Texas Freedom to Lie Project

Texas Freedom to Read Project (TXFTRP) has been caught in a Texas-sized lie.

But first, a bit of background.

If you’ve never heard of TXFTRP, it’s the main ALA astroturf group operating out of Texas. EveryLibrary, a de facto subgroup of ALA, is heavily involved in TXFTRP and has been from the beginning. Both organizations openly acknowledge their close ties.

From TXFTRP:

"The support of EveryLibrary has been instrumental in the launch and the ongoing work of the Texas Freedom to Read Project. As attempts at censorship and book banning have skyrocketed across the state of Texas, the need to protect our First Amendment rights is more important than ever. We are incredibly grateful for and look forward to a continued partnership with EveryLibrary. We are optimistic about the future of Texas as we FightForTheFirst [sic]." - Laney Hawes, Texas Freedom to Read Project. (emphasis added)

Statement from TXFTRP founder thanking EveryLibrary

From EveryLibrary:

EveryLibrary works to support communities who are fighting against book bans and censorship by providing a wide range of pro-bono tools, data, funding and training. We previously provided the Florida Freedom To Read Project with a sophisticated website built on the NationBuilder platform. Now, we are excited to provide the same tools to a group of advocates in Texas who are fighting against censorship in school and public libraries across the state. This group is called the Texas Freedom to Read Project and you can visit their website at txftrp.org and sign their petition to get involved. We are also providing them with many of the tools and resources that they need to win! See their press release below for more information. (emphasis added)

Statement from EveryLibrary on TXFTRP launch

Note the mention of “Fight for the First” in TXFTRP’s blurb. Fight For The First is—in the words of EveryLibrary founder and Executive Director John Chrastka—“basically change.org for libraries.” It’s a plug-and-play platform developed by EveryLibrary to get ALA astroturf groups up and running in minutes (source).

Fight for the First “About” page citing EveryLibrary’s role

As an EveryLibrary clone with a Texas twang, TXFTRP is scarcely different from the many other ALA-inspired, ALA-funded, ALA-trained organizations around the country. (For a refresher, here are the ALA/EveryLibrary agenda and playbook.)

To be clear, there’s nothing wrong with an advocacy group seeking outside help with its operations or funding. But just know that TXFTRP is no more organic or independent than any other ALA astroturf group.

Which brings us to the present day.

On March 11, TXFTRP published an article saying that, as of February 2026, New Braunfels Independent School District (NBISD) had “banned” 600+ books and aged up 800+ books (i.e., moved them from middle school to high school libraries).

TXFTRP article with scary headline and even scarier subhead

TXFTRP allegation that NBISD has removed or aged up nearly 1500 books

NBISD’s supposed actions were in response to SB 13, a bill passed in the 89th Texas Legislature that was signed into law June 2025 and took effect September 2025.

That bill strengthened protections for public school children by prohibiting library materials that are harmful, obscene, pervasively vulgar, educationally unsuitable, or contain indecent or profane content. Naturally, TXFTRP fought it tooth and nail.

NBISD, along with other school districts around the state, undertook a review of its library collection to ensure it was in compliance with SB 13. TXFTRP, sensing a scoop, requested records from the district pertaining to this review.

After analyzing the data provided to it by NBISD, TXFTRP thought it had a bombshell on its hands. Instead, it had a nothingburger.

Here’s why: At the time the article was published, TXFTRP didn’t know the real number of books NBISD had supposedly removed, since they were going off spreadsheets instead of querying the catalog directly. And in fact it had no way of knowing, since NBISD’s review wouldn’t be completed for another 3 months.

TXFTRP admitted as much, albeit in the final paragraph:

A note on our data and information provided.

We acknowledge there are discrepancies between the "Books Pulled by Who and Why" spreadsheets and NBISD Library Catalogs which still show some of the "weeded: SB 13," aged up, and restricted titles listed as "available." New Braunfels ISD provided the "Books Pulled by Who and Why" spreadsheets in response to a request for records of books "removed" or "deleted" since June 1, 2025, so that is what our conclusions and statements are based on. Unless we are otherwise informed, we anticipate the books listed as "weeded: SB 13" in the spreadsheets provided by NBISD have already been, or will imminently, be removed. (emphasis added)

Disclaimer at bottom of TXFTRP article on NBISD “book bans”

While the disclaimer attempted to clarify what was and wasn’t known, the article itself showed no such restraint. Here’s a sampling:

[Headline] New Braunfels ISD bans 600+ books, ages up 800+ titles using AI & overly-restrictive selection criteria.

[Subhead] Lonesome Dove, The Tattooist of Auschwitz, Guinness World Records & The Three Musketeers among hundreds of books removed from school library collections. ...

The school libraries may be open- but according to public documents obtained by a volunteer for Texas Freedom to Read Project- books are being removed and restricted at an alarming rate. ...

As of February 2026, New Braunfels ISD has removed more than 600 books from its high schools in response to new laws. Additionally, over 800 books have been removed from district middle schools and aged up to the high schools and approximately 60 titles have been removed from New Braunfels ISD elementary school libraries.

While over 450 books are publicly listed as “under review” on the district website, others have been quietly removed behind the scenes. In total, 678 titles are listed on internal tracking logs, obtained through public information requests, as “weeded: SB13.” (emphasis added)

TXFTRP made hay of the titles in the NBISD spreadsheets, stoking alarm across its platforms that beloved classics like Charlotte’s Web and The Three Musketeers were being removed from school libraries in an unprecedented act of censorship.

The sensationalistic narrative was amplified by friendly media outlets like KSAT (ABC affiliate in San Antonio) and the San Antonio Current. Even ALA fellow traveler PEN America got in on the action. They all repeated TXFTRP’s claims uncritically.

When confronted with their methodological errors and NBISD-sourced data showing far lower numbers than those in the article, TXFTRP doubled down.

Finally, on May 1, NBISD published the results of its review: 72 books were preemptively removed before the review commenced; 161 books were deemed non-compliant; 28 were aged up; and 218 were deemed compliant.

Those numbers were rather different from those cited by TXFTRP, to put it mildly. Here are both sets of numbers for comparison:

	TXFTRP Number	NBISD Number	Difference
Preemptively Removed	?	72	?
Non-Compliant	660+	161	500+
Aged Up	800+	28	~800
Compliant	?	218	?

It turns out TXFTRP over-reported the number of books removed by more than five hundred and the number of books aged up by around eight hundred.

TXFTRP will argue that they based their conclusions on data provided by the district—which, technically, is true.

However, they failed to ask some (pretty important!) questions:

1. Does the presence of a book on a spreadsheet mean it has been or will be permanently removed from the library’s collection?
2. What exactly does the “Weeded: SB13” label mean?

The answer to the first question is “Probably not,” or if one wishes to be charitable, “Not necessarily.” In fact, the answer was no, but TXFTRP never checked. Instead, it presented its assumptions as faits accomplis.

The answer to the second question would have been readily provided by the district, had TXFTRP bothered to ask. That job fell to a reporter for the New Braunfels Herald-Zeitung, who dropped this nugget in a story published after the NBISD review was complete:

The district stated that books labeled “weeded: SB13” were not necessarily removed for noncompliance, but because SB 13 prompted librarians to conduct a deeper review of their collections. One major factor in removal was age appropriateness, which could include considerations such as reading level, interest level or catalog “adult” designations.The district also notes that publisher’s reviews evolve over time, so librarians make judgments based on the most up to date information and move books as appropriate. (emphasis added)

It’s now clear that TXFTRP (willfully?) misinterpreted the internal labels the district assigned to books during its review. They thought—or rather, assumed, because it fit the narrative—that “Weeded: SB13” meant the book had been or would be removed. This turned out to be false. Nevertheless, it formed the basis for the article’s most sensational claims.

But the article was not just inaccurate; it was pure fear-mongering. TXFTRP’s objective was to generate outrage over a law designed to protect children in order to secure its repeal. And they were willing to spread falsehoods to achieve it.

That ain’t right, y’all.

