If you change one, you must change them all

*bolded terms refer to an authorized LCSH term*

If you read my last post about Transgenderism then you know that LCSH uses the term as an umbrella for a wide variety of gender non-conformant identities and behaviors. As I said last time, that term at one point was indeed used to indicate a broader set of identities and behaviors, but now is mostly used [by anti-trans activists] to refer specifically to people whose gender identity does not match that which they were assigned at birth — a much more narrow definition.

These conflations in LCSH however, have trickled down to another heading: Transgender people. The narrower terms assigned are:
Christian transgender people
Female impersonators
Jewish transgender people
Libraries and transgender people
Male impersonators
Social work with transgender people
Transgender children
Transsexuals
Transvestites
 
[Emphasis mine] the highlighted terms above leap out to me as terribly incorrectly placed. [I’ll acknowledge here that the specific relationship between Transsexuals and Transgender people may be improperly constructed as well]
The ‘impersonator’ headings have variant terms of ‘Drag queens’ and ‘Drag kings’ respectively and have parallel scope notes of:
Here are entered works on men who impersonate women, generally for purposes of entertainment or comic effect. Works on women who impersonate men, generally for purposes of entertainment or comic effect, are entered under Male impersonators. Works on persons, especially males, who assume the dress and manner of the opposite sex for psychological gratification are entered under Transvestites.
[the sexes are swapped in the scope note for Male impersonators]
Drag performers are not inherently trans people. There’s a wide wide world of difference between them. Certainly some trans people have performed drag professionally, but it is an emphatic error to place drag performers as NT under Transgender people.
Transvestites doesn’t belong here either. As the scope note indicates above, LCSH understands that it’s primarily a practice among straight men, for reasons other than entertainment or public performance. As with the impersonator headings, a variant term, ‘cross dressers’ is actually preferred by practitioners.
LCSH continuing to collapse varied forms of gender performance and expression under Transgender people does harm to trans people, especially trans women, and plays right into the hands of the politicians, their malicious laws, and anti-trans activists.
Recommendation:  Move Male impersonators and Female impersonators as NTs of Performance artists, and NTs of Gay culture [and while we’re at it, change the preferred term to ‘Drag kings’ and ‘Drag queens’ respectively]. Move Transvestites as an NT under Heterosexual men — Social life and customs, [and change preferred term to ‘Cross dressers’]

Transgenderism

*bolded terms refer to an authorized LCSH term*

 It is no secret that LCSH is a mess when it comes to gender and sexuality. Today, I want to focus specifically on a single term in the hierarchies of trans identities. [With an eye towards continuing this look at other terms]
First: Transgenderism, whose scope note reads:
Here are entered works on the various manifestations of cross-gender orientation, such as transvestism, transsexualism, male or female impersonation, intersexuality, etc., treated collectively.
From this well springs forth a great deal of trouble, because what even is this term? A google search [March 18, 2017] reveals the following from page 1: [CN: ANTI-TRANS RHETORIC]
  • Wikipedia [Transgender]
  • Focus on the Family [Understanding “Transgenderism”]
  • Focus on the Family [Transgenderism – Our Position]
  • Oxford English Dictionary [transgenderism]
  • Federalist [Psychiatry Professor: ‘Transgenderism’ Is Mass Hysteria Similar To 1980s-Era Junk Science]
  • Daily Wire [Report: Transgenderism Not Supported By Science]
  • Daily Caller [Journal: Transgenderism ‘Not Supported By Scientific Evidence’]
  • Huffington Post portal [Three articles all affirming trans people’s humanity]
  • Pacific Standard [Five Studies: What You Need to Know About Transgenderism, According to the Research]
  • New Yorker [WHAT IS A WOMAN? The dispute between radical feminism and transgenderism.]
  • Public Discourse [The Absurdity of Transgenderism: A Stern but Necessary Critique]
  • National Review [Making Sense of Transgenderism]
So from my count that’s 8 anti-trans hits, 2 reference sources [one of which doesn’t even use the term in the header], 2 mostly positive hits
The term in LCSH’s use is meant to be a broad umbrella to cover the concept gender non-conformity. That is indeed a useful concept for which to have a term, albeit a broad one. Unfortunately the scope of the term in its modern usage [the heading was entered in 2007] has shifted to be much more narrow. All of the above sources are specifically referring to the concept that people’s gender identities don’t match their assignment at birth.
Let’s look at the heading’s usage in WorldCat [search of su:Transgenderism, limited to 2016, books, first 10 hits]

Of these 10 — only a single one [Transantiquity, 5] has been assigned Transgenderism to mean anything other than “the concept that some people’s gender identities don’t match their assignment at birth”. I contend that the vast majority of assignments will follow suit.

We need a term for that concept, and perhaps Transgenderism is that term, perhaps not [edit: see below, 2017-03-22]  But just as importantly we need a different term for the wider scope of “gender non-conformity”. If LCSH wants there to be an umbrella term which encompasses what the current scope note above [all the way at the top!] does, the concept that there are people who cross dress for sexual satisfaction, perform drag, are transsexual, are transgender, are intersex — it cannot be Transgenderism because that is simply not how the term is being used, neither in resources, nor in cataloger application.

Recommendation: Add new term to LCSH for the broad concept of gender non-conformity. Limit the scope of Transgenderism [or replace the term for one which people actually use] to the concept of being transgender specifically.


Edit: 2017-03-22

After consideration, and checking sources — I’ve come to the understanding that Transgenderism must be removed from LCSH, contrary to the above recommendation. From the sources:

“This is not a term commonly used by transgender people. This is a term used by anti-transgender activists to dehumanize transgender people and reduce who they are to “a condition.” — GLAAD

Much like those who still refer to gay people exclusively as “homosexuals,” the majority of the people who use the word “transgenderism” are either biased against the community, such as the discredited anti-trans “expert”Dr. Paul McHugh, or harbor hatred toward the trans community, like the right-wing organization classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Family Research Council. — Advocate

So one thing I want to ask: why do we need this term? That is, are there resources about “the concept that some people’s gender identities don’t match their assignment at birth” that would not be better met with the term Transgender people?  I’m not convinced. On the other hand there are many dual terms for “Concept” and then “concept as manifested in people”. Ex. PovertyPoorBisexualityBisexualsDisabilitiesPeople with disabilities. I bring this up because I don’t think that the PSD would be so amenable to removing the noun-concept word entirely.

