Search results

In this contribution Mineke Bosch connects to Rosemarie Buikema's work with the Museum of Equality and Difference which aims at inspiring museum and exhibition curators to tell more complex stories that include postcolonial and gender perspectives. Bosch focuses on the importance of objects for the history of women and gender, and the value of historical knowledge about women and gender for museums and heritage institutions. She does so by discussing many aspects of the making of the exhibition Strijd! 100 jaar vrouwenkiesrecht (Struggle! 100 Years of Women's Suffrage) in the Groninger Museum in 2019. The exhibition through its objects not only changed the story of women's suffrage, it also enlarged 'suffrage literacy'. This in turn led to the recognition and acceptance of objects from this historical episode by museums.

Mineke Bosch vraagt zich af of zij met al haar kennis van de geschiedenis van vrouwen, gender en wetenschap in staat is de werking van gender in haar eigen academische carrière onder ogen te zien en of het wel verstandig is die te benoemen. Het inzicht dat het persoonlijke politiek is heeft haar echter overtuigd van het belang van wat wetenschapshistoricus Donna Haraway credible witnessing noemde. Hopelijk zet haar terugblik aan tot verdere autobiografische reflectie van feministische wetenschappers.

Abstract
In this contribution Bosch, sharply criticises Ewoud Engelen's pamphlet De mythe van de gemaakte vrouw. Nieuw licht op het feminisme (The myth of the fabricated woman. New light on feminism, 2016), which he wrote at the request of debate center 'Nieuw Licht'. Instead of an analysis of De Beauvoir's relevance for contemporary feminisms, he gives us a generalising diatribe against 'career feminists' who are encapsulated by neoliberalist lust for power and betray good old sociocritical feminism. It places him in the same category of good old socialists such as Pieter Jelles Troelstra, accusing suffragists of 'bourgeois feminism' (damesfeminisme).

In her contribution Mineke Bosch tries to explain the success of the major box office movie Mary Poppins that came out in 1964. Feminist critique of the movie seems by and large rather predictable in its presupposition that popular success means ideological weakness. Especially the comic representation of the suffragette mother of the children is seen as meaningful in this respect, and the movie's main message is read as enforcing family life. More positive assessments of the movie, on the other hand, emphasize the vital role of Mary Poppins who teaches feminine values in a non-linear and fragmented way that leaves room for multiple interpretations. However, Bosch argues that the magic of the movie is mainly in the figure of Mary Poppins, who incorporates two aspects of feminism: equal rights feminism as symbolized in the umbrella and a feminism that is defined as 'spiritual motherhood'. God knows what the second wave of feminism owes to Mary Poppins!

Wrestling with Gender and Biography: A Thematic ReviewIn her 'very short introduction' to biography of 2009, Hermione Lee notices that although much has been said and done about gender and biography, 'the challenge remains how best to tell the stories of the increasing number of women in the public sphere [.]'. In this review essay Mineke Bosch tries to answer this question by analysing two recent biographies of professional women: the first minister of state in the Netherlands, Marga Klompé, by Gerard Mostert, and sociologist and politician Hilda Verwey-Jonker by Margit van der Steen. Comparing the two, Bosch states that Mostert repeats old truths and stereotypes about successful women in the public sphere with his conclusion that Klompé was a meddler and a fiercelydominant busybody, and that precisely these character traits made it possible for her to capitalise on her ambitions and become one of the boys. Margit van der Steen shows a more subtle understanding of gender as an analytical category. Sheshows how Hilda Verwey-Jonker wrestled with being a woman in a man's world, changing her (gender) performance several times in parallel with her social and professional context. Both biographies, however, could have profited more fromrecent biographical theory in which the emphasis is more on 'doing identities' than 'being one/self'.

Are there historical explanations for the paradox that, in a country with a reputation for being egalitarian and democratic, reasonable and tolerant, women have less economic independence compared with other countries and are under-represented in decision-making roles in society? This has often, implicitly and explicitly, been the guiding question in historical research into the gender relations in the Netherlands. Mineke Bosch takes up this question again and discusses gender-historical research that focuses on specific developments in the area of 'work' and 'women's work', whereby the national character is of less relevance, as well as historical research in which broader lines are drawn in relation to the Dutch gender relations in comparison to other countries. In research in the second category, more so than in the first, standard explanatory concepts are used such as burgerlijkheid [bourgeois mentality] and domesticity, or pillarization. As outmoded connotations (and myths) concerning masculinity and femininity often lurk within these terms, this type of research risks degenerating into histories of nineteenth-century civilization in which gender relations were used as a basis for explanations.

Are there historical explanations for the paradox that, in a country with a reputation for being egalitarian and democratic, reasonable and tolerant, women have less economic independence compared with other countries and are under-represented in decision-making roles in society? This has often, implicitly and explicitly, been the guiding question in historical research into the gender relations in the Netherlands. Mineke Bosch takes up this question again and discusses gender-historical research that focuses on specific developments in the area of 'work' and 'women's work', whereby the national character is of less relevance, as well as historical research in which broader lines are drawn in relation to the Dutch gender relations in comparison to other countries. In research in the second category, more so than in the first, standard explanatory concepts are used such as burgerlijkheid [bourgeois mentality] and domesticity, or pillarization. As outmoded connotations (and myths) concerning masculinity and femininity often lurk within these terms, this type of research risks degenerating into histories of nineteenth-century civilization in which gender relations were used as a basis for explanations. This article is part of the special issue 'The International Relevance of Dutch History'.

Are there historical explanations for the paradox that, in a country with a reputation for being egalitarian and democratic, reasonable and tolerant, women have less economic independence compared with other countries and are under-represented in decision-making roles in society? This has often, implicitly and explicitly, been the guiding question in historical research into the gender relations in the Netherlands. Mineke Bosch takes up this question again and discusses gender-historical research that focuses on specific developments in the area of 'work' and 'women's work', whereby the national character is of less relevance, as well as historical research in which broader lines are drawn in relation to the Dutch gender relations in comparison to other countries. In research in the second category, more so than in the first, standard explanatory concepts are used such as burgerlijkheid [bourgeois mentality] and domesticity, or pillarization. As outmoded connotations (and myths) concerning masculinity and femininity often lurk within these terms, this type of research risks degenerating into histories of nineteenth-century civilization in which gender relations were used as a basis for explanations. This article is part of the special issue 'The International Relevance of Dutch History'.