[Libs-Or] About the Petition to the State Library of Oregon

[Taylor Worley]

Hi all,

I wanted to reach out and thank the folks who have been participating in
this conversation. I have learned a lot over the past few days through
reading your messages and considering everything that's being shared. I
hope other folks are finding it helpful as well. My biggest takeaway is
that it's good to have folks who understand the rules/structures that are
currently in place, however it's also *vital *to recognize when those
systems are flawed/broken and that sometimes spotlighting those faults or
breaking the rules entirely may be the best way to inspire change. (I think
this means my alignment is chaotic good
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alignment_(Dungeons_%26_Dragons)>, despite
what my D&D group would tell you; don't listen to them!)

In direct response folks expressing that they are scared to speak up
publicly, I want to offer my time and energy to anyone who would like to
have a private conversations and learn together. I am *not *an expert and I
mess up constantly, but I find that one on one conversations are incredibly
useful and, generally, much less intimidating/lower-stake than public
forums can feel. All my contact information is in my signature.

Very best,


*Taylor Worley (she/her)                                                 *Youth
Services Librarian
Springfield Public Library
225 5th Street
Springfield, OR 97422
660.988.4289 (cell)
541.726.2243 (office)
taylorlgkw at gmail.com (personal)
tworley at springfield-or.gov (work)



On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 9:58 PM Penelope Hummel via Libs-Or <
libs-or at omls.oregon.gov> wrote:

> Since my post late Monday raising ethical concerns in light of the OLA
> Executive Board’s endorsement of a petition promoting its president-elect
> for a position at the state library, I’ve had 20 different people contact
> me about it privately. (It’s been a busy couple of days.)
>
> One of them likened my original post to a public lynching.
>
> The other 19 were from people I know well and people I don’t know at all.
> They live all over the state, are early career, mid-career and retired, are
> managers and front-line staff.  They are your colleagues and quite
> possibly, your good friends. They may see some things differently than you
> do regardless of whether you know that about them or not.
>
> Almost all stated that they did not feel safe publicly disclosing what
> they had to say to me.  So, with their permission, I am sharing some
> representative comments anonymously.  My focus here is not to rehash points
> I’ve already made about the EDIA petition, but rather to raise the issue of
> how we (as the Oregon library community) hold respectful space for each
> other to express dissenting points of view.  As you encounter the recurring
> themes in these comments, I hope you will ask yourself: * how are we
> doing on that?  *
> _________________________________________________________________________
>
> *I feel silenced and unwelcome in this discussion given the language and
> the tactics that are being used.  I appreciate you speaking up and asking
> good questions because I obviously cannot. Libraries have an opportunity to
> provide a place where civil discourse can happen, a place where false
> dichotomies and polarization are discouraged.   There’s a real need for
> that in the world right now. The dialogue needs to be constructive. *
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> *Thank you for speaking up about this. I am sorry to see, once again,
> anyone offering up constructive criticism of anything being done by anyone
> having to do with EDIA efforts is being labeled as, “those who would keep
> whiteness in control of everything”. Unfortunately, this always turns
> personal and misses the point.*
>
>
>
>
> *Your assessment of the issue of conflict of interest was spot on, as well
> as your assessment of how things may have gone with the executive board. I
> have spoken with several colleagues today that saw it that way as well. But
> we fear speaking up publicly about it because of how we’ve seen things pan
> out in the past. I am still relatively early in my library career and don’t
> feel I can speak up in good faith without it being seen as a personal
> attack that leads to potential retaliation.*
> __________________________________________________________________________
>
>
> *Thank you so much for this statement. This is exactly how I felt when I
> read the petition, which I did not sign for this very reason. I am
> concerned that this will be noted by some and hurt my standing within the
> OLA ranks.*
> __________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>  *I share the same concerns as you, regarding the appropriateness of the
> petition and the conflict of interest, but I do not feel like that I can
> step forward. So I appreciate you giving voice to the potential ethical
> issues with the petition.*
>
>  _________________________________________________________________________
>
> *What you did is very brave and currently I am not brave enough to stand
> with you publicly and I am ashamed of that. While it may sound extreme, I
> am afraid of losing my ability to keep my job, or get another library job,
> if I speak up.*
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> *I felt compelled to write and just let you know I appreciate what you
> shared on libs-or about “groupthink” and concerns about conflict of
> interest regarding the EDIA petition. I, too, have been concerned about
> both of these things, both in this instance and many others.  *
>
>
>
> *I do feel like we (the collective ‘we’ of OLA) have been demonstrating
> some concerning behavior where if an idea/request/thought/initiative is
> presented under the lens of EDIA, it appears through repeated examples that
> they are accepted, cart blanche, without active discourse of clear critical
> thought.  I personally do feel unsafe bringing up dissenting opinions for
> the exact fear that was just enacted on you, which is public ridicule and
> criticism, immediately casting one out as not being an “ally” or supporting
> the needs and advances of our EDIA directives.*
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
>
>
> *I have concerns with the EDI Toolkit distributed, was it vetted by an HR
> attorney of reasonable experience? If not, I would consider it slanted
> advice, I don’t need the grief in my life to ask that question at this
> point. I am glad you made the points you did today. I was not surprised to
> see the responses that came.*
> ___________________________________________________________________________
>
> *My colleague and I discussed this and we do not believe commenting on the
> forum would accomplish much of anything other than creating trouble for us
> and possibly destroying our respective careers.  I read the petition and
> was dismayed at its divisive language and also that the author of the
> petition was being promoted as the perfect person to fulfill the new
> prospective job position, especially in light of her current position of
> being an incoming OLA president.  Like you, I felt this to be a conflict of
> interest. I would like to see the petition worded differently and the
> conflict of interest in naming Marci Ramiro Jenkins specifically for it be
> taken out in order to garner my support.  If I state this however then I’m
> labeled instantly as a racist so I won’t say anything. I appreciate that
> you took the leadership to address what you saw as problems with the
> petition in a way that I’d not be surprised was similar to the way a number
> of us saw it.  However open discussion and diversity of opinions no longer
> seems to be allowed, not even in the library world.*
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
>
>
> *I wanted to let you know how much I appreciate your posts to Libs-Or
> concerning the petition. I don't feel capable of navigating the hazardous
> trail of this discussion openly but have shared your concerns with this
> process. You have eloquently addressed them in a respectful way, which I so
> appreciate.  Like so many librarians I know and respect, I want to see
> BIPOC rise in the profession. I see this issue making it more difficult to
> navigate, especially after reading the September statement by WOC-LIB.
> Carry on and know how much you are appreciated for your ability to speak
> out. I am not alone in knowing that you are doing so with the best interest
> in the advancement of all libraries and librarians. *
> __________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> Penny Hummel
>
> PENNY HUMMEL CONSULTING
>
> penny at pennyhummel.com | 503.890.0494 | www.pennyhummel.com
>
>
>
> *Ensuring that libraries survive and thrive in challenging times*
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/libs-or/attachments/20220216/cddfb1ab/attachment.html>