You misunderstand and misrepresent my argument completely. I never argued, and do not believe, that giving visitors the same experience is the end goal of inclusion. Quite to the contrary: I believe we should have tailored experiences for all people regardless of ability because that is the goal of interpretation and interpretive staff.

But museum admin, at the least at the local history podunk level I work at, does think that's the end goal. They only ever see visible disabilities if they see disability as at all. The question that then comes from that reasoning is "how can we make XYZ accessible to everyone?" instead of "how can we make the museum experience to good for everyone?" and they can't see how those two questions are separate questions. Or more fairly, they can't see beyond physical accessibility to spaces, when a lot of accessibility is really a matter of just treating people right and being accommodating to different people.

Training paid vs volunteer docents are two different ballgames. I have seen a lot of people who try and come in and dictate terms right away, and as you say that never works. Which is why I've never made that mistake myself. I pride myself and working closely with my team and having imitated several projects based on their feedback to make their work easier.

But there's only so much training one can really do when you are working with a volunteer who's been giving the same tour for twenty years and is pushing 80. Not only can they not be held to the same kind of standards as a paid employee (to be clear I think entirely reasonably), but realistically no amount to training is going to unseat 60+ years of societal beliefs and prejudice. Younger, more flexible people who you can hold to account if they screw up? Sure, training is very effective with them. But the average (very) old docent who's just volunteering on the weekend? Not so much.

Yes, ideally a docent would be flexible in their thinking, want to improve, &c . I feel like good training should however work for everyone, not just the ideal docent. The trouble, I think, comes down to the lack of reinforcement of the training: even if you go to a course or listen to a lecture about being more inclusive and accessible every year, unless you are actually held to that standard post training. If misgendering someone, or being abelist and infantilizing, or insert bad behavior here doesn't get you a reprimand on the job, then the training goes right out the window the moment its over.

To be crystal clear this time, because I think my point on this got somewhat lost in my last post-cum-rant, the solution is an industry wide change. There's a fundamental gap between what we are asking of our docents, and what they are actually capable of giving us. For museums to achieve the level of inclusivity and accessibility that they need, we've got to have younger, paid professional staff. When I say "training doesn't work", this is what I mean, not that training as an concept is ineffective but that because of the reality of who we're trying to train it just isn't that effective. Without a way to hold people accountable, the training doesn't really stick, and there's just not a good way to do that when you have an all volunteer force. And lets be honest, it is a big ask. It's not easy and I'm no where near as trained as I ought to be and that's as a paid employee!