I agree that that is an interpretation worth considering if Parent Commenter has provided corroborating evidence. A charitable interpretation would suggest that

I agree that that is an interpretation worth considering if Parent Commenter has provided corroborating evidence. A charitable interpretation would suggest that this man has seen many arguments about the ostensible brilliance of some otherwise unknown or lesser-known person and that such people make for good propaganda (I use the word propaganda without trying to imply that this piece is propaganda, just to be very clear). A charitable interpretation would also admit there is no necessary malice in saying describing someone as a feminist academic. Feminist academics are, approximately, a class of academic and they do have idiosyncrasies, views, and methods unique to them. It is not an insult to say something is from feminist academia and feminist academia itself would like to admit that that is the standpoint from which it is arguing. There are many women who have failed to get the recognition they deserve. In fact, there are many people who have, full stop. There is also a market for upselling historical figures. Saying someone or something is underrated and then making a compelling case for it is incredibly difficult, man, woman, art, or whatever.