Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminist books to be banned from University libraries....

39 replies

busyboysmum · 29/10/2017 22:09

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/universities-may-censor-student-reading-xwjdhc9bn

Universities are considering the insertion of warnings into books and even moving some off open library shelves altogether to protect students from “dangerous” and “wrong” arguments.

The proposal could hit books by climate-change sceptics, feminists, eugenicists, creationists, theologians and Holocaust deniers. It will generate new controversy over free speech at British universities, where speakers have been “no-platformed” because of their views.

The move on books follows a campaign to restrict access to work by the historian David Irving, which has already resulted in some university libraries, including Churchill College, Cambridge, moving his books into closed storage. Others, such as University College London, have also labelled some of Irving’s books “Holocaust denial literature”, or shelved them with historiography rather than history.

Manchester has refused to removeIrving’s books from open display, arguing that making them available to students is a matter of free speech, which universities have a duty to uphold.

The director of library services at UCL, Paul Ayris, revealed the decision to move the Irving books was based on “contemporary thinking among librarians”. This included a study “of the sometimes complex ethical issues of library neutrality, in relation, for example, to climate-change denial, and questions of equality and diversity, as well as Holocaust denial”.

Ayris also referred to a campaign directed at Vancouver Women’s Library to ban 20 feminist titles including works by Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon on the grounds they might offend transgender people and sex workers.

Academics said controversial titles included Nigel Lawson’s book An Appeal to Reason: A Cool Look at Global Warming, and The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, which hypothesised that the children of Jesus and Mary Magdalene have a claim to the throne of France, inspiring Dan Brown’s novel The Da Vinci Code.

The debate is being led by a group called the Radical Librarians Collective, which argues that pretending that libraries are “neutral” in the way they display books “maintains the status quo of white supremacist capitalist patriarchy”.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
MrsTerryPratchett · 03/11/2017 14:47

Meant to say; reading helps that move. Obviously that means that stopping women reading about this issue helps the transactivists and punter groups. We stay in the dark longer.

MrsTerryPratchett · 03/11/2017 14:46

Presumably they know that what happens isn't the convenient 'bigots will be bigots' scenario that is the Party Line. Instead a lot of women move from that position to a more nuanced position over time. I know I did.

Bucketsandspoons · 03/11/2017 08:25

mrspratchett that's what struck me too. It isn't so much 'this is an unacceptable opinions because reasons' but 'this opinion or information must be hidden so we don't risk people believing it' Often in TRA stuff because the information is true and very inconvenient for people to know because then they question and see through the TRA narrative. The leaflets Helen Steel was assaulted over were factual!

Very dangerous road to go down.

Ereshkigal · 02/11/2017 22:28

If they disagree with me on prostitution, they should listen to what I say and try to refute my points. Same with the trans stuff.

Yes, but they can't. They aren't equipped to.

HornyTortoise · 01/11/2017 18:38

Horny they mean anyone who supports the Nordic model or writes critically about prostitution as the exploitation of women for the benefit of men.

I see. I am pro-Nordic model. Makes a hell of a lot of sense to me. I guess this makes me a SWERF aswell as a TERF.

Xenophile · 01/11/2017 14:37

I asked the librarians, and one of them said that on the down low, they do keep having to rescue feminist books from elsewhere because they get hidden in ways that David Irving for example, doesn't. It's all still available though and there is still easy access to primary sources on every topic taught via the online searches. I almost miss spending hours rootling about in bound journals though

MrsTerryPratchett · 01/11/2017 14:21

Horny they mean anyone who supports the Nordic model or writes critically about prostitution as the exploitation of women for the benefit of men.

This is my issue. They are conflating factual issues (denying the holocaust/denying the earth is round/creationism) which are very easily disproved, with (in their minds) wrongheadedness. They disagree with the OPINION radical feminists have on prostitution. That is incredibly dangerous.

Whatever happened to 'know thine enemy'. If I want to understand and combat the far right, I have to know what they are saying, what they believe and why. I can't just stick my fingers in my ears and say, "lalalalala". Brexit anyone? If they disagree with me on prostitution, they should listen to what I say and try to refute my points. Same with the trans stuff.

This level of 'debate' is why people jump into trans threads here, shout, "TRANSPHOBIC" and leave. They have had an opinion installed with no instruction manual.

Ereshkigal · 01/11/2017 09:51

Horny they mean anyone who supports the Nordic model or writes critically about prostitution as the exploitation of women for the benefit of men.

HornyTortoise · 31/10/2017 11:30

His words seem to me to leave no doubt He defines 'trans-exclusionary feminism and sex-worker-exclusionary radical feminism' as 'texts that spread disinformation'.

Yes, that is absolutely disgusting in my view to be quite honest. To put 'terfs' besides a bunch of proven bullshit. Basically again, saying that if feminism does not centre males, than it is wrong and bollocks and bigoted. Same shit different day eh

Not entirely sure what a swerf is. I know it stands for sex work excluding radical feminists but no idea what it actually means as I cannot see any branch of feminisn purposely excluding sex workers. More that radical feminism is against sex work...not the workers themselves. Is this right?

HouseholdWords · 30/10/2017 20:10

It's deeper than that, I'm afraid - the whole secondary education system, including A Levels, is broken down into bits, and the pupils are taught to pass exams, not think critically. For all sorts of reasons - getting more kids through school, feeding league tables, rooting out what successive governments have thought of as "bad" teaching ...

Ttbb · 30/10/2017 19:58

I blame antibullying campaigns, no, seriously. When schools started to get touchy feely, the quality of students that came out in relation to a sense of entitlement to not being offended/obligatory victimhood/the inability to make, dissect or defend an argument etc just went down hill. I mean really, this 'we don't agree with it so it's harmful for other people to read it' mentality is just ridiculous. Anyone who thinks that mere words can be dangerous is an idiot. What utter tosh.

theendisnotnigh · 30/10/2017 19:52

MrsTerryPratchett
It is shortsighted - but it also made me feel very depressed that there are librarians in Universities of all places who see feminists on a par with flat earthers! It could be funny ... but it isn't.

