This art icle was downloaded by: [ York Universit y Libraries] On: 29 Oct ober 2014, At : 11: 37 Publisher: Rout ledge I nform a Lt d Regist ered in England and Wales Regist ered Num ber: 1072954 Regist ered office: Mort im er House, 37- 41 Mort im er St reet , London W1T 3JH, UK Journal of Geography in Higher Education Publicat ion det ails, including inst ruct ions for aut hors and subscript ion informat ion: ht t p:/ / www.t andfonline.com/ loi/ cj gh20 The challenge of feminist geography a Sophie Bowlby & Linda Peake b a Depart ment of Geography , Reading Universit y , Reading, RG6 2AB, Unit ed Kingdom b School of Geography , Kingst on Polyt echnic , Penrhyn Road, Kingst on‐upon‐Thames, KT1 2EE, Unit ed Kingdom Published online: 24 Feb 2007. To cite this article: Sophie Bowlby & Linda Peake (1989) The challenge of feminist geography, Journal of Geography in Higher Educat ion, 13:1, 90-92, DOI: 10.1080/ 03098268908709063 To link to this article: ht t p:/ / dx.doi.org/ 10.1080/ 03098268908709063 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTI CLE Taylor & Francis m akes every effort t o ensure t he accuracy of all t he inform at ion ( t he “ Cont ent ” ) cont ained in t he publicat ions on our plat form . However, Taylor & Francis, our agent s, and our licensors m ake no represent at ions or warrant ies what soever as t o t he accuracy, com plet eness, or suit abilit y for any purpose of t he Cont ent . Any opinions and views expressed in t his publicat ion are t he opinions and views of t he aut hors, and are not t he views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of t he Cont ent should not be relied upon and should be independent ly verified wit h prim ary sources of inform at ion. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, act ions, claim s, proceedings, dem ands, cost s, expenses, dam ages, and ot her liabilit ies what soever or howsoever caused arising direct ly or indirect ly in connect ion wit h, in relat ion t o or arising out of t he use of t he Cont ent . This art icle m ay be used for research, t eaching, and privat e st udy purposes. Any subst ant ial or syst em at ic reproduct ion, redist ribut ion, reselling, loan, sub- licensing, syst em at ic supply, or dist ribut ion in any form t o anyone is expressly forbidden. Term s & Condit ions of access and use can be found at ht t p: / / www.t andfonline.com / page/ t erm s- and- condit ions THE DEVELOPMENT OF FEMINIST GEOGRAPHY IN BRITAIN Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 11:37 29 October 2014 From Sophie Bowlby, Reading University and Linda Peake, Kingston Polytechnic The development of feminist geography in Britain has been helped greatly by the existence of the Institute of British Geographers Study Group on Women and Geography (WGSG). Formally established as a Working Party in 1980 it achieved Study Group status in 1982. Since this time the WGSG has provided a source of friendship and support to its members, a forum for the discussion of ideas, and an institutional means of reaching people interested in the area. However, interest in feminist geography pre-dated the formation of the WGSG. Articles concerned with women's representation in geography and in geography departments began to appear in British journals in the late 1970s (Tivers, 1978; McDowell, 1979; Foord et al, 1980). This was a time at which many women in Britain had become interested or involved in the Women's Movement. However, in the world of geography few such women had found a way of expressing their feminism in their academic work. These articles, and soon the creation of the Study Group, encouraged those already working in the area and stimulated others to begin feminist research. In the early 1980s one of the major concerns of members of the Study Group was to make more people aware of the existence of feminist ideas and of the need to consider gender issues in geography. As a result members of the group decided collectively to produce a text on feminist geography aimed at undergraduates. The result—some one and a half years later—was Geography and Gender. Since then individual members of the Group have edited two further books which are intended to complement Geography and Gender by providing examples of research in the field (Momsen & Townsend, 1987; Little et al, 1988). The growth of academic feminism has helped to make the study of gender relations an almost respectable subject in geography and in radical circles a polite bow to feminism now appears obligatory. More importantly, although the nature of the Women's Movement, and the concomitant expansion of feminist scholarship in the social sciences in Britain, has undergone a number of transformations, its existence and the wealth of feminist writing available continue to attract the interest and enthusiasm of some students and researchers. Despite the fact that feminist geography has an institutional base in Britain, and that research and teaching in the area continue to expand it remains a minority interest as the following figures show. Two surveys have been conducted on the status of women in academic geography (see McDowell, 1979; Peake & McDowell, forthcoming). Taken over a 10-year period they reveal that very little change has taken place in the number of female geographers employed in geography departments. In 1988, out of the 72 universities, polytechnics and colleges of education that replied to the survey only three had female heads of departments, 25 departments had no female lecturers and a further 27 had only one. Overall, for every female full-time member of the staff there were seven males. And whilst 36 departments claimed to incorporate feminist geography material in courses, at only one, Edinburgh University, is there a course specifically on 'Geography and Gender' (given by Liz Bondi). The fact that there is only one course in feminist geography is indicative of a number of factors. Not only are many female lecturers already too busy teaching 90 Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 11:37 29 October 2014 other courses to set up a course specifically on gender, some are directly opposed to the notion (see McDowell & Bowlby, 1983 and Peake, 1986 for two opposing views on this debate). Those opposed to the idea of a separate course argue that it would serve only further to isolate feminist geography from the mainstream. What is needed instead is for work from a feminist perspective to be incorporated in all human geography courses. Those arguing for separate courses claim that introducing students to relevant debates and issues in feminist geography requires a