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?

Um, not Up

One lady did try to make my point. I was trying to say that I cant understand why women who are not university educated seem to find it hard to associate themselves with feminism and how to encourage them. I must admit I clammed up a little and felt really stupid. She actually said that she was not going to apologise to me just because she was middle class!!!! A lady came over to me afterwards and told me she thought it was her who looked stupid, not me. I did feel better after that. The lady who made me feel small has not been to a meeting since so I havent had chance to speak to her again.

MrsClown, How bizarre that that woman said that to you. Even girl children understand feminism! They can see that boys are treated differently and that that's unfair!
I imagine that for her to try to dress you down like that she must have felt threatened by your superior MUmsnet Feminist Education.
I have learned so much on here. I've never studied feminism either.

MrsClown - What a twunt that woman was. I think sakura's theory is right.

Incidentally, Kate Middleton has a university education, doesn't she? Clearly it's not a magic bullet!

Thanks for that all of you. I felt like telling her that I have had enough of men trying to make me feel stupid, I dont need women doing it too, especially supposed feminists.

Do it!

Having a degree does not 'make' you clever. If she thinks she was stupid before she did her degree, chances are that inside she still thinks she is stupid and uses the degree to hide it. If you had a degree too, she'd probably find another way to make herself feel better.

Why is it less ok to make a point about Kate Middleton than about academic women?

I don't think I was slagging her off - if KM feels that being a feminist is an important part of her identity she's doing a bloody good job of hiding it. Much more likely is that she simply doesn't see herself as a feminist - like a lot of women.

I think that perhaps to state that a lot of academic feminists don't understand the basic tenets of feminism is a little bit unsisterly. Wouldn't it be less antagonistic to say, "I happen to disagree with many academic feminists on what the basic tenets of feminism are".

There are various versions of feminism, but I don't think it's helpful to just discount or ridicule other women's versions.

dittany, that is exactly what I said. She doesn't claim to be a feminist. She went to university; clearly university does not make feminists of us all. What's wrong with saying that? She was just a visible example that came to my mind, but I don't see the harm - it seems very unlikely she would object to anyone saying she wasn't a feminist, unless (as I said), she is hiding it very, very well for reasons of her own.

Those issues are a small subset of academic women's interests, and don't correspond to my interests or research areas, or those of any of the many academic feminists I know. None of my feminist colleagues have any interest in arguing for the sex industry or "choice feminism".

But even if they do, I quite appreciate people (like Judith Butler) who I don't agree with but who challenge me to reconsider some of my preconceptions about gender. Or about porn or the sex industry (things I'm automatically against). Academia is a place where we can look at the foundations of our assumptions and challenge them, not just reiterate them blindly. it's not anti-feminist to urge people to consider the possibility of gender being insignificant, say.

dittany, I said she could be hiding the fact she's a feminist. I said it twice, actually. Obviously, I don't know if she is or not. Patently, she must be aware that her choices do not look like those a feminist would make. I suspect she feels perfectly happy about that. Many women don't define themselves as feminists and do not see a problem with it.

I do think there are aspects of KM's public persona that are not compatible with feminism - in the wedding alone, the white dress, the veil, being 'given away' by her father - these are all things people regularly discuss on MN as potential problems for feminists getting married.

If you feel she's a bad example, that is fair enough. But it's not what I said. All I said was that she's an example (a very visible one just now) of a woman who's been to university but has not become a declared feminist.

You know that other thread about where might you find a hotbed of radical feminist activity in UK academia? Well, I have this suspicion that Art History at St Andrews might be the opposite of that.

fennel, just in support of poor misrepresented Art Historians everywhere, I will say that one of my lovely supervisors is an Art Historian and quite obviously a feminist. She's great.

LRDTheFeministDragon " Clearly it's not a magic bullet"

Unsisterly but PMSL!

"We don't have to slag off Kate Middleton do we?"

no, you're right I have been defending her a lot. It's just that magic bullet term...

I honestly didn't mean that as a slagging-off comment. I just meant it's a bit daft of whoever spoke to MrsClown to think that university does something special to women that makes them into feminists.

I know lots of women like KM who would never say publicly that they were feminists. Obviously I disagree with their reasons, but that's their choice.

A bit off topic but why do many feminist have a problem with the white dress, the veil, being 'given away' by her father - these are all things people regularly discuss on MN as potential problems for feminists getting married

Personally for me wearing a veil or a white dress is a non-issue unworthy of interest, however the whole construct and meaning of marriage may actually be what is actually anti-women and the traditions and ceremony are just outward manifestations of this that actually serve to reinforce aspects such as protection and control, control of fertility and off spring and monetary resources.

I also think these so called anti-feminist feminists that Dittany refers to probably studied radical feminism in the 60/70's Whilst they might have identified with some of it they were also influenced by other liberal ideas as well. There core beliefs when translated appear liberal not feminist and they have opted into such ideas as women should be empowered to sell sex if they want money and they want sex. Ignoring the fact that the vast majority of women in the sex industry lack power and money, otherwise we might see more women paying men for sex with big city bonuses! these women see themselves as equal, strong, powerful and free and have side stepped all the very inconvenient truths about the experiences of their fellow women. These liberal ideas play into patriarchy and perpetuate the idea that women sell sex and men are free to buy it.

I?ve just finished feminism and youth culture, quite a dull book but the middle class researchers studied a cohort of working class girls, most of whom only aspired to have babies and claim benefits. Why? because their boyfriends couldn't support them and these girls only had access to a relatively small pool of possible male partners. It may well be that feminism for these girls is freedom from a bad marriage or violence and the ability to claim benefits in their own name. This is not what Dittany's anti-F academics just discover but what many unwittingly have encouraged. Whilst working class women may struggle against male oppression they fail to actually undermine it totally. White middle class men pay their benefits through the state, they are kept in a cycle of poverty and offered very few avenues out. Female academics would prefer to believe these economically vulnerable women have the same freedoms rather than acknowledge the sad truth.

"Female academics would prefer to believe these economically vulnerable women have the same freedoms rather than acknowledge the sad truth".

This is more of the blanket slagging off of academic feminists. Most of the women I work with are concerned with improving and widening the options for more women, including working class girls, not denying the class differences (if you work with sociologists you don't get to ignore social class).

I'm not saying they don't make mistakes but they are struggling against the system, in various different ways, trying to make a difference to women's lives.

I think that being well educated in certain fields goes a long way to help feminists understand that everything that they feel is an injustice is not the sole fault of men.

Certainly my experience is that so-called feminists with no understanding of basic economic concepts bark very consistently up the wrong tree.