I must say that I think that the original poster presented something
   considerably different from a hypothesis to be tested.  Rather she
   presented what she considered to be an important insight which she
   planned on developing into a dissertation.

   The insight was internally contradictory (museums have become less
   valued as they have headed into more "feminine" concerns such as
   education; family-based entertainment is less "valued" than male-based
   entertainment.) She was wildly general and biased in her statements
   (the phrase about "until America suspends its mystical belief in the
   nuclear family, such and so will not change or improve." [obviously a
   paraphrase]).  And therefore, she invites generalities and bias in
   response.

   I personally think, pace Hank, that the list was very generous and
   supportive of this, and it speaks well of the temperateness of the
   participants.

   Eric Siegel
   [log in to unmask]