• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Gays and Public Libraries

brodski said:
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. ;)
Click to expand...

Well I do remember about people talking about censorship, that while the content of shakespear is abhorrent to traditional family values, it would get the standard Art exemption.

I am reminded of a recent discworld book where they define the difference between art and porn. What is most important is this "Is there a vase?"

But on the history of pornagraphy show they made a very interesting claim, that the difference is the social class of the indended audiance.
 
Luke T. said:
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?
Click to expand...

Yes, actually, it does sound sensible and reasonable.

It's their child. If their twelve-year old cannot be trusted to behave appropriately in a library without supervision, it should be the parents' responsibility to supervise them.

Beyond that is the simple fact that different parents have different opinions about what is and isn't appropriate behavior for their twelve-year old, and I see it as being thorougly un-reasonable for the librarian to know the parental preferences of everyone in the world who might wander into their library. ("Oh, good morning, Mrs. Chung! Welcome to Canada! Did you have a pleasant flight from Shanghai? Now, I'll make sure little Weng-Xiu doesn't read up on any of that nasty capitalism or women's rights stuff while she's here. Oh, good morning Mrs. al-Jolson! Welcome to Canada!")

I doubt my parents would have batted an eyelash at my reading "sexually explicit materials" at the age of twelve, although my mother was a teacher and would have insisted that I spell and pronounce all the words correctly. Your parents may have been more strict. That's their perogative.

But at the same time, if it's their perogative, it's their responsibility.
 
Last edited:
ponderingturtle said:
Well I do remember about people talking about censorship, that while the content of shakespear is abhorrent to traditional family values, it would get the standard Art exemption.

I am reminded of a recent discworld book where they define the difference between art and porn. What is most important is this "Is there a vase?"

But on the history of pornagraphy show they made a very interesting claim, that the difference is the social class of the indended audiance.
Click to expand...


I understand your point (and agree with), but I think you may have missed mine, which was a (badly phrased) joke about the effect which censoring things generally has, especially censoring things for children, which are otherwise (relatively) widely available in society.

[irrelevant aside]
In fact I remember (when I was about 13 or so) a soft drinks company using the teenage desire to "rebel" to push one of its new sot drinks.
"tango" is a well established brand of orange flavour pop. A product called "still tango" as released as a non carbonated version. This was plugged on TV with a large number of (apparently) cheaply made chemicals. A few weeks later Tango started putting out TV spots and print adverts claiming that "still tango" had nothing to do with them, and was an illegal "pirate drink", this actually boosted sales amongst teenagers. It was later revealed that Still Tango was in fact produced by the makers of Tango [/irrelevant aside]
 
brodski said:
I understand your point (and agree with), but I think you may have missed mine, which was a (badly phrased) joke about the effect which censoring things generally has, especially censoring things for children, which are otherwise (relatively) widely available in society.

[irrelevant aside]
In fact I remember (when I was about 13 or so) a soft drinks company using the teenage desire to "rebel" to push one of its new sot drinks.
"tango" is a well established brand of orange flavour pop. A product called "still tango" as released as a non carbonated version. This was plugged on TV with a large number of (apparently) cheaply made chemicals. A few weeks later Tango started putting out TV spots and print adverts claiming that "still tango" had nothing to do with them, and was an illegal "pirate drink", this actually boosted sales amongst teenagers. It was later revealed that Still Tango was in fact produced by the makers of Tango [/irrelevant aside]
Click to expand...

And I am sure this whole contraversy has boosted library attendance ammoung teens. Getting loonies to decry you is a great marketing tactic.
 
ponderingturtle said:
And I am sure this whole contraversy has boosted library attendance ammoung teens. Getting loonies to decry you is a great marketing tactic.
Click to expand...

Cindi: Like, where are you going?
Mandi: We're totally going to the library!
Cindi: Gag me with a spoon, like, why?
Ami: Hello! It's the library with all the hot books!
Mandi: It'll be awesome!
Ami: I bet they totally have a, like, book with like, hot guys and stuff!
Cindi: Totally tubular!
Mandi: That library is like, so, like, radical!




