Although I have given my research participants pseudonyms, most of them choose not to be anonymous to me when answering the questions through email. In many cases they are my friends who have answered the questions to be helpful. I appreciate that they have bared their lives to me as they did, knowing that it makes them more vulnerable to me within our friendship. Although I sent them my own answers to the same questions, the power is still imbalanced in that I now possess their answers for publication. Because I want my dissertation to be good, I am beginning to feel the weight of the responsibility I have taken on in relation to the women I interviewed.

It is a challenge to me to ensure that in analyzing and reporting the data I stick to what I actually have, and not read what I know about them into what was said. One thing I'm doing to help is I've removed the responses from the email addresses and associated them only with the chosen pseudonyms. Over time this helps me to forget who was who.

It's a challenge to keep the data from seeping into my friendships. If something was written to me in an interview, it's not something I can speak to you or others about at a Pride brunch, at your house or at a TBN party. I can't tell you how your girlfriend feels about the problems in your relationship based on her interview. I can't give you my personal opinion on your identity or relationship (although I certainly have one). In some ways, I realize I have to prioritize my commitments to the participants over that of my community and circle of friends, even (perhaps especially because) they overlap.

At the same time, I can't let some of the things I know from being a community member slip into the research. Some of the things I know would be interesting to juxtapose against the data I have. Particularly those things which relate to the focus of my work: transition points in bi women's identity, definitions of monogamy and polyamory, and notions of community belonging. Some of these things have to be kept out because they were received in a confidential space, such as a BiWOT meeting. Other things are privileged because they were said to me as a friend.

In many ways, it's similar to my work as a journalist, particularly when I worked with vulnerable populations like bisexuals, transmen and transwomen. Having a code of ethics that empowered the people I interviewed was difficult, especially when it meant killing a story. But it was good practice for this kind of research, because it gave me experience in responsible use of material, ownership of information, and accountability to the people who spoke with me. There is a cost (in convenience, in time, in money, in power), to doing feminist research, but it also leaves me feeling that I can still look people in the eye after my work is done.