Are any of you radical feminists?

[Jazzicatz]

I would consider myself a radical feminist. I was told yesterday that the logical conclusion to radical feminism is lesbianism and seperatism! I am not in agreement, but would love to know your opinions.

You don't have to be a woman to be a feminist.

Thank you for all your comments.

My supervisor I know has 'issues' around radical feminism that extend outside of a theoretical refutation. I know he is very well read and so forth, but as with all subjects, I believe we all hold a particular perspective, and ours differ.

I really think you do, otherwise you are just co-opting someone else's oppression. To say men can hold views which would be described as feminist, can ally with a feminist movement (even if the consequences would be personally costly), yes. To use the f-word as an identity, definitely no. Non-feminists can think feminist things.

Jazzicatz-
I don't know what funding you have in place and how much it ties you to an institution, but ffs change supervisor. If you don't feel is critique is aimed at the content of the work or geared towards successful completion then go no further if you can help it. Talk to him first to explain why and to see if the relationship can alter, but walk out if you need- your contribution to the field is at stake.

Actually, what adela says is making me think: jazz, can you/have you asked him straight out to clarify if he is arguing in order to make you justify yourself, or because he fundamentally disagrees with this argument and thinks it has no place in the academic literature of your subject?

If the former, maybe he is just being aggressive to get you to explain yourself. If the latter, he's out of order.

I am uneasy when people say they grill their students in order to teach them. It is sometimes just an excuse for bullying.

LRP

Glad I can be of some help. There are real problems of communication in this process. Last year, for instance, I found myself vigorously defending a student's MA approach (using modern theories of sex workers to examine medieval prostitution) to her second supervisor and internal examiner, yet being very hard with her, often passing on their criticisms. I tried to make it clear that I was doing so to aid the process, to ensure her passing by developing answers which would satisfy at viva, but I'm certain she didn't feel like that. There is also no reason why supervisor and supervisee should agree-my own supervisor was very much a 'historian who focussed on women' and was quite disparaging of any attempt on my part to use feminist thought, but she offered unflinching support despite her reservations when she felt my approach would not lead to failure. And I'm afraid that far too many academics have been brought up on a confrontational approach-didactic method disguised as bullying-and might sometimes need to be reminded that this is not a universally good way of teaching.

But jazzicatz relationship with her supervisor has, at this point, failed and needs restoring. It might be that they can discuss this (why are you being like this, how far is your personal disbelief going to affect the thesis) and resolve it, and that he is surprised to have caused such problems, or it might not be. He needs to think about his responsibilities and supervising style. Were I taking her on from there, though, I would stress to her that WE need to work out answers to his points about what radfem leads to if we are to defend the piece at viva. This doesn't mean making her abandon them, just locate and justify them within other approaches. Tedious for anyone to do, but very much part of the game-you write the radical stuff in the field changing first book, not the thesis that lays the research base for it.

I think even when students complain amongst themselves that the supervisor is being hard on them, they can tell the difference between someone who is trying to help (like you), and someone who wants to shut down the student's work.

My current supervisor has just told me my chapter is pretty flimsy, she's not convinced by my arguments and she's unsure about how the whole thesis will fit together. It is hard to hear but it's also perfectly obvious that she's trying to help. It doesn't really sound as if jazz's experience is like this.

LRP

I agree with you about 'grilling' though, very bad term and practice. Thank you for making me think-I'm reading this year's crop of MA and PhD proposals as I write this and may handle some of them a little differently now.

I think the problem from my end is that the first part of a PhD is anyway a process of grilling-the student will read more widely and find that material and ideas contradict or don't fit with what was intended. Somehow, though, that organic process needs speeding up in order to ensure timely completion and avoid wasted work. You also need to ensure students are willing to respond to that criticism, even if to refute it, it's an essential part of making an original and sustainable contribution. It is, however, possible to explain this and any reservations, to be intellectually aggressive and personally decent, yet achieve the speeded up 'grilling'. But it's not pleasant for students, or for supervisors, who (if they're like me) walk a perpetual tightrope between building up resilience and setting the work in context and discouraging the very enthusiasm, intellectual courage and originality which make the experience worthwhile to us too. I hope, one way or the other, jazzicatz sorts it out and goes on to have a glorious career.

and LRP too, I hadn't read your last post.

Yeah, I have a bad habit of double-posting.

I do know what you mean, exactly. But I've had some incredibly sweeping criticisms from supervisors (eg., 'this is pointless, delete it'), but it is so easy to differentiate these remarks made in a helpful contexts, from bullying. Your students might not tell you they know the difference and might accuse you of being harsh - but I bet they do know, really!

Enjoy reading the proposals.

jazzicatz also doesn't mention the extent of her relationship with him-has he worked with her before. 'Pushing to breaking point' is a crap but not uncommon method of assessing students who are otherwise unknown quantities, especially when ther eis little written work in place.

Should note I can get away with a lot because I'm a historian. I send my students off to look at some relevant sources and comment on them. The proof of the theory is whether it works and illuminates, not whether it can be abstractly defended, and the source work is valuable even if the original framing doesn't work.

I am not at the beginning of my PhD but rather towards the end, I am currently writing up. I think this is about his personal beliefs rather than a strong theoretical dislike of the literature. In terms of the thesis he is pleased with the work I have done, he just doesn't like it that rather than adopting a socialist or dual systems feminist approach, which would be his choice, I have in fact chosen a radical one. I am going to have to have it out with him I think, as the argument was not really relevant to the PhD, but rather emerged from the general chat we were having about my current chapter. This is his problem, but it has certainly soured our working relationship.

I have known him for 6 years and we have worked together on research projects and have written together. He is not normally such an arse, but he does seem to have a massive problem with radical feminism!

That's sad. But it really is none of his business what approach you take.

I think the idea that it's ok to be a little bit feminist (after all, it makes the department look nice and inclusive and frees up everyone else to do 'sensible' work), but not too feminist, is quite a common one.

But I am just a great big cynic.

Sorry to hear that and for my ignorance. This sounds very like a conversation I had with my supervisor at the same point. She was pushing me very hard to write an explicit defence of method which I felt unneeded and unnecessary, putting her own reservations on the line, and hinting darkly at failure. When I started supervising myself I contacted her and asked why she'd changed at the end, her answer was she was focussed on viva defence and was trying to give me confidence in myself by showing that she liked my work but fundamentally didn't agree with me, that I was my own scholar now and should expect this battering.

I think, however, I'm guessing the motives of a bit of a cock (or a good teacher on an appalling day) here. If you're writing up and have got this far, you should be able to progress with him (but you should also talk..)

God, the things we do to each other by hiding stuff constantly.

Of course, whether academic success should be on the basis of 'last person standing' is another matter.

There was a good article on the f-word about feminism on campus which expressed my broader reservations-feminist thought academically great, but suggestions it might be used
politically no way

Having supervised my own students through MA's and dissertations, I really cannot understand the point in completely shattering someone's confidence. I have produced a rigorous justification for my methodology as he well knows, this wasn't really about that, it was about my personal beliefs, which he is not in favour of I think. Whilst it is important that the student provides a strong justification for their approach, that is different to arguing because you don't agree with that particular approach!

Some people think of it as part of preparation for life beyond the thesis, where the work itself may matter less, for going to the job interview where the old twat across the desk is thinking 'oh feminist' and asking shit questions in order to get their favoured candidate's marxist analysis of the 14th-century fishing industry supported (sorry, little bit of personal bitterness there). I don't, but dealing with such criticism and negotiating the boundaries of personal belief (often hidden) and academic work with colleagues is a shitty part of the life we've chosen. If it's confidence destroying though, it's failed. To an outsider I would suggest that much faith is being shown in your excellence and resilience by having the conversation, that you are being treated as a colleague not a student here, however inappropriate that feels. I would only risk such a conversation with someone I thought truly excellent.

Congratulations on supervising MA theses, you must be very exceptional indeed if allowed to do that before PhD obtained, another sign of your supervisor's ultimate confidence in you.

Totally agree.

(Sorry, meant that to jazz.)

I have a lectureship from another institution separate from where I am completing my PhD, hence why I am allowed to supervise students!

Glad to hear you're employed. Even so, normal practice is you need the next qualification up to supervise. You must indeed be exceptional if externals are willing to move from this (I would do so only on the merits of the supervisor and their publication record), whatever the institution's practice, and your supervisor must have enormous belief in you to allow you to take on such work at such a critical time.

Best of luck.

Not sure about that, suspect they are just short-staffed!

Elsewhere they might not realise that

Really must get on with work, though. Best of luck to you and to LRP and to anyone else in a similar situation. This is not a good time to be in higher education, but there is hope for all of us if the profession is renewed by your intellect, passion, and pedagogical criticism. Am cheered, even if I've been less supportive than I wished to be. Thank you both.