Gays and Public Libraries

[vIQleS]

It didn't work, the kids still show up here, surf the Internet see porn, take part in chat rooms, and I am sure at least a half a dozen of them are in ka-hoots with those Dateline- To Catch a Pedofile people.

As a librarian, I am NOT the thought police. I will check out ANY book, DVD, VHS, or CD to ANY patron with a library card. *And our policy is that if you are old enough to come to the library- by walking, running, or riding a bike or board, then you are old enough to have a library card.

Our "R" rated DVD's & VHS's are within reach of 'kids', and if one of them wanted to check out 'Saving Private Ryan", I wouldn't hesistate to check them out and send them on their way.

I'm a bit surprised to hear this - I work in a Learning Centre in a library - basically my job is to show people how to use the computers, teach classes, and monitor what people are doing...

We have very strict rules about what people can do with the computers, and they apply equally to kids and adults. (No porn, violence etc, only educational games...)

Books are divided up into Kids, Youth and Adult, and a child can never take an adult book out. If they need an adult book, their parent or guardian can issue it on their (adult) card. Our libraries may be a bit bigger than yours (we have 8 branches) and we are fully a department of the council, but I would have thought that common sense about what should be acceptable in a public area would mean similar rules no matter how big or politic the library...

ETA:The parent can specify that a child is an 'Advanced Reader' in which case they can take out a limited number of adult books...

 

[vIQleS]

We use Webmarshal. It works quite well... Every now and then it blocks a legit site, we just have to email IM and they unblock it.

 

[King of the Americas]

To vIQleS:

I don't think your policies will 'keep' kids from viewing 'adult' material...

SURELY, your library has quiet corners in which to read? What would keep a 10 year old from picking up say "Redbook" and reading about all kinds of sexually explicit material, or even a book about sex from the adult section?

Moreover, I would almost wager that it isn't your libraries policy NOT to check 'adult section' books out to Kids or Youths.

We too HAVE an 'Easy' section for like elementary kids, a 'Junior' section for teens, and an 'Adult' section. But if you have a card it is good for ANY item we have available for circulation. We have the sections so that you can easily find a book for the level you desire.

As I noted above, we do have disclaimers saying you aren't 'supposed' to have explicit material visible to other patrons, but if no one is looking... then who's to say what you do.

 

[steverino]

As I noted above, we do have disclaimers saying you aren't 'supposed' to have explicit material visible to other patrons, but if no one is looking... then who's to say what you do.

Again, isn't it part of your job to be looking, or monitoring? Regardless of your having a moral problem with monitoring, isn't that in your job description?

 

[vIQleS]

To vIQleS:

I don't think your policies will 'keep' kids from viewing 'adult' material...

Actually they mostly do (see below). We had a couple of problems with (mostly adults) coming in and browsing porn, so they cracked down and installed filters. It's also part of our job (there's one of us at each library) to monitor the users. I don't have a problem with porn, i don't think any of us do, but if you want to download it off the Internet, buy your own computer and pay for your own Internet connection. The tax payers don't want to pay for you to get your jollies in the library. *

SURELY, your library has quiet corners in which to read? What would keep a 10 year old from picking up say "Redbook" and reading about all kinds of sexually explicit material, or even a book about sex from the adult section?

Actually, my library is pretty small, but I take your point. I don't know what redbook is, and I'm sure none of the kids do either but I'm sure there are some kids coming in to look at the National Geographics or whatever... But if i see them looking at a webpage full of naked chicks I'm going to give them a warning.

I honestly think that books are different - I'm pretty sure, for example, that we don't have any playboys floating around the library, so what they have access to is much more acceptable. I just don't see a parallel at all.

Moreover, I would almost wager that it isn't your libraries policy NOT to check 'adult section' books out to Kids or Youths.

Actually - that's exactly what the policy is. Its built into the database, so if a child tries to take an adult book out it beeps at you. The librarian will then explain the policy to the adult (if there is one) and they can take the book out on their card if they're OK with the child reading it.

