Centring LGBT2QIA+ Subjects in Knowledge Organization Systems

Abstract

This paper contains a report of two interdependent knowledge organization (KO) projects for an LGBT2QIA+ library. The authors, in the context of volunteer library work for an independent library, redesigned the classification system and subject cataloguing guidelines to centre LGBT2QIA+ subjects. We discuss the priorities of creating and maintaining knowledge organization systems for a historically marginalized community and address the challenge that queer subjectivity poses to the goals of KO. The classification system features a focus on identity and physically reorganizes the library space in a way that accounts for the multiple and overlapping labels that constitute the currently articulated boundaries of this community. The subject heading system focuses on making visible topics and elements of identity made invisible by universal systems and by the newly implemented classification system. We discuss how this project may inform KO for other marginalized subjects, particularly through process and documentation that prioritizes transparency and the acceptance of an unfinished endpoint for queer KO.

Prejudice but no pride: The Portuguese Universal Decimal Classification’s labelling of sexual orientation

“…Watson illustrates the weight of metadata -namely, of controlled vocabularies -by commenting that if a user comes across terminology in a catalogue that may not be recognized or may be found offensive, the likelihood of the user actually using the information resource or, in the extreme, wanting to continue to retrieve information from that catalogue is reduced. Bullard et al (2020), aware of the limitations of contemporary KOSs -specifically, library classifications and subject heading lists -when it comes to the queer domain, design and develop KOSs for a library specialized in queer information and knowledge. Concerning the design of the library classification, Bullard et al emphasize the impracticality of the mutual exclusivity of concepts (a classic principle of library classification theory) when attempting to represent intersectional identities.…”

“…The representation of the queer community and, inherently, of the concepts of 'gender identity' and 'sexual orientation' in KOSs has been studied by authors such as Adler (2015), Bullard et al (2020), Christensen (2008), Drabinski (2013), Pinho and Milani (2021), Santos et al (1999) and Watson (2020), whose findings have strengthened the relevance of KOSs containing terms that truly and properly represent the contemporary spectrum of gender identities and sexual orientations. Pinho and Milani (2021: 189) deal with ethics in information representation and stress the social character of the library profession, as they state that it is a profession that cares not only about information but also about people.…”

“…The representation of the queer community and, inherently, of the concepts of ‘gender identity’ and ‘sexual orientation’ in KOSs has been studied by authors such as Adler (2015), Bullard et al (2020), Christensen (2008), Drabinski (2013), Pinho and Milani (2021), Santos et al (1999) and Watson (2020), whose findings have strengthened the relevance of KOSs containing terms that truly and properly represent the contemporary spectrum of gender identities and sexual orientations.…”

“…Bullard et al (2020), aware of the limitations of contemporary KOSs – specifically, library classifications and subject heading lists – when it comes to the queer domain, design and develop KOSs for a library specialized in queer information and knowledge. Concerning the design of the library classification, Bullard et al emphasize the impracticality of the mutual exclusivity of concepts (a classic principle of library classification theory) when attempting to represent intersectional identities.…”

Towards Knowledge Organization Ecosystems

“…It is important to mention that such expertise in ethics should be transdisciplinary in nature, making them fit for collaborating with groups in, for instance, different domains. To take an example, the issue of diverse genres of affinity bias such as partisanship towards western philosophy backed knowledge structuring (especially in religious and sexual orientation; see [20] for the latter) in established classification schemes are crucial ethical hotspots where ethics experts should facilitate remediation (more so, as classification schemes are often taken as base models for developing ontologies and KGs). 4.…”