Edited Recommendation: Add new term to LCSH for the broad concept of gender non-conformity [with the scope note of the current term Transgenderism.] Make the term Transgenderism a variant of Transgender people. [Or find a better term for the concept of trans-ness]

New LCSH!

As always — check out the full approved list


Amulets in literature

51C0QXFDM6L.jpg
I haven’t read it, but I’m betting the tentacle monster gets the amulet

Brigands and robbers in art

Brigand.jpg
YOUR BOOTS BETRAY YOU

Energy web

energiavioleta-41.jpg
Sounds like something Picard would get stuck in

Google Cardboard (Three-dimensional display system)

Build_Your_Own-e1465937154223.png
and I get to build it myself? Twice the fun!

Instruction librarians

Screen Shot 2017-03-06 at 7.35.42 PM.png
Nailed it.

Messianism in art

content_Tommy_Met-680.jpg
Listening to you, I get the music

Museums in social media

wiley.jpg
I bet their instagrams are terrific

Noir poetry

vlcsnap-2013-08-08-11h57m56s18.png
Walter Neff has got a plan                                                               Caught by Keyes’s little man

Polar bear populations

line-graph-down.jpg
Humans are terrible

The Breadth of Women and Men, Pt. 2

[Edit: 2017-03-05 — I removed all the recommendations for creation of additional gendered terms as per a colleague suggesting that exacerbating the problem is not the solution]
I ended the previous post with three questions:
1. Which headings appear on one list but not the other?
2. Of those, are there equivalent headings that in LCSH?
3. Why does the equivalent heading either not exist, or isn’t in the hierarchy?
Before I get to the specifics, I need to address the obvious elephant: The Marked Other.
I’ve written about this before but it’s so important, it’s worth saying twice [or more!]
Men have traditionally and still today of course, are seen as the neutral. The addition of women to a topic, is an aberration to be remarked upon. This is as enshrined into LCSH as it is in every other part of American society. Until 1973 a pattern of headings existed of “Women as […]” Ex. Women as accountants, Women as clergy, Women as judges, etc. in 1973 they removed this construction in favor of Women accountants, Women clergy, Women judges. It’s an acknowledgement that for a woman to be something other than a Mother, Sister, Daughter, or Wife wasn’t so strange that it needed to be billed “Women as judges?! How shocking”
That doesn’t mean that women are on equal status in LCSH however. The overwhelming majority of resources which purport to be about a topic, if they do not present themselves as involving women, will be cataloged ‘neutrally’. That is, if a book is about pilots, and all of the teachers mentioned are male, or there’s a mix of male pilots and female pilots — odds are that that those resources will be tagged Air pilots.
Unless a resource states in the title or somewhere else prominent Women pilots, lady pilots, female pilots galore! It is unlikely that that resource would get cataloged as Women air pilots.
This is going to be ‘answer’ to many of my three questions above: bias in cataloging, bias in publishing.

The list of remaining NTs of Men is shorter than the list for Women [after removing the equivalent terms], so we’ll start there. The following terms are NTs of Men which do not have an equivalent term in the NTs of Women. For each I’ll provide either one of three options for potential equivalents:
None: This indicates that there isn’t a term in LCSH that I think could be an equivalent candidate as an NT of Women.
N/A: This indicates that I don’t think an equivalent term could exist. That is, the concept is limited, not just in LCSH.
[Specific term which exists in LCSH]: In some cases I’ve found a specific term which matches, but is not currently an NT of Women.
Antique collecting for men                                 None
Brotherhoods                                                          Sisterhoods
Cosmetics for men                                                Cosmetics
Dandies                                                                     N/A
Eunuchs                                                                    N/A
Grooming for men                                                 Beauty, Personal
Latin lovers                                                              None
Male prostitutes                                                     Prostitutes
Men in black (UFO phenomenon)                    N/A
Strong men                                                              N/A
Uncircumcised men                                              N/A

Explanations follow:

Antique collecting for men

 There is no term for Antique collecting for women. The original term’s MARC record shows no work-being-cataloged citation which is a requirement for ever LCSH proposal. I assume that the work in question was:  Antique collecting for men / Louis Heilbroner Hertz. What’s interesting to me is that “Antiques — Collectors and collecting” and “Antique collecting” are both UF of Antiques. That is, apparently that LCSH term encompasses collecting.
Compare this with Women art collectors and Women book collectors neither of which have a men’s counterpart.

Brotherhoods

Sisterhoods is right there in LCSH, here is the comparison:

Brotherhoods (May Subd Geog)
[BV950-970]
UF Brotherhood
BT Church societies
Men
Secret societies
Societies
NT Monasticism and religious orders

Sisterhoods (May Subd Geog)
[BX4200-4556 (Catholic Church)]
[BX5185 (Church of England)]
BT Charities
Church history
Women in charitable work
RT Monasticism and religious orders for women
NT Deaconesses

They’re fairly similar although map to different parts of the classification scheme. Both are church-adjacent, and both incorporate ‘Monasticism and religious orders’.

Note that there’s an error in Brotherhood: according to H 370

Link a new heading only to the next broader heading in the logical hierarchy by means of a BT. [emph. mine]

Brotherhood has BTs of Secret societies and Church societies. Those are both NTs of Societies. That means that Brotherhood should not also have Societies as a BT.

Recommendation: Add Women as a BT of Sisterhoods, remove the Societies as a BT from Brotherhoods.

