influence of critical theory remains pronounced). Of course, the de-
velopment of women’s studies has also had an important, indepen-
dent influence as an extraordinarily dynamic interdisciplinary and
disciplinary field.^44
Panelists offer a wide range of reasons for privileging scholar-
ship emanating from women’s studies or from feminist perspectives.
Some appeal to homophilic preferences—where excellence is what
looks most like one’s own work (see Chapter 4)—but the “social use-
fulness of knowledge” is mentioned as well. An English professor
well-known for her feminist scholarship explains:
I certainly followed my own scholarly enthusiasm; I gave high
marks to “feminist” projects or projects focusing on gender...
Gender is a very important way in which the world and cultures
are organized. Even though gender scholarship has been in the
academy for twenty or thirty years, I still think that it’s insuf-
ficiently integrated into many scholars’ understanding of the
world. So I’m very happy when I see projects that incorporate
gender as part of their analytic equipment.Feminist scholarship also is sometimes promoted on the grounds
that in some quarters this type of work is the target of ridicule and
discrimination. One anthropologist notes, “I’ve served on a lot of
committees now with political scientists in my own institution, and
in a couple of cases cross-institutionally, and [they were] very hostile
to feminist work and women’s work.” An English scholar who noted
little opposition to gender proposals on her panel reasons that other
panelists may have felt “guilty” or been “embarrassed to admit” that
they had little interest in feminist work. She contrasts this with the
situation in her department, where “people make no bones about
disparaging feminist scholarship. They do that very freely.”
Precisely because some panelists explicitly privilege feminist
Considering Interdisciplinarity and Diversity / 231