IHE: Academic Freedom Battles Roil Indiana University

[Wahoo Redux]

If it be unacceptable to prevent a drag queen story hour at a pl, then what presentations, and by whom, would it be acceptable to deny access to said pl, and on what basis?

Freedom is a dangerous thing.

If the Nazis or NAMBLA want to do story time, we have to let them.  Their freedom guarantees our freedom.

You know who is dangerous to children?  Catholic priests.  We have the hard evidence.

But no one is going to object to a Catholic priest reading a story time.

[Wahoo Redux]

Marsh, Marsh, Marsh...

Tarmo Uukkivi, director of Operations and Protective Services, presented the report to council on July 26. The document presents the approximate prices for the crosswalk installation.  Despite giving more details, staff had issues with nailing down the exact costs.

"In terms of the costing, this presented a  challenge for staff," Uukkivi said in the meeting. "We approached a couple of companies that we typically used for line painting a lot in town and (they) refused to provide even general quotes on the work. That  left us looking at what we could come up with as a general estimate for the cost."

Estimates could be as high as $81,000 without considering maintenance. However, this amount may be lower with more accurate calculations.

"A lot of towns have done this for a lot cheaper. But those aren't real numbers to us because we don't have a quote in our hands," Coun. Scott Morrison said. "I'm proposing a substitute motion because we don't have enough information for the council to make an educated decision right now."

The initiative is causing excitement among councillors.

Critical thinking, Marshy.  Critical thinking.

[Wahoo Redux]

And just like people, horses can be trained not to fear and hate new things and ideas.

To enable us to ride and patrol safely we had training versions installed with help from @gevekomarkings who donated our new Bright Training crossings. We can get the horses used to them before riding them out in public.

I don't think these crosswalks cost the equivalent of $81K either.

[marshwiggle]

If there is a legitimately dangerous reason for not having rainbow crosswalks, then don't do them.

I thought hate was the only reason for someone to oppose them.

If your reason for not having rainbow crosswalks is hate and bigotry (likewise story times at the library), then do them.

If these people are screwing the numbers to make a rainbow crosswalk look dangerous or expensive----and I'd want the hard evidence----then my God yes that is bigotry and hate.

Do not be too fast to believe the extraordinary claims of hatemongers, Marshy.  I kind of doubt the expense or danger angles...

The problem is putting the onus on anyone to "prove" that "hate" isn't their motivation.

How about this from the UVic story?

Cleo Philp, director of campaigns and community relations with the University of Victoria Students' Society, said that money could be used in better ways. "It just feels like throwing money to the wind."

Philp, who is trans and uses she/they pronouns, said "getting the right-coloured crosswalk" is not the solution for making trans people safer on campus. She would prefer that the money spent on consultants go to �student bursaries for low-income trans and queer students instead.

Is that hate??????

[Wahoo Redux]

If there is a legitimately dangerous reason for not having rainbow crosswalks, then don't do them.

I thought hate was the only reason for someone to oppose them.

Strawman, Strawman, Strawman, Strawmarsh.  Never said that.  You said that.

If you oppose a rainbow crosswalk because it is a hazard, that is just prudence. 

If you oppose a rainbow crosswalk because you have a prejudice against LGBTQ people, that is hate.

We've already covered this.

Please don't play stupid, buddy.

If your reason for not having rainbow crosswalks is hate and bigotry (likewise story times at the library), then do them.

If these people are screwing the numbers to make a rainbow crosswalk look dangerous or expensive----and I'd want the hard evidence----then my God yes that is bigotry and hate.

Do not be too fast to believe the extraordinary claims of hatemongers, Marshy.  I kind of doubt the expense or danger angles...

The problem is putting the onus on anyone to "prove" that "hate" isn't their motivation.

How about this from the UVic story?

Cleo Philp, director of campaigns and community relations with the University of Victoria Students' Society, said that money could be used in better ways. "It just feels like throwing money to the wind."

Philp, who is trans and uses she/they pronouns, said "getting the right-coloured crosswalk" is not the solution for making trans people safer on campus. She would prefer that the money spent on consultants go to �student bursaries for low-income trans and queer students instead.

Is that hate??????
[/quote]

Come on, man.  Don't play stupid.

If you object to a rainbow crosswalk because it represents LGBTQ people then you are a bigot and you are in the throws of hate.  If a person objects to five or six strips of color on blacktop because it represents a historically marginalized demographic they have already proved it.

If you have a legitimate reason (expense, danger, a better use for the money) that is something different.

The articles presented have a lot of open ends to them.  I am extremely dubious that it takes $81K to paint a 24 X 6 stripe of pavement.  It costs between $3K and $6K to paint a two-story house.  It costs $1K to paint a car.

You're an academic.  Think about it.

This is debate desperation, Marshy.

None of us who consider ourselves good people want to be labeled "bigots" or "hateful," but if you enact a prejudice then you are a hateful bigot.

