I agree. I sent this on Saturday but it did not seem to go through, so I will resend here: Kelsey, you say: "Particularly, tenet six refers to avoiding the advancement of private interests at the expense of library users and colleagues. I understand that some people believe in the type of activism inferred in the new ethic. However, this may not be the case for all employees or all library users. " Dismantling systems and confronting biases that have historically and continue to disadvantage minority groups (LGBTQIA+ and BIPIOC in particular) are not "private interests" - they are actions that must be taken to ensure that all have equal access to information and resources. Just because this has not happened at your library does not mean the occupation as a whole has not been guilty of this historically. This is about correcting the path and moving forward in the right direction. How would this be "at the expense" of other library users? If we, as a profession, are truly treating everyone equally and with respect as you seem to claim, how does this change anything? Why does confronting racism, sexism, homophobia and other systems of oppression that are so engrained in our history as a nation AND continue to this day make so many uncomfortable, if not that it would mean something in the individual or the group's behavior must change? It's worth some introspection. Amber McLain Library Director, Patmos Library (she/hers/hers) ----- Original Message ----- From: Jennifer Noble via Michlib-l <michlib-l@mcls.org> To: krboldt@uproc.lib.mi.us Cc: Michlib <michlib-l@mcls.org> Sent: Fri, 06 Aug 2021 18:40:32 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [Michlib-l] New equity and social justice principle added to ALA Code of Ethics Respectfully, I don't think the new entry in the Code of Ethics is "vastly different" to the previous eight, nor should it drastically impact any service we provide that has been covered by the previous tenets. Here is the much-discussed last sentence, copied directly from the ALA website: We work to recognize and dismantle systemic and individual biases; to confront inequity and oppression; to enhance diversity and inclusion; and to advance racial and social justice in our libraries, communities, profession, and associations through awareness, advocacy, education, collaboration, services, and allocation of resources and spaces. Biases and equity are named explicitly in tenet 1. The rights of our colleagues, who we know are not all straight and white, to employment that protects their welfare are supported explicitly in tenet 5. We have theoretically already been activists under these existing tenets. What exactly is the problem with reiterating our support for unbiased information, equitable access, and inclusive spaces for our colleagues and communities here? What exact phrases are opponents of this tenet so uncomfortable with? I realize people may not be comfortable stating for the record which phrases make them uneasy. I only ask that you (if you are one of those people) unpack that uneasiness within yourself, even if you don't want to share it here. Talking about racism/sexism/homophobia/etc is not part of the problem. It's the first step to finally eliminating these evils. Jennifer Noble Adult & Teen Services Librarian Adrian District Library On Fri, Aug 6, 2021, 4:59 PM Kelsey Boldt via Michlib-l <michlib-l@mcls.org> wrote:
Hello,
I'd like to just throw my two cents in because I've been following this thread with great interest.
I tend to agree with our colleagues Karyn, Matt, Jennifer, and Kat on the addition of the ninth tenet in the ALA code of ethics. In particular, I agree with Matt that the tone of the last sentence of the new addition is vastly different than the the previous eight. It implies the need for certain types of activism in the workplace that directly impacts carrying out many of the other tenets. Particularly, tenet six refers to avoiding the advancement of private interests at the expense of library users and colleagues. I understand that some people believe in the type of activism inferred in the new ethic. However, this may not be the case for all employees or all library users. I like the simplicity of the previous codes so that any and all viewpoints can be expressed by staff and users alike.
What's more, the first sentence, to my mind, is redundant. The first, third, fifth tenets directly reference providing unbiased and respectful service to all library users and colleagues - which I would argue inherently affirms a person's dignity and rights.
This is why I believe the ninth tenet is rendered unnecessary. I can't speak to the history of the established code of ethics of the ALA and whether or not we have adhered to them as an industry with the honesty and respect claimed, but I think the first eight tenets listed in the ALA code of ethics are worthy of striving toward. Righting the wrongs of the past require us to live up to the lofty goals we've set for ourselves rather than create new language to speak directly to the issues of the current day.
I dislike the feeling of being misunderstood, and I think that is what has compelled me to add to this thread. I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I think generally that anyone who is against the addition to the ALA code of ethics is not against equality, subliminally or blatantly. I think we are against the notion that we need new language to complicate the first eight tenets of the ALA code of ethics.
Some of the less respectful comments in this thread are, I believe, exactly why these sorts of threads materialize and why people feel they need to make strong public declarations as opposed to have reasonable and malleable discussions. I'd love to have the discussion though. I'd really love to hear from those who like the new addition. Would you share practices that you have implemented or plan to implement in order to support the ninth code? I understand the ALA cannot do so, but perhaps getting a sense of what this code would look like in practice might help me to better understand or even change my mind.
I'd like to add that I have yet to work with anyone who does not treat people with kindness and respect. I have yet to meet a fellow colleague outside of our little library who does not do the same. I rarely meet patrons who do not also strive to treat staff and fellow patrons with respect as well. With that said, I am not trying to imply that there is never room for improvement or that just because something hasn't happened to me or in front of me that it doesn't happen.
I'd like to end just by saying that, regardless of whether we agree or not on the issues brought up in this thread, I think discussion is healthy and my assumption, until proven wrong, is that the people I work alongside in this industry are professionals who care deeply about the communities they serve. And I have yet to be proven wrong.
Thanks so much and have a great weekend,
Kelsey Boldt Assistant Librarian Ishpeming Carnegie Public Library 317 N. Main St. Ishpeming, MI 49849
_______________________________________________ Michlib-l mailing list Michlib-l@mcls.org https://mail3.mcls.org/mailman/listinfo/michlib-l