Cosmetics for men

First remember as I said in the previous post, terms with the prepositional phrase “X for [Class of person]” always get a BT of that class of person. This is an example of the occasional reversal from the marked other. Cosmetics is seen as a “woman’s domain” and so the LCSH Cosmetics stood in for all resources about make-up for women. Here are some resources that could’ve triggered the creation of such a heading:

But of course the unmarked heading Cosmetics would cover these as it is assumed that that implies a connection with women.

Dandies
Eunuchs

The above two terms, I’d marked as N/A because I don’t think that there really are female equivalents to be applied. Let me know if I’m wrong.

Grooming for men

As above with Cosmetics for men, this is an automatic BT to Men, and the reciprocal potential heading Grooming for women is a UF pointing to Beauty, Personal.

Beauty, Personal (May Subd Geog)
[GT499 (Manners and customs)]
[RA776.98-778.2 (Grooming)]
Here are entered works on personal grooming and appearance. Works on the attractiveness of women as a philosophic or artistic concept are entered under Feminine beauty (Aesthetics).
UF Beauty
Complexion
Grooming, Personal
Grooming for women
Personal beauty
Personal grooming
Toilet (Grooming)

As you can see from the scope note, Beauty, Personal is explicitly linked to women, as the note doesn’t point to Masculine beauty (Aesthetics), even though it could.

Latin lovers

This is kind of a shitty heading. There’s lots of literary warrant for it, but there are no other headings for specific stereotypes of classes of persons/ethnic groups. There are no headings for ‘Greedy Jews’ or ‘Lazy Mexicans’ despite there being literary warrant for those as well.

I’m not suggesting someone create a heading ‘Fiery Latinas’ or ‘Voracious Dark Haired Beauties’ because those would be shitty as well.

Recommendation: Delete this heading, use –Sexual behavior subdivision under classes of person instead when appropriate.

Male prostitutes

As I said in a post a week ago, Prostitutes used to be an NT of Women. I understand why they moved it, but that’s just putting a bandaid over it. Perhaps they were worried about the optics of when users might scroll to see what LCSH thinks Women are. But let’s look at the term:

Prostitutes (May Subd Geog)
Here are entered works on prostitutes in general as well as works specifically on women prostitutes.
UF Call girls
Female prostitutes
Girls, Call
Harlots
Hookers (Prostitutes)
Hustlers (Prostitutes)
Sex workers (Prostitutes)
Street prostitutes
Streetwalkers
Strumpets
Tarts (Prostitutes)
Trollops (Prostitutes)
Whores (Prostitutes)
Women prostitutes

[Emph. mine]

The scope note and two of the UFs specifically call out women as the domain of Prostitutes. They’ve removed the term from the hierarchy of Women, but the association still remains enshrined, they’ve just hidden it somewhat.

I’m not issuing any kind of recommendation until the issue of the term itself can be resolved, see the post on sex work I just linked to for more on that.

Men in black (UFO phenomenon)
Strong men
Uncircumcised men

These three terms, as above with Dandies and Eunuchs, do not call out to me as requiring female equivalents. Although we know women can be “Men in black” [just ask Agent L!] that’s the name of the term. Frankly, I don’t know enough about the phenomenon or sub-culture to really say anything intelligent here.

Strong men does not refer to simply men of strength, but more of the circus-ey, side-show type of strong man. I’m not sure there’s a history of such for women in that venue, and would probably be sufficiently covered by Women bodybuilders for more modern works.

Uncircumcised men could of course have corresponding Uncircumcised women because not all people with penises are men — but although I searched, I could not find any extant resources on circumcision amongst trans women or genderqueer people.


Next time we’ll start in on the unmatched Women NTs, and see what we see

The Breadth of Women and Men, Pt. 1

Earlier this week on twitter:
Now I was mostly idly musing as is my wont [though I did get two offers from dear colleagues!], but I started adding things to a spreadsheet anyway, to see what I could see.
There may be more posts in the future emanating from this poking around, but here’s the first.
 You know, and I know, that neither gender nor sex are binaries. LCSH isn’t quite there yet, so for the purposes of these analyses — I will be treating men and women as though they were opposite sides of a binary.
As I gathered more and more terms that are gender divided, I realized that the best place to start might be analyzing and comparing the narrower terms of two fairly high terms — Women and Men.
Before I do that, a word about broader terms [BT] and narrower terms [NT]. Let’s turn to H 370 in our Subject Heading Manual:
There are three main relationships for which a BT is assigned
Genus/species (or class/class member):
Apes
BT Primates
Buildings, Prefabricated
BT Buildings
Women executives
BT Executives
Cinematography
BT Photography
Dental anthropology
BT Physical anthropology
Whole/part:
Toes
BT Foot
Ethnology
BT Anthropology
Instance (or generic topic/proper-named example):
Whitewater Lake (Wis.)
BT Lakes–Wisconsin
Belleau Wood, Battle of, France, 1918
BT World War, 1914-1918–Campaigns–France
You may’ve noticed that all the examples link a term to a BT and none link a term to an NT. That’s because in MARC records, there are no NTs. In proposing and maintaining LCSH records — only BT relationships are recorded. The system automatically generates the corresponding NT. That isn’t going to come up or anything, I just think it’s interesting to know.

Two other pertinent points from the memo:
[ . . . ] and [ . . . ] headings:
Make a BT from the heading (or its equivalent) that follows the word and (cf. H 310).
Prepositional phrases:
Make a BT from the heading that corresponds to the term(s) following the preposition.
Examples:
Sex instruction for [group of people]
BT [group of people]
Church work with [group of people]
BT [group of people]
The […] and […] headings will be particularly important later. Remember the rule that a BT is made only for the term which follows the ‘and’.
Now that we’ve covered some of the rules of forming BT relationships — let’s see what terms LCSH has deemed Men and Women to be BTs of.

