National Library of Scotland censors The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht

[OhBuggerandArse]

Took it out of their centenary exhibition because the staff LGBT+ network kicked up a fuss. Craven. This really needs massive public challenge and push back - if the National Library isn't able to fend off the censors we are utterly lost. https://x.com/EthelWrites/status/1955390550494023958

The email says the investigator is independent and its up to them how long it takes, in so many words.

Complaint upheld.👏

oh, can you tell us more?

Herald article: archive.is/hpj0h

That link didn't work for me so

https://archive.ph/hpj0h

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/25546068.national-librarys-gender-critical-book-ban-complaint-upheld/

Lucy Hunter Blackburn is very gracious in the last paragraph.

https://www.nls.uk/media/dpknjpm1/dear-library-exhibition-independent-investigation-october-2025.docx

Link from NLS email - fingers crossed

Thanks for letting us know.

And well done to all of those who made complaints etc..

Right, good. And consequences?

'The legal investigation found removing the book was based on on an “inadequate risk assessment, informed by inadequate evidence and consultation”.
The library’s decision did not uphold the aims set out in the Library’s Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, the advocate's review found.'

Consequences!? 🤣 Good one! Have any of the gender bullies who've seen their organisations dragged into courts, fined and shamed, ever faced consequences? Funnily enough Nicola Sturgeon is the only one that comes to mind.

An interview with Amina Shah was the 2nd item on Front Row on radio 4 just now.

The interesting parts of the report to me are:

“Senior managers met with leaders of the Network in mid-May who indicated that if the book was included, they would "go public", inform the Library's partners, and would not feel comfortable representing the Library at planned Pride events in June. I accept, as some staff told me, the tone of those indications was threatening and inappropriate.”

and

“However, in my view, the main determining factor in the decision was advocacy by the Network and allies, supported by the Library's recognised trade union. They identified the book as posing a serious risk of harm to staff and visitors.Their indications they would "go public" and raise the issue with external stakeholders was a significant and weighty factor which led directly to escalation of the book's inclusion to the LLT and was seriously considered throughout the decision-making process. It is unclear whether the Network is intended to be an internal advocacy body or a group for mutual support. Nonetheless, it played a central role in objecting to the book's inclusion and ultimately having it excluded from the exhibition.”

Now the book has been included I’m wondering what “serious harm” has happened?

And serious harm, goodness bloody me!

Well NLS has done us a favour really. They caved into the TRA bullies, were than trashed in the press and did an investigation. Which showed…that they caved into TRA bullies. Hopefully other institutions will now think twice before they ride roughshod over women to appease those bullies.

Yes I got my email today from them.

was a good report from the independent person

Popped in yesterday, and took a photo of the book in front of the display showing the ’letters’ from the Reader to the Library:
‘I will not censor or
seek to ban opinions
different to my own.’

And the Librarian to the Reader:
’I will show you all sides of
the argument.
I will keep you safe in a space
for like and unlike minds.’

The irony!

Amina Shah’s interview was utter cringe. Self-serving and obviously still in fear of her local “LGBT Network”. Senior managers need to rediscover some courage. Or resign if the job does not match their skill set.

The villains of the piece are the LGBT+ staff network who really don’t understand the purpose of the place they work

it’s interesting that it was reading the book that made Ms Shah nervous about including it, made her frightened of the TRAs

Thank you for that link. It is an amazing document. Talk of listening to the lived experience of people in other PC groups - women and those with GC beliefs. Wow.

And some consequences ...

• 'The Library has arranged for an academic expert in Freedom of Expression and Library and Information Studies to deliver organisation wide training. This training will be delivered over multiple sessions in October and November 2025.
• The Library has reviewed its EQIA process and has taken legal advice on policies and procedures relating to equalities.
• The Library is reviewing the Terms of Reference for staff networks.'

Yikes.

I don’t believe she read the book before she made her decision.

Holy cow.

I'm impressed.

Well it claims in the Advocate report that she did and it was the tales of violent protests that convinced her that there was a risk. The Advocate says that in that case they should have sought advice on how to protect against the protest. It really is an amazing report. The person who wrote this did a good job of asking the right people the right questions and listening to the responses.

I am interested in whether the union - which (of course) supported the network and allies in calling for non-inclusion have anything to say.

The Librarian (it seems to me) was bullied and was - perhaps still is - scared of the bullies. But she is doing the right thing now. (Depends on the trainings and other reviews though).

I know the report says she read it, but I don’t believe it. I’d have to then believe that she knew it was weak to capitulate but did it anyways. Surely no one in a position of responsibility like hers would be so Lilly livered?

the sarcasm is obvs, right?

Eeesh, the Network really do not come out of that well, do they?

They clearly gave off vibes of 'nice Library you've got here, shame if something were to happen to it...'