The Reader’s Shop sends “this article about an Alabama lawmaker who sought to ban gay marriages and now wants to ban novels with gay characters from public libraries, including university libraries.
A bill would prohibit the use of public funds for “the purchase of textbooks or library materials that recognize or promote homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle.”
Comedians should have a blast
This story is fantastic fodder for political comedians everywhere! I’d like to know who the Alabama Legislature is going to appoint as the Censorship Czar. Whether one believes the results of scientific inquiry or not, isn’t it the role and responsibility of libraries (and thus librarians) to provide access to “all sides of the story” so people can come to their own conclusions? I’m SURE I read that in my first LIS course.
Re:Comedians should have a blast
What a comedian says or doesn’t say is no excuse not to do soemthing. To say this guy is overreaching is an understatement and undermines those who would like some restrictions at least in children’s materials. No doubt comedians would have fun with even that.
Lawmaker?
This story shows that irrationality is on both sides of the aisle. When we as professionals call for responsible collection development we always have in mind our constitutional duty of free speech as well. We do not advocate censorship as this Alabaman but we also consider what is appropriate on age levels and how we develop our collections with consideration to the public that uses them. This lawmaker is going beyond reason and at the same time gives fuel to those who are pushing for unrestricted collection development with no consideration for families. Now a library with policies that has open use to all ages and no consideration to appropriateness can cite this Alabama lawmaker. How can a responsible librarian use discretion and approporiateness when critics can now associate such policies with this lawmaker? Instead of it being comedic it is more tragic and an issue that we as librarians should address.
Prohibiting the use of public funds…
The first thought that comes to mind with this is that cutting off “public funds” is probably not too major of a problem. Private sources of funds (endowments, donations, etc.) could fill in the gap. With governmental budget supports to libraries declining across the United States, much of collection development is having to be done with such funds anyhow.
Creativity is perhaps appropriate in addressing this rather than merely outrage from whatever side one is on?
Ban on Gay characters
Well, there goes the Wind in the Willows. It is truly a shame that Alabama State funds are being used to pay for ignorant lawmakers.
Re:Lawmaker?
I suppose it depends upon what you mean by “consideration for families.” Not all families, by any means, have the same underlying philosophy. What my family considers harmful or dangerous, another family may not. As a librarian it is my job to help each family find material that they find affirming. The same goes for collection development. There are age appropriate materials that deal with many sides of a particular issue. I believe that the vast majority of librarians are concientious in the selection of books and other media for their collections, and they honestly try to provide balance and inclusion in those choices. Just because one family believes that homosexuality is wrong does not mandate that their library remove all books that present a different view… nor does it mean that their own views should be ignored and exempted from the collection
Sadly, I think the concept of appropriateness is often used as a code word for the removal, or restriction, of ideas and beliefs that some find disagreeable. Such parents are rarely worried about their own children, they always seem to be worried about other people’s children.
Re:Lawmaker?
“Sadly, I think the concept of appropriateness is often used as a code word for the removal, or restriction, of ideas and beliefs that some find disagreeable”
code word nothing, that *is* the definition of appropriateness, its also the definition of words like standards and laws and manners and any number of words that apply to how you behave in society.
Re:Lawmaker?
Hopefully “appropriateness” is not that broad. Given the diversity of thought and opinion in the United States, removing or restricting books containing ideas and beliefs that some find disagreeable will leave our shelves pretty bare. The good news would be, of course, that shelving will take a matter of minutes, and budgets for collection development will be in the double digits.