Bol P
Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd. 1998 Nov;105(11):397-400.
The refusal of the Dutch Dental Society in 1898 to admit three female dentists to their ranks, was the reason for a polemic. Two important male dentists both wrote a pamphlet considering the competence of women for the study and the practice of learned professions like dentistry. Moreover, they deliberated the value of study and practice for both women and society. The authors are strongly influenced by Social Darwinism and their arguments would now be described as male chauvinism. They admit that women could do the job as well as men, if only after a long evolution. But that evolution is not to be welcomed at all: the best attribute of woman (maternal love) would be frustrated and her highest task (child care) would not be fulfilled. Her femininity would disappear and the new 'man-woman' would not be desired by men, which would be detrimental to the institution of marriage. Already now, they argue, marriages are diminishing, lose quality and divorces are on the increase. They know the cause of all evil: feminism and the women's rights movements.
1898年，荷兰牙科协会拒绝接纳三名女牙医成为其成员，由此引发了一场论战。两位重要的男性牙医都撰写了小册子，探讨女性从事牙科等学术专业学习和实践的能力。此外，他们还思考了学习和实践对女性及社会的价值。作者深受社会达尔文主义的影响，他们的观点如今会被描述为大男子主义。他们承认，如果经过漫长的进化，女性能够和男性一样胜任工作。但这种进化根本不应受到欢迎：女性最好的特质（母爱）会受挫，她最崇高的任务（照顾孩子）将无法完成。她的女性特质将会消失，而新的“男性化女性”不会被男性所青睐，这将对婚姻制度造成损害。他们认为，如今婚姻数量正在减少，质量下降，离婚率不断上升。他们知晓一切罪恶的根源：女权主义和妇女权利运动。
