This paper focuses on language change based on shifting social norms, inparticular with regard to the debate on language and gender. It is a recurringargument in this debate that language develops "naturally" and that "severeinterventions" - such as gender-inclusive language is often claimed to be - inthe allegedly "organic" language system are inappropriate and even "dangerous".Such interventions are, however, not unprecedented. Socially motivatedprocesses of language change are neither unusual nor new. We focus in ourcontribution on one important political-social space in Germany, the GermanBundestag. Taking other struggles about language and gender in the plenaries ofthe Bundestag as a starting point, our article illustrates that language andgender has been a recurring issue in the German Bundestag since the 1980s. Wedemonstrate how this is reflected in linguistic practices of the Bundestag, bythe use of a) designations for gays and lesbians; b) pair forms such asB\"urgerinnen und B\"urger (female and male citizens); and c) female forms ofaddresses and personal nouns ('Pr\"asidentin' in addition to 'Pr\"asident').Lastly, we will discuss implications of these earlier language battles for thecurrently very heated debate about gender-inclusive language, especiallyregarding new forms with gender symbols like the asterisk or the colon(Lehrer*innen, Lehrer:innen; male*female teachers) which are intended toencompass all gender identities.