I’d really love to dive into this topic as I think it is often overlooked; however, it will require lots of careful planning and consideration to make it come to fruition. I’d love to hear any feedback anyone has on going about a sensitive topic such as this one.