Can a man teach feminism?

[lucydogz]

Reading the Guardian colour supp today, an article about gal dem quotes 2 young black women saying they were shocked, when taking a class on Feminism at Bristol university, that it was taken by white man.
Firstly, I see no relevance in his race. But why shouldn't a man teach Feminism?

No, Lass - and it is rather base of you to insinuate such frivolity.

I am just saying that men who have lived their lives as men have no business in lecturing people about feminism, because as men, they really don't have a clue about what it is to be a girl and then a woman.

Being a girl and then a woman is not just a matter of choosing an academic subject to study, dispassionately.

Being a woman is not a religion; being a woman is not a belief; being a woman is not some sort of theoretic paradigm.

Being a woman is biology.

A man cannot educate me about being a woman, because he would not know, because he is a man.

It is not humanly possible to objectively teach about various beliefs or philosophies

All teaching has a degree of bias, students need to be aware of that.

However, teaching is not proselytising.

Can a medical student be taught about childbirth by someone who hasn't given birth? Or diabetes by a lecturer without it? Or Chinese history by a black lecturer?

A man cannot educate me about being a woman, because he would not know, because he is a man

He isn't educating you about being a woman. He is teaching you about a poltical theory.

Can a medical student be taught about childbirth by someone who hasn't given birth? Or diabetes by a lecturer without it? Or Chinese history by a black lecturer?

Of course they can.

"The problem with men teaching feminism is that a key goal of feminism is to free women from having our world view and ways of understanding our own experience filtered through and limited by male perspectives and male authority. We are socialised to accept this authority and men are socialised to exert it over us. It's like asking cats to teach mice self-defence."

Is the argument not flawed? If a women can get over her socialisation to be a feminist, why can a man's socialisation be assumed?

Of course a man can do the role. It's not about trying to convert people it's about giving them the tools to understand the theories and issues, not socialising them or brainwashing them.

"filtered through and limited by male perspectives and male authority"

But that is an assumption that he is incapable of being unbiased and would discuss with students the material on the syllabus only through his narrative, rather than fact based. Moreover, consider a white history teacher: "filtered through and limited by white perspectives and white authority". Can a white history teacher teach about slavery in the US, or history generally in which white countries, particularly the British Empire let's not forget, have subjugated much of the world. What about the fact that in California they now teach LGBT history. Do they now need to get LGBT teachers to come in to teach this module? I think Tallulah's point is actually the best argument presented so far, but I still believe if one is honest about the logic underpinning, the problem she points out applies to many things in teaching.

" I should accept that his own academic studies overrule my own lived experience. I don't agree."

So then I repeat - you (although I think earlier I replied to someone else, so this you is general) don't want an academic discipline called feminism but a political movement. In which case, yes, I very much agree a woman should teach it.

"This means that reflecting on lived experience becomes part of the learning process, and part of the means of assessment. I'm not sure a man could adequately facilitate this in a university course on feminism."

Again with the experience. Do you want the course to be "I have experienced this this and that throughout my life"? That is a) not academic and b) just pointing out examples of sexism in every day life.

"Being a woman is biology.

A man cannot educate me about being a woman, because he would not know, because he is a man."

How many women here have male OB-GYNs? Do you not listen to them because they can't "educate you about female biology"?

Presumably the theoretical lecturer on feminism would have to teach about radical feminism (aka the only true feminism for most posters on here) and liberal feminism (aka choosy choice , watered down hand maidenry as it is usually dismissed on here)- or is that bias ok if it were a woman?

Can a white history teacher teach about slavery in the US, or history generally

Given the ethnic make up of the UK if they can't then those subjects would be off limits in the school I went to in a part of rural Scotland which is still overwhelmingly white.

Again with the experience. Do you want the course to be "I have experienced this this and that throughout my life"? That is a) not academic and b) just pointing out examples of sexism in every day life.

It sounds like you think that reflecting on one's experience as part of the learning process has no place in academic enquiry. Is that because you believe the best approach is some version of the Socratic method, with the lecturer as expert? Would this work just as well in Feminism as, say, law or medicine?

If a women can get over her socialisation to be a feminist, why can a man's socialisation be assumed?

My point is that if a man has genuinely overcome the socialisation that predisposes him to assume he is a higher authority on women's experience etc than we are, he is probably not going to apply for a job teaching feminism.