systematic as opposed to piecemeal approach. Furthermore, the establishment of clearly identified courses can serve to legitimate the issues and topics being taught, making it easier to acquire resources such as journals and books. This in turn may lead to the generation of new teaching materials making it easier for feminist work to prosper within the androcentricity of academia. As Peake (1986, p. 187) contends: "The issues of separatism and isolation, which arise from the setting up of separate courses, are not the central areas for concern; rather the problem is that specialist courses are necessary because of continuing sexism." As we have said, in the early 1980s the principal preoccupations of those working in feminist geography were to combat the invisibility of women in geographical research and to show the relevance of feminism to geography both empirically and theoretically. Thus, empirical research examined such issues as the particular problems of access suffered by women as a result of the gender role constraint (Tivers, 1985); the importance of women's paid work in both first and third worlds (WGSG, 1984); and the links between partriarchal assumptions and practices relating to the family and the spatial organisation and planning of Western Cities (McDowell, 1983). In addition, feminist geographers in Britain have always emphasised theoretical issues. Most of those involved in the early development of feminist geography were interested in socialist-feminist theory and an early concern was, once again, to show the relevance of 'women' and of feminist theory to the radical theoretical approaches then current in geography (Bowlby et ah, 1982). More recently the focus of interest has shifted. Feminist geographers here are now less exclusively concerned with showing the relevance of feminism to geographical questions and have also become interested in assessing the relevance of geography to feminist questions. We have begun to ask how and why there are similarities and differences in the social construction of sexual and gender identities and of patriarchal relations over space (Foord et al, 1980; McDowell & Massey, 1984). This shift of emphasis has not only involved looking at new questions but it has also meant looking at the old issues in new ways. Examples of some of these topics now being addressed are: women and housing in the Third World: processes of gentrification; the position of women in rural societies in the advanced industrial world; women's fear in and use of public space; the system of childminding in the UK; spatial variations in the employment experience of women in Britain; and spatial variations in patriarchal relations. In all of these research initiatives a theoretical concern with gender relations is now central. Intellectually, the prospects for feminist geography in Britain are exciting. New ideas are being developed, interesting debates are still in progress and a wealth of empirical and theoretical research topics are being identified. Institutionally, however, the prospects are less rosy. As the recent WGSG survey revealed there is still little recognition of either gender issues as a part of geography or of feminist geography as a specialism which ought to be taught to undergraduates. Despite the ritual mention of gender by many male radical geographers few know much about 91 Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 11:37 29 October 2014 feminist theory or practice. This not only means that many students remain ignorant of the subject but that job prospects for those who wish to specialise in feminist geography are limited. There will be few, if any, departments advertising for a feminist geographer in the near future in Britain. The advice given recently to one member of the WGSG about to start a career as a lecturer, that there "wasn't much future in gender" may well be true. This perhaps reflects the conservatism of geography as a subject and its reluctant acceptance of social theory as well as its domination by men. However, the problems relate not only to the acceptance of feminist geography but to the general academic job market. Since feminist geography is a new subject in Britain the majority of those involved actively are young and while some have obtained academic jobs these are often temporary and the immediate prospects for those doing PhDs at present are not particularly good. In the short term it seems unlikely, therefore, that there will be a major increase in the teaching of feminist geography or in feminist research in geography. In the longer term the general prospects for academic employment are likely to improve somewhat. To conclude, we expect that the fundamental importance of the subject—concerned as it is with the subordination of half the world's population—will ensure its survival. We also believe that it is vitally important that the impetus of the last decade should be maintained so that we can begin to develop a deeper understanding of the knowledge and strategies that can work towards equality in human-environmental relations. For further information on the WGSG contact Linda Peake or Sophie Bowlby at the addresses below. Correspondence: Sophie Bowlby, Department of Geography, Reading University, Reading RG6 2AB, United Kingdom and Linda Peake, School of Geography, Kingston Polytechnic, Penrhyn Road, Kingston-upon-Thames KT1 2EE, United Kingdom. STATUS AND PROSPECTS OF FEMINIST GEOGRAPHY IN CANADA From Suzanne Mackenzie, Carleton University In a plenary address to the International Geographic Congress in Sydney, Australia in August 1988, Janice Monk, speaking about 'Encompassing gender: progress and challenges in geographic research' described some of the historical and political differences characterising feminist geographic research in Britain, the US and France. Later I asked her "What about Canada?" She replied that Canadian work, it seemed to her, reflected the academic and personal histories of its researchers and teachers. The community of feminist geographers in Canada is still small enough, and young enough, that this is not only true, it is, by and large, an advantage. Canadian feminist geographers draw upon Anglo-American and Francophone intellectual and political traditions and adapt these in the context of the priorities thrown up by the vast, multicultural, mercurial environment in which they work. Feminist geography, like Canadian feminism as a whole, reflects the tensions inherent in a country which was a colony of both France and Britain and is now a North American neo-colony. In some respects, we are nourished by these tensions. Of 92