feminist philosophy vote

[Kenneth Allen Hyde]

On Mon, 7 Jun 1999, Trechter, Sara wrote:

> > 1)  Do not make GALA overtly feminist, despite the potentially large
> > number of feminists in the organization, because
> > a)  there are a great variety of feminisms; we do not want to be in the
> > position of deciding or rating someone's 'feminism.'
> > b)  feminism may be perceived as exclusionary, an overt statement could
> > make some people feel unwelcome.

In addition to the two reasons above, (a) and (b), may I add a few
comments?  First, I don't think that, in Academia as it currently stands,
"feminism" can ever be used in a non-problematic way.  There is simply too
much ideological and political baggage attached to the term at this point.
No matter how well-meaning we might be, as soon as we use the term
"feminist" we are going to reduce the "welcoming" feel of Gala.  There are
too many people in the academic and workaday worlds for whom a "feminist"
organization is necessarily anti-male.

That this is not the only definition, nor is it necessarily the dominant
accepted definition within the relevant academic fields, is beside the
point.  We are linguists, so we should recognize that terms mean what
society interprets them as meaning, not necessarily what we would like
them to mean.  Even if we redefine "feminist" for our own organization, we
would really be violating the Cooperative Principle of communication since
we would consciously be choosing to use the term in a way which does not
jibe with the usage of the majority of our interlocutors.

If Gala were an organization formed for the purpose of reclaiming
"feminism" from its backlash-tinged negative meanings, then I would say
that we should go ahead.  However, as long as that is not the main purpose
of Gala and as long as we are really open to anyone working in Gender and
Language (whether they are soi-disant feminist or not), then I think it
would be a mistake to try and use our organizational charter to fight that
particular battle at the expense of clear and concise communication with
our audience.

My final objection, I guess, all boils down to the fact that I am
uncomfortable with other people labeling me.  If I choose to label myself,
individually, as a feminist, that is one thing.  I can determine whether
and in what situations I am comfortable with it.  However, I do not
particularly care to have a group of my colleagues (or anyone, for that
matter) tell me that I am a feminist because members of Gala are feminist
by definition.  I do not wish to have a political label imposed on me from
outside.  I prefer to make my own political statements, not have them made
for me.  Perhaps I am alone in that feeling, but somehow, given the
personality of most linguists and scholars that I have met, I doubt it. =)

Cennydd

Kenneth Allen Hyde     |  No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife
Univ. of Delaware      |  between the shoulder blades will seriously
Dept. of Linguistics   |  cramp his style  -- Old Jhereg proverb
kenny at Udel.Edu         |  A mind is a terrible toy to waste! -- Me

//www.ling.udel.edu/hyde/prof/ken.html