Page 6 | National Library of Scotland censors The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht

OhBuggerandArse · 2025-08-12T22:46:14+00:00

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 https://x.com/EthelWrites/status/1955390550494023958]]

user1471471849 · 14/08/2025 11:25

ArabellaScott · 14/08/2025 10:15

'Harmful language statement

This statement covers harmful language that you may encounter when using Library collections and resources.

Some material in the collection and the language that describes them may be harmful.

Items in the National Library of Scotland's collections range from rare historical documents to online journals, covering every subject.

When using our catalogues, collections, and online resources you may encounter text, images, film or sound clips which include outdated, discriminatory, or harmful opinions or portrayals.

These may relate to:

Race and ethnicity
Gender
Sexual orientation
Ability
Religious belief
Class
Other areas of cultural sensitivity, such as contested geographical references

Describing and interpreting the collections

At the Library we have a responsibility to describe, interpret, and present the collections in ways that make them useful to a wide variety of people. It is also important for us to be welcoming, inclusive and reflective of contemporary society, and language is central to this.
We want to ensure that we describe and interpret material in a way that is accurate, respectful, and responsive to the people who create, use, and are represented in the collections we manage.
To do this, we are reviewing our descriptive content, including catalogue records, exhibition panels, articles, blogs and web content.
While we can change the way we interpret and present the collections, we also believe all items have research value. So we are also careful not to censor or erase any part of the original material, no matter how problematic.
Instead we want to make sure that people are aware of the nature of this content before they see it.

How you can be involved

We need your help. We have millions of items in our collections and it will take us a long time to go through all the content that describes them.

We would love it if you were able to help us.

If you discover any harmful or discriminatory language in any of our descriptive content at the National Library of Scotland, please use our online enquiry service to tell us.'

www.nls.uk/about-us/who-and-what/edi/

Oh my god, this is unbelievable. They are actually policing speech and ideas and so blatant about it that I can only assume they don't even realise it.

ArabellaScott · 14/08/2025 11:41

It's the encouragement to turn readers into Stasi-esque sensitivity readers that got me.

user1471471849 · 14/08/2025 11:53

I know, it's absolutely shocking!! They should pick up that copy of 1984 and have a quick skim of it too. They might learn something.

MarieDeGournay · 14/08/2025 12:02

I'd like to have confirmation that the NLS did not have a hard copy of WWWW until somebody nipped out to buy one the other day, because that contradicts their statement saying that they weren't - heaven forfend! - censoring it because it was stocked in the library, they had removed it from an exhibition, that's all.

If somebody has the receipt - perhaps literally in this case - that would be clear evidence that they are being economical with the truth about making WWWW freely available in the library.

ArabellaScott · 14/08/2025 12:08

MPs Kirsteen Sullivan and Tracy Gilbert have written to Ms Shah, the National LIbrarian, to raise their concerns.

https://x.com/kittysull1/status/1955681203442598174/

https://x.com/kittysull1/status/1955681203442598174

fromorbit · 14/08/2025 12:14

The National's editor attempt to cover up for the NLS censoring a book by lying about what happened is attracting attention. Their video defaming rge editors of the book is being called out.

Susan Dalgety
https://x.com/DalgetySusan/status/1955910314655912424

Morning LauraEWebsterr
any chance you or someone from your team could edit this video as it is misleading at best, at worst defamatory as it claims LucyHunterB
and I lied about our book being removed from the National Library’s exhibition. An apology would be welcome too. Thanks.
Quote
Lucy Hunter Blackburn
Oh I say, I think this is defamatory. I mean, properly, clearly.

https://x.com/DalgetySusan/status/1955910314655912424

ArabellaScott · 14/08/2025 12:16

MSP Rachael Hamilton has also written.

'Why are women who stood up and fought to protect their rights being censored by a public institution? I have written to the National Library of Scotland asking them to reverse their decision and include The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht in their exhibition

x.com/Rachael2Win/status/1955948980946289145

DontWheeshtMe · 14/08/2025 12:25

ArabellaScott · 14/08/2025 12:08

MPs Kirsteen Sullivan and Tracy Gilbert have written to Ms Shah, the National LIbrarian, to raise their concerns.

https://x.com/kittysull1/status/1955681203442598174/

Well don’t them
Hoping for more of that 🙏

LittleBitofBread · 14/08/2025 12:26

This is genuinely spine-chilling. I get it if they don't like the message (although I am firmly camp Won't Wheesht), but censoring books is right out of the totalitarian playbook.

StanfreyPock · 14/08/2025 12:27

ArabellaScott · 14/08/2025 07:53

I love the act of resistance of adding books to a library that is doing its best not to show them.

Grimly hilarious, visions of an (orderly of course) queue of CLAW* forming outside NLS, ready to smuggle in a book to a library....couldn't make it up.