—

URL of this page: https://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2026/05/texas-freedom-to-lie-project.html

Follow Protect Salado Kids on X: @ProtectSaladoKs

Follow Kelly on X: @patriotesse

Follow Dan on X: @OccupyLibraries @SafeLibraries @WLibraryA

Join World Library Association: WorldLibraryAssociation.org

Legal Defense for SLAPP Suits Against Free Speech

Bad Parenting

Bad parenting is exactly what you get when an entire generation of young parents has been brainwashed into accepting a sick arrangement in which they are stripped of their fundamental rights while the government seizes authority to co-parent their children.

This isn’t some freak accident of modern life. It’s a deliberate, insidious power grab dressed up as compassionate virtue-signaling, even as we watch in horror as kids spiral into anxiety, depression, gender confusion, and outright moral chaos.

It started with the poisonous lie of “It takes a village.” What that really meant was “Here comes the government,” with all efforts designed to sell parents on the fiction that strangers in Washington or the local school district know better than Mom and Dad. Decades of expanding Child Protective Services, mandatory government schooling, and bottomless welfare policies engineered to shatter two-parent homes have done the dirty work of destroying the family quite well.

Today’s young parents were raised inside this bureaucratic beast. From kindergarten onward, they were drilled to trust “the experts” without question, to accept that “tolerance” is demonstrated only by bowing to social pressures regardless of family values, and to follow the Pied Piper that leads them away from their parents until the separation becomes normal and parents’ rights lose out to the state’s agenda. Millions of parents meekly surrendered their kids to the machine and call it “partnership.”

Public schools bombard children day in and day out with gender ideology and early sexualization—explicit library books, sexual orientation events, constant displays, and curricula that normalize confusion and premature sexual knowledge. This is no accident. It serves as a deliberate catalyst, driving a sharp wedge of doubt between children and their own parents while replacing Mom and Dad with “trusted adults” in institutional settings. Teachers, counselors, and activists become the child’s real confidants and moral guides by default.

In Montgomery County, Maryland, schools force-fed this poisonous ideology (never introduced in curricula before the past decade) to kindergartners like toxin in the milk bottle and kept it secret from parents. After the discovery, the institutions refused parents even the courtesy of an opt-out—until the Supreme Court drove a stake through that scheme last year in Mahmoud v. Taylor, affirming parents’ fundamental right to direct their children’s religious and moral upbringing. California brazenly tried to let teachers secretly transition children behind their parents’ backs until the Supreme Court crushed that practice in Mirabelli v. Bonta. Ohio, Indiana, and other states are now racing to pass legislation protecting parents from having their children removed by child-welfare agencies simply for refusing to affirm a minor’s gender confusion.

The social contagion has infected schools, libraries, and clinics.

Teachers, guided by unions, are instructed to socially transition children behind parents’ backs. Counselors, guided by NGOs funded by taxpayer dollars, steer kids toward irreversible medical paths while warning them not to tell Mom and Dad until the plan is in full swing. Mental health interventions rely on heavy pharmaceuticals that numb any possibility of reason and growth toward healthy coping skills. Medical providers have succumbed to the social agenda of “gender-affirming care” that has irreversibly damaged thousands of young Americans, convincing parents that their children would kill themselves if they couldn’t switch genders.

The result? Young parents, themselves raised on the enforced premise that their feelings override science, the law, their families, and common sense, inevitably absorb the overarching lesson: give up your parental rights or give up your children. A generation of parents has been conditioned to outsource discipline to institutions, values to social media influencers, and moral formation to the state. When the kids inevitably crash and burn, struggling to make their way in the world, the social regime points the finger and loudly whispers “bad parenting”—demanding even more power over the next generation as the only solution to the societal spiral it itself curated.

Let the parent shaming begin.

This is evil masquerading as compassion. Every time a parent is coerced into silence, intimidated, or punished for daring to say “no,” another young family hears the message loud and clear: your authority is conditional. You are not sovereign over your own children—the government is. Public schools get to change your child’s name and gender identity at will and let boys watch girls in showers, but if you object at all, your child and all their friends are told you are a disgusting phobic bigot. Libraries get to stock graphic novels showing teenage boys giving each other blowjobs in front of children of all ages, and your only option is to keep your kid out of the library or cancel their card—even though libraries could easily restrict children to age-appropriate titles.

