WTFlorida? Brevard County Libraries Remove 19 Copies of 50 Shades from Circulation

Bitchin' Blog Posts

by SB Sarah | by SB Sarah | May 14, 2012 | Monday at 2:04 pm | 75 Comments

Image: Censorship definition crossed out in dictionary page, Image courtesy of BigStock.com WTFery of the morning, as reported by Dianna Dilworth on GalleyCat: Brevard County Public Libraries in Florida have pulled their 19 copies of 50 Shades of Grey from the shelves.

Why?

HuffPo has a quote from Don Walker, a spokesman for the library, who said, "it's semi-porgnographic." The HuffPo article indicated that several other libraries in Florida had refused to purchase copies, but Brevard bought 19, then took them out of circulation, sending notices to the 200 or so people on a waiting list.

Library services director Cathy Schweinsberg told Florida Today: Nobody asked us to take it off the shelves. But we bought some copies before we realized what it was. We looked at it, because it’s been called ‘mommy porn’ and ‘soft porn.’ We don’t collect porn.”

Brevard County Public Libraries don't collect porn. But since there's no established definition of what porn is, particularly for a library, I took a closer look at their collection to ascertain the items within their collection that I knew included sexually explicit depictions.

They have over 150 different Longarm novels, and a rather healthy collection of romances, including titles by Lora Leigh, Laurell K. Hamilton, Joey W. Hill, and Emma Holly.

So how does 50 Shades of Grey qualify as porn, while those works do not?

Your guess is as good as mine.

There's a petition online featuring plenty of irritated folks telling the library not to censor what their patrons read, but if you'd like to write a letter to the Brevard County Library Director, Cathy Schweinsberg, her address is:

Cathy Schweinsberg
Library Services Director
Brevard County Public Library
308 Forrest Ave.
Cocoa, FL 32922

Or you can email her at cschweinsberg@brev.org. There's additional contact information for Ms. Schweinsberg and for the library administration at their Contact page.

I don't know if any reasoned argument can sway the decision, but if you do write, please keep the argument reasonable and not attackernating, as tempting as it may be to say, 'OH COME ON NOW.' This is the letter I've sent her:

Dear Ms. Schweinsberg:

I'm writing in regards to your decision to remove 50 Shades of Grey by EL James from your circulating collection on the grounds that it is "porn."

I am not a resident of Florida, but many, many women I know are, and we are all avid readers of romance. The danger in removing one book on the grounds that it is 'porn' is that you have not defined what it is that constitutes pornography. Is it because this book features scenes that are labeled as BDSM? Your library carries Exit to Eden by Anne Rice, which also features BDSM, as well as several other works by writers of erotic romantic fiction that include bondage and domination scenes.

Is it that 50 Shades of Grey features explicit sexuality? Many other books do as well, and not just romance. For example, I examined your catalog and found over 160 different books in the Longarm series. Are you familiar at all with Longarm? It's a popular western series known for extremely graphic descriptions of sex and violence. Here is a sampling of scenes from Longarm books:

"Longarm was able to enjoy Ramona longer, and wilder, as Carlota cuddled close to kiss Ramona passionately on the mouth and finger Longarm's ass as he long-donged her sister."

- Longarm and the Deadly Dead Man
Located in your South Mainland Branch, currently checked out

"Longarm paid no attention to her giggling. He concentrated instead on feeling of sliding inside that sweet pussy and out again."

- Longarm and the One-Armed Bandit
Located in your Titusville Branch, currently on shelf

I apologize for the frank and explicit nature of the excerpts included, but if you are going to remove a book based on it being "porn," I wanted to make sure you were fully cognizant of the sexual content of several hundred other books in the Brevard County collection. If 50 Shades of Grey is porn, I'd posit that the Longarm series qualifies as well, though I remain unsure as to the specifics of your definitions.

Because 50 Shades of Grey is no more or less explicit than many other books in your collection, I conclude that pulling 50 Shades of Grey from circulation in your library is censorship. Worse, it is censorship based on an arbitrary and ill-fitting definition of pornography.

The fact that you carry books in your collection which are equally as sexually explicit means that you've removed 50 Shades of Grey on an inaccurate, ignorant, and ill-defined basis. If you're going to exclude all books with sexual content, you're going to remove many romances, works of literary fiction, and some mysteries and thrillers from your collection as well, to say nothing of Lady Chatterley's Lover and similar classics. If 50 Shades of Grey is pornography, then any book featuring sexual content may qualify. That might be more than half your circulating collection.

It should not matter what is in the books in your library. Neither censoring nor defining pornography are part of the job of a library, nor is it the responsibility of a library director to define what is and is not pornography, and to remove books that patrons have asked for. My understanding is that your job is to carry the books that your patrons are interested in reading, and to do so without judgment. I know there is a petition online regarding this matter already, with over 1500 signatures, my own among them.

Please reconsider your decision to remove 50 Shades of Grey from circulation. It was certainly not my favorite book that I've read, but I will defend the right of any person who wishes to read it, in your library, or anywhere else.

Thank you for your time,

Sarah Wendell

Thanks to BigStock for the censorship image.

Filed: General Bitching, Ranty McRant

Tagged: wtfery, make the burning stop, fifty shades of grey, censorship, brevard county public libraries, asshattery

| |

CarrieS said on 05.14.12 at 02:21 PM • [link]

AAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH
shiloh walker said on 05.14.12 at 02:22 PM • [link]

Oh, good grief. That longarm thing skates by but not 50? I haven’t even read the 50 books, and don’t plan to, but thuis is just stupid. People reacting to public outcry.

(O.o that never happens, does it…)
Tracy Faul said on 05.14.12 at 02:27 PM • [link]

I suspect it’s been removed solely due to that detestable phrase, “Mommy Porn.” It’s like an invitation to censorship.
Theresa Meyers said on 05.14.12 at 02:31 PM • [link]

Oh, by all means, let’s remove anything that’s labeled by popular culture as “porn”. Um…that leaves us a couple of non-ficiton books in circulation…and um, well maybe Ladie’s Home Journal.

So freakin’ annoying.

And I think your letter was right on the mark. If their patrons (who are paying with their damn taxes to have the library open) want the book, then they should circulate it. Stop worrying about censoring content based on a few freakish folks who are determined to legislate morality for every one else. Because that worked so well for prohibition, didn’t it?
MelanieRMeadors said on 05.14.12 at 02:34 PM • [link]

I wasn’t really planning on reading the 50 shades books, but I certainly would not say that other people should not be able to read them. Knowing how ignorant some people are, by pointing out other “pornographic” books, all they will do is take those books off the shelves as well. They’ll end up with an empty library. Let’s let people be big enough to decide FOR THEMSELVES what they should and should not read.
Sarah Schroeder said on 05.14.12 at 02:44 PM • [link]

Since this WHOLE LongArm/50 shade of grey thing has come up… I keep thinking of this one LongArm cover that came out like 20 years ago (argh…showing my age) where he is NAKED - up… NAKED… running across the cover with only a well place thigh covering his throbbing member. I’m trying to find the cover!
Laurie Evans said on 05.14.12 at 02:50 PM • [link]

Sigh… I dislike when libraries do things like this.
Julieinduvall said on 05.14.12 at 02:57 PM • [link]

Hey, Brevard County Public Library, it’s a slippery slope. If you’re removing one title because it’s “pornography”, you’re going to have to remove every other volume in your library that fits your library services director’s description. One of those titles is the Bible. Perhaps you might review Song of Solomon.

Have fun with that!
HollyY said on 05.14.12 at 02:59 PM • [link]

Great post and excellent letter. I signed the change.org petition. I’m a librarian and censoring the collection in this way just sucks. It’s definitely NOT in keeping with intellectual freedom as advocated by ALA.
Kim said on 05.14.12 at 03:12 PM • [link]

Well, a lot of public libraries didn’t even buy it because of its content. I’m a librarian, and in my discussions with a librarian who is head of collection development at a major city library, said she would not buy it because it is “mommy porn.” So, if it is censorship on the front end is it ok?

However, the academic library where I work, rented it for our popular reading collection.

This issue is interesting to me, because I select books in the fields of Philosophy and Religious Studies. I always think about what I pick very carefully. I try to make sure I select titles that will be used and fit my academic criteria, or make for a well-rounded collection. I might buy a book that is more popular than academic, but I wouldn’t even consider revisionist material by Newt Gingrich. Does that make me prejudiced against Newt Gingrich? Or am I just committed to what I consider academic integrity and peer review.

I hate censorship, but it happens all around us. Usually books are not added to a collection only to be removed, but tons of books aren’t selected to begin with. Is it censorship to not buy the book because it has been branded as “mommy porn.” It may be in their collection development policy to not buy porn, but what happens to the porn that slips in?

