FEMINISM IS TAUGHT in a few classes at Harvard, in which students read French theorists like Helene Cixous and Luce lrigaray and discuss such issues as androgyny, female-female bonding, and patriarchally defined syntax. But when I took an informal poll in a room full of guys the other day--"What do you think of when you hear the word `feminist'?"--the first response was, "Holly Near aiming a pair of pruning shears at my crotch."

Feminism has become a dirty word. Sure, we all support equal rights, but no need to be feminist about it. Images of castration and folk singers, not to mention hairy legs, lesbianism, hairy armpits, man-hating, facial hair, pantsuits and pushiness, are routinely associated with feminism in conversation and comic strips.

These stereotypes may not be new, but the extent to which they have superseded all positive images of feminism is new. Consequently, few men or women at Harvard call themselves feminist, at the risk of being labeled and dismissed.

Who are the feminists, then? These days, they are often people talking about an academic theory that has little to do with most women's lives. Feminist theorizing provides a protective shield of terminology behind which feminists can hide from the ugly world of name-calling chauvinists. Moreover, its academic isolation offers a convenient way for campus feminists to enjoy their feminism for two hours a day and shelve it on the way to the party Friday night.

Academics aside, people who call themselves "feminist" include the anti-pornography activists--who come off as being anti-sex, anti-men and anti-First Amendment--and the burnt-out institutions of what used to be the "women's movement."

So why should we care? If feminism has become alienated from most of the population, maybe that means it has outlived its relevance. Maybe feminism is a dinosaur. Of course, you could never get away with saying this about civil rights. But after all, most women students at Harvard have probably never experienced the kind of discrimination that Blacks or Hispanics may have by this time in their lives. Or at least not in the traditional sense.

Most of us have gotten the things we've worked for--we got in here, right? So, we think, the revolution is over. Feminism is last decade's model. Now let's talk about hunger. We can make jokes about dykes with hairy legs again. We're all equal--no feminists needed here.

WE ARE THE generation whose mothers went back to work. Our mothers struggled to balance kids and a job, and many of them fought for ERA. When I was a kid, I assumed that was my mother's battle. When I grew up, men and women would live in harmony, sharing rights and responsibilities. Maybe a woman president. Uh-huh. Maybe. But ERA lost. And I see myself facing the same balancing act my mother had to deal with.

Abandoning "feminism" makes it too easy to abandon what the word stands for. If we grow afraid to stand up for women's rights for fear of being branded "feminist," we endanger those rights themselves. In 1986, a referendum will be held in Massachusetts to outlaw abortions if the Roe v. Wade decision falls, and to cut government funding for abortions for poor women. The revolution is not over--if it was a revolution at all.

Let's bring feminism back to reality. Feminism means equal rights and responsibilities for women and men. With that definition, every man and woman at Harvard should be able to call himself or herself a feminist. On March 9, the March for Women's Lives will take place in Washington, D.C., to affirm the rights of all women to control their own bodies and their own lives. Anyone who believes in these basic freedoms should join the march. Feminism should not be left to the theorists and the caricaturists. It belongs in the lives of women and men.