Military Museums and Memorial Sites: Disappearing Women in the Military

  • Stephanie SzitanyiEmail author


Through a study of the USS Midway Museum as well as a veterans' ceremony on the deck of the former aircraft carrier, the chapter investigates military narratives on commemoration and death that are consumed by visitors at military sites of remembrance. Through the use of semiotics, the chapter illuminates gendered dimensions of public memory at these sites. Semiotics offer a unique means to excavate structures of meaning within military cemeteries, museums, and memorials—spaces created to communicate certain meanings. By excluding women’s military service from exhibits and remembrance ceremonies, war museums erase decades of women’s participation in war and reify national defense as a thoroughly masculine domain. Structuring public memory in ways "that determine what is remembered (or forgotten), by whom, and for what end” (Gillis, Memory and Identity: The History of a Relationship. In Commemorations: The Politics of National Identity, ed. John R. Gillis. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994, p. 3), narratives of valor contribute to understandings of national belonging, linking membership to service in wars and subtly encoding citizenship as a male privilege.


  1. Buffalo Soldier Educational and Historical Committee. 2017. The 6888th Central Postal Directory Battalion Monument. Accessed February 15, 2019.
  2. Chavez, J. 2018. Las Cruces Unveils Women Veterans Museum. ABC 7 News – KVIA. Accessed February 15, 2019.
  3. Faust, D.G. 2008. This Republic of Suffering: Death and the American Civil War. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  4. Ferguson, K., and P. Turnbull. 1999. Oh, Say, Can You See? The Semiotics of the Military in Hawai’i. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  5. Gillis, J.R. 1994. Memory and Identity: The History of a Relationship. In Commemorations: The Politics of National Identity, ed. John R. Gillis, 3–25. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Jeffords, S. 1989. The Remasculinization of America: Gender and the Vietnam War. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Lorber, J. 2000. Using Gender to Undo Gender: A Feminist Degendering Movement. Feminist Theory 1 (1): 79–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Millar, K. 2015. Death Does Not Become Her: An Examination of the Public Construction of Female American Soldiers as Liminal Figures. Review of International Studies 41 (4): 757–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mills, C. 2007. White Ignorance. In Race and Epistemologies of Ignorance, ed. S. Sullivan and N. Tuana, 11–38. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  10. Noth, W. 1995. Handbook of Semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Pang Kah Meng, A. 2004. Making History in From Colony to Nation: A Multimodal Analysis of a Museum Exhibition in Singapore. In Multimodal Discourse Analysis: Systemic Functional Perspectives, ed. Kay L. O’Halloran, 28–54. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  12. Rancière, J. 2010. Dissensus: On Politics and Aesthetics. Ed. and Trans. Stefen Corcoran. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  13. Segs4Vets. 2011. The Segs4Vets Program. Accessed March 25, 2013.
  14. Shapiro, M.J. 1997. Violent Cartographies: Mapping Cultures of War. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  15. Smith, C. 1989. Museums, Artefacts, and Meanings. In The New Museology, ed. P. Vergo, 6–21. London: Reaktion Books.Google Scholar
  16. Szitanyi, S. 2015. Semiotic Readings of the USS Midway Museum. International Feminist Journal of Politics 17 (2): 253–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Tilly, C. 1985. War Making and State Making as Organized Crime. In Bringing the State Back In, ed. Peter B. Evans, Dietrich Rueschemeyer, and Theda Skocpol, 169–181. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. USS Midway Museum. 2013. Coming Attractions. Accessed March 20, 2013.
  19. ———. 2018. Museum Fact Sheet. 2018. Accessed September 9, 2019.
  20. Zingheim, K. Interviewed by: Szitanyi, S. Telephone Interview. (2013, March 6).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Schools of Public EngagementThe New SchoolNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations