My son's lecturer - I was glad he was being taught by a radical feminist, but now...

[lborgia]

My son is taking a unit in Gender, Crime, and Justice.

I was a little surprised he took that course, but very happy, but now feel it is going horribly wrong.

Because the lectures are all available online, I've seen what she says, because I wanted to check that the comments were exactly as DS described, and they were.

The lecturer insists that men become criminals because they are dealing with feelings of inferiority, and as if they're not masculine enough, and compensating.

She insists that women are criminalised by controlling men, and/or the patriarchy. That no women becomes a criminal of her own volition.

She said that only women are victims of domestic violence.

She said that all women are victims of rape, even if only because their lives are ruled by fear of rape.

There were others, but these stuck in my mind.

Oddly, I consider myself a radical feminist, but I think that a lecturer needs to deal with academic concepts, supported by sources, rather than sweeping generalisations, which are announced in purely subjective terms. I think this throws the reality out with the bathwater.

If this was a postgrad course, this could lead to debate, but with 1st year undergrads, it is making pronouncements as if they're absolutes, isn't it?

I agree that many many women end up with criminal records via drugs, sex work, stealing, which are undoubtedly usually as a result of men in their lives.

I agree that women have to live their lives with rape as a potential reality.

I do not believe that only women deal with DV, and one of the reasons my son is so upset is that his first girlfriend was so controlling, and made his life miserable. I'm still mortified that I didn't realise because it didn't occur to me that she could be doing anything wrong.

Anyway, I thought I would ask you for your thoughts and advice. I'm not going to get involved directly, it's uni, not school, but I think she is actually having the opposite impact, implying that women are by definition victims, and making my son angry and confused, when he went in keen to learn.

I think I would feel the same if my daughter had the same teacher...?

I teach A level History and that's the most challenging thing for the students, questioning the validity of historians' interpretations. By the time they get to university they will have honed this skill.

She said that all women are victims of rape, even if only because their lives are ruled by fear of rape.

'Victim' is a too strong word but otherwise, I agree with this. This was effectively what Susan Brownmiller said.

I also agree that women and children far outnumber male victims of DV and other forms of violence. The statistics attest to that.

With regard to gendered criminalisation, the research is textured and her lectures should reflect this.

Yes I broadly agree with the above post . It's the other stuff I find problematic. That women only ever commit crimes because of the patriarchy.

They are mere ciphers with no agency in that reading. Presumably they only do good works or create great art because of the patriarchy. Which is patently not the case.

Why on Earth are you poking your nose into your adult child's lecture notes? Do you sign his homework too?

This.
By all means give him your opinion if he asks for it. But generally, it's not up to you to criticise his teacher, whether he's 7 or 17.

Why would either of you waste your time commenting, without reading my posts properly? How daft.

He asked for my opinion.
He's been living at home and attending online this term, and has been approaching everyone in the house to discuss all his subjects.

I'd rather, given that he's got this far being a pretty good person, he didn't come away from this experience feeling he can dismiss everything she says as hyperbole.

I asked him how he was going to handle it. I didn't make suggestions on what to do about it.

I told him I agreed with the premise behind much of what she said, but understood it got lost in her reductive statements. I gave him space to come to his own conclusion.

@YetAnotherSpartacus - pretty much what I said to him. Dramatically phrased, sweeping statements, but I understand what's behind it. Unfortunately the genuine issue gets lost in her didactic approach.

It's not rare. The percentage of victims made up of men seems to usually be somewhere between 30-50% depending on which study you look at. It's always the lowest in government crime stats (presumably because men are known to under report) and is much higher when you ask women if they've ever hit their partner - presumably because men don't like to admit they're being beaten up by a woman.

The lecturer does sound a bit bonkers though tbh if she genuinely believes what she's saying.

Many of those statements are not radical feminist positions, for example;
no women becomes a criminal of her own volition denies women agency, which is antithetical to radical feminism.

Why would you waste your time with this pointless post? Please direct me to where he asked for your opinion, then where he needed mummy to act like the hero.

A 7 stone women hitting out at a man isn’t abuse the same was as an 18 stone man hitting a women is. So if you ask people have you ever been hit by a partner the responses you get aren’t always representative of the harm done.

@EmilyGilmoresSass - ooh, you're an ickle bit cross aren't you?!

Bless.

No, simply astounded an adult really needed his lecture notes looked at.

No, simply astounded an adult really needed his lecture notes looked at.

OP's offspring is not officially an adult at just 17.

The old chestnut that men are just as likely to be victims of DV isn't supported by the actual numbers of dead women vs dead men...

I would say she’s been massively successful.

He’s thinking hard and having internal debates himself - checking literature and discussing with you.

Hurrah for using his mind and not just being spoon-fed - tbh I was a little disappointed that a PP suggested only postgrad students should think. 😔

I’d also say those statements are not wildly inflammatory…

Undergrads should still be able to critically analyse though I admit most first year students don’t and the marking rubrics reflect this but by year 2 they are definitely expected to. Not sure if your country has the same expectations at level 4 and 5.

As an ex criminology student who has studied gender and crime I’d disagree with the lecturers viewpoints. Apart from the rape one.

The numbers of people that are actually killed are a tiny percentage of the overall number of abused.

I think this is a general problem with ‘activist’ academics.

The only time I ever got a bad mark on an essay was when I disagreed with the stance of the lecturer.

Only women can experience domestic violence = Bollocks. Men can experience is too, albeit there are more female domestic violence victims.

I'm guessing she thinks that only women can experience rape as well. Also complete bollocks. It is views like this that keep male rape victims from speaking out.

What a dangerous message to send out to teens/young adults. You'll get girls thinking that it is alright to hit their boyfriends because men can't experience domestic violence. Or thinking who cares if my boyfriend is as drunk as a skunk and can't consent because men can't experience rape.

She should meet my neighbours he regularly gets hit by his female partner and she's bigger than him. In fact last argument she stamped on his head but the one time he has retaliated to her violence he was thrown out of the house and labelled as disgusting by everyone they know. She on the other hand laughs at the fact she's stabbed him, given him a black eye and a concussion. He told work friends and they all laughed about it apart from one person.

It wouldn't be acceptable to have an incel preaching a hatred of women it shouldn't be acceptable from the other side either. Education should be balanced.

If he's not happy with the content he should complain or discuss with his supervisor. I'd be surprised if it is the way you describe, as that would generate complaints.

Yep!

OP

he does realise he's just getting one person's opinion, I hope?

@EmmaAgain22 - thanks, yes, I think that's why he talked to me about it. I've always been the one trying to teach him this perspective, and suddenly here was someone introducing a whole new level. He did come back recently and say that it is clearly one area that gets this approach, because nothing else has included this approach.

Just on previous pps, although a young adult, he only turned 17 in October. I didn't have to check his notes, he had made a note to be sure he was quoting verbatim. Also, this teacher has not taught this unit before, I think is covering a sabbatical, and this was 3 weeks in, so not a lot of time for complaints.

Thanks all.