*Conspicuously Law Abiding Women as you all know

IcyJoMarch · 14/08/2025 12:28

MarieDeGournay · 14/08/2025 12:02

I'd like to have confirmation that the NLS did not have a hard copy of WWWW until somebody nipped out to buy one the other day, because that contradicts their statement saying that they weren't - heaven forfend! - censoring it because it was stocked in the library, they had removed it from an exhibition, that's all.

If somebody has the receipt - perhaps literally in this case - that would be clear evidence that they are being economical with the truth about making WWWW freely available in the library.

It's on page 30 in the bundle FOI request, but the reason for the book needing to be bought in has nothing to do with gender beliefs:

Email from Alison Stevenson, 2 June 2025:
As the Legal Deposit copy of the book has been caught up in the processing backlog caused by the British Library cyber-attack, Acquisitions placed an order for a print copy last week and this will be available in the Reading Room by the time the exhibition opens.

The cyber-attack has had a horrific impact on copyright libraries (I'm a regular user of one) so I have no doubt whatsoever that this is the truth.

Meanwhile, let's all take a moment and think of Amina Shah, who said this on 28 May 2025, in her recommendation to not include this title in the public bookshelf:

‘There is a danger that this issue itself will overshadow the celebratory nature of the exhibition.’

How's that working out for you?

dobbydotdot · 14/08/2025 12:29

fromorbit · 14/08/2025 12:14

The National's editor attempt to cover up for the NLS censoring a book by lying about what happened is attracting attention. Their video defaming rge editors of the book is being called out.

Susan Dalgety
https://x.com/DalgetySusan/status/1955910314655912424

Morning LauraEWebsterr
any chance you or someone from your team could edit this video as it is misleading at best, at worst defamatory as it claims LucyHunterB
and I lied about our book being removed from the National Library’s exhibition. An apology would be welcome too. Thanks.
Quote
Lucy Hunter Blackburn
Oh I say, I think this is defamatory. I mean, properly, clearly.

I think that video from the National would say that it identifies as 'accurate journalism'. The truth is very different, as these things often are...

DontWheeshtMe · 14/08/2025 12:29

fromorbit · 14/08/2025 12:14

The National's editor attempt to cover up for the NLS censoring a book by lying about what happened is attracting attention. Their video defaming rge editors of the book is being called out.

Susan Dalgety
https://x.com/DalgetySusan/status/1955910314655912424

Morning LauraEWebsterr
any chance you or someone from your team could edit this video as it is misleading at best, at worst defamatory as it claims LucyHunterB
and I lied about our book being removed from the National Library’s exhibition. An apology would be welcome too. Thanks.
Quote
Lucy Hunter Blackburn
Oh I say, I think this is defamatory. I mean, properly, clearly.

I don’t do X
Whats in the video ?

Glamourreader · 14/08/2025 12:30

Gosh the sales of the book will be boosted no end!

Perhaps we'll need new edition with these events as a new chapter?

NotAtMyAge · 14/08/2025 12:33

Pam Gosal MSP has also written to the National Library. Another splendid letter.

https://x.com/PamGosalMSP/status/1955698260951089329

Chersfrozenface · 14/08/2025 12:36

IcyJoMarch · 14/08/2025 12:28

It's on page 30 in the bundle FOI request, but the reason for the book needing to be bought in has nothing to do with gender beliefs:

Email from Alison Stevenson, 2 June 2025:
As the Legal Deposit copy of the book has been caught up in the processing backlog caused by the British Library cyber-attack, Acquisitions placed an order for a print copy last week and this will be available in the Reading Room by the time the exhibition opens.

The cyber-attack has had a horrific impact on copyright libraries (I'm a regular user of one) so I have no doubt whatsoever that this is the truth.

Meanwhile, let's all take a moment and think of Amina Shah, who said this on 28 May 2025, in her recommendation to not include this title in the public bookshelf:

‘There is a danger that this issue itself will overshadow the celebratory nature of the exhibition.’

How's that working out for you?

Show quote history

It would be unkind to ask.

user1471471849 · 14/08/2025 12:39

user1471471849 · 14/08/2025 11:53

I know, it's absolutely shocking!! They should pick up that copy of 1984 and have a quick skim of it too. They might learn something.

A pertinent quote that this brings to mind from Orwell's '1984', 'those who control the present, control the past those who control the past control the future'.

BettyBooper · 14/08/2025 12:42

IcyJoMarch · 14/08/2025 12:28

It's on page 30 in the bundle FOI request, but the reason for the book needing to be bought in has nothing to do with gender beliefs:

Email from Alison Stevenson, 2 June 2025:
As the Legal Deposit copy of the book has been caught up in the processing backlog caused by the British Library cyber-attack, Acquisitions placed an order for a print copy last week and this will be available in the Reading Room by the time the exhibition opens.

The cyber-attack has had a horrific impact on copyright libraries (I'm a regular user of one) so I have no doubt whatsoever that this is the truth.