They won’t, and they don’t have to. We have to tolerate it because we allow it.

Doctors and insurance companies experiment with one drug regimen after another to manage out-of-control behaviors and depression raging through hundreds of thousands of teenagers, with no real resolution or accountability to children or parents. The brainwashing is complete when parents are grateful to the system for “co-parenting” with them through the wreckage of their own children’s lives.

Parents are supposed to just get over it and watch their child’s life fall into a mental health nightmare. How did we get here?

The answer has been hiding in plain sight: when you strip people of their true role in any setting and call it “partnership,” disastrous levels of dysfunction are the most likely result. It’s the predictable, engineered outcome of parents tricked into surrendering their once-unquestioned rights and responsibilities over their own children.

Parents, do you see yourselves and your families in this drowning pool?

This assault on the family must be exposed, confronted, and defeated. We need ironclad parental-rights laws with real teeth, massive school choice expansion to shatter the state’s monopoly on indoctrination, and a ferocious cultural uprising that refuses to accept the premise that a government department in another state is a better guardian than a fit mother or father. The Supreme Court has begun drawing lines in the sand. States are following. But the deepest work is cultural—re-teaching a generation that the family is the first and most legitimate authority, not a passenger in the back seat while the car drives off the cliff.

Parents must stop apologizing for wanting to raise their own kids and reclaim their God-given authority over the family. Stop asking permission to decide what is best for your child.

A wonderful, caring village is not raising your child. It’s a power-thirsty bureaucracy hiding in the schools, libraries, pharmacies, and clinics—and it is ruining your children on purpose to maintain control.

—

URL of this page: https://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2026/05/bad-parenting.html



Follow Kelly on X: @patriotesse

Follow Dan on X: @OccupyLibraries @SafeLibraries @WLibraryA

Join World Library Association:

WorldLibraryAssociation.org

Legal Defense for SLAPP Suits Against Free Speech

SafeLibraries.org - Are Children Safe in Public Libraries?

George Johnson vs. The Facts

The following is a response to remarks made by author George Johnson (All Boys Aren’t Blue) in a televised discussion with children’s advocate Bonnie Wallace on FOX 26 Houston’s Isiah Factor Uncensored. The video was published on April 9, 2026, and can be viewed below.

The Economic Argument

3:49—Johnson argued that libraries should carry sexually explicit books because poor kids who want to read them can’t afford to buy them.

This argument is invalid because it rests on two flawed assumptions:

1. Taxpayers are obligated to purchase any book anyone requests and provide it free of charge, regardless of other considerations.
2. Minors benefit from reading sexually explicit books.

The “Anything Goes” Argument

5:05—Johnson said all books belong in libraries.

Some books are objectively, demonstrably harmful to minors, e.g., books that promote gender ideology (see here) and books that contain sexually explicit content (see here).

Additionally, libraries have a right and a responsibility to curate their collections, which even the ALA acknowledges (see here, here, and here).

Finally, libraries aren’t warehouses and were never conceived as such (see here).

Johnson Calls Wallace a Liar, Part 1

5:54—Wallace said the ALA defines YA as ages 12 and up. Johnson said that’s not true.

• The Young Adult Library Services Association (YALSA), a division of the American Library Association, says this on their FAQ page: “Q: What is a young adult services (YA) librarian? A: A librarian who caters to the needs of the young adult population, ages 12 to 18” (see here).
• The YALSA Teen Space Guidelines page says this: “YALSA’s Teen Space Guidelines are a tool for evaluating a public library’s overall level of success in providing physical and virtual space dedicated to teens, aged 12-18” (see here).
• The YALSA Young Adult Library Services page says this: “Young Adult Library Services is the official journal of the Young Adult Library Services Association, a division of the American Library Association. YALS primarily serves as a vehicle for continuing education for librarians serving young adults ages twelve through eighteen” (see here).
• The minutes for the 2011 YALSA Board of Directors Meeting says this: “Young adults are defined by YALSA as young people between the ages of 12 and 18” (see here).

