Neist

I have, but I you have to remember that for a lot of people graduate school is likely the most stressful time of their life up to this point. Understandably, some people have probably put social graces aside and have entirely focused on surviving. 
It's possible that your peers are indeed simply catty and unfriendly, but try to contextualize their behavior against the extremity of the experience of graduate school. Admittedly, such thinking might not help a lot, but it might help you sympathize with others or perhaps build bridges with them. Suffering sort of loves company.

Graduate school is a soul-crushing experience. I mean, I love it, and there's no reason why I believe you won't either, but you really need to be prepared to adapt and change. You will not be the same person going in that you will be going out. Understand that and embrace it.
I could easily imagine graduate school as a PTSD inducing experience if one tries to grind through it with the wrong mentality. Graduate students tend to be gritty, high achieving individuals, but the strategies that made you successful in the past will not necessarily work in graduate school. It's too strenuous. And If you don't bend or adapt, you'll break. 
Don't feel as if you don't need to rely on others, be it friends, mental health professionals, or physicians (I'm pretty certain I've developed more than one illness over the years, both mental and physical, due to the stress of graduate school). 
Two cents.

Hello!
As @catsbloom noted, MLIS programs aren't as competitive about admissions. Also, this is purely anecdotal, but it'll likely be easier than an English Lit MA. However, funding is very competitive, if available at all. That said, generally, although not always directly through the library school, the University of Oklahoma has several assistantships available in the library proper in a variety of departments. I attend the University of Oklahoma, and I know quite a few people funded through the library.
If you have any specific questions about the University of Oklahoma, you can ask here or pm me, if you like.  

Speaking of reading at desks, I highly recommend that people consider acquiring book stands.
I got one a few years ago, and it changed my life (at least academically). There are physical limits to how much a person can read in a sitting, and a book stand allowed me to easily surpass those limits. Before, 5-6 hours straight would have been trying, but I could easily push through 10 now, if the necessity called for it.
Anyone have a dream chair they'd love to own? I'd personally love a Swopper, but they are crazy expensive.

I love the internets.

You should be fine if you have limited experience in the subject as long as you demonstrate in your application materials precisely why you want to study it. Also, knowing and referencing active scholars in the your specialty is a big plus in your application materials. 
Very few universities have undergraduate programs in the history of science, and only a slightly larger pool of universities employ faculty members who teach courses in the history of science, let alone any particular facet in the history of science.
In the contingent of students entering into my program when I did, out of five of us, I was the only student with any extended 
Oh, and I should also add that some programs do require some familiarity with the sciences, but these programs tend to be more uncommon than ones that do not.

Okay, okay.. I'm grading the last bit of papers from this semester, and I'm going to pull my hair out.
When I'm given a bit more authority this fall as an official graduate TA, I'm going to metaphorically slap some of these students. No, you can't write your paper in Arial. No, you can't write it at size 13 font (I notice!). No, you cannot insert an inch of blank space after the title of the paper to arbitrarily fulfill paper length requirements, or for that matter, microscopically increase leading to do the same. I worked as a graphic designer, and I notice minute fluctuations in leading. 
Stop trying to cheat, students.
I hope there's a word count limit instead of a page range limit in the next course I TA for.
Oh man, this person used run-ons for half of the sentences. I seriously think this person was wasted when they wrote this paper. 

So, I'm grading some papers, and I'm pretty sure some of these students were heavily intoxicated when they wrote them. For example, how does someone almost correctly use a comma? Oh, they used a comma, but about two words down further than correctly placed, several words beyond a conjunction. There's also quite a bit of missing words from this paper and several heavily misspelled ones. 
Ergh.

O....kay.  Just gonna pirouette over all of the above comments and offer my perspective.
It sounds like you might be doing something that is viewed as unfashionable or possibly antiquarian or overly technical by the historians in your department.  (Though I confess your method doesn't seem that strange to me -- it appears analogous to art historians who focus on the art itself, or like or anything in material culture studies.)  Are there historians of science whose work you can point to as examples of what your method can accomplish?  That might help them figure you out.
I would advise you to at least try to see the professors' perspectives and learn from what they have to say.  It's their job to get you to defend what you are doing and explain its importance. Right now it sounds like you are writing them off as people who refuse to comprehend the significance of your research. But they are most likely just doing their best to help you. Let yourself be stretched a little.
Of course, if you are confident of your career path in librarianship, you can get through as best you can, then do whatever you want afterward.  While in the program, look into opportunities like Rare Book School or any kind of relevant side-job you can get working in special collections or research libraries. 

Those are all good starts.

I think there are more than a few who wish to have that 'problem'.

I have colleagues whose primary method is historical linguistics, and they get tired of explaining to fellow historians how they do what they do and why it should be considered history. A large part of their work involves explaining and defending their methodology to non-specialists. But such is the price of getting to do the work you want. 

Can you give a concrete example? You say 'method/perspective', but it sounds like the pushback you're getting is over the "so what". 
The broader problem is that no matter how confident you are in your own outlook, if the general reaction to what you're attempting is negative, you're going to have substantial problems on the job market where no one will wait around for the explanation. Plus, it sounds to me like the people you're talking to don't find your explanations satisfactory in any case. 
I should note that this can be more of a problem of framing and phrasing than of approach - it took me a solid hour of describing what I wanted to do for my dissertation to my adviser to have her go "ah, yes, that will go somewhere." When you strike on a description that resonates with others, it's important to remember and use it elsewhere. 

