The Contribution of Critical Pedagogy to Feminist Research on Sexual Violence

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This research entitled "The Contribution of Critical Pedagogy to Feminist Research on Sexual Violence" presents an exciting review and reflection on the methodological challenges in feminist research in Spain focused on sexual violence. From my point of view, it seems to be a work of adequate quality and necessary. However, I have some questions for the authors, and in addition, I present suggestions.
1. Why do the authors set the date from 2015 to 2022? Is there any particular reason? Authors must state the reasons for this decision.
2. Why haven't the authors done a systematic review?
3. Considering the nature of the study, it is convenient to create two sections in the discussion about common errors in this type of study and advice on good practices for researchers who decide to investigate the subject.
4. There are errors in the references and citations; please check them.

Many successes with your study.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Aim an objectives

R26-36 must be moved to R90 after ().

R143 ... "very recent" becomes "recently".

R344 ...after the "education model" a bibliographic reference must be placed in ().

Before the conclusions, a few sentences about the limits must be written.

No bibliography at the conclusion section.

33- must be written in palatine linotype;

34?

35?

39, 41, 42, 43, 47, 48, 50, 53, 56, 58 must be rewritten according to MDPI requirements.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Point 1: R26-36 must be moved to R90 after ().

Response 1: Agreed, this has been done.

Point 2: R143 ... "very recent" becomes "recently".

Response 2: Agreed, we have changed this.

Point 3: ...after the "education model" a bibliographic reference must be placed in ().

Response 3: We suggest placing the following reference:

Sánchez, Natalia, Erika María Sandoval, Ruth Liliana Goyeneche, Dany Esteban Gallego, Leidy Yurany Aristizabal. 2018. La pedagogía crítica desde la perspectiva de Freire, Giroux, y Mclaren: su pertinència en el contexto de Colombia y América Latina. Revista Espacios, 39 (10), 41. [CrossRef]

Point 4: Before the conclusions, a few sentences about the limits must be written.

Response 4: With regard to the limitations of the study, we wish to highlight the absolute lack of critical pedagogy studies on praxis in cases of sexual violence. Only our own research in this field in recent years enabled to address this challenge. There is no doubt that if we had been able to draw on other studies, the article would have been significantly enriched.

To deal with this limitation, in future studies we propose to broaden the literature in Spanish, extending it to other parts of the world. Specifically, we aim to carry out the same study in the Latin American context, home of some of the most important theorists of critical pedagogy and consequently the area of its greatest development. In our view this broadening of the field would enrich both feminist research and the praxis of critical pedagogy on sexual violence.

Point 5: No bibliography at the conclusion section.

Response 5: Agreed. We suggest adding the following references:

In this article we have presented an overview of feminist research on sexual violence in Spain in order to explore some of its achievements and limitations. To do so, we conducted a review of recent literature and subsequently outlined the premises of feminist research being employed in contemporary empirical research on sexual violence.

Even though there are still very few empirical studies on sexual violence in Spain, feminist epistemology and methodology are gaining ground through the application of some of its premises (situated knowledge, formulation of questions that relate to women’s lives and experiences, giving prominence to women’s voices, a commitment to social transformation, and analysis informed by feminist theories, etc.) (Biglia & Bonet, 2015). Although still insufficient, these advances are politically significant as they provide new knowledge that breaks with categories and points of view that are rooted in inequality between genders or monolithic and uniform visions of the problem of sexual violence (Haraway, 1988; Anderson, 2015; Ruan, 2020).

Beyond this somewhat slow progress in the production of feminist knowledge on sexual violence, feminist research presents us with methodological challenges that still require development (Jiménez, 2021). In this article, we have identified a number of ways that critical pedagogy can contribute to feminist research and we have illustrated this with examples from two recent research studies we have participated in.

Until now these two forms of knowledge production have not been connected in the area of sexual violence, but from our point of view, both forms of action-research are parallel strategies that can provide feedback to one another through horizontal and bidirectional dialogue (Luna et al. in press). Concepts such as co-production of knowledge, (de)construction of hegemonic paradigms of knowledge and power, participation, horizontal communication, and humanisation are resources from critical pedagogy that can be useful in overcoming the methodological challenges of research praxis proposed by feminist research. Critical pedagogy contributes to the demystification of entrenched inequality and power (Freire, 1985) by unmasking the barriers that impede people from developing their critical capacities and bringing about social transformation. Critical-social reflection and the deconstruction of social categories and androcentric forms of knowledge favour new forms of equitable and democratic social order (Luna et al. in press).

As such, both critical pedagogy and feminist research methodology foster the transformation of social reality through participative techniques of knowledge production that question the bases of gendered knowledge and therefore reveal the underlying structures of privilege and domination. Research on sexual violence is a field where both forms of knowledge production and participation can go hand in hand and can be mutually enriching.

Point 6: 33- must be written in palatine linotype;

Response 6: We have modified this.

Point 7: 34?

Response 7: This is anonymous because they refer to work by the authors of the article, which, following the blind revision, we have eliminated. In the article that includes the identification of the autors the references are correctly included.

Point 8: 35?

Response 8: This is anonymous because they refer to work by the authors of the article, which, following the blind revision, we have eliminated. In the article that includes the identification of the autors the references are correctly included.

Point 9: 39, 41, 42, 43, 47, 48, 50, 53, 56, 58 must be rewritten according to MDPI requirements.

Response 9: We don’t find the mistakes in the next references: 42, 43, 48, 50 and 53. Could you tell me where are the mistakes, please? Thank you so much.

The other references have been modified according to MDPI requirements.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

1. No bibliographic reference should be made to the conclusions.

2. I ask the authors to write the bibliography correctly. Follow the MDPI requirements. Wrongly written bibliography cannot be tracked by search engines and citations cannot be reported.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf