Womens Studies Lack Status

In 1974 Phillida Bunkle, feminist, and history lecturer at Victoria University, aired the possibility of there being a women's studies course at this university. She met with an enthusiastic response from the university administration - but there was a hitch. They had no money to pay her for organising and co-ordinating the course, or for tutoring; nor was there any to pay any member of another department who might lecture or tutor in the course. As well as this it was conditional that the course go under the wing of the history department. (Many people in this department were encouraging and willing to help, fortunately). This agreement meant of course that the secretaries of that department would be coping with one extra paper, and that finance for photocopying and so on would necessarily come from that departments coffers.

The department released Phillida from one course - but gave it to her husband with whom she is sharing one job. In effect then, what has happened is that their total workload has increased by one course.

From this year Phillida has been paid for her work, but still the many other lecturers from other departments who contribute give their services free, without having their own workloads reduced.

The pattern that is emerging, quite clearly, is that being a women's issues course, it is not being taken seriously not seriously enough to pay the people who contribute (mainly women) to pay the secretaries extra for their increased workload, or to accredit the six credits it earns to a history major. The course was allotted $150 for books which, relatively speaking, is not particularly generous.

What seems to be lacking is some structure to cope with interdisciplinary innovation. There are not financial provisions for this, nor any provisions for coping with the associated secretarial work involved. At the moment there are only disincentives to attempt anything new within the present structure.

Had Phillida not bee paid this year she would not have continued organising Women in Society (and she is the only person who has the time) because, as usual, women would have been working out of the kindness of their hearts, something men seem to think they are happy to do. She is not happy with the present situation the secretaries are not, and nor are the other women and men who are at present working for nix.

The course has more than proved its value to students and it has endured a test that no other course has ever had to. It is about time the University realised this and cleared up the anomalies involved. It is quite incredible that at a supposedly liberal and progressive (?) institution such as a university, a course involving women's issues should be facing such on uphill battle to gain any of the recognition that is the unquestioned right of other courses.

—Sue Jarvis