More on Brave Books

[MercyA]

From Judd Legum on Twitter: "Earlier this month, a mysterious woman appeared before a school board in Texas and claimed that, when she was 11, she READ A SCHOLASTIC BOOK THAT SPARKED A DEBILITATING PORN ADDICTION. We investigated. And it's ABSOLUTELY WILD what is happening."

Long story short, the woman works for Brave Books (publisher of political propaganda masquerading as children's literature). She encouraged the school board to ban Scholastic books and book fairs. Her "testimony" was promoted by both Brave Books and SkyTree Book Fairs, a conservative alternative to Scholastic Book Fairs. (Unsurprisingly, the president of SkyTree Book Fairs recently worked for Brave Books as well.)

Read the whole story here: https://x.com/JuddLegum/status/1729866145975418994?s=20 [ETA: This is a Twitter thread; a fuller story is available here: https://popular.info/p/mysterious-woman-tells-school-board.] 

Scary times. 

Edited November 30, 2023 by MercyA

[HomeAgain]

I saw that story and I honestly don't know what to say to it.  It wasn't a welcome sight to come on to the board this morning and realized Guest Hollow is still promoting propaganda, or on Facebook seeing Crewton Ramone keeping his stance of ignoring the facts in favor of gaslighting people. 

I'm worried for the future of education, public and private. The lack of critical thinking is going to kill us all.

Edited November 30, 2023 by HomeAgain
edited because my pre-coffee brain doesn't deal with homophones.

[Danae]

Even if I believed her ridiculous story, which I do not, someone who developed a porn addiction from seeing a drawing of a scene one would expect to see in a church when the pastor says “you may kiss the bride” is not someone with the moral character or discerning judgement to be advising anyone on book choice.

 

[MercyA]

12 minutes ago, Danae said:

Even if I believed her ridiculous story, which I do not, someone who developed a porn addiction from seeing a drawing of a scene one would expect to see in a church when the pastor says “you may kiss the bride” is not someone with the moral character or discerning judgement to be advising anyone on book choice.

Yes. The picture in question:

And the school board voted to restrict access to this book for kids in 8th grade and lower. SMH.

[Faith-manor]

19 minutes ago, Danae said:

Even if I believed her ridiculous story, which I do not, someone who developed a porn addiction from seeing a drawing of a scene one would expect to see in a church when the pastor says “you may kiss the bride” is not someone with the moral character or discerning judgement to be advising anyone on book choice.

 

Louder for the stragglers in the back!!

I mean just SHEESH! We have law enforcement, judges, and juries who look at insane pornographic and sex abuse materials, and yet do not develop life long addictions. Her assertions are so disgusting, it staggers the imagination.

[Faith-manor]

8 minutes ago, MercyA said:

Yes. The picture in question:

And the school board voted to restrict access to this book for kids in 8th grade and lower. SMH.

Texas is rapidly becoming a fascist state. 

[Faith-manor]

Also, is the school board planning on banning kissing? Just wondering. I am pretty certain most kids have witnessed their parents kiss at one point or another. Maybe a ban on children attending weddings, watching Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty, Shrek, Princess Bride, Beauty and the Beast,....what next? Their brain cells don't seem to connect in such a way as to make common sense a possibility. 

[TheReader]

10 minutes ago, Faith-manor said:

Texas is rapidly becoming a fascist state. 

 

4 minutes ago, Faith-manor said:

Also, is the school board planning on banning kissing? Just wondering. I am pretty certain most kids have witnessed their parents kiss at one point or another. Maybe a ban on children attending weddings, watching Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty, Shrek, Princess Bride, Beauty and the Beast,....what next? Their brain cells don't seem to connect in such a way as to make common sense a possibility. 

It really is getting just about this absurd. I've never more wanted to move out of my state, but here we are, and it sickens and saddens me. I keep voting, voting, voting, to no avail. :sigh: 

 

[pinball]

1 hour ago, MercyA said:

Yes. The picture in question:

And the school board voted to restrict access to this book for kids in 8th grade and lower. SMH.

That’s a picture from the book Drama, which it sounds like it is available to only grades above grade 8…I’m guessing due to sexual themes that are more involved than kissing.

I’m pretty sure the above picture is from the scene where one boy takes the place of the female lead…so that might be a picture of 2 boys kissing.

Yes, I know they are on stage in a play. Yes, I know men played all the roles in Shakespeare.

Edited November 30, 2023 by pinball

[marbel]

So if I have the right book, here are the CommonSense media reviews for it. It sounds as if the graphics and reading level make it attractive to young kids, but the themes seem like they are for an older audience. 

https://www.commonsensemedia.org/book-reviews/drama

I agree that the whole p*rn addiction thing is insane and I'd hope the school board wouldn't act simply in response to that. But from what I can see here, it seems like a middle school book, not for little kids. 

[Grace Hopper]

Read the linked Politico article. It’s not all about whether or not the pic is problematic. This is a PR stunt set up by one business to take over the marketplace of another. 
 

Yes, the neofascists ate it up, and that’s scary. But we should never forget, like with all the school voucher stuff going on, that there’s always a money trail, too. 

BTW the comment section following the article is pretty entertaining. 
 

ETA it’s not Politico, sorry, here’s the proper link to Legum’s sub stack article, which is linked in the Twitter thread Mercy shared in the OP

https://popular.info/p/mysterious-woman-tells-school-board

Edited November 30, 2023 by Grace Hopper

[bolt.]

So she used this story to "encourage" that local school board to ban scholastic book fairs?

That sounds like she took up some time at that meeting with her absurd story, but did it have any impact?

What is the goal of this kind of activism?

It's true that many 'coming of age' books for tweens and teens have details in them that feel lively and sexy for their target audience. I personally remember experiencing 'romance novel feelings' arising from books in my school library as I was growing up. These are appropriate things to explore in the privacy of literature and they are perfectly normal feelings to feel while reading. In fact, reading published works of fiction, written for teens and tweens, is a very safe space -- as opposed to exploring on you tube, or other parts of the internet that 11yos may access out of curiosity.

It's also true that nobody wants kindergarteners to accidentally read detailed descriptions of sexual activities in a book that's not age-appropriate for them.

Surely reasonable people can handle both sides of this issue and work towards reasonable solutions?

In my opinion, 11yo is not too young to think about sex or experience sexual feelings while reading. But 8th grade seems to overshoot the target a little -- is there a practical reason for that age grouping?

[pinball]

1 hour ago, Danae said:

Even if I believed her ridiculous story, which I do not

Most people’s porn addiction begins with looking at “innocent” pictures and progressing from there. 

It’s not ridiculous at all, IMO

 

[pinball]

Here’s a good breakdown of the book, Drama.

https://www.picturethispost.com/drama-banned-book-review-for-the-book-and-against-the-ban/

After reading this, I’d support the book being available in 7th grade and up.

I don’t think it’s appropriate or necessary for younger grades

[Dmmetler]

1 hour ago, MercyA said:

Yes. The picture in question:

And the school board voted to restrict access to this book for kids in 8th grade and lower. SMH.

I'd say 5th-8th grade is the target market for Rania Telgemeier's graphic novels. I don't think most kids woild be interested below about age 10, and I think most high school students would find them too juvenile. They really hit the mark as high interest/easy readability books for middle grade readers. The only reason why this book is targeted is that it has sympathetic gay characters. 

 

[Dmmetler]

8 minutes ago, bolt. said:

So she used this story to "encourage" that local school board to ban scholastic book fairs?

That sounds like she took up some time at that meeting with her absurd story, but did it have any impact?

What is the goal of this kind of activism?

It's true that many 'coming of age' books for tweens and teens have details in them that feel lively and sexy for their target audience. I personally remember experiencing 'romance novel feelings' arising from books in my school library as I was growing up. These are appropriate things to explore in the privacy of literature and they are perfectly normal feelings to feel while reading. In fact, reading published works of fiction, written for teens and tweens, is a very safe space -- as opposed to exploring on you tube, or other parts of the internet that 11yos may access out of curiosity.

It's also true that nobody wants kindergarteners to accidentally read detailed descriptions of sexual activities in a book that's not age-appropriate for them.

Surely reasonable people can handle both sides of this issue and work towards reasonable solutions?

In my opinion, 11yo is not too young to think about sex or experience sexual feelings while reading. But 8th grade seems to overshoot the target a little -- is there a practical reason for that age grouping?

It's a defacto book ban. By 9th grade, most kids are interested in more "young adult" themes, so librarians won't usually stock middle grade books, particularly not for authors who are strongly associated with middle grade, and if you limit to 8th grade and up, middle schools, where there ARE still kids who are interested in middle grade won't stock it since 6th and 7th graders can't have it. 

