What do you think?
Rate this book
Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales From Inside The Strange World Of Women's Studies
Two respected feminist scholars show how political correctness has turned academic feminism into a parody of itself and suggest how to get back on track.
"Dismayed by what they claim are the dogmatic methods inherent in many women's studies programs, Patai and Koertge, two feminist academics, urgently call for introspection and reform. Recounting the experiences of colleagues who have grown alienated and disenchanted with the movement, the authors convincingly demonstrate that on many campuses feminist scholarship is being subverted by indoctrination, separatism, political agendas, and a militant intolerance for opposing viewpoints. The authors call for a new "humanistic feminism" that promotes the liberal principle of tolerance and inquiry. This study should alert concerned women to the dangers of ideological chauvinism and serve as a guide for the realignment of women's programs. Essential reading for anyone involved in women's studies."
-Carol McAllister
"A wake-up call to feminist women in academe."
-Kirkus Reviews
"Dismayed by what they claim are the dogmatic methods inherent in many women's studies programs, Patai and Koertge, two feminist academics, urgently call for introspection and reform. Recounting the experiences of colleagues who have grown alienated and disenchanted with the movement, the authors convincingly demonstrate that on many campuses feminist scholarship is being subverted by indoctrination, separatism, political agendas, and a militant intolerance for opposing viewpoints. The authors call for a new "humanistic feminism" that promotes the liberal principle of tolerance and inquiry. This study should alert concerned women to the dangers of ideological chauvinism and serve as a guide for the realignment of women's programs. Essential reading for anyone involved in women's studies."
-Carol McAllister
"A wake-up call to feminist women in academe."
-Kirkus Reviews
256 pages, Paperback
First published October 28, 1970
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
April 21, 2013
This is a book about feminism in academia, Women's Studies, and how much it has gone downhill from being a fresh, new voice for women, exposing women's historical stories and contributions to our culture, into an intolerant, hostile boot camp for indocrinating women to become feminists. It's written by two former Women's Studies professors. A quote by Albert Camus at the beginning gives a sense for their role: "Every revolutionary ends by becoming either an oppressor or a heretic." They were specifically targetting Women's Studies, not feminism in general, as they are still devoted feminists. Nonetheless, Women's Studies is "the academic arm of feminism," so the same arguments go for any feminists that engage in the same behaviors this book discusses.
It was fascinating to get this peak into Women's Studies, as I always wondered what those classes were like. This book talks a lot about the hostility men and heterosexual women face in these classes, the policing that goes on to ensure that everyone is toeing the feminist party line, the ways academic feminism obsesses over language and political correctness, how dissenting voices are silenced, how the classroom is more like a bitchfest and therapy session than a critical and rigorous education, and how they shun all male-influenced scholarship, which essentially walls them off from the rest of academia and robs women of an education. My favorite thing about this book is the explanation of academic feminists' chilly attitude toward science and scientists. It explained a lot.
The book was extremely persuasive. The authors are impressively logical and talented at constructing a solid argument. I paid close attention to all of their commentary, but much of the book was consumed with stories of former and current Women's Studies professors and students. This anecdotal technique is very common in Women's Studies, so the authors used it in an ironic way to show how flawed Women's Studies is. It's more personable, but it seriously compromises the credibility of the argument. It's easy to manipulate statistics, but it's so much easier to cherry pick anecdotes. It makes it impossible to disprove or debate.
The only thing you have left to go on is the integrity of the authors. I did get the sense that they had integrity, and were trying to tell the whole story, as they were honest that they sometimes got mixed answers, or answers that contradicted their argument, and they seemed careful to quote people verbatim and provide enough context. Nonetheless, I did get the sense they somewhat exaggerated how bad things are in Women's Studies. From reading this book, you'd think this kind of behavior is rampant. While I'm sure it's quite common, I feel skeptical that it's as bad as this book makes it out to be.
It was fascinating to get this peak into Women's Studies, as I always wondered what those classes were like. This book talks a lot about the hostility men and heterosexual women face in these classes, the policing that goes on to ensure that everyone is toeing the feminist party line, the ways academic feminism obsesses over language and political correctness, how dissenting voices are silenced, how the classroom is more like a bitchfest and therapy session than a critical and rigorous education, and how they shun all male-influenced scholarship, which essentially walls them off from the rest of academia and robs women of an education. My favorite thing about this book is the explanation of academic feminists' chilly attitude toward science and scientists. It explained a lot.