[Wahoo Redux]

Edit: it should be the "throes of hate."  Sorry.

[apl68]

Dismissing my stance regarding drag queen storytimes as impossible to explain as stemming from anything other than hate is reductive.  Every library and librarian sometimes has to make decisions not to permit a proposed library event or event in a library meeting room.  Libraries have to make guidelines and policies, and then they have to make judgement calls when it turns out the guideline or policy was unable to spell out every possible contingency ahead of time.  And every library has different guidelines and policies and judgements, because libraries and communities aren't all alike, and there's no one-size-fits-all.

In the case of community rooms, I have to tell people every year that we can't let them use our library's community room.  It's generally for reasons that don't have anything to do with hot-button culture war issues.  For example, we have a policy of not letting our community room be used for religious services, broadly defined.  The room's not really there for such services in the first place, and we don't want to give any hint of favoritism toward one or another group, and the simplest way to manage that is to have a single rule that rules them all out.  Our rule might not stand up to a court case, but we've never had a challenge to it--because, when we explain it and they have a chance to think about it, people can see that maybe the public library isn't really the best place to hold their religious service anyway.

And there are other reasons for turning requests down, which I won't get into here for lack of space.  Hate or taking stances on issues doesn't figure into any of them.  We just can't accommodate everything all of the time--sometimes for reasons considered general best practices, sometimes for practical matters involving our building, sometimes--in our case hypothetically, since so far I can't think of a time when it's ever actually been an issue here--because of community considerations.

I served my library apprenticeship in a very diverse university environment.  I've spent over 19 years as a public librarian in a small town that's probably a good deal more diverse in various ways than many would give a town this size credit for.  For two decades it has been my professional and personal commitment to give all the members of the community access to good library service.  I've worked with the local housing authority and other agencies in various ways to try to better serve under-served segments of the community.  I've spent over a decade building up the Dollie Parton's Imagination Library program in our county--we currently have over 600 children under the age of five here receiving books mailed to them free of charge each month because of that ongoing work.

All of which is to say that I have any librarian's commitment to reading and intellectual freedom.  I buy books all the time that I personally would very much rather not have anything to do with--every librarian does; it's part of the job.  Last year I stood up in the presence of our local state representative--a man it would be much in my interest to try to curry favor with--and said to his face in a public meeting that recent controversial library legislation that he supported was wrong.  I wonder how many other people at The Fora have personally done something like that on an intellectual freedom issue, instead of just griping about it at an anonymous forum?

But by all means, write me off as a hater because I won't pronounce a particular shibboleth regarding drag queen story times or the like.  Meanwhile I've got other things to worry about besides what to do about drag queen story times or where to shelve books the Legislature doesn't like.  Stuff like a chronically balky HVAC system.  And multiple vendors who've ghosted us when we've tried to get straight answers out of them.  And wondering how best to deal with declining local tax revenues that have created a structural budget deficit that's draining down our operating reserves and might eventually force me to make some tough choices about cutting staffing levels and services.  Most librarians have things like that to think about too, when they're not trying to justify themselves to people who are just so sure they know how to do their jobs that much better than they do.

[Wahoo Redux]

You know, apl, I think all that was covered with my buddy the Mashbarian. 

If there is a good practical reason not to give the community room to some group, so be it.

If no religious group gets to use the community room, I think you can be sued (from my meagre understanding after a Google search) but at least you are not playing favorites or behaving in a hypocritical manner.

And, like the Marshmaster, I have no doubt you are a person of true character. 

But I would add a few things.

Nobody hates everything.  Even people who think they hate everything don't hate everything.  Hate is generally a very targeted thing.

So, a librarian who is a good, warm, wholesome person who does their job professionally, great, but if they deny the community room to a drag queen simply because that person is a drag queen then the librarian has a wee bit of hate in their heart.

I thought about it, and the problem with "serving the community" is that you play into the stereotypes and prejudices of the majority.

The other problem is making the mistake of kowtowing to the violence of bigots.

The other problem is that if a demographic in the community cannot be served because there is a drag queen in the community room it is the demographic's choice not to patronize the library, not the fault of the drag queen.

It is a choice that someone makes not to frequent the library, not that they are denied service.

If Shelly (who used to be Sam before the operation) walks into the periodicals room and sees Bob wearing a bright red MAGA hat and decides "I will not patronize an establishment which serves that kind of degenerate," the fault is on Shelly, not Bob.

Finally, this is not a question of any particular profession.  All this holds true for the manager of a Bob's Big Burger or a Walmart as well as a library, but since the library is generally a public institution paid for with tax dollars, people like me do actually have a say.

[ciao_yall]

Dismissing my stance regarding drag queen storytimes as impossible to explain as stemming from anything other than hate is reductive.  Every library and librarian sometimes has to make decisions not to permit a proposed library event or event in a library meeting room.  Libraries have to make guidelines and policies, and then they have to make judgement calls when it turns out the guideline or policy was unable to spell out every possible contingency ahead of time.  And every library has different guidelines and policies and judgements, because libraries and communities aren't all alike, and there's no one-size-fits-all.

