Insider/Outsider Debate

As far as the insider/ outsider debate goes I fall in the middle with where I stand. I always think that it is good to be an insider in writing on the topics that concern you. Insiders most of the time have a more intimate knowledge of the topic they are writting on. They are able to show in addition to tell what it is like in that certain culture. When an insdier writes about his or her own culture the reader can get a better sinceof what is is like to be apart of that culture according to that insiders experience. But this can also work in a number of ways.

One way in which there might be a problem with the insider writting about the own culture is if they were not brought up in that culture. A person with Native American hertiage but who was raise around whites would be no better of a resource than someone without that heritage. In that same repect someone who is not apart of that culture biologically but has been immersed in it or has done a substantial amount of research on that culture should be able to produce some worth while reading.

The question that I would ask about this subject would be the issues that I have brought up here. Most would assume that writers should be insiders to the subject that they are writting about but is it all that nessecary if they have done the research?