I understand how young people talk. The young people of the Eighties. Dammit, I'm not old!!
 
slingblade said:
Are you serious, or is this one of those inside jokes I often don't get?
Click to expand...

No joke. I stand by my words. He states that it is within his power to say what material is available to young children. This sounds great, as long as WE agree with HIS criteria. Then he says he sees kids watching porn in his library. I say he is not doing his job allowing that. His actions are shocking, not my reaction.

If he wants kids to have what he calls "All the information" then maybe he should work in the nude.
 
TragicMonkey said:
Cindi: Like, where are you going?
Mandi: We're totally going to the library!
Cindi: Gag me with a spoon, like, why?
Ami: Hello! It's the library with all the hot books!
Mandi: It'll be awesome!
Ami: I bet they totally have a, like, book with like, hot guys and stuff!
Cindi: Totally tubular!
Mandi: That library is like, so, like, radical!




I understand how young people talk. The young people of the Eighties. Dammit, I'm not old!!
Click to expand...

Omi Gawd, Diju see that? They totally have a book with, like, Rick Spingfield on it! I could, like, die!
 
ponderingturtle said:
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?
Click to expand...
Obviously, this is why it is improper for books written by female authors to be on the same shelf as books by male authors unless those authors are married.
 
steverino said:
No joke. I stand by my words. He states that it is within his power to say what material is available to young children. This sounds great, as long as WE agree with HIS criteria. Then he says he sees kids watching porn in his library. I say he is not doing his job allowing that. His actions are shocking, not my reaction.

If he wants kids to have what he calls "All the information" then maybe he should work in the nude.
Click to expand...

Ah, the "Naked is EVIL" arguement.

Your argument is also flawed because he would support their interest, not intentionaly expose them to it.

Steve, could you answer my questions about porn, what dammage did porn do to you, when where you exposed to it, and what do you think about exposing people of that age to it?
 
ponderingturtle said:
Steve, could you answer my questions about porn, what dammage did porn do to you, when where you exposed to it, and what do you think about exposing people of that age to it?
Click to expand...

I was first exposed to porn in junior high school by a magazine brought to class by one Charles Walgreen IV. His great grandfather started a drug store chain. It had photos of "69."

Other than that, the usual-Dad's Palyboy hidden under his bed, the photos of Indians in South America in National Geographic, who, by the way, ran a "spread" of a hoax, a naked civilization in the Phillippines that turned out bogus.

I am not a prude. I just think 7 year-olds should not have porn access at public libraries, same as the two threads exploring ad nauseum young girls' sexy garments.
 
steverino said:
I was first exposed to porn in junior high school by a magazine brought to class by one Charles Walgreen IV. His great grandfather started a drug store chain. It had photos of "69."

Other than that, the usual-Dad's Palyboy hidden under his bed, the photos of Indians in South America in National Geographic, who, by the way, ran a "spread" of a hoax, a naked civilization in the Phillippines that turned out bogus.

I am not a prude. I just think 7 year-olds should not have porn access at public libraries, same as the two threads exploring ad nauseum young girls' sexy garments.
Click to expand...

And I think that 7 year olds will not be looking for porn on the internet at public librarys. So anything that the child dirrects themselves to is the key.

How many 7 year olds have any interest in porn, and would seek it out? That is the key point here, he is giving them access to what they want to find, not shoving porn in their faces like you seem to think.
 
Luke T. said:
Parents should escort their kids even at the library?

But anyway, it all looks like a non-issue to me:
"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."

Coun. Lowe told the group that when children are in the adult sections of the library they must be accompanied by an adult.

"We also have R-rated movies which are not checked out by anyone under 18," she said. "They account for approximately five per cent of the collection."
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Perhaps you missed this bit?
 
Thank you all for defending me, and all patron's rights to look at and or view what THEY want. I am NOT here to disallow or suggest 'adult contented' material to kids. My job is to provide as much information as I can afford to the public, period.

