A couple months ago, I performed my last bit of volunteering for a while, teaching some computer savvy to the residents of a local retirement community. The minute the discussion turned to the internet, one of the ladies wanted to know if she could order books online, followed by a chorus of support from the others.
I made some joke that they needed to slow down if they were reading faster than book donations come to the rec center. There were snorts of disgust, which I attributed to it not being a very funny joke. (I’m in a slump.)
While I was demonstrating the search function of one bookseller’s site, one of the ladies asked for a particular book that I knew I’d donated less than a month earlier. I said so. Her response: “That’s very nice, dear, but most of those donations are in the trash before we ever see them.”
We snuck down the hall (with all the stealth you’d expect of a group of twenty, two with walkers, one in a wheelchair) to the room designated as a library. I gasped when they turned on the lights. Floor-to-ceiling, wall-to-wall shelves.
ONE of which had books sitting on it.
I’ve personally donated enough books over the past ten years to fill up that library, and I’m not the only one. I’ve served on committees to organize book drives that each collected nearly a thousand books for that library.
ONE SHELF?!?!
The ladies explained (after I wound down from my rant) that someone has taken it upon themselves to impose “community decency standards” upon the library, which means the residents—who range in age from 65 to 102, who have lived through several wars and the Depression and civil unrest, who have spawned countless children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren—must be sheltered from reading material which contains coarse language, violence, and—shield your eyes, precious innocents!—sex.
I called the administrator the following day to express my dismay about the state of the “library.” She explained that one resident had taken responsibility for maintenance of the library. We went round and round about the unfairness to the rest of the community, the final outcome being that the administrator would rather deprive the entire community of reading than cause offense to anyone.
She was not impressed by my suggestion that “anyone” could avoid offense by staying the hell out of the library.
The other half of my book donations go to a women’s shelter, and I began to wonder if that was another route straight to the landfill. The administrator there assured me all book donations are appreciated. Their library overflows and spills out into the hall once or twice a year, at which point they cull the books that get the least attention, sell them, and put the proceeds back into the shelter.
I asked if she was at all concerned about exposing the women in the shelter to coarse language, violence, and sex. Her response: “For most of these women, a significant element of abuse is having their choices taken away from them. We don’t do that here.”
I’m trying to rally the bawdy broads of the retirement community to reclaim their library from its self-appointed censor. Until they stage their coup, I’ll be sending all my cussing, fighting, and smutty castoffs where I know they’ll be put to good use.
No related posts.
This just made me want to cry. I can’t imagine any community that would benefit from such draconian censorship, but a retirement community!?! Of all people who should be able to pick up or put down a book based on whether it’s interesting or insulting to them…these people should have that right. While the women’s shelter is full of people who’ve had choices taken from them, I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that the retirement community has members who feel the same about their own choices. Whether it be infirmity, economics, or “I know best” family members, many elderly people feel disempowered, disdained, and out of control. Give them their choices back!
Whew. I’m sure you know I’m not ranting at you; I just can’t get over having a book-impoverished library because of someone’s idea of acceptable reading material. Grrrrr.
We snuck down the hall (with all the stealth you’d expect of a group of twenty, two with walkers, one in a wheelchair) to the room designated as a library. I gasped when they turned on the lights. Floor-to-ceiling, wall-to-wall shelves.
Oh Kerry– the whole thing is horrifying and terrible, that someone would self-appoint themselves an arbiter of “taste” and “decency” and worse, that the administrator has no spine, but that line…
The image it conjures up– that needs to go in a book. Because seriously, that’s one of the funniest things I’ve read in ages.
If you need a foot soldier in the war on censorship, I’m ready to don a black leotard and balaclava, grab my flashlight, and dumpster dive to retrieve those poor trashed books.
But seriously…
It sounds like you are doing a wonderful job for those folks and I do hope they stage a coup and release the romance!
Well, you know, as long as the majority of the other reading residents are okay with this, the rest of the world ought to respect it. It’s really none of our business and nothing personal. Not everyone has the same standards as we do. We can love and respect each other anyway.
As for the Women’s Shelter, I’m so glad they keep everything. I really think a good romance novel, graphic nookie and all, can go a long to boost a woman’s self-esteem and belief that she *deserves* kindness and respect and that *true love* doesn’t treat you like crap.
We can love and respect each other anyway.
Because tossing books if they don’t adhere to one individual’s arbitrary tastes and morals just smacks of love and respect.
Kimber An, you makes no sense at all.
If the majority don’t want books with sex, then the majority has the choice not to go to the romance shelf.
It’s that simple.
Besides, it’s one person who has taken it up as his/her own job to censor everyone else. Not the majority.
I’m speechless.
I’m not surprised by this, though it dismays me. Those who have lived a long time in this country have unfortunately lived through some times of terrible oppression. It seems some individuals are stuck there.
