Mary Daly, on Separatism
In response to the publishing of her first book The Church and the Second Sex in 1969, Mary Daly was issued a terminal contract by Boston College i.e. her position would not be renewed once it had expired. Her situation became the cause for student protests, petitions, and teach-ins celebrating academic freedom. With student (all male at the time) and other popular support, not only was she taken on as full professor but also was given tenure. AND she refused to admit male students to her classes at Boston College.
She believes that men's presence in her classrooms kept the women students from fully and freely exploring radical feminism. Because of her ban on men from her classroom she has provoked repeated reprimands from Boston University and accusations that she was violating both university policy and Title IX (the federal statute banning discrimination in higher education on the basis of sex) requirements.
The confrontations came to a head in 1998 when Boston College Theology Department Chairman Donald Dietrich told Daly that senior Duane Naquin (represented by the Center for Individual Rights (CIR), a public interest law firm in Washington) was registered for one of her spring courses, "Introduction to Feminist Ethics", even though Naquin had never taken the pre-course in Women's Studies, a prerequisite for the class, Daly didn't flinch. She had told Naquin in September what she's been telling male students for the last 30 years: that she would teach him separately - in effect, doing double time for no extra pay. Boston College confronted her and demanded she admit the students; Daly announced that instead she would retire, effective January 1999, rather than admit the students. She changed her mind, however, and brought a lawsuit against the college in May 1999, alleging they had violated her rights as a tenured professor. As the case was about to go to trial in early 2001, Daly and Boston College reached an out-of-court settlement, in which she again agreed to retire.
Can you imagine the motivation that these guys had for wanting to join the Feminist Ethics class? Do you think it had anything to do with wanting their fellow (female) students to explore their feminine identities, their feminine essence? Do ya?
Isn't it ironic that (some) men would keep (some) women from exploring the teachings of Mary Daly under her. In fact, would send a message to women around the world that they will not allow women to be taught in an environment supportive to teaching radical feminism. That men demand the right to mediate the message of radical feminists. That they will shut down avenues that radical women have to discuss radical feminism. That women are not allowed a safe space to explore a women-only identity. The wrath of men comes down on every head that dares to suggest that the freedom to associate cannot be extended, even as a courtesy, to the education of women learning within radical feminism. It's really difficult to learn while every step you take there is a man standing there with an ax swinging at your feet. Really impedes your progress.
The irony lies in the fact that the world that we move in (outside of Mary Daly's women only Feminist Ethics course) is men-only. What possible difference could it have made to those two guys to just let us try to grow in a man-free class?
(Black journalists cite Freedom to Associate while excluding White journalists from a meeting held here in South Africa.)
She believes that men's presence in her classrooms kept the women students from fully and freely exploring radical feminism. Because of her ban on men from her classroom she has provoked repeated reprimands from Boston University and accusations that she was violating both university policy and Title IX (the federal statute banning discrimination in higher education on the basis of sex) requirements.
The confrontations came to a head in 1998 when Boston College Theology Department Chairman Donald Dietrich told Daly that senior Duane Naquin (represented by the Center for Individual Rights (CIR), a public interest law firm in Washington) was registered for one of her spring courses, "Introduction to Feminist Ethics", even though Naquin had never taken the pre-course in Women's Studies, a prerequisite for the class, Daly didn't flinch. She had told Naquin in September what she's been telling male students for the last 30 years: that she would teach him separately - in effect, doing double time for no extra pay. Boston College confronted her and demanded she admit the students; Daly announced that instead she would retire, effective January 1999, rather than admit the students. She changed her mind, however, and brought a lawsuit against the college in May 1999, alleging they had violated her rights as a tenured professor. As the case was about to go to trial in early 2001, Daly and Boston College reached an out-of-court settlement, in which she again agreed to retire.
Can you imagine the motivation that these guys had for wanting to join the Feminist Ethics class? Do you think it had anything to do with wanting their fellow (female) students to explore their feminine identities, their feminine essence? Do ya?
Isn't it ironic that (some) men would keep (some) women from exploring the teachings of Mary Daly under her. In fact, would send a message to women around the world that they will not allow women to be taught in an environment supportive to teaching radical feminism. That men demand the right to mediate the message of radical feminists. That they will shut down avenues that radical women have to discuss radical feminism. That women are not allowed a safe space to explore a women-only identity. The wrath of men comes down on every head that dares to suggest that the freedom to associate cannot be extended, even as a courtesy, to the education of women learning within radical feminism. It's really difficult to learn while every step you take there is a man standing there with an ax swinging at your feet. Really impedes your progress.
The irony lies in the fact that the world that we move in (outside of Mary Daly's women only Feminist Ethics course) is men-only. What possible difference could it have made to those two guys to just let us try to grow in a man-free class?
(Black journalists cite Freedom to Associate while excluding White journalists from a meeting held here in South Africa.)
Comments
Post a Comment