Home ESSHC | Home IISH
Sixth European Social Science History Conference
22 - 25 March 2006
 
 
Browse Networks       or search for  
All rooms are equipped with an overhead projector
Rooms C, D, E, F, G and H (H only on Saturday): slide projector (framed slides, carrousel. There are extra carrousels available to set up your presentation in advance)
Rooms C, D, M, N, O, U and Committee Room 2: beamer to connect your laptop. You have to bring you own laptop. (If you want to use your Apple notebook, please contact us, as it may be incompatible.)
Rooms C, T and U: VCR
 
Programme

Menu
Wednesday 22 March
   8:30
   10:45
   14:15
   16:30
Thursday 23 March
   8:30
   10:45
   14:15
   16:30
Friday 24 March
   8:30
   10:45
   14:15
   16:30
Saturday 25 March
   8:30
   10:45
   14:15
   16:30

All days

Putting Law in its Place. Contextualising Feminist Responses to the Hungarian Draft Civil Code of 1913
This paper sets out two factors in particular as significant for the development of feminist “civil rights” campaigns in early twentieth century Hungary. One was the absence of a complete civil code for the country as a whole. Another was the presence of a plurality of unstable, changing and non-binding legal norms. The first feminist campaign to address concrete conditions in the civil law could only occur in 1913,when a fully drafted code came before the parliament (having been up for public debate since 1911) and when a Hungarian civil code finally looked set to become operative. But the new draft code, which was never to become law, was full of ambiguities; it oscillated between a variety of approaches (some more, others less patriarchal) to women's legal independence and retreated from committing itself to principles of gender equality. Using approaches borrowed from critical legal and feminist legal theories, I argue that these legal ambiguities forced early twentieth century feminists in Hungary to confront dominant (nineteenth century) views of law as an objective body of fixed rules, elaborating their own critique of law as a subjective, indeterminate and unreliable guarantor of equitable treatment.