[You don’t have to read all these now!! This is just so you can consult the full list if you want, later, I’m going to break it down in a bit]

Women (May Subd Geog)
[GT2520-2540 (Customs)]
[HQ1101-2030.9 (Sociology)]
Here are entered works on the human female. Works on female organisms in general are entered under Females.
UF Human females
Wimmin
Woman [Former heading]
Womon
Womyn
BT Females
Human beings
RT Femininity
SA subdivision Women under individual wars, e.g. World War, 1939-1945—Women; also subdivision Relations with women under names of individual persons; and headings beginning with the word Women
NT Abused women
Abusive women
Advertising and women
Architecture and women
Assyrian women
Aunts
Bahai women
Beauty contestants
Bisexual women
Buddhist women
Christian women
Church group work with women
Church work with women
Computers and women
Crones
Dalit women
Dance for women
Daughters
Daughters-in-law
Discounts for women
Exercise for women
Fascism and women
Femmes fatales
Gentile women
Gifted women
Heterosexual women
Hindu women
HIV-positive women
Homeless women
Housewives
Indian women
Indigenous women
Internet and women
Jaina women
Jewish religious education of women
Jewish women
Large-breasted women
Lesbians
Libraries and women
Married women
Mass media and women
Matriarchy
Medically uninsured women
Mentally ill women
Middle-aged women
Middle class women
Minority women
Mothers
Motion pictures and women
Motion pictures for women
Museums and women
Muslim women
National socialism and women
Nieces
Older women
Overweight women
Ovum donors
Photography of women
Physical education for women
Poor women
Preaching to women
Pregnant women
Puerto Rican women
Queens
Racially mixed women
Radio and women
Retired women
Runaway women
Rural women
Samaritan women
Scolds
Sedentary women
Self-defense for women
Self-employed women
Separated women
Sex instruction for women
Sexual ethics for women
Sexual harassment of women
Sexual minority women
Sikh women
Single women
Sisters
Social work with women
Syriac women
Tall women
Taoist women
Technology and women
Television and women
United States. Navy—Women
Upper class women
Urban women
Video games for women
Violence in women
Widows
Wild women
Wives
Women’s mass media
Working class women
Yezidi women
Young women
Zoroastrian women
Men (May Subd Geog)
Here are entered works on the human male. Works on male organisms in general are entered under Males.
UF Human males
BT Human beings
Males
RT Effeminacy
Masculinity
SA headings beginning with the word Male, e.g. Male nurses
NT Abused men
Abusive men
Antique collecting for men
Bahai men
Bisexual men
Brotherhoods
Brothers
Christian men
Church group work with men
Church work with men
Cosmetics for men
Dandies
Eunuchs
Fathers
Gay men
Gifted men
Grooming for men
Heterosexual men
HIV-positive men
Homeless men
Househusbands
Husbands
Indian men
Indigenous men
Jewish men
Latin lovers
Male prostitutes
Married men
Men in black (UFO phenomenon)
Middle-aged men
Middle class men
Motion pictures and men
Motion pictures for men
Muslim men
Nephews
Older men
Overweight men
Photography of men
Poor men
Preaching to men
Rural men
Sex instruction for men
Sexual harassment of men
Sexual minority men
Short men
Single men
Social work with men
Sons
Sperm donors
Strong men
Uncircumcised men
Uncles
Upper class men
Urban men
Violence in men
Widowers
Wild men
Womanizers
Working class men
Young men

That’s a lot of terms and I don’t expect you to read ’em all, but I wanted to make sure you had them for your own analysis [knowing not everyone has access to ClassWeb, the most up-to-date place for LCSH].
Next, I wanted to whittle down these lists to make them a little more manageable. I matched identical terms and equivalent familial relationships. I also mapped Short men to Tall women as being kin, though I am willing to entertain that there should be headings for Tall men and Short women [neither exist at press time]. Femme fatales being matched to Womanizers is admittedly, not the best match, but they’re close enough to me that I still felt justified.
The following are the matched headings.
Men
Abused men
Abusive men
Uncles
Bahai men
Bisexual men
Christian men
Church grp work w/ men
Church work with men
Sons
Womanizers
Gifted men
Heterosexual men
HIV-positive men
Homeless men
Househusbands
Husbands
Indian men
Indigenous men
Jewish men
Gay men
Married men
Middle-aged men
Middle class men
Fathers
Motion pictures and men
Motion pictures for men
Muslim men
Nephews
Older men
Overweight men
Sperm donors
Photography of men
Poor men
Preaching to men
Rural men
Sex instruction for men
Sexual harassment of men
Sexual minority men
Single men
Brothers
Social work with men
Short men
Upper class men
Urban men
Violence in men
Widowers
Wild men
Working class men
Young men
Women
Abused women
Abusive women
Aunts
Bahai women
Bisexual women
Christian women
Church grp work w/ women
Church work with women
Daughters
Femme fatales
Gifted women
Heterosexual women
HIV-positive women
Homeless women
Housewives
Wives
Indian women
Indigenous women
Jewish women
Lesbians
Married women
Middle-aged women
Middle class women
Mothers
Motion pictures and women
Motion pictures for women
Muslim women
Nieces
Older women
Overweight women
Ovum donors
Photography of women
Poor women
Preaching to women
Rural women
Sex instruction for women
Sexual harassment of women
Sexual minority women
Single women
Sisters
Social work with women
Tall women
Upper class women
Urban women
Violence in women
Widows
Wild women
Working class women
Young women
Check back in the next post where — I want to address three questions:
1. Which headings appear on one list but not the other?
2. Of those, are there equivalent headings that in LCSH?
3. Why does the equivalent heading either not exist, or isn’t in the hierarchy?

Sabaton (Musical group)

Earlier in this series: Iron Maiden (Musical group), Blind Guardian (Musical group)


 

Sabaton is a Swedish power metal band — they’re into war. Like, really into war. I’m not sure where they got this war-lust from considering that Sweden stayed ‘neutral’ in World War 2. I toss it in quotes because they still sold thousands of tons of iron to the Nazis. Yes, I haven’t forgotten that Sweden. On the other hand they harbored nearly all of Denmark’s Jews. So it’s a mixed bag.

Sabaton are good, but if you aren’t into war [as I am not] their catalog can be a bit exhausting and demoralizing with its endless glorification. That being said, they have some fantastic tunes, and lead singer Joakim Brodén has two affectations that I find delightful.

The first is this Thor-style chest piece that he wears.

imgres.jpg                                            images.jpg

The second is that he rolls his Rs. I used to think it was an accent thing [though none of my other Swedish bands roll their Rs until I found this interview:

David: You have a rather special accent when you sing, with rolling r’s, how come?

Joakim: Well, I want the lyrics to be recognizable. It’s easier to catch the message if I use a distinct pronouncing. But also I want people to hear that we are not from an English speaking country. So that’s why the r’s come out kind of Scottish and I guess I sound German sometimes.

http://www.metalcovenant.com/pages/livereviews/sabaton_special_srf_2005.htm

Primo Victoria (2005)

Primo Victoria

650 _ 0 World War, 1939-1945 $x Campaigns $z France $z Normandy.

Reign of Terror

650 _ 0 Persian Gulf War, 1991.

Panzer Battalion

650 _ 0 Iraq War, 2003-2011.

Wolfpack

650 _ 0 World War, 1939-1945 $x Naval operations $x Submarine.

650 _ 0 World War, 1939-1945 $x Campaigns $z Atlantic Ocean.

Counterstrike

650 _ 0 Israel-Arab War, 1967.

Stalingrad

650 _ 0 Stalingrad, Battle of, Volgograd, Russia, 1942-1943.

Into the Fire

650 _ 0 Napalm.

650 _ 0 Vietnam War, 1961-1975.

Purple Heart

650 _ 0 Purple Heart.

Metal Machine

650 _ 0 Heavy metal (Music)


Attero Dominatus (2006)

Attero Dominatus

650 _ 0 Berlin, Battle of, Berlin, Germany, 1945.

Nuclear Attack

651 _ 0 Hiroshima-shi (Japan) $x History $y Bombardment, 1945.
651 _ 0 Nagasaki-shi (Japan) $x History $y Bombardment, 1945.

Rise of Evil

651 _ 0 Germany $x Politics and government $y 1918-1933 .

650 _ 0 World War, 1939-1945 $x Causes.

In the Name of God

650 _ 0 Terrorism $x Religious aspects.

We Burn

600 1 0 Karadžić, Radovan V., 1945-

650 _ 0 Islamophobia $z Bosnia and Herzegovina $z Srebrenica.

650 _ 0 Genocide $z Bosnia and Herzegovina $z Srebrenica.

Angels Calling

650 _ 0 World War, 1914-1918.

Back in Control

650 _ 0 Falkland Islands War, 1982.

A Light in the Black

650 _ 0 Peacekeeping forces.

Metal Crüe

650 _ 0 Heavy metal (Music)


Metalizer (2007)

[skipping this one as it’s a re-release of their demo and has no particularly interesting content to analyze]

 


The Art of War (2008)

Sun Tzu Says

700 0 0 Sunzi, $d active 6th century B.C. $t Sunzi bing fa. $k Selections. $l English. $s Spoken word.

Ghost Division

610 1 0 Germany. $b Heer. $b Panzer-Division, 7.

The Art of War

700 0 0 Sunzi, $d active 6th century B.C. $t Sunzi bing fa. $k Selections. $l English. $s Spoken word.

40:1

650 _ 4 Wizna, Battle of, Wizna, Poland, 1939.

Unbreakable

650 _ 0 World War, 1939-1945 $x Underground movements.

The Nature of Warfare

700 0 0 Sunzi, $d active 6th century B.C. $t Sunzi bing fa. $k Selections. $l English. $s Spoken word.

Cliffs of Gallipoli

650 _ 0 World War, 1914-1918 $x Campaigns $z Turkey $z Gallipoli Peninsula.

Talvisota

650 _ 0 Russo-Finnish War, 1939-1940.

Panzerkampf

650 _ 0 Kursk, Battle of, Russia, 1943.

Union (Slopes of St. Benedict)

651 _ 0 Montecassino (Monastery) $x Siege, 1944.

The Price of a mile

650 _ 0 Ypres, 3rd Battle of, Ieper, Belgium, 1917.

Fire Storm

650 _ 0 World War, 1939-1945 $x Aerial operations.

A Secret

700 0 0 Sunzi, $d active 6th century B.C. $t Sunzi bing fa. $k Selections. $l English. $s Spoken word.

650 _ 0 Sound recordings $x Pirated editions.


Coat of Arms (2010)

Coat of Arms

650 _ 0 World War, 1939-1945 $x Campaigns $z Greece.

Midway

650 _ 0 Midway, Battle of, 1942.

Uprising

651 _ 0 Warsaw (Poland) $x History $y Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, 1943.

Screaming Eagles

610 1 0 United States. $b Army. $b Airborne Division, 101st.

650 _ 0 Ardennes, Battle of the, 1944-1945.

The Final Solution

650 _ 0 Holocaust, Jewish (1939-1945)

Aces in Exile

610 _ 0 Great Britain. $b Royal Air Force. $x Foreign service.

610 _ 0 Great Britain. $b Royal Navy. $b Fleet Air Arm $x Foreign service.

650 _ 0 Britain, Battle of, Great Britain, 1940.

Saboteurs

650 _ 0 Operation Freshman, 1942.

Wehrmacht

610 1 0 Germany. $b Wehrmacht.

White Death

600 1 0 Häyhä, Simo.

Metal Ripper

650 _ 0 Heavy metal (Music)


Carolus Rex (2012)

The Lion from the North

600 0 0 Gustav $b II Adolf, $c King of Sweden, $d 1594-1632.

Gott Mit Uns

650 _ 0 Breitenfeld, Battle of, Germany, 1631.

A Lifetime of War

650 _ 0 Thirty Years’ War, 1618-1648.

1648

650 _ 0 Prague, Battle of, Prague, Czech Republic, 1648.

The Carolean’s Prayer

650 _ 0 Sweden $x History, Military $y 17th century.

Carolus Rex

600 0 0 Charles $b XII, $c King of Sweden, $d 1682-1718.

Killing Ground

650 _ 0 Fraustadt, Battle of, Wschowa, Poland, 1706.

Poltava

650 _ 0 Poltava, Battle of, Poltava, Ukraine, 1709.

Long Live the King

600 0 0 Charles $b XII, $c King of Sweden, $d 1682-1718 $x Death and burial.

Ruina Imperii

650 _ 0 Northern War, 1700-1721 $x Campaigns $z Norway $z Trøndelag.

650 _ 0 Sweden $x History $y Charles XII, 1697-1718.


Heroes (2014)

Night Witches

650 _ 0 World War, 1939-1945 $x Participation, Female.
650 _ 0 Women air pilots $z Soviet Union.

No Bullets Fly

600 1 0 Brown, Charlie, 1912-2008.
600 1 0 Stigler, Franz, 1916-2008.

Smoking Snakes

610 1 0 Brazil. Exército. Força Expedicionária Brasileira, 1944-1945.

Inmate 4859

600 1 0 Pilecki, Witold, 1901-1948.

To Hell and Back

600 1 0 Murphy, Audie, 1924-1971.

650 _ 0 Post-traumatic stress disorder.

The Ballad of Bull

600 1 4 Allen, Bull, 1916-1982.

Resist and Bite

650 _ 0 World War, 1939-1945 $x Underground movements $z Belgium.

650 _ 0 World War, 1939-1945 $x Campaigns $z France $z Ardennes.

Soldier of 3 Armies

600 1 0 Törni, Lauri Allan, 1919-1965.

Far from the Fame

600 1 0 Janoušek, Karel, 1893?-1971.

Hearts of Iron

650 _ 0 Halbe, Battle of, Germany, 1945.

Man of War

610 2 0 Manowar (Musical group).


The Last Stand (2016)

Sparta

650 _ 0 Thermopylae, Battle of, Greece, 480 B.C.

Last Dying Breath

600 1 4 Gavrilović, Dragutin.

Blood of Bannockburn

650 _ 0 Bannockburn, Battle of, Scotland, 1314.

Diary of an Unknown Soldier

650 _ 0 Argonne, Battle of the, France, 1918.

The Lost Battalion

610 1 0 United States. $b Army. $b Infantry, 308th.

Rorke’s Drift

650 _ 0 Rorke’s Drift, Battle of, South Africa, 1879.

651 _ 0 Rome (Italy) $x History $y Siege, 1527.

The Last Stand

610 1 0 Vatican City. $b Guardia svizzera pontificia–History.

Hill 3234

651 _ 0 Afghanistan $x History $y Soviet occupation, 1979-1989.

651 _ 0 Soviet Union. $b Sovetskai︠a︡ Armii︠a︡.

Shiroyama

650 _ 0 Satsuma Rebellion, 1877.

Winged Hussars

651 _ 0  Vienna (Austria) $x History $y Siege, 1683.

650 _ 0 Poland. $b Armia. $b Kawaleria.

The Last Battle

650 _ 0 World War, 1939-1945 $x Campaigns $z Austria $z Tyrol.

Finding Sex Work in LCSH

I read Beacher Wiggins’ response to Sanford Berman, [courtesy of Tina Gross, and I suggest you give it a read too!]. Now obviously the first thing I note is that he checks this very blog [thought not by name], but AFTER that fannish-squeeing, I absorb the rest.

There’s a tremendous in there to unpack, and I can’t do it all right now. One pull-out that I do want to highlight is the term ‘Sex workers’.

Wiggins:

Sex workers. This phrase was added as a “see” reference to the heading Prostitutes in 2008.

Berman:

I’m well aware that SEX WORKERS is presently a see-reference to PROSTITUTES. The trouble with that is that “sex workers” is a much broader term, encompassing not only prostitutes, but also exotic or pole dancers, stripteasers, phone sex operators, and erotic film actors, among others.

Side note: that this isn’t the first time criticism has been made of this entry, Hope Olson, the latest and MUCH DESERVED! recipient of the Margaret Mann Citation, notes in her work: “Confirming this perspective, the general heading ‘Prostitutes is a narrower term under the heading ‘Women'” [The Power to Name: Representation in Library Catalogs. Hope A. Olson. Signs, Vol. 26, No. 3 (Spring, 2001), pp 639-668. The University of Chicago Press]

I don’t know when this was changed — as it stands, Prostitutes is not an NT of Women but despite searching the PCC site, I couldn’t turn up the editorial meeting when this was changed. As I’ve lamented before, LCSH is frustratingly bad at version history.

But back to the business at hand.


First, terminology: let’s go to the sources — this is to indicate the scope of the term ‘Sex worker’ covers a variety of services and to also demonstrate its preferred usage.

What is Sex Work?

Sex work is any type of labor where the explicit goal is to produce a sexual or erotic response in the client. Sex work includes prostitution, but it also includes a bunch of other things like erotic dancing, pro-dom/pro-sub work, webcam work, sensual massage, adult film, phone sex, being a sugar baby, etc.

http://www.new.swopusa.org/learn-about-sex-work/

International Union of Sex Workers

We’re a group of people who work in the sex industry and adult entertainment, together with allies who support our aims.

We believe that everyone in the industry, whether they are there through choice, circumstance or coercion, deserves the same human, civil and labour rights as other citizens.

We’re a grassroots organisation, founded by a migrant who worked in a range of jobs in the sex industry. The organisation brings together people from all sectors – people who sell sexual contact or BDSM services, people who work for or run agencies, websites or brothels, strippers, erotic dancers and glamour models, porn actors and film makers, phone sex workers and web cam models; men, women and transgender people; straight, gay and bisexual.

http://www.iusw.org/iusw-who-we-are/

Sex Workers’ Rights are Human Rights

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2015/08/sex-workers-rights-are-human-rights/

Sex workers were the first to use the terms sex work and sex worker. The terms have been adopted by numerous international health, labor and human rights organizations, including the United Nations and its affiliated agencies.

