I'd urge you to read very closely David E. S. Stein's “On Beyond Gender: The Representation of God in the Torah and in Three Recent English Renditions” published in Nashim: A Journal of Jewish Women’s Studies & Gender Issues and just made available online (as per his two links at John F. Hobbins' blog Ancient Hebrew Poetry, where John twice at least valorized the piece before anyone could easily read it). Unfortunately, Gesa E. Kirsch's and Joy S. Ritchie's article, "Beyond the Personal: Theorizing a Politics of Location in Composition Research," is still not available online for free (although your library might have CCC 46.1 : 7-29); I'd urge you to read that article just as closely. Then come back here to finish my post.
What did you notice? See the default, unmarked masculinist frames? Beyond Gender is where Stein suggests three works go, and ought to go, when representing God in the Torah. Beyond the Personal is where Kirsch and Ritchie say (feminist) composition scholars go, and ought to go, when collaborating with students on publication and such.
What if "going beyond" is really never going anywhere except this place where one pretends he's not priviledged? Can't we see how "gender" and "the personal" become objectified by these scholars pretending to say something about the well-bounded limits of the "feminine" and of "feminisms"? As if beyond gender is not gendered masculine by default. As if beyond the personal is not gendered male in an unmarked way.