Bosch M
Gewina. 1997;20(4):184-210.
According to recent historiography on women/gender and science, the uneasy relationship between women and the exact sciences only arose when in the last quarter of the nineteenth century secondary education for girls was organised and structured in opposition to boys' education, stressing the importance of a 'modern' curriculum. Before that moment women had taken part in the popular science culture as visitors of public lectures, as amateur and rather more professional scientists and as writers of best selling books on botany, chemistry or physics. This thesis, as argued most convincingly by Patricia Phillips in her book The Scientific Lady (1990), is tested for the Netherlands. Part I deals with recent literature on the history of gender and science. Part II explores the extent to which women had access to eighteenth-century science culture in the Netherlands, and the traces this left on early nineteenth-century education for girls. The author shows that the educational reformer Barbara van Meerten-Schilperoort did indeed pay quite some attention to the 'sciences' in her curriculum proposal as well as in her publications. This confirms the thesis that only when women gained access to formal education in girls' schools next to the state regulated boys' schools for secondary education, were the exact sciences labelled 'masculine', and contrasted with the 'feminine' humanities, in part as a reflection of the respective curricula.
根据最近关于女性/性别与科学的史学研究，女性与精密科学之间的这种不和谐关系，是在19世纪最后25年女子中等教育按照与男子教育相对立的方式组织和构建起来、强调“现代”课程重要性时才出现的。在此之前，女性作为公众讲座的听众、作为业余及较为专业的科学家，以及作为植物学、化学或物理学畅销书的作者，参与到大众科学文化之中。正如帕特里夏·菲利普斯在其《科学女士》（1990年）一书中最有说服力地论证的那样，这一论点在荷兰得到了验证。第一部分论述了关于性别与科学史的近期文献。第二部分探讨了荷兰女性在多大程度上接触到18世纪的科学文化，以及这在19世纪早期女子教育中留下的痕迹。作者表明，教育改革家芭芭拉·范·梅尔滕 - 席尔佩鲁特在其课程提案以及出版物中确实相当关注“科学”。这证实了这样一个论点，即只有当女性除了进入由国家管理的男子中等学校之外，还能进入女子学校接受正规教育时，精密科学才被贴上“男性化”的标签，并与“女性化”的人文学科形成对比，这在一定程度上反映了各自的课程设置。