The term sex worker is neutral, descriptive and informative without being judgmental. It recognizes sex work as a reality, whatever the speaker’s opinion about the work itself. It does not distinguish by gender, race, ethnicity or creed. It allows the possibility of the worker’s dignity and ability to make decisions. Most of all, it affirms the humanity of the person.

http://sexworkersproject.org/media-toolkit/downloads/03-WhatsInAName.pdf

When discussing sex work using existing LCSH, there are a substantial number of terms collocated on the business side of things:

Sex-oriented businesses which has NTs of Adult movie theatersBrothelsGay BathhousesMassage parlorsPornographyProstitution, and Sex tourism.

Following the chain of NTs, we pick up additionally: All-male adult movie theaters, Internet pornography, Male prostitution, Pornographic films, and Telephone sex. [I’m picking only the ones that I think fall into the ‘business-ey’ side of things]

I pause to note that Escort services is an NT of Service industries and has no connection this hierarchy, despite being a pretty well-known euphemism for same.

But there is no overarching BT term for the providers of sexual services. I have identified the following terms which could be usefully placed as NTs.

Lap dancers, Prostitutes, Sex surrogatesStripteasers

Some terms that we don’t have in LCSH but probably should, there’s plenty of literary warrant:

‘Dominatrices’

Interestingly, all the memoirs I found written by dominatrices [I have not determined if the plural ‘dominatrices’ is actually a better choice for the preferred term] used Sexual dominance and submission in some capacity rather than following the standard practice for biographies of:

600 [Person’s name]

650 [Class of person] — Biography

which I suppose would’ve necessitated proposing the term. Here’s some good literary warrant:
‘Webcam models’
[note that many of these works are assigned the heading Computer sex which is also not in the hierarchy of Sex-oriented businesses perhaps because it is intended to cover freely exchanged cybersex?]
‘Telephone sex operators’
[As above, Telephone sex  is not in the hierarchy of Sex-oriented businesses]
This is not an exhaustive list, and many other terms as seen enumerated by the organizations are possible — but I think it’s very unlikely LCSH would ever authorize “Pornographic film actor” or anything like that because they don’t have any terms for other genres of actor.

A note: there is a problem in creating an LCSH BT of ‘Sex worker’. And that’s what to do with the term Prostitute itself. In reading for this blog post, it seems that many sex workers would prefer that were the term to be used. But how then to differentiate the category from the specific?
Berman is correct in that we need a BT term ‘Sex workers’. Perhaps I’ll put together a proposal.

Anti-Semitism Actually

I make no secret of being Jewish. I mean, I really don’t. I’ve been disturbed at the increase of anti-Semitism, but also surprised at how many people seem to be flabbergasted that these ideas are “still around” or that this hatred “still lingers”. Much more knowledgable people than I have written about the history and the present of anti-Semitism, and I’ll leave it that to them. I only know from what I’ve experienced first hand, so that’s what I’ll share.


I grew up in Sharon, MA a town known for its high Jewish population. I attended private Jewish day school for K-12 and for three years attended Kingswood, a Jewish sleep-away camp in the summers. My point being that I had a fairly culturally insular life. This story takes places the year before I started going to Kingswood.

At [redacted summer camp] I enjoyed a fairly standard first week. I found the ropes course to be challenging and fun, I’d made a few friends, and I was looking forward to being in a play that summer. Like many groups of young boys, there was one, whom I’ll call ‘Joe’, who was the defacto leader of our little group. He was a taller, more confidant, and had that all-around cool-guy vibe that we all responded to.

Then we had the first barbecue. There was a barbecue every week on Fridays. The food was of course provided, and you could have a hamburger or a hotdog. Because I knew ahead of time that I wouldn’t be able to eat either [coming from a kosher-keeping household] my parents had cleared it ahead of time that it’d be okay if I brought my own meat wrapped in tinfoil [so as not to share the grill with the other non-kosher meat].

So that first Friday I brought a hamburger and a hotdog, wrapped in tinfoil in a cooler. When my new found friends saw that I was having both, they asked why — and I explained that I’d brought them from home, that they were kosher. This is the part that I don’t understand, even today. They latched onto that word. Kosher. I didn’t know them well, and I certainly don’t know them now, I find it hard to believe I was the first Jew they’d ever met, but it’s possible I was the first they’d met who kept strict kashrut. Either way.

Joe did that asshole-kid thing. He refused to ‘hear’ the word or understand it. He kept calling it ‘koshen’ with an ‘n’.

“So you’re koshen? You’re a koshen boy?”

That’s what he called me for the rest of the summer. Koshen boy. Of course, because he did it, so did some of the others. I was out. I finished out the summer, participating in my activities that I’d signed up for, but I didn’t have friends anymore. Sure I knew the people in the activity groups, but it wasn’t camp-friends. The worst part was every Friday. They’d find me wherever I’d gone to eat my single hotdog or single hamburger [somehow thinking if I didn’t bring both it’d be okay] and taunt me.

The next summer I went to an all Jewish summer camp.

 

This is a relatively small blip in my life, but it was important too. I was pretty sheltered growing up and while I certainly heard of anti-Semitism happening in the US and elsewhere, our community was so insular, it didn’t often happen to people I knew.

Anti-Semitism didn’t start with the Holocaust and it didn’t end there. It knows no national boundary. It may be a rising tide, but if all you see is the tide — you’re missing the ocean.

 

New LCSH!

As always — check out the full approved list

New LCSH!


Aesthetes

picture of aesthete
Oh this hat is so edifying!