Rules for Thee, but Not for Me

7:55—When discussing his Florida lawsuit, Johnson mentioned the “Trump-appointed judge” and “conservative judge.”

When conservatives do the same (in reverse) by mentioning an “activist judge” or an “Obama-appointed judge,” they’re accused of attacking the judiciary and undermining the integrity of our court system by questioning a judge’s impartiality.

The Therapeutic Argument

8:44—Johnson said removing books that depict the sexual assault of minors will not stop it from happening, and that these books help victims “navigate” their experience.

In actuality, they re-traumatize victims by causing them to relive their assault (see, for example, here and here).

The Prevention Argument

8:57—Johnson argued that sexual assault on college campuses occurs because “you are not allowing books that teach sex or consent to young adults before we place them in dormitories together.”

This causal link is unsubstantiated. More generally, though, the idea that exposing minors to sexually themed books would reduce sexual assault is contradicted by the evidence. There is abundant research showing that exposure to sexually explicit content, whether consensual or not, correlates with sexual violence (see here).

The Sex Ed Argument, Part 1

9:14—Johnson said parents who believe sex education should occur at home are unlikely to provide it themselves, arguing that their support for removing sexually explicit books for minors in libraries is evidence of their reluctance to discuss sex with their children.

His first claim—that parents who believe sex education should occur at home are unlikely to provide it themselves—is simply not true.

These parents are not unwilling to teach their children about sex. They just want it taught by the right people (the parents), in the right setting (the home), and with content they deem age-appropriate.

Moreover, the abundance of sex education resources for parents undermines Johnson’s claim. If parents were truly unwilling to have these conversations, there would be little demand for such materials.

As for his second claim—that parents’ support for removing sexually explicit books for minors from libraries shows a reluctance to discuss sex with their children—this, too, is false.

There are several reasons parents might support such removals that are unrelated to their personal attitudes toward sex or their willingness to discuss it with their children:

• adherence to age-appropriate standards grounded in decades of child and adolescent development research
• a desire to ensure taxpayer funds provide clear community benefit
• concern about exposing minors to harmful material
• a view of the library’s purpose that excludes prurient content

These reasons are consistently articulated by child protection advocates, making Johnson’s apparent unfamiliarity with them surprising.

The Sex Ed Argument, Part 2

9:33—Johnson said, “There has to be some type of way that we’re teaching young adults about puberty, about the changes that are happening to their body, and about the realities that are happening around them.”

Needless to say, parents—who are most invested in a child’s flourishing and are legally responsible for their well-being—should be the decision-makers in this regard, not society at large, and certainly not individuals unrelated to, or unknown to, the child.

It should be noted that Johnson is indirectly arguing that his book and similarly explicit books are educational, and therefore beneficial to minors. Decide for yourself by reading this report.

Johnson Calls Wallace a Liar, Part 2

10:27—Wallace said she’s found All Boys Aren’t Blue in elementary school libraries in Texas. Johnson vigorously shook his head and said, “She hasn’t.”

Johnson’s objection is hard to understand. If his book is indeed educational, he should welcome its presence in school libraries.

He devoted almost all of his remarks to arguing that libraries need more books about sex, yet his instinctive response to Wallace’s claim inadvertently concedes that his own book crosses the line, at least for elementary-aged readers. This contradicts his assertion that “all books belong in libraries.”

Wallace did, in fact, find Johnson’s book in several Texas elementary school libraries—one in McAllen ISD, one in Edinburg ISD, and three in Houston ISD (Oak Forest, Bell, and Stevens Elementary). And this was based on only a cursory search; most Texas elementary school libraries were not examined.

McAllen and Edinburg removed Johnson’s book after Wallace notified their administrations that it is prohibited in Texas prisons due to its explicit content; Houston removed the book for unknown reasons.

Incidentally, All Boys Aren’t Blue is also found in elementary schools outside Texas, including Garrison Elementary (audiobook) and Mann Elementary (audiobook) in Washington, D.C.:

Catalog entry for All Boys Aren’t Blue audiobook at Garrison Elementary (Washington, D.C.)

