I’m taking a break from social media for a moment, but here’s a quick thought:
Ask me how much I care about where we draw the line on toppling monuments of bigots and slaveholders. This might be a conversation I’d be interested in if 99% of America’s statutes weren’t of white dudes. As it stands, five—FIVE—statues in Washington, D.C. are of women from history; the other 46 statues depicting women do so anonymously, or even better, toplessly. Call me and ask me how much I care when all of our historical monuments aren’t to white men who tried to oppress women or people of color.
As for what we do with the toppled statues, I’m personally of the throw-them-in-the-museum variety, but honestly? I don’t care. I don’t think historical monuments need to be destroyed; in fact, I think it’s counterproductive. But do I care, when my friends are under threat from actual Nazis? No, I decidedly do not.
9 replies on “On Toppling Monuments”
Your point about the overwhelming number of statues dedicated to white men really struck me. It’s frustrating to think that we’ve glorified figures who contributed to oppression while sidelining the stories of women and marginalized groups. Personally, I’ve often wondered how we can shift this narrative and promote a more inclusive history—it’s something I explored in a piece on Apostate Verity. It’s essential that we reflect on who we choose to honor in our public spaces. Thanks for raising this important discussion!
Stepping back from social media while monuments come down gives the piece an unusually reflective pace. Connecting public memory to who gets honored in stone still feels timely.
The five-out-of-fifty-one statistic makes the point better than any argument could. Who gets commemorated in a public square is a choice made by people at a particular time, and it is reasonable for later generations to revisit it. Adding more statues of women seems like a simple place to start. (I run Final Grade Calcs, a tool for students, and history classes are where these conversations begin.)
The point about D.C.’s statues really lands. Five statues of real women versus a city full of anonymous or topless figures says a lot about whose history we chose to cast in bronze. I agree that moving toppled monuments into museums makes more sense than destroying them, but I also get the exhaustion of debating process while real threats are happening. Prioritizing people over pedestals isn’t a hard call. Related resource: PicYep
The point about the five statues of women in D.C. versus the anonymous and topless ones really stuck with me. I agree that the museum option makes sense for preserving history without glorifying it, but the author’s frustration is fair: when the landscape is so overwhelmingly white and male, debating the fine line of removal feels like a distraction. The urgency of the moment matters more than perfect protocol. Related resource: Subtitle Translator
Jillian’s point about the five statues of women in D.C. versus 46 anonymous or topless ones stopped me cold. I’ve walked past those monuments my whole life and never counted. Her refusal to debate the fine points of statue removal while real Nazis march is the right instinct — sometimes the abstract argument is just a way to avoid the urgent one. I’d still put the toppled ones in a museum, but she’s right that it’s not the priority. Related resource: Notary Stamp Maker
The point about the anonymous and topless female statues in D.C. is what stuck with me. It’s easy to debate where to draw the line on removing monuments when the existing landscape already tells you whose history counts. I lean toward the museum approach too, but I get the frustration with treating this as an abstract debate while real threats are happening. Related resource: Web Dashershrea
The point about the five statues of women in D.C. versus the anonymous and topless ones really stuck with me. It’s easy to debate where to draw the line when you’re not the one whose history is barely represented. I lean toward museums too, but I get the urgency when real threats are marching in the streets. The debate over statues feels like a luxury when people are fighting for basic safety. Related resource: NoomiClone Controls
The D.C. statue count — five named women versus forty-six anonymous or topless ones — makes the ‘where do we draw the line’ debate feel oddly premature. Preferring museums over destruction still lands as a practical middle ground when the threat is not theoretical.