Public awareness of crime, sexual harassment in libraries, and inappropriate books and web sites in schools due to American Library Association policy. ⚖️
Librarians protect their fellow Marxists at all costs, even crossing all borders. Here on an American Library Association platform (on Facebook) they compare kids wanting to be dinosaurs and superheroes to drag queens. Librarian Jennie Audrey gets triggered by seeing someone opposing drag queens for kids in a Canadian library and reacts by asking the 54.2K+ members of the ALA Facebook closed group called Library Think Tank - #ALATT to "outnumber the negative comments with positive comments and support this librarian providing access to a Drag program." They do. You see, librarians have a hidden network to collude with each other how to better s3xualize and propagandize more children. This is just one such example.
The person about whom she complains, Marco Moreau, says,
Hello family and friends! If you would like to email or contact the Parkhill library or the lady who is putting on a “story time for all ages” by a drag queen please respectfully email
lbrock@middlesex.ca
Or call
519-294-6583
People can do as they please but my children would like to learn there abc’s and 123’s not be influenced they can magically be turned into a girl or boy at the ages of “story time” I’d assume 3-8 years of age.
I say this with no offence but there is much more children of that age, should be taking in. If my son told me he wanted to be Batman for a day,he would want too and possibly, me letting him would possibly influence him into thinking he was Batman for years.
What agenda they are pushing is unfair to children and parents who allow it are sick in the head.
# letchildrenbechildren!
So Jennie Aubrey writes to start the bullying process:
Hi all,
I saw this shared by a "friend" and I am disappointed. Hoping we can instead outnumber the negative comments with positive comments on this post and support this librarian providing access to a Drag program.
There then follows a lot of comments, including these, just the tip of the iceberg on bullying and gaslighting and astroturfing that is so typical of librarians:
Jamie Keller
Don't dress as a bat, man, that might make you trans-ylvanian.
Taryn DeeCee
Ahh yes. This is why we've historically seen just tons of children who dressed up as superheroes or princesses or dinosaurs, for say a birthday party or Halloween, decided that they were superheroes and princesses and dinosaurs for years. Because children notoriously do not understand costumes and have never ever in the history of all time played dress up. 🙄 (Heavy sarcasm, btw)
Erin Matlin
I say we email this director with words of support and encouragement. Let her know that we support her.
Christine Clear to Erin Matlin
I just did!
Misty Wyscarver
Here is the comment I left on his two posts:::::
Marco Moreau, I'm so sorry that you have been lied to about Drag Queen Story Hours. They aren't sex parties in front of children. They aren't grooming workshops with the goal of making your child LGBTQIA. Please stop believing that there is some hidden sexual agenda. There isn't. Anyone telling you that there is, is lying to you and setting you up to be a political pawn.
Story Hours- and I mean all story hours have the goals of establishing early childhood literacy skills and reading readiness. They also enhance social skills by allowing children to interact....
Katrina Stokes
Ah, the irony of someone using the "place of learning" argument but doesn't know the difference between *there* and *their*.
Anna Nellis
Because everyone knows letting your kid pretend to be Batman for a day is a slippery slope that can lead to them being confused forever 🙄
That's why all of my childhood Halloween costumes became lifelong, identity shifting obsessions. God, the amount of therapy it took to convince me I wasn't Nala from the Lion King...
Katrina Stokes to Anna Nellis
right?? I should be a warrior, a princess or MFing dragon!!!
Anna Nellis to Katrina Stokes
unfortunately the fact that I went as a witch multiple times DOES track tbh 😂
You can go to Marco Moreau's post to see the librarians here are harassing him there. For example, Misty Wyscarver says, "Really? The stupidity is coming from your narrow, hateful minds. You don’t realize how ridiculous and ignorant you make yourselves appear."
For generations more genders have been recognized than just the binary. Native Americans recognized those referred to as two- spirit. In India the Hijra are recognized as the third gender meaning they are neither completely male or female. Please visit the library and research it. There are more than XX XY genders. There are XXY and XYY medically recognized. There also intersex people who are born with both genitalia.
I am not the problem. Ignorance is the problem.
This is what librarians do to push their way into community after community. They use an ALA-provided centralized means of communication to send out the bat signal, organize, then attack. Also across borders. And this is happening in your own community even if you don't realize it, precisely because it's done in hidden ways, in this case a private/closed Facebook group that people/parents cannot see, as this instance illustrates.
The above information is so fresh that people are still writing comments there even now.
So there's the latest, freshest example of librarians using an ALA platform to bully parents opposing drag queens s3xualizing children—even in Canada.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: ROXBURY SCHOOL LIBRARIAN SUES ROXBURY PARENTS OVER PARENTS EFFORTS TO KEEP SEXUALLY EXPLICIT BOOKS OUT OF SCHOOL LIBRARY
CORINNE M. MULLEN, ESQ.
Certified Civil Trial Attorney
April 20, 2023
Roxbury High School librarian Roxana Caivano has filed a defamation action against a group of Roxbury parents who have opposed sexually explicit books on the shelf of the Roxbury School library. The parents, represented by First Amendment lawyer Corinne Mullen, have responded with a letter demanding dismissal of the lawsuit based on it being a frivolous pleading.
Why would a librarian sue parents over an issue that should be openly debated in the public domain and in the public forum of a BOE meeting? Seeking to silence parents is at odds with our rights to act as citizens in an informed democracy. There is a very public and prominent constitutional debate in our country today as to what books should be accessible to children on the shelves of a school library. This issue is raging across America and parents believe it is their fundamental right to debate and to question the level of appropriate content for their minor children. Parents should have the right to have a voice in whether their children should be exposed to sexualized content in the books chosen by public school employees.
Some Roxbury School parents have been active participants in this public debate about this critical constitutional issue. Ironically, they are being sued by Roxana Caivano, Roxbury School librarian who is seeking to silence them and impose a chilling affect on the First Amendment rights of the parents.
The parents believe that all students have a right to see themselves reflected in the literature they read, while at the same time not be exposed to sexually inappropriate material, which is pervasively vulgar. "We would not expose our minor children to this material at home and we challenge the right of school officials to override our decision and to promote and expose minors to this material in school," said one of the parents. "We at least, as parents, should have a voice in the debate and be able to express our views in public forums and at public meetings considering such cases."
This lawsuit inhibits open and robust debate on the issues as we as a nation must face on the appropriateness of content to which our children are exposed. Our speech is clearly constitutionally protected speech about a public and critical issue. "Ironically, this lawsuit seeks to silence public debate about free speech issues," commented the parents' attorney, Corinne Mullen, a First Amendment lawyer specializing in defamation. Press inquiries may be made to The Mullen Law Firm, 201-420-1911 or corinne@mullenlawfirm.com.
## 30 ## 30 ## 30 ##
=======
And she's right on target as American Library Association and state library associations like Texas Library Association work individually and together to stop parents from "express[ing] our views in public forums and at public meetings considering such cases." Examples:
The silencing of parents is so bad, as educationally unsuitable material sweeps America because of school librarians, that parents feel the need to speak up for their rights before state legislators, like this example from New Jersey:
JMJ
+
PARENTAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOM RALLY
WE URGE ALL LIBERTY LOVING CITIZENS TO SHOW UP AND STAND UP TO THE TYRANNICAL MURPHY ADMINISTRATION AND THOSE LEGISLATORS WHO TRAMPLE ON OUR RIGHTS AND OUR FREEDOM
WHEN: MAY 15TH 10:30 AM TO 1:00 PM
WHERE: STATE HOUSE ANNEX, 125 WEST STATE STREET, TRENTON
WHY: Support Parental Rights
Oppose the Sexualization and Indoctrination of Children in PublicSchools
Defend Religious Freedom and Freedom of Speech
THE ISSUES:
NJ’s obscene and pornographic Sex Ed Standards and School Library books
Transgender indoctrination without parental knowledge or consent
Critical Race Theory and Marxist indoctrination teaching hatred and intolerance in public schools
Promotion ofInvasive Procedures, including abortion and experimental transgender protocols that can cause Sterilization, Systemic harm without parental knowledge or consent
CompulsoryVaccination despite knownSevere Adverse Reactions and Deaths
Parents have the right and responsibility to direct the education of their children and states have the primary responsibility for supporting that parental role. Also, teachers have the right to refuse to participate in mandates that violate their sincerely held religious beliefs. The Courts have supported religious freedom and opposed school boards in the numerous cases that have been litigated on this issue.
Children must be protected from sexualization, transgender experimentation and mutilation, and dangerous ideologies, such as Critical Race Theory, that promote hatred and intolerance in public schools,protected from inappropriate, sexually explicit pornographic books for children in our libraries. Parents who disagree with the “protocol” to affirm and transition gender confused children, often without parental knowledge or consent, can be considered “abusive” and risk losing custody of their children.
Vulnerable children depend upon caring and courageous adults to stand up to predators in the schools, bureaucracy, and medical field that expose them to dangerous experimentation and mutilation.
Let us stand to defend our families, our freedom, and our faith. Not only children, but the future of our state and nation depends upon it. For more information contact Jeryl Maglio at 862-596-2726 or via email: dtf@doloresturcofoundation.org.
Lastly, I myself have been named in the defamation lawsuit / vexatious litigation by Roxana Caivano, though I am not a party. I have written about Roxana Caivano here: "Roxbury High School Librarian Roxana Caivano and Gender Queer" https://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2023/03/roxbury-high-school-librarian-roxana.html
What happens when Hollywood joins forces with librarians and left-wing focused education advocacy groups? The push to get grossly s3xualized books into kids' hands takes on a shiny new PR sheen.
Texas Library Association (TLA) is pushing librarians to take part in the #LetAmericaRead campaign, which uses the cover of fighting censorship and book banners to further distort the important and necessary work of getting p0rnographic materials out of schools. Through the power of celebrity and trending social media content, the organizations behind this hope to get s3xualized material into kids' hands.
(Click on pictures to make them larger for clarity.)
So, who all is involved? Let's start with the official sponsors of this PR campaign:
Creative Artists Agency (CAA)
The CAA is an American talent and sports agency based in Los Angeles, California. While CAA does its best to stay out of the news, it has been linked to claims of aiding and abetting Harvey Weinstein in preying on female actors, per an exposé by Variety. This exposé, and others, claims numerous agents were not only aware of Weinstein's actions but deliberately placed female actors in positions that increased their chances of being victimized.
In the world of politics, OpenSecrets.org notes that CAA donates almost exclusively to American politicians and organizations associated with the left wing of the American political landscape.
Campaign for Our Shared Future
The Campaign for Our Shared Future (COSF) lists itself as a "non-partisan, not-for-profit 501(c)(3) organization." Its founders, Heather Harding, Ed.D., and Eliza Byard, Ph.D., cite a desire to focus on intersectional issues relating to education, racial equity, and LGBTQ+ issues. Byard was the Executive Director of GLSEN (formerly the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network) from 2008 to 2021.
COSF has a noticeable slant to the content published on its website, as exemplified by casting Florida's House Bill 1557 “Parental Rights in Education” as “Don't Say Gay,” a name created and used by US media to reframe and distort the focus and purpose of the bill.
#LetAmericaRead
Examining the organizations listed on the #LetAmericaRead website is very revealing. The American Library Association is deeply embedded in this organization, as is FReadom Fighters, an advocacy organization created by the Texas Library Association. While it maintains a publicly separate identity from TLA, it is heavily promoted and discussed on the TLA listservs and maintains a very noticeable presence at the TLA Annual Conference.
What Should Parents Do About #LetAmericaRead?
Let everyone know who is behind this campaign—a Hollywood talent agency linked to Harvey Weinstein's crimes, a leftwing education advocacy group, and librarian organizations actively working to keep p0rnographic content in schools.
Use Twitter's “Community Notes” feature to provide important context on #LetAmericaRead posts and fill the comments on other social media websites with that information.
Talk to other parents about who is driving this PR campaign and call your representatives to let them know not to be taken in by literal Hollywood spin.
#LetAmericaRead is attempting to take historical cases of censorship and apply them to the current grassroots campaign in America to remove s3xual content from school libraries and to get schools and librarians to stop grooming kids. It strips all context regarding the content of the books being challenged to try and make parents the enemy of children and schools.
Protect our kids – Hollywood and librarians want p0rn in schools.
—
The above was submitted to me for anonymous publication so parents, legislators, and librarians could get valuable inside information not available from other sources where such voices are silenced. This is another in a series of anonymous publications from librarians, library board member, library school professors, and library directors calling out for reform. Send submissions to me at SafeLibraries@pm.me.
In addition, Campaign for our Shared Future is a "partner" in ALA's "Unite Against Book Bans," a coalition of organizations, created by ALA, dedicated to ensuring children retain access to s3xually exploitive material in public schools and libraries by any means, including censorial legislation. So no surprise COSF supports s3xualizing children.
It is also noteworthy that after I reported this story below, TLA made their @TXLA Twitter account private to allow time for it to delete damning evidence of its s3xualization of children. It took about a month before the account was opened against to the public. And @TXLA blocks me to this day. Here's what I reported that caused them to go private/silent:
— Dan Kleinman of SafeLibraries® 🟧 (@SexHarassed) April 26, 2022
Texas Library Association At It Again
And TLA is at is again, now at #TXLA23 telling its groomers to be cautious, keep a low profile, and censor out any possibility of a challenging response to their propaganda:
Just a friendly reminder to be aware of who is following you on your various social media accounts and what you may be posting on your accounts especially as we gather for important learning opportunities and multiple social events during next week's conference. We know our colleagues from across the US have been misrepresented on social media and we absolutely do not want any of us to go through similar experiences.
Handy tip – did you know on Twitter you can limit who responds to your tweets to only those accounts you follow? Go to any of your posts and look for the three dots on the top right and select "change who can reply". There you will have the option to select everyone, people you follow, or only people you mentioned as those who can respond.
Instagram has something similar where you can either allow or restrict comments on posts.
I am certainly looking forward to seeing everyone next week and celebrating a year of hard work!
Lucy
----------------------------------------
Lucy Podmore
TASL Chair
Remember, to get rid of these groomers from your schools and remove the grooming material, follow these instructions:
I thank the brave librarians and others who come forward—anonymously—to let others know what's going on. You at TXLA23 and AASL23 can contact me for confidential assistance as well:
Have you noticed school children have been inundated with educationally unsuitable or pervasively vulgar school books nationwide? Librarians are working to pass legislation to ensure schools retain such materials despite United States Supreme Court rulings and common sense, precisely to use the power of the state to stop parents from complaining to school boards about such materials.
It is a very dangerous development in the war to s3xualize children, it must be stopped, and this post will detail how a small group of people made up and promoted the claimed "right to read," precisely to cut off parents and impose their own worldview on America. Once that is realized, no parent or legislator will want legislation that would codify this radical foothold on the American education system.
Indeed, the ultimate way to stop this is to get on school and library boards, remove all references to the "Library Bill of Rights," stop any librarian interaction whatsoever with any current library association, then legally remove all educationally unsuitable material from schools, the way it used to be before librarians imposed their made-up rules on everyone. It's the librarians who are the true minority, not the parents.
Here's the story I just read that spills the beans on American Library Association's attempt to legislate their 1960s radical view of age discrimination:
Eadopt the American Library Association's Library Bill of
25
Rights that indicates materials should not be proscribed or
10300HB2789ham001
- 3 -
LRB103 29629 AWJ 58578 a
1
removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval or, in
2
the alternative, develop a written statement declaring the
3
inherent authority of the library or library system toprovide
4
an adequatecollectionstockof books and other materials
5
sufficient in size and varied in kind and subject matter to
6
satisfy the library needs of the people of this stateand
7
prohibit the practice of banning specific books or resources.
This legislation will codify the "Library Bill of Rights" in Illinois and become the model legislation for nationwide codification.
So let me explain a general overview of whence comes the "Library Bill of Rights" and how the word "age" got added that American Library Association hopes becomes law. Then you'll know why this legislation must be defeated by any means, or the s3xualization and indoctrination of school children will become set in stone and there won't be any means whatsoever to stop the onslaught. The First Amendment right to seek redress of governments will be overturned by this legislation, as will US Supreme Court precedent. Redress will be gone. Parents children will be s3xualized. Game over. Marxists win.
The @ALALibrary is the problem. “Age” is now equated with other aspects such as background or views with no mention of what may be inappropriate. This is why they call all challenges a “ban” or “censorship”. pic.twitter.com/4bkixBmWpK
However, the Code of Ethics of the Library Bill of Rights is not a federal statute, but is promulgated by the American Library Association. The Library Bill of Rights is an unambiguous statement of principles that should govern the service of all libraries. While the documents represent the policies of the American Library Association, there is nothing to indicate that there would be a private cause of action based upon a violation.
Third, the "Library Bill of Rights" is just an aspirational creed for librarians—so it should not be applied generally via law:
Wiegand, Shirley A. “Reality Bites: The Collision of Rhetoric, Rights, and Reality and the Library Bill of Rights.” Library Trends, Library Trends: The Library Bill of Rights, 45, no. 1 (Spring 1996): 75–86. https://hdl.handle.net/2142/8065.
This creed, albeit lacking in legal support, might provide inspiration to library professionals and would provide them with a standard which goes beyond First Amendment mandate. It might be incorporated into the employment contract for library professionals, but it would not represent the current state of legal principles.
Fourth, at least one library has already removed from its policies all references to the "Library Bill of Rights" precisely because its inclusion of the word "age" is so harmful to the children of the community:
Schaper, Arthur. “Big Victory: Wyoming Library Board Cuts Ties With American Library Association Over Graphic Children’s Books; Board Didn’t Back Down to Mob of Pro-LGBT Leftists at Meeting; Also Modified Library’s Mission Statement; And More to Come!; A Culmination of Hard Work by Wyoming MassResistance Parents.” MassResistance, November 6, 2022. https://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen4/22d/WY-Library-exits-ALA/index.html.
The Campbell County Public Library (CCPL) will no longer have any association with, nor be associated with The American Library Association (ALA) its affiliate organizations, subdivisions or subsidiaries thereof. No CCPL public funding will be used for any membership, training, informational services, or events sponsored by the aforementioned groups or any groups associated with them. CCPL policies will be adjusted to reflect the same.
Fifth and lastly, it is important to know that American Library Association has admitted it knows certain materials in schools are "s3xually inappropriate for minors," but it trains librarians to "reframe" such material as diversity and inclusion, before such matters even get to legislators. Yes, ALA is specifically targeting legislators for misinformation, and here we are, ALA is trying to get legislation passed to codify its "Library Bill of Rights." Read/watch:
But ultimately, we found that the thing that needs to happen most, and it needs to happen before these bills are introduced, is sustained uh messaging that reframes this issue um that uh that takes it away from the idea that these are inappropriate for minors, or s3xually inappropriate for minors, and promotes them as diverse materials and programming that are about inclusion, fairness, and protection of everybody's right to see themselves, and their families reflected in the books in the public library.
So librarians know such material is inappropriate for children, but they are still going to spread it just by "reframing" it, just by fooling people. Now these very same people want our legislators to pass laws codifying the reframing of inappropriate material that violates Board of Education v. Pico as "diversity" and "inclusion." Truly diabolical to fool legislators into allowing librarians to continue to harm children by making this "reframing" the law of the land.
Now back to the "Library Bills of Rights" and how "age" got inserted.
A small group of librarians just decided to add the word "age" to their "Library Bill of Rights" that they had previously made up. They were enamored with the anything-goes-at-any-age views of a 1960s radical sociologist named Edgar Friedenberg who wanted equality of rights between adult and child library uses. So they added the word "age." You see, before then, everyone knew you don't allow children school library access to inappropriate material. We all know it now too, we just let the librarians bully us into thinking it's a First Amendment right when it isn't.
Marxists in govt schools now have a powerful ally, the American Library Asso. (ALA). It has elected a new Pres., Emily Drabinski who describes herself as a “Marxist lesbian”. The ALA will now turn our libraries woke. As a librarian myself, I will be in the trenches fighting ALA!
To Xi Van Fleet @XVanFleet who experienced Marxist indoctrination first hand, Friedenberg looks like a Marxist because he believed parents have no authority over their children. That comes directly from the Marxist goal of abolition of family. It also comes from the Marxist goal of abolition of religion. When there is an absence of morality, there is no longer a difference between right and wrong. Therefore, anything goes in terms of books for children. See:
Why are school boards and the propagandists in the media defending rapists and attacking parents? The sobering answer to that question is that the abolition of family is essential to the successful infiltration of their ideology. If Marxists can abolish parental authority, the state can control the educational system—and ultimately society.
So this Marxist Edgar Friedenberg is the genesis of the word "age" in the "Library Bill of Rights." And now the American Library Association, itself Marxist, wants to get the "Library Bill of Rights" codified nationally. Should we allow that? Should legislators agree to that? If they do, what does that say about them?
But thanks to the out and open s3xual indoctrination of school children by school librarians using the "Library Bill of Rights" as both sword and shield, parents have finally began to wake up and have been successfully using US Supreme Court cases to get books like "Gender Queer: A Memoir" by Maia Kobabe and "All Boys Aren’t Blue: A Memoir-Manifesto" by George M. Johnson pulled from public schools.
American Library Association reacted by giving those books awards and creating "Unite Against Book Bans" to lie about the legal removal of educationally unsuitable material from public schools and to cast the parents as a small minority of religious nuts driven by dark money to take away the alleged right to read of students.
Part of Unite Against Book Bans involves legislative efforts, like asking your legislator loaded and deceptive questions, like, "Would you introduce or sponsor legislation that would prohibit government entities from banning books from local libraries and schools because of the content, ideas, or viewpoints expressed in the book?" and "Would you introduce or sponsor legislation that would protect librarians and educators for doing their job of providing a variety of age-appropriate reading materials to students?" Source: Unite Against Book Bans; Candidate Questionnairehttps://uniteagainstbookbans.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/UABB_CandidateQuestionnaire_02-ac.pdf
Those push questions exactly mirror the very law ALA seeks to get passed in Illinois. What a coincidence.
This legislation is so precious to ALA that it is funding school librarian Amanda Jones to sue parents for defamation, and in return Amanda Jones has asked her Louisiana legislature to pass laws to ban parents from challenging books. Another coincidence.
Moving forward, legislation is needed to protect your constituents against these types of unfounded, vicious attacks. I hope that you will not only speak up against their actions, but take action as a political leader to prevent this from continuing.
I myself have been named in the defamation lawsuit of another school librarian suing other parents, but I digress:
So let's get to the meat of the matter. Heard of the right to read for school children in schools? It's a "phantom right" perpetrated by American Library Association and other politically motivated groups, according to:
Koganzon, Rita. “There Is No Such Thing as a Banned Book: Censorship, Authority, and the School Book Controversies of the 1970s.” American Political Thought 12, no. 1 (January 2023): 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1086/723442.
Abstract:
What accounts for the persistence of school book banning controversies in the United States? In Island Trees School District v. Pico (1982), the Supreme Court ruled that book removal violates children's right to read, but school book challenges have only increased since then. I argue that Americans have been unable to put this controversy to rest because a misleading narrative of censorship framed the Pico case and has continued to frame the question since. That narrative depicted what is fundamentally a contest between competing adult authorities—educational professionals and parents—as instead a contest between children and adults. By reconstructing the development of this narrative by young adult authors and professional educators in the 1970s, I show that the invention of children's "right to read" in this period sought to discredit the legitimate democratic authority of school boards over curricular decisions in a way that left the conflict simmering and unresolvable.
This article is outstanding in a number of ways. It's well written, well researched, and it sheds light rarely seen elsewhere about the scam ALA plays on the American public. I may not republish it, but I do have permission to share it, so ask me if you would like a copy.
Here's what I learned from this article:
1
There's no such thing as a banned book. Children's "right to read" was invented to "discredit the legitimate democratic authority of school boards over curricular decisions."
2
Newspapers always target parents in book challenge cases yet they never raise the issue of how the inappropriate books got into the library in the first place. Censorship is always the issue, never the initial selection of the material. Why is that?
3
The right in book challenges is always the "student's right to read," rather than how such a book was selected in the first place.
4
Everyone's always critical of the parents challenging the books. No one looks at the "motives of the educators who select the works that end up being challenged." So parents and school boards suffer high scrutiny, while everyone overlooks "the motives and authority of the writers and educators in generating and assigning the controversial work." And University of Houston Professor Rita Koganzon is going to correct that shortfall now.