Catalog entry for All Boys Aren’t Blue audiobook at Mann Elementary (Washington, D.C.)

Given the number of public elementary schools in the United States and the book’s notoriety, it is likely present in many other schools across the country as well.

—

URL of this page: https://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2026/04/george-johnson-vs-the-facts.html

Follow Protect Salado Kids on X: @ProtectSaladoKs

Follow Kelly on X: @patriotesse

Follow Dan on X: @OccupyLibraries @SafeLibraries @WLibraryA

Join World Library Association: WorldLibraryAssociation.org

Legal Defense for SLAPP Suits Against Free Speech

Has Public Education Become a PSYOP??

Has Public Education Become a PSYOP??

In the 1938 play Gas Light, a husband dims the lamps while insisting nothing has changed, driving his wife to question her sanity. Over the past several years, a scaled-up version of this tactic, called “gaslighting” has unfolded systemically in America's public schools and libraries.

Systemic gaslighting is widely recognized as a form of psychological warfare (also known as psychological operations or PSYOPS). Definitions and examples appear consistently in psychology, sociology, military doctrine, and historical analysis. The aim to of a PSYOP is to distort perceptions of reality, induce self-doubt, demoralize targets, and achieve nearly unbreakable control or dominance without using physical force.

Systemic and organized gaslighting is demonstrated by activity scaled beyond individuals to institutions including schools and libraries, media in any form, governments on all levels, and corporations. It involves coordinated repetitive manipulation, characterizing valid concerns as abnormal or denying observable patterns, and the rewriting of shared history, events and reality —to make groups question their collective sanity, memories, perceptions and/or even lived experiences. This creates a "surreal" environment where the intended powerful narrative becomes the only one allowed.

So what's the allowed narrative? 

Thousands of books available to children give subtle hints or come right out and say that children may not be the sex they think they are. 

"But having a penis isn't what makes you a boy. Having a vulva isn't what makes you a girl." (p. 71 Sex is a Funny Word by Cory Silverberg)

"Maybe you're called a boy but you know you're a girl. You know how girls are treated and what they do. That's how you want to be treated and what you want to do."(p. 84 Sex is a Funny Word by Cory Silverberg)

"Maybe you're called a girl but you know you're a boy. You know how boys are treated and what they do. That's how you want to be treated and what you want to do" (p. 84 Sex is a Funny Word by Cory Silverberg)

That's 662 pages of gender confusion in one children's book in thousands of public libraries. 

                                    Why would any children's

              book have 662 pages? 

(Editor's Note) Not sure why the downloaded version shows this page count, but the hardback version page count is 160 pages, pointed out by a reader. 

Same question applies...why would any children's book have 160 pages? Does anyone believe a first grader will read 160 pages to themselves? 

Social Transitioning of Children Did Not Occur in a Vacuum

Public schools became primary vectors for the systemic gaslighting. Over 1,000 U.S. districts—educating millions of children—have adopted policies allowing or requiring staff to socially transition students (new names, pronouns, bathrooms, clothing, access to therapists) without parental notification. In California and New York, frameworks explicitly state students control their "transition" at school, even against family wishes. Teachers act as de facto therapists offering affirmation, often hiding "gender support plans" in separate files kept secret from parents. The public school curriculum and library materials flooded the children with content regarding sexual orientation, gender ideology, promotion of early sexualization, sexually explicit descriptions and illustrations, and separation form parents and families.  WorldCat (the world's largest library catalog, covering thousands of U.S. libraries) shows thousands of titles with subject headings like "Transgender people," "Gender identity," "Transgenderism," or related terms. Thousands of those books are available in public libraries available to children, and in school libraries where parents cannot see what the child is reading or able to view.

Schools justified secrecy by claiming parents might be unsupportive, equating normal caution with abuse. This inverts reality: concerned parents exercising basic oversight become the villains, while institutions insert themselves as the child's true guardians.

Add in Critical Race Theory, Anti-Capitalist Ideology, and Social Activism and stir with Gender Ideology. 

This mirrors classic psychological warfare.

The children suffered, but the PSYOP raged on 

Has the PSYOP had any impact? Decide for yourself...

