Should there be an F in GALA?

[Chris Beckwith]

I think that Langworthy is right on, from my perspective as a linguist
interested not only in grammaticized genders but in cognitive processes of
categorization and what they mean for human behavior.  I agree that
American feminism has done much to reshape our world; I also hope that
men will come even more to grips with their problems, and women will
support them in this, because without women and men working together
things will not get better for either.  But I don't know what any of
that has to do with a scholarly organization the idea of which is to
focus on questions of 'gender and language'.  I suppose it is conceivable
that one day some macho individual could 'take over' the paper/article
review processes, if the membership just sat by and let him (/her?) do it.
But, let's be frank here.  The organizing committee consists entirely of
women who sound both pro-woman and pro-feminist.  The men writing in have
all been pro-feminist.  I would assume that anyone who is aggressively
anti-feminist would not be interested enough in GALA's activities to try
and wrest control of the association and change its direction.  The danger
in entertaining this kind of fear, and taking a narrower view of things by
insisting on putting the label 'feminist' on the organization, is that so
many people, women and men, who are interested in the subject of 'gender
and language', and have much to contribute from many points of view,
would feel either excluded or intimidated, or put off by the political
stance that is implied by the term.  There are many different kinds
of feminisms, but the fact remains that the word is by its origin and
definition one-sided and is unlikely ever to become truly neutral.
Science requires neutrality.  The unfair treatment of women by other
organizations is wrong, but that is a poor reason for GALA, an
organization that is so far controlled entirely by women, to overtly
(and,it appears to me, unnecesarily) give up its neutrality.  Of  course,
there is no reason GALA could not be a 'covert feminist' organization
(sounds cool!); it appears to be likely anyway.  The problem is the open
expression of such views.

Carter, if I understand her right (brain not working well tonight; need
sleep) also expresses a reasoned view of this sort.

So, let's be open to all viewpoints, as long as it's scientific work.
There are plenty of fora for political statements and argumentation.  (The
latter are fodder for scientific research on gender too!)  The complexity
of the topic 'Gender and Language' is such that we should not a priori
fixate ourselves on any one point of view, no matter how worthy, I think.

Thank you for reading my opinion. I hope I didn't offend anyone.

Chris