I should get back to work…I am putting-off writing meeting minutes. :(
Lynnd said on 05.14.12 at 03:15 PM • [link]

and don’t forget the incest in Genesis with Lot and his daughters…

Then there is Lolita and Fanny Hill. Yup, slippery slope.
Ridley said on 05.14.12 at 03:32 PM • [link]

Maybe Brevard County readers will read a good book instead.
Darlynne said on 05.14.12 at 03:44 PM • [link]

Sarah, your letter was perfect. No one at that library will be able to duck and cover with Longarm sliding in and out.
CMM said on 05.14.12 at 04:07 PM • [link]

I too am a public librarian and am shocked that my colleagues in Florida would remove 50 Shades from their shelves. It goes against all the tenets of librarianship. If this subject matter does not interest you, simply do not check it out. What I find even more disturbing is that people are not protesting The Hunger Games, with children killing children in a survival game but are protesting 50 Shades where adults are having consensual sex. What is wrong with this picture? Live and let live; choose your own subject matter which should ALL be available at your local public library.
Guest said on 05.14.12 at 04:23 PM • [link]

It’s so sad when libraries make reflexive, fear-based decisions before any challenges have even been made! As a librarian, I understand the desire to avoid trouble—controversy distracts from the good work we do and we’re always fighting for funding as it is—but it’s our job to a) have standards and policies in place that determine what we purchase b) do our research and know what we’re buying and c) represent a wide variety of interests and viewpoints. This library clearly failed on all counts! Anyone who bothered to flip through 50 Shades would see that it’s no more explicit than the erotic romances most librarians already have on their shelves. I work in a library system where there’s a battle going on over erotica in our e-book collection—luckily, we have enough librarians who truly believe in the freedom to read!
Darlene Marshall said on 05.14.12 at 04:26 PM • [link]

When I see crap like this I always feel like I ought to be apologizing for the State of Florida (something I seem to do all too often). I would like to give props to the Alachua County (Florida) Library District which has 50 Shades along with a lot of other books, and takes a general attitude of “Let the readers decide what they want to read”. I should add I’m on the board of the ACLD Foundation, because we believe supplemental funding will help keep our library strong when the barbarians are hammering at the gates.
katherinelynn_04 said on 05.14.12 at 04:37 PM • [link]

Well put, Sarah! I haven’t felt a need to read 50 Shades, but I am all for allowing people to do so. It’s one thing to choose not to buy the book (libraries do have a limited budget), but to REMOVE them once purchased? That seems wasteful, and if I were a patron I would complain.

And we shall not get into how stabby I get when I read/hear the phrase ‘mommy porn’. It does something to my head and I am filled with unspeakable rage.

(on a completely separate point, I was watching Dateline on Friday and the story was about the Bashara case. If you’re not familiar with it, Bob Bashara’s wife was murdered in Detroit under suspicious circumstances and Bashara is a suspect. A sex dungeon was found for his BDSM fetish during the investigation. But the post-commercial blurbs kept saying things along the line of ‘a story straight out of ‘50 Shades…’ It drove me NUTS)
Suzanne Schultz Pick said on 05.14.12 at 04:37 PM • [link]

This isn’t shocking for Brevard Co. They get complains by parents for allowing kids to check out any book they want. They had to go as far as to have release forms for parents, allowing kids to check out R rated movies or books of racy topics. I’m sure it’s because this is so popular (whereas the romance books mentioned tend to be for patrons of a certain age.) It’s not right, but it happens.
azteclady1 said on 05.14.12 at 05:20 PM • [link]

I brought this up last week over at Karen’s—though I didn’t go as far as checking out the library’s collection, I’m not surprised that there are other titles with more…questionable content there (Longarm, really?)

From where I sit, the problem there is with a) the popularity of the book and b) the attendant outcry over “mommy porn.”

As long as there was no fanfare or public attention called to those erotic romances, all was well—but dog forbid anyone thinks that public money is spent on “mommy porn.”
Bnbsrose said on 05.14.12 at 05:31 PM • [link]

The difference? Nobody is on the news is taking about M/M/F scenes in Emma Holly’s books, or buttfucking in Lora Leigh’s, or BDSM in Anne Rice’s. I mean it’s not like those catalogs the collection buyers get tell them anything at all about the contents of the book, right? Of course, now that you’ve pointed out, there’ll be some big bonfires in old Brevard County tonight. Except for the 160 various Longarm books. They’re written for men, so it’s O.K. It’s only us little wimmen who need to be protected from the nasty sex.
Oh, and in the current economy, when library budgets, and libraries themselves, are getting cut right and left, how do you justify the expense of buying NINETEEN copies of a book and then taking them out of circulation?
KenHoughton said on 05.14.12 at 05:32 PM • [link]

“They have over 150 different Longarm novels, and a rather healthy collection of romances, including titles by Lora Leigh, Laurell K. Hamilton, Joey W. Hill, and Emma Holly.