As I noted above, we do have disclaimers saying you aren't 'supposed' to have explicit material visible to other patrons, but if no one is looking... then who's to say what you do.

I don't know the layout of your library, but how do you guarantee that while a patron is looking at violent kiddie bestiality porn no children will wander past and see it? Or is that child then 'choosing' to look?

It just seems like too many opportunities for a customer complaint to me - I would think that in America of all places you'd be worried about that.

* I don't mean you obviously...

 

[King of the Americas]

vIQles:

I don't think your library is in compliance or even in line with the intent of the ALA's (The American Library Association) policies and procedures...

I have said it once, twice, and now a THIRD time. "I am NOT a monitor."

I am a curator, cataloger, and a checker-outer...

I can answer your question, or point you a direction, but what you do and where you go thereafter is your business, NOT mine.

As far as viewing 'child porn', I can't say I know that looks like. I mean one guy's bubble covered toddler, may be another man's filthyness exposed. I am not a cop. If someone checks out that terrorist handbook thingy, I don't make a report to Homeland security. I IGNORE what people do in the library, unless they are disrupting others...

 

[drkitten]

Again, isn't it part of your job to be looking, or monitoring?

The American Library Association says that it isn't.

From the "Library Bill Of Rights"

I. Books and other library resources should be provided for the interest, information, and enlightenment of all people of the community the library serves. Materials should not be excluded because of the origin, background, or views of those contributing to their creation.

II. Libraries should provide materials and information presenting all points of view on current and historical issues. Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval.

III. Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment.

IV. Libraries should cooperate with all persons and groups concerned with resisting abridgment of free expression and free access to ideas.

V. A person’s right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background, or views.

VI. Libraries which make exhibit spaces and meeting rooms available to the public they serve should make such facilities available on an equitable basis, regardless of the beliefs or affiliations of individuals or groups requesting their use.

 

[King of the Americas]

Exactly...

 

[luchog]

...STINK...S*UCK...and or cause problems...

We have tried them, but eventually some patron has difficulties accessing their 'hotmail' account, or some other site that raisies a red flag.

There was a review done on net-filtering software some time ago by one of the major tech magazines. All of the major filtering applications had problems both with filtering non-pornographic websites, as well as failing to filter a substantial number of pornographic sites.

The most interesting thing, however, is that the reporter discovered that one of the most commonly used filter packages (i can't recall the exact one, the magazine is in storage) was set to deliberately filter a number of non-pornographic websites. The company that produced it was owned and run by conservative Mormons, and sites containing information about homosexuality and gay rights, abortion rights, teen pregnancy and sexuality, contraception, STDs, breast cancer(!), and some far-left politics were explicitly included in a list of blocked websites. And some pornographic websites were still accessible; though not as many as with other filtering software.

In some states, net-filtering software is mandatory for publc schools and public libraries.

Where I live, we actually have two separate library systems, the King County Library System, and the Seattle Public Library.

SPL only uses filter software on the computers in the children's section of the library; with all other computers being unfiltered. http://www.spl.org/default.asp?pageID=about_policies_publicuseofinternet

The KCLS, however, includes moderate filtering on all computers, with substantially more filtering on the children's section computers; including "Sexual Education", "Web-based email", "Hosting Sites" (such as Myspace), and "Search Engines". Patrons can also request that their or their children's accounts be more strictly filtered. Although not specifically stated on their website, patrons can request that all the computers at their local branch be set up for more strict filtering. Not sure how many requests would be necessary before more strictly filtering would be implemented, however; and I haven't heard of it happening yet. http://www.kcls.org/about/filtered.cfm

The Kitsap Regional Library (where I grew up) also uses filtering software on all it's computers. Unless things have changed (likely) since I was last there, about 8 years ago, they do not have computers specifically for the children's section, but have all of their computers in one small dedicated area in each branch. http://www.krl.org/Know Your Library/policies/InternetPolicyAcceptableUse7_04.pdf

 

[luchog]

then he said recently that he feels safer in his neighborhood with the drug dealers than he does in my (other) brother's neighborhood. because there are gays there.

what a guy.

