The Debate Over the Women’s Museum Was Never About Women

“House Democrats oppose a bill for a Smithsonian women’s history museum.”

This is not a sentence I ever expected to read.

Aren’t Democrats supposed to be the feminists? The champions of inclusion? The self-appointed defenders of the “disadvantaged”? And on top of that, they are the ones who pushed for the women’s museum to begin with.

Last week, the House voted on HR 1329, legislation concerning the establishment of the Smithsonian American Women’s History Museum. Despite the Office of Management and Budget’s statement of support for the bill, it failed to pass the vote.

Initially introduced by Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y., the bill later became the subject of controversy after Rep. Mary Miller, R-Ill., added language clarifying that the museum would recognize biological women in its exhibits.

Apparently, complying with the actual definition of a woman makes you “far-right”; at least that is what a quick online search of Mary Miller will tell you.

TRENDING ARTICLES

opinion

Seattle’s Socialist Mayor Now Panicking Over Businesses Leaving

Jarrett Stepman

opinion

Senate GOP Leaders Pull a Bait-and-Switch With Reconciliation 3.0

Deroy Murdock

news

Tulsi Gabbard Resigns From Trump’s Cabinet for Heartbreaking Reason

Bradley Devlin

Once Miller’s amendment was adopted, many Democrats who had previously supported the bill suddenly withdrew support—an unsurprising choice given the Left’s agenda. An American Women’s History Museum was acceptable only so long as the definition of “woman” itself remained, well … undefined.

In the final 204-216 vote last week, several brave Republicans actually joined the Democrats to vote against the bill. But this was because they rightly don’t see the need for a women’s history museum at all.

Probably because they understand what so many don’t: The Smithsonian doesn’t care about everyday women who are mothers and professionals and students who contribute to this country. Instead, they emphasize the oppressed/oppressor blueprint promoted by the Left.

Race, immigration, sexuality, and discrimination are all legitimate subjects of historical discussion. The problem comes when they cease to be mere components of history and instead become the predominant framework through which all history is interpreted.

The Smithsonian already does this consistently. The National Museum of American History—which will likely shed many of its women’s history didactics and displays for the women’s museum—is perhaps the very worst example of this.

For example, the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History already frames portions of women’s history through explicitly modern identity politics and gender ideology. One athletics exhibit features “Lia” Thomas and asks visitors, “Do transgender athletes upset the competitive balance?”

Another panel praises actress Charlotte Cushman, who portrayed male roles in the mid-19th century and is celebrated for having “flouted traditional gender roles” while living among a circle of so-called female bachelors. Elsewhere in the exhibit, an entire wall is dominated by a projected image of a drag queen accompanied by the phrase, “And may the best drag queen win.”

Additional displays emphasize themes such as sexual independence from men, feminism, cross-dressing, and sexual freedom.

Increasingly, women are presented less through their contributions to a shared American story—as mothers, builders of communities, educators, reformers, artists, professionals, and citizens—and more through stories centered on sexuality, identity, and resistance to traditional social norms.

In a post explaining his decision to vote against the bill, Rep. Josh Brecheen, R-Okla., said, “Without clear statutory guardrails to protect against radical left-wing ideology being injected into American/women’s history at the Smithsonian, this new museum is set to provide a permanent venue on our National Mall for pro-abortion and LGBT ideology.”

The debate over HR 1329 was never simply about celebrating women’s history. It was about whether or not the Left could put a chokehold on yet another institution telling the American story.

And that distinction matters because the Smithsonian has demonstrated, repeatedly, which side it takes.

In short, the National Women’s History Museum should not exist in the first place. And it doesn’t, yet. It was authorized by Congress in the 2020 omnibus bill, but Congress hasn’t designated a site yet.

In the unfortunate case that it is built, it will merely become another battleground for gender ideology and the many other falsehoods of the woke agenda. But the achievements of American women are not separate from the American story; they are inseparable from it. Their history should remain integrated within the broader American narrative rather than isolated into another ideological silo.

As Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., commented, “We say we need to unite this country, but then we isolate every group.”

He is correct. At the 250th anniversary, now is not the time to endlessly subdivide citizens into competing demographic categories, each encouraged to view itself primarily through grievance, identity, and difference, as the Left so encourages. Rather, it is time to put an end to it—and that starts with the end of the Smithsonian’s National Women’s History Museum.