So how does 50 Shades of Grey qualify as porn, while those works do not?”

The others can write their way out of a paper bag?
Noelle Pierce said on 05.14.12 at 06:17 PM • [link]

Thank you for your well-articulated letter! The fact that anyone would censor a book based on a poorly-coined phrase (coined by the media, no less), enrages me. I haven’t read 50 Shades, and I’m not sure I ever will, given the two excerpts I read (the “Tampon Scene” being one. *shudder*), but I *do* read books featuring BDSM and non-BDSM erotica. And I enjoy them, “mommy porn” or not. (I cringed typing that just now. I *hate* that phrase, but whatever).

This reminds me of when our libraries were urged to remove Harry Potter on the basis that it “encouraged witchcraft,” which, of course, meant Satan worship. Grrrr.
Susan said on 05.14.12 at 06:47 PM • [link]

I have no desire to read 50 Shades—in fact, I don’t think I’d read it if you paid me by the word—but this is ridiculous. Libraries all across the country are hurting and they won’t take the opportunity to get people thru the doors by stocking a top-selling novel? The patronizing, belittling moniker of “mommy porn” was definitely the killer here, while boatloads of other stuff with mature content (sex and violence) made it to the shelves.

Oh, and let’s not try to justify excluding the book based on the quality (or lack thereof) of the writing. If that’s going to be the yardstick, darn few books—including those of other popular, bestselling authors—wouldn’t make the cut. Sure, let libraries debate the literary merit of all their acquisitions and then see how empty those buildings would become.
Cris said on 05.14.12 at 06:56 PM • [link]

If they’re going to remove it, they should do it because it’s shite (I read all 3 so a friend could have someone to discuss them with and will, sadly, never get those brain cells back), not because it’s “porn”. It’s not… in fact, it’s not even that hot or explicit. Also, the term “mommy porn” is completely idiotic, and whoever coined it should be shot in the arse.

But the point is, they shouldn’t be censoring anything—either on the front end (i.e. deciding not to buy it because it’s dubbed “porn”) or retroactively because a bunch of staunch conservatives got their knickers in a wad. You Americans have such baffling & puritanical attitudes toward sex… Europe hasn’t collapsed due to debauchery spawned by lax attitudes toward sex! (The economy is a whole other story, however, :P)

I’m so glad I’m presently in a state whose libraries have both the 50 Shades trilogy, and a healthy romance & erotica collection (albeit, apparently, no Longarm that shows up in the catalogue). Very well-articulated letter.
Beth A said on 05.14.12 at 07:30 PM • [link]

Speaking as a librarian, this really irks me. The only thing I hated more than having to by 30-some-odd copies of the 50 Shades books (which were awful reads btw) is having every third romance reader compare Christian to Heathcliff from Wuthering Heights. Just the same, I would never tell patrons what they can or can’t have access to. Never!
Ladyof Lostshadows said on 05.14.12 at 07:40 PM • [link]

In the current age of tight budgets, I call bullshit on them not knowing what a book they ordered 19 copies of was about before they placed the order.
Susan said on 05.14.12 at 07:54 PM • [link]

“You Americans have such baffling & puritanical attitudes toward sex… “

Love the broad brush here.
Unimaginative said on 05.14.12 at 08:46 PM • [link]

Damn it! The absolute worst thing about this is that we’re now having to defend a book that many of us hate, and it’s getting even more freaking media attention, and will probably boost more sales. Why, if they have to stir up a controversy, can’t they do it for an underrated book that needs more attention? Grrrrrrrrrrr.
Amber said on 05.14.12 at 09:14 PM • [link]

The letter was perfect. And it brought the phrase “as he longdonged her sister” into my life, over which I can’t stop giggling.
asianromance said on 05.14.12 at 10:16 PM • [link]

As a librarian, my coworkers and I tend to add books to the acquisitions list after reading reviews about them or receiving recommendations from our community. These librarians either 1. lazed on the job and ordered something they just heard was popular without reading reviews about it or 2. received numerous requests for it and so, they bought 19 copies of it. However, a few naysayers with sticks up their butt are complaining very loudly about the “pornographic” content.

