Showing posts with label Sarah Houghton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sarah Houghton. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 25, 2017

The State of Sexual Harassment in the Library, by Kelly Jensen

The State of Sexual Harassment in the Library

by Kelly Jensen
@veronikellymars
24 October 2017

Source URL: 
Emphasis and hyperlinks in original.


It was only a few years ago, but we’ve all seemed to have forgotten. nina de jesus and Lisa Rabey, known as Team Harpy, spoke out against a male colleague who had been making female colleagues uncomfortable for years at librarian conferences and events. His name emerged from personal experiences the women had, as well as the whisper network — something that, as more and more discussion of sexual harassment and misconduct have entered into public discourse, has become a more well-known tool used among victims.


In speaking out, Team Harpy did what it was people ask for in any situation of sexual assault and/or harassment: they talked.

Not only were they sued for doing so, a community turned against them, calling them little more than harpies looking for attention.

The viral #MeToo campaign began with a tweet from Alyssa Milano (with credit for the term being traced back to Tarana Burke, a black woman, ten years ago) as a way to show the magnitude of sexual harassment and assault. Those who experienced either were encouraged to post “Me, Too” as a status on their various social media. My feeds filled, followed with many urges for people to speak out and up and change the story.

Many of those statuses, as well as the urges to speak up, came from the same people who didn’t support victims who have come forward in the past in the same way. Because it’s a lot easier said than done, especially if it’s being done against someone who “doesn’t seem like the type.”

But the truth is this: there is no single “type.”

And the harder truth is this: there is no single “type” of victim.

It’s been impossible not to look at the #metoo campaign without feeling anger and frustration. Not because of its power in drawing attention to a widespread and horrifying phenomenon. But because it didn’t happen until celebrities began to come forward. We didn’t see anything like this when de jesus and Rabey spoke up; instead, they were spurned by a community — and those who did support them saw significant negative response for doing so — and they unfortunately served as an example of what happens when you speak out before it’s popular to do so. de jesus and Rabey ultimately settled the lawsuit, posting apologies and statement retractions.

While these women did what people have been asking victims to do, in the wake of the case, little to nothing has been done in terms of starting a dialog about the magnitude of sexual harassment and misconduct that occurs in the library. It’s easy to believe a library is an ideal place, but that’s not the case. Especially as it pertains to public libraries, with doors open to any and everyone in a community, that means any and everyone in a community is welcomed into the same shared space. And for an institution that is primarily staffed by women, even more so than education, it means opening up the possibility of women as targets of harassment and violence of the sexual sort.+

I have experienced my fair share of sexual harassment. I’m lucky: verbal and light physical harassment are the extent of my experiences. Snapped bras, butt grabs, and countless comments about the size of my chest and games of “can successfully fling x-thing between her boobs” were part of my everyday experience growing up.

But nothing could equate to the sorts of sexual comments and advances I received working in the public library.

There are stories I could share about men who touched me without permission. Who commented on my appearance regularly without permission (and one man who liked to tell me how much he liked when I did my hair this way or that way and thought a new haircut made me look awful). Men who, when even told no, would still touch or hug or say things that were out of line.

But the worst one still lingers with me today, years later, because of what happened and how little in control of the situation I felt.

I was working alone at the reference desk on a weekday morning, when an older man came in and started using the copier. The copies were a few feet from the reference desk, close enough that if someone else were at the desk, they’d hear what was going on, but far enough away from any other staff points that it was otherwise cut off. As the man began using the copier, I saw he was getting frustrated and asked if he needed any help.He said he was getting a message that the paper was low, and could I refill it?

This was an easy problem with an easy solution. I left the reference desk and headed to the cabinet where we kept the paper. It sat right behind the printer, so the man met me by the cabinet. I kneeled down to unlock it and grab the ream of paper and in the process, he said “your husband must love it when you’re on your knees.”

I felt myself go red and hot with shame. I felt my stomach twist and drop. And I didn’t know how to respond. Do I yell? Do I laugh it off? Tell him to knock it off? Being there, by myself, I had no idea what the proper response was, so rather than saying anything, I shrugged my shoulders, shoved the paper in the printer, and asked if he needed anything else. He didn’t, and I immediately walked into the bathroom out of the public service area to collect myself.

The man was gone when I came back out, so I tried to resume my normal work. But I spent the entire rest of my shift wondering: what do I do about a comment like that? Who do I tell? Would anyone believe me? I didn’t even get the guy’s name, I hadn’t seen him around before so he wasn’t a regular, and what good would it do for me to say anything anyway? It was embarrassing and shameful. I didn’t want to repeat that comment to anyone, let alone acknowledge that it was made at me.

Now, five plus years later, I repeat that moment in my head over and over and wonder how many other people have had similar — or worse — experiences and carried it with them day after day in the name of public service. How many at my own workplace encountered him or individuals like him and didn’t say anything out of fear or shame or uncertainty.

Because that’s the thing of it: working in a public library means working with the public. Librarians are taught to deal with mental illness. Taught to deal with homelessness. Taught to deal with hard and personal reference issues with dignity and professionalism.

But librarians are not taught what to do when they become the victim of harassment.



SO WHAT?


This many years on, I should have let that experience go, as I’ve let go of so many of the others in the name of living my life. But I haven’t, and I can’t, knowing I didn’t say anything and knowing that I certainly am not alone in having had something like that happen. I beat myself up sometimes, knowing that I didn’t say anything, which only perpetuated the power of silence. That man didn’t learn from what he said, and I didn’t speak up, didn’t serve as a model of what to do in a situation where I was disempowered. Where I was made to feel shamed while simply doing my job. If someone who isn’t afraid to speak up doesn’t, then how does a cultural shift happen which encourages everyone to speak up begin?

