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

Herald article which incorporates some of the material in the FOI responses. https://archive.is/LfFRy

From the Herald:

On May 27, a management paper recorded the network’s warning that they would “have no choice” but to notify LGBT+ partners of the library’s “endorsement” of the book if it was displayed.

Why would an employer allow a staff network to undermine management decisions and threaten to dob them in to the network's "partners"? I do hope the paper also recorded management's refusal to give way to blackmail.

National librarian and NLS chief executive Amina Shah then recommended exclusion, “not due to the content of the book itself or the views expressed, but to the potential impact on key stakeholders and the reputation of the Library”.

So that went well.

From the current NLS EDI strategy document.

Reads 'Priority 1'. Laughs in bitter, ironic fashion.

Can you not have a link and a picture in the same post? Here it is (I hope).

From the Herald

"..... I would be interested to know what would have happened if a democratic selection had included a non-fiction work advocating for racist, homophobic, or other discriminatory and exclusionary viewpoints."

The hyperhystria in this is off the charts, the book is about the 'lived experience' of many women, from Scotland, 'lived experience' is something they oh so passionate about, but only if it's their over the top fantasy 'experience', real experience does mean squat to them. 🤬

To be fair, according to the FOIs their initial EDI process decided that NLS should include the book. It was only when the LGBTQ+ network got shirty that they changed their minds. So the problem wasn't the EDI policy, it was more about who made the biggest fuss and who threatened them.

Letting a staff network hold you to ransom is not good management.

How is it even relevant?!

Ultimately this is a book about the exclusion of women being denied their lawful rights and how they fought for them against the government and the press and various other organisations who were misrepresenting the law and discriminating against them.

It's a pro-womens right book.

It's others (who haven't even read it) who describe it as anti-trans and full of hate.

If they want to misrepresent it as the authors being the same as being racist etc I'm sure that's that's legally challengeable ...

Wow! How many taxpayer funded hours have these feeble minded dolts wasted on this ridiculous censorship?

And they think they are the good guys? What an embarrassment.

We need a proper answer from them about that exactly they dislike from the content of the book and how that justified this absolute circus. We need paragraph by paragraph which bits they argue are ‘harmful’ to staff and ‘hate speech’. Is it the account from a lesbian? Or an abused woman?

This has the potential to get very embarrassing for them, very quickly.

"So which extract do you have most problem with?"

"Could you show us your internal policies on Equality"

"How would you deal with a gender critical woman in your workplace"

I’d like to see the staff network sued.
These networks should be held accountable

Susan Dalgety on bbc radio Scotland now

What a pathetically weak ideology that’s threatened by a book.

No doubt they’ll include Sturgeons rewriting of history memoir in future if it gets enough votes.

Seriously, if you’re a paid employee of an organisation who feels unsafe due to the proximity of a book, you should be told to get a grip, not indulged & pandered to.

’Safe’ - another word mangled & misappropriated by the Rainbow gang.

Which one is Bungle?

It continues to be a concern that the LGBTQ flavour of rabble rousers are being rewarded for bad behaviour by the establishment. Getting what they want as soon as they make a fuss.

I've no doubt that AS weighed up the likelihood of media coverage of the resulting protests from both sides and decided that the staff group would make the most noise (and do the least work while they were at it).

Shame on her. I knew her years ago but she had a spine then.

I felt a post card coming on and found a nice one of Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht which I sent to the NLS and I've completed a complaints form.
I do hope the sales of WWWW increase.

One of the comments on the article is a gem:
'Ms Shah, you no longer have a reputation to protect'.

Reminiscent of 'Senator, you are no Jack Kennedy'

I would say it's unbelievable, but it's yet another example of censorship and men's rights overriding those of women .

A clear protest is needed here - a network of GC are needed to place multiple copies of the book back on the open shelves, with some disguised as other books so the rainbow fuckers won't be able to spot them.

That internal correspondence gained through FOI is very eye opening.

Clearly at least one person knew it was correct to include the book. However you can feel the pressure growing, with all the usual cliches appearing, about hate speech, possible protests, feeling unsafe, harm.

The section that considers the negative consequences of its inclusion upon the LGBT community also considers the consequences of its exclusion to the gender critical ‘community’. They’re exactly the same. Funnily enough the LGBT group win the day, because of the hate speech lie, that they’re apparently a vulnerable group (🙄🙄) blah blah.

Hilarious that they were worried about reputational damage if they included the book. FAFO.

Comparable to racist, homophobic hate speech, they say? And not, as per Maya's court win, legally protected free speech a d entirely WORIADS? Well, i wonder if WWWW fancy an easy day in court?

It has to be direct discrimination, hasn't it?

Amazing to see this emerge right on the heels of all the NHS Fife coverage in the Scottish press. You couldn’t have timed it better for press interest.

Which one isn’t?!

And Summerhall's reaction to Kate Forbes speaking at their (publicly funded to a large extent) venue. BBC Scotland being kept busy by the 🌈 🤡 tonight.

I hadn’t bought it so popped into my local Waterstones and got one today. They were on the shelves you’ll all be pleased to hear. I turned it around front and centre 😎

Which one’s Bungle?

I agree that they’re all Bungle, with a side order of Zippy thrown in to reflect the attempt at silencing GC voices 🤐

I just saw this post on X from someone who says she works at the National Library of Scotland. They didn't even have a hard copy of TWWWW until yesterday, only the e-book:

https://x.com/22carrots/status/1955673461554282643