In belle époque France, criminal juries were criticized as too tolerant of crime and too lenient to effectively punish criminals. While the French institution of the jury was under attack by magistrates and other elites, mixed sex juries provided an alternative model. Jury reformers advocated the introduction of mixed-sex criminal juries in France in order to render better verdicts and reduce crime, especially in the areas of infanticide and abortion. The French National Assembly debates over proposed legislation, however, stalled over political concerns with women's truncated citizenship rights. Historical analysis of the types of arguments deployed in this jury reform debate (including archival documents, parliamentary records, and press sources) reveals that reform proponents argued that gender difference-especially in terms of morality and psychology-justified women's admission to juries, particularly in cases of infanticide and abortion. The operation of an unofficial “women's jury” (jury féminin) between 1905 and 1910 in Paris demonstrated women's judicial decision-making capacity. Analysis of this citizens' jury documents the development of a feminist critique of the legal treatment of domestic violence, reproductive freedom, and marriage law publicized in the early twentieth century. This research contribution posits grounds for the re-periodization of feminist legal history as viewed through this case study of women's claims to jury service in Third Republic France.

中文翻译：

---

“男性暴政”与“女性陪审团”：法兰西第三共和国陪审团的性别政治

在美好年代的法国，刑事陪审团被批评为对犯罪过于宽容，对有效惩罚罪犯过于宽容。当法国的陪审团制度受到地方法官和其他精英的攻击时，混合性别陪审团提供了另一种模式。陪审团改革者主张在法国引入混合性别的刑事陪审团，以做出更好的判决并减少犯罪，特别是在杀婴和堕胎领域。然而，法国国民议会对拟议立法的辩论因对妇女被剥夺公民权的政治担忧而停滞不前。对本次陪审团改革辩论中使用的论点类型的历史分析（包括档案文件、议会记录、和新闻来源）揭示，改革的支持者认为性别差异——尤其是在道德和心理方面——证明妇女进入陪审团是正当的，特别是在杀婴和堕胎的情况下。非官方“女性陪审团”的运作（陪审团女性) 1905 年至 1910 年间在巴黎展示了女性的司法决策能力。对这个公民陪审团的分析记录了 20 世纪初公开的对家庭暴力、生殖自由和婚姻法的法律处理的女权主义批评的发展。从这个法国第三共和国妇女要求担任陪审员的案例研究来看，这项研究贡献为女权主义法律史的重新分期奠定了基础。