It doesn’t, and it can’t.

I feel guilt. I feel sadness. And I feel shame for feeling both of those things. While this happened in the days before de jesus and Rabey spoke out, I think about my non-response in light of what they put at stake in speaking out; it would have been much easier and much less costly on every level.

I also feel tremendously lucky that this particular incident is the thing which haunts me. Because it could have been so much worse.

Because for many library employees, it is so much worse.

In the libraries where I worked, there was no policy or procedure in place for what to do about sexual harassment. If anything, it fell under the general “write a report” category of behavioral issues in the library. But how does one write a report when it comes to a comment or two from someone not known to the person reporting?

What the libraries I worked at did offer, though, were staff in-service training days. But not one of those days, across the many I sat through, explored gender dynamics in the library and not one highlighted the real problem of sexual harassment in the library space.

If we’re going to have active shooter training as library staff in the event of a potential violent incident, then we damn well also need sexual harassment and assault training because the likelihood of that happening is, presumably, much steeper given the statistics.

It’s everyday.

Likewise, there have been few regional or national conferences addressing the challenge of sexual harassment in the library. There have been workshops offered — one will be named later on, along with the resources discussed — but there hasn’t, to my knowledge, been a keynote speaker headlining a conference which directly addresses sexual harassment in the library. And certainly, as any librarian knows, accessibility for those conference is a challenge in and of itself. Money is tight, seniority often plays a role in travel opportunities, and those who do attend large conferences are often overwhelmed by choice and obligations, so attending each and every workshop of value is not possible.

Another issue complicating matters is one that’s quite simple and utterly frustrating in its simplicity: gender. Though librarianship is dominated by females, leadership in libraries doesn’t always look the same way. While 60% of directors in research libraries are female, that still leaves a whopping 40% of those libraries under the leadership of a man. In public libraries, the percentage isn’t as wide, though 35% of directors in public libraries are male. Looking at this another way, research libraries are 68% female employees and public libraries are 79% female employees.

We like to believe the gender of our leadership doesn’t matter, but we’ve seen even in libraries than male directors earn more than female directors. So it’s not a huge leap to suggest that, even in an institution that strives to serve and provide equal opportunities to all, that challenges which can easily fall under the poorly-named category of “women’s issues” aren’t at the forefront of administration. Men experience sexual harassment, but not at the level women do. And more, men who work behind closed doors in offices out of public spaces don’t even have the same potential to hear the sorts of comments or experience what their female colleagues do while working the public service desks.

It’s the public service facing employees who see it, who hear it, and who experience it, from the teenage pages who shelve books up to those with double master’s degrees working academic reference desks.



WHAT DOES IT SOUND LIKE OR LOOK LIKE THOUGH?


On Monday, October 16, 2017, I put together a short Google Survey and distributed it across social media. The survey, which can be seen here, received 250 responses as of this writing days later, and it’s still receiving feedback.

That magnitude of response speaks for itself. But as much as the responses speak to the reality of sexual harassment in the library, so do the questions asked by potential participants. Many asked if x-experience “counted” as sexual harassment (in all cases, yes, it did). Many asked if it counted were it from someone they worked with (yes, it did). Still others asked if it counted were the harasser someone from whom they purchased various library supplies from (yes, it did).

The reality is this: those working in libraries have a hard time defining what sexual harassment is, and often, they have a hard time accepting that they, too, were a victim.

Because in the name of serving patrons, so often those comments are simply brushed off or accepted as “part of the job.” This isn’t true. Librarians, in all systems and across all levels, deserve to work in an environment free from harassment. But until there’s a comprehensive understanding of what harassment is and how to respond to it, until there are tools for employees to reach for when put into the situation, and until there’s support from administration for those employees to stand up for themselves in order to protect themselves and do their jobs well, we’ll keep hearing stories like these:

A patron started emailing me asking for sexual photos and videos. He also approached me in the library.

I was 8 months pregnant and working at the reference desk. A patron was touching my stomach and making sexual comments. I smacked his hand away. He called the police that I assaulted him. The police informed him I defended myself and him touching my pregnant belly and making lewd comments was sexual assault and sexual harassment. He was told not to interact with me again but was not banned from the library.   

I was regularly sexually harassed at my previous place of employment by multiple staff members, mostly security guards and maintenance staff members. They would routinely comment on my appearance and the way I dressed. In addition to staff, I was frequently harassed by customers. I have been asked out by numerous customers, who would then get angry that I refused their advances. I remember one customer ask me why I wasn’t married yet. I’ve received notes commenting on my appearance. I’ve been stared at while shelving library materials.

A teen patron would follow me around and tell me about how he was better than my boyfriend, he was going to beat him up, for me to tell him where he lived, all with his hand down his pants.

My male supervisor (50’s) got me a birthday present (single mom in 30’s). It was an apron, that stated “If I am what I cook… I’m fast, cheap, and easy”

Worked at the front desk as a circ asst. Custodian frequently flirted and asked if he could kiss him. Would ‘playfully’ hit and one time, strangle me. Eventually escalated to him grabbing my ass at the front desk during a shift.

Last February a patron quietly – so I could hear him, but no one else could – subjected me to a monologue about all the things he wanted to do to me. It amounted to threatening me with sexual assault.

As a student page, I was pulled into the washroom by a male coworker. As a librarian, a male manager repeatedly made sexual comments directed to me.

