Disclaimer: As you might know history and politics is not my area of knowledge but I thought I might say a few words. As most of this is based on a history of Britain by Simon Schama and a few scant conversations with more clued up friends, feel free to tell me I'm talking out of my orange furry arse.
Citing a grade-school teacher as an "academic" in the same sense as the modern feminist academic movement is more than a stretch.
To dismiss the mother of Mary Shelley as just another grade-school teacher might be stretching it a bit too. Mary Wollstonecraft had some quite policically academic male contempories, such as Tom Paine, and married William Godwin, who is described (in dis book wot I'm readin') as a social philosopher. Her publications were direct, and scathing attacks on the type of justification for subjugation, that was being spouted at the time. While she may not have been a lecturer in 'woman studies' at suchandsuch college , I think it's safe to class her as an academic of her time.
The problem I see with trying to define academic feminism in those times was that it seems to be closely interwoven with a general push towards greater rights for all. So while it's easy to see how such characters played an important role in changing public opinion of the time, it's harder to confidently label anyone as a 'feminist'.
As for the effect of the Germaine Greers of this world today, well that is a whole different kettle of fish.
I would probably say that because the general concepts from the early days of equalitarian ideas are now so very well accepted in society, then 'academics' can't possibily have the same type of impact:
Academic: "All women..."
Society: "Yes, yes. We're working on it!!"
JMHO