Meanwhile, let's all take a moment and think of Amina Shah, who said this on 28 May 2025, in her recommendation to not include this title in the public bookshelf:

‘There is a danger that this issue itself will overshadow the celebratory nature of the exhibition.’

How's that working out for you?

Show quote history

So they apparently put an order in at the end of May for a hard copy and it still hasn't arrived? Or am I misunderstanding?

IcyJoMarch · 14/08/2025 12:47

I don't know about the arrival, sorry. It might be sitting in a stack in Acquisitions, awaiting its turn?

BettyBooper · 14/08/2025 12:50

IcyJoMarch · 14/08/2025 12:47

I don't know about the arrival, sorry. It might be sitting in a stack in Acquisitions, awaiting its turn?

Fair enough! It just seems an awful long time to be waiting for a book that was supposed to be there for the start of the exhibition in June. I wonder how many others haven't arrived yet? 🤔

Chersfrozenface · 14/08/2025 12:58

BettyBooper · 14/08/2025 12:50

Fair enough! It just seems an awful long time to be waiting for a book that was supposed to be there for the start of the exhibition in June. I wonder how many others haven't arrived yet? 🤔

Show quote history

When they realised that the ordered copy of a book scheduled to be in an exhibition hadn't arrived in time for the opening of that exhibition, they could have popped out to a bookshop for a copy. I bet petty cash would have covered it.

Are they so stupid that they didn't think of that?

Or was it awfully convenient, seeing as The Chosen Ones didn't want it in the exhibition at all?

Original poster

OhBuggerandArse · 14/08/2025 13:16

For Women Scotland and assorted feminists are having a read-in at the NLS, having come on from the Edinburgh International Book Festival... https://x.com/ForWomenScot/status/1955962105217032237

https://x.com/ForWomenScot/status/1955962105217032237

OP posts:

BettyBooper · 14/08/2025 13:17

Chersfrozenface · 14/08/2025 12:58

When they realised that the ordered copy of a book scheduled to be in an exhibition hadn't arrived in time for the opening of that exhibition, they could have popped out to a bookshop for a copy. I bet petty cash would have covered it.

Are they so stupid that they didn't think of that?

Or was it awfully convenient, seeing as The Chosen Ones didn't want it in the exhibition at all?

Show quote history

Hmmmm. Going to a bookshop to buy a book. What an outlandish plan!

Heggettypeg · 14/08/2025 13:49

ArabellaScott · 14/08/2025 10:15

'Harmful language statement

This statement covers harmful language that you may encounter when using Library collections and resources.

Some material in the collection and the language that describes them may be harmful.

Items in the National Library of Scotland's collections range from rare historical documents to online journals, covering every subject.

When using our catalogues, collections, and online resources you may encounter text, images, film or sound clips which include outdated, discriminatory, or harmful opinions or portrayals.

These may relate to:

Race and ethnicity
Gender
Sexual orientation
Ability
Religious belief
Class
Other areas of cultural sensitivity, such as contested geographical references

Describing and interpreting the collections

At the Library we have a responsibility to describe, interpret, and present the collections in ways that make them useful to a wide variety of people. It is also important for us to be welcoming, inclusive and reflective of contemporary society, and language is central to this.
We want to ensure that we describe and interpret material in a way that is accurate, respectful, and responsive to the people who create, use, and are represented in the collections we manage.
To do this, we are reviewing our descriptive content, including catalogue records, exhibition panels, articles, blogs and web content.
While we can change the way we interpret and present the collections, we also believe all items have research value. So we are also careful not to censor or erase any part of the original material, no matter how problematic.
Instead we want to make sure that people are aware of the nature of this content before they see it.

How you can be involved

We need your help. We have millions of items in our collections and it will take us a long time to go through all the content that describes them.

We would love it if you were able to help us.

If you discover any harmful or discriminatory language in any of our descriptive content at the National Library of Scotland, please use our online enquiry service to tell us.'

www.nls.uk/about-us/who-and-what/edi/

This will be like painting the Forth Bridge.
They'll carefully edit everything to exclude the hate-words du jour and include the approved terminology, and long before they finish going through the collection, the goalposts will have moved, probably several times. (Think "black" v. "coloured", which some older people still carefully say because it was dinned into them when they were young and impressionable that it was the polite term to use.).
And whatever they use, they'll hurt somebody (think "queer" and how that's eagerly been taken up by people who didn't live through the bad old days).
They'd be far better putting up a big notice in the foyer and on their website:
"Warning: THIS Is A LIBRARY.
It contains material written in all times and in all places, by people with every opinion and every turn of phrase. You are pretty much guaranteed to encounter words and statements that offend you. If you feel you can't cope with this, DON'T COME IN.'

Chersfrozenface · 14/08/2025 13:54

I read a lot of detective fiction from the turn of the 20th century up to the turn of the 21st. In some of those works there are attitudes and language that make me uncomfortable.

But as witnessed by the fact that I'm posting now, I'm still alive and in one piece.