#1 Turing Test Hater

more rand art upon ye

+ bonus

me: yeah i know, they’re all primary colors, it’s perfect

When you go for an MLS (Master’s of Library Science, which is a thing, and which is usually required for “professional-level” library work [which is also a weird and contentious concept that I won’t go into here]), one of the things you study is the organization of information. This deals with how to determine what a book or other material is “about"—a concept we tongue-in-cheek call “aboutness"—and how to convey that to a potential user of the item and make it easy for them to find. Things like keywords and subject headings, do I put this book about how often wild birds attack aerial drones in with books about birds or with books about technology, if its a fictional novel do I put fantasy in it’s own section or mix it in with all of the other fiction, so on and so on.

OP is organizing books by how they would look for them. OP’s partner is thinking in terms of aboutness. This is a system that works for OP because it’s their personal library: they know basically what books they own and they only own books that are relevant to them, and if they know what the book looks like, that can be a quick way to find it.

In a library that assumes the public (or people who do not own that particular collection of books) are using the collection, that doesn’t work. Books are often re-issued in multiple covers, or re-bound in new covers when they get worn out, and if the user doesn’t know what the book looks like or is expecting a different cover, they’re lost. That’s why non-personal libraries used standardized cataloging systems like the Dewey Decimal System or Library of Congress System to organize a book by what it’s “about”, and then put books about the same or similar topics together, marked with labels and signage so a person unfamiliar with the book or collection can find their way to it.

Basically, OP’s system works for their own personal library, because it’s best suited to how the primary user—OP themselves—looks for books. OP’s librarian partner is coming from a background of thinking in terms of a public-facing collection, where aboutness is the key criteria and communicating it to a user unfamiliar with the collection is the priority.

for example, we have a microscope that is perfectly functional, good microscope, but its software is abandonware because the company refused to maintain it. the company is still in business, still makes essentially the exact same software, but they made all of the old tech incompatible with new software to force people to buy the new microscope tech. it would cost a quarter million dollars to replace this microscope. this perfectly good microscope.

Survivorship bias is such a huge factor when it comes to which queer narratives and stories survive the march of time. For transmasculine people, the challenge has always been not only overcoming anti-queer sentiments of the day, but also contending with a lack of legal and societal personhood that put them in a position where telling their story- or even discovering themselves- was literally impossible. The level of risk involved in even just exploring your identity in secret, let alone finding community and recording your experience, was astronomically high when you were considered another person’s property, largely uneducated and expected to not communicate with anyone other than your husband, relatives and children. I’ve seen mentioned how many societies outlawed and punished gay (mlm) relationships but not lesbian ones, but the rather obvious conclusion to that is because it was seen as such a non issue that it was beneath notice, due to the lack of cis women’s ability to exist outside of the constant control and supervision of her male relatives. To say they were “privileged” for not being legally barred from sapphic relationships would be silly, because legally speaking they would’ve been at the total mercy of their owners (male relatives) if discovered, which served as punishment in itself.