The Library of Congress (LC) and the Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC) interpretation of Resource Description and Access (RDA) 9.7 regarding gender when identifying persons reinforces regressive conceptions of gender identity. The rule instructs catalogers to record gender when identifying persons, and although RDA gives catalogers the flexibility to record more than two gender labels, LC limits Name Authority Cooperative Program (NACO) catalogers to a binary label: male, female, or not known. In this article, the authors challenge gender as a descriptive attribute for personal names, critique how LC is instructing NACO catalogers to record elements about gender, and make recommendations to address describing persons in LC authority records.

Background: Except for one study in 2004, the literature has no data on the information-seeking behaviour of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer/questioning (LGBTQ) health professionals. After a decade of change for LGBTQ people, and the growth of electronic information sources and social networks, it is appropriate to revisit this subject. Objectives: To gain an updated understanding of the information-seeking behaviour of LGBTQ health professionals and of how medical libraries can provide a culturally competent service to such users. Methods: A mixed-methods approach was adopted combining a Web-based questionnaire with email follow-up discussions. One hundred and twenty-three complete responses were received, mostly from the USA and Canada, between November 2012 and October 2013. Results:LGBTQ health professionals remain more comfortable seeking LGBTQ health information from a medical librarian whom they know to be LGBTQ because they perceive LGBTQ librarians as more likely to have specialist knowledge, or through concern that non-LGBTQ librarians may be more likely to react in a stigmatising or discriminatory way. The study also provides evidence suggesting that online chat has marginal appeal for respondents seeking LGBTQ health information, despite its anonymity. Medical libraries seeking to demonstrate their cultural competency should provide visible evidence of this, such as through the creation of dedicated resource lists, promotion of LGBTQ literature on the library's website, and display of other symbols or statements supporting diversity. Conclusion: Opportunities exist for LGBTQ health professionals and medical librarians to work together to ensure that medical libraries are culturally competent and welcoming spaces for LGBTQ patrons, that library collections match their needs, and in the creation of guides to ensure maximum access to the results of LGBTQ health research. Medical libraries should also consider nominating and, if necessary, training a specialist in LGBTQ health information. Such measures are more likely to be successful than reliance on online chat, despite contrary suggestions in the literature.

No abstract

No abstract

How do controlled vocabularies address transgender topics?This talk explores the use of hierarchical taxonomic structures to describe people’s often-fluid gender identities and sexuality, particularly the lack of accurate and appropriate language in most commonly used subject thesauri, and how the lack of this accurate and appropriate language can affect potential users. More specifically, this refers to individuals who identify as gender nonconforming.This term, as defined by the Sylvia Rivera Law Project, refers to “people who do not follow other people's ideas or stereotypes about how they should look or act based on the female or male sex they were assigned at birth.” The phrase is frequently used as an umbrella term that encompasses a wide variety of gender identities,including transsexual, drag queen, gender queer, and butch.  Many standard vocabularies have a long and complicated history with regards to prescriptive access points for marginalized groups and sexualities. This talk offers a historical overview of the ways in which authorizedvocabularies have differed from vernacular language commonly used by community members and LGBTQ scholars to describe their own lives, and explores well- and lesser-known subject vocabularies such as the Library of Congress Subject Headings, Medical Subject Headings, terminology used by community archives and libraries, and tags assigned by LGBTQ people when describing their personal collections. The proposal builds on research by Melissa Adler, Sanford Berman, Ellen Greenblatt, Matt Johnson, Patrick Keilty, and Hope Olson.