I bet this censorship wouldn’t have happened if the book was written by a man…
LAG said on 05.14.12 at 10:37 PM • [link]

Loved the letter. I’ve been lurking here for quite awhile, but felt I needed to add my 2 cents. I’m a member of my small town public library board of trustees (small town of fewer than 1,000, VERY rural and conservative). The question of whether to purchase the three 50 Shades… books came up at my board of trustees meeting last week when our librarian said she had received several requests from community members to purchase them. Note she was NOT asking the board for permission to purchase (after all, the board pays her to make collection development decisions) but she was giving the board a “heads up” in case complaints start coming in about the purchase. Our board was totally behind the decision to purchase (although we did have to explain to one of our newest members what the trilogy is about) because it is not our job to decide what an individual may or may not choose to read. We do have a pretty strong collection development policy and reconsideration of materials policy in hand and are prepared to point any people with questions in that direction. And yes, we do also have a few books in the collection that are on the more explicit side (no Longarm, though). Bottom line, we have members in our community who want to read these books. It is our job to provide what the community wants to the best of our ability (and as our budget allows).

Does this library have a board that oversees its operations? Maybe those who use this library could attend the board’s next meeting and voice their concerns about the purchase and subsequent withdrawal of the title. I briefly looked at the library’s policies that were posted online, but did not see anything about collection development or material reconsideration.

BTW, in my breadwinning job I am the interlibrary loan manager for a small academic library. Some of the things that I’ve seen people request over the years make 50 Shades seem pretty mainstream—just sayin’.
LG said on 05.14.12 at 10:46 PM • [link]

Whenever I read about stuff like this, I like to play “Find the hypocrisy.” The best example of something I found in their catalog that would make Don Walker have a meltdown is Wild Rock, which I affectionately think of as the “caveman sex” manga. The story, if I remember correctly: the son of the head of one tribe dresses as a girl in the hopes of attracting the interest of the son of the head of the other tribe, so that they can form an alliance or something. They fall in love, and the guy who dressed as a girl feels guilty, but I think the other guy knew all along he was really a guy. Anyway, it’s all an excuse for graphic on-page sex. This manga, by the way, can be found in their YA section, because I think that’s where they shelve all their manga. And they have problems with 50 Shades because it’s “semi-pornographic”? Really?
MeghanPA said on 05.15.12 at 07:12 AM • [link]

The fight against censorship applies to all books, not just these. Someone mentioned Hunger Games like it a new concept (read deeper into it), didn’t we all read Lord of the Flies - i found that much more disturbing. Reading is like TV. No one forces a channel on you, no one shoves the remote in your hand. If you don’t want to read a book, DON’T, and don’t tell me that i can’t have my books whether violent, sappy, or erotic. You run the risk - what with the supposed separation of church and state in this country - of having to remove Bibles, Korans, Talmuds and all other scripture from the library because it may be deemed as “offensive”. Don’t these people have enough to do in their lives than worry about what I’m reading?
Sheryl Nantus said on 05.15.12 at 08:41 AM • [link]

Someone approved that purchase order… and they didn’t know what they were buying?

I don’t think so… probably some nitwit whined and now it’s a Big Thing.

Idiots.
Flo_over said on 05.15.12 at 09:22 AM • [link]

If it’s perfectly OK for a library patron to look up porn (VISUAL AUDITORY ANYONE WALKING BY CAN SEE IT AND EEWWW!) on the library computers then it should be perfectly acceptable for the library to pander to porn in their books.

Personally, I thought the 50 books were trash. Not only were they terribly written but the themes and characterizations were dreck as well. But if libraries were to take out all books that were poorly written… well there would be far fewer books to borrow.
Heather said on 05.15.12 at 09:49 AM • [link]

If you really want to be a crankypants, send a copy of your letter to the Board President, as well.
NatashaB said on 05.15.12 at 10:02 AM • [link]

Oh My God. I didnt know there was sex in Longarm books. I bought my 85 year old father inlaw about 10 of them at Xmas. He asked if there were anymore the other day!!
Lynn S. said on 05.15.12 at 10:27 AM • [link]

Oh, the turmoil. I can’t help wondering if they have Time magazine in their periodical department.
Smelly Pugsley said on 05.15.12 at 11:23 AM • [link]

NatashaB: You just made me spray coffee all over my PC, and now I can’t stop crying!!
Heather said on 05.15.12 at 11:30 AM • [link]

To clarify: writing to the Board president is a good thing, because you’re going over her head to complain to the people who are HER boss, and express dissatisfaction.

Also, in a more positive spin, we should also consider writing to our libraries that ARE stocking the book, to express our appreciation at their meeting our needs.
MissB2U said on 05.15.12 at 11:38 AM • [link]

Natasha - He probably thinks you’re the bestest daughter-in-law ever! I say chin up a brazen it out. And buy him some more books!
BrooklynShoeBabe said on 05.15.12 at 11:45 AM • [link]

‘OH COME ON NOW.’

