ABSTRACT

The following interview1 reads like excerpts from an administrator’s journal, showing how the personal is political, with Jean speaking on issues like managing a program: ‘[I use my] ability to tell when the bureaucracy was just being bureaucratic and when it was being actively misogynist’ and interdisciplinary knowledge: ‘I’ve observed: the more abstract or quantitative a field, the less likely it is to take gender into account’

We decided that a focused interview would be better for eliciting the dynamics of women’s studies than a traditional article. So Catherine, Jean and Cindy conferred over questions and themes, then convened over wine, cheese and a tape recorder at Jean’s home. It was a cool July evening, Catherine and Cindy knew they had found the right house: the clues-the house with an elegant rose garden and a car parked in the driveway with ‘Uppity Older Women’ on the bumper-sticker. Jean sat in her favorite, rather tiny rocking chair and provided stories and analyses. The two seasoned academics engaged in an intimate discussion of the political nature of women’s studies, while the doctoral student recorded the nuances. What follows provides a leader/founder/insider’s explanation of the evolving contributions, interdisciplinary intertwinings, and politics of women’s studies over almost the past 30 years.2,3

The Evolution of Women’s Studies

M: Tell me about yourself-who you are, the work that you’ve done, and how you came to be involved in women’s studies.