ST editorial speaks up finally:

[OverTheCounter]

In the flap over the banning of three children's books by the National Library Board, what started out as a conservative-liberal tug of war, centred on homosexuality and non-traditional families, has grown into a contretemps about "book burning" censorship which has drawn a wider swathe of disputants. The NLB, however, does not burn but pulps books that it finds objectionable, so the offending items are "no longer in existence". This is the image that fair- minded library users will find disconcerting. One can understand the disposal of public property considered unusable but the emphatic destruction of books which librarians, of all people, should love is hard to fathom.



A pertinent issue is the manner in which an acquired book, among the NLB's collection of five million books and multimedia items, is deemed undesirable. The board receives 20 complaints about book titles every year and each can trigger a review by librarians and senior management. They are guided by NLB's collection development policy and librarians' perception of the "concerns of the community". These are reasonable steps, not least in a disparate society like ours, but clearly insufficient. A more consultative approach is needed, bearing in mind the role of the 25 public libraries as social spaces for the young and old to browse.


It is heartening that the people who gathered at the National Library atrium last Sunday were mainly those who cared about reading. But it would have been far more edifying if people, including librarians, had congregated to discuss the wider issue of turning libraries into arenas for those espousing different values and lifestyles to joust for space.


Such a discussion would have revealed that books in themselves are often not the bone of contention - as the flow of ideas and knowledge should be celebrated by all. What deserves deeper reflection is the conflicts that arise when individuals and groups fret over what should and should not be read. The urge to purge runs deep and long everywhere, and it is not surprising that libraries to get caught in the crossfire.


In the United States, the Library Bill of Rights and community mandates offer scope for a professional practice of librarianship to develop. This acknowledges that librarians ought to become less arbiters of cultural content and taste and more facilitators of access to a world of knowledge and learning. Nonetheless, professional judgment will always be required as selection is an inevitable feature of any collection. Some exclusions are justifiable, for example, hate literature. But across a wider terrain, if moral policing is made part of the remit of the library, it would sit uncomfortably with the aim of fostering a love of knowledge and reading.


- See more at: http://www.straitstimes.com/news/op...people-are-odds-20140715#sthash.k4tbtpgF.dpuf

 

[OverTheCounter]

IT IS troubling that the National Library Board has decided to pulp three children's titles that were deemed to be not "pro-family" because they portrayed "alternative" family structures ("NLB defends move to remove books"; last Friday).

First, it is sociologically problematic to regard kinship relations that do not follow the mother-father-children model as being "not pro-family". From an anthropological perspective, family models that do not fit into a heterosexual mould have always existed throughout history.

For instance, in the study A Society Without Fathers Or Husbands, academic Cai Hua showed how the Na of China have existed for hundreds of years without having father figures in the children's lives.

Similarly, sociologist Carol Stack has shown in her research of urban African-American families that kinship can be consolidated without marriage, through a communal network of black women that often did not have biological ties. And in Families We Choose, Professor Kath Weston provided detailed ethnographic studies of gay and lesbian kinship wherein family is not solely defined along biological lines, but also on criteria like friendship and love.

In Singapore, we are not exempt from these "alternative" family structures. Let us not forget that many samsui women - among our pioneer generation - had taken a vow of chastity, and formed families by adopting children and sustaining a sisterhood that extended into kinship relations that existed without men or husbands.

These "alternative" family relations are part of Singapore's rich cultural heritage; they are "pro-family" as countless Singaporeans were raised and nurtured within these family structures.

These sociological facts reveal two things about family: First, the concept of the family is susceptible to changes that do not always conform to the heterosexual model. Second, the one common denominator that determines kinship relations is love.

These are values demonstrated in the books banned by the NLB. I urge the board to question whether its concept of "pro-family" truly stands up to close scrutiny.

Bay Ming Ching

- See more at: http://www.straitstimes.com/premium...the-idea-family-20140715#sthash.1BLAARzA.dpuf

 

[OverTheCounter]

From drawing rousing support from the "pro-family" camp to expressions of surprise and protest from the "pro-choice" camp, the National Library Board's (NLB) decision to withdraw and pulp three children's storybooks has drawn much confusion as to what is acceptable in secular Singapore.