LOL. I have to say that is my reaction to everything nowadays from the Trayvon Martin killing to the anti-gay marriage vote in North Carolina to the weather in NYC. I’m generally just frustrated, annoyed, and other feelings like that. So, I think I’m just going to sign the petition. As a public librarian, I’m just offended by the banning of 50 Shades of Grey. It’s not like it is a BDSM novel involving 5 year olds. *thppt*
BrooklynShoeBabe said on 05.15.12 at 11:54 AM • [link]

Most of us are not like this! Here is the American Library Association’s Library Bill of Rights, which most of us generally subscribe to.

The American Library Association affirms that all libraries are forums for information and ideas, and that the following basic policies should guide their services.

I. Books and other library resources should be provided for the interest, information, and enlightenment of all people of the community the library serves. Materials should not be excluded because of the origin, background, or views of those contributing to their creation.

II. Libraries should provide materials and information presenting all points of view on current and historical issues. Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval.

III. Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment.
NatashaB said on 05.15.12 at 12:56 PM • [link]

Its just now I know why he is so keen on them. Anna my MIL told me several times that she found Mick was up in the middle of the night in the sitting room reading the books over and over (apparently he couldnt sleep). She would have kittens if she knew what he was at.
JimLynch said on 05.15.12 at 01:30 PM • [link]

And three states are either banning 50 SHADES from their libraries or removing the existing copies from their shelves. Because, y’know, nothing decreases interest in a very sexual book than making it a banned book…
Indiaedghill said on 05.15.12 at 01:38 PM • [link]

I’m a librarian. I tried 50 Shades and found it to be about the worst-written, most boring book I ever read. HOWEVER, that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be in public libraries, because if only books =I= thought were terrific were in the libraries, it would be a pretty boring collection for huge numbers of OTHER people. The Florida library could make a decision not to BUY the book for the collection, but pulling it AFTER it was in the collection was mindbogglingly stupid, as well as in clear violation of the ALA guidelines. But just think: now people who’d managed never to hear about the book will be pantingly eager to read it!
Khenta said on 05.15.12 at 01:51 PM • [link]

“Mommy porn”? ORLY? So it would be okay if it was “daddy porn”, huh? Wtf… O_o
Kim said on 05.15.12 at 01:56 PM • [link]

I want to make sure everyone knows that I am in no defending what this library did. However, I think there are some misconceptions flying around about libraries and the role of a librarian.

Libraries are super strapped for cash and personnel is the biggest expense, not materials. Therefore, a lot of libraries (though not all) implement automatic purchasing plans to cut the pricey process of professional selection. Many libraries have as policy to purchase all NY Times Bestsellers. The concept that a library is reviewing every title is antiquated. It is MUCH cheaper for a library to spend less time selecting than saving money on not purchasing individual books. I just want to make it clear, that little review is not laziness, it is mostly due to lack of funding for professional staff and the way in which many libraries operate.

So, to claim that librarians should know about every book added to the collection is antiquated. People are expensive. Books are cheap. Most demands on libraries are to provide the same amount of service at a lower cost. Collection budgets have been slashed, but personnel budgets have been destroyed in many areas.

Please think about the strains on little budgets and on librarians in general before claiming that not reviewing a book makes the librarian lazy. What Brevard County did is wrong, but it is pertinent to understand the way in which libraries operate.

BTW, “mommy porn” just smacks of sexism.
ReadingPenguin said on 05.15.12 at 02:16 PM • [link]

I’m going to say it again: what is wrong with porn? No, really? Okay, I get that a library might not want to intentionally start a porn collection, but what’s with the harm in a few sexy books?

I know where the 50 Shades squeamishness is coming from, though. My future mother-in-law recently asked me if I had read it, which I have not. She looked at me and very sincerely told me that she heard it had SEX in it, and it really shouldn’t be allowed on the shelves. 1) She’s an example of why books get banned. 2)God help me if she ever figures out the internet well enough to stumble upon my blog :/
Nora said on 05.15.12 at 02:29 PM • [link]

They probably should have just said they removed them because they were so appallingly written they didn’t really count as “books”, and left it at that. ;~)
LG said on 05.15.12 at 02:40 PM • [link]

“So, to claim that librarians should know about every book added to the collection is antiquated.”

True. The library I work at, which, granted, is an academic library, gets most of its books via established profiles. We try to look up reviews and make sure that whatever we add to our collection fulfills a need and contains good, useful information, but sometimes weird stuff slips through.

Unfortunately, this library, by pulling 50 Shades for no other reason than that it has been called “mommy porn” by the media, has opened its entire collection up for scrunity. Since they don’t have a clear definition of what “porn” means, it is now pathetically easy for anyone to look at the things in their collection and say “this is porn” and ask why it isn’t immediately being removed. And they’ve got quite a lot of things that people could gripe about, things that they probably couldn’t say slipped through the cracks because they were on a bestseller list or got an excellent review.

One of the reasons my “find the hypocrisy” game tends to focus on manga is because 1) I know the publisher imprints that tend to focus on explicit stuff, which makes searching easier and 2) all it takes is for one staff member to do a quick flip-through in order to find the explicit stuff or look at the cover for the parental advisory warning, so the claim that “we don’t read everything, we couldn’t have known” is less valid. Especially when the library in question considers manga to be entirely YA.

I’d be more sympathetic if, say, a community member complained and the book had gone through a challenge process. It doesn’t sound like anything of the sort happened here.
riwally said on 05.15.12 at 02:50 PM • [link]

Does anyone remember their history lessons? In 1933 the Germans burned over 25,000 books for not corresponding with Nazi ideology. Is this where we’re headed with all the crapola censorship by libraries? What’s next? Removing anything that speaks of oral sex, anal sex, BDSM, autoerotic sex, menage, MMF, FFM, orgies, wife swapping, homosexuality, heterosexuality, or just plain white bread sex in general. Might as well lock the doors. Brever County, FL should be ashamed. Would they want the censorship police to come to their home and removing their idea of “porno”? Pull your heads out of your asses. We’re not living in a police state here, we’re the greatest country in the world where we have the unalienable right do so whatever we damn well please within the law. KMA all you hypocrits and spoilers.
Kim said on 05.15.12 at 03:11 PM • [link]

I feel like whenever someone brings-up Nazism in a discussion like this, we all lose. A strong argument does not need the most evil regime ever on the face of the planet to justify it. Think about Glen Beck fear tactics. He sees Nazism everywhere.
Kim said on 05.15.12 at 03:14 PM • [link]

I agree. I just wanted to take “lazy librarians” out of the equation. The librarians acted unethically, but not necessarily lazily.
Wendy Barron said on 05.15.12 at 04:04 PM • [link]

Maybe they were tired of the books coming back with the pages stuck together, and are waiting to get the new edition, with the easy-clean vinyl pages? ;-)

Seriously, though. STUPID move on their part, fantastic response with the petition, and that is one kickass letter you wrote, Sarah.
Brian said on 05.15.12 at 04:07 PM • [link]

IIRC Brevard isn’t the first to pull 50 Shades. It’s also been pulled at some libraries in Wisconsin and Georgia too.
guest said on 05.15.12 at 04:41 PM • [link]

I’m a librarian at a public library and we have purchases 63 copies of this book to fill holds, and another 25 copies in electronic format. Not all public libraries are so reactionary!
riwally said on 05.15.12 at 05:07 PM • [link]

Sorry about the Nazi reference. Just wanted all to remember “Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it”.
Emily said on 05.15.12 at 06:18 PM • [link]

*stands and applauds wildly* Fantastic letter, Sarah! It’s too bad it had to be written.
Kirsten said on 05.15.12 at 06:41 PM • [link]

Yep, I agree, someone was asleep on the job here. Or living in a closet. How exactly could anyone miss out on the media coverage? Even my mom had vaguely heard of it.
Kirsten said on 05.15.12 at 06:54 PM • [link]

The library director did, in fact, say that when asked why Fear of Flying, Lady Chatterly’s Lover, etc., were still in the collection- because they’re “classics”. Apparently graphic sex is okay as long as the book’s been around for at least thirty years. I guess that’s another reason to read the classics…
Ladyof Lostshadows said on 05.15.12 at 08:30 PM • [link]

I don’t think they were lazy, I just don’t think any library normally places that large an order for one book without reading a description.

I think they just went into cya mode as soon as the media picked up the “mommy porn” label and ran with it.
Anna von Stromberg said on 05.15.12 at 09:57 PM • [link]

Y u so awful, Florida. Whenever my home state in in the news, it’s never for anything good. It’s always for people being murderers/criminals, bat-shit crazy or incompetent voters.

