Update on the National Library of Scotland debacle.

[TheywontletmehavethenameIwant]

After the NLS removed The Women Who Wouldn’t Wheesht from the Dear Library Exhibition they received so many complaints The Library commissioned an independent review of the process leading up to the decision not to include the book.

This reviewer, an advocate and independent member of the Scottish Bar, was asked to investigate:

• The process for the public nomination
• The initial selection of items for the exhibition
• The decision to review the initial selection
• Whether appropriate corporate governance processes, including equality impacts assessments were followed throughout
• What influencing factors may have contributed to the decision.

As one of the many people who lodge a complaint, I received an email today with the finds of the investigation. I can’t link to it, because it’s just a document, and I couldn’t find a copy of it on the NLS’s website, although it due to be posted there. I thought I'd post this in case anyone was wondering how it all turned out

Investigator's Summary
The process for public nomination and selection of books to be included in The Book That Shaped Me was reasonable and appropriate. The LGBT Staff Network and allies raised concerns that 'The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht' had been selected, because members considered it was discriminatory and exclusionary and involved a risk of serious harm to staff and visitors. Those concerns were appropriately escalated, and the National Librarian ultimately assumed responsibility for deciding whether the book should be included. She decided it should not, and that was supported by the Chair of the Board. That decision was based on inadequate risk assessment, informed by inadequate evidence and consultation. The decision did not uphold the aims set out in the Library's Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion policy.

By my reading of the report, it’s clear that the CEO and the Chair of the Board caved to pressure from the alphabettie Staff Action Group.
The investigated didn’t buy any of the sorry excuses that the staff gave for it being withdrawn, the report corrected a couple of what I would call lies, but the investigator didn’t, that were put forward in an attempt to justify the action.

The 2 main reason’s the Staff Group gave were the book contravened the NLS EDL policy, and that having in the exhibition would be a threat to the safety of staff.

The report points out that excluding a book written by gender critical women was not inclusive, and that by pulling the book the NLS were the ones who contravened their own EDI policy. It also stated that neither the CEO nor Chair made any attempt to risk assess the alleged threat to staff.

My family have got a copy of Mein Kampf, it was in a box of random books bought from a second-hand stall. I've flicked through it and it's the most god-awful dirge.

Books - however disliked - should be available for reading to understand what they actually say, because otherwise they take on a mythic status that becomes whatever anyone wants them to say, and no-one can counteract it because they haven't read it. And you have to actually read something in order to properly criticise it!

Why are they avoiding naming the book? It's not the Candyman or Beetlejuice, ffs!

I wish they'd provide one example of the 'actual physical harm' they allege has been suffered. Not including that which is entirely self inflicted by their own bigotry and intolerance.

Yes, I noticed 'a certain book'.

The better analogy is probably Voldemort.

The book that shall not be named

the dark words

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15326075/Trans-activists-try-ban-feminist-book-SECOND-time-national-library-hostile-staff.html

''This is no way for Scotland's cultural life to be conducted.
'Stifle the voices of people whose views you disagree with, or disapprove of, and you are left with a society where only a tiny, well-connected elite thrive.
'The signatories of this letter, who claim to be drawn from the ‘academic, heritage, arts, literary and cultural sectors’, should be the very people arguing against censorship. Instead, they try to justify it by claiming “inclusivity” for themselves.''

Hear, hear.

'The letter has been handed to senior management before a board meeting on Thursday who are expected to discuss the fallout from the first book ban.'

https://www.nls.uk/about-us/who-and-what/leadership-and-governance/board/about-the-board/

Contact
You can contact the Chair of the Board by writing to them at the Library or by emailing [email protected].

Wow, 'poet' got scare quotes!

😶

''We hope the Board and senior managers of the National Library of Scotland will see this for what it is, a form of McCarthyism which should not be indulged further and has no place in contemporary Scotland.''

hear, hear.

'Poet' should read 'unhinged trans activist whose modest early promise has been completely eclipsed by his years of spearheading the obsessive and vindictive hounding of women writers, harassment-by-process of literary organisations, and most prominently in recent times, yelling 'give us wombs and give us titties' into a megaphone in the public square.'

"We stand in solidarity with queer and trans staff at the National Library of Scotland, who in recent months have been subject to harassment and bigotry in their workplace."

I demand proof of this claim, it's blatantly absurd and should be challenged forthwith.

'Harassment' means women speaking to them, when said women have not yet had their brains examined for wrongthink, and when a large number of women are known to believe there are only two sexes, and sex is immutable, and have refused to submit themselves for reeducation training at the gulag as decreed by the Equality Network.

I expect.

Maybe the sequel to the book that shall not be named should be a dictionary
With Uxbridge and Oxford English definitions of things like harassment and harm

Forward prize collection had about five pages of gurning on the subject of muh transition.

Eventually, surely even he will get bored?

I think he's moving onto his next 'transition' - busy just now re-inventing himself as a 'Gaelic writer' (because Shetland isn't exotic enough/doesn't open up dedicated minority language funding streams in the same way?) It's great, do a quick Gaelic course and—hey presto—you can start dipping into pots of money that were designed to encourage and support actual Gaelic writers. Cultural cosplay as a funding strategy - remind anyone of anything? It’s exploitative in the most predictable way: extract value from the culture, contribute nothing of value back, and call it opportunity.

Éistibh a luchd an tighe-se
re scél na mbod bríoghmhar

Probably not so very brìoghmor these days after all the HRT, but I'd rather not think about that.

Google tells me its a poem "Listen to the People of This House," from 1500. Also, a modern one about a huge penis...

I don't know the modern one. The reference is this:

http://www.archipelago.org/vol7-3/8.htm

https://ethelwrites.com/2025/11/25/the-women-who-wouldnt-wheesht-statement-in-response-to-an-open-letter-to-the-national-library-of-scotland-from-activists-in-the-academic-heritage-arts-literary-and-cultural-sectors/

'Freedom of speech is the single most essential condition for a vibrant culture. Stifle the voices of people whose views you disagree with, or disapprove of, and you are left with a society where only a tiny, well-connected elite thrive.

The signatories of this letter, who claim to be drawn from the ‘academic, heritage, arts, literary and cultural sectors’, should be the very people arguing against censorship. Instead, they try to justify it by claiming “inclusivity” for themselves. This is no way for Scotland’s cultural life to be conducted.

We hope the Board and senior managers of the National Library of Scotland will see this for what it is, a form of McCarthyism which should not be indulged further, and has no place in contemporary Scotland.'

A quick Gaelic course and hey presto? Good luck with that!
The grammar of the Gaelic languages is tricky as hell, and publishing in a complicated language that you only have a nodding acquaintance with would be asking for trouble.

And we wouldn't wish that on him, now would we?

Aye, but it's poetry.

Choppy lines and any anomalies or mistakes can just be passed off under poetic license, and in fact the mangling of it will quite likely be absorbed as 'self reflexive irony'.

This is still up on the other place complete with the full link to the Google doc albeit now closed to new signatories. Do spare a thought for the poor petulant bullies “going through an awful time” 🤡

What does that 'awful time' consist of, exactly? Having to abide by rules and the law?

sone future historian is going to have a field day with this

Were it not real, that “we order you to ban the book” letter would be ridiculous.

I must have watched far too many Harry Potter movies, because I can’t un-imagine WWWW, aka “that book” as one of the “biting books” in the Restricted Books section of the library.

Still, I suppose it is helpful to have the signatories’ muppetry out in the open. How interesting that the authors of the letter are indistinguishable from the co-signatories (and might even be some of the anonymous ones).