Edited November 30, 2023 by Dmmetler

[pinball]

18 minutes ago, Grace Hopper said:

Read the linked Politico article

What linked Politico article?

Linked from this thread?

I’m missing it if you mean it’s linked on this thread

[MercyA]

14 minutes ago, pinball said:

Here’s a good breakdown of the book, Drama.

https://www.picturethispost.com/drama-banned-book-review-for-the-book-and-against-the-ban/

After reading this, I’d support the book being available in 7th grade and up.

I don’t think it’s appropriate or necessary for younger grades

Also, from Common Sense Media: "Middle school characters talk about crushes and dating and kiss on the cheek and lips on a couple of occasions. Mentions of breakups and asking someone to the school dance, as well as scenes of dancing close together."

Do you support making all books about kissing and dating available to only 7th grade and over?

[pinball]

6 minutes ago, MercyA said:

Also, from Common Sense Media: "Middle school characters talk about crushes and dating and kiss on the cheek and lips on a couple of occasions. Mentions of breakups and asking someone to the school dance, as well as scenes of dancing close together."

Do you support making all books about kissing and dating available to only 7th grade and over?

No. I support each book being evaluated on its own particular contents.

 

 

[bolt.]

3 minutes ago, pinball said:

No. I support each book being evaluated on its own particular contents.

 

 

I can't get your linked article to load. Could you tell me which particular contents of this book do you think aren't coming though clearly in the common sense media description? Is there something that makes it suitable for 12-13yos (7th grade?) but not 11yos?

[pinball]

52 minutes ago, bolt. said:

I can't get your linked article to load. Could you tell me which particular contents of this book do you think aren't coming though clearly in the common sense media description? Is there something that makes it suitable for 12-13yos (7th grade?) but not 11yos?

The synopsis includes mention of aggressive behavior of a boy towards the female protagonist, Cassie. Then at the end of the book, the boy admits he has feelings for Cassie. 
 

To me, the whole idea of a boy being aggressive to a girl bc of his romantic feelings is repulsive. I certainly don’t want younger kids introduced to that. 7th grade is soon enough but I’d hope girls wouldn’t internalize that and would talk it over with a parent. 

Edited November 30, 2023 by pinball
Feelings, not feels

[Grace Hopper]

39 minutes ago, pinball said:

What linked Politico article?

Linked from this thread?

I’m missing it if you mean it’s linked on this thread

Sorry, I misstated Politico. It’s actually an article from Legum’s sub stack account (Popularinfo.com). 
 

https://popular.info/p/mysterious-woman-tells-school-board

Are middle and elementary grade kids using their own money at the scholastic book fair? I mean, seems like there’s a point at which concerned parents can look over what their kids want to order. 
 

I may not have chosen to let my kid order that particular title. But I’m not into book banning. 

[pinball]

9 minutes ago, Grace Hopper said:

Sorry, I misstated Politico. It’s actually an article from Legum’s sub stack account (Popularinfo.com). 
 

https://popular.info/p/mysterious-woman-tells-school-board

Are middle and elementary grade kids using their own money at the scholastic book fair? I mean, seems like there’s a point at which concerned parents can look over what their kids want to order. 
 

I may not have chosen to let my kid order that particular title. But I’m not into book banning. 

Thanks for the clarification.
 

Re: being “into book banning” 

There is a huge difference between providing kids with age appropriate books and “banning” them. There is a reason libraries have different sections.
 

[Grace Hopper]

Just now, pinball said:

Thanks for the clarification.
 

Re: being “into book banning” 

There is a huge difference between providing kids with age appropriate books and “banning” them. There is a reason libraries have different sections.
 

It’s a slippery slope.

https://www.cpr.org/2023/06/29/colorado-springs-school-district-book-bans-bible/

Look, I’m not advocating for zero wisdom in curating school library collections. But this particular story is about a marketing enterprise at its core.  

[maize]

What do you all mean by book banning?

My association with the word comes from countries with actual government censor offices where certain books and materials are forbidden from being sold or owned by citizens of the country. I haven't seen that happen anywhere in the US so the word ban comes across to me as inappropriately hyperbolic. I've seen lists of so-called "banned" books but to make it onto the list the book just needs to have at some point been removed from a school or library somewhere. I do not understand how that is a ban. Yes it makes the books less easily accessible to segments of the population...so call it that. 

