Russell Morton Brown, a retired University of oronto English professor, said The Handmaid's Tale wasn't likely written for 17-year-olds, "but neither are a lot of things we teach in high school, like Shakespeare.

"And they are all the better for reading it. They are on the edge of adulthood already, and there's no point in coddling them," he said, adding, "they aren't coddled in terms of mass media today anyway...[The Handmaid's Tale] is the most taught Canadian novel at the high school level," he said. "I think it provides a lot to talk about, and generally speaking it does engage students."

There are some pretty standard arguments why pornography should be viewable on public library computers…

1)       The biggest one (to my mind) is that, in keeping with the value of Freedom of Expression that is core to our profession, libraries don’t censor books, DVD’s or other materials based on their content.  Not censoring any of the material that patrons view on PAC’s can be seen as an extension of this value.  (To be fair, libraries do “censor” with our selection in some ways – have you ever heard of a public library that has a subscription to Playboy?  Me either.) 

2)       Another major question around this issue is: who gets to decide what is appropriate and what isn’t?  Should we restrict all scenes of intercourse showing penetration?  All scenes of intercourse?  All nudity?  What about erotic photography that’s artistic in nature?  Clips from award-winning movies that have nudity?  And how do you write any policy that will be equally enforced by all staff?  (I’m reminded of the US Supreme Court Judge who said “I can’t define pornography but I know it when I see it.”) Ultimately, just as I may be offended by some of the violent or sexist or racist videos that I see patrons watching on YouTube, I understand that it’s their right to watch these videos (as long as they are not illegal.) 

3)       How do you balance the right of the person watching the pornography with the right of the person who may be offended by it?  Although it’s not an exact parallel, my wife worked as a nurse on a unit in Calgary dealing with lots of young guys who had suffered serious spinal injuries and were left paralyzed.  They had a PAC in their common area and many of the nurses were offended that these young guys were watching pornography.  But should the patients’ right to explore or deal with their sexuality in this manner be trumped by someone else’s right to not be exposed (no pun intended) to material that may bother them?   

At any rate, a timely topic with Freedom to Read Week (www.freedomtoread.ca) coming up in a couple weeks!  Thanks for raising it!

As you know, I don't post a lot about what happens in my working life and this topic especially may seem like I'm airing something private. 

But with the start of this year's Freedom to Read Week, the timeliness of this discussion was too good to pass up.  The discussion so far has been very respectful - exactly what you would expect from a group of engaged, intelligent professional librarians.  And who knows - maybe some colleague will read this post and the discussion can continue here in a public forum in the spirit of openness and sharing that defines both libraries and Web 2.0?  Or some other readers may choose to chime in with their thoughts and experiences as well.

Finally, another reason I'm extended on my initial thoughts here instead of writing a second response to the librarians' mailing list is that this sort of feels like debating "Is there a God?" or "Is abortion right?" - people feel very strongly about their position and it's next to impossible to convince them otherwise.  So sometimes it's better not to argue at all.  (Shea, reading this, rushes to take Jason's temperature!)