The book was extremely persuasive. The authors are impressively logical and talented at constructing a solid argument. I paid close attention to all of their commentary, but much of the book was consumed with stories of former and current Women's Studies professors and students. This anecdotal technique is very common in Women's Studies, so the authors used it in an ironic way to show how flawed Women's Studies is. It's more personable, but it seriously compromises the credibility of the argument. It's easy to manipulate statistics, but it's so much easier to cherry pick anecdotes. It makes it impossible to disprove or debate.
The only thing you have left to go on is the integrity of the authors. I did get the sense that they had integrity, and were trying to tell the whole story, as they were honest that they sometimes got mixed answers, or answers that contradicted their argument, and they seemed careful to quote people verbatim and provide enough context. Nonetheless, I did get the sense they somewhat exaggerated how bad things are in Women's Studies. From reading this book, you'd think this kind of behavior is rampant. While I'm sure it's quite common, I feel skeptical that it's as bad as this book makes it out to be.
January 29, 2008
This book is really about the field of "women's studies" in American universities, not feminism per se, which seems substantially different for the most part. It's worth reading for anyone interesting in feminism in academe, since much of that is tied in with women's studies departments. It's also worth reading if you want an example of what can happen when political ideology supplants rigorous standards of rationality and empiricism. Once again, the academic left is making a fool of itself.
February 11, 2020
I did not need to read much of this book to understand that it is an outdated complaint of second wave feminists who do not enjoy that the development of the discipline did not end with them. In the most curious irony, they complain that established feminists won’t allow critique of Women’s Studies and then also complain that the young students are critiquing Women’s Studies unfairly. This is unquestionably racist in the most wholly unexamined way, but in the way that is a trademark of academia as a whole. The phrase that made me put it down for good was Anna takes on the inherent racism and sexism of any classical academic canon by stating “you can’t invent people who didn’t exist” as if works by Black women writers, academics, analysts, and political activists weren’t actively repressed by the dominant culture.
Don’t waste your time, even though these sentiments still exist. They will die if we let them.
Don’t waste your time, even though these sentiments still exist. They will die if we let them.
July 23, 2025
IS WOMEN’S STUDIES IN THE UNIVERSITY ENGAGING IN INDOCTRINATION?
Daphne Patai is a professor emeritus at the University of Massachusetts Amherst; Noretta Koertge is an emeritus professor of philosophy at Indiana University.
They wrote in the ‘Acknowledgements’ of this 1994 book, “we thank all of our fellow feminists, even those who think we are wrong-headed, for demonstrating what should be abundantly clear to all, that women can be just as brave and cowardly, generous and selfish, thoughtful and obtuse, insightful and insensitive as the other half of the human race. The failures of feminism are no different from the failures of all the grand schemes that have set out to improve human society in one fell swoop, and they remind us of how important it is to have enlightened institutions and traditions that foster open discussion and critical debate.”
They state in the Prologue, “This book began eight years ago, with a number of conversations… our conversations meandered … except for the fact that almost everything we talked about was informed by, or at least flavored with, ideas and analyses that had developed within contemporary feminism… we began to discuss our concerns about the direction in which Women’s Studies programs and feminism in general appeared to be heading. At first, we tended to view the unpleasant little anecdotes we reported to each other---irregularities in the way programs conducted their affairs or odd methodological turns in feminist research---as isolated excesses or local anomalies. As the years passed… it became increasingly clear to us that what we were really saying … was that many of the central tenets and favored practices of feminism within today’s society are seriously flawed…
“We each identify strongly with the feminist movement. In criticizing certain aspects of feminism, we are therefore not only [criticizing] some of our own previous beliefs and practices but also jeopardizing friendships with many colleagues and allies. Even the people who basically agree with us often remarked during interviews how important it is not to criticize feminism in a way that would give legitimacy to the political and religious right… Nevertheless, in the end, we decided we should speak about the troubling aspects of Women’s Studies as we see them.” (Pg. xiii-xiv)
They continue, “We believe that it is feminists, not their opponents, who must speak out about contemporary feminism’s tendency to turn into a parody of itself. Where did things go wrong? And why? Answering these questions is hard enough; it is even more difficult to suggest solutions. But… it matters today that attention be paid to the harm done to contemporary feminism by the ideological policing and intolerance going on in its own ranks.” (Pg. xv)