 

Edited November 30, 2023 by maize

[aggie96]

NM. Discussion moved on before I posted. 🙂

Edited November 30, 2023 by aggie96

[pinball]

1 hour ago, Dmmetler said:

It's a defacto book ban. By 9th grade, most kids are interested in more "young adult" themes, so librarians won't usually stock middle grade books, particularly not for authors who are strongly associated with middle grade, and if you limit to 8th grade and up, middle schools, where there ARE still kids who are interested in middle grade won't stock it since 6th and 7th graders can't have it. 

Come now. . Feel free to advocate for what you think are appropriate age levels for books and readers but don’t call it book banning when you don’t agree with someone else’s opinions about what THEY think are appropriate.

 

[Dmmetler]

4 minutes ago, pinball said:

Come now. . Feel free to advocate for what you think are appropriate age levels for books and readers but don’t call it book banning when you don’t agree with someone else’s opinions about what THEY think are appropriate.

 

They are removing it from school and classroom libraries. I am well aware of the " as long as people can buy it, it's not banned", and I do not believe anyone using such argument is using it in good faith. This book is now going to be inaccessible to many students regardless of their parents' beliefs about appropriateness. 

 

 

 

 

 

[pinball]

Just now, Dmmetler said:

They are removing it from school and classroom libraries. I am well aware of the " as long as people can buy it, it's not banned", and I do not believe anyone using such argument is using it in good faith. This book is now going to be inaccessible to many students regardless of their parents' beliefs about appropriateness. 

 

 

 

 

 

It is being removed from some libraries because it is deemed to be inappropriate for the children that use the libraries but it remains in libraries where it is appropriate. That’s not banning.

The definition of banning is being cheapened when it is used in such a disingenuous manner as advocated by people in this thread.

[Grace Hopper]

13 minutes ago, pinball said:

It is being removed from some libraries because it is deemed to be inappropriate for the children that use the libraries but it remains in libraries where it is appropriate. That’s not banning.

The definition of banning is being cheapened when it is used in such a disingenuous manner as advocated by people in this thread.

Do you feel the titles listed from Brave Books appropriate for school libraries?

[4kidlets4me]

48 minutes ago, pinball said:

Come now. . Feel free to advocate for what you think are appropriate age levels for books and readers but don’t call it book banning when you don’t agree with someone else’s opinions about what THEY think are appropriate.

 

But that's the problem now isn't it. A certain section of the public thinks they should be in charge of what everyone gets to read. Why should my kid be denied the chance to read the book because you (general you) think it's inappropriate for your kid?

[ktgrok]

4 hours ago, MercyA said:

Yes. The picture in question:

And the school board voted to restrict access to this book for kids in 8th grade and lower. SMH.

good lord. I was reading VC Andrews in middle school, and snuck my dad's Heinlen novels. Still didn't end up a pervert or porn addict, as far as I can tell. Somehow, those seem way more problematic than a kiss no worse than in a disney movies. 

2 hours ago, marbel said:

So if I have the right book, here are the CommonSense media reviews for it. It sounds as if the graphics and reading level make it attractive to young kids, but the themes seem like they are for an older audience. 

https://www.commonsensemedia.org/book-reviews/drama

I agree that the whole p*rn addiction thing is insane and I'd hope the school board wouldn't act simply in response to that. But from what I can see here, it seems like a middle school book, not for little kids. 

But, they said middle schools couldn't have it, has to be 8th and above. Middle school's have 6-8th. 

[Faith-manor]

8 minutes ago, Dmmetler said:

They are removing it from school and classroom libraries. I am well aware of the " as long as people can buy it, it's not banned", and I do not believe anyone using such argument is using it in good faith. This book is now going to be inaccessible to many students regardless of their parents' beliefs about appropriateness. 

 

 

 

 

 

Agreed! When books are actually removed from public funded libraries, not just potentially re-shelved in an agreed upon age/grade appropriate area, then they are being banned. From publication? No. But they are being effectively banned for the economic class of families whose tax payer dollars are being used to fund the library, and then they are told they have no right for their child to have access to that book at the library whereas they had it before. That is an official ban, and the actors involved in making these decisions are elected school board members being paid with tax dollars to do the job, by township officials, city council members, etc. all on the public dole making official decisions. Just because a state legislature or congress does not decree this through a vote on the hill, doesn't make it less of a ban. It isn't a private decision by a privately owned, privately held company. So therefore, it does meet the qualification of a ban. The definition of ban is not restricted only to what the federal government restricts.