RELATED STORIES

• Blood boils over book ban
• Withdrawn NLB books to be pulped
• NLB gets some 20 complaints about book titles a year

On one hand, it is understandable that some parents would want certain books removed from the library because these books espouse values that are contrary to their own, and so their children should not get their hands on the books.

Even if some may argue that such parents have a choice of not allowing their children to borrow these books, it cannot be ignored that some parents sometimes leave their children in public libraries, either by themselves or with their foreign domestic workers, while they run errands.

They want their children to be protected from being influenced in a subtle way by values contrary to the ones held by themselves.

But still, not getting your children to talk about what they had read in the library and not asking if they needed clarification on anything they had read is bad parenting.

CONTROVERSY

The controversy generated by the withdrawal of the children's books by NLB mirrors other recent controversies - the Wear White versus Pink Dot movement and the campaigns for and against the repeal of Section 377A, the law that criminalises sex between men.

These controversies were deemed important enough for even religious leaders to wade into, so as to provide better clarity to their own congregants.

It is indeed right for religious leaders to provide better direction on matters that concern morality to their believers.

But wading into such arguments by religious leaders also has the potential to muddy the waters further as to what is a moral issue versus what is a matter of public policy, especially when such leaders are not careful with how they articulate such views and to whom they are directed at.

There is certainly a difference between morality and secular ethics, and if we do not properly distinguish between the two, we may undermine the secular basis of our nation.

This is why it is important for NLB to make a clear stand on this issue.

In 1958, segregationists alleging that the book The Rabbit's Wedding promotes racial integration and interracial marriages sought to have it banned in Alabama in the US.

The director of the library in the southern state, upon reviewing the book, found that it had no objectionable content.

She determined that it was her ethical duty to defend the book against an outright ban. The book was eventually placed in special reserve shelves in the state library.

ALTERNATIVE

If the NLB felt that the books presented issues of sexuality to children who are too young to understand them, it could have decided to place them in a restricted section of the children's library, allowing only parents to check them out, instead of withdrawing the books from its libraries and pulping them.

In its media statement about why it decided to take down the books, the NLB explained that age-appropriateness and value-appropriateness (as determined by the Government) were its criteria for making that decision.

As far as science is concerned, the Government has determined the theory of evolution as opposed to creation theory is what would be taught to students in our public schools.

And yet, we find books that support creation theory such as And God Created Squash: How The World Began by Martha Whitmore Hickman available to children in our public libraries.

What criteria did the NLB use to determine that such books are appropriate for its young readers?
Ravi Philemon has been doing community work for more than 20 years. He was an editor with The Online Citizen and pens his thoughts on www.raviphilemon.net



This article was first published on July 13, 2014.

Get a copy of The Straits Times or go to straitstimes.com for more stories.

- See more at: http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/morality-v-secular-ethics#sthash.IDK1f36O.dpuf

 

[OverTheCounter]

On Sunday, over 400 people turned up at the National Library Building atrium for a book reading session organized by two concerned parents, Ms Jolene Tan and Ms Germaine Ong, who wanted to emphasize the importance of children’s literature and its crucial role in extending horizons, broadening minds and encouraging empathy toward those who live in different circumstances.

Entitled “Let’s Read Together“, this event was also billed as a peaceful statement” against the recent decision by the National Library Board (NLB) to pulp — indeed, completely censor — two children’s book, namely, “And Tango Makes Three” (by Peter Parnell and Justin Richardson), and “The White Swan Express” (by Jean Davies Okimoto).


“And Tango Makes Three” is based on the true story of two male Chinstrap Penguins in New York’s Central Park Zoo who raised a baby penguin together as a couple. “The White Swan Express” tells the stories of four baby girls from a Chinese orphanage and the families which adopt them. The stories feature a single mother as well as a lesbian couple among its characters.

The event organizers roped in friends to help set up a small library corner where people can borrow the books that they, and other parents, have brought. Some people also brought along their stuffed penguin toys, which they displayed prominently. Many attendees brought along their children and sat around the open space to read
aloud to them.

Ms Germaine Ong, a freelance marketer, told reporters that she wants her daughter to know that every family is valid, and not to look down at families different from her own.This book reading event is a statement against bigotry and intolerance. It is a rejection of the idea that some families are less worthy than others simply because they are different, or that some people deserve derision or scorn simply because they are different.This event is also about encouraging empathy for those less fortunate than us.
Let us take a step back from LGBT rights and the issue of what should constitute a proper or valid family unit. Let us look instead at the broader picture of what role literature should play in society.

