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

[Steve Silver]

Apologies for being late to this conversation (crazy week and just now
getting to some of my emails). Meredith and Matthew have wonderfully
expressed why this petition and work deserve our support. Kate, your
articulate perspective on the OLA board dynamics that led to the petition
is immensely helpful. Penny, your willingness to be a respectful voice
raising questions about process that I had not originally considered, while
still supporting the intent of the petition, is appreciated. Nancy, your
explanation of the State Library's engagement with this topic, and
procedures they are/will be required to follow, is a helpful addition to
this conversation. Many thanks go to the OLA board for wrestling with this
topic in good faith and with intention. And of course, much thanks to Marci
for her leadership in this area, even while carrying the extra emotional
and cognitive labor we as a profession and society far too often tacitly
(or explicitly) expect from our BIPOC colleagues.

I think we can all agree that change is needed. At least I hope we can all
agree on that point. Librarianship remains more white than the US
population and has seen little to no improvement despite efforts and
rhetoric dedicated to improving representation of BIPOC. What we have been
trying to do has not been effective. New approaches are needed. Change by
definition means disrupting the status quo. Disruption and change are messy
and uncomfortable. If it were clean and easy we likely would have
accomplished it by now. Missteps by all involved will inevitably happen as
we struggle together to forge a new and better path. In my opinion, those
missteps and my discomfort pale in comparison to the systematic injustice
and harm we as a profession and society continue to inflict on our BIPOC
colleagues, potential colleagues, and communities. Policies, procedures,
and ethics exist for good reason and ought not to be lightly abandoned or
ignored. But dismantling white supremacy in our profession requires
dismantling policies, procedures, and even ethics that are doing harm
rather than their intended good. If we are smart we will learn from our
missteps, but not let them derail us from the critically important,
difficult, messy work of dismantling white supremacy within our profession.
This old, white, hetero, male fully supports this work being done by the
OLA board, the EDI Anti-Racism committee, the State Library, and especially
Marci and our other BIPOC colleagues, despite whatever mistakes will be
made along the way. I continue to learn, grow, and make mistakes. May we
all do the same.

Steve Silver

On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 9:03 AM Meredith Farkas via Libs-Or <
libs-or at omls.oregon.gov> wrote:

