Despite being a voracious reader all my life, I'm surprised I never noticed until now that there is no literary equivalent of the ESRB. Perhaps someone should work on that.
There is already one in place. It's called.. librarians. They do a lot more than just stand around a look pretty. There are degrees you can earn which includes things like how to manage tracking books and operate exchanges, managing catalog systems, training in computer use and learning, and... judging appropriate book content for readers. Librarians are much more than just someone who will help you with a book, if you ask.
While that's true, I think GP's idea isn't necessarily a bad one. You could argue the same thing about game store clerks negating the need for ESRB ratings.
As far as what rating a book has as to who should be allowed to read it, what do you think? If you are a voracious reader, would you be happy having certain book topics restricted based on your age? Or maybe what your parents thought was right? Maybe they didn't want you know about certain topics. Be careful what you wish for.
> would you be happy having certain book topics restricted based on your age?
When I was a child, I can recall reading 2 books that contained (rather different) graphic accounts of characters coming to significant harm. I absolutely wish they had been better restricted.
While in the mainstream trigger warnings are hated by the righties and content warnings are hated by the lefties, once you get away from the culture war everybody loves content categorization. For example, before you read any piece of fanfiction you're greeted with a long list of tags describing it's content, particularly the content some readers might find distressing. It's a tool for readers, not a government conspiracy.