I also loved the image of the group of elders sneaking. It made me smile.
This reminded me of something that happened in our own family. While my Grandma was dying of cancer, my Mom, my SIL and I took turns reading to her in the hospital. We were reading Nora Robert’s Montana Sky.
One day, my Grandma was particularly eager for me to read, and confessed that she liked it when I read the best. I asked her why, and she said, “Because you don’t edit out the good parts.”
I got on Mom’s case about it, and she defended herself by saying, “I don’t want the nurses and Grandma’s roommate to overhear.”
I told her if they had anything to say about it, they could say it to me, because I’m doing whatever Grandma wants. But you are absolutely right, we have a tendency to tread our Elders like children.
I’m determined not to stand for it. I’m going to be one feisty old lady.
Jess
Oh my! This is such an awful story.
I have a family with many aging aunts and uncles, most of whom will probably not think too highly about the amount of sex in my upcoming release, but I would never think to prevent them from seeing it. I’ve issued teasing warnings, that’s all. Beyond that, they have the right to make their own decisions. Read or don’t read. Under no circumstances can I endorse that choice being taken away.
I’m so glad you’re lobbying on behalf of those seniors, Kerry. Good on you! And I’m also glad to hear the women’s shelter has a completely different attitude.
Further rabble rousing, because I am a terrible influence: “What, is this woman a 400-pound Samoan wrestler? Even if she is, you outnumber her twenty to one. You can take her!”
And it IS my business to do something about oppression anywhere I find it, particularly when those being oppressed have the mistaken impression they’re powerless to do anything.
Wherever rabble needs to be roused, I will be there, rousing the rabble. *hands on hips, cape fluttering in the wind*
An indignant army of seniors is about the Best Thing EVER. I want pictures.
They need to stage a coup and tell that single censor that she can take her one acceptable shelf back to her own room and keep herself company.
And they should wrangle that administrator and tell her that they’ve looked into communities that don’t allow censorship.
Go Kerry!
WHAT THE HELL! I just feel annoyed at this one resident who made things so *boring* for everyone else! And the administrator. Wow. Annoyed annoyed annoyed..
If the majority of the seniors approve of the censorship, they are not oppressed and their choice is none of our business.
Respect- 1) To hold in high regard, to show courtesy and honor to, 2) To show consideration for, to avoid intruding upon.
Based on this: “If the majority of the seniors approve of the censorship, they are not oppressed and their choice is none of our business,” my impression of the post was that this was NOT a community majority decision, but rather the bias of the one resident who volunteered to manage the collection.
Well, that came out sideways. I meant to quote the line in the original post about the one resident who managed the collection which led me to believe this was NOT a community decision. And the administrator’s response was frightening as well. The good of the one outweighs the good of the many? There’s a lot of stuff I object to. I avoid it.
Who said the majority approved? It sounded from Kerry’s post that it was ONE MEMBER making the decision for all of the rest. And that ONE (plus the administrator with no spine) certainly was NOT holding those other residents in high regard, showing them courtesy or honor. In fact, that one resident was showing NO consideration and was intruding upon the residents rights to read what they wanted to read.
Now I’m speechless.
Can they be given gifts themselves? Or can you start another library… a computer one
.
I am blanking on where you are at the moment but once you figure out if they can take gifts or what you are doing please email me.
I don’t care if 99 out of 100 approve of the censorship. If one person feels she has the right (and she does) to read a book with a dirty word, a dirty scene, a happy ending, death, blood, gore, violence, ghosts, vampires, WHATEVER, then she absolutely has the right to do that and these FREE books, donated by generous people, should be available to her. Censorship is wrong, always, forever, and no matter the circumstances. If you don’t want smut in your reading, don’t read that book, but no one person has the right to tell everyone else what to read.
Kerry, I’d like to say that I’m speechless too, but obviously I’m not.
Wrong wrong wrong.
This chaps my buns, and I’m going to do my best to not swear in my comments. Well, not swear much anyway….
The residents who are not happy with the current state of affairs need to voice their concerns to the spineless administrator. Then that women will have to decide which she would prefer – 1) Offending one person imposing their personal community standards on the whole or 2) Offending all the other residents (presumable more than just ONE!) who think the current library status quo sucks balls.
Kerry, have you thought about having your own Underground Book Railroad? I feel so bad for all those residents who want your donated books but are being denied the privilege of pawing through the donations (one of life’s great joys IMHO). Maybe you could take a bag of donated books – and instead of giving them to the Library Volunteer From Hell, you can give the bag to one of those residents you know would enjoy them….and in turn she can pass them along to her like-minded friends. Cut out the Puritan middle man, and take the books directly to the people!
And that woman who runs the women shelter? I would have so kissed her on the mouth. Just sayin’.