In the case of community rooms, I have to tell people every year that we can't let them use our library's community room.  It's generally for reasons that don't have anything to do with hot-button culture war issues.  For example, we have a policy of not letting our community room be used for religious services, broadly defined.  The room's not really there for such services in the first place, and we don't want to give any hint of favoritism toward one or another group, and the simplest way to manage that is to have a single rule that rules them all out.  Our rule might not stand up to a court case, but we've never had a challenge to it--because, when we explain it and they have a chance to think about it, people can see that maybe the public library isn't really the best place to hold their religious service anyway.

And there are other reasons for turning requests down, which I won't get into here for lack of space.  Hate or taking stances on issues doesn't figure into any of them.  We just can't accommodate everything all of the time--sometimes for reasons considered general best practices, sometimes for practical matters involving our building, sometimes--in our case hypothetically, since so far I can't think of a time when it's ever actually been an issue here--because of community considerations.

I served my library apprenticeship in a very diverse university environment.  I've spent over 19 years as a public librarian in a small town that's probably a good deal more diverse in various ways than many would give a town this size credit for.  For two decades it has been my professional and personal commitment to give all the members of the community access to good library service.  I've worked with the local housing authority and other agencies in various ways to try to better serve under-served segments of the community.  I've spent over a decade building up the Dollie Parton's Imagination Library program in our county--we currently have over 600 children under the age of five here receiving books mailed to them free of charge each month because of that ongoing work.

All of which is to say that I have any librarian's commitment to reading and intellectual freedom.  I buy books all the time that I personally would very much rather not have anything to do with--every librarian does; it's part of the job.  Last year I stood up in the presence of our local state representative--a man it would be much in my interest to try to curry favor with--and said to his face in a public meeting that recent controversial library legislation that he supported was wrong.  I wonder how many other people at The Fora have personally done something like that on an intellectual freedom issue, instead of just griping about it at an anonymous forum?

But by all means, write me off as a hater because I won't pronounce a particular shibboleth regarding drag queen story times or the like.  Meanwhile I've got other things to worry about besides what to do about drag queen story times or where to shelve books the Legislature doesn't like.  Stuff like a chronically balky HVAC system.  And multiple vendors who've ghosted us when we've tried to get straight answers out of them.  And wondering how best to deal with declining local tax revenues that have created a structural budget deficit that's draining down our operating reserves and might eventually force me to make some tough choices about cutting staffing levels and services.  Most librarians have things like that to think about too, when they're not trying to justify themselves to people who are just so sure they know how to do their jobs that much better than they do.

apl68, I'm sure you are often caught between a rock and a hard place, balancing opinions on all sides of the political spectrum about the appropriateness of various reading materials, as well as your own beliefs about such matters.

I did a little research and learned that Drag Queen Story Hours started in 2015 because LGBTQ+ parents were bringing their children to events they found very heteronormative, and wanted their children and their friends to be able to recognize all sorts of families and gender expressions.

Then I found this article by Chris Rufo, which tries to create direct links between Drag Queen Story Hour and BDSM, pedophilia, subversion, "necrophilia, bestiality, and race fetishism."

When parents, voters, and political leaders understand the true nature of Drag Queen Story Hour and the ideology that drives it, they will work quickly to restore the limits that have been temporarily—and recklessly—abandoned. They will draw a bright line between adult sexuality and childhood innocence, and send the perversions of "genderfuck," "primitivism," and "degeneracy" back to the margins, where they belong.

But then, this.

Drag Brunch - Baby Shark

[Wahoo Redux]

Then I found this article by Chris Rufo, which tries to create direct links between Drag Queen Story Hour and BDSM, pedophilia, subversion, "necrophilia, bestiality, and race fetishism."

When parents, voters, and political leaders understand the true nature of Drag Queen Story Hour and the ideology that drives it, they will work quickly to restore the limits that have been temporarily—and recklessly—abandoned. They will draw a bright line between adult sexuality and childhood innocence, and send the perversions of "genderfuck," "primitivism," and "degeneracy" back to the margins, where they belong.

This is when hate boils over.

Good people who believe they are doing no harm when they deny drag queens the community room...

...because they are afraid of the community reaction...

...because they have been taught that drag queens are somehow wrong...

...because they think that God is upset about drag queens (while Israel and Gaza commit endless atrocities on each other and Putin threatens nuclear war)...

...because they have a personal, visceral reaction to drag queens (as they might a clown)...

...because they believe other people have an "ideology" (apparently unaware of their own)....

...or because they just don't like people who are different...

...feed into Rufo's fascist hysterical rage.

To deny a drag queen the community room or to stonewall a rainbow crosswalk may seem like small things, but those sorts of things hurt people very badly and encourage the deep hatemongers to act on their hatred. 

Don't be those people.