> I recognize that everyone is in different places in their journey in
> understanding their privilege and the insidious ways whiteness culture and
> racism are baked into our institutions and beliefs (as evidenced by the
> anonymous comments you shared). I recognize that people make mistakes on
> that journey and I try to have empathy for folks when they do it, but,
> Penny, you are not making that easy. I do not necessarily agree that asking
> questions isn't being an ally, but many people have responded to you to try
> to provide education and context and, rather than consider that you might
> have something more to learn here, you seem to only focus on the responses
> of a BIPOC man. Do you understand that for you and I, conversations like
> this are merely an academic discussion, whereas for our BIPOC colleagues,
> they are existential? I always try to keep that in-mind when I engage in
> these conversations, because tone-policing BIPOC in extremely asymmetric
> dialogues would make me look ignorant.
>
> It is the BIPOC library workers who have pushed OLA towards this work and
> their unpaid labor helped create the progress that has been made so far.
> And I'm immensely grateful for that because their initiative helped all OLA
> units (including ACRL-Oregon when I served on the Board) to really look
> inward and investigate ways to be more inclusive and equitable. I'm
> honestly ashamed that I didn't focus on EDI work more during my year as
> ACRL President. During the years I served on and chaired the OLA Membership
> committee, including when you were President, there was no OLA focus on
> antiracist work. OLA units were incredibly homogeneous and no one seemed to
> have a concern about that beyond getting more representation from beyond
> the Willamette Valley. That you're more concerned about current optics than
> the lack of inclusion you helped to continue as a past OLA President is
> disappointing.
>
> Progress is not made by people charitably encouraging and mentoring one or
> two BIPOC librarians (and then taking credit for the good work they are
> doing) -- it is made by fostering changes in systems. You are experienced
> enough to know that as a government unit, the State Library has stringent
> hiring policies and procedures that could not be railroaded by either
> Arlene, Marci, or OLA. I'm grateful that the Board sent a very clear
> statement of support for someone who has done SO MUCH for OLA and for BIPOC
> librarians in Oregon (more than encouraging two BIPOC to go to library
> school). Marci has helped to create SYSTEMIC CHANGE in how OLA runs and all
> that even before her presidential year. I'm in awe.
>
> Your original post essentially accuses Marci and Arlene Weibel of cronyism
> (or at least giving the impression of cronyism), which is really insulting
> given your knowledge of how the OLA Board works. Are you also concerned
> about the cronyism that has led to BIPOC being systematically left out of
> positions of power in our field for generations? Are you concerned about
> the cronyism that still has white men overrepresented in positions of power
> in our field? Have you spoken up or tried to change those things? What
> about the optics of only being concerned about cronyism and partisanship
> when it is focused on supporting a BIPOC woman? And you seem unwilling to
> see or care about the harm you are causing Marci, which after publishing
> those anonymous comments is only growing. But worst is the accusation that
> Marci and other BIPOC have bullied the OLA Board and others into going
> along with something they disagree with. You've impugned not only Marci's
> character, but that of each individual OLA Board member, and you've made
> Marci doubt the very real support she has from many allies in the
> profession.
>
> I hope you will reconsider your point of view.
>
> Meredith
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 8:07 AM Penelope Hummel via Libs-Or <
> libs-or at omls.oregon.gov> wrote:
>
>> Max--it is unfortunate that you appear to believe that *any *critique of
>> a EDIA initiative, however respectfully and thoughtfully expressed, is
>> hurtful to BIPOC people.  By saying “just stop” you are quite clearly
>> telling me to shut up. That the only way I can avoid your repeated public
>> censure is to either go silent, affirm everything you say, or recant my
>> heresy.  It must be frustrating to you that unlike others, I haven’t
>> cracked under your constant pressure.  This is exactly the toxic dynamic I
>> was trying to address in my last post.  Thank you for demonstrating it so
>> clearly.
>>
>> I’m not sure who you’ve cc’d on this message at the American Library
>> Association but can only hope that they are affiliated with the Office of
>> Intellectual Freedom.
>>
>> In general, I find virtue signaling to be pretentious and annoying but
>> since I am being publicly accused of damaging my BIPOC colleagues, I will
>> just say that there are currently two Oregon BIPOC librarians who are doing
>> the great work they are doing in part because I saw their potential,
>> mentored them and encouraged them to go to library school. I did so for all
>> the same reasons that OLA is supporting its EDIA initiatives:  our
>> profession needs to become more diverse and nurturing BIPOC talent is
>> essential in that effort.  I fail to understand how the only way to support
>> EDIA work is to never dare to question any of it.  And so far, no one who
>> has been engaged in this current conversation has addressed this issue.
>> Reiterating how important EDIA work is (which I wholeheartedly agree with)
>> does not address this issue.
>>
>>
>> You are entitled to behave on this listserv however you want.  What
>> surprises me are the number of people in our community who continue to
>> lavish public praise on you despite the nature of your discourse. You write
>> below “Anyone who has eyes can make their own judgements about you and your
>> behavior.”
>>
>> Yes, Max, that’s quite true.  Anyone who has eyes can make their own
>> judgements about you and your behavior.
>>
>> I stand by mine.
>>
>> Penny Hummel
>>
>> PENNY HUMMEL CONSULTING
>>
>> penny at pennyhummel.com | 503.890.0494 | www.pennyhummel.com
>>
>>
>>
>> *Ensuring that libraries survive and thrive in challenging times*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Max Macias <max.macias at gmail.com>
>> *Date: *Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 6:05 AM
>> *To: *Penelope Hummel <penny at pennyhummel.com>
>> *Cc: *"libs-or at omls.oregon.gov" <libs-or at omls.oregon.gov>, "
>> REFORMANet at googlegroups.com" <REFORMANet at googlegroups.com>, <
>> thall at ala.org>
>> *Subject: *Re: [Libs-Or] About the Petition to the State Library of
>> Oregon
>>
>>
>>
>> Ms. Hummel,
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you--it is great to know where people stand.
>>
>>
>>
>> When white people are scared to talk and they find a spokesperson for
>> them--such as you--a mass of pity is created for them.
>>
>>
>>
>> However, when BIPOC raise concerns on this email list they are labelled
>> as aggressive, as 'using tactics" to intimidate people--they are castigated
>> and ostracized.
>>
>>
>>
>> You, Ms. Hummel are being aggressive, unprofessional and are using
>> intimidation tactics against BIPOC who are doing Equity, DIversity,
>> Inclusion and Antiracism work in Oregon.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm not going to label your behavior--I wouldn't want to be accused of
>> being aggressive.
>>
>>
>>
>> Anyone who has eyes can make their own judgements about you and your
>> behavior.
>>
>>
>>
>> Please stop now--you are hurting people.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Max Macias
>>
>>
>>
>> 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/20220217/89b4582c/attachment.html>