Later, they add, “The academy is… a highly visible stage, upon which feminism’s excesses have been plain to see for some time now. We are not claiming that every single Women’s Studies program… displays the problems described by this book. But far too many do so for this matter to be buried or left unaired any longer… Important allies have already been lost. Too many among the first generation of feminists in the university, those who organized and fought for Women’s Studies programs, are now profoundly alienated from these very programs and endeavors. More are on the verge of becoming disenchanted. Feminism cannot afford such a brain drain. Among women students… ‘feminist’ has already become a label many prefer to avoid… Clearly, academic feminism must begin to acknowledge and address its considerable problems, or else shrink into an introverted and marginal sect.” (Pg. xvii-xviii)
In the first chapter, they observe, “What troubled us most was that many of the aspects of Women’s Studies that distanced, and in some cases drove away, women were the very features in which advocates took particular pride… Where critics objected to emotional coercion in the classroom, advocates talked about the importance of transforming students’ consciousness. Where dissenters saw feminist ideology distorting scholarship, advocates praised the virtues of research guided by political commitments. Where exiles complained about an atmosphere rife with hypocritical avoidance and shunning, advocates claimed to have found a sanctuary from patriarchal strife.” (Pg. 4)
They suggest that, ‘Women’s Studies, in its early phases had a choice. Its justified critique … could have led it to claim the high ground by insisting on broader, more balanced, less biased curricula and research. But this is not the choice that many programs and Women’s Studies faculty made. Instead, at every juncture at which feminist bias has emerged, it was justified by the prior bias of men… Such inconsistencies are unworthy of a feminism that hopes to have a future.” (Pg. 10)
They outline, “The stories in the preceding chapter … touch on all of the issues that any critical discussion of feminism in the academy must engage. From these stories.. emerges a portrait of problems besetting Women’s Studies today… shocking instances or unprofessional behavior and subversion of normal academic standards and procedures---all carried on in the name of feminism.” (Pg. 44)
They note that “Black women… have grown increasingly angry as what they view as the refusal of white feminists to admit their own racism. They favor the term ‘structural racism’ to refer to institutional arrangements dependent on both the heritage of racism generally and the subtle complicity they allege exists between white women’s self-definition and the white American male’s assumption of an identity constructed on the oppression of African-Americans.” (Pg. 68)
Later, they adds, “in a climate in which it is assumed that every white person is a racist, it would be surprising if individuals did not sometimes allege racism when it is to their advantage to do so. The only remedy for such abuses is to stop using identity as a passkey to all questions of truth or responsibility.” (Pg. 80)
They argue, “The most important goal of any Women’s Studies course… is to convert students to feminism. Feminists answer the charge that they are indoctrinating students by pointing out that all education attempts to change students… What is wrong, then, with exposing students to the sexism, racism, homophobia, and exploitation that pervade society and also affect their own lives? Why not help them change their attitudes? Of course, feminists themselves realize that many students do not respond favorably to their pedagogy, and the phenomenon of ‘student resistance’ is now the focus of organized discussions and scholarly papers.” (Pg. 97-98)
They assert, “in the early ‘80s… was the need for a radical reappraisal of all the assumptions and values found in traditional scholarship. As a consequence of this turn… what came to be transmitted to students as feminist scholarship was every bit as problematic as the tense and volatile atmosphere of feminist classrooms.” (Pg. 115)
They conclude, “the feminist persuasions prevailing … today often lead to consequences deeply subversive of the best academic traditions. Intolerance, anti-intellectualism, and ideological policing produce work that is shaped … by an ideological agenda… Nonetheless… these practices are proudly ‘owned’ by many feminist faculty.” (Pg. 184) They add, “Women’s Studies programs, in their bunker mentality and tendency to cut themselves off from the rest of the university in the name of feminist commitment, do function in some respects like cults and communes.” (Pg. 196)
This book will interest those seeking critiques of feminism.
Daphne Patai is a professor emeritus at the University of Massachusetts Amherst; Noretta Koertge is an emeritus professor of philosophy at Indiana University.
They wrote in the ‘Acknowledgements’ of this 1994 book, “we thank all of our fellow feminists, even those who think we are wrong-headed, for demonstrating what should be abundantly clear to all, that women can be just as brave and cowardly, generous and selfish, thoughtful and obtuse, insightful and insensitive as the other half of the human race. The failures of feminism are no different from the failures of all the grand schemes that have set out to improve human society in one fell swoop, and they remind us of how important it is to have enlightened institutions and traditions that foster open discussion and critical debate.”
