Here's my final post about the Berks. It was a great conference, but actually--and I know this is a controversial point to make*--I think NWSA is better.
Here's the breakdown, as I saw it:
- Really white
- Old school (they had a softball game! Along with debates about whether we should be Women's and Gender Studies or just Gender Studies, or what about Women's Studies?)
- Striving for interdisciplinarity, but not with 100% success. It was definitely a history conference.
- Very few men.
- Really, really reputable. As Astrid pointed out, the only feminist historian who wasn't there was Gerda Lerner.
- Somewhat multi-ethnic, with institutional structures in place to support this. Many more people of color than the Berks.
- Newer school (no softball, no dance, and a growing body of new scholarship)
- Truly interdisciplinary
- A few men, but not as few as the Berks.
- Getting more reputable. And it should be! It's a great conference. And have I mentioned that our presidents are Beverly Guy-Sheftall (immediate past president) and Bonnie Thornton Dill? And because of their work, folks like Angela Davis come to our conference. For fun.
*You know, controversial if you're a feminist scholar. If you're not a feminist scholar--if, for instance, you're someone who teaches college and has an office next door to a feminist scholar, you'd be likely to say, "What? Berks? NWSA? What are you talking about?"