> However, while women did take up medical roles, they could undoubtedly face animosity and suspicion as a result.
> ... without hindrance or disturbance from those people who might regard her with contempt or otherwise mistrust her medical knowledge.
> Unfortunately, we do not know any further details about the kinds of resistance Joan faced as a physician or the medical treatments she performed, or even if Henry ever granted her request.
I appreciate the historical evidence and what it means to us today. I disagree with the wild conjecture why she wrote this request.
I believe this request by Joan du Lee is more about making medicine a profession like carpetry, masonry and similar which were supported through masters, journeymen and guilds, than about hindrance based on sex.
Midwifes and doulas have been around for millennia in all cultures. In my limited knowledge, I am not aware of a culture where most of these roles are not females.
Midwifery is a narrow field, but there were lot of fully acknowledged "doctors". Our first evidence was for Peseshet (c. 2600 BC, Ancient Egypt), the "Lady Overseer of the Female Physicians", meaning that she was not only the doc but there was an entire "school" of female "docs".
There are of course also Enheduanna (c. 2300 BC, Sumer), Mesopotamian Healing Women (c. 2000 BC and earlier), and of course Agnodice, from the Greek tradition (c. 5th century BC and earlier).
Are you trying to say that women historically haven't had any obstacles to becoming doctors? Just because you can point to a handful of exceptions doesn't mean that discrimination doesn't exist. I don't know as much about the Middle Ages but read some Galen or pretty much any Greek author and tell me with a straight face that any of these people would have no problems with women being doctors.
> I am not aware of a culture where most of these roles are not females.
Literally Europe, in between the time when births moved to hospitals and before women became doctors. There were no "midwifes" nor "doulas" present during birth.
Also, literally whole communist block the whole time and also long after the communism felt. While midwifes and doulas just were not a thing. The nurses are all women, doctors used to be almost only men and now are mix of men and women.
> Europe, in between the time when births moved to hospitals and before women became doctors
Don't know about the rest of Europe, but in the UK midwives became an official profession in 1902 and have consistently almost all been women, whilst most births would have been at home until the introduction of the NHS in 1948.
My Mom was a midwife in the London in the mid-20th century. She used to joke that she was a black belt...in midwifery. Apparently the belt colors had meaning then and still do other places (after a quick search it looks like Ghana still uses a black belt for midwives).
In the Soviet Union most doctors were women. Random citation: "In 1917, 17 percent of doctors were women, yet by 1940 61 percent were women. From the 1950s the figure fluctuated at around 65–70 percent (Ryan, 1989: 38)."
Women become doctors long before 70s and 80ties. There being word for a midwife in that language does not imply practicing midwifes during communism. They have word for knight too and knights were not a thing either.
You are very wrong w.r. to communist block. Women's participation in medicine (and other intellectual professions) was generally high, possibly higher than in the west.
The gender split depended on specialist. Pediatricians would be women much more often then surgeons. Gynecologists were frequently men, the more in-hospital you are, the more men you would encounter.
The eastern europe idea of what is "intellectual" or "important" was different then western one, leading to women having different jobs. Good half of what Americans consider "intellectual" was seen as administrative and boring. Economics is an example of women supposedly doing something more progressive, but in eastern europe it was being seen as easy school for future administrative workers that dont require "real" specialization.
According to actual data rather than vague virtue signalling: There were 53,442 women students enrolled at U.S. medical schools in 2023. They made up 55% of all medical school students. Women first became the largest gender group enrolled in medical schools for the first time in 2019. There is still a shift towards men between application and enrollment, one could just wildly assert that that is either/both evidence of and/or a betrayal of meritocracy, but there is no actual evidence of any of that unless you have actually sat on a medical admissions committee.
I doubt the fact that you believe this to be true but it is actually false will change much about your perspective. But given the throwaway nonsense I feel like its worth the time to point out.
> According to actual data rather than vague virtue signalling
> They made up 55% of
You just debunked yourself. Are there any diversity program for men? They are minority, only 45% (or much lower if you count other genders)! We need mandatory quotas! In other fields like IT, it is a huge problem!!!
> However, while women did take up medical roles, they could undoubtedly face animosity and suspicion as a result.
> ... without hindrance or disturbance from those people who might regard her with contempt or otherwise mistrust her medical knowledge.
