Open Forum

I think it would depend upon the content of the exhibit, is this a general text for more inclusivity broadly or is there a specific reason for the exhibit itself this needs to be addressed? Are there are non-binary, two spirit or other people portrayed in the exhibit that are referred to as women because that is how they were referred to in the period but might not be so now?

Overall, the language sounds good to me.

------------------------------
Rebecca Dupont
Arlington VA
------------------------------

I agree that it depends on the context of the exhibit. My comments are assuming that the exhibit does not deal with these issues ...

But, to my mind, two of the most relevant questions are: Why does this text single out women and not also include men? and If this is a historical exhibit, why is this even necessary? 
The text as written is itself unclear.  "The term is used broadly..."  What term - women?  If so, it implies that the term women itself is offensive in some way. I appreciate that you are seeking helpful / constructive criticism.  I think your best tact is to focus on the content of the exhibit itself.  If the term women is included in the exhibit text to refer to the specific women in the exhibit or women generally of the time, then adding this text is historically inaccurate. The women identified as women, and if they did not, we have no way of knowing that. The proposed text is beyond the scope of the exhibit. Perhaps that is a reasonable explanation for your client.

------------------------------
Deborah Bigness
Manager of Site Operations, Lubbock Lake National Historic Landmark
Museum of Texas Tech University
Lubbock TX
deborah.bigness@ttu.edu
------------------------------

Hello Matt,

Gender is a social construct, but anatomy is not. Social inequality is not genetic. I think it is unfortunate that some would advocate the elision of references to 'women' in the supposition that doing so promotes social equality. Gendered social roles reinforce and serve to justify inequality. But so does the suppression, omission, and silencing of women's histories and narratives, and that should be brought to its end.

best regards,

------------------------------
Kevin Coffee
Lowell National Historical Park
Lowell, NY
https://www.nps.gov/lowe/
------------------------------

I think the language is too academic and high-falutin' -- "many [who??] consider gender to be a social construct [what's a 'social construct'? not all visitors are sociologists!]," "denote a range of identities [what's the range, between what and what?]." and, OK, "binary construct of male and female [what's a binary and what's wrong with binaries? do you want to get into a whole definitional exercise? and BTW what's with "not necessarily"? so much hedging!)] are certainly current terms to many in the know who are involved in the efforts to move us forward...But the average visitor might head-spin with the fine-tuning and be OK with just "This exhibit uses gender terms that have changed over time, and tries to respect the context of each era in its use of words such as 'men' and 'women' ".  IMHO that might be enough -- I don't know the exhibit, so my edit might not work -- but you could add "We respect each visitor's approach to these changing definitions..." -- and you could add a notebook//on-line space for comments!! Could be fascinating! -- Beau Vallance, retired museum educator

------------------------------
Elizabeth (Beau) Vallance
Associate Professor Emerita
Indiana University
Bloomington, IN
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 7/8/2022 6:39:00 PM
From: Elizabeth (Beau) Vallance
Subject: RE: Gender statement for history exhibition

I think the language is too academic and high-falutin' -- "many [who??] consider gender to be a social construct [what's a 'social construct'? not all visitors are sociologists!]," "denote a range of identities [what's the range, between what and what?]." and, OK, "binary construct of male and female [what's a binary and what's wrong with binaries? do you want to get into a whole definitional exercise? and BTW what's with "not necessarily"? so much hedging!)] are certainly current terms to many in the know who are involved in the efforts to move us forward...But the average visitor might head-spin with the fine-tuning and be OK with just "This exhibit uses gender terms that have changed over time, and tries to respect the context of each era in its use of words such as 'men' and 'women' ".  IMHO that might be enough -- I don't know the exhibit, so my edit might not work -- but you could add "We respect each visitor's approach to these changing definitions..." -- and you could add a notebook//on-line space for comments!! Could be fascinating! -- Beau Vallance, retired museum educator

------------------------------
Elizabeth (Beau) Vallance
Associate Professor Emerita
Indiana University
Bloomington, IN
------------------------------

Matt,

I seems as all of the responses to your interesting question are more or less in agreement.  Realizing that you are between the proverbial rock and hard place, if your client insists on using some type of statement, perhaps a simple statement such as, "The terms men and women in this exhibit are used as they were generally understood at the time." would be a way to resolve your dilemma.  Best of luck.

------------------------------
Deborah Bigness
Manager of Site Operations, Lubbock Lake National Historic Landmark
Museum of Texas Tech University
Lubbock TX
deborah.bigness@ttu.edu
------------------------------

I would agree with Elizabeth and Matt, reading their responses.  A simplification of the statement would probably be best for most visitors. Additionally, you could add a QR code or link with the description in case any visitors are still confused or want to learn more.

------------------------------
Rebecca Dupont
Arlington VA
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 07-11-2022 10:37 AM
From: Deborah Bigness
Subject: Gender statement for history exhibition

Matt,

I seems as all of the responses to your interesting question are more or less in agreement.  Realizing that you are between the proverbial rock and hard place, if your client insists on using some type of statement, perhaps a simple statement such as, "The terms men and women in this exhibit are used as they were generally understood at the time." would be a way to resolve your dilemma.  Best of luck.

------------------------------
Deborah Bigness
Manager of Site Operations, Lubbock Lake National Historic Landmark
Museum of Texas Tech University
Lubbock TX
deborah.bigness@ttu.edu
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 7/11/2022 10:46:00 AM
From: Rebecca Dupont
Subject: RE: Gender statement for history exhibition

I would agree with Elizabeth and Matt, reading their responses.  A simplification of the statement would probably be best for most visitors. Additionally, you could add a QR code or link with the description in case any visitors are still confused or want to learn more.

------------------------------
Rebecca Dupont
Arlington VA
------------------------------

This is an interesting thread. I think the text is good, but probably needs to be sanded down a bit more. And how that should be done depends entirely on the form and content of the exhibition and who you would like your audience to be. However, and in any case, one way you could get around the "social constructionist" jargon would be to just say that sex and gender get their determinations from society and culture, and that similarly, like society and culture, they change through time.

As a recent PhD grad from a hybrid program in Cultural Studies and museum studies, I can also tell you *that* concept specifically, the "social constructionist" one, is in the process of being mediated again and already sounds outdated to the ears of the specialists who've inherited it. I'm cribbing from the Fields' sisters book here, which is itself ten years old now....: Sex and gender might be social constructs, but so is the USA, and so are murder and genocide. "Social construction" is a big umbrella term. It's too general. There are many different families of social constructions.

This kind of problem with language and the symbolic is universal to museums and museum studies I think. We are all grappling with this. It's a very good question, how to refine this.

------------------------------
Seth Alt PhD
Dr. Alt
------------------------------