Jargon-Heavy Feminist Theoretical Scholarship Impede My University Learning

If Feminist Readings Were Easier to Understand, I Could Put Feminist Practice to Use

For me, life as a college student is a roller coaster of emotions. Some days I am optimistic and ready to learn, and other days I feel completely discouraged and incompetent. I’m sure all students wish to get the most out of their education. A successful education to me, means being able to practice what I learn outside of the classroom. My journey through a Sustainability Studies major which is under the Gender and Sexuality Department, has brought about some realizations of the level of expectations that some of my professors have. Those being:

1. On the first day of class, come well-versed in a variety of gender related issues.
2. Be prepared to debate and discuss about vague 20+ page articles about whatever.
3. Understand the works filled with jargon and ivory tower language written by white feminists.

I am far from a scholar but not far enough to realize that there is a disconnect between students and with what is taught by some university professors. Within the past three years, I have taken six gender and sexuality related courses. From those six classes, I have passed only 2 with an B grade, and 4 with a C-. Now, I know that some may argue that those grades are passing. However, I would like to think that my knowledge picked up from these courses can be carried out and practiced with my everyday routine. Unfortunately, that has not been the case.

Getting to the point, the majority of my gender and sexuality courses have been text heavy. What a surprise, I know. But, nearly 100% of the texts have been written by ivory tower scholars who’s English language is foreign, even to me, a native-speaker of English. The expectations listed above account 80% of all my gender and sexuality course professors. So I question, how am I supposed to practice what I learn when I do not even understand it to begin with? Even with additional lectures by professors, there is still a confusion with what I am going to assume, every student in the room.

To bridge the disconnect with students and understanding feminists texts, authors need to write in a way that can be easily understood and accessed by the common people. Theory as Liberatory Practice by bell hooks, explains a similar idea where feminist theoretical works

“…cannot be shared in everyday conversation and cannot be used to educate the public”.

So, if these feminist theoretical texts are deviant from common language and cannot be used for educational purposes, why do we read them? In addition, hooks states

“…the only work deemed truly theoretical is work that is highly abstract, jargonistic, difficult to read, and containing obscure references”.

What is the point of having such dense, feminist theoretical work when the general public cannot understand it? It makes no sense, nor does fancy language make it any more meaningful with ivory tower language. My point is, professors need to stop providing us students with works that fit this archetype. We do not understand making us fail at default.

Marcia Latta, author of “Translate jargon into language your audience will understand”, highlights the importance of making works understandable for everyone. Keeping works concise, make for good communicators. Consistently writing with vague, ‘academic’, ivory tower language tends to lose it’s meaning simply because it’s exclusive.

According to a study by the University of Chicago, works that are exceedingly long, excessive and jargonistic are more likely to be cited in other academic works. One researched stated,

“[i]t’s pretty much completely opposite of the common advice. They tell you, ‘Keep it as short and succinct, to the point, and have one main point per abstract.’ And our findings are almost completely opposite, not only for one subject, but it was across fields.”

The findings should carry out across university curriculum. If not, the results include but are not limited to:

1. Professors questioning why students don’t understand
2. Misinterpretations of feminist theoretical works
3. Failure to practice feminist teachings outside of the classroom

Speaking on my own behalf, successful learning as being able to apply and practice feminist theories in my lifestyle. If I am being honest, I have not learned much from the works featured in the abundance of gender and sexuality classes taken. The reasoning: wasted time reading theoretical works that I do not understand. To fix this, it would be ideal that we read a range of feminist theoretical works that are inclusive for all.