> Unfortunately, we do not know any further details about the kinds of resistance Joan faced as a physician or the medical treatments she performed, or even if Henry ever granted her request.
I appreciate the historical evidence and what it means to us today. I disagree with the wild conjecture why she wrote this request.
I believe this request by Joan du Lee is more about making medicine a profession like carpetry, masonry and similar which were supported through masters, journeymen and guilds, than about hindrance based on sex.
Midwifes and doulas have been around for millennia in all cultures. In my limited knowledge, I am not aware of a culture where most of these roles are not females.
Midwifery is a narrow field, but there were lot of fully acknowledged "doctors". Our first evidence was for Peseshet (c. 2600 BC, Ancient Egypt), the "Lady Overseer of the Female Physicians", meaning that she was not only the doc but there was an entire "school" of female "docs".
There are of course also Enheduanna (c. 2300 BC, Sumer), Mesopotamian Healing Women (c. 2000 BC and earlier), and of course Agnodice, from the Greek tradition (c. 5th century BC and earlier).
Are you trying to say that women historically haven't had any obstacles to becoming doctors? Just because you can point to a handful of exceptions doesn't mean that discrimination doesn't exist. I don't know as much about the Middle Ages but read some Galen or pretty much any Greek author and tell me with a straight face that any of these people would have no problems with women being doctors.
> I am not aware of a culture where most of these roles are not females.
Literally Europe, in between the time when births moved to hospitals and before women became doctors. There were no "midwifes" nor "doulas" present during birth.
Also, literally whole communist block the whole time and also long after the communism felt. While midwifes and doulas just were not a thing. The nurses are all women, doctors used to be almost only men and now are mix of men and women.
> Europe, in between the time when births moved to hospitals and before women became doctors
Don't know about the rest of Europe, but in the UK midwives became an official profession in 1902 and have consistently almost all been women, whilst most births would have been at home until the introduction of the NHS in 1948.
My Mom was a midwife in the London in the mid-20th century. She used to joke that she was a black belt...in midwifery. Apparently the belt colors had meaning then and still do other places (after a quick search it looks like Ghana still uses a black belt for midwives).
In the Soviet Union most doctors were women. Random citation: "In 1917, 17 percent of doctors were women, yet by 1940 61 percent were women. From the 1950s the figure fluctuated at around 65–70 percent (Ryan, 1989: 38)."
Most of them pediatricians and the first contact doctors. The gender split depended on the specialty.
The gynecologic and doctors doing childbirths were frequently men. Likewise, surgeons. And there was stereotype of them being better then women.
My mom is a doctor, pediatrician, and she finished medical school end of 70s or beginning of 80s.
One of her coworkers went by the title "moaşa", the Romanian word for midwife.
Women become doctors long before 70s and 80ties. There being word for a midwife in that language does not imply practicing midwifes during communism. They have word for knight too and knights were not a thing either.
You are very wrong w.r. to communist block. Women's participation in medicine (and other intellectual professions) was generally high, possibly higher than in the west.
The gender split depended on specialist. Pediatricians would be women much more often then surgeons. Gynecologists were frequently men, the more in-hospital you are, the more men you would encounter.
The eastern europe idea of what is "intellectual" or "important" was different then western one, leading to women having different jobs. Good half of what Americans consider "intellectual" was seen as administrative and boring. Economics is an example of women supposedly doing something more progressive, but in eastern europe it was being seen as easy school for future administrative workers that dont require "real" specialization.
[flagged]
According to actual data rather than vague virtue signalling: There were 53,442 women students enrolled at U.S. medical schools in 2023. They made up 55% of all medical school students. Women first became the largest gender group enrolled in medical schools for the first time in 2019. There is still a shift towards men between application and enrollment, one could just wildly assert that that is either/both evidence of and/or a betrayal of meritocracy, but there is no actual evidence of any of that unless you have actually sat on a medical admissions committee.
https://www.aamc.org/news/medical-schools-fewer-apply-class-...
I doubt the fact that you believe this to be true but it is actually false will change much about your perspective. But given the throwaway nonsense I feel like its worth the time to point out.
> According to actual data rather than vague virtue signalling
> They made up 55% of
You just debunked yourself. Are there any diversity program for men? They are minority, only 45% (or much lower if you count other genders)! We need mandatory quotas! In other fields like IT, it is a huge problem!!!