Wow. That is horrible for the residents of the retirement center, but it’s also a slap in the face of the generous folks making donations.
If I found out that my favorite organization was throwing my donations in the trash, I’d throw an Irish redhead bitch fit. I’d definitely have to stir up some trouble over that.
Grrrrrrrrrr.
Oh, yeah, I think it’s an appalling situation – particularly that the library was actually there in a type of institution that’s normally known for having space problem but not being used – and the image of everyone “sneaking” to the library is absolutely hilarious.
I’ve also sent this link to my sister who has worked in many sevice levels within residential care from activity directors to administrators before she retired. Her input on the other side of this should be interesting. Not sure what that would be but I bet for sure she’ll have some fascinating tales to tell. Maybe I can convince her to post.
Kimber An, the point of Kerry’s post was that ONE resident (likely the primmest and most judgmental) had decided what constituted what was fit for the library, while many others didn’t agree, but were either too intimidated to speak out (really, how would an eighty year old woman say to the administrator ‘but I want to read the good bits!’), or didn’t feel they had the right to complain because they couldn’t (ie – were too ill or infirm) help with the library maintenance.
Unfortunately, self-appointed morality monitors do have the ability to intimidate by making anyone who disagrees feel like a smut-purveyor. Any romance writer who has written sex scenes has experienced this. I’m not saying they should have porn on the shelves, but really, sex scenes in romance novels? No one is being forced to crack a spine and read it.
And I forgot to add, how did the library morality monitor decide which books passed and which ones didn’t? Ya gotta wonder, did she read all the naughty ones before tossing them?
This is really bizarre. I hope that when I’m in a nursing home I’ll be able to escape a little with a thriller, or relive some of my happier moments with a romance. Surely by then I’ll be able to judge my own reading material, and whether or not I skim the “good parts” is between me and God.
Although, I can’t really see myself reading an explicit scene out loud to my mother. That can be my daughter’s job
I hope these residents can get hold of the books they want to read! There’s a fantastic story there, too–you should go for it!
This is sadly typical. I never understand but so many people want power over others, usually because they are unhappy about choice.
See the problem with choice is that some people will choose things that we think are wrong, so the reaction is to take away the choice. be it books or helmet laws or lawful orifices or whatever.
Fully functional adults can make their own decisions. That they may choose something you don’t think is right is no reason to remove their choice. Sadly so many “compassionate” people who are doing something “for their own good” are doing the exact opposite.
Most community members probably don’t even know what’s going on, which is so often how these things happen. The first thing I’d do is to organize a residents’ meeting to lay out the facts of the situation and urge a petition be sent to the woman who’s afraid of offending the censor. Maybe a petition full of signatures from already offended residents might get her to reconsider.
But I also agree with Sarah Frantz that this is not an issue in which a majority of censors should ever be acceded to. Rather, following the example of our own government (this is why we have the Supreme Court, lol), a mechanism should always be provided to protect the minority from the whim of the majority. Because the majority is sometimes wrong (Brown v. Board of Education, for example).
And when it comes to this kind of situation — where there are no minors involved, no evidence of legal obscenity — the majority is most often, most certainly, and most terrifyingly wrong.
I’ll read the other comments in a moment but first I must say…
WHAT THE HELL?????
Dear gawd, how dare they! or she… or whomever is in the end taking away these old people’s right to chose. Damn them/him/her.
Oh for the love of…
Maybe you could try bypassing the censor. Instead, go by from time to time with a bag of books and leave it with one of the ‘bawdy broads’ to be shared with her like-minded friends. That way, the books get enjoyed, even if they don’t go into the ‘official’ library.
I wonder what would happen if you sent a letter to the editor of the local newspaper or offered to send letters to all of the family members of the seniors letting people outside the smaller sphere know what is happening. If I found out that this was going on at the home where my grandmother lives, I’d be up in arms about it. The family members of these residents might help lead the charge for change.
Not only that, but all of those who have in good faith donated books deserve to know that their donations were trashed. I’d be furious – FURIOUS – to discover my donation had been accepted and then dumped into some landfill. This is fraud.
And this is one of those times when it seems that something bigger should be done. If you are willing to share the name of the center via private e-mails, I would personally be happy to write a letter to the administrator expressing my personal outrage at this censorship and the act of removing yet another layer of dignity for these seniors. Shame on them!
That’s just outrageous.
That administrator needs her head examined!
And I’m wondering just how the oh-so-offended censor knows if a book has naughty scenes or impure language. Does she read every single one? I’ll grant you that with most romances, it’d be obvious that the books contain the sort of thing this kind of self-righteous idiot would object to, but there are plenty of other genres which occasionally have sex or swearing or violence but often don’t, so is Mrs. Grundy the only one who gets to enjoy all the book donations before she trashes them in the name of Protecting The Community? o_O
Angie
That’s unbelievable. I think the admin needs a swift kick, and the men & women of the center need to take action.