They state in the Prologue, “This book began eight years ago, with a number of conversations… our conversations meandered … except for the fact that almost everything we talked about was informed by, or at least flavored with, ideas and analyses that had developed within contemporary feminism… we began to discuss our concerns about the direction in which Women’s Studies programs and feminism in general appeared to be heading. At first, we tended to view the unpleasant little anecdotes we reported to each other---irregularities in the way programs conducted their affairs or odd methodological turns in feminist research---as isolated excesses or local anomalies. As the years passed… it became increasingly clear to us that what we were really saying … was that many of the central tenets and favored practices of feminism within today’s society are seriously flawed…
“We each identify strongly with the feminist movement. In criticizing certain aspects of feminism, we are therefore not only [criticizing] some of our own previous beliefs and practices but also jeopardizing friendships with many colleagues and allies. Even the people who basically agree with us often remarked during interviews how important it is not to criticize feminism in a way that would give legitimacy to the political and religious right… Nevertheless, in the end, we decided we should speak about the troubling aspects of Women’s Studies as we see them.” (Pg. xiii-xiv)
They continue, “We believe that it is feminists, not their opponents, who must speak out about contemporary feminism’s tendency to turn into a parody of itself. Where did things go wrong? And why? Answering these questions is hard enough; it is even more difficult to suggest solutions. But… it matters today that attention be paid to the harm done to contemporary feminism by the ideological policing and intolerance going on in its own ranks.” (Pg. xv)
Later, they add, “The academy is… a highly visible stage, upon which feminism’s excesses have been plain to see for some time now. We are not claiming that every single Women’s Studies program… displays the problems described by this book. But far too many do so for this matter to be buried or left unaired any longer… Important allies have already been lost. Too many among the first generation of feminists in the university, those who organized and fought for Women’s Studies programs, are now profoundly alienated from these very programs and endeavors. More are on the verge of becoming disenchanted. Feminism cannot afford such a brain drain. Among women students… ‘feminist’ has already become a label many prefer to avoid… Clearly, academic feminism must begin to acknowledge and address its considerable problems, or else shrink into an introverted and marginal sect.” (Pg. xvii-xviii)
In the first chapter, they observe, “What troubled us most was that many of the aspects of Women’s Studies that distanced, and in some cases drove away, women were the very features in which advocates took particular pride… Where critics objected to emotional coercion in the classroom, advocates talked about the importance of transforming students’ consciousness. Where dissenters saw feminist ideology distorting scholarship, advocates praised the virtues of research guided by political commitments. Where exiles complained about an atmosphere rife with hypocritical avoidance and shunning, advocates claimed to have found a sanctuary from patriarchal strife.” (Pg. 4)
They suggest that, ‘Women’s Studies, in its early phases had a choice. Its justified critique … could have led it to claim the high ground by insisting on broader, more balanced, less biased curricula and research. But this is not the choice that many programs and Women’s Studies faculty made. Instead, at every juncture at which feminist bias has emerged, it was justified by the prior bias of men… Such inconsistencies are unworthy of a feminism that hopes to have a future.” (Pg. 10)
They outline, “The stories in the preceding chapter … touch on all of the issues that any critical discussion of feminism in the academy must engage. From these stories.. emerges a portrait of problems besetting Women’s Studies today… shocking instances or unprofessional behavior and subversion of normal academic standards and procedures---all carried on in the name of feminism.” (Pg. 44)
They note that “Black women… have grown increasingly angry as what they view as the refusal of white feminists to admit their own racism. They favor the term ‘structural racism’ to refer to institutional arrangements dependent on both the heritage of racism generally and the subtle complicity they allege exists between white women’s self-definition and the white American male’s assumption of an identity constructed on the oppression of African-Americans.” (Pg. 68)
Later, they adds, “in a climate in which it is assumed that every white person is a racist, it would be surprising if individuals did not sometimes allege racism when it is to their advantage to do so. The only remedy for such abuses is to stop using identity as a passkey to all questions of truth or responsibility.” (Pg. 80)
They argue, “The most important goal of any Women’s Studies course… is to convert students to feminism. Feminists answer the charge that they are indoctrinating students by pointing out that all education attempts to change students… What is wrong, then, with exposing students to the sexism, racism, homophobia, and exploitation that pervade society and also affect their own lives? Why not help them change their attitudes? Of course, feminists themselves realize that many students do not respond favorably to their pedagogy, and the phenomenon of ‘student resistance’ is now the focus of organized discussions and scholarly papers.” (Pg. 97-98)
They assert, “in the early ‘80s… was the need for a radical reappraisal of all the assumptions and values found in traditional scholarship. As a consequence of this turn… what came to be transmitted to students as feminist scholarship was every bit as problematic as the tense and volatile atmosphere of feminist classrooms.” (Pg. 115)
They conclude, “the feminist persuasions prevailing … today often lead to consequences deeply subversive of the best academic traditions. Intolerance, anti-intellectualism, and ideological policing produce work that is shaped … by an ideological agenda… Nonetheless… these practices are proudly ‘owned’ by many feminist faculty.” (Pg. 184) They add, “Women’s Studies programs, in their bunker mentality and tendency to cut themselves off from the rest of the university in the name of feminist commitment, do function in some respects like cults and communes.” (Pg. 196)
This book will interest those seeking critiques of feminism.
May 12, 2020
Well written take down
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews