experience, interpretation and valuation of events as ‘representative of
humanity as such’ (idem) is not per se done consciously or on purpose. The
absence of wilful intent however does not mitigate its effects.
Getting othered by the ‘street corner boys’ onVerdiplein, as someone
who did not belong and whose presence was not desired, was an important
element in my fieldwork. It sensitized me to the undercurrent power plays
on the square and the dynamics of exclusion. Getting challenged on aspects
of my identity I myself deemed less relevant sensitized me to the strong
impact of the appeal to conventional truths of social hierarchy. The exer-
cises of ‘me man, you woman’ ran parallel to ‘you street boy, me elevated
researcher whose good intentions should not be questioned and whose
person should be treated with courtesy and respect’.
Relating to Young’s concept, both I and the male adolescents engaged
in a practice of cultural imperialism. Both I and the male adolescents took
our own experience and culture and established it as the norm in our reci-
procal appraisal. We did so however on different grounds and hence with
different outcomes. In the constellation of Young’s characteristics of the
domineering, I unconsciously appealed to my status as bourgeois. The rea-
lization of this came about both by the insistent ascription of my field that
I was ‘some kind of bourgeois controller’ and my own presumptuous
ascription of the male adolescents as ‘boys’. The male adolescents appealed
to their quality of being male to set the framework of reference in which
our mutual relationship balanced out.
This divergence in appraising one and the same issue, namely the social
relation between the male adolescents and myself, repeats in the divergent
appraisal of the social dynamics onVerdiplein. By thinking about the male
adolescents as ‘boys’, I on forehand categorized them and limited their
input into my research. When they in return categorized and limited my
persona to my female identity, I came into revolt. I acknowledge that I am
a female, but I contend that I am more than what Ior othersunder-
stand under that concept. Moreover, in the end I wish to be appraised on a
wider range of characteristics than this female quality. Vice versa, the male
adolescents, andVerdipleinin general, represent and encompass more than
the issues the repressive regulations on the square address.
One could argue that my female quality limited my reach as a researcher
onVerdiplein. The exact opposite can be argued as well. The following field
note comes from my first prolonged conversation with Edward. He
recounts he has seen me on the square before, trying to accost the Somali
men congregating to chew qat. He attributes my failure^18 to my quality as
‘You Are Not from Around Here, Are You.’ 13