Former Male white boss who discussed to another male white coworker while all three of us were having a discussion how he hates those young girls doing car washes because “I mean they’re like 13 but they’re all wet and dressed like that and mmmmm”. Male white coworker who would only call me “girlie”. Having multiple male white patrons masterbate and having to approach them.

I went into an elevator with a patron. He mentioned that it was good I had a book cart between us so that he was forced to control himself.

Male faculty member asking me to “find the good sex scenes” in a YA book. Repeated comments over several months about/offers to “make sure I’m really a lesbian” and maybe “I just hadn’t had any good times with men” While I was a nursing/pumping mother, comments about being jealous of my baby “glad someone gets to enjoy those.”

I was 23 and worked in circulation. My boss worked there for many years and was an older man. Maybe in his late 40s earler 50’s. He had almost entirely female staff, many of us pretty young. He’d talk openly about what the students wore and what he could see, he’d share sex jokes, he even had a woman in lingerie as a screen saver. He also used a computer a lot that had autocomplete set up. One time I tried to help a researcher with that computer and the autocomplete filled it in with the suggestions “12 year olds nude, 13 year olds nude, etc.”



These are the tip of the iceberg, of course, and but a small sampling of the incredible and horrifying breadth of experiences shared by librarians. You can access a partial list here to get a sense of the wheres and hows of sexual harassment in libraries of all stripes.



WHAT ARE WE DOING ABOUT THIS?


I work in a customer service profession. I feel that it’s my responsibility to smile and be pleasant, even when dealing with total ogres.

That comment, in response to the question “did you report the incident,” wasn’t an uncommon response. A few other responses:

No of course not. The culture was such that male employees especially management were extremely well protected and insulated – women who reported them were blackballed or frozen out or treated badly until they quit or quieted down. And “the customer is always right” mantra extended particularly to male customers when it was a woman’s word as well.

No. It didn’t seem to be worth the hassle.

Yes, incident reports were written in some cases. Sometimes not, but once we got in the habit of writing them for incidents like this, It happened with more regularity.

Most incidents, yes. My coworkers are 90% women and deserve to know when these guys are around

No. I was raped before and my experience is that reporting is more traumatic than the incident itself..

Yes. I did on more than one occasion. But they didn’t really listen until the third time I reported it.

It was refreshing to see how many reported the incidents and experiences. A lot of those responses came with caveats — some felt they did it only to have a paper trail, even though they knew nothing would be done, and others did note that they knew their supervisors would “have their backs.” A few also noted that, even when they reported, they felt they weren’t being believed or heard, and as one mentioned above, it required getting into the habit of writing reports, even if those reports didn’t necessarily have a follow through action.

But even in reporting, there is no guarantee of a response or protection. Though many who responded to the survey noted that the incidents were discussed at meetings — a valuable tool for keeping staff informed but also an incredibly vulnerable position for a victim to be a part of — many more said that they weren’t believed, that they should accept the comments as “nice compliments,” and/or that these sorts of things simply come with the territory of working with the public.

I got called up to HR to talk about me being mean and abusive.

My supervisor is supportive. But no action taken against patrons.

She asked security to get footage of the guy so we could ban him . She wanted a one-year ban. Guardian Security, our contractor, overrode her (a flagrant violation of policy) because the ‘alleged’ conduct was verbal only, and there was no evidence that I had been threatened.  

I didn’t feel like they cared or took me seriously.

I was told as a student page that I shouldn’t dress provocatively if I don’t want the attention and that it was essentially my fault: boys will be boys. As a librarian I was questioned as to if I was making it up as there were no witnesses to the manager’s behaviour.

Boss took it seriously; we crafted responses, and I was allowed off desk/to avoid helping this patron if he came in. My boss and I agreed that if anything else happened [my boss] would talk to the man about it.

Initially, the response from my bosses was supportive because they wanted to fire him. Once they realized they couldn’t fire him, they made me feel bad for reporting it. I was told he was in counseling and to think about how he had a wife, kid and mortgage.

My supervisor cosigned an incident report and discussed it with my staff.

The first time I reported I was blamed for enticing the patron. I was friendly, as I am with all patrons, so I must’ve sent mixed signals. The second time I went to the director when a patron repeatedly made me uncomfortable and crossed the line into touching. The police were called and he was banned for a month. Everyone was annoyed, I was embarrassed.

The (female) director of my library asked why I didn’t make a sound, stand up (I was seated at the reference desk and he had reached across), or make a big enough scene to get someone’s attention.

My first director, a male did nothing. I called the police. Although once he let me take an unscheduled vacation to get me away from the guy.

The head Librarian immediately removed him, bodily, from the building and then formally banned him from returning, to any branch.

I was told the patron asked out all the female librarians and that he was “harmless.”

“Patrons are like that.”

They were very supportive, filed a report for future reference, and spoke to the patron in question.

They were worried about my safety while doing my job.



WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE


One of the repeat comments throughout the survey was that, even in situations where management was sympathetic toward the victim, little was done that impacted the harasser. A number of responses said that the perpetrator was “well known” and a “harmless regular” and/or they were not given any punishment or response from the library.

Other responses, though, said that upon having a paper trail through incident reports, those patrons were banned from the library.

So what is the correct response? Do library employees need to continue on with their jobs and accept harassment as a part of working with people? Or does something more need to be done?

In an ideal world, there would be staff training offered not just in how to best serve a wide swath of people in the library and not just in how to protect oneself in the event of a violent incident. There should be training and opportunities to learn how to stand up for one’s self and respond to harassment in the library. There should be sensitivity training for administration in terms of listening to and responding to staff who report, as well as opportunities to build a team which encourages speaking out and up because of the built-in levels of trust and support within the system.

