OMG! I am flabbergasted that a library professional would just "grab" a book without following procedure. Not having read the book, I cannot comment on its contents, but a public or county library system needs to have a broader selection of materials than a public or private school library. Just can't get over this. Are we becoming our own worst enemy?

Remove "Where the Wild Things Are" next. That book is scary.

Don't you know only straight teens can come of age sexually in literature?? When GLBT youth start learning about themselves it's Child Pornography. This makes me sick, homophobia at it's worst. A book that shows LGBT kids that other kids feel what they're feeling, that they're not alone or weird or crazy is essential for every public library! You cannot imagine how literally life saving a book like that is for a confused gay kid who hates their thoughts and feels alienated from their peers.

No one is removing books marketed toward preteen girls in which 150 year old men eating the placenta out of their new wife so that the baby that is devouring her from the inside can be freed. Nope, they are simply further marginalizing an already shaky and oft oppressed teen demographic. The 9.12 Project claims to protect the Constitution. But, because it's a Glenn Beck mouthpiece, this of course only means the Constitution as he and his sheep bleat it.

--"As the copies that are checked out return, we will take them out of circulation," explained Sweet in the email to Marinelli.-- What makes me angry is that their patrons clearly WANT the book. It's being checked out, but now it will be removed from the collection without cause (child pornography? don't make me laugh) and without following any type of procedure? So disheartening and an example of terrible, cowardly librarianship.

A library professional advocating censorship, this offends me on a deep level. The purpose of the public library is to provide access, not judge what is and is not appropriate for their users. What books I have access to should not be the decision of one person, who has never met me or has any right to judge my moral standards. If you don't like it or don't think it's appropriate, there's a very simple solution: DON'T READ IT. How dare you tell me or my children what they can and cannot read. Land of freedom, except at this library.

I just searched their library system catalog at the website link provided - for Nabakov's LOLITA. I found ten copies. Figure that one out.

How ineffably sad it is that two people in this library system have chosen to remove this book. I find it disturbing to read the publisher's notes on the book: "Invisible. Unheard. Alone. Chilling words but apt to describe the isolation and alienation of queer youth. In silence and fear they move from childhood memories of repression or violence to the unknown, unmentored, landscape of queer adulthood, their voices stilled or ignored. No longer. Revolutionary Voicescelebrates the hues and harmonies of the future of gay and lesbian society, presenting not a collection of stories but a collection of experiences, ideas, dreams, and fantasies expressed through prose, poetry, artwork, letters, diaries, and performance pieces." and realize that once again, homophobic adults are silencing their voices. Shame on Gail Sweet.

Just because someone identifies as part of a group doesnt mean she speaks for the group.

We keep going 10-steps backwards!! Frustrating!

Was the action as a part of the 9-12 group? If so we need to know that because they aren't fulfilling the mission of the group. If not it doesn't belong in the story. I belong to a 9-12 group and this is the last thing we would bother with. As libertarians we don't care about the sexuality of teens or consenting adults.

What amazes me, constantly, about those who contribute statements of support for this "shaky" demographic, is that they never, ever acknowledge that the demographic is populated by those who choose to be part of that community. It is not as if they are forced into the lifestyle. They choose the lifestyle. And I cannot wait for the "born this way" crowd's response.

As an observer of this tale, I can tell you that it is the continual identification of 912 group that brings the most attention. The woman in this question is a member but does not speak for the group. The press keeps trying to make that connection, but fails so it plants the seeds of doubt...kinda like an Alinsky acolyte.

As a librarian I am shocked at this action by a fellow, presumably, professional librarian. It is not our job to censor books / library items regardless of whether we personally agree with them or not.

So, if this woman doesn't represent the views of this 912 group, why does their website include photos of her addressing the Rancocas school board (http://www.meetup.com/912burlco/photos/836801/) and congratulatory messages from other members of the group (http://www.meetup.com/912burlco/messages/boards/thread/8641375) ? And what about these comments from group organizer Gerry Grabinski in the Philadelphia Inquirer? (http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/nj/20100506_Activists_see_momen tum_in_book_ban.html) He doesn't represent the group either?

Esme, Just as Obama does not represent the views of all Americans, or Rangle represent the views of all taxpayers, or Gingrich represent the views of all Republicans. That is the logic. However, given the tendency to go from the specific to the general (defying the rules of logic) because she reflects the tone of some members does not mean she speaks for the group, or does the other gentleman. Yet, your answer is an example of what I cited earlier, that the members of this demographic want to be members, it is a matter of choice for them and not a birth issue. Mommy and Daddy didn't make them that way, the LGBT (don't you just love the institutionalization of the losers) members choose of their own free will to participate. And further, you do not address the issue of the book in question. You just want to stir the pot. Poor you.

Josh - you made a really good point regarding other books that aren't being banned. There is one thing about this that I find rather satisfying: What is the best way to get kids to read a book? Tell them they can't. This book will be very popular in that area now and kids will find a way to get a copy. I also have not read the book but I would like to see a better system in place for its potential removal.

From the 9.12 Project's website under '9 Principles, 12 Values' - "It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share my personal opinion." I guess it is just wrong if people other than 9.12 Project members share their opinions and stories through books. Hypocrites.

I don't think that this is a case of censorship (as in "'concerned citizen' thinks that isn't appropriate") as much it is a case of political grandstanding. Beck's mouth-breathers club is just trying to score points with the segment of this country that make Chicken Little seem like The Dude, and they're using this twit Sweet to do it. She'll get the brunt of the backlash because she's the director, while the group gains noteriety and new members from these incidents with minimal PR damage, a win-win situation for them. Too bad for Sweet that she's not bright enough to at least exploit the system so that her backside is covered after the fallout settles. Right now she's given her board cause for termination if they change their minds and decide that she's expendable, although I do admit that's unlikely.

Time for a good old fashioned book burning YEE HAW!!!

You progressives better start figuring out your exit strategy. These right wing nutjobs are frothing with violent fantasies against their fellow Americans. I'm saving every last dime I have, then I'm getting out of here and immigrating to a country that actually has values. Good Luck.

"What amazes me, constantly, about those who contribute statements of support for this "shaky" demographic, is that they never, ever acknowledge that the demographic is populated by those who choose to be part of that community. It is not as if they are forced into the lifestyle. They choose the lifestyle. And I cannot wait for the "born this way" crowd's response. " Wilbur, do you honestly believe people CHOOSE to be exiled, shamed, harassed, beaten, and murdered because of their sexuality? I can tell you from my experiance working with gay and trans teens that many of them, if given the choice, would choose to be straight if only to stop the hate and violence directed their way. Many of them do their best to pass for straight and suffer psychological problems because of it. I bet you Matthew Shepard or Angie Zapata would have loved to have been able to be straight rather than being murdered only for being who they were. People like you are the reason these books are published in the first place. Shame on this director and the spineless staff members going along with this blatant censorship of members of their community. I'm 100% for free speech on BOTH sides, but not at the expense of another group's freedom to read. If you don't like it, say so, but don't restrict others who DO want and need these materials in their community.

Perhaps Director Sweet should reconsider the sale of this title. It's out-of-print and copies are going for upwards of $150 each from dealers. She could turn this into a win-win situation for the library system, selling off anything to which the conservative critics object and raising library revenues.

"E" Bravo! I was about to post something similar. As a dedicated queer peer, mom to another and also parent of a bisexual child...it is very true that if most queer kids had a choice they would definitely not choose the sexuality they were born to. Despite the growing freedom to be out and proud in some parts of this country there are even places in the big cities where the LGBTQ community is treated badly. Especially in the high school environment where kids are working on figuring out who they are as adults, i.e. political stances, religion/spirituality, social affiliations. Teens defending their choices by putting down those who don't share their views or choices. Being a queer youth, high school tends to be a hostile environment. I would ask the commenter to at least educate themselves about sexuality before making such statements. As for the librarian? She walked right out of Farenheit 451. This kind of censorship by a committee of two, one of which appear to be the toady of the other? I hope that members of the community and the library board are calling both of them to task on this.

I suppose they'll be burning books next, much like the Sauberung of 1930's Germany; the "cleansing" of libraries of any literature deemed to have an "Un-German spirit". Are we to have another Library of Alexandria, destroying that which you do not understand?

I suppose they'll be burning books next, much like the Sauberung of 1930's Germany; the "cleansing" of libraries of any literature deemed to have an "Un-German spirit". Are we to have another Library of Alexandria, destroying that which you do not understand?

Sounds to me like Gail Sweet should have a LOT to say on this topic, like how she can call herself a professional when she clearly has no idea how to handle a situation like this. Guess trying to sweep it under the rug didn't work out too well for you, eh?. There's only one work to describe this woman. Coward.

Wow wilbur do you honestly think I chose to be gay? If I had a choice I wouldn't have chosen to be anything other then who I am. and yes I was born this way, I had a regular childhood no abuse, no circumstances that would change my sexuality. I am gay and I am proud. the fact that these people took books off the shelf because they don't agree with them is aprehensible.

So, can we get rid of Tolkien's work next? That witchcraft stuff is evil and there's not one mention of how great America is in the entire series!

So, how is banning a book protecting the constitution?

Just how does censorshipndefend the constitution?

a group of young theatre artists is responding to this controversy by taking the book Revolutionary Voices and performing theatrical readings of it throughout the tri-state area. Please check out this website for more info: www.revolutionaryreadings.com

But Lolita counts as Literature and is revered and, now, meaning at the present time, is not viewed as obscene.