I'm continually Shock at the ease with which men on the left - and I assume that he's on the left - don't just dismiss women's voices but can actually define them as 'hate speech'.

MrsTerryPratchett · 30/10/2017 19:45

It's so stupid and short-sighted.

In my day university students were considered to be people who could think critically. We were encouraged to read, for example, primary texts by IRA leaders, rather than secondary texts. Because we were supposed to be able to assess ideas and place weight onto them accordingly. Now it seems that university students are too stupid and delicate to assess thoughts. They must be spoon-fed and protected from ideas.

They should be ashamed of themselves.

HouseholdWords · 30/10/2017 19:26

Oh OK, fair enough. I'd skim read it as an kind of "we could also think about it this way" - I recommend the WonkHE blog I linked to, though. Much more rational.

Xenophile · 30/10/2017 19:19

David Irving, creationist ideas, Dworkin et al are on our University library shelves. I might go and ask the librarians tomorrow if they have any plans to censor students access to ideas. If I know our librarians, I'll be followed out the door by guffaws of laughter.

You might not like certain ideas, I personally think Flat Earthers are a bunch of swivel-eyed loons but, by giving those views air, we can make them disappear.

theendisnotnigh · 30/10/2017 18:12

Householdwords
His precise words are:
I argue that the same kind of recataloguing and reclassification can be done in the case of texts that advocate climate change denial, trans-exclusionary radical feminism, sex-worker-exclusionary radical feminism, creationism, flat Earth theory, and other texts that spread disinformation
His words seem to me to leave no doubt He defines 'trans-exclusionary feminism and sex-worker-exclusionary radical feminism' as 'texts that spread disinformation'.
This librarian is defining feminist texts in this way - and seeing himself and his colleagues as having the power to reclassify feminist works as disinformation. The sheer ignorance, the lack of insight, not to mention the arrogance and misogyny .....

HouseholdWords · 30/10/2017 17:46

I don't think he's saying exactly that, but he's saying it as an example of how a "Radical" librarian might start to categorise knowledge. It's meant as an analogy - but a bad one - to re-classifying David Irving from History to HIstoriography (ie from a record of past events to a book about how we write history/theories f history).

The TERF/SWERF stuff is a bad example, but typical of men who think they're more radicaler than thou I say, put them on the table and measure them

But the overall point made in the rather more literate & coherent WonkHE blog is that all ordering/classification of knowledge is ideological. Cue Derrida and Foucault and archive fever ....

DJBaggySmalls · 30/10/2017 17:17

There must be as womens studies have been taken over and turned into, among other things, gender studies.

theendisnotnigh · 30/10/2017 16:49

Hmm. I'm still completely Shock at his open letter of complaint to the Times that slimthistime posted. t
Are there more librarians/ academics who would file gender critical feminist writings alongside flat earthers??

theendisnotnigh · 30/10/2017 15:21

The irony is that he is complaining that his ideas have been misrepresented
]

theendisnotnigh · 30/10/2017 15:19

Having actually read that letter, what I find most worrying is his inclusion of "trans-exclusionary radical feminism, sex-worker-exclusionary radical feminism" alongside "creationism, flat Earth theory, and other texts that spread disinformation.
So he's not bigoted, judgemental, biased or anything. He KNOWS. Our literature and ideas are safe in his hands as he knows precisely where gender critical feminists are to be placed.
The irony that he is complaining that his ideas have been represented.
I don't think that they have been exposed enough if that is his take on feminism.

Slimthistime · 30/10/2017 14:59

a complaint made about the article
mentions the bizarre nature of conflating feminism and Holocaust denial

medium.com/@SimonXIX/an-open-letter-to-the-sunday-times-bf815f0c01d0

HouseholdWords · 30/10/2017 11:14

Here's an interesting blog re libraries:

wonkhe.com/blogs/a-radical-librarian-writes/

Datun · 30/10/2017 11:07

HouseholdWords

Okay that’s interesting. My impression is that the no platforming at universities is buying into the culture of not being able to say anything for fear of offence. And the book thing is jumping on the bandwagon.

I realise that this could be very much a fringe element, though and used to derail.

I hadn’t heard too much about the sexual harassment, bloated salaries, indifference side, though. And I agree that our universities are still top-notch.

I can’t remember the exact details, but as far as I know, universities being rated on student satisfaction is part of the problem. As it grades the University, which then determines funding.

Therefore, students are the consumers, and the curriculum is the product. And the students get to influence the product.

Is that correct, or have I got it wrong?

HouseholdWords · 30/10/2017 10:32

I think the real issue here is that there's a huge political move afoot, being run through "news" and Twitter, to destabilise and attack UK universities.

Politicians are experiencing a backlash from parents and young voters about fees & debt, and are trying to blame universities for the situation (I got blocked on Twitter by Andrew Adonis over the summer, for calling him out on his ridiculous ignorant statements about university fees and VC's salaries etc etc etc - the #blockedbyAndrewAdonis is a big club, he's a vair sensitive flower).

So there is a campaign to smear UK universities, insinuate that we're pro-Remainer propagandists (actually, we deal in facts and we know what the overwhelming facts are about Brexit's effect on UK universities); that we have bloated salaries; that there are admin staff just sitting around filing their nails; that we don't care about students & our indifference drives them to suicide; that we are "politically correct" vigilantes about de-colonising the curriculum & toppling statues; that we sexually harass our students.

And so on ...

It's very worrying. Particularly as UK universities are amongst the best in the world.