For women feminist literary critic, the subjectivity versus objectivity, or critic-as-artist-or-scientist, debate has special political significance, and her definition will court special risks whichever side of the issue it favors. If she defines feminist criticism as objective and scientific, the definition precludes the critic-as-artist approach and may impede accomplishment of the utilitarian political objectives of those who seek to change the academic establishment. If she defines feminist criticism as creative and intuitive, privileged as art, then her work becomes vulnerable to the prejudices of stereotypic ideas about the ways in which women think, and will be dismissed by much of the academic establishment. These questions are political in the sense that the debate over them will inevitably be less an exploration of abstract matters in a spirit of disinterested inquiry than an academic power struggle in which the careers and professional fortunes of many women scholars – only now entering the academic profession in substantial numbers – will be at stake, and with them the chances for a distinctive contribution to humanistic understanding, a contribution that might be an important influence against sexism in our society.