Smiling isn’t free, some people don’t like to be addressed, can we talk about that?
I am autistic. I enjoy spending time in libraries because they are often quiet, serene, calming places where I can bury my nose in a book and no one will bother me. It’s a space where I can engage with my special interests without having to pretend to be neurotypical in order to facilitate social interactions, commonly known as masking.
We know that masking is harmful to autistics. There is abundant research to support that, and that’s not my focus today. And we also know that libraries need to be accessible spaces for everyone, including neurodivergent folks. I don’t think that’s particularly contentious. But these two points are a bit at odds with each other, and that’s where the Reference and User Services Association’s Guidelines for Behavioral Performance of Reference and Information Service Providers comes into play.
As a library patron, I already know how to navigate my library’s shelving system and computer resources. I can use the book return and the automated checkout system without human assistance. I know where the humans are if I need to interact with them of course, but the crucial point here is that dealing with the humans is expensive for me. I want to spend my energy on engaging with the materials in the library. I may not have much energy available.
The RUSA (2008) has a set of behavioral standards for how librarians should interact with patrons. For example, section 1.2.2 includes “acknowledges patrons by making initial eye contact, employing open body language, or using a friendly greeting to initiate conversation.” In the same section, there are multiple similar guidelines, including remaining visible to patrons, wandering through the library asking if patrons need help, and so on. This means that even if I can navigate around the reference desk to avoid that initial interaction, I can be ambushed at any time with social expectations; this can leave me feeling on edge and prevent me from fully engaging with my prefered materials. There are multiple references to using body language and making eye contact with patrons, both of which make me very uncomfortable.
Drabinski looks at this issue from a systems of power perspective (2019). “We talk about the assumptions that document makes about people, that everyone is comfortable with direct address, that the emotional labor of a smile is the same amount of work for every person working at a reference desk.” When the guidelines are written by neurotypical people and codify the behavior that neurotypical people expect and desire, that can make spaces less accessible for people like me.
And the same is true when I’m on the other side of the reference desk. Putting the expectation on me to perform that type of social interaction is expensive, and leaves me unfairly burdened compared to my neurotypical coworkers. Since my neurotypical act is not always convincing, I may be rated poorly on patron satisfaction surveys that are based on these criteria. I’m at a disadvantage regardless of the role I’m in within a library, as an employee or patron, because of the neuronormative codified behavioral expectations.
If libraries are going to be accessible to everyone, both for patrons and for library workers, we need to rethink these neuronormative behavioral expectations and find ways to improve accessibility for everyone, including neurodivergent people.
Drabinski, E. (2019). What is critical about critical librarianship? Art Libraries Journal, 44(2), 49–57. https://doi.org/10.1017/alj.2019.3
RUSA. (2008, September 29). Guidelines for Behavioral Performance of Reference and Information Service Providers. Reference & User Services Association (RUSA). https://www.ala.org/rusa/resources/guidelines/guidelinesbehavioral