The digital closet 2014 - slideshare - aug 20

The Digital Closet:
Discriminatory Filtering and LGBTQ*
Information on the Internet
Ethical Issues for Teachers, Librarians, &
Parents
Alvin M. Schrader, PhD
Adjunct Professor, iSMSS
[Institute for Sexual Minority Studies &
Services], and
Professor Emeritus, University of Alberta
alvin.schrader@ualberta.ca
www.ualberta.ca/~aschrade
August 2014

This version has been updated with
findings from several studies,
including a 2014 ALA report, and
news accounts of U.K. filtering
Revised from original Slideshare upload entitled
“The Digital Closet & Global Access to LGBTQ*
Information: Ethical & Empirical Considerations
for Schools, Libraries, & Parents” (July 14, 2014)
Based on a presentation to the 2014 Information
Ethics Round Table held at the University of
Alberta on April 26, 2014

 Internet filtering
~ Internet content filters
~ LGBTQ* targeting by filters
~ viewpoint discrimination
~ filtering as censorship of websites and
social media
~ LGBTQ* and other lawsuits in the U.S.
~ limitations of Internet filters
 LGBTQ* – the rainbow community
 LGBTQ* rights in the world
 Library associations and Intellectual
Freedom
 Educational associations and LGBTQ*
policies
Outline
3

Introduction
Global information rights
and social responsibility are
essential foundations for
universal human rights in
21st century digital
environments.
4

5
Discriminatory practices
perpetrated by Internet content
filters prevent access to
information about LGBTQ*
minorities.
Internet filters silence LGBTQ*
voices, render them invisible, and
perpetuate homophobia, biphobia,
and transphobia.

What are Internet Content Filters?
• A rudimentary form of artificial intelligence – software
programs constructed by commercial vendors with
unknown credentials and hidden agendas.
• Designed to censor digital content considered
“objectionable,” by targeting keywords, phrases,
URLs, and subject blocking categories – determined
by computer algorithms.
• Other blocking methods are bandwidth consumption,
protocols, file types such as .mp3, image files such
as .jpg, dynamic categorization, and whitelists – often
combined with security and firewall features.
• Most filters block entire webpages and websites.
6

What are Internet Content Filters? (2)
• Many libraries do not operate filters directly but are
subject to state library, library consortium, or local or
provincial/territorial/ state government systems of
which they are a part.
• Digitally literate users, especially young people, use
proxies and other tools to circumvent filters.
• Filters are black boxes resistant to transparency and
public accountability.
• Keyword lists, subject blocking categories, and other
methods are individually selected and constructed by
each vendor and are therefore highly idiosyncratic.
7

Why and How are Internet Filters Used?
• Filters in schools and libraries (and at home) create
false security and complacency among government
officials, school and library administrators, teachers,
librarians, and parents.
• Government funding for Internet access in libraries
and schools in the U.S. requires – or is believed to
require – that filtering software be used.
• IT administrators and school and library decision-makers
typically set filters to the most restrictive
levels.
• Unblocking websites requires human intervention
and usually requires justification to the IT
administrator – a very intimidating prospect not only
8
for staff in schools and libraries but also for students
and library users.

Flaws of Internet Content Filters
• Filters are driven by extreme secrecy.
• Blocking decisions and blocking content categories
by vendors and programmers are value-laden,
agenda-driven, idiosyncratic, non-standard, and
secret.
• Filters both overblock (false positives) and
underblock (false negatives) at unacceptable rates,
because cultural and linguistic dynamics transcend,
and are always beyond the reach of, algorithmic
functionality.
• Filters are perpetually imperfect for both
technological and cultural-linguistic considerations.
9

Flaws of Internet Content Filters (2)
• No mass-imposed, one-size-fits-all filter will satisfy
even the dominant elite because consensus is a
fiction.
• Mass-imposed filters privilege a narrow range of
voices and render minority viewpoints invisible.
• Filters impede
~ student and adult learning, freedom of inquiry, and
the right to read;
~ violate the right of students and adults to access
constitutionally protected information; and,
~ curtail student and adult development of critical
skills for understanding and negotiating the
digital world.
10

Reasons to Oppose Internet Filtering
• Outsourcing value systems that undergird democracy
and human rights to anonymous third-parties is a
poor model for
~ digital curricula and education;
~ individual student responsibility;
~ freedom of expression and the right to receive
expressive communications;
~ social justice; and,
~ democratic citizenship.
• The Internet is the critical source of information for
young people in the 21st century, particularly LGBTQ*
adolescents and allies.
• Young people in poverty and those living in rural areas
are the most vulnerable, so having access to the
11
Internet solely through filters is dangerous to their

LGBTQ* Communities and Filters
• Filters engage in viewpoint discrimination.
• Filers censor LGBTQ* information and
websites.
• Filters silence LGBTQ* minorities and make
them digitally invisible.
• Average coming-out age is 15, but of first self-awareness
is 10, and the key factor is Internet
access to information.
12

LGBTQ* Communities and Filters (2)
• By denying access to LGBTQ* information, filters…
~ harm LGBTQ* and questioning young people;
~ impede adolescent identity formation and reinforce
LGBTQ* negative self-concepts;
~ sustain and augment marginalization,
stigmatization, discrimination, scapegoating, gay
bashing, bullying and cyberbullying;
~ increase sexual health risks for gender and sexual
minorities;
~ intensify “othering” (marginalizing) and compound
addiction, depression, suicidality, and other mental
health issues;
~ exacerbate the digital divide especially in rural and
poor communities;
~ stifle public understanding and acceptance;
~ perpetuate invisibility and ignorance; and,
13
~ obstruct and impede LGBTQ* growth into resiliency.

What is Resiliency?
14
• Resiliency is the ability to adapt to and
bounce back from life’s changes, adversities,
and setbacks.
• When we are resilient, we are able to
harness our inner resources to keep going
forward.
• Resiliency and mental health are intertwined.

What is Viewpoint Discrimination?
• Restricting constitutionally protected speech
15
(discourse, text, images, all forms of human
communication) based on the ideas and
views expressed in that speech.
• Overblocking errors in filtering functionality
result in viewpoint discrimination.

