Intellectual freedom was the focus of a presentation at the staff engagement day at the Oak Park Public Library back in early December 2016, given by James LaRue, the director of the ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom. The one thing that struck me about Mr. LaRue was how polished he was in his presentation, and how well he knew his material.
There were times in his talk when he addressed the transformative power of libraries in communities. He touched on a theme from the staff day in December 2015, that we should demonstrate the library's importance to the community through stories that appeal to the heart, rather than using facts to appeal to the brain, since the toxic sociopolitical environment that has taken hold recently lessens the power of facts. He encouraged this kind of storytelling advocacy as a way to maintain the place of the library in the community when faced with potential budget cuts from those who consider libraries an unnecessary expenditure.
He started out by saying that values drive what libraries do, and that led to the creation of the Library Bill of Rights, which is something that has been continually re-interpreted as needed throughout the years since, rather than constantly changed.
He started out by saying that values drive what libraries do, and that led to the creation of the Library Bill of Rights, which is something that has been continually re-interpreted as needed throughout the years since, rather than constantly changed.
In his talk, he shared that intellectual freedom entails not only allowing access to a variety of library materials, but also allowing people to use library spaces to hold a variety of public events. He talked about controversies surrounding presentations on Islam and the current situation in Israel, with people opposed to what they considered politically-charged events.
In further expounding upon the theme of intellectual freedom, he shared a story about the controversy over a children's book about George Washington's slave who served as his chef. There were some people who no longer wanted the book to be printed because it made slavery look appealing. Others felt that the book's presence was an opportunity to diversify the pool of authors, since its author was African-American. Mr. LaRue talked about disagreements he encountered with people he worked with closely on matters of librarianship.
I feel the issue of conflicting values also applies to accessing of obscene materials in libraries, especially on the Internet. Because the ALA is such a staunch advocate for freedom of access to information, it strongly opposes and furthermore resists any efforts to censor materials at libraries, which includes opposition to Internet filters. That means that people are supposed to have the unfettered ability to access obscene materials at the library.
The ALA's strong stance against filters that block obscenities on public library internet service has earned it a place on the 2017 Dirty Dozen List issued by the National Center on Sexual Exploitation. This project entails an annual list of organizations that profit from or facilitate sexual exploitation, with the first annual list issued in 2013. In every year since then, the ALA has been included.
In the face of the public health crisis that is pornography, the ALA refuses to do anything to prevent access to obscene materials on public library Internet service, like installing filters, claiming that it would erode intellectual freedom, and violate the 1st Amendment. However, the 1st Amendment doesn't protect all forms of speech, because not all forms of speech are created equal. Courts have ruled that obscene materials should not receive 1st Amendment protections, which is important to acknowledge given the damaging effect they have on people's minds and society as a whole.
And then there's the major concern raised by parents that children are exposed to obscene material, not only Internet pornography, but in the content of books, too: This issue is at the heart of a campaign of citizens to remove a book called This Day in June from the collections at the West Chicago Public Library. The book features scenes of a gay pride parade, which includes explicit sexual acts. Kurt Jaros raised concerns about this book with the West Chicago Library Board when his 3-year-old daughter found it at the library, and it stood out to her with its colorful cover.
The campaign calls for the removal of the book from the library's collection, an act that typically makes intellectual freedom advocates cry foul. I can understand this argument because it's a slippery slope: if one book like this one is removed, it then becomes more difficult to prevent the removal of other books. And I recognize that in fulfilling intellectual freedom, library collections should provide materials representing a variety of viewpoints. But in the case of this book, parents are having to face a dilemma that no parent should have to face, in having to discuss sexuality with children when a child finds a book like this with obscene material, when sexuality is really something over the heads of children. That's why libraries should not simply be putting books like This Day in June out on the shelves for children to easily access, without doing anything to help parents who do not agree with normalizing the homosexual lifestyle. I feel it makes sense, at the very least, for the library should put this material in a section with educational materials intended for parents. While including such a book in the collection may give voice to homosexuals and help them feel comfortable with who they are, having it there without representation of differing viewpoints on the LGBTQ movement creates an imbalance favoring the sociopolitical left, and leaves unsupported those not in agreement with that movement, and just passes the discomfort from homosexuals to those who affirm heterosexual marriage, without actually removing it.
The reality of conflicting values makes dialogue even more important, especially when it comes to hot button issues of sexuality that are becoming ever more prevalent in recent years because the LGBTQ movement does so much to put topics of sexuality out in the open without acknowledging that small children are just not in a position to intellectually process any of it. While public libraries are supposed to facilitate meaningful dialogue about issues, they do a poor job of dialoguing with those who express concerns, because the ALA just won't budge from its strong stance on issues of intellectual freedom. It's time for the ALA and similarly-minded intellectual freedom advocates to acknowledge the conflicting values that exist regarding obscene materials and start up the conversations in earnest with those who are concerned about issues related to sexuality, whether it be the health crisis of pornography, or children being exposed to sexuality at too young of an age. It's through honest conversation, based on an awareness of the conflicting values, that will put us in the right direction toward addressing the interests of all parties involved.
The campaign calls for the removal of the book from the library's collection, an act that typically makes intellectual freedom advocates cry foul. I can understand this argument because it's a slippery slope: if one book like this one is removed, it then becomes more difficult to prevent the removal of other books. And I recognize that in fulfilling intellectual freedom, library collections should provide materials representing a variety of viewpoints. But in the case of this book, parents are having to face a dilemma that no parent should have to face, in having to discuss sexuality with children when a child finds a book like this with obscene material, when sexuality is really something over the heads of children. That's why libraries should not simply be putting books like This Day in June out on the shelves for children to easily access, without doing anything to help parents who do not agree with normalizing the homosexual lifestyle. I feel it makes sense, at the very least, for the library should put this material in a section with educational materials intended for parents. While including such a book in the collection may give voice to homosexuals and help them feel comfortable with who they are, having it there without representation of differing viewpoints on the LGBTQ movement creates an imbalance favoring the sociopolitical left, and leaves unsupported those not in agreement with that movement, and just passes the discomfort from homosexuals to those who affirm heterosexual marriage, without actually removing it.
The reality of conflicting values makes dialogue even more important, especially when it comes to hot button issues of sexuality that are becoming ever more prevalent in recent years because the LGBTQ movement does so much to put topics of sexuality out in the open without acknowledging that small children are just not in a position to intellectually process any of it. While public libraries are supposed to facilitate meaningful dialogue about issues, they do a poor job of dialoguing with those who express concerns, because the ALA just won't budge from its strong stance on issues of intellectual freedom. It's time for the ALA and similarly-minded intellectual freedom advocates to acknowledge the conflicting values that exist regarding obscene materials and start up the conversations in earnest with those who are concerned about issues related to sexuality, whether it be the health crisis of pornography, or children being exposed to sexuality at too young of an age. It's through honest conversation, based on an awareness of the conflicting values, that will put us in the right direction toward addressing the interests of all parties involved.
No comments:
Post a Comment