How is the practice of banning books protecting the Constitution? That sounds like proto-Nazism. Oh, right. We actually live in a fascist country, I keep forgetting. It's so easy to do so when we are told time and time again how "free" our "democracy" is...

And to E or Wilbur or whoever said being gay is a choice, and asked, "Who would choose to be straight rather than murdered?": What a sick question, first of all. Are those my only options? What world do you live in?! But if forced to answer: I would rather be murdered for being who I am than pretending to be someone else. The latter is suicide, and I don't believe in suicide. So someone would have to rob me of my life first, yes. Is my sex life really that interesting or important to you? Get a hobby.

They will come for our books long before anyone ever comes for our guns.

Just remembering what the IFLA/UNESCO Public Library Manifesto states: "The following key missions which relate to information, literacy, education and culture should be at the core of public library services: [...] 7. fostering inter-cultural dialogue and favouring cultural diversity; and 9. ensuring access for citizens to all sorts of community information; [...]" http://www.unesco.org/webworld/libraries/manifestos/libraman.html#2

WWW.REVOLUTIONARYREADINGS.COM we are combatting this regressive banning through a series of theatrical readings from the book. come check us out on our website! STOP SILENCING THE LGBT COMMUNITY!

I think we should remove any and all books that i disagree with, ( just because ) everyone should think like me, after all what is a library for? This librarian should be fired or this library should lose state funding, as a violation of the NJ Anti discrimination law.

Thank you for bringing this subject to light. We have long been awaiting press coverage of the ban at Burl Co Public Library. We have been performing excerpts from the book as a theatrical reading to show its value and to show that it is not obscene or vulgar and CERTAINLY not child pornography. We are REVOLUTIONARY READINGS and you can read more about our project at www.revolutionaryreadings.com. STOP SILENCING THE LGBTQ COMMUNITY! Be a part of the revolution!

If you had gotten your degree from the Library School at Rutgers, you wouldn't be "flabbergasted" by this. I'd say that about 50% of the current grad students there are fully in favor of active censorship. It's sad, infuriating, frustrating and just plain depressing.

What's really depressing is that this important book is out of print.

I get all my best ideas for new books to add to my collection from articles like these. Must make sure to add Revolutionary Voices to this year's order.

I'm glad that I can borrow a copy from my local University Library here in Hong Kong. The U.S. really seems to be getting more and more messed up.

Note: this book is out of print! WorldCat lists only 400 libraries that still own copies. Please see my blog post on why, if your library owns this book, you should never weed it: http://shelfcheck.blogspot.com/2010/07/revolutionary- voices-if-you-have-this.html

blmnbeah http://gpgeutvi.com pzefoxst nibnjeli <a href="http://zlqxnols.com">namqbhnb</a> [URL=http://idasjsxh.com]vafggeex[/URL]

I find a group that claims to defend the U. S. Constitution being party to such a blatant act of censorship ironic in the extreme. Clearly, the First Amendment only protects THEIR freedom of speech.

Gail Sweet is correct. I discuss this, including a response to this SLJ story, at "Et tu, Mary Minow? Then Fall, Gail Sweet!" http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2010/08/et-tu-mary-minow-then-fall-gail-sweet.html

Kudos to Max. Eloquently and truthfully put. Moving in a world that is largely against them (and only VERY slowly coming around), the LGBT youth NEED this book, and who is Ms. Sweet to define what is 'child pornography'?? As much as an action like this should be expected (and that's part of what makes this so unnerving), this is unacceptable and deeply troubling to me. It is 2010, and censorship like this, of material that does NOT need to be censored, in an entirely unprofessional manner, has no place. And, as evidenced by the majority of the comments here, will not be tolerated.

Furthermore, I find it interesting that almost every single comment on here utilizes correct spelling and grammar, and words that aren't typically in the average American's vocabulary. In short, we're clearly intelligent, free-thinking individuals... and you can't tell those kinds of people what they can and can't read. I can't remember the specific username that made this particular statement, but they were entirely correct when they said 'how do you get someone to read a book?... Tell them that they're not allowed.' These two women wanted to pull this 'filth' off the shelves, and in doing so, they've all but handed a copy to everyone who has gotten wind of this. I had never even heard of this book until now, but you can bet your bottom dollar I'm going to get my hands on it. *golf clap* Bravo, ladies.

If you want to read the book then you can request it through Inter Library Loan. I'm sure that the NY Public library will be happy to send a copy since they have 11 and none of them are checked out. This is a non-event. The books were donated to libraries and they never circulated because there was no interest in the books until this became a media issue. No one cared to read this book. It sat on shelves for years. Now suddenly it is in demand? Why would this book suddenly be worth over $100 when it was freely available from libraries for the past decade and no one checked it out?