The social sciences have accommodated changes in methodological and epistemological thought. These include 'new' sociology/cultural studies (e.g., Atkinson, 1990; Du Gay, 1997; Long, 1997), new cultural and human geographies (e.g., Jackson, 1993; Mansvelt, 2005; Massey, 2005) and new leisure studies (Aitchison, 1999). In these cases, the term new does not imply creation of new sub-disciplines, or a total rejection of earlier or 'traditional' thinking, but rather it is used as a broad reference to communicate a diversity of work that transgresses the disciplinary boundaries to knowledge construction. As tourism and hospitality studies are fields in which a diverse range of disciplines have exercised their influence, it is surprising that only recently have these broader philosophical and methodological issues begun to be incorporated (e.g., Franklin & Crang, 2001; Hollinshead 1999; Phillimore & Goodson, 2004; Tribe, 1997). However, studies addressing a whole variety of issues such as power, 'Othering', gender, race, sexuality, embodiment, subjectivity and alternative methodologies (Aitchison, 2001; Hollinshead & Jamal, 2007; Johnston, 2001; Pritchard, 2004) demonstrate that we are now following the lead of the social sciences, and moving into the field of new tourism research (Tribe, 2005). Tribe contends that tourism and hospitality studies are beginning to make a slow retreat from the binds of logical empiricism (which we would argue are still firmly entrenched within tourism and hospitality academia). In doing so, Tribe argues, we have moved beyond a strait-jacketed fascination with positivistic research to embrace more reflexive and critical paths of inquiry.