call for discussion: item 1c.i

[Mary Bucholtz]

While the voting on item 1b takes place, we'll be continuing with our
discussion. The next item is one that has already generated a lot of
discussion:

1c. Philosophy
i. Relation to feminism

The following positions are summarized from earlier postings on this topic.
If we have inadvertently omitted or misrepresented the views of anyone who
posted earlier, please repost to correct the record.
--------------------------------------------

1. Issues to consider

a. Will the organization presuppose a feminist set of values? If so, will
these be stated explicitly?
b. What would it mean in practice to define ourselves as a feminist
organisation: political aims in our constitution, refusing to consider
nonfeminist pieces submitted to a hypothetical journal, requiring members
to endorse a set of ideological principles?

2. Feminism and gender
a. Will the association be focused on feminist issues rather than gender
issues (i.e., both female and male genders, at least, as well as other
'genders')?
b. Being a feminist organization doesn't exclude work on men's language.

3. What it might mean to be a feminist organization
a. Beginning with the definition of "feminist" as "a person who advocates
the equality of and equal opportunity for females," GALA should be feminist.
b. A feminist organization need not be based on ideology but on an
alternative structure: - For example. if there is to be a journal, would it
be limited to academic style, or could there be more accessible papers that
might attract a wider audience? - If there are conferences, could there be
alternatives to the 20 minute paper and the 5 minute response, the
traditional conference model based on the traditional academic lecture? -
If there is a governing board, could there be representation for a student
member or independent scholar and some way of subsidizing them? And what if
instead of offering a prize for the best paper  (something thatrewards
competition and individualism), there would be a prize for the best
collaboration between an established scholar and a student or independent
scholar (something which rewards collaboration and mentoring)?

4. Objections to a feminist organization
a. GALA should be open to scholars and teachers who are not working in a
feminist framework. Admittedly, many members will be, but it shouldn't be a
requirement.
b. We don't really want to be giving litmus tests on people's feminist
principles.

5. Alternatives to a feminist organization
a. Rather than being focused on feminism, we should promote dialogue
between feminism and gender scholarship: this kind of dialogue shouldn't be
avoided, but welcomed where it is engaged in seriously on both sides;
serious challenges help us sharpen up our arguments, whether we are
nonfeminists being challenged by feminists or the reverse, or indeed
feminists being challenged by other feminists, which is where most of this
field's vital energy has been over the past few years.

Discussion is now open on the following question: What will GALA's
relationship to feminism be?