Some Thoughts On University

It's been a while, which is primarily because I have been super, super busy with uni and work. Finally, I got some classes to teach, so I am back in the classroom, but as a tutor, which is infinitely better than being a regular teacher. 
Initially, I didn't want to write this week, as it is going to be my birthday (yay!) and I decided I didn't have to put pressure on writing during my birthday week (no idea what the excuse for all the other weeks was). 
However, I am momentarily tortured in a really terrible lecture and felt compelled to write about it, so that the time wasn't a complete waste. Having returned to university for my master's degree, I must conclude that the university system sucks as much as it did back when I obtained my BA. I am appalled by how abstract, theoretical and utterly nonsensical most of the classes and tasks are and how they have nothing to do with the real world or later possibilities of the real world. 
Me not wanting to pursue a career in academics (anymore), I am pretty upset about this limited opportunities, as I would love to have a rounded-off and complex introduction into what kind of academic I could become instead of what the university imposes on me. Still, and I am in my freaking master's degree, I have to comply to teacher's ideas of how academic writing should look like and you must also know that EVERYONE has a different idea of what that should look like. On teacher passionately stresses the important of positioning myself within my academic word, using "I" and "my" because "my thesis" cannot argue, but I can. Then, class 2, I am told that you should NEVER EVER use personal pronouns because you're an academic loser is you do so. 
Secondly, the tasks to complete are not only majorly useless, but will not further my career or be helpful for any other purpose. I don't understand why, especially in a master's degree, your essays, articles, papers, etc. cannot be published somewhere, or at least it is encouraged to hand them in and get reviews on them. 
Now, to the present lecture. It is a series lecture, which means the lecturers change weekly, presenting their piece of the pie for a specific topic (the concept of home, in this case). It is, certainly, a very interesting topic, but all lecturers have failed to give good presentations up to this point and I do not understand why this is not addressed, reviewed, criticised or even in any way met with consequences (I am not suggesting to fire anyone who cannot give a presentation...well, maybe I am). 
These people get MONEY for this shit, standing in a room of more dead than alive people, speaking with three decibel and failing to introduce a proper structure of their presentation but feel great about themselves as academics, sitting in their high castles and writing paper NO ONE wants to read. 
I am sorry for the ranty tone, but this is driving me insane. I am not a good academic writer (which is fine, there is no audience in it, as it seems), but I can spot a bad presenter if I see one and ALL OF THEM have been poor presenters so far and I know no one will walk up to them (I am talking about their supervisors here) and tells them they sucked epically, so they think they did a good job). 
I believe the major problem with university is the high castle I introduced earlier. Most of these people have little to no contact with the real world in which most people have to live and endure, writing papers in such abstract and theoretical terms they have lost any access to different perceptions of reality. It is fascinating that in a fortress of knowledge and education, I find myself most repressed when it comes to uttering my opinions and thoughts because there is a clear academic code which indoctrinates what to think, whom to deem superior and, most importantly, what not to think.
Coming from some sort of real world (teaching and nannying is as real as it gets), I find myself struggling to fit into this head-centred, perfectly manicured world in which undesirable topics are swished under the carpet, or only acceptable within the realms of a paper, safely structured, organised and quoted.
We as students get graded, assessed, evaluated every single day, but I think at university level it should be a mutual process. Why can people grade me according to their own limited vision of a concept but I have to endure their horribly structured and executed lectures, having no power to criticise or "complain about the service". I have to swallow what they give me, regardless of how poorly done it is, yet am exposed to scrutiny every day. 
This is not me whining about being assessed. I don't mind being assessed by experts on the field, as long as it is feasible, relatable and useful - which, as I perceive it, at university it often isn't.
I should insert here that I actually raised my hand to tell her she should speak up, but it didn't do any good - I don't think she's capable of speaking louder, actually, but I tried. 
I wish students would concern themselves more with the service they are given - and also complain, criticise and assess the service on a daily basis because if no one every points it out, how is it going to change?