3.Methodology

The methodology of this research while considering inbetween space which is informed by three narratives was based on the definition of "in-between" which is developed by Elizabeth Grosz. According to Grosz, the in-between state is a descriptive thing that enables the formation of identities, allows existence, even though it lacks identity, form and quality. Grosz points out to potential of inbetweenness by emphasizing that the transition of the in-between notion to its own formation enables it to establish another relationship with different meanings. The in-between approach has also been used in architecture and has allowed the formation of new spatial relationships and approaches.

“Instead of conceiving of relations between fixed identities, between entities or things that are only externally bound, the in-between is the only space of movement, of development or becoming: the in-between defines the space of a certain virtuality, a potential that always threatens to disrupt the operations of the identities that constitute it.”

(Elizabeth Grosz, Architecture From Outside ,2001)20

This research paper develops “space of in-betweenness" in the context of Turkish queer immigrants' queerness, immigrants and cultural experiences in the Netherlands.

3.1. Community-led Research

This research is also seeking an answer that how it is possible to queering academic research, which is highly patriarchal, authoritarian, hierarchical, and has strict rules and what is queer

20 Elizabeth Grosz, Architecture From Outside,(Massachusetts Institte of Technology,2001) pp 9293 method and methodology in academic research. In line with queer theories, queer can be associated with actions such as disrupting identities, dualities and norms, becoming dynamic, constantly destroying, and crossing borders. Queer is a process rather than an ideal to be achieved. In this context, we can consider queer as an action rather than an adjective. That’s why "queering" may discussed as a part of our daily practices that we constantly repeat. There is a concern about queering academic research while focusing on researcher/subject and researched/topic as an identity and duality in this research paper. On that point, methodology was planned around the discussion about norms of academic production and its subversion and transgression and dynamism among the research, the researcher and the topic. These components are significant to deal with ethical part of this research.

Along with feminist criticism, the importance of subjectivity and experience in academic studies emerged. The claim that the researcher should be objective became critical. When considered together with queer theory, the destruction of researcher- researched and subject(l)-object(l) dualities and fixed identities can be significant part to think about. Is it the researcher who produces academic research? How can research exist without the knowledge of the researched? How does the relationship between the researcher and the researched affect the research? How do the identities, experiences and transformations of the researcher and the researched affect the research in the process? When these questions are considered from a queer perspective, it is seen that research is a very complex process. It is necessary to think of research as a relational, dynamic field where the components do not dominate over each other. In this direction, queerizing the components of the research and their relationality has been considered in this research paper.

While developing “space of in-betweenness", the design principles mentioned in Sasha Costanza-Chock’s book “Design Justice: Community-Led Practices to Build the Worlds We Need” will be applied into the process.

Sasha Costanza-Chock21 approaches the established dominant design paradigm from a justice lens in her book. She is questioning power in design processes while considering design justice. She brings out the relation of design, power and social justice by considering hegemonic universal design. The book presents us a way of designing which has concerns about the needs and experiences of people who are most marginalized within the matrix of domination. Designing or researching with people requires great responsibility, participatory-design discourse is not just about extracting feelings, ideas and experiences of marginalized community.

She shared Design Justice Network Principles22 that developed in workshop which was planned by Una Lee, Jenny Lee, and Melissa Moore in 2015. Main goal of Design Justice Network Principles is putting people who are normally marginalized by design to the center of design in design process. Working in collaboration is most important part of creative practices to address the deepest challenges that communities face. Design justice not only changes past injustices of the design or research process, but also erases barriers for the future while breaking the forms and dynamics of hierarchical research or design process. Design justice relationship between sociotechnical systems design and power and it's also about this growing community of designers, developers, artists, researchers, community organizers and many others who are interested in building the discourse and the theory and practice of design justice together. Design Justice inspired this research with critical analysis of the matrix of domination. The current DJN principles are listed on the main website:

“1. We use design to sustain, heal, and empower our communities, as well as to seek liberation from exploitative and oppressive systems.

21 Sasha Costanza-Chock, Design Justice: Community-Led Practices to Build the Worlds We Need, (The MIT Press,2020), pp 5-9

22 Ibid, pp 6-7

2. We center the voices of those who are directly impacted by the outcomes of the design process.

3. We prioritize design’s impact on the community over the intentions of the designer.

4. We view change as emergent from an accountable, accessible, and collaborative process, rather than as a point at the end of a process.

5. We see the role of the designer as a facilitator rather than an expert.

6. We believe that everyone is an expert based on their own lived experience, and that we all have unique and brilliant contributions to

7. We share design knowledge and tools with our communities.

8. We work towards sustainable, led and controlled outcomes.

9. We work towards exploitative solutions that reconnect us to the earth and to each other.

10. Before seeking new design solutions, we look for what is already working at the munity level. We honor and uplift traditional, indigenous, and local knowledge and practices.”

Turkish queer immigrants in the Netherlands are a marginalized community that reconceptualize the system in which class, race and gender are interlocked mentioned in the book.23 These individuals are visible at their intersections. That's why this research fits in the frame of multi-axis analysis in which race, class, or gender is considered as an interlocking construct to support social justice and visibility of this community.

This research used participatory research method based on design justice in order to premediate ethics with the participation of queer Turkish immigrant individuals. In participatory research method, the roles of the researcher and user are blurred. Individuals participate directly in the design process and express themself. Co-creative research is a significant part of this method because the researched community is not a passive object and researcher doesn’t extract information and their experience for the research. In co-creative research, the roles are blurred, and mixed, researched community plays a role in whole process in research.