Overblocking errors in filtering
functionality result in viewpoint
discrimination
alt.sexy.bald.captain
breast
couple
Super Bowl XXXI
groin injury
The Beaver [magazine]
VictimsofPornography.
org
DirtyPicturesBand.com
American Urological
Assn
TheSmokingGun.com
online nursing exam
Lesbian.org
Implantinfo.com
PFLAG
SexHelp.com
prescription drugs
Hustler entry in Wikipedia
WW II history website
Moby Dick
Dick
Archie R. Dykes Medical
Library
16

Netsweeper, a Canadian filter, initially
classified the website of Little Sisters
Book and Art Emporium, an LGBTQ*
bookstore, as pornography.
[Classification was changed in 2008 after being
challenged]
CyberSitter: “We filter anything that
has to do with sex. Sexual orientation is
about sex by virtue of the fact that it
has sex in the name.”
17
Other examples of viewpoint
discrimination

Content Blocking Categories
Anti-Gay Filtering Practices
Blocking categories constructed
by various filters that deliberately
hide LGBTQ* websites
• Education.lifestyles
• Lifestyle
• Lifestyle and culture
• Sex education
• Sex education/sexuality
• Sexuality
• Sexual materials
18

Content Blocking Categories (2)
Anti-Gay Filtering Practices
Blocking categories constructed
by various filters that explicitly
name LGBTQ* websites
• Gay/Lesbian Topics
• Gay or Lesbian or Bisexual
Interest
• Homosexuality
• LGBT
19

Example: Blue Coat
Scope note on Blue Coat filter’s
LGBT content blocking category
states:
“Websites that provide reference
materials, news, legal information,
anti-bullying and suicide
prevention information, and other
resources for LGBT people or that
relate to LGBT civil rights…. [They]
do not contain sexually explicit
content and are generally suitable
for viewing by all age groups.” 20

This is what Blue Coat actually
does…
Blocks:
• The Advocate Magazine
• good.as.you.org
• bilerico.com
• pamshouseblend.com
• glsen.org
• towelroad.com
• GLAAD
• AMERICAblog Gay
• Human Rights Campaign
• joshseefried.com
Allows:
• American Family Assn
• National Org for
Marriage
• Family Research
Council
• Glenn Beck
• Ann Coulter
• Rush Limbaugh
• Red State
• Breitbart
This filter is used by many U.S. schools
21
and the U.S. Pentagon

Filtering as Censorship – 2002
Kaiser Study
A 2002 study tested how much impact 7
filters had on access to teen health
information
22
• Symantec
• SmartFilte
r
• Websense
• AOL Parental
Controls
• BESS N2H2
• CyberPatrol
• 8e6
See no evil: How Internet filters affect the search
for online health information. Kaiser Family
Foundation, 2002
www.kff.org/entmedia/20021210a-index.cfm

Teen information websites about
Gay Health were subjected to the
most severe levels of censorship
(60%), followed by sites about
Condoms (55%) and Safe Sex (50%).
See no evil: How Internet filters affect the search
for online health information. Kaiser Family
Foundation, 2002
23
Many other topics of critical
importance to teens, of all identities,
were also censored.

Teen health information blocked by the 7 filters
Health Sites Blocked by Filters:
http://www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/Chart-Pack.pdf
(Chart 3, Kaiser Family Foundation, 2002)
http://www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/Chart-Pack.pdf 24

The 7 filters blocked access to
these specific health information
websites for teens…
www.femalehealth.com [female condom
website]
www.gayhealth.com
www.goaskalice.columbia.edu/
www.hivchannel.com/prevention/safesex/
www.teenwire.com [Planned Parenthood teen
website]
www.youngwomenshealth.org/spherpes
25
See no evil: How Internet filters affect the search for
online health information. Kaiser Family
Foundation, 2002

Filtering as Censorship – 2009 South
Dakota Public Libraries Study
26
50% of libraries had been asked by
patrons to unblock filters
Patrons’ reasons varied – hotmail, dating
services, drug research for prescriptions,
school project research
“Does Filtering Stop the Flow of Valuable Information?: A Case
Study of the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) in South
Dakota,” by Candice Spurlin and Patrick M. Garry, Patrick.
South Dakota Law Review, 2009

Filtering as Censorship – 2011 ACLU
campaign Don’t Filter Me!
The American Civil Liberties Union
launched a campaign to test access
through school computers to 8 well-known
websites
~ 5 gay-affirmative sites
~ 3 anti-gay (“pray-away-the-gay”)
sites
Don’t Filter Me! American Civil Liberties Union,
2011
https://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights/dont-filter-me-final-
repo2r7t

• Day of Silence
• It Gets Better Project
• The Trevor Project
• GSA Network
• Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education
-N--e-t-w--ork
• National Association for Research
and Therapy of
Homosexuality
• People Can Change
• Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays
and Gays
28
Websites tested for Don’t Filter
Me!
Don’t Filter Me! American Civil Liberties Union,
2011
https://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights/dont-filter-me-final-
report

Findings by Don’t Filter Me!
29
~ Filters blocked the pro-LGBTQ*
websites
~ Filters allowed the anti-LGBTQ*
websites
Don’t Filter Me! American Civil Liberties Union, 2011
https://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights/dont-filter-me-final-report

Findings by Don’t Filter Me! (2)
These filters were found to engage
in LGBTQ* viewpoint discrimination
• Blue Coat
Systems
• Fortiguard
• Lightspeed
Systems
30
• M86
Solutions
• URL
Blacklist
• Websense
Don’t Filter Me! American Civil Liberties Union, 2011
https://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights/dont-filter-me-final-report

AASL Study
A 2012 study found that 94% of U.S.
schools use a filter to censor
“objectionable” online content.
Over half of U.S. schools said that
filters:
~ impede student research
~ discount the social aspects of learning
~ go beyond U.S. CIPA (Children’s Internet
Protection Act) requirements
31

U.S. schools use filters to
block various social
networking media
~ social networking sites- 88%
~ im/online chatting - 74%
~ online gaming - 69%
~ video services - 66%
School Libraries Count 2012! Supplemental Report
on Filtering, American Association of School
Librarians, 2012
ala.org/aasl/filtering-schools
32

Filtering as Censorship – 2012 U.S.
National Technology Access Survey
33
Public libraries not applying for
federal E-rate discounts to avoid
compliance with legally required
CIPA filtering:
Urban - 44% (61
“2011-2012 Public Library Funding and Technology Access Survey:
Survey Findings and Results,” by John C. Bertot et al.,
Information Policy & Access Center, June 19, 2012
libraries)
Suburban - 30% (350 libraries)
Rural - 28% (532 libraries)
Overall - 29% (944 libraries)

PEW Study
A study of U.S. middle and high school
teachers found that 97% of schools
employ:
Internet filters, and
Cell phone use policies, and
Acceptable Use Policies (AUPs)
How teachers are using technology at home and in their classrooms.
Pew Research Center Internet & American Life Project, 2013
http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2013/Teachers-and-technology
34

1/3 of all surveyed teachers say
filters have a major negative
impact, but the % varies
depending on who and where they
teach:
~ lowest income students . . . . . . . . . . . .
49%
~ students in large metro areas & cities .
37%
~ students in small towns . . . . . . . . . . . .
28%
~ highest income students . . . . . . . . . . . .
24%
How teachers are using technology at home and in their classrooms.
Pew Research Center Internet & American Life Project, 2013
35

Filtering as Censorship – 2010 & 2013
Surveys by Project Tomorrow
36
Belief that their access to the Internet
and websites is inhibited by filters and
firewalls:
45% - teachers, 2010
36% - teachers, 2013
48% - students grades 6-8, 2013
58% - students grades 9-12, 2013
Project Tomorrow, “Speak Up National Findings,” May 2010
www.tomorrow.org/speakup/pdfs/SU09UnleashingTheFuture.pdf
Presentation at the National Symposium, American Library
Association and Google, Inc., Washington, DC, July 29-30, 2013. In:
Fencing Out Knowledge: Impacts of the Children’s Internet Protection
Act 10 Years Later,
by Kristen R Batch, American Library Association, June 2014

Filtering as Censorship – 2013 Rhode
Island Schools Study
Rhode Island schools block 89 categories of digital
“Social Opinion” category – blocks websites of the American Civil
Liberties Union, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals,
the National Organization for Marriage, and Planned
Parenthood, and other content deemed “controversial,
inappropriate, or time-wasting”
“Obscene/Tasteless” category – blocks “explicit graphical or text
depictions of such things as mutilation, murder, bodily functions,
horror, death, rude behavior, executions, violence, and
obscenities”
37
content, for example:
American Civil Liberties Union of Rhode Island, “Access Denied:
How Internet Filtering in Schools Harms Public Education,” February 2013
http:// riaclu.org/images/uploads/Access_Denied-
_How_Internet_Filtering_in_Schools_Harms_Public_Education.pdf

Filtering as Censorship – 2014 ALA
Study of Schools and Public Libraries
~ Filtering is not the answer. Instead, educate students on
responsible use, and reframe AUPs as Responsible Use
Policies.
~ Widespread overreaction, fear, and myth have triggered
misunderstanding and imprudent “over-implementation” of
filtering in schools and libraries, resulting in unconstitutional
Internet censorship far beyond the 3 narrowly defined
categories of visual images prohibited by CIPA in 2000 –
namely, visual depictions deemed obscene, child
pornography, and harmful to minors.
~ Federal law does not mandate blocking controversial ideas,
political viewpoints, or digital platforms. Fencing Out Knowledge: Impacts of the Children’s Internet Protection
38
Act 10 Years Later, by Kristen R Batch, American Library
Association, June 2014

~ Federal Communications Commission (FCC) enforcement of
CIPA makes it a civil, not a criminal, matter, requiring schools
and libraries merely to file a certification of compliance, and
no school or library has ever been found out of compliance
since 2001.
~ Filtering negatively impacts those who can benefit most from
school and public library access – the 60 million Americans in
rural and low-income communities who are without access to
either a home broadband connection or a smartphone.
~ Filtering creates two classes of students – an advantaged
higher-income class with unfiltered home access, and a
disadvantaged lower-income class with only filtered school
and library access.
~ Filtering provokes not only negative educational
consequences Fencing Out Knowledge: but negative Impacts of social the Children’s and ethical Internet consequences
Protection
39
as well.

~ As solutions to hacking, copyright, cyberbullying, and value
issues, schools and libraries are illegally blocking Internet
content and legitimate educational resources as well as
social media, social networking, interactive, user-generated,
and collaborative tools, platforms, and websites.
~ Filtering restricts learning opportunities to prepare students
to be responsible users, consumers, and producers of online
content and resources.
~ Filtering compromises school and library goals of digital
citizenship, digital inclusion, digital literacy and media skills,
and digital ethics and online social behaviour – goals vital for
future opportunity, post-secondary success, and career
readiness, as well as for full democratic and economic
participation in cyber society.
40

~ Filters are black boxes lacking transparency and
accountability.
~ Filtering places decision about what content will be censored
in the hands of third-party vendors, not librarians, who have
marginal control over filtered content.
~ Filtering poses fundamental challenges to intellectual
freedom, violates basic principles of librarianship and
librarians’ core professional values, and is incompatible with
the democratic right to receive information.
~ Blocking categories constructed by vendors reflect target
markets and the specific values and agendas of individuals,
groups, or even countries – not librarians’ professional values,
principles, and standards of classification, collection
development, and freedom of access.
41

~ Key responsibility for implementing school and library filtering
rests with technology directors, whose individual attitudes
affect the application of content filtering as much or more than
written policies, and whose influence has been overlooked
and seldom examined.
~ Expert findings about filtering from congressionally mandated
studies are being ignored.
~ Few studies measuring filtering performance have been
conducted since 2008.
~ This is a critical time to recognize the unequal and uneven
impact of CIPA and filtering practices.
42

The British government ordered
the big 4 ISPs to impose opt-out
filtering (not opt-in) on all U.K.
customers
Blocked websites include:
London Friend [LGBT charity]
Stonewall [gay rights charity]
LGBT* [group in Liberal Democrat party]
Glasgay! [arts festival in Glasgow]
DIVA [lesbian magazine]
~ gay and lesbian “lifestyle” websites are
censored in “Sex Education” or “Lifestyles”
blocking categories
43

In the U.K. at the present time:
~ as of mid-2014 few ISP customers are
opting for filtering
- Virgin Media 4%
- BT 5%
- Sky 8%
- Talktalk 36%
~ 2014 campaign launched by UK Open
Rights Group “against blunt, ham-fisted Internet
filter systems that cause more harm than they
solve” - Dave Neal, “Majority of UK web users haven’t
turned on ISP’s internet porn
filters,” The Inquirer, July 23, 44

In the U.K. at the present time (2):
~ 20% of websites checked are blocked by one
or more ISPs, such as Guido Fawkes [political
blog], www.sherights.com [feminist blog], and
a small car dealing business
~ technology does not allow website owners to
determine whether their sites are blocked
~ informed choice is undermined; raising
awareness and empowering people is
hindered; parents’ opportunity to teach
children about proper Internet use is denied
~ transparency is critical
~ open debate is essential
45

Viewpoint Discrimination – LGBTQ*
Lawsuits in the U.S.
46
~ Out of court settlements in 2 lawsuits against
Tennessee school districts – allowed access to
constitutionally protected gay educational websites,
and the filter, used by more than 100 Tennessee school
districts, adjusted accordingly 1
1. American Civil Liberties Union, “Franks v. Metropolitan Board of
Public Education—Case Profile,” August 13, 2009
https://www..aclu.org/lgbt-rights-hiv-aids/franks-v-metropolitcan-board-
of-eduation-case-profile

Viewpoint Discrimination – LGBTQ*
Lawsuits in the U.S. (2)
47
~ Court decision in lawsuit against Camdenton
(Missouri) school district – guilty of
“unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination that violated
the students’ First Amendment rights” and ordered to
pay $125,000 in legal fees and costs, for blocking LGBT
affirmative websites under “Sexuality” category while
permitting access to anti-gay websites 2
2. American Civil Liberties Union, “PFLAG v. Camdenton R-III School
District,” April 6 2012 www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights/pflag-v-camdenton-r-iii-
school -district; PFLAG v. Camdenton R-III School Dist. C.D. Mo.,
January 15, 2012.

Viewpoint Discrimination – Other
Lawsuits in the U.S.
~ Court decision in lawsuit against North Central
Regional Library District (Missouri) school
district – upheld filtering policy as constitutional
under one particular set of facts in one library system,
but the library had modified its Internet filter and
amended its filtering policy in the meantime 3
3. Bradburn et al. v. North Central Regional Library District, launched
in 2006 with court ruling on April 10, 2012. Cited in “Why Recent
Court Decisions Don’t Change the Rules on Filtering: Blocking
Access to Protected Speech Can Lead to Litigation and Legal Fees,”
by Theresa Chmara, American Libraries, July/August 2012
www.americanlibrariesmagazine.org/article/why-recent-court-decisionsdon%
E2%80%99t-change-rules-filtering
48

Viewpoint Discrimination – Other
Lawsuits in the U.S. (2)
~ Court consent order against Salem (Missouri)
Public Library – prohibited from blocking religious
49
content and alternative viewpoints under “Occult,”
“Criminal Skills,” or any other filtering category 4
4. Hunter v. Salem Public Library Board of Trustees, 4:12-cv-00004-
ERW, United States District Court, Eastern District of Missouri
Eastern Division, March 5, 2013.

Limitations of Internet Content Filters
- SizeT aenchdn gorloowgticha ol fC tohnes Iindteerranteiot ns – new
websites come onstream by the second, old
websites morph
- New media services, new
technologies – filters can not keep up with
the rapid evolution of Internet tools and
platforms, e.g., video gaming, texting (1993),
blogging (1994, 1999), Craigslist (1996), Google
(1998), Myspace (2003), LinkedIn (2003), Facebook
(2004), wikis (2004), YouTube (2005), Reddit (2005),
Twitter (2006), Tumblr (2007), Dropbox (2007),
Manhunt (2008), Grindr (2009), Instagram (2010), etc.
50

Technological Considerations (2)
- Primarily text-based – reliant on exact-match
software algorithms; image detection by
many filters is still text-based – “technical
limitations continue to preclude accurate
identification of obscene images” - Fencing Out
Knowledge: Impacts of the Children’s Internet Protection Act 10 Years
Later, 2014
51

Cultural-Linguistic Considerations
- Ambiguous terms and imprecise
categories – nuances, synonyms, homonyms,
homographs, metaphors, similes, double entendres,
twists of phrase, puns, euphemisms, coded terms,
initialisms, acronyms, appropriated meanings
52

53
Examples of ambiguous terms and
imprecise categories

In 1991,
Toronto Mayor
June Rowlands
refused to
allow this group
to perform at
City Hall on the
basis of their
name alone
54

Cultural-Linguistic Considerations (2)
- Evolution of terms/subjects
- Variable perceptions of offensiveness –
profanity, blasphemy, heresy, sedition, terrorism,
indecency, obscenity
55

- Variable interpretations of legal terms –
obscenity, pornography, “harmful to minors” laws
(U.S.), age of consent laws, community standards
- Variable perceptions of age-appropriateness
– rigid conformity of one-size-
fits-all treating older students the same as
younger ones, failure to recognize enormous
variation in adolescent development and ignoring
the vast diversity of student needs, differing ages of
majority, differing ages of consent
57

- Variable region-specific and culture-specific
value-laden terms – more cultures
than countries, values, beliefs, norms, traditions
59

~ in the U.S.…
Unshelved, July 18, 2009 60

- websites in languages other than
English – and foreign language words adopted
into another language
- Circumvention technology – proxy servers,
“over the wall” software in China
- “Teenspeak”
61

General Concerns about Filtering
~ Foreign (mostly U.S.) English-language
commercial computer programs – block lists
treated as trade secrets, pervasive ideological bias,
conservative religious value systems
~ Reliance on exact-match character
recognition – underblocking (false negatives) and
overblocking (false positives), reductive,
decontextualized, disregarding multiple layers of
meaning
63

General Concerns about Filtering (2)
~ Violation of constitutionally protected
digital expression and access
~ Belief in the power to control attitudes and
behaviour by prohibiting words and ideas
~ Promotes uniform world view – no knowledge of
choices, no awareness of the world’s rich diversity,
viewpoint discrimination hinders empathy, understanding,
and respect
~ Lack of accountability and due diligence in
product testing
65

United Nations and Internet Freedom
~ UN Human Rights Council Resolution L13 – The Promotion,
Protection and Enjoyment of Human Rights on the Internet,
2012 http://geneva.usmission.gov/2012/07/05/internet-resolution
~ UN Human Rights Council Resolution A/HRC/26/L.24 on
The Promotion, Protection and Enjoyment of Human Rights
on the Internet, 2014 Endorsed by 82 countries
“The same rights that people have offline must also be
protected online, in particular freedom of expression,” in
accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights and other international human rights treaties.
“The fundamental importance of open, critical and even
controversial expression on the Internet is a universal
value that applies in all societies.”
66

No large-scale testing or even public
awareness programs have been
67
initiated in Canada or, to my
knowledge, in any other democracy.
Instead, many institutions and some
governments recklessly and deviously
impose filters on Internet users without
due diligence and rigorous product
evaluation.

Schools and libraries have legally
enforceable AUPs, which specifically
identify prohibited types of online
conduct and content, so why filter?
IT users in schools and libraries must
legally accept the terms of institutional
AUPs, as well of-age terms for adult and
other websites, so why filter?
68

Schools and libraries, as well as all other
public institutions, have an ethical obligation
to follow public accountability and full
disclosure principles.
If public institutions (and governments) use a
filter, their main pages should notify Internet
users of…
69
~ filter name
~ blocking level
~ blocked subject categories
~ a statement that adult supervision is still
required commensurate with user age and
maturity
~ user rights and remedies, particularly
reconsideration procedures and a dispute
resolution process.

Schools and libraries should be aware
that filtering does not absolve them of
child supervision and guidance
commensurate with the age and the
maturity of both groupings of, and
individual, Internet users.
Filters should never be treated as
babysitters!
70

Educational curricula should include full
courses on Internet and social media use,
ethics, privacy, surveillance, cyberbullying,
and related issues.
Libraries should develop regular programs
around these same issues, targeting
specific audiences of children, students,
parents, library users, and citizens.
Libraries and schools should reframe AUPs
AUPs as Responsible Use Policies.
71

Hierarchies of Oppression
Balancing Equality Rights
• Freedom from homophobic, biphobic, and transphobic
oppression is acutely linked to freedom from ignorance
around misogyny, sexism, double standards, and gendered
privileges and power.
• Sexism and misogyny are the ubiquitous weapons of
homophobia, biphobia, and transphobia – girlie man, sissy,
effeminate, momma’s boy, the pink government, pansification,
man up, don’t be a pussy, boys don’t cry.
• Homophobia, biphobia, and transphobia are the misogynistic
male’s fear that gay men will treat him the way he treats
women, and that lesbians will treat other women better than
he does.
• Stereotyping and ignorance based in fear lead to violence.
72

Balancing Equality Rights (2)
• Women’s liberation and gay liberation are inseparable
oppressions and struggles.
• There can be no hierarchy of oppression. The struggle
against one form of injustice is the struggle against them all.
• Truth to power has many voices.
• But just as there is no hierarchy of oppression, there can be
no hierarchy of equality and equality rights.
• The larger struggle for a reasonable balance among
competing human rights continues on many fronts.
73

Balancing Equality Rights (3)
• States – and societies – must live up to the universalist
promises to all marginalized minorities inherent in the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well as in numerous
other international agreements, which they have signed and
are thus legally binding signatories.
• On top of this international framework of human rights
guarantees to which Canada is a signatory, Canada must live
up to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the
Canadian Human Rights Act, and provincial and territorial
human rights acts.
74

Homophobic Women
On a personal note, I have never been able to
understand homophobic women.
Is it self-hatred at not being born a privileged
male? Is it religious indoctrination? broader
cultural desensitization?
Or is it just oblivious naivety about how
intimately linked homophobia is to misogyny
and sexism?
75

Homophobic Women (2)
How can it be that any self-respecting,
caring, spiritual adult woman could feel
herself entitled
to bully a queer teen, to tell a 5-year-old
that a queer loved one is going to burn in
hell, to choose religious doctrine over their
own queer child and then disown them and
kick them out of the house – all the while
thinking she herself is acting self-righteously
free of
personal, emotional, moral, spiritual, and
societal consequences?
76

Homophobic Women (3)
A message to her, and all like-minded men:
No sacred text can justify persecution and
violence against anyone. Homophobia is a
choice, not homosexuality.
- Rev. J.P. Mokgethi-Health (Sweden), at the 2014 International
AIDS Conference, Melbourne, Australia, July 20-25, 2014.
Quoted in “'Homophobia is a choice, not homosexuality':
Inter-faith Message,” by Bobby Ramakant,
Citizen News Service, July 21, 2014
77

Unintended Consequences
The Many Prices of LGBTQ* Filtering
• Over-reliance on technology to limit access to
“undesirable” information and knowledge
• Outsourced judgment and diminished sense of
personal responsibility – impeded critical thinking,
media, and literacy skills
• Poor modelling of democratic citizenship and
citizenship education
• Educational goals are put at risk for all students,
especially the ability to understand the digital
environment
• Silencing of LGBTQ* voices 78

The Perils of Invisibility
When those who have power to name and to
socially construct reality choose not to see
you or hear you … when someone with the
authority of a teacher, say, describes the
world and you are not in it, there is a
moment of psychic disequilibrium, as if you
looked into a mirror and saw nothing. It
takes some strength of soul – not just
individual strength, but collective
understanding – to resist this void, this
nonbeing, into which you are thrust, and to
stand up, demanding to be seen and heard.
79
Adrienne Rich, Blood, bread and poetry, 1986,
p.199 (from “Invisibility in academe,” 1984)

Internet filtering is
the 21st century
version of book
banning for the
digital generation.
80
Filters = Internet
censorship

The worst part of
LGBTQ* Internet
content filtering
is…..
%#@^%!*&)_=+”{
]&$#^&$&@#^@!
$**$#&@~*#@!~`
-^+_%-#@!~`-
^+_%-!!!!!
81

LGBTQ* minorities are
not equal and will not
grow as easily into
resiliency if they can
not communicate
freely and visibly on
the Internet.
82

Who’s in the LGBTQ* Community?
• Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans*, Trans-
Identified, Transgender, Transsexual, Two
Spirit, Intersex, Pansexual, Queer, Questioning,
and Allies
• Sexual & Gender Minorities, Sexual Minority &
Gender Variant (SMGV), Sexual Orientation &
Gender Identity Minorities (SOGI)
• Gender Fluid, Gender-Queer, Trans* and
Gender Nonconforming Minorities
• Initialisms: LGBT, LGBTQ, LGBTI, LGBTQ2S,
GLBT, GLBTQ, LGBTQQIA, LGBTQQIAAP,
LGBTTI2QQ, LGBTTIQQ2SA*,
LGBTTTIQQAAPK, Q2GQIAASCP(GSM)
life ***
healing
sunlight
nature
serenity
spirit
83
***Alternate colour meanings for the Rainbow Flag:
acceptance, tolerance, happiness, harmony,
peace, spirit

Far worse than
stereotyping,
scapegoating,
ridicule, and
caricature, the
greatest enemy
of public truth in
Hollywood
movies has
been invisibility.
84

The United Nations and LGBTQ*
Rights
• UN Free and Equal Campaign https://www.unfe.org
• UN Resolution A/HRC/17/L.9/Rev.1 LGBT Rights
Endorsed by 94 countries
~ UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon: The time has come
to act on discrimination and violence against LGBTI
people [2012].
~ UN Special Rapporteur Maina Kiai: “A nation that can
silence one group can silence all groups” [2014].
~ Argentina introduced this Resolution, supported by Brazil,
Chile, Uruguay, Mexico, and Colombia: Resolved to
ensure that violence and discrimination on grounds of
sexual orientation and gender identity remain on the
85
HRC's agenda [Human Rights Council, June 24, 2014].

Sources: Freedom to
Mary; ILGA: Int’l LGBTI
Assn; CIA World
Factbook
86

Death Penalty in 11 States for Being Gay*
• Brunei
• Iran
• Maldives
• Mauritania
Less barbarous but still reprehensible anti-homosexuality
laws exist in 72 other countries.
* Technically, the death penalty in most of these countries is for homosexual
“acts.”
87
• Nigeria
• Saudi Arabia
• Somalia
• Sudan
• Tonga
• Uganda
• Yemen
State-sponsored homophobia: A world survey of laws:
Criminalisation, protection and recognition of same-sex love,
by Lucas Paoli Itaborahy & Jingshu Zhu, ILGA, May 2013;
The Curious Case of Countries Where Being Gay Is a Crime,
by James Kirchick, 2014 www.thedailybeast.com/

Worldwide Use of Homophobic Language
(12 months 2012-2013)
faggot – 14 million tweets/year
no homo – 5 million tweets/year
so gay – 5 million tweets/year
Dyke – 2 million tweets/year
All four terms – 26 million tweets/year
www.nohomophobes.com
88
on Twitter

Faggot
No Homo
So Gay
Dyke
Screenshot, nohomophobes.com April 24, 2014 89

Marriage Equality Dates
1. Netherlands 2001
2. Belgium 2003
3. Spain 2005
4. Canada 2005
5. South Africa 2006
6. Norway 2009
7. Sweden 2009
8. Portugal 2010
9. Iceland 2010
10. Argentina 2010
11. Denmark 2012
12. Wales and England, 2013
90

Marriage Equality Dates (2)
13. Brazil 2013
14. France 2013
15. New Zealand 2013
16. Uruguay 2013
17. Luxembourg 2014
• civil unions in many other countries
• some within-country jurisdictions:
- U.S. (2003+) but people can still be fired for
being gay, lesbian, bisexual, or trans* in 33 U.S. states;
- Mexico (2009+)
91

Milestones in the Long Struggle for
Canadian LGBTQ* Human Rights
1969 – federal decriminalization of same-sex
relationships
1977 – Quebec first province to prohibit
discrimination on the basis of sexual
orientation
1982 – Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
(equality rights – 1985)
1992 – Canadian military ended anti-gay policy
1995 – sexual orientation “read into” the Canadian
Charter by the Supreme Court of Canada as a
prohibited ground of discrimination
2003 – Ontario first province to legally recognize
marriage equality
92

The Supreme Court of Canada
Learning about tolerance is … learning that
other people’s entitlement to respect from
us does not depend on whether their views
accord with our view. Children cannot learn
this unless they are exposed to views that
differ from those they are taught at home….
Tolerance is always age appropriate.
Chamberlain v. Surrey School
District No. 36, 2002, par. 66,69
91

But key challenges lie ahead for
Canadian LGBTQ* social justice….
Canada still does not explicitly prohibit discrimination on
the basis of Gender Identity & Gender Expression.
This is an urgent and simple legal remedy.
Canada provides millions of taxpayer $$ to virulently
homophobic countries around the world.
This must change.
Canada impedes LGBTQ* refugee & asylum seekers.
This must stop.
92

95
Library Associations and
Intellectual Freedom

Intellectual Freedom Statement
Canadian Library Association
All persons in Canada have the fundamental
right, as embodied in the nation's Bill of Rights
and the Canadian Charter of Rights and
Freedoms, to have access to all expressions of
knowledge, creativity and intellectual activity, and
to express their thoughts publicly. This right to
intellectual freedom, under the law, is essential to
the health and development of Canadian society.
Libraries have a basic responsibility for the
development and maintenance of intellectual
freedom. 96

Intellectual Freedom Statement
(2)
It is the responsibility of libraries to guarantee
and facilitate access to all expressions of
knowledge and intellectual activity, including
those which some elements of society may
consider to be unconventional, unpopular or
unacceptable. To this end, libraries shall acquire
and make available the widest variety of
materials.
Both employees and employers in libraries have
a duty, in addition to their institutional
responsibilities, to uphold these principles.
97

Diversity and Inclusion
Statement
The Canadian Library Association believes that a
diverse and pluralistic society is central to our
country’s identity. Libraries have a responsibility to
contribute to a culture that recognizes diversity
and fosters social inclusion.
Libraries strive to deliver inclusive service.
Canada’s libraries recognize and energetically
affirm the dignity of those they serve, regardless of
heritage, education, beliefs, race, religion, gender,
age, sexual orientation, gender identity, physical or
mental capabilities, or income.
98

Internet Access Policy
CLA believes that the best and most
reliable filter is a child’s parent or
guardian.*
……..
The filtering of terminals in children’s
areas can coexist with full access
elsewhere in the [public] library and
preserve a range of choice consistent
with public library principles.
99
Internet service in public
libraries: A matter of trust, Feb. 2000

Internet Access Toolkit
Ontario Library Association
Offering only filtered Internet
workstations to the public would not
meet the spirit of the OLA Statement on
the Rights of the Individual or the
Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
OLA Intellectual Freedom Committee's Report
on Internet Access [1998?]
100

Freedom to Read Statement
American Library Association
We believe rather that what people read is deeply
important; that ideas can be dangerous; but that the
suppression of ideas is fatal to a democratic society.
Freedom itself is a dangerous way of life, but it is
101
ours.

Resolution on the Use of Filtering
The American Library Association
affirms that the use of filtering software
abridges the Library Bill of Rights.
ALA Intellectual Freedom Committee, July 1,
1997
Software in Libraries
102

“Why Recent Court Decisions Don’t Change the Rules on Filtering:
Blocking Access to Protected Speech Can Lead to Litigation and Legal
Fees,”
by Theresa Chmara, American Libraries, July/August 2012
103
Libraries should continue to be wary of using
Internet filtering systems that block
constitutionally protected material for adults or
minors.... If libraries use filters that block
constitutionally protected material deemed
harmful to minors and do not allow adults to
disable filters, or fail to provide an effective
unblocking system, those libraries may open
the door to years of litigation and significant
legal expenses.

Statement on Intellectual Freedom, Access To
Information and Censorship
Chartered Institute of Library & Information Professionals
CILIP is committed to promoting a society where
intellectual activity and creativity, freedom of
expression and debate, and access to information
are encouraged and nurtured as vital elements
underpinning individual and community fulfilment
in all aspects of human life.
CILIP, 2005
104

Public Access to and Freedom of Expression in
Networked Information
The Council Of Europe
Cultural institutions providing public access to networked
information and communication should do so for all, without
regard to race, nationality, religion, culture, political affiliation,
physical or learning impairment, gender or sexual orientation.
Children choosing to use those Public Access Points that are
provided for whole community use should, as far as possible,
be able to do so under the same conditions as other users.
Nevertheless, in order to avoid access to harmful and/or illegal
content, filtering systems requesting the use of personal age
codes should be provided at Public Access Points.
105

Public Access to and Freedom of Expression in
Networked Information (2)
The Council Of Europe
The use by managers of Public Access Points of software
filtering systems to block access to certain content is an
unwarranted interference with the individual’s freedom of
access to information. If filtering and blocking systems are to
be made available, it should only be as an option that
individuals can choose and calibrate at their own preferred
levels.
The Council Of Europe, 2005
106

107
Educational Associations and
LGBTQ* Policies

Code of Professional Conduct
Alberta Teachers’ Association*
The teacher teaches in a manner that respects
the dignity and rights of all persons without
prejudice as to race, religious beliefs, colour,
gender, sexual orientation, gender identity,
physical characteristics, disability, marital
status, family status, age, ancestry, place of
origin, place of residence, socioeconomic
background or linguistic background.
108
First teachers’ association in Canada to include:
~ sexual orientation 1999
~ gender identity for students 2003
~ gender identity for teachers 2004

Sexual Orientation & Gender Identity Policy
The Board is committed to establishing and maintaining a safe,
inclusive, equitable, and welcoming learning and teaching
environment for all members of the school community. This
includes those students, staff, and families who identify or are
perceived as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, transsexual,
two-spirit, queer or questioning their sexual orientation, gender
identity, or gender expression.
All members of the school community have the right to learn
and work in an environment free of discrimination, prejudice,
and harassment. This right is guaranteed under theCanadian
Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Alberta Human Rights Act,
and Alberta School Act.
109
Edmonton Public School Board, 2012

110
Statement by former
Mayor of Edmonton,
Alberta

The health of the LGBTQ*
community is a barometer of
the entire community.
109
City of Edmonton Mayor Stephen Mandel,
Mayor’s Pride Brunch, a fundraiser for
Camp fYrefly, June 2007

Resources
• LGBTQ-Related and General
Filtering Research and
Commentary
• LGBTQ* Resources for Librarians
and Teachers
• LGBTQ* General Resources
• Trans-Identified and Gender
Nonconforming Resources
112

LGBTQ-Related & General Filtering
Research & Commentary
American Civil Liberties Union. (2012). “Don’t Filter Me!” Web content filtering in
schools. Final report. https://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights/dont-filter-me-final-report
American Civil Liberties Union of Rhode Island. (2013). “Access Denied: How
Internet Filtering in Schools Harms Public Education.” http://
riaclu.org/images/uploads/Access_Denied-
_How_Internet_Filtering_in_Schools_Harms_Public_Education.pdf
Ayre, Lori Bowen. (2004). Filtering and filter software. Library Technology
Reports. American Library Association, v.40(2) (March-April).
Batch, Kristen R. (2014). Fencing Out Knowledge: Impacts of the Children’s
Internet Protection Act 10 Years Later, American Library Association, Policy
Brief No. 5.
Bertot, John C. et al. (2012). “2011-2012 Public Library Funding and
Technology Access Survey: Survey Findings and Results.” Information Policy
& Access Center
http://ipac.umd.edu/sites/default/files/publications/2012_plftas.pdf
Chmara, Theresa. (2012). “Why Recent Court Decisions Don’t Change the Rules
on Filtering: Blocking Access to Protected Speech Can Lead to Litigation and
Legal Fees,” American Libraries, July/August
www.americanlibrariesmagazine.org/article/why-recent-court-decisionsdon%
E2%80%99t-change-rules-filtering
113

LGBTQ-Related & General Filtering Research
& Commentary (2)
Deibert, Ronald, et al., eds. (2008). Access denied: The practice and policy of
global Internet filtering. MIT Press.
Heins, M., et al. (2006). Internet filters: A public policy report. Brennan Center for
Justice. Rev. ed.
Holt, David Brian. (2011). “LGBTIQ teens – Plugged in and unfiltered: How Internet
filtering impairs construction of online communities, identity formation, and
access to health information.” In E. Greenblatt, ed. Serving LGBTIQ library and
archives users: Essays on outreach, service, collections and access.
McFarland, 266-77.
Houghton-Jan, Sarah. (2008). Internet filtering software tests: Barracuda,
CyberPatrol, FilterGate, and WebSense. San Jose Public Library, Calif.
http://www.sjpl.org/sites/all/files/userfiles/agen0208_report.pdf
“LGBTIQ Teens – Plugged in and Unfiltered: How Internet Filtering Impairs
Construction of Online Communities, Identity Formation, and Access to Health
Information,” by David Brian Holt. In Ellen Greeblatt, ed. Serving LGBTIQ
Library and Archives Users: Essays on Outreach, Service, Collections and
Access, pp. 266-277. American Association of School Librarians. (2012).
114

& Commentary (3)
Neal, Dave. (2014). “Majority of UK web users haven’t turned on ISP’s internet
porn filters.” The Inquirer July 23, 2014
www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2356869/majority-of-uk-web-users-havent-turned-
on-isps-internet-porn-filters
Patrick, Ed. (2014). “Is web filtering in the UK excessive?” CILIP www.cilip.org.uk
Project Tomorrow. (2010). “Speak Up National Findings.”
www.tomorrow.org/speakup/pdfs/SU09UnleashingTheFuture.pdf
Purcell, Kristen, Alan Heaps, Judy Buchanan, and Linda Friedrich (2013). How
teachers are using technology at home and in their classrooms. Pew
Research Center Internet & American Life Project. Available at URL:
Rideout, V. (2002). See no evil: How Internet filters affect the search for online
health information. Kaiser Family Foundation. Available at URL:
Schrader, Alvin M. (2013). “’Nowhere to Turn, Nowhere to Go’: LIS Services for
Sexual and Gender (LGBTQ) Minorities.” Presentation to LIS 541: LIS
Services in Culturally Diverse Society. Edmonton, AB, 12 September 2013.
Available at URL: http://www.slideshare.net/alvinschrader/library-and-information-
services-and-issues-for-lgbtq-communities?from_search=38115

& Commentary (4)
Schrader, Alvin M. (2013). “Reflections on meaning in library and information
studies: A personal odyssey through information, sexuality, and gender.” In P.
Keilty & R. Dean, eds. Feminist and queer information studies reader. Litwin
Books, 62-97.
Schrader, Alvin M. (2012). “The digital closet: How internet filters suppress
access to information by, for, and about sexual and gender minorities,” Lorne
MacRae Intellectual Freedom Lecture, Alberta Library Conference.
albertalibraryconference.com/presentations/ALC2012Schrader.pdf
Schrader, Alvin M. and Kristopher Wells. (2010). “Queering libraries and
classrooms in the United States and Canada: Strategies to build inclusive
school and public library collections and services for sexual minority and
gender variant youth.” In E. Greenblatt, ed. Serving LGBTIQ library and
archives users: Essays on outreach, , Service, Collections and Access, pp.
94-112.
Schrader, Alvin M. (2007). ‘I thought I’d find myself at the library’: LGBTQ
services and collections in public and school libraries.” PNLA Quarterly 72.1
(2007): 4-9. pnla.org/quarterly/Fall2007/PNLA_Fall07.pdf
Schmidt, Eric E., and Jared Cohen. (2014). “The future of Internet freedom.” New
York Times, Mar. 11. 116

& Commentary (5)
School Libraries Count 2012!: National Longitudinal Survey of School Library
Programs. Supplemental Report on Filtering. American Association of School
Librarians, Chicago, Ill., 2012 ala.org/aasl/filtering-schools
Spurlin, Candice and Patrick M. Garry. (2009). “Does Filtering Stop the Flow of
Valuable Information?: A Case Study of the Children's Internet Protection Act
(CIPA) in South Dakota.” South Dakota Law Review, Vol. 54, No. 1
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1368900
Thornburgh, Dick, and Herbert Lin, eds. (2002). Youth, pornography and the
Internet. National Academy Press.
117

LGBTQ* Resources for Librarians and
Teachers
• ALA GLBTRT (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgendered
Round Table) http://ala.org/glbtrt/news
• Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual Librarians Network owner-GAY-LIBN@
usc.edu
• Gay Librarians group – Facebook
• State-sponsored homophobia: A world survey of laws:
Criminalisation, protection and recognition of same-sex love, by
Lucas Paoli Itaborahy an Jingshu Zhu, International Lesbian and
Gay Association, May 2013
• The Curious Case of Countries Where Being Gay Is a Crime, by
James Kirchick, Jan. 2, 2014 www.thedailybeast.com
• “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Information Needs,”
by Patrick Keilty. In: Encyclopedia of Library and Information
Sciences, 3rd ed., 2009
• “Lindy Reads and Reviews” http://lindypratch.blogspot.com
• Out Behind the Desk: Workplace Issues for LGBTQ Librarians,
ed. Tracy Nectoux. Litwin Books, 2011
118

• “Out in the Library: Materials, Displays and Services for the Gay,
Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Community” http://bit.ly/1nYyJtx
• Queers Online: LGBT Digital Practices in Libraries, Archives, and
Museums, ed. Rachel Wexelbaum. Litwin Books (forthcoming)
• Rainbow Family Collections: Selecting and Using Children's Books with
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Content, by Jamie
Campbell Naidoo, 2012.
• “Reaching Out: Library Services for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual,
Transgender, and Questioning Youth.” Film/DVD by Lynne Barnes, 2004
(16 mins) lynneword@hotmail.com
• “Resources for Building a High School Library Program that Meets the
Needs of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgendered, or Questioning
Students: Part I,” by Cynthia Peterson, 2010
http://cjpeterso.edublogs.org/2010/12/20glbtqresources1/
119
Teachers (2)

• Serving Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Questioning Teens:
A How-To-Do-It Manual for Librarians, by Hillias J. Martin, Jr. & James
R. Murdock. Neal-Schuman, 2007.
• Serving LGBTIQ Library and Archives Users: Essays on Outreach,
Service, Collections and Access, ed. Ellen Greenblatt, McFarland,
2010
• Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity: Recommended Fiction and
Nonfiction Resources for K-12 Schools. Edmonton Public Schools and
Edmonton Public Library http://bit.ly/1aTo5Pg
120
Teachers (3)