Literature is not just to teach the young moral values that society or the government prefers them to adopt. Literature should inspire a questioning attitude. Literature should foster inquisition, invite readers to take a fresh perspective at issues, and encourage original thought. Literature should foster creativity. It should edify, entertain, and educate, perhaps even all three at the same time. Literature should stir within the consciousness of the reader a deeper appreciation of the human condition.

That to me is what literature is about. It is not a simple matter of deciding that some books will impart the incorrect values and thus they should be censored. That is a most shallow view of what literature is.


Why should the two books in question, “And Tango Makes Three” and “The White Swan Express“, be simply about describing alternative family units? Surely they can have deeper meanings what is up to the reader to explore. Surely there are larger issues being brought up, such as the role of discrimination in society, the basic need of each individual for love and care and acceptance, and the human struggle for equality and self-determination.

Surely it is up to the young reader to form his or her own interpretation of these two books. Why must our children (and adults, for that matter) be forced to accept the NLB narrow and superficial interpretation and be forced to accept censorship as a given?

Let people read these two books. Let people discuss and debate them. Let people form their own opinions and interpretations. Let there be both support as well as opposition to these opinions and interpretations. Let the people be free to read and to think and to form their own views of the world.

With censorship, all of the above is killed off immediately and there is no more room for thought, for debate, for opinion. Surely this is not right. Surely this is oppression.

 

[scroobal]

My sense is that it is not about the books. It is a proxy war between the gay community and the those who feel that the community was advancing its agenda too aggressively.

The kids and the mothers at the atrium were reduced to pawns. Bless them for what they don't know. No different to the doe eyed volunteers that sometimes you encounter at grassroots events and who equate Singapore to the PAP.

 

[scroobal]

No kid born believes that some families are different, unusual or wrong. It's the older ones and the adults that shapes a kid's thinking. All kids are born without bias.

If Germaine Ong had brought up her daughter well, the kid will quickly know what is right and what is wrong and not pass judgement in a gratituous manner. No need to pick up a book specially to teach this.

Ms Germaine Ong, a freelance marketer, told reporters that she wants her daughter to know that every family is valid, and not to look down at families different from her own.

 

[OverTheCounter]

My sense is that it is not about the books. It is a proxy war between the gay community and the those who feel that the community was advancing its agenda too aggressively.

Yes, it goes far beyond the books. That is why the discussion is not restricted to the issue of censorship alone.

Additionally, it would appear the govt is now tilting towards the position that the anti-LGBT movement has gone a little too far in pressing their point by using NLB as its proxy. On that count I agree totally.

From the ST editorial:

Such a discussion would have revealed that books in themselves are often not the bone of contention - as the flow of ideas and knowledge should be celebrated by all. What deserves deeper reflection is the conflicts that arise when individuals and groups fret over what should and should not be read. The urge to purge runs deep and long everywhere, and it is not surprising that libraries to get caught in the crossfire.

In the United States, the Library Bill of Rights and community mandates offer scope for a professional practice of librarianship to develop. This acknowledges that librarians ought to become less arbiters of cultural content and taste and more facilitators of access to a world of knowledge and learning. Nonetheless, professional judgment will always be required as selection is an inevitable feature of any collection. Some exclusions are justifiable, for example, hate literature. But across a wider terrain, if moral policing is made part of the remit of the library, it would sit uncomfortably with the aim of fostering a love of knowledge and reading.
​

 

[laksaboy]

It's about censorship of books in a public library.

This will open a can of worms. It need not be about LGBT stuff. Anything that is politically incorrect or doesn't reflect 'social norms' will be removed. You are to think, speak, read and believe things that have been pre-approved for you by the higher authorities.

This is a sure-fire way to dumb down an entire country.

 

[Confuseous]

The NLB CEO declined to talk to the sit in crowd on Sunday - most probably because she had not received her script.

 

[GoldenDragon]

It's about censorship of books in a public library.

This will open a can of worms. It need not be about LGBT stuff. Anything that is politically incorrect or doesn't reflect 'social norms' will be removed. You are to think, speak, read and believe things that have been pre-approved for you by the higher authorities.

