Nicole,
I would hate to see you leave this list.  Hilde: i disagree with you: I think it is very problematic to take what was a conflict in point of views and call it not "playing nice." I didn't see any name calling or personal attacks. I didn't see anyone devaluing anyone on the list itself. 

Moreover, I find it refreshing to see someone (Nicole) throw a wrench into business as usual- it's truly scary how few - are there any others? -- feminists within academia question the basic structure of what we're/they're doing in there- I've raised this on the list several times over the years- or at least on other lists- to little or no avail.  That the question of the relation between academia, including the professional-tenure-track and *feminism* continues to be begged by feminists in academia. Feminism isn't just a set of ideas or values of interaction- though mentoring is definitely a good start since it's been ridiculously informal when at all offered to juniors-- This basic feminist service is crucial, and it's an interesting contradiction that illuminates the limits of professionalization as a mix with feminism- to say the least- There is a contradiction in the situation of "feminist academia" in its failure to mentor its juniors in a vigorous, organized fashion. Again, the bigger questions have been broached by Nicole- which is I take is questioning the tenure track as a *feminist* position. Sure we want jobs and security, etc, but where is the effort to reflect on how this professionalism has restricted and contrained the content, form, and scope of feminism-as-intellectual. I find it fascinating that the rest of us simply took for granted what Nicole threw immediately into question: the value of tenure-track feminism (to coin a phrase now). Because the issue is not just practical- it extends beyond practicality to the way in which most of us reflect or fail to reflect upon the situation of a professionalized, academicized feminism in relation to the possible intellectual vitality or lack thereof of feminism. 
 
Someone - Alexis- pointed to Bousquet's (Michael Bousquet?) work on the subject of adjunct labor and tenured labor-I downloaded it and just skimming his work, i found the place where he talks about the absence of activist culture among tenure track academics in contrast to the presence of it among adjuncts. 
Why is the relation between academia and feminism not problematized by people calling themselves feminist? I make a plea here for list-members to not get defensive about their personal achievements- it's not all about what you individually do in your specific niche, it's about feminism in the big picture and how the current institutionalization of feminism with in academia and elsewhere affects the status of women, affects substantive feminist *change.*  

Kathy Miriam

-----Original Message-----
>From: Nicole Garner <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: May 30, 2008 10:51 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Reminder
>
>Hilde,
>Im leaving FEAST anyway but how was it playing nicely to exclude a huge group of people on an elitist basis, i guess the playing nicely only applies with regard to the elites, its cool for yall to exclude us because yall decided we arent good enough but not OK for us to criticize yall, i learned that lesson when i was about 4 years old, i just dont play by bourgeoisie rules because they are the basis for oppression anyway.  
>Nicole 
>everyday it's another death, with every breath a constant threat, so watch yo' step!memories bring me misery, and life is hard in the ghetto, it's insanity, Got me thinkin, what do Hell got?Cuz I done suffered so much I'm feelin shell-shockedAnd drivebys an everyday thangI done lost too many homies to this motherfuckin game