Well, gender may have something to do with it; but that may in fact be a result rather than a cause. I'd suggest the following alternative. Museums have a connotation of being collections of old stuff. "museum piece" is synonymous with "obsolete". We live in the midst of a commercial culture that thrives on convincing the public that the old is worthless, that they need to buy the newest stuff. We also live in the midst of an industrial/ technological culture that in many areas does render old stuff worthless. (Would you want a fifteen year old computer sitting on your desk?) If there is a difference with respect to Europe, it might be the pervasiveness of commercial television in the U.S. hammering in the messages that you must acquire new stuff constantly. Or it might be the history, Europe for a long time having been ruled by kings who found it in their own interest to be the descendants of a long line of heroic figures, and rightful heirs of the glories of the past. Perhaps there is something genetic involved, the New World having been settled by people who were willing to leave the Old World behind and move into places that had no (to them) history, leaving the Old World to those who were not so willing to leave history behind them. I think of another gender factor (this is coming from one who loves museums but isn't involved in them professionally) is the extent to which the titular "head" of a museum, like the president of a college, is supposed to be more of a fund-raiser than an administrator. So a fund-raiser has to go out and rub elbows with the people who have the money; and those are the business leaders who are predominantly men. Perhaps it is perceived, rightly or wrongly, that on the average men are more effective at getting money out of other men, and that is the main thing that matters.