“Censorship is the tool of those who have the need to hide actualities from themselves and from others. Their fear is only their inability to face what is real, and I can't vent any anger against them; I only feel this appalling sadness. Somewhere in their upbringing, they were shielded against the total facts of our existence.”
– Charles Bukowski (1920-1994) German-American poet, novelist, and short story writer
I was struck by the comments of one Scioto County Commissioner who attended a recent board meeting hosting community members on all sides of concerns about a recent display at the Portsmouth Public Library.
The display in question featured Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer or Questioning (LGBTQ) inclusive children’s books, formerly featured in the youth services area of the library. Literature for children of all developmental stages included frank discussions of gender identity, physical anatomy, and inclusion for those of all ages within the LGBTQ+ community.
The library posited that the display was intended to “offer children’s literature that corresponded with June being Pride Month – a month that observes years of struggle for civil rights and the ongoing pursuit of equal justice under the law for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer community, as well as the accomplishments of LGBTQ individuals.”
(Kasie McCreary. “Portsmouth Public Library hears citizen complaints, support of Pride Month display.” Portsmouth Daily Times. June 21, 2022.)
PPL was in the process of dismantling the display due to complaints when a single patron checked out all of the books featured. The stir was born and the controversy spread. The meeting at the library offered area residents the opportunity to express their opinion on the LGBTQ display and its removal.
The comments from those in attendance were both surprising and predictable as those on the many sides of the issue presented their understandings of the library's role in the matter. Each was allowed a brief time to speak, and the board offered no answers to questions posed. Simple and easy enough, right? Well, maybe not so straightforward, after all.
I found Commissioner Bryan Davis's views very interesting. As a public official, Davis used this opportunity to air his platform and delineate his stand. As I watched video of the board meeting, I became very interested in what he had to share.
Davis began by saying he was disappointed in the LGBTQ display. He felt the issue was about “improperly purchased and shared books in an age-sensitive part of the library” – what he believed were “age-inappropriate books the children should not be allowed to access.”
I was frankly amazed when Davis called the display “a direct effort by the library staff to push a one-sided agenda upon the most impressionable and vulnerable in our community” – our county's children. He claimed the display “was not about Pride or about the LGBTQ community” but about indoctrination.
I felt blindsided by this view in that I have never known the public library to preach or edify any belief other than literacy or reading. Davis presumably had knowledge that some sinister plot was unfolding whose purpose was to promote homosexuality and alternative lifestyles. One must presume he thinks the library is actively enlisting converts.
Not only did Davis accuse the library of recruiting children into the gay lifestyle, he informed the board that he had talked to many of his constituents who had concerns about the display and “who were so disgusted that they told him they would never support the library again.”
I began to wonder what exactly elicited such a disagreeable response from the citizenry. Was it the content of the material in question, or was it an overall disapproval of alternate lifestyles? Believing it was some of both, I found myself thinking of living in an overwhelmingly conservative community where liberal ideas are often thought to be gateways to socialism … and even to everlasting hell.
Davis then reminded the board that “the Portsmouth Pubic Library is levy-supported by the taxpayers of Scioto County” and that, with their Pride Month display, they were in danger of a “possible erosion of public trust.” He informed the board and others in attendance that approximately 30% of total library funding came from this money, and “the loss of state funding in 2009 had already cost the library 17 positions.”
I guess I was supposed to wonder why the state was not supporting libraries as much as they used to. Perhaps there is an inference here that the loss of attendance at libraries has something to do with politicians opposing controversial content or pornography. I'm not sure. I'm still scratching my head over that one.
At any rate, the commissioner also bemoaned that “the community was not asked about purchasing books with their hard-earned tax dollars” – money that he claimed “clearly financed an agenda not supported by the majority of its citizens.” Davis believed the proof of their indoctrination was that the children's books containing LGBTQ messages had been “erroneously placed” and “should never be in the children's section again.”
Could Davis be for completely banishing all questionable gender-related material or for putting it behind a barrier to be accessed only by those deemed knowledgeable or mature enough to understand any negative influence that it may pose? I wondered if, in his view, a child may even read a library poster promoting Pride month.
David supported his view that the indoctrination “agenda” was afoot by stating the books were “an attempt to indoctrinate, not educate, as is evident by the absence of subject matter regarding the negative impacts of sexual-reassignment surgery and the negative and ethical issues surrounding transgender ideology and other subjects.”
Is that “absence” idea true? I'm pretty sure the library offers access to health materials with a myriad of viewpoints and access to societal ideologies of every kind, including precepts of the Christian Bible. At what age is condemnation of homosexuality taught or, at least, made accessible to young minds? If it is limited by age, I did not know.
Claiming that he “feared for the future of the library system,” Davis offered what he said was “an important solution.” He urged the library board to develop “an accountability system and policies by which a community review panel or the library board approved subject matter, especially those subject matters of potentially controversial issues.”
What censorship guidelines would people with these policies use to insure free speech and freedom of expression? Some folks are so restrictive in their views that any fair compromise would likely be impossible. I am reminded of Congress and their seemingly constant gridlock over the most sensible solutions.
Davis ended his comments by tying his position that the library was inculcating LGBTQ views through their month-long recognition of Pride with a personal, patriotic appeal. He urged the board “to make July part of their veterans appreciation for the entire month and not just one week because our veterans deserve it.”
I thought about the military, and I thought about LGBTQ people in the armed forces. The RAND Corporation recently found (2018) that 6.1 percent of people in the U.S. military self-identified as LGBT. It’s the first ever direct estimate of the military’s LGBT population, even though LGB people, at least, have been allowed to serve openly for seven whole years.
I also thought about the fact that LGBT veterans are at a disproportionate risk for suicide and other poor health outcomes. Sexual and gender minority veterans have faced stigma and discrimination, which can affect their health. LGBT Veterans are more likely to report that their health is fair or poor and that they have multiple chronic conditions. Maybe Davis would support getting better treatment for these gay vets who are obviously in need. Could a kid read a book from the library about their struggles without being in danger of indoctrination?
“Learned institutions ought to be favorite objects with every free people. They throw that light over the public mind, which is the best security against crafty and dangerous encroachments on the public liberty.”
– James Madison
What Is Really Going On?
I have to include this before closing. Another man at the meeting who objected to the display made references to books supported by Planned Parenthood, yet with a quick and under-toned warning about age-appropriateness, he chose to read what he considered offensive excerpts from these books to those whom he believed to be vulnerable – children in the room.
Who is indoctrinating whom? Who is positioning politics and doctrine?
Censorship of our public libraries is the latest ultra-conservative Republican answer to the ills of society. Republican opposition to children’s books about LGBTQ parents, what they judge as “pornography,” and any suggestion of critical race theory is now a major GOP movement in America. It smacks of censorship, and it must be viewed for what it is – unfounded fear driving homophobia.
When public libraries limit information and present books that address only one viewpoint okayed by just one group, we lose diversity of thought and diversity of ideas. Conservative Republicans practice emasculation of any alternative view. For example, they are currently demonizing teachers as groomers of what they believe are dangerous ideological concepts. They wish to cut any reference to opposing thought out of public schools.
How easy it is to imagine their efforts will actually breed illiteracy and significantly damage every child's right to education? Censorship promotes false information while breeding lies and even conspiracy.
Despite the pressure put on our public library board through fear tactics like assumed “majority opinions” and possible “funding and staff cuts,” PPL must present diversity opinions and minority views that foster alternate reason and allow choice. We, the public, must be intelligent enough to distinguish a library from a church or a political rally.
What is honestly most dangerous to our youth – books containing LGBTQ references or efforts to squash the right to read? After all, it is time we recognize that children and teens must learn to navigate a divided society filled with those more than eager to condemn their understandings of race, gender identity, and sexuality. Some people want not only to take books out of circulation but also to control tax dollars and stop libraries from purchasing what they consider to be “offending texts.” That, in itself, is authoritarian control.
And, here is a big lie: organizations supporting public library censorship – No Left Turn in Education, Moms for Liberty and Parents Defending Education among the most prominent – claim to be grassroots and parent-led promoters of ethical values. The public library is open to all, free to all, and inclusive of all subject matter. We live within the safeguards of a very important document called the First Amendment. Some would choose to unfairly control even the printed material on the shelf of our libraries.
The movement to censor? What started in schools has rapidly expanded to public libraries, accounting for 37 percent of book challenges last year (2021), according to the American Library Association. Conservative activists in several states, including Texas, Montana and Louisiana have joined forces with like-minded officials to dissolve libraries’ governing bodies, rewrite or delete censorship protections, and remove books outside of official challenge procedures.
Consider one such case alarming case in Texas recently …
Judge Ron Cunningham, the head chair of the governing body of Llano County in Texas (who was once part of the security detail for then-Gov. George W. Bush) strode into the main library at the end of 2021and took two books off the shelves — Sendak’s In the Night Kitchen – because some parents had objected to the main character in the story, a little boy, appearing nude — and It’s Perfectly Normal: Changing Bodies, Growing Up, Sex, and Sexual Health, a sex education book for parents and children ages 10 and up, that includes color illustrations of the human body and sex acts.
Judge Cunningham also ordered librarians to pause buying new material and to pull “any books with photos of naked or sexual conduct regardless if they are animated or actual photos,” emails reviewed by The Washington Post showed.
(By the way, in one of the emails obtained through a public records request and shared with The Washington Post, Cunningham seemed to question whether public libraries were even necessary.) “The board also needs to recognize that the county is not mandated by law to provide a public library,” Cunningham wrote in January.
John Chrastka, executive director of EveryLibrary, said library boards are designed to be independent to protect records, serve the entire community and protect patrons’ First Amendment rights.
“When boards become politicized, there are problems because they either favor one group over another or start to spend taxpayer money in less-than-transparent ways,” Chrastka said. “If a board is motivated by political ideology or a religious agenda, it stops being a public institution because it does not serve the whole public.”
(Annie Gowen. “Censorship battles’ new frontier: Your public library.” The Washington Post. April 17, 2022.)
Censorship, beliefs of indoctrination, threats to funding, single-viewpoint accountability, even jingoistic patriotic parallels – it is evident that a group featuring themselves as the moral majority of the area wish to impose their own will on the hearts and minds of Scioto County youth.
What about this tremendous concern over censorship in a county declared by commissioners as a “Second Amendment Sanctuary” for guns, a county that ranks lowest in Ohio for health outcomes, a county that still reels from a devastating opioid epidemic? Scioto County officials should be worried about the physical health and well-being of young children and take proactive measures against gun violence, disease, addiction, and poverty instead of worrying over information about their sexual identities. The Portsmouth Public Library cannot become a political arm of a fearful Republican Party. Can it?
“It’s not just the books under fire now that worry me. It is the books that will never be written. The books that will never be read. And all due to the fear of censorship. As always, young readers will be the real losers.”
– Judy Blume
No comments:
Post a Comment