Manga pulled from public libraries

[Giant Robot]

http://www.icv2.com/articles/home/8510.html

I thought this was interesting in light of the case of the man who was given 20 years for downloading some anime that was determined to be child porn. What do you all think?

[simonm]

1. Betty Boop should be pulled also

She looks too young for some of the outfits she wears.

[noamnety]

2. The initial report of that case was misleading

He had already served 46 months for child pornography charges, then an additional term for violating the terms of his probation, then this last case was not only cartoons, but also pornographic photos of real children, as well as emailing graphic descriptions of parents molesting their own children.

Aside from that, if the library's holding material that would be rated R in a movie theatre, then it's perhaps not unreasonable for the libraries to have similar protections.

[Giant Robot]

3. I can understand that

But, if the book was not in the kids section, and the child checked it out, the mother should have some responsibility in this, rather than just pulling the offending book.

Actually I own this book, and it is a very comprehensive history of manga in Japan, and looks at some history of art there in general. There is a section (I think) on hentai, but it is hardly the sum total of the book, and also presented as more scholarly discussion.

I was unclear whether the mother who complained actually examined this book first or if it was a failing on the library staff to let the parent know this was from an adult section. But I do not think pulling this book is the answer. Better library procedures and parental responsibility yes.

And I mentioned that other case I guess more because I was thinking about manga and obscenity in general, and thought to provide some sort of frame to the discussion. That was my intent in mentioning that.

As an aside, when I was a minor, and comic book geek, there were some adult items that I wanted over the years. Some comics with intense violence or maybe some nudity. Whomever the dealer was, was upfront about the content and showed it to my parents to get their ok first. I don't see why that doesn't happen more often.

[noamnety]

4. I'm not sure about the mother's responsibility

The child was 16, and every 16 year old I know, including my own, was allowed to go out without their mother's supervision - especially to a library. Heck, when I was 16, I wasn't even living at home anymore. 16 year olds are old enough to legally be left home alone, old enough to stop by the library after school to do some research. I can't blame the mom for being negligent in any way here.

Brainstorming here, but I guess they could have color coded library cards that identify you as a minor, and code the rated R books so they aren't accessible to minors. The parents could even sign a waiver to allow kids to have access to rated R materials if they feel their kid is mature enough (that would be the parental responsibility part of it).

There'd be some negative consequences, but possibly not as bad as banning the books altogether.

[Giant Robot]

6. I disagree about the first part

Even if the child is 17, that is still legally a minor, and any material marked for adults is out of his hands unless parents say so. Yes he sure can do most of the adult things, drive, have a job, etc. but he is still legally a minor. The mom is responsible for his life by law, if not by fact. Change the laws if you want to redefine age of adulthood, but that's the reality now. Growing up I never had a problem with my parents reviewing the occasional adult material I wanted to purchase/view/whatever, and I plan on doing that with any little Giant Robots that come along. So I put some responsibility on the parents here.

I don't even really think there need to be any negative consequences, just a learning experience, and like you said, maybe changing library policies with different library cards, or having parents sign a waiver, or something. This could be a moment for a community to come together and direct their library in a wonderful way, rather than just a knee jerk censorship response that it is.

[noamnety]

8. There's a difference

it's one thing to be legally held accountable for a minor's actions ... it's a whole other manner to be legally responsible for supervising a minor every waking minute of the day, until the day they are legally an adult.

I'm influenced of course by my own life (aren't we all?), but I was enrolled at a college in a different state when I was 16. I can't imagine that my mom was supposed to accompany me to college or hire a babysitter for me at that point. The thought of that is fairly amusing, though. :D

[Giant Robot]

10. But adults are responsible

I am not sure what the course of events were in your life, but in general, adults are responsible for their child(ren)'s lives every minute until they are 18. That again may not have been the way things went for you, but it how most of the country works. That does not mean I expect parents to monitor every decision that their child(ren) make(s) 24/7, but it does mean they have a certain responsibility in this that goes past what the library's is, in my opinion. This may not be a legal definition, but I think on some moral or ethical level that is true.

[noamnety]

14. every minute?

That's not even economically possible for most families. If the parent(s) work, there's a very high probability that they won't be able to get home from work before a high school student is dropped off from school.

Aside from that, it's not the legal requirement, either - otherwise parents who let their 16 year olds stay home alone for an hour while they did grocery shopping would be charged with neglect. They'd definitely be charged with neglect if their 15 year old got pregnant, but I can't recall any cases where the parents were charged with neglect because their teen had sex while they weren't home. Parents are held legally accountable for the consequences of their kids actions, particularly the financial consequences, but the judicial system doesn't charge them with neglect for not supervising the kids every minute.

[Giant Robot]

15. But they CAN be charged with neglect for that(15 y.o pregnancy)

It is not feasible to do so, but it is possible. In my state, if a minor is truant, it is the adult that will face jail time. If the minor is caught with porn, for example, the parent's will be the ones to face the prosecutor first. If a minor has a party while their parent's are away, and the police, come, the parents will face the charges.

All I am really trying to say is that the parent has some culpability here, not necessarily get into a debate about parental responsibility. Obviously your case was very different from this. And yes the reality is that minors cannot be supervised 24/7. But parents will be held accountable very often, and need to be a part of their child(ren)'s lives for many many reasons.

[noamnety]

17. The library certainly feels the parent is culpable

"it was the parent's responsibility to determine what a minor checked out of the adult section." --County Library Collection Development Coordinator

I don't know what to make of that, though. The library believes parents should approve each book a child checks out? Why even give them their own card then, if that's what they believe?

The mother is obviously involved in the kids' life; she took action on the issue, whether we agree with her position, or the library's. It's just so hopelessly unrealistic to call women culpable or irresponsible or negligent for not having enough money to stay home and be full-time moms. Legally, it's unrealistic as well, given that the Red Cross in California does babysitting certification for minors as young as 11. You can't be old enough to be certified as a babysitter, but so young you still require one yourself.

[kevinbgoode]

5. Exactly. . .pull the kid from the parental household

It would be nice to see some fundies get their panties in a wad when they are discovered to be "bad" parents.

[Giant Robot]

7. I think that goes against a lot of people's thinking

To look at their own responsibility in something. It's a lot easier for it to be the library's fault and make them deal with it. Don't look at it, it might offend or scare or disrupt. Just get rid of it. Sarcasm meter on high now just so you know.

[AngelFactor]

9. A better solution

If the solution here is to pull the book, wouldn't the solution to war to be to pull the guns? Just asking.

@@@

American Justice? Sure, so why is an attorney getting away with tampering with court documents even though he “inadvertently” filed three pages of emails detailing what was done with the court.

See for yourself: http://www.maximumadvocacy.com/Court_records.html, look on pages 25-27 of document 64.

Unbelievable. Priceless. Hilarious, if it wasn’t so sad but true.

How’s your faith in the justice system?

[SmokingJacket]

11. There should maybe be a "rated X" shelf in the library...

not for outright porn, but for otherwise informative materials that happen to have adult content, like this book.

It would be easy enough to make sure you're 17 or whatever before you can get an X-rated card, or else you can show ID for those books, or something.

I'm not in favor of censorship, or for making ALL adult books off-limits to kids.

[Giant Robot]

13. I am so with you on this

There could be such an easy solution that keeps this book, and others like it, in circulation for years to come. And it could be that simple. But no.

I know I try, in the course of my job, to try to keep people from catastrophic thinking, but I can just see this going down hill fast. First some book with something offensive about comics in Japan, next the Koran, and then...? We cannot let this happen.

[SmokingJacket]

16. This country is freaking out over sex, in particular.

I agree -- I think it's going to get worse before it gets better.

[DUHandle]

12. My library has that book

it's great!