Gays and Public Libraries

[steverino]

I work in a small public library...

Since my arrivial, I have done eveything in my power to put stuff on the shelves that would shock, dismay, and or outright offend local patrons, not because I want to 'make trouble', but because I think people deserve ALL the information, not just the stuff they agree with...

the kids still show up here, surf the Internet see porn...

You are sick. I am glad I don't have kids, or live near your library. It sounds like you are not doing your job to me. If these kids are under your control, which is the impression you want us to have, then you should not allow them to look at porn in the public library. What is your problem?

 

[Ladewig]

And that is a good subject to discuss separately. What does each person feel is "adult material" unsuitable for children?

I would not like to see a scientific or educational article on homosexuality put in the "adult section", for example. But I think anything by Anais Nin or Henry Miller ought to be.

Fair enough.

 

[Admiral]

Isn't that illegal? I thought that ratings were enforcable by law when it came to libraries/video stores checking them out to patrons.

Nope. The MPAA has no legal significance whatsoever (in the United States- the ratings ARE law in a lot of European countries.) There is no law against selling R rated movies to minors, or multiplexes letting them into R rated movies.

The reason most theaters follow the ratings is that the distributors, because of industry pressure, only give the films to theaters that follow the ratings, or at least seem to.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Yes. It is a government institution.

So, the government's job is to raise your children? You abdicate your parental responsibility on seeing your child doesn't get exposed to anything improper, and you remove the responsibility from the child to behave itself, and expect the government to do it for you?

I always thought you were something of a conservative, not a proponent of the Nanny State.

The alternative is that a parent follow their 12 year old around the library and look over their shoulder at what they are reading. Sound sensible or reasonable to you?

If the parent thinks the 12 year old is in danger in the library by himself, why is the parent permitting it to happen? Has the parent no authority over the child?

a. The parent feels strongly that the child should be protected from something.
b. But the parent hasn't the time or energy or will to bother with doing it.
c. So the parent expects the government to take care of it for him.

It seems like less of a burden for the objecting parent to do some parenting than for everyone else to sanitize the world so that the parent doesn't have to exert the effort to do what the parent thinks ought to be done.

I don't want my child to be bitten by snakes, but I simply can't follow him into the jungle to protect him. I could keep the child out of the jungle, true, but he likes the jungle. I thereby demand the government exterminate all the snakes in the jungle. Or, since I believe in other people's right to have access to snakes, I'm willing to make a mighty concession: find all the snakes and remove them to another jungle, one where my child won't go. Unless he does, of course, which will be the fault of the government for not stopping him.

The sensible and reasonable thing is that if the parent wants some parenting done, it'd be best to do it himself rather than expect other people and government institutions to do it for him.

 

[Hawk one]

Please explain why you say that. Keep in mind this is in context of adult material being present in the library.

Because at that point, a normal 12-year old is pretty much mature enough to handle sexual content in written word without taking any damage of it. I know I was, I know other kids around me were, and I make no claim whatsoever to be specifically mature for my age, neither then nor now.

Heck, by the age of 12, kids should have learned about sex in school (of course, many schools are rather uptight about this, but what can you do?). They certainly do around here. By suddenly saying that you can't have the possibility to even read about it is making a bigger deal out of it than it really is. It's just sex. It's not like violence or murders, is it?

What is absurd is that you would have a parent accompanying every child in a library. It is a much simpler proposition that adult material be in an adult section that is clearly marked off limits to minors. Then only one adult (a librarian) is necessary to keep an eye out for any and all minors.

No, I don't want an adult accompagnying -every- child in the library, that is a strawman. But, to avoid more misunderstandings:

Kids that needs to be accompagnied -everywhere else- in public should also be accompagnied in the library. And as long as there isn't a specific appointment going on (like reading hour), -then- that's the job of the parent. Period.

Kids that are allowed autonomous movement in the enviroment around the library (for example in malls). should also be allowed to do so in the library. Of course, many parents have different views on when this age is; and it'll partially also be decided by the enviroment you're in (kids in small towns are generally "let loose" much faster than kids in big cities). Kids that have been taught about sex in school should be considered able to handle sex in literature.

As for an adult section, that is pretty much impractical, because frankly, a hell of a lot of literature not specifically written for a younger audience will usually have -some- sex in it. I started reading ordinary novels at the age of nine or ten, and more often than not, acts of sex were happening. An "adult" section would be completely arbitrarily decided, based on which of the few books would be too nasty, and it still wouldn't do much, because there's still a vast amount of books that a bunch of morally hysterical parents would shout loudly about (mostly thanks to rumours about how nasty the book is rather than having read the books themselves). It would never be enough, and it wouldn't help.

There is already a real children's section, and a section for all the other literature in a library. At least any library I've seen. That is a good enough separation in my view.

 

[clarsct]

I was reading Heinlein at age 12. In my freshman lit class I did a report on 'Stranger in a Strange Land'. If you haven't read it, let's say much of the nature of the book would be considered sexually questionable by these uptight prudes.


If you haven't had the sex talk with your kid by age 12, you're far, far too late.


I do not think the Librarian has any obligation to monitor your children, unless they are physically doing damage to the library or disturbing the other patrons, in which case his job is to throw the offenders out.

Most libraries I have been in won't even let me access all the threads here at the JREF, due to 'slang language' let alone Pr0n. If I saw a 14 yr old checking out a copy of The Story of O, I may raise an eyebrow, but does the librarian have a right or responsibility to monitor his patron's tastes? I don't think so. Censorship is not the job of any library.

 

[TragicMonkey]

There is already a real children's section, and a section for all the other literature in a library. At least any library I've seen. That is a good enough separation in my view.

I don't think the librarians should have the authority to deny children access to books outside the children's section, not without the parent's permission to do so.

[anecdote]

When I was nine, I discovered mythology. First the Greeks, then the Norse, then the Egyptians. Started out with the books with the nice pictures, then moved on to more of the real myths, and those were adult. The public librarian attempted to stop me checking out a particular collection of less-bowdlerized-than-usual Greek myths. I don't know whether she had read the book and disapproved of the sexual content, or disapproved of the few illustrations which were all photos of Greek art (kylixes, statues, etc) which had some nudes (naturally, they were Greek!), or whether she felt that heathen myths were unChristian (this was in South Carolina, after all) and thus a bad influence.

Luckily I had good parents. They did, you know, parenting and junk. Made sure I didn't get into danger from other people, or get into trouble by misbehaving myself. My mother told the disapproving librarian that I had been reading what I liked since I started reading, and the only side effect seemed to be I was getting smarter, so she'd better hand over the book.

Did it do me any damage? Probably not. I didn't understand most of the sexual stuff, it went right over my head and wasn't of interest. Kids are either aware of sex or they aren't, and if they aren't it won't bother them because they aren't even able to think of it. If they are, then it's too late, they can't unlearn something. At that point the best thing is to make sure that what they know is actually correct and not the bizarre ideas that kids get from other kids.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Which people?

Those Canadian sickos who want to put gay books in the library.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Yes. It is a government institution.

The alternative is that a parent follow their 12 year old around the library and look over their shoulder at what they are reading. Sound sensible or reasonable to you?

Got it we, need to make all of the united states age apropriate for a 8 year old.

 

[ponderingturtle]

How many public libraries have an extensive collection of sex manuals for any persuasion? Or are they talking about the works of Jean Genet or something like that?

My guess is that these where likely magazines, is having popular periodicals that weird?

 

[ponderingturtle]

Please explain why you say that. Keep in mind this is in context of adult material being present in the library.

THe exact nature of this adult material was never defined. It sounds like articles from popular womens(or mens) magazines.

So don't take them to the super market either because they have all this adult material right at the check out line. Look at the magazines there some time and see how many have sex as prominent article topics.

And they are in such easy reach of children. Just think you will have to supervise you children at the supermarket at all times now too.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I'm not entirely sure your criticism is well founded. "Gay and lesbian" books can include materials that have nothing to do with sexually-explicit material. It is possible that the offended patron was objecting to a book about famous lesbians in history or about a gay teen coming out to his parents or any number of other non-sexual topics.

It is possible that the offended patron was referring to a gay sex manual, but not enough information is known at this time to be sure.

Exactly the article was horribly uninformitive about what the nature of the objectonable material was.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Charlie parsed it into a question of whether gays and lesbians should have their own separate library. That would not solve the entire complaint. The question should have been should all adult material be in a separate library. To make this a gay/lesbian thing is disingenuous.

Yes, what could be worse, these kids could be reading things that romanticize teenage suicide, like Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliette, definitely in the adult section. Have to keep kids safe from such deviants

 

[ponderingturtle]

You are sick. I am glad I don't have kids, or live near your library. It sounds like you are not doing your job to me. If these kids are under your control, which is the impression you want us to have, then you should not allow them to look at porn in the public library. What is your problem?

Here is an interesting question, for people on these boards

When did you first see porn, and how would you feel about a child of the same age as you seeing porn? Do you feel it scared you for life?

I would have been 10 or 11 when I saw my first porn movie and I don't think it did anything harmful to me.

It just seems that for many people their beliefs do not match their experiance in this area.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Nope. The MPAA has no legal significance whatsoever (in the United States- the ratings ARE law in a lot of European countries.) There is no law against selling R rated movies to minors, or multiplexes letting them into R rated movies.

The reason most theaters follow the ratings is that the distributors, because of industry pressure, only give the films to theaters that follow the ratings, or at least seem to.

But there might be specific local laws about corrupting minors and the like. But they would be based on content not on rating.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Those Canadian sickos who want to put gay books in the library.

What aren't you enough of a bibliophile to appreciate some hot book on book action?

Hmm, what do straight books get in on with?

 

[pgwenthold]

Nope. The MPAA has no legal significance whatsoever (in the United States- the ratings ARE law in a lot of European countries.) There is no law against selling R rated movies to minors, or multiplexes letting them into R rated movies.

The reason most theaters follow the ratings is that the distributors, because of industry pressure, only give the films to theaters that follow the ratings, or at least seem to.

And the MPAA ratings were absolute genious. Now, if only the music industry would have learned from them, it would have avoided a lot of crap in the past.

Rate yourself and you can keep the government off your back.

Besides, it's an awesome marketing tool.

 

[Dancing David]

I'm real proud of my little North Ontario hometown (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pembroke,_Ontario).

Yes, it's like something out of Twin Peaks, but at least they're doing the right thing when it comes to it's Public Library and the complaints of a single individual. (http://www.thedailyobserver.ca/weba...?contentid=355294&catname=Local+News&classif=)

Should gays and lesbians STFU and get their own library or should gayfriendly books be stocked in a public library?

As a youth, I spent a lot in time in this library. It's kinda neat that it was rumored that Frank Lloyd Wright may have had a hand in it's design. Dang, if it don't look Wrightish.

Charlie (we were helpless, helpless, helpless) Monoxide

Libraries should contain a wide variety of books.

 

[slingblade]

You are sick. I am glad I don't have kids, or live near your library. It sounds like you are not doing your job to me. If these kids are under your control, which is the impression you want us to have, then you should not allow them to look at porn in the public library. What is your problem?

Are you serious, or is this one of those inside jokes I often don't get?

 

[brodski]

Yes, what could be worse, these kids could be reading things that romanticize teenage suicide, like Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliette, definitely in the adult section. Have to keep kids safe from such deviants

You know, I know a few English teachers who would like to make it illegal for kids under 16 to read Shakespeare, that way some of they may actually have some interest in doing so.