So has HoS in general. That's why Truitt is so interesting!

I study something as equally esoteric, and I'd like to comment that if you do manage to find a location to study your interests, you might consider career paths outside of the traditional, academic. Indeed, it might be the wisest course of action.
I'm planning to work in libraries. No department would ever want someone who specializes in what I do.  Well, it's highly unlikely, at least. Job prospects are generally based on departmental needs which are in turn based on archetypal historians. 

My 2cents to my friends is: No one going into a history Ph.D. program expects to be wealthy afterwards.
 
Financial stability is defined differently if you have kids, a mortgage, or other obligations. But if you are single or even in relationship without children or outstanding debts (such as student loans, etc), you'll have a better time managing the process, both during and after your Ph.D. program.
Like @Sigaba has said before, if you want to be a professor, get a Ph.D., if you want to do anything else, reconsider it. However, this doesn't mean down the road you will be highly overeducated and unemployed. The amount of careers and positions available in higher ed administration, nonprofit, cultural institutions, government, etc, are all fitting and held by history Ph.D.
I work in public history, and nearly everyone I've worked with has a MA or PhD in history. And depending on your field (mine is American urban history) you can apply it to different careers. For example, the city I live in was hiring a director of affordable housing and one of the preferred qualifications was an advance degree in urban studies, anthropology, or history.
The Reddit post makes it seem like if you pursue a history Ph.D. you will become homeless and destitute. Not the case at all. I doubt too many people (evidenced by employment records) are in paucity because they pursued a history Ph.D. What the post should say is that you will not be guaranteed, and it is unlikely, that you will become a tenured professor (lecturers, instructors, VAPs, etc, are also options).
A person with a history Ph.D. is a part of an incredibly educated, skilled, and connected member of the upper strata of American educational attainment ladder, and would be able to work in a multitude of fields, not just teaching.

I would recommend two things:
First, that you spend some time thinking through why very few faculty members focus on this particular topic and the impact of that fact on your job prospects at the other end of your degree.
Second, that you broaden your horizons; the scholars who study the intersection of sexuality and power, in Insular contexts and elsewhere, are manifold.

Unfortunately, this question is almost impossible to answer. Some class requirements are probably stipulated by the ABA. However, the precise requirements beyond these mandates are probably up to the program/school in question. The only way you'll know for certain is to shop around for law schools and ask them. Luckily for you, attending law schools in recent years is a bit of a buyer's market (i.e., many law schools aren't getting enough students), so they'll likely answer any question you have enthusiastically. 
My suspicion is that you might have to settle for a normal course load for your JD, then specialize in the philosophy of law in an LLM or SJD.
(For context, I worked at a law school for 10+ years)

True, but programs tend to adhere to these deadlines because a well-qualified applicant might have funded offers from other programs, and those programs will generally require notice of acceptance by April 15.
Whether a program likes it a not, they have to consider an April 15th deadline.

It is hard to wait, I know. My advice would actually be to do a search on the Results page to give you a good idea of when acceptances have typically rolled out from that school in years' past. I think there are some great questions that could be asked of your POI in the interim, if you haven't asked them already (ask more about some of the latest and most innovative scholarship being produced by the department; ask for clarification on something your POI said in one of the more intriguing publications they have written lately; ask for inside knowledge on the housing situation in the area where you may be moving to; etc.), but I would actually steer clear of asking about when decisions will be rolling out as it could come across as impatient.
And congrats on your positive interview! Best of luck to you.

If I'm briefly given a moment to reminisce, it seems only yesterday that I was in everyone's situation. I just thought I'd chime in and say that no matter where you end up, I want to assure everyone that if you don't get the acceptance that you hoped for, it's not necessarily because you're inadequate for graduate school. To be honest, as I sit here writing a book review for a course tomorrow, I've concluded, now after several years in graduate school, that everyone is both inadequate and adequate.  
This graduate school thing is rough. Lots of reading. Lots of writing. Nowhere near enough time for either if one wishes to do them well.

If I'm briefly given a moment to reminisce, it seems only yesterday that I was in everyone's situation. I just thought I'd chime in and say that no matter where you end up, I want to assure everyone that if you don't get the acceptance that you hoped for, it's not necessarily because you're inadequate for graduate school. To be honest, as I sit here writing a book review for a course tomorrow, I've concluded, now after several years in graduate school, that everyone is both inadequate and adequate.  
This graduate school thing is rough. Lots of reading. Lots of writing. Nowhere near enough time for either if one wishes to do them well.

If I'm briefly given a moment to reminisce, it seems only yesterday that I was in everyone's situation. I just thought I'd chime in and say that no matter where you end up, I want to assure everyone that if you don't get the acceptance that you hoped for, it's not necessarily because you're inadequate for graduate school. To be honest, as I sit here writing a book review for a course tomorrow, I've concluded, now after several years in graduate school, that everyone is both inadequate and adequate.  
This graduate school thing is rough. Lots of reading. Lots of writing. Nowhere near enough time for either if one wishes to do them well.

FIRST ACCEPTANCE! U CHICAGO FOR EARLY MODERN!!!

I guess it depends on what one considers common, but it's unheard of, at least. And I imagine this is largely dependent on the department, university, and POI. 
If you did or did not hear back from a POI, I wouldn't necessarily believe it distinctly applies anything in particular.