More, staff trainings and discussions about harassment need to be talked about with regularity. A one-off staff training day isn’t enough. Encouraging staff responses, developing constructive and powerful dialog, and finding solutions that protect staff members while being conscious of serving a unique and varied patronage requires providing regular opportunities to learn, to discuss, and to share.

Perhaps simply filing an incident report isn’t a solution. It might instead be part of the solution, with a form that goes to a staff member or committee of staff members who review the comments and offer solutions for the victim. Those solutions may range from giving them time off the service area to allowing them time to speak with a supervisor and follow through with next steps. Likewise, administration should step up and be braver in issuing consequences for perpetrators. At the library where the incident I experience happened, one of the levels of discipline we had for teenagers was, after three strikes for behavior issues, they and their parent/guardian met with the director to talk about following library behavior policy. Though this took time from the director’s schedule, it gave those teens (and their adults) a chance to hear what their problematic behavior was, allowed them a chance to talk through it and ask questions, and then they were allowed to use the library again, knowing that another incident would lead to a 30-day ban from the library.

We know many of the harassment incidents are from repeat offenders, those so often written off as “harmless weird people.” But those “harmless weird people” need to be subject to the same rules as other patrons of the library. Chances are, their inappropriate behavior doesn’t just impact staff. It’s likely they’re impacting other patrons as well.

Some other ideas and encouragement for better dialog and training from those working in libraries:

It’s very difficult to draw the line between serving patrons and putting up with harassment, especially when you don’t want patrons to lose library privileges. We know that they need us, but it’s not always possible to provide services when you’re afraid.

I work in an academic library now, and I’ve heard that student workers have had incidents in the past and either didn’t report, or only told another student worker. I think there is a feeling that working in public service, it’s just something you have to deal with. I think training on how to respond to those situations is needed, as well as reminding workers that it’s not something they need to put up with.  

Yes! Let us know easy scripts, ways to say no, have posted policies so we can throw the creeps out.

Library world isn’t any different than the rest of the world. Outside of the library building, but still on the clock, I’ve been physically and verbally harassed at ALA conferences. Including being picked up and carried around a bar by a library vendor during a library social event. The bar’s bouncer told the man to put me down, then he himself got really close to me and started saying how pretty I looked. This is one of the most frightening situations I’ve been in and now I avoid that vendor at every conference (and ignore online “networking” connections).

Yes. Too often librarians and other library staff have to be nice no matter what a patron, coworker or volunteer does to them. The expectation is that libraries are desperate for patrons and if we expect a high code of conduct and respect we’ll drive people away. Well, I think harassers and abusers should either get help or be driven away.

Our profession is made up of mostly women, however many times admin are men, who may not realize the extent of harassment faced daily. This needs to change. We can no longer boil down harassment to just a “quirk” of working with public.Good customer service is not an excuse for staff members to put up with abuse.  

I know there are many women who have experienced sexual harassment in the workplace by their co-workers. I also feel as though there is a weird misogyny in libraryland. It’s almost as if male librarians are seen as more competent or capable than their female counterparts (which might explain why they are disproportionately in leadership positions.) The harassment from men in the public also needs to be better addressed. It should be clear to the public that there is zero tolerance for inappropriate behavior, and employees should be given better training so they know how to handle those situations as they occur.

I think it’s an issue for many (if not all) service jobs. I feel like libraries may have it worse than other sectors because 1) those of us who are tax payer funded often hear “I pay your salary with my taxes” and patrons acts like this gives them extra entitlement to us 2) sexy librarian trope 3) we’re a mostly female work force.

As far as how/why we address this… Toxic masculinity and the the patriarchy are big factors that we alone can’t take on. They are big picture things to consider and address when and where we can (like I do with my teens). Male allies are important, and we’ll be hard pressed to do this without them. But. support from other women is vital. For example, the female supervisor I had who was skeptical to my reports. I felt her skepticism was due to my non traditionally attractive appearance and that I should be thankful for the attention. Now she never said this, but others have, and i have been made to feel that because of my appearance, I should be thankful when a man catcalls me, corners my, propositions me, etc. Then there’s also my another female supervisor I had to who told me I was flat wrong and being overly sensitive; she even made a comment about “stupid liberal millennials.” Women like this hurt us just as much as those who harass us in the first place.

So training not just to stop harassment, but to support those who have been harassed. In addition, supervisors, admin, etc. who have a zero tolerance policy and who will back their staff regardless of tax payer dollars.

All of this, of course, comes right back to where we started: why now? Why haven’t we had this discussion before? And why do we demand the work of doing better fall on the backs of victims, rather than start from the top?

Why is it we didn’t step up and support the women who have spoken up and out before? Are we lacking the tools or have we chosen being nice and quiet over lending a hand and speaking up and out?

It’s both.

The library world, despite how it’s depicted, is no different than the social world at large. If anything, it’s a microsocial world, featuring the best and the worst of culture at once. Knowing that and being empowered to work in and within that dynamic can and should be the start of building the skills and tools necessary to stay safe, stay strong, and stay connected to what’s going on.

And it can help ensure that those who do speak out find the support they deserve.



RESOURCES


There are no universal resources about sexual harassment available. The American Library Association has no policies nor no guidelines available to members about protecting themselves from sexual harassment in the library, either in the form of experiencing it from patrons or colleagues.

Instead, the resources being shared are, much like the whisper network, happening much more quietly, privately, and in rare cases, at local and regional conferences with materials not readily accessible to those not in attendance.

At this year’s American Library Association meeting in Chicago, Waukegan Public Library (and Book Riot contributor) Katie McLain and coworker Amanda Civitello presented on sexual harassment, offering both a definition of what it is, how it plays out in the library, and they put together a series of resources for helping get the discussion fired up at the library. You can read their slides and handouts here.

Although it’s not related to sexual harassment, Katie McBride — Book Riot contributing editor — recently wrote about security and violence in the public library. This piece, in conjunction with McLain’s work above, provide insights to help get the work started.

It’s also worth reading Melissa DeWitt’s take on sexual harassment in the public library from Hack Library School, along with the resources cited therein.



LOOKING AHEAD


Nothing will ever change how those who have spoken up against sexual harassment and assault have been treated in the past. Nothing will ever change how brave victims have been in doing what so few have had the power to do.

But we can use them as the spark that ignites the fire within the rest of us to do something and change the culture of sexual harassment in the library.

Because, as much as it shouldn’t be, the responsibility is upon each and every one of us to build a toolbox of responses and pull from it as necessary. To protect ourselves, to protect our colleagues, to protect other patrons, and to protect what it is that makes the library the special place that it is.

We can do better.

We can always do better.



+Women, of course, are not the only victims of sexual harassment. But for the sake of this piece, they are the focus, as they are so frequently the focus in society at large. For men and those of other genders who experience sexual harassment and violence, know that you are being heard, you are being seen, and you are being believed by me. You are not forgotten.

*Lisa Rabey shared the survey tied to this piece, and her tweets about it are well worth reading. I can only imagine what the recent discussions on such a broad level about sexual harassment and assault are bringing up for Rabey and de jesus.



Note from Dan Kleinman:

That's a good write up, mostly (like it leaves out how Sarah Houghton was part of Team Harpy and never apologized to the man even after his career was dashed).

But it does not address the main source of the problem, namely, American Library Association policy guidance many libraries follow that facilitates child p0rnography viewing in public libraries, thereby leaving unfettered access to the Internet.  If librarians will not address the problem of being misled by ALA into allowing p0rn viewing despite the law, then the sexual harassment problem will never go away.

Indeed, ALA says sexual harassment of librarians never happened and never will.  Nowhere does the author discuss any such denials by the very people mainly responsible for the problem.  Keeping blinders on only makes the problem continue unabated.

Sunday, January 8, 2017

The Dog Not Barking: Sexual Harassment of Librarians

I want my readers to understand the American Library Association [ALA] intentionally hides the dog not barking when it advises local communities, namely, the sexual harassment of librarians and library employees.  I provide as evidence a recent news story where ALA is misleading yet another community, potentially leaving its library employees and librarians to work in a sexually hostile work environment.  Instead of writing more, read the letter I am sending to the library, local government and local media:

sbrown2@townofchapelhill.org

mayorandcouncil@townofchapelhill.org; library@townofchapelhill.org; tgrubb@newsobserver.com; news@heraldsun.com

Dear Chapel Hill Public Library Director Susan Brown,

I’m Dan Kleinman of SafeLibraries and I have information for you, the library board, and the town council to consider regarding library Internet filters and how they are negatively portrayed by the American Library Association [ALA].  My opinion will be based on over a decade of my activity in this area and on the Durham Herald-Sun article entitled, “Chapel Hill Town Council to Ponder Online Filter at Library,” by Tammy Grubb, 7 January 2017 ( http://www.heraldsun.com/news/chapel-hill-town-council-to-ponder-online-filter-at-library/article_9e8aea20-d513-11e6-b7ed-0bbaff37e801.html ).  When linking to sources on my own publications, I merely provide a convenient means to present primary source material for your consideration, such as the video of a library employee speaking out about the sexual harassment she suffered as a result of the library’s adherence to ALA policy that allowed a hostile work environment instead of adhering to the law; management told her don’t let the door hit you on the way out if you don’t like it.

First, a member of the Federal Communications Commission [FCC] has said library Internet filters work well and libraries not using them should reconsider past decisions to not use them.  I have written about this here: “FCC: Library Filters Work, Having Them is a Community Decision, and Libraries Should Revisit CIPA Filters Due to Technological Advances” ( http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2014/08/visser.html ).

Second, former American Library Association President Carla Hayden, testifying before US Congress before being confirmed as Librarian of Congress, said filters work well and libraries should block Internet pornography.  I have written about this here:  “Librarian of Congress Nominee Carla Hayden Misleads Congress But Speaks Truth About Filtering” ( http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2016/05/carla-hayden.html ).

Third, even ALA leadership itself admitted library filters work well and no longer block “breast cancer,” for example, when forced into it by a National Public Radio [NPR] affiliate in response to a court deciding libraries need not unblock porn sites for patrons: “ALA Admits Library Filters Work; Barbara Jones Bursts Her Own Breast Cancer Bubble” ( http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2012/02/ala-admits-library-filters-work-barbara.html ).

This is remarkable as just a week before ALA wrote in the Huffington Post that filters block “breast cancer.”  Only when forced into it on an NPR affiliate did the truth come out.  This is a 100% turnaround in only a week, and it only came about only after ALA was publicly challenged.  This is an example of why ALA refuses to participate in any public challenges of its harmful policies (but is happy to have the media blindly repeat them).

Fourth, the US Supreme Court ruled against the American Library Association on the issue of library filters.  In 2003, US v. ALA held that there is no First Amendment protection for viewing Internet pornography in public libraries since libraries have traditionally blocked porn ( http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/539/194.html ).  ALA, having lost this case, misleads people by intentionally not talking about porn as US v. ALA did repeatedly but instead calling it “constitutionally protected material.” Yes, Internet porn is indeed constitutionally protected material, but SCOTUS ruled that is not the case in public libraries.  And notice in the Durham Herald-Sun article ALA is using this same deception to mislead your own community: “The American Library Association does not recommend Internet filters, saying they can block ‘constitutionally protected speech, including content on social networking and gaming sites, compromises First Amendment freedoms and the core values of librarianship.’”