I'm aware of a number of men who have at least largely overcome this socialisation. One way you can tell is that their teaching efforts are largely directed to men and boys and they listen to women on issues affecting women rather than telling or teaching us.

Is that because you believe the best approach is some version of the Socratic method, with the lecturer as expert? Would this work just as well in Feminism as, say, law or medicine?

Would you be happy with say Laurie Penny or Polly Vernon teaching that radical feminism is bigoted and has had its day?

If you aren't, then clearly a Socratic method saying these are the tenets of radical feminisim and these are the tenets of liberal feminism. Whilst they overlap there is a view , particularly amongst radical feminists, that liberal feminism betrays the fundamental principles of feminism.

Do you want your female lecturer with her "lived experience" proselytizing one over the other?

"My point is that if a man has genuinely overcome the socialisation that predisposes him to assume he is a higher authority on women's experience etc than we are, he is probably not going to apply for a job teaching feminism."

Who is we? I am quite willing to accept that a man who is highly educated in the theory of a subject is much more qualified than me to teach in that subject. Being a women doesn't automatically mean you/me/any other woman knows more.

It's fine giving those examples of men who listen to women, but do they listen to non feminist women too (the majority apparently) or just the ones they agree with.

Feminism is more than a set of theories, it's a practice.

I'm sure someone who wasn't a surgeon / gardener / meditation practitioner / what you will could in theory teach those practices based purely on an understanding derived from books.

But I wouldn't personally be employing any of their trainees.

Sorry meant

Whilst they overlap there is a view , amongst some radical feminists, that liberal feminism betrays the fundamental principles of feminism. But that is for you to make your own minds up on

I am quite willing to accept that a man who is highly educated in the theory of a subject is much more qualified than me to teach in that subject. Being a women doesn't automatically mean you/me/any other woman knows more

Exactly- what is being taught is the philosophical and political principles of feminism not how to be a feminist.

Feminism is more than a set of theories, it's a practice

If it is being taught as an academic subject it is nothing more than a set of theories. It is not teaching you how to be a feminist. It is teaching feminist theory. Your comparisons with actual skilled trades are specious.

Why don't they teach surgery as an academic subject do you think?

Do you want your female lecturer with her "lived experience" proselytizing one over the other?

I'm a bit surprised that anyone would see proselytising as the only alternative to the Socratic method. Critical reflection is commonplace in a number of academic disciplines and is used alongside other pedagogies. From what I've read, it's one of the approaches actually used in Women's Studies courses. I'd guess (although I haven't looked into it) that most Women's Studies courses would include both radical and liberal perspectives, since these are areas of debate among feminists.

If I were a student and considering taking a course in feminism or women's studies I'd expect it to cover a range of material in a variety of ways, and be taught by someone with appropriate experience. In practice, in 21st century Britain, that will be a woman with an academic career whose background includes some feminist engagement in non-academic contexts.

Why don't they teach surgery as an academic subject do you think?

Why do you think they don't? You are comparing apples and oranges. Universities don't teach feminism to produce qualified feminists. "Feminist" is not a skilled profession or trade.

Do you think students are taught about the principles of Marxism because the desired end result is a qualified, practising Marxist? Do you think the theory of Marxism can only be taught as an academic subject by a Marxist to budding baby Marxists? Because that us what you are saying.

Is racism only understood by racists?

Do you (general you who think men can't teach feminism) think men should be allowed to take feminism as an academic course?

"Feminism is more than a set of theories, it's a practice."

So you are saying an academic course on feminism should have as an end result a subservient set of followers of feminism? Sounds a lot more like ideological indoctrination than an academic discipline.

I think this thread shows just what happens when men try to teach such subjects they clearly don't understand.

It just gets so dull and dreary, no fire, no life and certainly no point.

I am a woman.

I think there is a lack of understanding about the difference between teaching a philosophy/political view as an academic subject and applying , or even rejecting, the principles of that philosophy/political view to how one lives one's life.

So you are saying an academic course on feminism should have as an end result a subservient set of followers of feminism?

And presumably an academic course on Marxism must, following the logic that only women can teach feminism, lead to the result that the end result is a set of John McDonnell clones.

Any answers as to whether a man is allowed to study feminism?