Wow, your brother sounds seriously closeted. Next time he goes off on one of his rants, just tell him that once he comes to terms with his own latent homosexuality, he'll find it a lot easier to cope with life. Offer to put him in touch with counselors.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I can say that I hate net filtering software, at my brothers house I could not access my email on their machines because of password/autologin software and because of net monitoring software(and my sister in law forgot the password she used)

 

[TragicMonkey]

One of my previous employers had a filter on. I couldn't read the news stories, on Yahoo News, about the wrongful death suit against Tommy Lee (when the kid drowned in his pool) because every article mentioned "Pamela Anderson" which was an automatic block. I thought that was pretty funny because Pamela Anderson could go assassinate a world leader or blow up a shopping mall and a lot of people wouldn't find out about it because her name triggers filter blocking. With enough filters, she could get away with anything!

 

[vIQleS]

vIQleS:

I don't think your library is in compliance or even in line with the intent of the ALA's (The American Library Association) policies and procedures...

I don't see why it would be... They may be relevant and really good, but i don't know why we would just adopt another countries library policies, instead of writing our own. I don't know if we even have a nationwide library policy...

I have said it once, twice, and now a THIRD time. "I am NOT a monitor."

I am a curator, cataloger, and a checker-outer...

And fair enough - like i said, i don't know how your library system works, but my job is exactly that - to monitor and help people use the computers.

I don't think that its wrong to impose sensible rules on the use of tax-funded computers. In fact i think its important, if only to prevent customer complaints.

I IGNORE what people do in the library, unless they are disrupting others...

For the most part i do too.
Don't get me wrong - I'd be the first person to jump up and down if i thought the library was censoring books... But i don't expect the library to have penthouse on their magazine shelves, and if the customers want to browse porn they can use their own bandwidth.

PS. If you're ever in Auckland let me know - I'll show you around the libraries and buy you lunch, and we can chat about the differences...

 

[ZirconBlue]

. . . if the customers want to browse porn they can use their own bandwidth.

So, poor people don't deserve equal access to porn?

 

[King of the Americas]

vIQleS:

ALRIGHT...I get it now. You aren't in America!

Auckland...? Where's that? Around on the Southern Hemisphere, I'd wager.

In America, we treasure our intellectual freedom, and this even means the freedom to access porn via other people's dime.

Here, there's no accounting for taste. One man's Monet, is another man's Flint. Michealangeo vs. Hefner, there's no descriminating here.

Moralist taxpayers don't get to tell ME what I can and should read, even if it is on their dime.

 

[ZirconBlue]

Moralist taxpayers don't get to tell ME what I can and should read, even if it is on their dime.

Of course, that doesn't stop them from trying.

 

[ZirconBlue]

Oh, and I believe the "NZ" after Auckland refers to New Zealand.

 

[steverino]

So, poor people don't deserve equal access to porn?

Poor people can buy second-hand Playboys at garage sales. Just like I have to drive a crappy old VW, instead of a nice new BMW.

A capitalist pig might say to the poor, "Educate yourself on more productive (non-porn) sites on the library computer, get a better job, then view all the porn you want at home. Me, I just mooch the internet signal off my neighbors for free. I hate the term "poor" for me, and prefer to think of myself as "broke all the time."

 

[LostAngeles]

My response to the "won't somebody think of the children" argument is "where are their parents, and why aren't they watching their kids?"

...Laurentian Valley Councillor George Hodgkinson, a returning member of the board, noted that the concern was access by children to the materials in question.

"These books are definitely not in the children's department," he said. "Children are the responsibility of their parents and legal guardians, not the responsibility of staff. They give a service, they are not their parents. Our staff is quite astute in not letting children check out materials unsuitable for them. We have a responsibility to service all people. It's up to the individual who comes into the library whether they wish to access any books."
...

Mr. Hodgkinson thought of the children and asked the same question, TM.

I salute him and you in the name of, "Damn f***ing straight."

 

[LostAngeles]

... I hate the term "poor" for me, and prefer to think of myself as "broke all the time."

I use the euphism, "college student," myself.