Those “core values of librarianship” are not the core values of any community.  The “core values” include that it is “age” discrimination to keep children from reading any material whatsoever.  It’s in ALA’s so-called “Library Bill of Rights,” as if it were some kind of document of national importance.  Yet obviously communities think it perfectly appropriate to protect themselves including their children from inappropriate material.  As the Court in US v. ALA put it, “The interest in protecting young library users from material inappropriate for minors is legitimate, and even compelling, as all Members of the Court appear to agree” ( http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/539/194.html ).  So the “core values of librarianship” are not the core values of anyone else.

Fifth, ALA uses a disgraced expert to claim filters do not work.  It even touts a recent report it had drafted on the topic, but the author of that merely cited to the disgraced expert’s work.  This is of relevance since ALA is now misleading your community on this point.  As the Durham Herald-Sun article states, “The association notes the software can be unreliable, blocking too much or too little content, and letting experienced computer users circumvent the filters.”  That comes from the disgraced expert.  You see, her work was conducted many years ago, at a point when filters really did cause trouble.  But times have changed, as the FCC and the Librarian of Congress have noted.  The disgraced expert’s work has not been updated.

And I say disgraced because she is the only member of a three person team who did not apologize for making false claims of sexual harassment against a fellow librarian.  After a year and a half of harassment by those librarians, the man lost his career.  Two of the librarians admitted they lied and apologized, but ALA’s disgraced filtering expert never did, likely because that would call into question her false claims about library filtering, and she’s ALA’s one and only expert on the subject.  I have written about this here: “TeamHarpy Faked Sexual Harassment, Hurting True Efforts to Stop It” ( http://www.librarians.cc/2015/03/teamharpy-faked-sexual-harassment.html ); “RIP Nat Hentoff: He Exposed the Shame of the American Library Association” ( http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2017/01/rip-nat-hentoff.html ).

So, literally, ALA is misleading your community to think filters do not work based on old research by a woman who destroyed a man’s career with false claims of his being a “sexual predator.”

In a more insidious way of misleading your community, ALA is not advising your community that library filters have vastly improved and even the FCC and the Librarian of Congress now say so.

One can sense the reporter at the News & Observer could smell a rat since the next paragraph points to another library having no trouble at all with filters: “The Orange County Public Library hasn’t had any problems with its software, in place for several years, director Lucinda Munger said. The filters meet the minimum requirements, which can let offensive materials slip through, she said.”

Sixth, there is also the question of state law.  Does your state law punish obscenity?  Are libraries exempt?  Does your state law have an exemption from sexually hostile work environments for public libraries?  Does your state law allow for the creation of public libraries for anything whatsoever or for the use and benefit of the public? Internet pornography is neither for the use nor for the benefit of the public. Providing Internet porn in libraries, the natural result of having no filters, may violate state law.  A library may be autonomous, but only to act within the law, not to exceed it.

ALA has bullied its law-defying ways into many libraries.  Much harm has resulted from that, including the sexual harassment of librarians that ALA says never happened and never will.  I have written about this here: “Sexual Harassment of Librarians Never Happens; Child Pornography is Intellectual Freedom” ( http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2014/12/sexual-harassment-of-librarians.html ).

Indeed, ALA does not advise that a lack of Internet filtering can lead to legal actions against libraries and municipalities.  It’s like the dog not barking.  I would think knowing a lack of Internet filters may increase liability risks for taxpayers may be of interest to decision makers.  ALA is promoting its own policy by leaving out that libraries might be sued over sexual harassment caused by Internet porn-viewing patrons.  But such harassment occurs frequently and victims are often afraid to speak out.  Here’s a library employee/victim who spoke out, only after eight years after she quit, and I present video and a transcript: “Library Insider Linda Zec Gives Scoop on Porn in Libraries” ( http://www.librarians.cc/2015/01/linda-zec.html ).

Conversely, ALA advises that blocking Internet pornography might lead to a library/municipality being sued.  That has never happened and never will, precisely because SCOTUS ruled there’s no First Amendment right to Internet porn in public libraries, there’s no free speech right to Internet porn in public libraries.  When I made that statement in the Chicago Tribune, ALA piped up to say I was false, that libraries have been sued for blocking porn, and gave as an example a legal case that was about blocking LGBT material but not porn.  ALA literally lied to make that statement because the same ALA leader just a year and a half earlier made a different statement about the same case.  As this shows, ALA will intentionally mislead to convince people to think whatever it wants them to think.  I have written about this here: “ALA Admits Libraries Have Never Been Sued for Blocking Porn” ( http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2013/11/NeverBeenSued.html ); “ALA Misleads on Internet Pornography in Libraries” ( http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2013/11/ALAMisleads.html ).

So ALA advises libraries might be sued for blocking Internet porn, which will never happen, and leaves out that libraries and municipalities are indeed sued for failing to block Internet porn, thereby creating a hostile work environment.  It even scoffs at that idea after I forced it to discuss the issue, as I linked above.  Does anyone want to work in a hostile work environment that invites sexual harassment?  Yet ALA misleads communities into rationalizing why Internet filters should not be used in public libraries.  Do you want your community and your library employees, librarians, trustees, and patrons to be subjected to a sexually hostile work environment?  Of course not.

