Spoons make people fat

Week 14 Prompt

Consider yourself part of the collection management committee of your local library, or a library at which you would like to work. You must decide whether or not to separate GBLTQ fiction and Urban Fiction from the general collection to its own special place. Some patrons have requested this, yet many staff are uncomfortable with the idea - saying it promotes segregation and disrupts serendipitous discovery of an author who might be different from the reader. Do you separate them? Do you separate one and not the other? Why or why not? You must provide at least 3 reasons for or against your decision. 

Answer: Do not separate either.

Reasons 1 (short version)

1.) Promotes segregation, if separated.

2.) Libraries must have materials for all type of people in the community, not “most” of the community.

3.) Allows people to see different views and promotes a more accepting society.

Reasons 2 (long version)

1.) I think this one is pretty obvious. By separating GBLTQ fiction and Urban Fiction, the library is promoting segregation and discrimination. If all other fictions were separated (fantasy, mystery, thriller, etc.) then it wouldn’t be as much of an issue (as difficult as that may be), but that’s typically not the case. Separating a specific type of fiction from ALL OTHER FORMS OF FICTION, shows that it’s “special” in some way, but not in the way they intend it to. People are separating something because they find it “offensive”. Offensive to who? I looked up some articles of people that agree with this type of separation, and they ALWAYS make sure to add “that they do not have anything against those people or their lifestyle”, yet their books can’t be on the same shelf as the rest…hmm…pretty sure someone is full of s***. If you are not offended by the content, why are you assuming others are? Why are you being offended for other people? If it doesn't apply to you, don't speak on behalf of someone whom it does apply to. Another “solution” to this “problem” is patrons asked if the books could be marked/labeled in some way, as to not be accidentally checked out by an unsuspecting patron. I will delve a little deeper into this in my third point, but bottom line is that is promoting segregation. How is this any different from the “separate but equal” mentality? Last time a checked, that didn’t work out so well. In this day and age, that is just not acceptable behavior. It never was, but now we are working towards a more accepting and encompassing society and if we do this, this is a step backwards, not forward.

2.) One of the arguments that I have seen is that the community feels like it should have a say in what the library does or does not add to the collection. That is true to some extent, because that is the library’s job to cater to the community; however, some libraries have gotten to the point where the community feels they have the right to “approve” new addition first. Last time I checked, the library was not your personal book collection. It is the librarian’s job to do or purchase what they think is necessary or useful to a library ON BEHALF of the community. The community should have a say in what the library pursues. I am not arguing against that point, but at the same time, do they get to vote on what makes it in or not in to the library? No. That’s not what a library is. That’s not what a library does. There would be so many books that would not make it into a collection just because “I don’t like fantasy books, we shouldn’t add that.”, or “We have too many books from that author, we shouldn’t add the next book in the series.” Obviously, I am making these up, but can you see how ridiculous that logic is? People complain all the time about things they find inappropriate. I once overheard a patron complaining that a horror movie had too much violence in it and it should be taken off the shelves. It’s a HORROR movie. Were you expecting cupcakes and rainbows? If a person wants to have a say what gets into a library, they should either work in the library or be on the board. Dismissing something just because it is not what you believe in, or what the majority of people believe in, doesn’t make it wrong. The goal of ANY library should be to cater to all people UNBIASEDLY, no matter sex, race, gender, occupation, social status, etc. By leaving out the minority of any kind, you are already breaking that guideline, and that is not what a library is supposed to be.

3.) By having materials that are “out of the norm” allows people to have the opportunity to view something differently than how they see it. Every single person in this world is different. Even twins are different in some way. Therefore, libraries should have content to cater to all those different types of people. It promotes different views, and hopefully acceptance, even though that doesn’t always happen. The arguments that always get my blood boiling is that the books “should be labeled in some way so they exercise discretion for readers and families.” How often are people choosing a book they didn’t look into first? How many people go to the library and just pluck a book off the shelf and take it home with NO IDEA what the book is about? I think it’s safe to say that it’s few. If people, especially parents, are worried about their child being exposed to “lude” content, how is that the library’s fault? It is not the library’s job to screen every book and write all the possible things people could be offended by. There is not enough time in the world to do that, nor is it practical. If a parent is that worried about what a child is reading, why are they not screening the book for them? To blame the library for their child reading a book they find inappropriate and suggesting the book be separated or removed is like trying to say that spoons make people fat so let’s get rid of all the spoons in the kitchen. The “solution” does not fit the cause.