To steverino:

Firstly, if you are not 18, your 'parent' must sign a permission slip, for you to access the internet. These 'parents' are made aware that the library interent suffers no filters, so whatever is available on the net, you have access to via our computers. This includes chat rooms, message boards, e-mail, poker sites, and yes even porn.

It is NOT my job to moniter kids or adult activity on the net, nor is it my job to report to parents what their kids or any other kid is reading and or viewing. Now, if a parent was to come in and tell me that they don't want their kids on the internet or checking out "R" rated movies, then obviously I wouldn't do so. It would be easy for me to make a note within my cataloging system, saying that Sally's Mom doesn't want her seeing 'adult' stuff.

The library IS a dangerous place, there are any number of books, magazines, movies and website available here, that 'kids' probably shouldn't be subjected to, but it is the 'PARENTS' job NOT mine to make sure their kids are looking at the 'right' information.

Steverino, do you really believe that a librarian should 'stop' kids from looking at stuff that is intended for adults???

Where would you start and or stop???

Is it okay for a 12-13 year old to see an anatomy book?

Is it okay for a 12 year old to read "Redbook"?

Is it okay for a 13 year old to read "The Da Vinci Code"?

I mean, when you attempt to censor what patrons see or have access to, a fundamentalist would want EVERYTHING not according to THEIR beliefs deleted or taken off the shelf. I simply can not justify 'limiting' patrons' source availability, simple because some prude doesn't want their kids subjected to 'bad' stuff...

I think I provide a 'good' service, here at our library. Moreover, I think that ANY step taken to 'limit' what can be viewed here would be a 'bad' thing.

If you disagree with this, I humbly suggest you accompany your kid to the library and make sure they don't see anything that you wouldn't approve of, because as far as I know, there are NOT any libraries that prefer to be a parental substitute.
 
King of the Americas said:
The library IS a dangerous place, there are any number of books, magazines, movies and website available here, that 'kids' probably shouldn't be subjected to.
Click to expand...

I apologize for attacking you personally. I am sure that in reality you are doing a great job at your library and that I was being melodramatic with the offense I had taken. I was initially responding to your post#22,
where you write, "I have done eveything in my power to put stuff on the shelves that would shock, dismay, and or outright offend local patrons..."

Then you say, "the kids still show up here, surf the Internet see porn..."

Now I am being criticized because people here are saying kids are not interested in porn in the first place, and ask me to define what age is a kid, etc. But you brought up the kids-watch-porn thing. And it sounded a bit off to me.

I hesitate to go here, but to get off the porn thing, my mom has a little, rare book shop. Every few months someone will come in and ask if she carries "Protocals of the Elders of Zion." She sometimes has a copy. If they seem, you know, to have a white-power vibe, she says, "no." If they seem to be Jewish, scholarly, etc., and she has a copy she will sell it to them. I realize a shop gives you more leeway than a public library, but wonder if this book is widely available in libraries?
 
Last edited:
The Protocols are available in it's entirety at several places on the Internet. So yes, it is available at the library. You can pick your commentary too: white power or scholarly Jewish.
 
King of the Americas said:
Thank you all for defending me, and all patron's rights to look at and or view what THEY want. I am NOT here to disallow or suggest 'adult contented' material to kids. My job is to provide as much information as I can afford to the public, period.

To steverino:

Firstly, if you are not 18, your 'parent' must sign a permission slip, for you to access the internet. These 'parents' are made aware that the library interent suffers no filters, so whatever is available on the net, you have access to via our computers. This includes chat rooms, message boards, e-mail, poker sites, and yes even porn.
Click to expand...

KoA, thank you for clarifying that. I know I and a lot of others assumed something other than what you were saying. For the most part, I 99% agree with you-it's not your job to monitor what your patrons are reading/viewing. I am surprised, however, that your library doesn't have porn filters. I know that we have them on the LOLLIPOP, and I would have guessed most government-funded internet sources would have been the same.

Marc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom