These discussions are not "plotting and scheming". This is a valid
discussion relevant to the library profession as a whole, and it concerns
our responsibility as a profession within wider society. I for one would
like this profession to acknowledge and discuss these issues, and LIS-LINK
is a very valuable resource for achieving this. Besides, it beats deleting
continual requests for videos!
Sarah
Tom Roper wrote:
> If LA members really want a "Diversity Council", so be it...I think most
> of us would be more interested in developing professional unity...but is
> it necessary for the plotting and scheming to set it up to be carried
> out on this list?
>
> Tom Roper, Head of RCVS Library and Information Service
> Tel (library): +44 (0)20 7222 2021
> Direct line: +44 (0)20 7202 0721
> Fax: +44 (0)20 7222 2004
> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
> Web site: http://www.rcvslibrary.org.uk
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: THOMPSON, David [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 11:29
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Please support the Diversity Council as a new Group of The
> Li brary Association
>
> Sarah wrote:
> >I'm afraid experience leads many of us to believe that if we are not
> >specifically included then we are excluded. I'm sure other minorities
> >can
> relate to this!
>
> Even as a gay person myself (+ a pagan, and BDSMer - so lots of minority
> groupings there...) I'm not entirely sure of the wisdom of this. I have
> personally found that I am only excluded when I decide to emphasise my
> "otherness" - and then it is my own perceptions that do the excluding...
>
> When talking about being "inclusive", surely the more explicit we become
> in
> listing all of those groups we must include, the more we risk *not*
> including one of the smaller "minorities". Nicky's tongue in cheek
> comment
> about Heterosexuals feeling excluded could be a genuine point - if we
> list
> each group individually and separately, then surely we *must* also
> include
> "Straight", "Married", "White" etc - or risk making them feel excluded.
>
> It seems to me that dividing us all into tighter and tighter defined
> "minority" groupings merely emphasises our differences, rather than our
> commonalities. I know that as Librarians our urge is to catalogue and
> classify every minutiae, but that very act can itself be the first step
> towards the segregation and control of the thing catalogued.
>
> Surely "Inclusive" implicitly means just that - holistically including
> *everyone*, regardless of any social, religious, political (or any
> other)
> affiliations or categories - whether externally or personally applied.
> To
> try and make that implicit inclusion explicit merely defeats it's
> meaning
> and it's purpose.
>
> "Strength through Diversity" comes from our common ground, not our
> differences.
>
> Regards
> David
--
Ms. Sarah Currier
Research Fellow
INSPIRAL Project
Centre for Digital Library Research
Andersonian Library, University of Strathclyde
101 St. James Road, Glasgow G4 0NS
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0)141 548 4586; Fax: +44 (0)141 548 2102
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Web: http://inspiral.cdlr.strath.ac.uk/
|