But in this particular case, the biggest issue is that this fallacious argument of "got addicted to porn because a scholastic book contained a cartoon illustration of two people kissing" has been used to further the business aims of one of Scholastic's, competitors.

Beyond that, this is also a case of one woman making a very public announcement that either she is a paid agent of Brave Books OR she is a sex addict and needs therapy ASAP. I suspect the first, but since she has conspired to be a part of this crap, I am fine with her being labeled and hounded as the other.  You reap what you sow, and it is time to allow this to happen to the bad actors involved in this constant attack on everyone else's choices.

Taking a leaf right out of the usual outrage groups' playbooks, if they don't like the books at the public school, then send they can send their kids to private school or homeschool. If they don't want their kids to read something that violates their family values, then get their a$$es off the couch, and go to the library with their kid and actually parent said child. It is not the librarians' jobs, the volunteers' jobs, to keep track of the whims every parent in the district. Take some responsibility for their own kid instead of having a winge and a nutty about other families literary choices.

 

[Grace Hopper]

13 minutes ago, Faith-manor said:

 

Beyond that, this is also a case of one woman making a very public announcement that either she is a paid agent of Brave Books OR she is a sex addict and needs therapy ASAP. I suspect the first, but since she has conspired to be a part of this crap, I am fine with her being labeled and hounded as the other.  You reap what you sow, and it is time to allow this to happen to the bad actors involved in this constant attack on everyone else's choices.

 

 

 

Edited November 30, 2023 by Grace Hopper

[marbel]

51 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

But, they said middle schools couldn't have it, has to be 8th and above. Middle school's have 6-8th. 

Right, but regardless of what this particular school has decided, it seems like a middle school book to me. So if I was in charge, I'd probably put it in the middle school library. Maybe, I mean I haven't read the whole book. 

Regarding what we read as kids: I had the full run of the public library as a kid, and read a lot of things I later came to regret. I can only imagine that's easier now with unfettered internet access, as some kids seem to have. I did not become an addict, but years later I can still recall some passages that were disturbing to me at the time. I am 67 years old! There are things that are not easy to forget. NOT saying this woman became a porn addict because of this one exposure though I cannot say it is impossible, depending on where one goes with it. Nor should policies be based on such anecdotes. 

Edited November 30, 2023 by marbel

[pinball]

37 minutes ago, Faith-manor said:

When books are actually removed from public funded libraries, not just potentially re-shelved in an agreed upon age/grade appropriate area, then they are being banned

Links to where this has happened

[Pam in CT]

The issue seems to be that a particular private sector company is wielding very targeted panic-flogging in an extremely intentional and cynical way so as to displace a competitor. Wielding astroturfed Porn Panic as opposed to the prior rounds of White Guilt panic or Trafficking panic or LGBT Grooming panic or whatever.  Once again melding CRT!!! culture war brouhaha to extremely specific profit ends.

Am I missing something?

[pinball]

1 hour ago, 4kidlets4me said:

But that's the problem now isn't it. A certain section of the public thinks they should be in charge of what everyone gets to read. Why should my kid be denied the chance to read the book because you (general you) think it's inappropriate for your kid?

Most societies have standards.

To use a book mentioned…Flowers in the Attic, which involves severe child abuse and brother-sister incest does not belong in elementary or middle school libraries.

I also thinks it is such garbage that schools shouldn’t waste their money buying it for HS libraries, either.

Yes, if your 10 yo middle schooler wants to read Flowers in the Attic from his middle school library, I think he should be denied that, whether I have kids or not.

 

[maize]

2 hours ago, Dmmetler said:

They are removing it from school and classroom libraries. I am well aware of the " as long as people can buy it, it's not banned", and I do not believe anyone using such argument is using it in good faith. 

