"Publications of landscape architects show that the planning and design ofopen spaces as well as the setting of standards for their "proper" use areundertaken with images of users in the experts' mind. They could range fromthe idealized "modulus user" to the opposite, the "potential vandal". Suchimages tend to influence decisions on the way usable open space is allocatedor denied to various groups and class within the planning and design process.Landscape architecture in the Federal Republic of Germany in the 1950'sand 1960's has mainly followed the conservative political mainstream ofthose years, and developed middle-class oriented concepts for the use of openspaces which tended to heavily emphasize users' traditional family and gen-der roles. Sexist opinions on women's role have contributed to concepts foropen spaces in which space for women in their traditional functions asmothers and homemakers only should be provided. The tendency inherent inthese concepts to ignore women's own wishes for a self-determined use aswell as other tendencies to confirm women to the "private" family sphereand exclude them from participation in public activities, i.e. the practiceand advancement in the field of landscape architecture itself can be seen aspart of general anti-liberation tendencies inherent in this thinking.These conservative middle-class-oriented images of women are expressed inmetaphors of primordial,pre - industrial femininity - the "domestic"woman - as well as in its counterpart - negative images of "modern Women"of independent mind. The idealized image of the "loving gardener becomespart of the ideological basis of conservative open space concepts that in gen-eral envision the middle class family as model users. Woman as "loving gardeners" are seen - in a premominantly petit-bourgeois context - as constantly working for the benefit and enjoyment oftheir families only in the home as well as In public and private open spaces.They seem to maintain gardenss for the enjoyment of their families and touse parks only as weary shoppers or child-minding mothers. Additonally,they are supposed to follow rather rigid standards for "decent" femininemanners in public open spaces. Only in upper - class contexts, gardenss aresometimes described as spaces for the recreation of women. If women do notseem to comply with such male oriented standards of behavior, sanctions areinherent such as ridicule for the "incompetent gardener or demands forstiffer penalties for juvenile "vandals" if they happen to be girls.The absence of statements on the use of landscape by women - apart fromtheir implicit presence in the context of family recration - can be seen asan indicator that landscape was not seen as an open space for women's self-determined use, either.These concepts for open space that tend to ignore women's wishes, i. e. to usegardens and "nature" in general as spaces for temporary escapes from theirstifling traditional roles and, on the contrary, tend to restrict women to te-hir traditional roles - as wel as the refusal of many landscape architects toaccept women landscape architects as equals can be seen as part of a gen-eral conservative, sexist political stance. The image of women as "lovinggardeners" is part of a general, conservative politica concept that is i.e. di-rected against broader participation of women in public functions It is im-plicitly promoted by German landscape architects of the 1950's and 1960'sthrough their concepts for the design and use of open spaces and also throughtheir explicit poltical statements."