Children’s literature on postage stamps

set of 4 forever stamps of Ezra Keats Snow Day
Forever until the USPS is dismantled and replaced with something horrible

Crab cakes

a birthday cake in the shape of a crab
Happy birthday Megan! I hope you weren’t wanting the other kind of crab cake…

Equality in mass media

scene from The Incredibles "when everyone's super, no one will be"
not too many children’s movies espouse such a Randian “some people are just better than others” message, so that’s fun

Erotophobia

sheet music from Erotamania, by Dream Theater
all my Dream Theater friends will get it

Free rider problem (Economics)

still from The Simpsons, Mr. Burns riding on the back of Smither's bike and not pedaling
The rich are the problem

Jazz–Auditions

still from "Whiplash'
Sure he’s good, but AT WHAT COST

Las Vegas Strip (Nev.)

still from "Honey I Blew Up the Kids"
I went to Vegas this summer, very disappointed at the lack of Giant Toddler

Metal sculpture, Canadian

Sculpture of star-man, the Rush mascot
I can’t confirm this is actually metal…

Mills and mill-work [edit 2017-02-09, this is not a NEW LCSH, rather, it’s an updated LCSH, thanks to sanspach for bringing to my attention]

Still from Arkham City
Remember that batarang challenge in the steel mill? Ughhhhhhh

Politics on television

Still from Supergirl
I’m pretty sure President Lynda Carter is an alien on Supergirl. But they really haven’t followed up on that.

 

Surprise parties

still from "District 9"
The real surprise comes when you turn into an alien prawn

Tall buildings–Shading

tweet decrying a new building "Morphosis"
wow people hate the Morphosis

Vampires in popular culture

Collage of pop culture vampires
I will not be wading into the “I Am Legend: vampires or zombies” debate

Women bass guitarists

still of lead singer/bassist of Triosphere
TRIOSPHERE
*head bangs*

Women guitarists

still of The Great Kat
THE GREAT KAT
*continues headbanging*

#LISMentalHealth2017

Previous iteration of this post


CN for police, self-harm,  and involuntary commitment

 

It was recently my birthday (January 26) and it was a mixed day. I say that because while things are going fairly well in my personal life, the last vestiges of our democracy is crumbling — that tends to color every day a certain hue of resistant beige. It was not however, my worst birthday. That title belongs to January 26th, 2003, my 19th birthday. I want to acknowledge that it was the worst for reasons entirely personal and not at all to do with the state of the world in 2002 [which were certainly awful, but not on my mind at that time]

At that time, I was living at the Austen Riggs Center in western Mass on an indefinite absence from Wesleyan University. Austen Riggs is a voluntary-only open-door-kinda-treatment facility. That means that you are not allowed to be there if you need a locked-unit or are judged a risk to harm yourself or others. I’d been there since Oct. 31 of 2002.

You need to understand that although I was in a serious treatment program, my mind was always on getting back to school, back to my friends. I’d had to leave Wesleyan in September of my sophomore year and didn’t know when [if ever, and spoiler: never] I’d get to go back. In my mind, my friends were moving on, having new experiences, and forging on without me. I felt left-behind, forgotten, and losing touch with what I was working towards.

Let me pause to be perfectly clear that it was not healthy to hold “return to Wesleyan and be with all my friends and everything will be as though I’d never left” as my goal. It wasn’t realistic because it wasn’t possible. Not that I couldn’t have returned, but that anything would be the same even if I did go back. Time had passed and would continue to pass and rekindling that magical first year of college can’t be done.

January 25, 2003 — it was about to be my birthday and I was feeling particularly lonesome. I wanted to see my friends so I drove down to Wesleyan. It wasn’t enough, and it didn’t help. If anything it made my feelings worse. Seeing them in person was just further evidence to me that I’d missed some important window on those relationships — and that that window was ever widening.

I panicked. I broke down. I was hopeless.  I drove.

I drove all night. I stopped for gas and ate and I drove. I didn’t know where I wanted to go, I just knew that when I was driving with my music playing, I felt like I was in charge of my life, I was in control of my destination and my story and my future. I’d gotten on I-90 West and eventually saw a sign for Niagara Falls in the early hours of the morning. I’d never been there, and so I stopped. It was early and cold on January 26th and it was my birthday. I saw the Falls and sat for a while alone. Listening to the empty silence and smelling the cold.

I kept driving. Seeing signs for Ohio I thought maybe I’d see my friend at Oberlin whom I’d never visited. I called my parents first to explain what I’d been doing, they were worried. I was also worried. I called my friend and we got together at Oberlin. I spent the night there and had promised my parents I’d come back the next day. It was snowing harder by that point and I was not a good driver. I’m still not a good driver.

I spun off the road a little ways and my car got stuck. I couldn’t get it back onto the road. I started walking, hoping somebody would come along who could get me to a tow truck. A semi picked me up and offered to drive me to a gas station at the next off-ramp, he called a dispatch, got my car towed and had the tow guy meet me at the gas station. The tow guy drove me to an ATM so I could get cash to buy back my car. I got to a motel and slept, charging my phone and calling my parents again.

The rest of the trip was uneventful. I went home to Sharon and told my parents that I didn’t want to be at Austen Riggs anymore, they had me call the Centre to tell them that I was home safe. Then the police arrived, the Centre had called them to bring to a psych unit at a hospital.

I was scared. I was angry, and I was scared. But here I pause this mostly-flat telling to editorialize again. I survived this encounter in no small part due to being white and affluent. When I wouldn’t get on a gurney, when I resisted and struggled — no excessive force was used against me. No weapons were brought out to escalate the situation. This is not the the treatment people who don’t look like me, who don’t live in ‘good’ neighborhoods get. I was handcuffed to the gurney and restrained but I survived and wasn’t harmed.

If there’s any point or message to this besides “I’m sharing this story so that others in LIS will know that they are not alone with having scary or ‘dangerous’ histories and presents” — it is this: responding to the acutely symptomatic with law enforcement is a terrible societal idea. They are not equipped for those situations and the usual gamut of implicit and explicit biases has far too many times lead to their murdering those they are sent to help.

This did not happen to me, I was protected by my place in the social structure. It shouldn’t happen to anyone.