I live in Martin County, Florida (representing the Treasure Coast, wooo) and they have a pretty good collection of romance. Including 50 Shades of Grey, which currently has a huge waiting list. Martin, Palm Beach and Broward counties, though, all south of Brevard, are a little more socially progressive leaning than many of Florida’s other counties. The whole state is pretty conservative, socially—unfortunately.
Carol Oszczakiewicz Abraham said on 05.15.12 at 10:14 PM • [link]

A librarian referred me here…and here is a link of interest to anyone who enjoyed 50 Shades: https://www.facebook.com/WhatT…
Girlygirlhoosier52 said on 05.16.12 at 07:12 AM • [link]

Just so you know… Here’s the Brevard County Library webpage & they are also on Facebook…
http://www.brevardcounty.us/Pu…
Jennifer Armintrout said on 05.16.12 at 07:31 AM • [link]

Yeah, I was just thinking, “Excuse me? I was just busy working on a synopsis for a m/m/m/m/f erotica over here in America, so let’s not be tarring everyone in the colonies, okay?”
Jenny Lyn said on 05.16.12 at 09:41 AM • [link]

“Nobody asked us to take it off the shelves.”

Your TAX PAYING PATRONS (!!!) asked you to put it ON your shelves, Ms. Schweinsberg! The only thing you should be concerned with is if the content is illegal, i.e. child pornography. Nothing else. Anything more is censorship, period. There’s no such thing as “mommy porn”, that’s just some stupid term a media drone vomited that unfortunately stuck. Gah!

I tweeted about this last week when the story came to light, along with my outrage over the censoring of this book. I had hope that someone like Sarah would get ahold of the story and rally the troops. My prayers were answered. Thanks, Sarah!

I dearly love my state, especially the little rural corner I reside in, but I hate having to constantly apologize for some of the idiots who live in it with me.
Sharon said on 05.16.12 at 11:23 AM • [link]

I’m still in library school, so I guess my opinion is different. Every book published won’t make it into a library’s collection. The issue isn’t whether or not a book becomes part of a collection but why. If a librarian isn’t putting 50 Shades into a collection because it’s been called “mommy porn” (especially if she hasn’t read the book!) then yes, I would say that she is engaging in censorship. I know library usually won’t put actual porn into a library’s collection but we have to determine what porn is. Is sexually explicit material automatically porn? The answer is obviously no. Romance novels, erotic romance novels, erotic movies (e.g. my local library carries the movie Henry and June, which carries an NC-17 rating and is very sexually explicit), etc. manage to make into libraries across America all the time. So why is 50 Shades different from any of this material? Is it different simply because the media has called it “mommy porn”?
Jenniferrachelwebb said on 05.16.12 at 04:53 PM • [link]

As a librarian, I wanted to reply to the question of whether librarians should be familiar with every book they buy. Of course librarians can’t read every book on our shelves (although it’s amazing how many library patrons think we have), and it’s true that many libraries have automatic purchasing plans in place. But there’s no excuse for librarians not being up on what’s happening in pop culture! When 50 Shades exploded in the media, my library director and several of our staff made a point of looking through the books to see what the fuss was about and so we could answer questions about them. I consider it my job to be aware of what books are being talked about and why, even if I don’t read them all cover to cover. (That’s my excuse for being on Twitter at work, too…) :)
Ctslair said on 05.17.12 at 10:21 PM • [link]

Uh-oh…better not let your MIL-to-be read the Bible, it has a lot nastier things than just SEX in it. LOL…
Firsty Lasty said on 05.19.12 at 09:56 AM • [link]

You see, this is why I like posts like this. People start talking about the seedy underbelly of Romance and I love it. :D
Jean Lamb said on 05.24.12 at 11:14 PM • [link]

Personally, I think _Kushiel’s Dart_ by Jacqueline Carey did it better anyway. Not to mention the Jurisdiction novels by Susan R. Matthews (first one _An Exchange of Hostages_) for those who want to be on the other side. (someone has got to have written a fanfic where Lady Phedre meets Andrej Kosciusko, and if so, I’d like to read it).
Holly Robb said on 05.27.12 at 11:09 AM • [link]

Check out this 50 Shades Blog www.twitchypalmmoms.com it’s Hilarious!!
lanie said on 05.30.12 at 03:32 PM • [link]

I’ve read 50, and I think it’s pretty crappy, but as a librarian, I fight for someone’s right to read whatever they want. Librarians should be familiar with the books they’ve purchased - at least to the point where they have read a review or looked at it more than just “Oh, it’s on a best-seller list”. In the case of 50, it is pretty immediately obvious that it is highly sexual in nature, even just from the summary. Not to mention the copious romance novels and many many other books, both current and classic.
Twinkle Teacher said on 05.31.12 at 06:01 PM • [link]

I’m obsessed with it. What happened to freedom of speech. All I know is these books make me happy, and I’m all about the happy. ;)