Academic attainment and feminism?

[suwoo]

I have wanted to start this thread all day but have been scared that it is stupid or I will be flamed. I want to ask if people feel there is a correlation between academic attainment and feminist principles. Is that a valid question?
I had no idea that I was a feminist. I knew I had these thoughts and principles but didn't know what they were or the significance of them until we did feminist literary theory this semester- it was like an epiphany and my whole world made sense

Had I not gone to uni at the grand old age of 35, maybe I would never had these revelations.

What do you think? Those of you that identify as a feminist, what level of education do you have?

Yeah, I think that's it exactly - she's writing beautifully there, but that is presumably exactly what inspires other people to go and write about the same ideas in other ways, so she doesn't have to be the last word on the subject.

Incidentally, I have a little one-woman campaign going about crappy sexist language of inspiration in academia since one of my teachers a long time ago told me 'seminal' was a much more academic word than 'inspirational'.

Sure, but that's why it's no disrespect to her to say someone else could go correct (or enlarge on?) the stuff about fairytales, isn't it?

As a complete ignoramus* about all things academic, can someone explain why discussions about feminism and the academia always end up circling around lit crit?

*I have a BA in Economics from a tin pot outfit. I was exposed to no explicit feminism whatsoever in my entire educational career and all of my knowledge comes from my lived experience and MN (and the suggestions of links and books posted on here).

Me too.

(Sorry, that last was to dittany).

Aye - more people study lit. crit. than women's studies; more people teach it. I expect it's no more than that though I do think it makes it quite complicated, and I'm a lit. person myself.

Was that to me?

I think it'd be better for someone like me to teach Dworkin's ideas plus accurate/more detailed work on her textual subject-matter, if I were teaching fairy tales. Makes sense. I don't think it's fair to say someone shouldn't be taught at all because of inaccuracies in something that's not their main subject, of course.

Where do you think I should start with teaching Dworking (or other theorists you like) in lit crit? I'm thinking I will do the Chaucer story alongside something explicitly feminist theory next time, so that's a start.

It's not, I should make clear, why I return always to the subject of the written word and the literary tradition. It's because I happen to think that words and writing are of central importance in our world. I fully appreciate that I have a warped and disproportionate take on this. It's also because that is my (long-distant) academic training, and I make my living these days putting words on the page (often for publications I wouldn't even dare to mention on these threads).

It is entirely possible, of course, that over the ensuing decades I have become a mere sniggering pawn of the patriarchy. But I really don't think my English degrees are instrumental in that.

Understood - sorry, I wasn't clear.

I think I ought to get off this thread as I'm tending towards hijacking to work out how to teach feminist theory in my lit. crit. lessons and it's quite right, it's a bit of a side issue (except in that there are lots of people who study lit. crit., so a big potential audience)

It's not an insult, dittany - I said theorist you like (pl.) because I am planning to ask people on here to help me work out who might be best to read. I'm not implying you like them for any reason but the obvious.

From where I sit, as a woman who is a practical feminist, as AnyFucker once described herself, the time for pontificating about feminism in a literary sphere as a main focus of attention is not here yet. I am not saying that those doing the lit crit are not doing an interesting job, nor that it may not be productive in getting students to think in a different way about feminist issues or lots of other worthy stuff. But it just doesn't seem very effective in changing the status quo. And that's what will help rape victims, mothers who are hamstung in their life choices, trafficked women, women who are cat-called, women who are (or who are at risk from being) shunned from their families because of the decisions they make etc etc ad infinitum. So where in the academy do those people sit?

I really hope that I win the euromillions tonight. If I do, I hereby undertake to plough money into feminist research that can be used to force the patriarchy-colluders to sit up and take notice. Actually, I have a massive list of things feministy that I will do if I had that kind of cash. Vive la revolution!

I'm a journalist, Dittany. I write for all sorts of things from women's magazines to trade health publications. I write mainly about health but I have written about all kinds of things, from domestic violence to the problems faced by young people with learning disabilities when they are moving from child to adult services.

But in answer to your rhetorical question, no it is not why I am 'sneering' at Dworkin. I just don't feel like getting carped at for writing for mainstream publications.

x posted a lot there.

dittany - It was me that found the link to the Counting for Nothing doc and I still haven't watched it. Tut, tut. I will do it tomorrow.