I am absolutely arguing in good faith when I challenge the "banned book" terminology. It intentionally creates a false correlation. Here's an example of an article making the hyperbolic comparison explicit:
"Book banning evokes images of oppressive dictatorial regimes and harrowing dystopian novels, such as Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451. And yet, recent events in America come as a sobering reminder that censorship is omnipresent; a persistent dystopian stain on modern, democratic society. Over recent months, there has been a flurry of book bans across many US states, as a plethora of books have been removed from school and libraries alike." https://issuu.com/theeaglegazette/docs/eagle-vol8-issue3/s/15089219

The words book banning intentionally call to mind dictatorial regimes and dystopian novels--that is precisely why they are being invoked. But the comparison is not an accurate or appropriate one. It's just one more example of the ongoing to trend to paint any opinion or action stemming from "the other" political side--whichever that is--as pure evil in intent and purpose. 

We aren't living in either a dictatorship or a dystopia because a handful of books are removed from a handful of school libraries. There is NO actual correlation here. 

Edited November 30, 2023 by maize

[Heartstrings]

“Book banners” have no intention on stopping at schools and public libraries. That’s just where they are starting.  They’ve tried and failed (so far) to ban sale of books they disapprove of as well.  This is similar to anti-abortion laws that aimed to chip away at Roe while insisting that “no one wants over turn Roe” right up until Roe was overturned.  No one believes this will remain limited to schools.  No one.  

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/31/us/virginia-obscenity-book-ban.html#:~:text=A judge in Virginia on,because of their sexual content.

Edited November 30, 2023 by Heartstrings

[WildflowerMom]

I've read through this, looked up some stuff, and basically agree some with both 'sides'.  But I want to say that I feel badly for this girl.  20 years old, probably coerced by brave to stand up there and say all that, and now she's being vilified by another group.  

Edited November 30, 2023 by WildflowerMom

[Heartstrings]

4 minutes ago, WildflowerMom said:

But I want to say that I feel badly for this girl.  20 years old, probably coerced by brave to stand up there and say all that

It’s a disgusting business practice by Brave.  With that kind of grossness being what they opt to put on public display it makes me wonder what other kind of rot is happening in that company.  

Edited November 30, 2023 by Heartstrings

[Grace Hopper]

23 minutes ago, maize said:

I am absolutely arguing in good faith when I challenge the "banned book" terminology. It intentionally creates a false correlation. Here's an example of an article making the hyperbolic comparison explicit:
"Book banning evokes images of oppressive dictatorial regimes and harrowing dystopian novels, such as Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451. And yet, recent events in America come as a sobering reminder that censorship is omnipresent; a persistent dystopian stain on modern, democratic society. Over recent months, there has been a flurry of book bans across many US states, as a plethora of books have been removed from school and libraries alike." https://issuu.com/theeaglegazette/docs/eagle-vol8-issue3/s/15089219

The words book banning intentionally call to mind dictatorial regimes and dystopian novels--that is precisely why they are being invoked. But the comparison is not an accurate or appropriate one. It's just one more example of the ongoing to trend to paint any opinion or action stemming from "the other" political side--whichever that is--as pure evil in intent and purpose. 

We aren't living in either a dictatorship or a dystopia because a handful of books are removed from a handful of school libraries. There is NO actual correlation here. 

I understand. But I also feel it necessary to remain vigilant so we don’t wake up one day to find we no longer have voices. 

[TexasProud]

2 hours ago, pinball said:

It is being removed from some libraries because it is deemed to be inappropriate for the children that use the libraries but it remains in libraries where it is appropriate. That’s not banning.

The definition of banning is being cheapened when it is used in such a disingenuous manner as advocated by people in this thread.

Yep.

[Innisfree]

28 minutes ago, pinball said:

To use a book mentioned…Flowers in the Attic, which involves severe child abuse and brother-sister incest does not belong in elementary or middle school libraries.

There’s a huge difference between Flowers in the Attic and the book under discussion, though. Including a couple of pictures of people kissing seems so innocuous that it would have gone completely unremarked upon had there not also been LGBTQ content… and, of course, if the private company hadn’t had a financial stake in creating conflict. I really don’t see the problem with Drama unless one wants to prevent any recognition that gay people exist, and, gasp, might even be students in middle school classrooms. 

[TexasProud]

That said, what this woman did was wrong and she is just looking out for her own interest.

But my pet peeve is all the screaming about banning books.  Moving a book to the adult section or YA is not banning.  The parents who believe their child should still be able to read it can get to it and give it to them, but my child cannot stumble across it in the children's section. 

[Pam in CT]

@maize , I agree that hyperbolic language is unhelpful and it behooves us all to be mindful of our use of it. 

I see a real distinction between the use of the term "censorship" vs the term "book ban," however.