Hopefully the words of the FCC and the Librarian of Congress will guide you instead of the misleading diktat of the ALA that is in part derived from an outdated and disgraced expert who lied and thereby destroyed a man’s career.  Hopefully you’ll think about what I said and decide to comply with the law and community standards, let alone common sense, instead of with ALA’s intentionally deceptive diktat.

I’ll be happy to answer any questions, of course, from you or from those whom I have CC’d.  Feel free to write or call me at 973-610-8296.

Dan Kleinman


NOTE ADDED 25 JANUARY 2017:

The town voted down the filters claiming, falsely, that certain words will prevent finding medical information: "'Certain words can cause you not to see an entire website that might have medical or pertinent information that you're researching,' said Chapel Hill Mayor Pam Hemminger:
Well she's wrong, so I commented as follows:

"'Certain words can cause you not to see an entire website that might have medical or pertinent information that you're researching,' said Chapel Hill Mayor Pam Hemminger."

That is openly false and has been for years.

Any harm that results from unfiltered Internet computers, including s3xually harassed librarians and library employees, can now be laid directly at the feet of the Chapel Hill government. That government should then be sued, as others have, to the full extent of the law. That mayor should be sued personally as well.

Anyone reading this in the future needing help suing for damages, please contact me.

That lady should be thrown out of office at the next election and replaced with someone who will comply with the law, common sense, and community standards.

Evidence of community standards is as follows, a poll showing 84% favoring pornography filters:
I'm considering using FOIA to find out what led this awful government to do exactly what the ALA wanted instead of what the community wanted and what the law states.


NOTE ADDED 27 JANUARY 2017:

I have filed the following FOIA request:

Regarding the Mayor and others in the government who decided not to use Internet filters in the public library or who contributed in any way with the decision, I’ll call them “the government” either individually or as a group.  Media reported a decision was made by the government not to use Internet filters in the library, in part because words or phrases would cause the filters to block health information.  I’ll call that the “decision.”

This FOIA request seeks all communications in all formats (letters, emails, social media messages private and public, tweets, audio recordings, etc.) sent to the government and responses from the government that pertain to the decision, laws relating to public libraries, or any other topic related to the decision, including communications to/from the library director, anyone else locally, anyone else nationwide, any group such as the American Library Association, or any filtering supply company.  No one should be excluded.

Note this FOIA includes those CC’d and BCC’d on emails.  BBC is a convenience for the letter writer, not a means to evade FOIA.  Similarly, use of direct messages in social media is a convenience for the people involved, not a means to evade FOIA.

Note that where a distribution list is used that is under the control of the government, the individual addresses/emails/identities/names contained in that distribution list is also requested via this FOIA request, whether that distribution list is used in the TO, CC, or BCC section of the relevant document.

I also ask for all notes taken by the government as a result of reading or participating in the various communications, whether handwritten or electronically recorded, and for all written or verbal/audio directives to destroy such notes no matter who or what group made the directive.

I am not asking for attorney-client privileged information.

However, if a person is a lawyer, but no legitimate attorney-client relationship is present, then any FOIA response must include information from such a person.  I say this to be clear that communication cannot be withheld even if it comes from a lawyer, unless that lawyer is in a non-sham attorney-client relationship with the government.

If any information is withheld on the basis of attorney-client privilege, please identify the name and address of the person having entered any attorney-client relationship with the government.

Certainly the decision by the government was not made in a vacuum.  I know I, for example, sent you information on the issue.  I expect that to be including in the other information included in the FOIA response.  It’s only a single email from me and perhaps a tweet or two from @SafeLibraries so this should not be burdensome in the slightest.

The information returned under this FOIA will be published by me on SafeLibraries and/or on Sexual Harassment of Librarians after my investigation.  This is a matter of public importance and public safety, so please waive any fees.

I request that where possible the documents provided in response to the FOIA request be made available in PDF format, and all audio recordings be made in common audio formats such as MP3.  All should be provided as attachments to an email sent to SafeLibraries@gmail.com.

Thank you very much.

Tuesday, April 14, 2015

Another Librarian Speaks Out About Being Sexually Harassed

Another librarian speaks out about being sexually harassed (and the recent Team Harpy debacle), namely, well-liked, well-respected Meredith Farkas:
I’m disturbed by the fact that, after all of the petitions, and Facebook drama, and blog posts, and tweets about this no one seems to be talking about this (other than right-wing feminist-hating nut-jobs) since the lawsuit was settled and Lisa and nina published retractions.
.... 
Still the greatest tragedy here, in my opinion is that so many women suffer sexual harassment and most of the time the perpetrators get away with it.  And this whole sordid affair [#TeamHarpy] did little to help the cause of encouraging women to come forward.  I’ve been sexually harassed and stalked and never reported any of it.  But it was when a faculty member at a former job who used to stand too close to me and would put his arm around my waist sometimes later escalated to grabbing a colleagues breasts that I realized my silence was hurting other women.  Because men who do things like this don’t just do it once.  If they get away with something that you consider too minor to report, they may escalate to doing something much worse to someone else.  We have to find more ways to help women feel safe reporting harassment.  I’m happy that more conferences now have codes of conduct and discernible methods of reporting inappropriate behavior, and that will help, but it’s not enough. 

Exactly.  

Note Team Harpy member/treasurer Sarah Houghton has not yet retracted anything—likely since she is ALA's public library Internet filtering expert and doesn't want to be connected further to one of the biggest hoaxes in American librarianship history.

URL of this page:

Thursday, March 26, 2015

TeamHarpy Faked Sexual Harassment, Hurting True Efforts to Stop It

Three librarians worked together to lead an effort to smear another with false claims of sexual harassment.  Faking sexual harassment claims harms efforts to oppose true sexual harassment as much as faking censorship claims harms efforts to oppose true censorship. These three librarians are known as Team Harpy, and they have hurt opposition to sexual harassment.

