Social Work with People Practicing Same-Sex ... - ILGA Europe

8. Methodology of Research of LGBT
Community in Ukraine
Maksim Kasyanchuk, “Donbass-SotsProekt”
Ukrainian society has been underestimating of importance of LGBT as integral part of
the society for a long time, so public opinion reflected traditions of either unfounded
denial of specific, institutionally grounded needs and lifestyles of LGBT people, or
considered them as anecdotal or grotesque turncoat of the traditional lifestyles of
heterosexuals.
In scientific discourse the LGBT problem area was in full “possession” of the repressive
Soviet medicine, particularly, psychiatry and epidemiology (STI and HIV).
First examples of balanced, unbiased and scientific approach were the review books
by the Russian authors — Igor Kon and Leo Klein (the end of 1990s — beginning of
2000s), which still remain valuable source of information.
This initiative was picked up by authors and publishers of the Kharkov journal “Gender
Studies”, which started to publish articles on lesbian matters, written in traditions
of qualitative methodology. From time to time the journal provided coverage of
“homosexual” 1 in the contexts of culture and “male identities” 2 .
In 1997 the Dutch anthropologist Robert Oostvogels made his first visit to Ukraine.
His work became the first ethnographic description of everyday life and customs of gay
subculture in several oblast centres of Ukraine. Even though his work is not absolutely
flawless, it retains its importance as the “first glance from outside”, particularly
reflecting local colour and flavour.
As for quantitative studies, these were supported in every possible way not by academic
institutions, but by efforts of Ukrainian LGBT activists.
Within this short presentation I will try to systematize the methods that were used in
sociological studies of LGBT community on Ukraine. Detailed descriptions can be found
in relevant references in the text.
So, all global sociological studies can be divided into qualitative and quantitative.
Qualitative studies describe vivid but isolated instances or cases, so our options are
to trust or to distrust the author regarding the typicality of described phenomena.
Qualitative studies shift away from detail, providing the generalized picture — a bird's
eye perspective. Both methodologies have strengths and weaknesses; ideally good
study has to combine both particulars and generalized views. But it cannot appear in
“vacuum”. In order to formulate persuasive research programme, there should be works
describing the issue from different sides, and reflecting various issues separately. In
this regard, often scattered efforts of scholars and public activists will not be wasted.
1. Works in tradition of qualitative methodology.
These primarily include cultural and anthropological studies, or so-called works on
urban ethnography. These words, like their classic prototypes (works by Miklouho-
Maclay, Margaret Mead, Bronislaw Malinowski), are based on participant observation,
when the researcher lives the life of objects under study, speaks their language, gets
deep into detail of their customs, traditions and symbols; later on — after abandoning
1 Суковатая В. О, Лесбия, печаль
неутолённая! Лесбианизм как
Утопия и Миф о женской дружбе,
любви и сексе // Генд. иссл. —
2000. — №4. — С.340-345.
2 Здравомыслова Е., Темкина А.
От лицемерия к рационализации:
дискурсивная трансформации в
сфере сексуальных отношений //
Генд. иссл. — 2004. — №11. —
С.176-186, http://www.kcgs.org.
ua/RUSSIAN/pub/gs11/11.pdf
117