Clubbing masculinities: Gender shifts in gay men's dance floor choreographies

This is an Author's Accepted Manuscript of an article published in Journal of Homosexuality, 58(5), 608-625, 2011 [copyright Taylor & Francis], available online at: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/00918369.2011.563660This article adopts an interdisciplinary approach to understanding the intersections of gender, sexuality, and dance. It examines the expressions of sexuality among gay males through culturally popular forms of club dancing. Drawing on political and musical history, I outline an account of how gay men's gendered choreographies changed throughout the 1970s, 80s, and 90s. Through a notion of “technologies of the body,” I situate these developments in relation to cultural levels of homophobia, exploring how masculine expressions are entangled with and regulated by musical structures. My driving hypothesis is that as perceptions of cultural homophobia decrease, popular choreographies of gay men's dance have become more feminine in expression. Exploring this idea in the context of the first decade of the new millennium, I present a case study of TigerHeat, one of the largest weekly gay dance club events in the United States

Rigor and Ethics in the World of Big-team Qualitative Data: Experiences From Research in International Development

In the large international projects where many qualitative researchers work, generating qualitative Big Data, data sharing represents the status quo. This is rarely acknowledged, even though the ethical implications are considerable and span both process and product. I argue that big-team qualitative researchers can strengthen claims to rigor in analysis (the product) by drawing on a growing body of knowledge about how to do credible secondary analysis. Since this necessitates a full account of how the research and the analysis are done (the process), I consider the structural disincentives for providing these. Debates around credibility and rigor are not new to qualitative research in international development, but they intensify when new actors such as program evaluators and quantitative researchers use qualitative methods on a large scale. In this context, I look at the utility of guidelines used by these actors to ensure the quality of qualitative research. I ask whether these offer pragmatic suggestions to improve its quality, recognizing the common and hierarchized separation between the generation and interpretation of data, or conversely, whether they set impossible standards and fail to recognize the differences between and respective strengths of qualitative and quantitative research

What rheumatologists in the United States think of complementary and alternative medicine: results of a national survey

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>We aimed to describe prevailing attitudes and practices of rheumatologists in the United States toward complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) treatments. We wanted to determine whether rheumatologists' perceptions of the efficacy of CAM therapies and their willingness to recommend them relate to their demographic characteristics, geographic location, or clinical practices.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A National Institutes of Health-sponsored cross-sectional survey of internists and rheumatologists was conducted regarding CAM for treatment of chronic back pain or joint pain. In this study we analyzed responses only from rheumatologists. Response items included participant characteristics and experience with 6 common CAM categories, as defined by the National Institutes of Health. Descriptive statistics were used to describe attitudes to CAM overall and to each CAM category. Composite responses were devised for respondents designating 4 or more of the 6 CAM therapies as "very" or "moderately" beneficial or "very likely" or "somewhat likely" to recommend.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 600 rheumatologists who were sent the questionnaire, 345 responded (58%); 80 (23%) were women. Body work had the highest perceived benefit, with 70% of respondents indicating benefit. Acupuncture was perceived as beneficial by 54%. Most were willing to recommend most forms of CAM. Women had significantly higher composite benefit and recommend responses than men. Rheumatologists not born in North America were more likely to perceive benefit of select CAM therapies.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In this national survey of rheumatologists practicing in the United States, we found widespread favorable opinion toward many, but not all, types of CAM. Further research is required to determine to what extent CAM can or should be integrated into the practice of rheumatology in the United States.</p

Seasonal influenza vaccination of healthcare workers : Systematic review of qualitative evidence

Background Most countries recommend that healthcare workers (HCWs) are vaccinated seasonally against influenza in order to protect themselves and patients. However, in many cases coverage remains low. A range of strategies have been implemented to increase uptake. Qualitative evidence can help in understanding the context of interventions, including why interventions may fail to achieve the desired effect. This study aimed to synthesise evidence on HCWs’ perceptions and experiences of vaccination for seasonal influenza. Methods Systematic review of qualitative evidence. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL and included English-language studies which reported substantive qualitative data on the vaccination of HCWs for seasonal influenza. Findings were synthesised thematically. Results Twenty-five studies were included in the review. HCWs may be motivated to accept vaccination to protect themselves and their patients against infection. However, a range of beliefs may act as barriers to vaccine uptake, including concerns about side-effects, scepticism about vaccine effectiveness, and the belief that influenza is not a serious illness. HCWs value their autonomy and professional responsibility in making decisions about vaccination. The implementation of interventions to promote vaccination uptake may face barriers both from HCWs’ personal beliefs and from the relationships between management and employees within the targeted organisations. Conclusions HCWs’ vaccination behaviour needs to be understood in the context of HCWs’ relationships with each other, with management and with patients. Interventions to promote vaccination should take into account both the individual beliefs of targeted HCWs and the organisational context within which they are implemented