Team Harpy comprises Lisa Rabey (@ByShieldMaiden), Nina de Jesus (@satifice), and, later, Sarah Houghton (The Librarian In Black, @TheLiB) pictured top right.  Ms. Houghton became the team treasurer of online collections.  "Sarah Houghton is running the legal defense fund for the sake of transparency and openness. (link)"  I believe she traveled to Canada to speak against Joe Murphy (@LibraryFuture), the victim of the fake, phoney, and fraudulent Team Harpy.

This kind of fakery harms true efforts to stop sexual harassment.  And I'm not the only one saying so:
I would also strongly advise against using this episode to proclaim that sexual harassment is not an issue within ALA.  Hopefully we as an organization can constructively address this issue though [sic] better documentation and dialog. - Daniel Cornwall, Alaska Chapter ALA Councilor
Correct, Mr. Cornwall, and that's why I started Librarians.cc and Library Journal has written about it (link).  I'm trying to build a repository of information.

Just look how bad this #TeamHarpy debacle is:
I made false and damaging comments about librarian Joe Murphy for which I would like to apologize. .... 
... I posted tweets that referenced librarian Joe Murphy implying without a basis in fact that he was a sexual predator.  These unsubstantiated statements gained wide attention and caused Mr. Murphy significant damage. 
My intention in posting these tweets was to draw attention to the issue of sexual harassment of female librarians in the profession.  My statements were made carelessly, and were not based on facts.  I have never observed Mr. Murphy sexually harass or exhibit sexually predatory behavior. .... 
I was ill prepared for the damaging impact that these unfair statements would have.  I wholly retract my statements and unreservedly apologize to Mr. Murphy for the significant damage I have caused to his personal and professional reputation. 
I strongly encourage those who aligned with #teamharpy and decided to attack Mr. Murphy to cease to continue to defame or disparage him. ....
That is by Lisa Rabey of Team Harpy.  I have to use ellipses since Ms. Rabey successfully forced me to censor out information on sexual harassment here.  Team Harpy apparently was always interested in themselves, not in stopping the sexual harassment of librarians.

What a disgrace.

Where does Joe Murphy go to get his reputation back (link)?

Even I became a target of Team Harpy's spin machine, e.g.:

Then both Joe Murphy and I got a threat:


Then the free speech librarians like Ingrid Henny Abrams (@MagpieLibrarian) sent out the message to #TeamHarpy to block me, complete with false claims of homophobia, and almost 100 have, all because I drew parallels to my being sued for defamation for exposing Gay Hate @ Your Library (link):


And Team Harpy member Sarah Houghton?  She is ALA's top Internet filtering expert.  She says Internet filters do not work even though everyone knows they work really well now (link).  ALA just published a heavily-promoted report on ten years since CIPA called, "Fencing Out Knowledge: Impacts of CIPA 10 Years Later (link)," and how filters do not work, all based on Team Harpy member Sarah Houghton's research, if you look in the footnotes.  And now Sarah Houghton is a proven faker.  I've always said that report was false as it was based on Sarah Houghton's outdated findings.  I could never have imagined the extent of the fakery.  And yes, Team Harpy's Sarah Houghton is also helping to fund the defamation suit against me.  So while complaining about a supposed SLAPP suit against her Team Harpy members, Sarah Houghton's funding a SLAPP suit against me (link).

Anyway, I am trying to help sexually harassed librarians and I am asking people not to be discouraged by Team Harpy's fakery.  Please contact me if you need help or if you want to write anonymously here at Librarians.cc.

And I see readers of #GamerGate are interested in what I'm writing.  Welcome.

NOTE ADDED 28 MARCH 2015:

This story has gone international.  See:
I commented there as follows:
Missing from this story is the third member of TeamHarpy, Sarah Houghton, calling herself the "Librarian in Black." Interestingly, the Librarian in Black got involved in this matter to the point of essentially becoming part of TeamHarpy. And we know what happened to TeamHarpy.  And the Librarian in Black is the American Library Association’s [ALA] leading expert on library filtering software and she says filters don't work and should not be used.  And your local library might not use filters as a direct result of this proven liar's false claims.  
This intentional destruction of a man's career over false allegations for a year is in part the Librarian in Black's doing. It was all false. That has got to be very bad for Librarian in Black's credibility. And she's ALA's leading expert saying library filters do not work. That has got to be very bad for ALA's credibility.  
They can spin it all they want but if this were a court of law opposing counsel would tear her to pieces. I know, I've investigated experts myself and they lost all credibility as a result of what I uncovered.  
Of course library media will do all they can to ignore how ALA's filtering expert has completely destroyed her credibility. I mean this is a national story now, this TeamHarpy debacle.  
What a complete debacle.  
When ALA is on your local library, in its anything-goes policy based on ALA's “Library Bill of Rights,” now you know ALA’s top expert supporting the claim that library filters do no work is one of the TeamHarpy liars who destroyed a man’s career. They lied there and they are lying about filters not working when everyone now knows they work well. See “FCC: Filters Work, Communities Should Decide, Libraries Should Revisit CIPA” http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2014/08/visser.html  
Don’t let a TeamHarpy liar influence your public library’s following the law by filtering out p0rn, since libraries are for the use and benefit of the community by law, and that precludes p0rn, no matter what ALA and its TeamHarpy liar-expert says.  
My opinion, of course.  I have to say that so I don't get sued by the self-arrogated free speech police, again.  Contact me for help cleaning out the p0rn from your local library.


URL of this opinion: