Pages

Monday, December 12, 2022

New York Times: Librarians Losing Child Sexualization War Against Parents; Librarians Want Out

The New York Times has printed that librarians are losing the child sexualization war against school parents, even as they win some battles, and librarians want out:
This is the story of what happened when parents in one town in New Jersey tried to remove a handful of books that they said were explicit and sexually inappropriate — and the battle that ensued. 
.... 
Michael Barbaro
So these forces of parental rights and proposed book bans, they’re clearly ascendant. They’re on the march. They won school board races across the country and are feeling, it seems, pretty emboldened.

And Alexandra, that makes me wonder about the strategy of those like Martha who fought so hard to defend these books in a place like Annandale.

I mean, Martha, in the end, had a total victory in her battle to keep those five books on the shelf. But in retrospect, it looks like in the process, she may have, in a sense, lost the bigger war because that victory helped fuel the successful candidacy of someone like Caroline, which will give Caroline pretty big and lasting power over which books are on the shelf.

I mean, just to simplify this question — did winning some of these book ban battles end up costing people like Martha the bigger war over control of school boards?

Alexandra Alter
I mean, that’s a really interesting question that I think a lot of people are asking right now. If the school board had voted differently and they had removed a couple of those books, would it have taken some of the fuel out of the fire? And maybe people wouldn’t have been as motivated to run for school board seats themselves?

That’s entirely possible. It seems like in a lot of districts where members of the Parental Rights Movement are running for school board and winning, it’s because, precisely like you said, they feel like they’ve been ignored and unheard.

Michael Barbaro
Mm-hmm.

Alexandra Alter
And they’ve lost some of these battles over individual books. And now what they’re trying to do is change the entire policy, not just get a few titles off the shelves —

Michael Barbaro
Right.

Alexandra Alter
— but pass new rules about how you can decide what goes in the library in the first place, and taking, you know, a professional librarian like Martha kind out of the equation, or taking some of the control back from the professional educators and librarians, and putting it in the hands of the school board or sometimes the community.

Notice also American Library Association policy adherence makes librarians feel terrible about their jobs:

Alexandra Alter
And in the course of our reporting, we’ve talked to librarians all over the country. And a lot of them say the same thing, that librarians are really exhausted, and scared, and tired. And they don’t feel like this was what they signed up to do.

They’re finding themselves at the center of these ideological battles. And when people used to just complain about books and try to get books removed, now they’re complaining about the librarian and trying to get the librarian fired, or in some cases jailed because they’ve provided those books to children.

So it’s just become a really scary time for a lot of librarians. And Martha, like many other librarians, is pretty fed up with that.

As the school librarian Martha Hickson put it:

Martha Hickson
I turn 63 in two weeks, and retirement is within my grasp. And I’m just trying to crawl my way to that finish line. It’s not the way I want to be and it’s not where I want to be in my career.

I, up until a year ago, really, really loved my work. And it’s harder to love it now.


She's trying to "crawl her way to that finish line."  It's awful what librarians endure to enforce American Library Association policy.

The parent involved made clear exactly what American Library Association policy promotes, namely grooming; school librarians are beginning to tire of defending this sexualization of children by some organization from Chicago, Illinois:

Caroline Licwinko
By providing material that is inappropriate to a minor and breaking down the natural walls that children are supposed to have to keep them safe, that is grooming.

When there’s a library book that is talking about, hopefully, adults at sex parties, or setting up Grindr accounts to meet someone just for sexual reasons, that’s only, that’s not natural. That’s not natural for a 14-year-old to be looking at in school.

And providing this type of information, that is absolutely one of the top ways that people who abuse, sexually abuse, children, that is how they break into a child’s naturally protective sphere.


Here is my published response to that story:

Dan Kleinman
Such books may be removed from the school immediately per US Supreme Court. There's no need for a review committee that's just an American Library Association tool to drag out book removal or make it impossible, as happened here.

Board of Education v. Pico says pervasively vulgar books may be removed from school forthwith. The books in question are pervasively vulgar. That is the basis for the removals, not the ideas they contain that the removal of which Pico would not allow.

United States v. American Library Association says, "There are substantial Government interests at stake here: The interest in protecting young library users from material inappropriate for minors is legitimate, and even compelling, as all Members of the Court appear to agree."

In contrast to SCOTUS twice saying material inappropriate for minors may be removed immediately, American Library Association says no material whatsoever may be removed since that would be age discrimination and that would violate the Library Bill of Rights. If you can't remove a book guiding children to take pictures and post them on Grindr for illegal sex (due to their age), then anything goes.

Between Chicago, IL, based ALA and US Constitution based SCOTUS, I choose SCOTUS. The books should have been removed per Pico.

The school board will eventually change from ALA anything-goes worshippers to those who respect the law. At that point the books will be removed, and legally so.


Lastly, American Library Association knows it is losing this war to sexualize children.  Notice ALA has not promoted this New York Times story via any of its many media outlets.  ALA makes a habit of staying silent about what it sees as bad news for ALA.  And it's silent about this story and parent Caroline Licwinko getting elected to the school board and the school board successes of Moms For Liberty —because getting on the school boards is the means to erase ALA's harmful policies.  ALA is silent about this.  This is how you know ALA knows it's losing its war to sexualize school children.

This is the way, parents.  Directly expose how school librarians following ALA diktat are sexualizing children, then run for and win positions on school boards.  Demoralized librarians will jump on ALA's sword then run for the exits instead of doing what's right to protect children.  "And I’m just trying to crawl my way to that finish line," said Martha Hickson.

By the way, notice the story mentions a lot how the books are not obscene or standards are applied that apply only in the case of obscenity.  Example:

Alexandra Alter
And also, in order to meet the definition of obscenity or pornography, the works in question are supposed to be totally devoid of any artistic, or educational, or political, or scientific value. 
So most people, when they looked at a novel like “Lawn Boy,” for example, would say there’s a story being told. There is an artistic purpose. There is an explicit sexual scene. But it’s not the bulk of the narrative. And there’s a lot else going on.

But the legal question is just one piece of what’s animating Caroline.

Obscenity is not the issue with respect to school books.  This is why American Library Association promotes claims of obscenity so heavily (and why media parrots such claims), because they already know such claims are a loser for parents.  So, parents, be careful not to be misled by media, as well as by the school librarians, the issue is pervasively vulgar materials in schools, not obscenity that's nearly impossible to prove.  

Some schools write policies having latent obscenity poison pills so the policy looks good to parents but that obscenity standard doesn't apply so is used to sink any parental challenge while you think the policy is protecting children.  Here's a school policy from Texas, for example, where provision 7 is the poison pill killing 5 and 6:



Tenure!  Notice how tenure protects librarians who sexualize children—why is that and what does that mean?  Are there no ethics codes that apply to school librarians?  So take action as soon as possible to remove any groomers:

Martha Hickson
Knowing the practicalities and realities of the world of education, I expect that they will hire a baby librarian, probably as young as they can and as cheap as they can.

That person will then have four years in which they will not be tenured. And tenure has been a great protection in this situation. So for those four years, that individual will be at a great, great disadvantage.

Sources:


Barbaro, Michael, and Alexandra Alter. “When Book Bans Came to Small-Town New Jersey; Clashes Over What Belongs on Bookshelves Have Put School Librarians at the Center of a Widening Fight.” The New York Times, December 7, 2022, sec. Podcasts. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/07/podcasts/the-daily/book-ban-high-school-libraries.html.

Kleinman, Dan. “Comment to When Book Bans Came to Small-Town New Jersey.” The New York Times, December 8, 2022, sec. Podcasts. https://nyti.ms/3hf6Q6x#permid=121900687.


Related:



American Library Association. “Martha Hickson Receives AASL Intellectual Freedom Award.” Text. News and Press Center, April 15, 2020. https://www.ala.org/news/member-news/2020/04/martha-hickson-receives-aasl-intellectual-freedom-award.

Gregory, Jamie and American Library Association. “Martha Hickson, Students, and School Board Save 5 Challenged Titles.” Intellectual Freedom Blog (blog), February 24, 2022. https://www.oif.ala.org/oif/martha-hickson-students-and-school-board-save-5-challenged-titles/.

Capital Resource Institute. “Voters Against Obscene Books in Public Schools.” Rasmussen Reports, October 3, 2022. https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/partner_surveys/voters_against_obscene_books_in_public_schools.


Kleinman, Dan. “Court Rules Gender Queer Obscene; Parents Forced By Schools to Seek Judicial Relief.” SafeLibraries® (blog), May 22, 2022. https://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2022/05/court-rules-gender-queer-obscene.html.

Kleinman, Dan. “Library Bill of Rights Means ‘Nothing’: Berry v. Yosemite Community College District.” SafeLibraries® (blog), August 30, 2019. https://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2019/08/library-bill-of-rights-means-nothing.html.


Monday, December 5, 2022

School Librarians Train to Violate FOIA Law to Keep Parents In the Dark About Sexualizing Children

School librarians are trained to violate Freedom of Information Act [FOIA] laws so as to keep parents in the dark about sexually inappropriate materials in public schools and libraries.  They train to use personal resources to evade open public records laws, then say the records do not exist.  That's dishonest.  It's lying.  It’s illegal.  That we are talking about innocent-acting librarians doesn’t make it suddenly legal.

Should a parent file a FOIA request, they may be informed no documents exist.  Oh there are documents, librarians are just trained to conduct public business in a way they think circumvents FOIA and other laws (such as record retention laws).  

As a result, future FOIA requests should include special language to deal with this lawlessness, and perhaps FOIA laws themselves should be amended to account for this specific subterfuge by an entire government job classification: librarian.  

For example, private text messages were obtained via FOIA that proved an elementary school librarian at the Blackshear Elementary School in Austin, TX, set up a drag queen to "read" to students at his school with a Texas Library Association [TLA] officer of the "Queers and Allies Roundtable," was informed the drag queen had a criminal record, then guided the convicted drag queen to fool the required background check—and the librarian was himself a BSDM fetish performer at night:

Shannon, Tracy. “Unbelievable: Austin, Texas, Elementary School Librarian is a BDSM ‘Leatherman’ by Night; Invited Convicted Male Prostitute Drag Queen to Read to Schoolchildren.” MassResistance, April 26, 2020. https://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen4/20b/Austin-TX-Blackshear-library/index.html.
 
Here is the evidence.  In Texas, an executive board member of TLA (the largest state-based library association) and board member of the American Library Association’s [ALA] Freedom to Read Foundation [FTRF] has provided essentially that very training to Texas librarians in a published podcast of the TLA.  Generally, FOIA laws can be viewed at National Freedom of Information Coalition (NFOIC).  Texas FOIA laws can be viewed at the NFOIC site at https://www.nfoic.org/texas-foia-laws/.

Former school librarian Dorcas Hand, pictured above right, is the TLA executive board member and the FTRF board member who spills the beans.  

She admits librarians are not lawyers and are trained to reach out for help from ALA, TLA, and other librarians and, importantly, to use personal email addresses precisely to prevent parents from getting the records under the state's open public records act.  The TLA website directs them to submit an online Google form with the basics of the problem, then someone having experience in that type of challenge is selected by Dorcas Hand herself.  These are public records and any subsequent communications are as well, but the subterfuge essentially makes them nearly impossible to get.  

Here is a transcript of what Dorcas Hand said, emphasis in original:
20:34 "Once the match is made the volunteer reaches out by email.  Uh, volunteers never use their professional email, and they work hard to have their conversations with, um, people who are looking for help on personal devices and WiFi.  We don't want anybody who's involved in this caught by a FOIA request.  And, and we know that's happening.  So we, we try to be very careful.  Um, and, and those two people make their own arrangements.  Once I've connected them I am not a part of the conversation, unless somebody comes back to me and they need more something.  Um, we never give legal advice.  We are not lawyers.  Um, we might point people in the direction of resources that may suggest how they get legal advice, um, we certainly use all of the ALA resources, and, um, some of those, I mean there's case law that you can look at, specific cases that may relate to what you're talking about, and that can be helpful when you're talking to people, but we don't say this is how you solve this problem, because we don't know, if it's going to court, we don't know all kinds of things, and it's not our job to do any of that.  Um, we have put together an internal wealth of resources to answer questions.  The volunteers share whichever ones they think are most useful.  Um, we did go back once and build a tip sheet to support a specific question because that question seemed to come three or four times...." 22:00
Here is the source of information upon the above is based so you can see/hear this yourselves and in full context: 

Sweeney, Cate, and Dorcus Hand. “Banned Books Week 2022, Part I; Libraries Transform Texas Podcast.” Texas Library Association, September 12, 2022. https://anchor.fm/texas-library-association/episodes/Banned-Books-Week-2022--part-I-e1m8rvv.
Let's celebrate Banned Books Week!  Our featured guest for this podcast is Dorcas Hand, school library advocate and coordinator of the Intellectual Freedom Helpline for the Texas Library Association. Cate Sweeney, vice-chair of TLA's PR and Marketing Committee, hosts this episode. In Part I, we'll hear from Dorcas about three different book challenges she faced as a school librarian; as well as what the Helpline does and how it can help you.
"Libraries Transform Texas Podcast"?  Libraries transform Texasinto what?  Apparently, a lawless place where school librarians actively defy law so as to keep parents in the dark about how they are sexualizing school children with sexually inappropriate material.

Does anyone think this is harmless, kids reading sexually inappropriate material?  Just kids reading about "lived experiences"?  Does anyone think this is "diversity" or "inclusion"?  Or LGBT allyship?  Exposure to sexualized material directly harms children:

Lin, Wen-Hsu, Chia-Hua Liu, and Chin-Chun Yi. “Exposure to Sexually Explicit Media in Early Adolescence Is Related to Risky Sexual Behavior in Emerging Adulthood.” PLoS ONE 15, no. 4 (April 10, 2020): e0230242. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230242.

Ross MD MPH, Carolyn C. “Overexposed and Under-Prepared: The Effects of Early Exposure to Sexual Content; Is the Internet Impacting Sexual Development?” Psychology Today, August 13, 2012. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/real-healing/201208/overexposed-and-under-prepared-the-effects-early-exposure-sexual-content.

Rodenhizer, Kara Anne E., and Katie M. Edwards. “The Impacts of Sexual Media Exposure on Adolescent and Emerging Adults’ Dating and Sexual Violence Attitudes and Behaviors: A Critical Review of the Literature.” Trauma, Violence & Abuse 20, no. 4 (October 2019): 439–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838017717745.


V., Juliette. “6 Subtle Ways Child Predators ‘Groom’ Their Victims.” The Mighty, July 12, 2019. https://themighty.com/2019/07/grooming-signs-child-sexual-abuse/.

Jeglic PhD, Elizabeth L. “How Sexual Abusers Try to Groom Children; 99 Percent of Child Sexual Abuse Involves Grooming.” Psychology Today, April 18, 2022. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/protecting-children-sexual-abuse/202204/how-sexual-abusers-try-groom-children.

So Texas parents may want to spread the word about this and act accordingly.  These school librarians are grooming your children with sexually inappropriate material, they know they are doing that, so they are knowingly and purposefully violating Texas law to get it done by any means, whatever it takes, in a way designed to prevent you from knowing.  Now you know.


By the way, when librarians “report a book challenge, book ban, book removal” to ALA or to state library associations like TLA, that document is a public document, as well as all that follows as a result, even if made from a private device on private time to try to circumvent FOIA.  Such reports are not proprietary to ALA or TLA despite their claims of confidentiality.  They cannot disclaim the law.  They are made by public employees acting on public time addressing public issues subject to FOIA laws that as we have seen above they do not want to reveal to the public.  FOIA laws supersede ALA/TLA diktat.  Be sure your FOIA requests include these challenge/ban/removal reports as well.  Give no quarter to librarians intent on violating the law to maximize the sexualization of children, even if they call themselves @FReadomFighters.  There’s no “FReadom” to sexualize children.  When @FReadomFighters gets people to tweet #FReadom on Fridays to #txlege, they are essentially trying to groom the legislators to allow school librarians to have the freedom to continue to sexualize more children in more schools.  Groomers don't just operate on the children.




The following documents are from the Texas Library Association—they show TLA acting upon the recommendation of Dorcas Hand to guide public employees to evade FOIA laws.











As Texas legislators seek to pass legislation due to circumstances caused by librarians trained to violate Texas law, I'm sure they will be happy to see how Texas librarians operate secretly to violate law so as to better groom more Texas children, including those legislators listed here in this typically pro librarian slanted story ("this book-banning era"):

Thompson, Maggie Q. “Austin Libraries Prepare for a Barrage of Book-Banning Bills; Rating Books, Jailing Librarians, and More.” The Austin Chronicle, December 2, 2022. https://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2022-12-02/austin-libraries-prepare-for-a-barrage-of-book-banning-bills/.

Librarians are breaking the law specifically to sexualize more children.  Children are being directly harmed.  Why would anyone give librarians any credence at all?  They literally gang up on you behind your backs—to target the most vulnerable, our children.  


NOTE ADDED 15 DECEMBER 2022:

Likely as a result of the above reporting, the Texas Library Association has locked its @TXLA Twitter account.  Could there be a bigger admission of guilt?  I've never seen any library association ever lock their account.  Does anyone know if they are being officially investigated?

Here's more:


NOTE ADDED 16 DECEMBER 2022:

Assumption: locked its Twitter account to delete tweets showing child grooming by #librarians, so etc. won’t see them. Prediction: When open again, #TXLA will accuse me of defamation saying no such evidence exists. uses this trick.

Saturday, December 3, 2022

ALA Blames Parents for 'Toxic Framing' of Explicit Books

December 3, 2022

Kim Butler
ARDC Intake Division - Chicago
One Prudential Plaza
130 E Randolph Dr, Ste 1500
Chicago, IL 60601-6219

Re: Complaint, Deborah A. Caldwell-Stone
in relation to 
Dan Kleinman No. 2022IN03640

Dear Kim Butler,

I hereby add to my previous response dated November 29 additional information below just discovered about Deborah Caldwell-Stone’s reframing material known to her to be sexually inappropriate for children as diverse and inclusive.  

She made the following statements in public on The Daily Show with Trevor Noah site (and as usual with zero counterbalance because she will never allow herself to be challenged publicly).  In “Why Are So Many Books Being Banned? - Beyond the Scenes | The Daily Show,” by The Daily Show with Trevor Noah, YouTube, 20 September 2022, https://youtu.be/i2iiyU-z5E4, the following statements can be seen/heard that back up the new evidence relevant to her violation of Rule 8.4.

The new evidence is: 

1) She knows her reframing tactic is the key to her Rule 8.4 violation since she herself uses reframing as a sword against parents, several times, to claim parents are reframing books for children as pornography to commit censorship.

3:53.5 “[Parents who attend school board meetings] even use false framing around the the the idea that this is pornography…” 3:58.5

23:30.5 “Parents Defending Education, whatever, um, are creating a false and uh toxic framing around materials that deal with uh gender identity, sexual orientation, and even sex ed.  You know.  And they’re arguing that these books are obscene for minors to read, obscene for the display for minors, or are, you know, whoever writes them or whoever provides them are pandering obscenity to minors.  And that’s absolutely false.  What the Const, you know, the Supreme Court has told us what is protected speech in this case, and sex is a protected top, subject.  Gender identity, sexual orientation, all these things, that, you know, if it has educational value, it has scientific value, artistic value, literature, that’s all protected by the First Amendment.  But they’re trying to shift the needle on this conversation.  They’re trying to reframe this in a way that um gives them the tools they need to censor all of this material.  And, uh, and use the courts, and and use the law to do it.”  24.30.5

2) Since she is claiming parents are reframing books for children as pornography, she is flat out lying to them and about them, and knowingly, per her statements submitted in my ethics complaint.  She knows these books are sexually inappropriate for children.  Her statements are intended to mislead people about sexually inappropriate material for children in schools and how it could be removed forthwith under the law if only librarians trained by her were not lying.  (This logical conclusion was based on assistance by co-author and child development professional Valentina Janjus.)

3) She speaks about obscenity but that is not the issue in Board of Education v. Pico that’s relevant to school libraries.  She’s flat out lying about law by implying books may never be removed from schools since they aren’t obscene under California v. Miller, SCOTUS 1975, a case that doesn’t even apply to school library books.  In reality, pervasively vulgar books may be removed immediately from schools under Board of Education v. Pico, SCOTUS 1982.

4) She brags about being a “recovering attorney,” so her claim she was not acting as an attorney for her employer is patently false as here she is on television and streaming services making essentially the exact arguments she made in the webinar that is the subject of this RPC 8.4 violation.

51:39 “And, you know, I’m a recovering attorney so uh it’s almost incumbent on me to throw up To Kill a Mockingbird although it’s kind of cliched, ha ha ha.” 51:49

5)  Lastly, she makes no mention that the real issue is parents oppose books suffused with pervasive vulgarity like per Harris (https://web.archive.org/web/20110416110441/http://www.harrisinteractive.com/NewsRoom/HarrisPolls/tabid/447/ctl/ReadCustom%20Default/mid/1508/ArticleId/754/Default.aspx) and Rasmussen (https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/partner_surveys/voters_against_obscene_books_in_public_schools) polls, not “gender identity, sexual orientation, and even sex ed” books per her deceptive reframing.  

Overall, she is basically saying no books are ever inappropriate for school libraries when that is legally false and books like “Gender Queer” are being removed under Board of Education v. Pico so often that American Library Association created Unite Against Book Bans just to counteract that specific book being removed.  

This type of false statement is a part of a pattern for Deborah Caldwell-Stone, a habit, if you will.  It’s her habit to say there’s no there there to serious crimes that affect people negatively as a result of American Library Association policy.  As a result of American Library Association policy recommendations not to filter out pornography from library computers despite the law and despite United States v. American Library Association, SCOTUS 2003, many librarians have been sexually harassed by porn-viewing male patrons.  By the way, US v. ALA found, “There are substantial Government interests at stake here: The interest in protecting young library users from material inappropriate for minors is legitimate, and even compelling, as all Members of the Court appear to agree.”  But Deborah Caldwell-Stone doesn’t mention that either.

Some librarians have obtained large amounts of money by settling out of court as a result of sexual harassment suits arising from the application of American Library Association policy created by her Office for Intellectual Freedom.  Deborah Caldwell-Stone, however, said librarians have never been sexually harassed and likely never will be because all the suits settled out of court and, besides, proving it in court is so hard to do.  See her say this here: https://youtu.be/JwXeTfvzQHk?t=316

That was nine years ago.  Librarians continue to be sexualized by porn viewers as a result, just as today, children continue to be sexualized by books selected by school librarians trained by the same attorney.  This attorney has a long term pattern of lying to communities and harming them, and she’s doing it again, in a manner that affects the nation and her children as a whole, all occasioned by her continuing violation of Illinois RPC 8.4.  

Will the ARDC finally put an end to this?

Please incorporate this into my previous response as if it was originally submitted then and there.

Thank you.

Respectfully,

/Dan Kleinman/

Dan Kleinman
SafeLibraries® brand library educational services
641 Shunpike Rd #123
Chatham, NJ 07928

- - - 30 - - -



NOTE ADDED 3 DECEMBER 2022:

Updated to add, "This logical conclusion was based on assistance by co-author and child development professional Valentina Janjus."