This document is the result of a year of work and collaboration by the Trans Metadata Collective (TMDC; https://transmetadatacollective.org/), a group of dozens of cataloguers, librarians, archivists, scholars, and information professionals with a concerted interest in improving the description and classification of trans and gender diverse people in GLAMS (Galleries, Libraries, Archives, Museums and Special Collections). The Collective’s primary goal was to develop a set of best practices for the description, cataloguing, and classification of information resources as well as the creation of metadata about trans and gender diverse people, including authors and other creators

Many knowledge organization researchers and cultural heritage practitioners authors have illustrated the fallacies, inconsistencies, failures, mistakes, and incorrect information contained in the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH). However, LCSH and its associated apparatus continues to be the dominant knowledge organization system in academic libraries (and increasingly, archives). This panel brings together individuals involved in a pair of connected projects aimed at documenting the harm and/or inaccuracies caused by LCSH by engaging in “ethical outreach” to creators and authors; by developing alternative “radical” or “critical” practices; and by evaluating the results of those practices.

For nearly a century (1933 onwards), catalogers and others have engaged in discussions over the ’ethical’ labeling of marginalized subjects in knowledge organization systems (KOS). In order to understand and contextualize contemporary conversations, I undertook a comprehensive review of this literature. The resulting project 1) synthesizes the broader history of these discussions, 2) examines its facets and subdomains, and 3) provides a foundation for the realignment of KO work towards social justice. To achieve these tasks, I replicated and expanded upon a now-unavailable database prepared by Hope A. Olson and Rose Schlegl in 1999. As this database suggests, the literature has expanded fivefold in the last two decades and taken a number of different directions. My analysis of these differences (here called KO ‘subdomains’) establishes a historiography of critical cataloging movements and a framework from which to understand them. It also demonstrates gaps in the literature, how contemporary authors have abandoned areas of early importance, and how certain subdomains have become nearly independent. Finally, my analysis indicates the insufficiency of a philosophical tradition descended from Ancient Greek Aristotelian “virtue” ethics as a method upon which to base twenty-first century KOS. Instead, I advance the concept of “equitable” knowledge organization and the realignment of KO work towards principals of social justice.

We present the results of an investigation into the biographies, letters, and archives of approximately 50 well-known figures in Western intellectual and artistic history in the post-Enlightenment era. In this article, in the interest of space, we have limited our remarks to the biographies and partners of Virginia Woolf, Frida Kahlo, Max Weber, Edna St. Vincent Millay, William Moulton Marston, Erwin Schrodinger, and Victor Hugo. While some of these non-monogamous relationships are well known, some of the evidence of their existence has been ignored, misrecognized, or intentionally obscured. The results of this survey demonstrate that contemporary patterns of non-monogamies are deeply rooted in historical precedence. Our hope is that by outlining some of the themes in our historical findings we can help modern researchers better interpret their own quantitative and qualitative research. Additionally, we look particularly closely at relationships between metamours. A great deal of previous psychological and sexological research has focused on competitive behavior in sex and relationships, particularly competition between rivals. However, relatively little attention has been given to collaborative (or symbiotic) behavior. Our research has located a wealth of examples of metamours supporting one another in material, social, and psychological ways throughout their lives. Furthermore, we suggest that while our existing societal and social-scientific norms primarily focus on competitive sexual behaviors, much can be learnt from historically documented practices of consensual non-monogamy. These practices—however flawed—point to potentially emancipatory ways of living, loving and building relationships, families, and communities—as some contemporary research has demonstrated. Moreover, a future world might benefit from a turn to far more collaborative relationships—and such behavior is well within the realm of possibility.

Transgender, non-binary, and/or gender diverse—here shortened to “trans”—authors seeking to receive full credit for their work face unique challenges and risks. Trans people do not receive the same legal protections against discrimination as cisgender people worldwide; they are subject to significant risk of discrimination, harassment, and violence; and many experience a particular form of personal trauma connected to their pre-transition identities that makes them especially vulnerable within the academic community. One significant source of epistemic labor, risk, and trauma for transgender authors, is the continued circulation of their previous name. In this article, we present five high level principles for trans-inclusive name changes in academic publishing and consider the implications of such a paradigm shift within the scholarly world.

This paper examines the addition of “asexuality” to the Library of Congress Subject Headings as a case study from which to examine the critical cataloging movement. Beginning with a review of some of the theoretical and practical issues around subject access for minoritized and marginalized sexualities, this paper then contextualizes, historicizes, and introduces the critical cataloging movement to the literature, situating it within a larger and longer history of radical cataloging. It will define critical cataloging as a social justice-oriented style of radical cataloging that places an emphasis on radical empathy, outreach work, and recognizes the importance of information maintenance and care. This paper introduces the concept of “catalogic warrant” to characterize the process of “reading” the catalog to examine the harm or benefit of terms on users and the wider library community.