General LGBTQ* Resources
• "A Little Gay History: Desire and Diversity Across the World,
ed. R.B. Parkinson. Columbia University Press, 2013
• The Advocate http://www.advocate.com/
• APIRG Library http://www.apirg.org
• Alberta GSA Network – Facebook page
• Alberta Teachers’ Association
– Sexual Orientation and Gender Variance
http://bit.ly/1jJRexj
– PRISM Project http://bit.ly/1lLfkft
– Gay-Straight Student Alliances in Alberta Schools: A
Guide for Teachers, by Kristopher Wells. 2005
http://bit.ly/1lkzL37
• Camp fYrefly www.fyrefly.ualberta.ca
• Canadian Lesbian and Gay Archives http://www.clga.ca/
• The Canadian War on Queers: National Security as Sexual
Regulation, by Gary Kinsman & Patrizia Gentile. UBC Press,
2010
121

• “Coming Out in the Workplace.” Angus Reid Public Opinion
and the Canadian Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce,
Career Connections, Fall 2012: 18-23 http://bit.ly/1lLfJyv
• Daily Xtra Canada’s Gay and Lesbian News
• Discriminatory laws and practices and acts of violence
individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender
United Nations Human Rights Council, Nov. 17, 2011
• Egale Canada www.egale.ca
• Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD)
http://www.glaad.org/
• Gay and Lesbian Review
• Gay Canada gaycanada.com
• Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN )
122
General LGBTQ* Resources (2)

• Gay-Straight Students Alliance (GSA) Network
www.ismss.ualberta.ca/students
• How to Close the LGBT Health Disparities Gap, by Jeff Krehely,
Center for American Progress, 2009 http://bit.ly/1m6QBxP
• HuffPost LGBT www.huffingtonpost.com/news/lgbt
• Human Rights Campaign http://www.hrc.org/
• Institute for Sexual Minority Studies and Services, University of
Alberta www.ismss.ualberta.ca
– Inside/OUT Speakers’ Series
http://ismss.ualberta.ca/speakers.htm
– No Homophobes Project http://nohomophobes.com
– OUTreach www.ualberta.ca/~outreach
123

• International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia
http://dayagainsthomophobia.org
• International Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association
http://ilga.org
• International Human Rights Commission https://iglhrc.org/
• It Gets Better http://www.itgetsbetter.org/
• Lambda Literary Foundation http://www.lambdaliterary.org
• LGBTQ Interest Group, BCLA (British Columbia Library
Association) lgbtq-list@lists.bclibrary.ca
• NativeOut http://nativeout.com/
• Outlooks Magazine www.outlooks.ca
• PBS: Two-Spirits http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/two-spirits/
124

• Perceptions Newsmagazine (not online)
• PFLAG Canada (Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays)
http://www.pflagcanada.ca/
• Pink Blood: Homophobic Violence in Canada. Douglas Victor Janoff.
University of Toronto Press, 2005
• Pink Shirt Day http://pinkshirtday.ca
• Pride at Work Canada http://prideatwork.ca
• Pride Centre of Edmonton www.pridecentreoredmonton.org
• Pride Week @ University of Alberta (featured on Outlook TV)
http://bit.ly/1nyWYvd
• Rainbow Refugee Committee www.rainbowrefugee.ca
• Safe and Caring Schools for Two Spirit Youth: A Guide for Teachers
and Students. Society for Safe and Caring Schools and
Communities, 2011
125

• Saskatchewan Resources for Sexual Diversity, U of
Saskatchewan http://library2.usask.ca/srsd/
• Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity. Edmonton Public
Schools
www.epsb.ca/ourdistrict/topics/sexualorientationandgenderidentit
y/
• Stonewall National Museum and Archives
http://stonewallnationalmuseum.org
• The Trevor Project http://thetrevorproject.org
• Two Spirit Circle of Edmonton Society – Facebook page
• 2-Spirited People of the First Nations www.2spirits.com
• University of Alberta Libraries – LGBTQ webpage (English
Language and Literature subject guide)
http://guides.library.ualberta.ca/content.php?pid=95998&sid=774
244
• Xtra! Canada’s Gay and Lesbian News http://dailyxtra.com/
• “You Can Play” Project http://youcanplayproject.org
• Youth Line http://youthline.ca
126

• AlbertaTrans www.albertatrans.org
• Canadian Professional Association for Transgender Health
www.cpath.ca
• Forge Forward http://forge-forward.org/
• GenderSpectrum https://www.genderspectrum.org/
• International Transgender Day of Remembrance
http://www.transgenderdor.org/
• Living a Transgender Childhood
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epDPui27QZQ
• National Center for Transgender Equity (US)
http://transequality.org/
• TransAdvocate http://www.transadvocate.com/
• Trans Alliance Society http://www.transalliancesociety.org/
127
Trans-Identified & Gender-
Nonconforming Resources

• Trans Equality Society of Alberta http://tesaonline.org
• Transgender Archives http://transgenderarchives.uvic.ca/
• Transgender Canada www.transgendercanada.com
• The Transgender Project http://trans.ichannel.ca/
• Transgender Visibility: A Guide to Being You
http://www.hrc.org/files/assets/resources/transgender_visibility_g
uide_042013.pdf
• TransKids Purple Rainbow
http://www.transkidspurplerainbow.org/
• TransYouth Family Allies http://www.imatyfa.org/
• “TransGeneration.” Documentary, DVD, 2006
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyGLd4VKEe4
• World Professional Association for Transgender Health
www.wpath.ca
128
Nonconforming Resources (2)

• Gender Failure. Rae Spoon and Ivan E. Coyote. Arsenal Pulp
Press, 2014.
• Gender Outlaws: The Next Generation. Kate Bornstein and Bear
Bergman. 2010.
• Nobody Passes: Rejecting the Rules of Gender and Conformity.
Matt Sycamore. 2006.
• Some Assembly Required: The Not-So-Secret Life of a
Transgender Teen. Arin Andrews. 2014
• Trans Bodies, Trans Selves: A Resource for the Transgender
Transgender Community. Laura Erickson-Schroth. 2014.
129
Nonconforming Resources (Print)

• Transgender 101: A Simple Guide to a Complex Issue. Nicholas
Teich. 2011
• Transgender Child: A Handbook for Families and Professionals.
Stephanie Brill & Rachel Pepper. 2008.
• Transgender Explained for Those Who Are Not. Joan Herman.
2009.
• The Transgender Phenomenon. Richard Ekins & Dave King.
2006.
130
Nonconforming Resources (Print 2)

WITH THANKS!
~ To my colleagues who guided me to useful
research and who patiently reviewed earlier
drafts – Sandra Anderson, Michael Brundin,
Bev Clarke ‘and the boys’, Frank Testin, and
another who must, sadly, remain anonymous.
~ To conference and event organizers who
invited me to present this research in earlier
stages of development, Mount Royal
University Library (Calgary), the Alberta
Library Conference, the Ontario Library
Association Super Conference, and the
Information Ethics Round Table (Edmonton).
~ And to my life partner and best friend Tony
131

The digital closet 2014 - slideshare - aug 20

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (8)

Destaque

Destaque (20)

Semelhante a The digital closet 2014 - slideshare - aug 20

Semelhante a The digital closet 2014 - slideshare - aug 20 (20)

Último

Último (20)

The digital closet 2014 - slideshare - aug 20