This is a sure-fire way to dumb down an entire country.

New martial art move from Yaacob? The claw?

 

[Confuseous]

It's about censorship of books in a public library.

This will open a can of worms. It need not be about LGBT stuff. Anything that is politically incorrect or doesn't reflect 'social norms' will be removed. You are to think, speak, read and believe things that have been pre-approved for you by the higher authorities.

This is a sure-fire way to dumb down an entire country.

What does a clown like this man knows about anything?
Next thing, he will tell us, relac lah, this happens only once in 50 years.

 

[laksaboy]

New martial art move from Yaacob? The claw?

Silat champion - praying mantis claw.

 

[OverTheCounter]

It's about censorship of books in a public library.

This will open a can of worms. It need not be about LGBT stuff. Anything that is politically incorrect or doesn't reflect 'social norms' will be removed. You are to think, speak, read and believe things that have been pre-approved for you by the higher authorities.

This is a sure-fire way to dumb down an entire country.

This censorship thing has been going on for some time now, apparently.

ST 15 July 2014:

By Pearl Lee

At least six children's books have been pulled off the shelves in recent months, more than previously confirmed by the National Library Board (NLB).

Last Saturday, the library board's chief executive, Mrs Elaine Ng, said three titles - And Tango Makes Three, The White Swan Express and Who's In My Family? - had been pulled this year.

However, The Straits Times understands that there were more.

The NLB withdrew the children's book Who's In My Family? by Robie Harris on March 26, and then temporarily took all 22 remaining titles by Harris off the shelves in April.

They were then reviewed individually by the board's selectors, and three titles classified as non-fiction for junior readers were recommended for permanent removal.

These were It's Not the Stork!: A Book About Girls, Boys, Babies, Bodies, Families And Friends; It's So Amazing! A Book About Eggs, Sperm, Birth, Babies, And Families; and It's Perfectly Normal: Changing Bodies, Growing Up, Sex, And Sexual Health.

All three focus on sex education for children and have a page featuring various family structures, including those with single parents and same-sex couples.

The Straits Times understands that a note was sent out to all public libraries on April 8, asking for the three titles to be withdrawn. They are no longer listed in the NLB's catalogue.

All remaining titles by Harris, which were deemed "pro-family books for young persons", were returned to the shelves. These include Who Has What?: All About Girls' Bodies and Boys' Bodies, and Mail Harry To The Moon, a story on having a new sibling.

Yesterday, the NLB declined to comment on whether it had indeed withdrawn the three Harris titles and why it had done so.

The NLB may also have axed another children's title, The Family Book, by Todd Parr.

Transport consultant Paul Barter, 47, said on Facebook last Saturday that he wrote to the NLB that day to ask if it had removed the book.

He borrowed it several months ago, but cannot find it in the library now.

Dr Barter, who has an adopted daughter, said he has been looking for "age-appropriate books that have adoption as a theme, that mention adoption in positive ways or which portray a diversity of family circumstances in a friendly way".

He told The Straits Times that he had wanted to borrow the book again as it was a "useful resource to teach my daughter about her identity", but could not find it.

Again, the NLB declined to comment.

The Facebook group, Singaporeans United For Family, which collected signatures to support the NLB's action, has submitted an open letter to the Ministry of Communications and Information, Ministry of Social and Family Development and Ministry of Education.

According to the group, the letter is backed by 26,000 signatures. It declined to reveal the identities of these supporters, and would not name the person who had written the online letter.

Mrs Ho Bee Bee, a 42-year-old personal assistant who signed the letter, said the removed titles "were for kids of young age".

"Making them readily available at the children's section makes me uncomfortable," said the mother of two boys, aged 10 and 11. "I had trusted NLB to purchase books suitable for young children."

[email protected]
- See more at: http://www.straitstimes.com/news/si...oks-librarys-shelves-201#sthash.iX6D3RXt.dpuf

 

[dr.wailing]

No kid born believes that some families are different, unusual or wrong. It's the older ones and the adults that shapes a kid's thinking. All kids are born without bias....

In psychology we call an infant's mind "tabula rasa" (plural: tabulae rasae [Latin, feminine noun, nominative case])