5
Basically, "young adult" or YA literature "became a vehicle for professional educators to counter the reticent child-rearing practices of families and communities by treating them as obstacles to their children's healthy development." Sound familiar with all the gender transitions going on without parental involvement? So YA authors hopped on ALA's censorship train and "position[ed] themselves as alternative sources of education against families." Then when their books got challenged, "they transformed their case for promoting YA books through library and curricular selection into a case for students' rights to read them, thereby obscuring their own pedagogical purposes behind rights claims."
6
"[A]uthors of YA books understood their work as an intervention into child-rearing and a subversion of reticent parents unwilling to expose their children to controversial s3xual and social issues." "[L]ike YA writers, educators saw their efforts in competition with those of parents and communities, if not in outright opposition to them. Both writers and educators viewed families as failing to equip their children with updated views about s[3]xuality and hot-button social issues and saw YA books in school libraries and curricula as a means to counteract them." "Having forged a strategic alliance, YA writers and professional educators transformed their battle for educational authority against parents into a claim about the rights of children against censorship, not only obscuring the nature of the conflict but also undermining their own pedagogical authority in the process."
7
In the 1970s, there never was any "book banning." It was just a contest between educators/writers and parents/communities. The tussle between the "book banners" and the "book selectors" is the heart of the problem. The made-up "right to read" just obscured this tussle. It was "conceived as a means of discrediting parental dissent and shielding educators from community opposition." This "rights talk" is all made up to for the writers/educators/librarians to fool people.
8
A "series of questionable assumptions about family life and children's experiences" was used to justify the entire YA genre, such as the assumption "parents were unjustifiably concealing [information] from [their children]." Author Judy Blume was part of the problem. "YA books did not so much reveal the facts of life to adolescents as transform the facts of life from peripheral eventualities into the defining cultural dramas of adolescence."
9
"Only once YA books had popularized this cultural script as the healthy way to grow up and made the case for the necessity of openness and publicity around these issues could parental reticence around them be questioned and overruled on the grounds that it impeded healthy development."
10
YA book authors were averse to "moralizing." Parents who didn't want to "reveal 'adult secrets'" were now "downright negligent." "Refusing to moralize allowed YA writers to overcome their distance from readers and claim to relate to them better than their parents." "Indeed, it was not unusual for journalists to describe YA writers as children."
11
"But writers could not triumph over parental objections to their work on the authority of their kinship with children alone. They required the affirmation and assistance of another set of authoritative adults—the experts in education and development. Because the primary buyers of YA books were schools and libraries, 'youth novelists and librarians therefore have a common cause. We want the attention of the newest generation,' Peck proclaimed (1973, 205)."
12
x NOTE: BECAUSE I AM PREPARING THIS FOR A ZOOM MEETING TONIGHT, I DON'T HAVE TIME TO FINISH THE TEXT AND WILL GET TO IT IN THE FUTURE. I WAS BASICALLY SUMMARIZING THE GRAPHICS, AND THEY ARE ALL PRESENT. SO I WILL PUBLISH THIS NOW IN THIS INCOMPLETE STATE. FORGIVE ME!
[NOTE ADDED 7 MAY 2023: Here is a link to the YouTube video of the Zoom meeting referenced in the above paragraph wherein I discuss the contents of this post—and more:
BEEN WARNING PEOPLE LIBRARIANS WANT LEGISLATION TO S3XUALIZE SCHOOL KIDS + STOP PARENTS FROM RAISING THE ALARM. THIS STORY SHOWS @ALALibrary STARTING IN ITS HOME STATE TO PASS JUST SUCH LEGISLATION. #UniteAgainstBookBans
— Dan Kleinman of SafeLibraries® 🟧 (@SexHarassed) April 10, 2023
NOTE ADDED 11 APRIL 2023:
Another problem with the "Library Bill of Rights" is that librarians themselves intentionally mock it and ignore it when authors try to stop the s3xualizing of children, so why should it be codified if librarians themselves will toss it aside to meet their Marxist purposes? It's already provably arbitrarily applied. We can't have arbitrary legislation.
