United Kingdom
General community for news/discussion in the UK.
Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.
Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
view the rest of the comments
The book sounds harmful, but is it the job of libraries to pick books according to such a criterion? That question was going to be rhetorical, but now I think about it, I genuinely have no idea if public libraries have some charter or other that would restrict what kind of books they hold.
I would be more concerned about books on woo-woo health stuff like homeopathy - I'm sure there are books in libraries that have the effect of discouraging people (including parents) from using alternative medicine instead of medicine.
BTW, 58 libraries is about 2% of the total libraries in the UK.
On the one hand, you don't really want to give people the power to decide what books are available. Assholes would use that to remove queer books, for example.
On the other hand, that power is already implicitly in place. There's finite space in a library, so they must choose a subset of all possible books. I'd want to know how the existing processes work before suggesting changes.