Page 27 - Šolsko polje, XXXI, 2020, 5-6: Teaching Feminism, ed. Valerija Vendramin
P. 27
n. perger, m. mencin, v. tašner. ■ teaching feminism ...
predetermine and prearrange the “seating order” at a supposedly round-
shaped table; they predetermine who gets to be recognised as authorised
to sit at the table and speak or, more specifically, who gets to speak with
authority grounded in the “symbolic profit of normality” (Bourdieu, 1996,
p. 23) and with an institutional backup, provided to those whose speaking
up is integrated into the institutional life-as-usual, and whose speaking up
is distorted through the predominant attitudes and perceptions of femi-
nists being “lonely and unhappy, angry, man-hating, lesbian[s]” (Dyer &
Hurd, 2018, p. 443) and who are thus left unheard. Hence, the tables need
to be turned and antifeminism, masculine domination and the accompa-
nying sexism – rather than feminist practices and principles – need to be
questioned and seated on the other side of the table.
Conclusion
Feminism in the higher education of today is faced with numerous chal-
lenges. Recognising the embeddedness of higher education in the wid-
er social environment, and thus its susceptibility to social processes and
“happenings”, it is important to acknowledge the dangers represented by
neoliberal ideology alongside the strengthening of nationalistic ideologies
and extreme right-wing movements and parties in relation to feminist
practices. Namely, through the lenses of neoliberal ideology, feminism
is perceived as a redundant and irrelevant part of the present, a remain-
der of the past, of the “old times”, that was supposedly successfully ad-
dressed through and with the individual’s wish to work hard enough –
supported by national and international frameworks of gender equality
– in order to overcome (gendered and gendering) obstacles on their career
paths. While these neoliberal “post-feminist” times with their easy-to-sell
exceptional successful stories – seen more as the rule than the exception
– constitute feminism as needless, right-wing movements alongside an-
ti-feminist backlashes in the form of “gender ideology” perceive feminism
as a threat, or better said, as an obstacle that disables and makes it hard-
er for the past of the unquestioned patriarchy and masculine domination
to return.
Due to higher education’s social embeddedness, these social process-
es undoubtedly touch on the state and life of feminist principles and with-
in higher education’s institutions. Thus, at the level of curricula, wom-
en’s studies and feminist approaches are rarely explicitly mentioned and
stressed, let alone obligatory for all students. Rather, it seems like high-
er education in Slovenia continues to shy away from recognising the im-
portance of feminist teaching and knowledge production. As such, gen-
der is put on the bench when it comes to institutionalised and officialised
25
predetermine and prearrange the “seating order” at a supposedly round-
shaped table; they predetermine who gets to be recognised as authorised
to sit at the table and speak or, more specifically, who gets to speak with
authority grounded in the “symbolic profit of normality” (Bourdieu, 1996,
p. 23) and with an institutional backup, provided to those whose speaking
up is integrated into the institutional life-as-usual, and whose speaking up
is distorted through the predominant attitudes and perceptions of femi-
nists being “lonely and unhappy, angry, man-hating, lesbian[s]” (Dyer &
Hurd, 2018, p. 443) and who are thus left unheard. Hence, the tables need
to be turned and antifeminism, masculine domination and the accompa-
nying sexism – rather than feminist practices and principles – need to be
questioned and seated on the other side of the table.
Conclusion
Feminism in the higher education of today is faced with numerous chal-
lenges. Recognising the embeddedness of higher education in the wid-
er social environment, and thus its susceptibility to social processes and
“happenings”, it is important to acknowledge the dangers represented by
neoliberal ideology alongside the strengthening of nationalistic ideologies
and extreme right-wing movements and parties in relation to feminist
practices. Namely, through the lenses of neoliberal ideology, feminism
is perceived as a redundant and irrelevant part of the present, a remain-
der of the past, of the “old times”, that was supposedly successfully ad-
dressed through and with the individual’s wish to work hard enough –
supported by national and international frameworks of gender equality
– in order to overcome (gendered and gendering) obstacles on their career
paths. While these neoliberal “post-feminist” times with their easy-to-sell
exceptional successful stories – seen more as the rule than the exception
– constitute feminism as needless, right-wing movements alongside an-
ti-feminist backlashes in the form of “gender ideology” perceive feminism
as a threat, or better said, as an obstacle that disables and makes it hard-
er for the past of the unquestioned patriarchy and masculine domination
to return.
Due to higher education’s social embeddedness, these social process-
es undoubtedly touch on the state and life of feminist principles and with-
in higher education’s institutions. Thus, at the level of curricula, wom-
en’s studies and feminist approaches are rarely explicitly mentioned and
stressed, let alone obligatory for all students. Rather, it seems like high-
er education in Slovenia continues to shy away from recognising the im-
portance of feminist teaching and knowledge production. As such, gen-
der is put on the bench when it comes to institutionalised and officialised
25
