Watching the faction defend it's case and attract support, they have time to guess how their colleagues and the press might react if they themselves mentioned the problem. And their participation adds precious little to the discussion. Mainly, academics claim ground a faction has already secured. As if the movement discussion never occurred, however, these studies invariably begin at the ABCs. Hackneyed questions like these are guaranteed to produce no new insights.
Academics say they supplant unsubstantiated movement rhetoric with correct, compelling analyses.
It might be better if they did. For in order to make an analysis academically respectable, they tear the guts out of it. Take socialization, for instance. The thesis that cultures train women to shuffle is now popular with academics. Originally the movement linked sexism and socialization to illustrate three simple points.