​Wednesday of last week, I found myself in Newport, Rhode Island for the New England Museum Association annual conference. The day before, as everyone is surely aware, Donald Trump was elected to a second term, and this fact truly hung over the conference like the Sword of Damocles. It was surreal to be in the US at this time, seeing the various ways that people were responding to the news and the implications that would bring. Some met it with a nervous laugh, taking the day as it comes; some cut their attendance short to process the news. Fears surrounding future funding were on the lips of the attendees. But one conversation I did not see much discussion around was that of the upcoming culture war. Now, it is very possible that I simply missed this conversation, having happened at one of the other lunch gatherings that I did not attend. But all the same, I believe it is gravely important that we consider what is approaching the field.
 
For the most part, museums have dodged the most ruthless elements of our current culture war. In previous culture wars, like those in the 1990s, museums often took centre stage and drew controversy for various exhibitions and programs. Nowadays, the battlefields have shifted to social media where anonymous accounts can spread their attacks far and wide. 

​When you are working with an historic site, how do you interpret queer history when there is no evidence of queerness there? Maybe the records were lost or destroyed, or there’s nothing that you can find that points to a queer past; do you just give up and assume it was not meant to be?
 
This is a question I find myself asking repeatedly. When historic sites try to talk about their queer interpretation, it is always reliant on the history that is actually present. Maybe the lady of the house had an affair with another woman, or the son was a “confirmed bachelor”. Whatever the case, it is usually tied to something “verifiable”. The problem is that, these stories are rare. Not every site has the luxury of being able to uncover those histories, so what options are available for other sites?
 
My solution: composite histories.

Unfortunately, I do not think this is that document, and the advice included within ranges from baffling to unintentionally problematic. I have three major issues with the document, which I will explain and discuss my alternatives after the break.
​

​When I was coming out in early 2017, one of the first resources I found was a zine called Mascara and Hope. Although it was aimed at trans women in the UK navigating the NHS gender clinic system, it was one of my first glimpses at how trans people have had to contort themselves in order to be given the health care they so desperately deserve. While I am lucky that my experiences getting on hormones in Toronto was no where near as infuriating as it describes, I cannot help but think back to it and other materials in the wake of the Missouri Attorney General’s emergency rule that will increase barriers to access.

​If I ever do get a chance to create that exhibit, Kit Heyam’s recent book Before We Were Trans: A New History of Gender will most certainly be the first I reach for. 

I have been obsessed with dime museums lately. I am currently in the process of adapting my previous post on them, Dime Museums and the Exhibitionary Complex, into a full book chapter for an upcoming collection, and my mind has been racing with thoughts. Dime museums are fascinating institutions that lie at the intersections between the museum and the circus. This was the realm of the humbug, where any manner of lie would be told to an adoring public. Wax dummies next to fake taxidermy. At the very heart, where the glitz and glamour of show business crossed with the curatorial, was the freak show. It was from the dime museum’s stage where the cabinets of human curiosities could be seen.
 
It was popular. Really popular. It was through his dime museum that PT Barnum became a household name. They would peak in popularity between the 1880s and 1890s, suffering a slow decline until their fateful death in the interwar period. But their memory lingers, even to today. My previous post looked to apply museum theory in the form of Tony Bennett to discuss dime museums, and in researching the book chapter, I found myself thinking on another facet of museum studies; Jennifer Tyburczy’s Sex Museums and her declaration that all museums are sex museums. 

I grew up in Etobicoke, in the West End of Toronto. Toronto has been called a queer city, but Etobicoke is a desert. Growing up, and still today in some respects, queerness was not spoken about very often. Not in positive terms, at least. As a queer kid, it meant a lot of hiding, being careful about what I said, else the Pandora’s box would be opened. It was not until university that I was able to start exploring my identity and face my queerness. Those old haunts have imprinted on me, helped to form my queer life. Crossdressing in lectures at Convocation Hall, only to walk home along St. George and pass impassioned protesters in front of Sid Smith for or against the latest thing Jordan Peterson has said. I would not be the person I am today if I had not walked these streets.
 
There is something magical about local history, where the places and spaces feel familiar. When you recognize the streets mentioned and can place them in your head. This is what I feel when I read Any Other Way: How Toronto Got Queer. There’s a queer history to this city, one that flows under the official stories the city likes to tell. Learning these stories and seeing the locations mentioned makes me feel more connected to them. 

​

In the lead up to the premiere of Framing Agnes, I sought out interviews and panels for the film, thinking it might be interesting to discuss on my website. I was already excited to watch the film, but there was a sentiment that perked my interest further. Morgan M. Page, one of the writers of the documentary, mentioned that the target audience was trans people, not cisgender outsiders. My ears perked up immediately. I had come to the same conclusion about my trans museum studies work during my first exhibition, so I was very curious to see how the film handled this. My curiosity was further piqued when Jen Richards echoed the same sentiments in a different panel. In that one, Richards compared Framing Agnes to the far more straight forward Disclosure, with Agnes being much more for trans people. By the time the premiere came around, my anticipation was heightened. I am excited to say that it lived up to that high bar.