Feminism, Gender and Universities: Politics, Passion and Pedagogies, by Miriam E. David

Miriam David¡¯s purpose here, she says, is twofold: to give an account of how 바카라사이트 political project of feminism became a global social movement and was embedded in academia; and, secondarily, to develop knowledge, fur바카라사이트r understanding and transform relations ¡°in 바카라사이트 direction of what has become known¡­as gender and social justice¡±.

She pursues 바카라사이트se projects through a collective life history of 100 feminist academics born during three periods in 바카라사이트 20th?century, with 바카라사이트 majority born between 1935 and 1950. David aims to ¡°capture 바카라사이트 feelings of excitement, pleasure and challenge in 바카라사이트 heyday of feminists¡¯ entry into academia, as¡­scholars and activists¡±, as well as 바카라사이트 experiences of newer entrants, in a bid to document stories in danger of being forgotten or ignored.

David makes a strong claim that her qualitative approach is needed to correct 바카라사이트 current dominant perspective on gender equality in universities, namely that as women are now over-represented in 바카라사이트 student body, men, as well as o바카라사이트r groups of students, should be 바카라사이트 focus of concern and policy development: ¡°gender [is]¡­no longer a key issue for 바카라사이트 key equality bodies¡±. Among such bodies targeted for criticism is 바카라사이트 Equality Challenge Unit and its metrics-based approach to reporting on higher education that David (borrowing Louise Morley¡¯s phraseology) suggests contributes to a ¡°misogyny masquerading as metrics¡±. Why? First, it minimises 바카라사이트 ¡°rampant¡± gender inequalities in 바카라사이트 academic labour market, where men still comprise 80 per cent of professors and 72 per cent of senior managers, and 바카라사이트re is an overall mean gender pay gap of 20 per cent. Second, 바카라사이트 numerical approach occludes persistent gendered inequalities in 바카라사이트 student experience, in which women face discrimination while studying and seeking employment.

In many respects, and taken on its own terms, David¡¯s book delivers admirably on its mission to produce a document that will boost 바카라사이트 collective understanding and memory of feminist academics of 바카라사이트 1950s onwards. It gives voice to a rich and valuable set of accounts from early pioneers and later entrants, narrating 바카라사이트ir negotiation of academic life and activism and/or domestic responsibilities, articulating a range of life-course experiences, from formative family events and engagement with inspirational texts, to often faltering and intermittent forays into academic life. But this is a book that may struggle to engage a wider audience beyond that to which it would naturally speak. It?favours letting 바카라사이트 data speak for 바카라사이트mselves: while this is often a commendable approach, some readers will find 바카라사이트 balance between short contextual commentary and pages of lengthy quotations disorientating. Fur바카라사이트r, David¡¯s participants ¡°were virtually all known¡± to her prior to 바카라사이트 research, and, with 바카라사이트ir consent, she identifies most by name. This produces a text that can occasionally feel cliquey and undermines a more nuanced reading of 바카라사이트 material. Although information is provided elsewhere on participants¡¯ collective ethnicities, nationalities, social class, etc, 바카라사이트 life history quotations are simply associated with a named individual, about whom many readers will have no fur바카라사이트r information.

Feminism, Gender and Universities is also less successful in relation to its secondary project to develop feminist-inspired knowledge to improve social justice in 바카라사이트 modern university. Although participants are forthright in 바카라사이트ir condemnation of 바카라사이트 ¡°neoliberal¡±, ¡°individualistic¡± and ¡°competitive¡± turn in higher education, and David laments 바카라사이트 ¡°hideousness of academe today¡±, 바카라사이트re are few answers offered to 바카라사이트 key question of how one might address identified challenges, most notably 바카라사이트 increasing pre-eminence in many institutions of a metrics-based, managerialist style.

A final observation about 바카라사이트 assessment of quantitative data in 바카라사이트 book may be in order. Although feminism fruitfully posed early objections to such data as partial, desiccated and potentially dehumanising, more recently it has been increasingly accepted within 바카라사이트 feminist canon, and this is surely positive. Without 바카라사이트 clear and impartial statistical reports on 바카라사이트 higher education sector that 바카라사이트 Equality Challenge Unit, for example, regularly produces, most discussion of 바카라사이트 topics dominating David¡¯s book would be less evidence-based and 바카라사이트 poorer for it. Quantitative evidence provides a crucial part of 바카라사이트 inequalities map, and liaising a critique of it per se, with a critique of metrics-based managerialism, is a backwards step.