 

"Censorship" is, to my mind, a word that conveys an act of government that curtails expression. When a prison warden blacks out portions of outgoing letters: censorship. When military command limits outgoing or incoming information: censorship. When the DOJ enjoins a newspaper from printing classified material or grand jury materials that the outlet has lawfully acquired: censorship. When a municipal governments issues a regulation that BLM placards cannot be placed on a town square where other placards can be: censorship.

(There may be limited circumstances where such actions are warranted.)

Content decisions by private companies may *look* superficially similar, as when a private mall allows its pavillion to be used by some organizations but not others, or a newspaper to publish some op ed or letters to the editor opinion but not others, or a social media platform to remove some types of posts but not others. But there are any number of distinctions between the actions of government, with the force of law behind them, vs the actions of private companies making private decisions based on their assessment of where their customer / advertiser base is at, or the image they wish to convey, or their corporate values or etc. Those types of actions to my mind are not "censorship," and I would count the use of that language there as hyperbolic/ incendiary/ unhelpful.

 

Publicly funded public libraries are something of a grey area when it comes to "censorship." The "publicly funded" side of their operations suggests there properly should be some sort of mechanism for societal input to the values that guide the curation. That's difficult to effect in practice -- it's not feasible for all 18,000 of the people, or all 12,000 of the adults, in my town to weigh in on each and every book and video and puzzle our library acquires; there are good reasons to give a fair amount of discretion to the professionals who work hard to be well informed about new titles in their respective areas; there are bad reasons to fear a tiny handful of loudmouth cranks from wielding disproportionate influence. And the "public access" side of libraries' mandate and purpose for existing includes, I think, a mission to enable folks from different walks of life to find material that help them -- a library in a heavy-majority Christian area with a stated or (more likely) de facto policy to not carry any books about other religions, for example, would not be serving its "public access" mission very well, even if its governance board were content with such a policy/ practice; even if some loud townspeople were demanding it. 

It's a balance; the balance is often tricky, trickier when kids are involved.

But in the "no books about Islam" library hypothetical, I don't think the language of "book ban" would be over the top. I still wouldn't quite use "censorship" in that case --  a library procurement decision is something short of an overt act of a government entity, or of book-burning. But I think we do need *some* sort of language for library restrictions on books based on content that a handful of folks complain about. I mean, in that hypothetical, they are banning a whole category of books. In FL, legislators actually passed a list of books that school libraries were prohibited from acquiring. It's a thing; it's becoming more of a thing; we need language for the thing. What language makes sense to you?

 

(And all this is a definite rabbit trail off the OP, which is something very much narrower, a private company flogging outrage to displace a competitor!)

[rebcoola]

28 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

“Book banners” have no intention on stopping at schools and public libraries. That’s just where they are starting.  They’ve tried and failed (so far) to ban sale of books they disapprove of as well.  This is similar to anti-abortion laws that aimed to chip away at Roe while insisting that “no one wants over turn Roe” right up until Roe was overturned.  No one believes this will remain limited to schools.  No one.  

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/31/us/virginia-obscenity-book-ban.html#:~:text=A judge in Virginia on,because of their sexual content.

Yep, in a small town what started as a group trying to get a dozen books relocated to the adult section spiraled into a campaign to defund the library.

https://www.thenation.com/article/society/libraries-book-banning/

May not technically banning but it sure would have the same effect. 

[Heartstrings]

3 minutes ago, rebcoola said:

Yep, in a small town what started as a group trying to get a dozen books relocated to the adult section spiraled into a campaign to defund the library.

https://www.thenation.com/article/society/libraries-book-banning/

May not technically banning but it sure would have the same effect. 

That’s happened to a library near me and  my home town is unfortunately a current target of this as well.  I feel strong that defunding libraries is the ultimate end goal.  

Edited November 30, 2023 by Heartstrings

[pinball]

10 minutes ago, rebcoola said:

Yep, in a small town what started as a group trying to get a dozen books relocated to the adult section spiraled into a campaign to defund the library.

https://www.thenation.com/article/society/libraries-book-banning/

May not technically banning but it sure would have the same effect. 

And it failed.

your link limits the number of articles one can read without registering or signing up.

I fat fingered it and managed to get the part of the country where it happened but I could not get back to read that site.

so I googled. And found out it didn’t pass. Dayton Library in Washington state