They better not try that crap with my book in my MomMom’s retirement village. She won’t don a balaclava (messes with the hair, ya know) but she will steamroll — twice! — anyone who gets in the way of her choices.
OH MAN! I’m fuming. My local used bookstore is run by volunteers, some of whom (I think) refuse to shelve/sell donated erotic romance.
Chaps my hide.
You know, when I first read this, Kerry, I thought you’d been volunteering at a residential (AKA nursing) home, which would’ve been bad enough. Not justified, mind you, but maybe somewhat more explainable.
Then I reread it and realized you were talking about a center at a senior/retirement community. It absolutely boggles the mind that anyone would let that many books be trashed from a library in that type of setting where the individuals are still mostly mobile and active. Active enough to use computers, I might add.
Because I’m assuming that not all the books donated were romances and not all the residents are females. Just my dad’s home library alone had fantasy, westerns, mystery and, yep, even some romances which he reread regularly until his eyesight and health began to fail.
One shelf enough? Or even one bookcase? I don’t think so not even for one person.
And forget any idea of blaming it all on one little prim and proper old lady. Technically, that might be what happened but it doesn’t explain how it came to happen.
What the heck are any administrators at a retirement community thinking to allow an entire room full of donations to be tossed out? I’d really like to hear them explain their reasoning to their board once said board members get earfuls from community members who cheerfully made those donations.
This is unbelievable. I take care of donations for a public library and the only books I throw in the trash are the ones that contain mold or mildew since that’s a health hazard. Since romance is the highest circulating genre around here, I make sure lots of it goes into the collection (what we already have goes to the booksale).
Just out of curiosity, did you notice what kind of books were left on the shelves?
This is beyond belief. Where are the families of these residents? Are they the ones paying the bills? I can’t believe they would take a basic freedom away from those people and impose their own narrow-minded views on those people as if they’re small children instead of adults. I’m going to check on my own donations. This really fires me up.
Yeah underground book railroad! That’s the least I would do. It was my first thought…get them the books anyway, then raise hell. I couldn’t believe this. So wrong.
Grrrrr!
I’ve worked in centres for the elderly as a nurse. The loudiest, pushiest resident and/or their family ALWAYS get their way.
Those ladies need to stand strong and loud and force the rule of the majority.
“We went round and round about the unfairness to the rest of the community, the final outcome being that the administrator would rather deprive the entire community of reading than cause offense to anyone.”
I don’t suppose it occured to her that she was offending the rest of the community by allowing one person to censor all reading material. That is wrong on sooo many levels, and I hope you are successful in convincing the other members there to stand up for their rights.
If the majority of the seniors approve of the censorship, they are not oppressed and their choice is none of our business.
Hmmm, where does it say the majority of seniors approved of the censorship?
Respect- 1) To hold in high regard, to show courtesy and honor to, 2) To show consideration for, to avoid intruding upon.
By the way, adding a smiley each time one makes a ridiculously asinine comment doesn’t help make that comment, less asinine.
Just sayin’.
I haven’t read all of this so maybe this has already been talked about but screw that crap.
Each one of those people pay good money to be there – regardless of if it is out of their pocket, their families wallet, their savings or they are a number the government pays for to be there.
THEY have rights.
EACH ONE OF THEM. And that could and might be one of us some day and do you want your rights decided on and screwed over just because you lost a coin toss?
No matter if it is something as little as the choice of a book (which honestly is a BFD)….
Really Kimber An you think majority should rule just to keep the peace even if it isn’t majority? I get that I might be a bit touchy on the subject right now as someone who finds herself having more control taken away from her than she ever thought she would have to give up ‘for my own good’, and it can be a bitter fucking pill to swallow.
Place yourself where they are after all they have lived and all they have done and god knows all they have fought for and to be told no, you can’t have that because it might – WHAT rot your mind? And most likely they are not in a position they can just get in their car and go to the store and get what they want.
So can you HONESTLY say you not only approve but think it is ok and we should smile at them for being considerate?
oops replied to wrong post
ah well sorry karen
hi
(almost forgot the smile)
My local RWA chapter hosts its meetings at a retirement home (they are SO NICE!) and regularly donates books to them. While I don’t think anybody has donated any erotica, most of what we do donate is romance. I would hate to think all our donations were trashed. Yes, we’ve likely read the books ourselves, but there’s a lot of money invested in those donations. We could be taking them to UBS’s or donating them to places where they do NOT get thrown out. I like the idea of notifying the community via the newspaper that their donations are being trashed. Then they can donate directly to residents, who seem like they’d be interested in having an available library a bit bigger, and more varied, than a single shelf.