What I managed to read from these posts was that it wasn't just the gender identification. (And I'll admit up front, I've read the reaction to the columns, not the actual columns themselves, although the reaction did include quotes).
My experience with "lady"-anything is that it's just a little to close to "little lady" (pat-pat on the head).
In the quotes I read, Resnick was stressing various things about the fact that the editor, who happened to be a woman, didn't complain about X, Y, or Z.
So his stressing the gender, at least in those comments, made sense. I think the women would have preferred "female" to "lady" (again, think "lady-pat-pat on the head"
)
When I was in college and much younger than I am today, I argued with men who told me I had to smile (because I was female) or called me "little lady" or other condescending descriptors. Eventually, though, I decided there wasn't a lot of point arguing with people of a certain generation. The concepts are just too ingrained. (Like arguing with my grandfather about certain racial issues).
But if I was paying money to belong to an organization and part of the point of that organization is to support its members (in this case, to advocate for its members, to offer assistance to new authors, etc.), then I'd want that organization to value my contribution and not pat me on the head, just because I'm in a minority. (Assuming that women are actually still minorities in the SWFA, even). I'd expect there to be a place for discussion.