The numbers reveal an unprecedented social contagion. Across the United States, diagnoses of gender dysphoria among children ages 6–17 nearly tripled from 2017 to 2021, totaling more than 121,000 cases in that period alone. Referrals to gender clinics exploded—sometimes 500% or more in a few years—with a sharp shift toward adolescent females, many with comorbidities like autism, trauma, or mental health issues. Earlier years had far lower rates.

The most comprehensive and widely cited source is the 2022 Reuters/Komodo Health analysis of claims covering ~40 million pediatric patients annually (from a broader pool of ~330 million patients):

• 
  2017: 15,172 new Gender Dysphoria diagnoses
• 2018: ~18,321 (approximate, part of steady rise)
• 2019: ~21,375
• 2020: 24,847
• 2021: 42,167 (70% increase from 2020)

Cumulative 2017–2021: At least 121,882 unique minors newly diagnosed. These are undercounts, as they exclude out-of-pocket care, uninsured cases, or undiagnosed individuals

Oddly enough, the DSM-V reclassified “gender identity disorder” to “gender dysphoria” in 2013. Why change a diagnostic category for a disorder that affected less than 0.014% of boys (roughly 5-14 per 100,000) and less than 0.003% (roughly 2-3 per 100,000) of girls at that time? (Bright Path, April 27, 2025 ed.) The incidence was a clinical rarity, and yet the DSM IV required revision for this particular diagnosis.

Did this all start in 2013?

What kind of coordinated effort would it take to see a 70% increase in one year?

These statistics are not representative of a organic cultural evolution.

It's not just the diagnosis, it's the SURGERIES...

2019–2023 (5 years) — Do No Harm Database (most recent detailed claims-based analysis): 5,747 unique minors underwent gender-affirming surgeries. This includes ~4,160 breast removals (mastectomies) and hundreds of genital procedures (e.g., ~660 phalloplasties reported in some summaries). Total gender-related interventions (surgeries + hormones/blockers): 13,994 minors.

2016–2020 (4–5 years) — JAMA Network Open study (national hospital data): 3,678 gender-affirming surgeries for ages 12–18.

~3,215 chest/breast procedures (vast majority).

~405 genital surgeries. Overall US gender-affirming surgeries (all ages) rose sharply in this period.

2019–2021 (3 years) — Reuters/Komodo Health insurance claims: At least 776 mastectomies on ages 13–17 with prior gender dysphoria diagnosis. 56 genital surgeries in the same group.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

This coordinated psychological operation (PSYOP) is aimed at reshaping young minds on gender and sexuality while undermining parental authority and biological reality with a consequential breakdown of society as a whole. 

"Only boys and girls? What about the rest of us?"

(Sex is a Funny Word by Cory Silverberg) 

This book, and thousands of others like it that promote gender confusion are In the Children's Section of thousands of public libraries and schools. 

WHAT EXACTLY DID IT TAKE TO TALK THOUSANDS OF PARENTS AND CHILDREN INTO GENDER DESTRUCTION SURGERY WITH 

NO RESEARCH TO BACK IT UP? 

Doctors who deliver babies 

might not know what they are 

looking at and can't tell the

difference between boys and girls.

(Sex is a Funny Word

by Cory Silverberg) If even the doctor can be 

confused, then it's surely ok for children to wonder.    

Mechanisms of the PSYOP

First, narrative engineering and term redefinition. 

"Gender-affirming care" sounds compassionate but often means puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries with weak or no evidence/research to support the outcomes. According to a U.S. Health and Human Services Report in 2025, comprehensive peer-reviewed analysis found significant long-term risks for impact on bone density, fertility, sexual function, and cognitive development and "very weak evidence of benefit" for puberty blockers, hormones, and surgeries in minors. Despite the lack of research into the long term effects of this unprecedented care model for minors, considerable resources in health care and education were devoted to promoting the ideology and interventions, using                         children as the pawns on the chessboard. 

Destruction of gender is redefined as affirmation. 

The second mechanism of a PSYOP is pathologizing resistance. 

Pathologizing is the "practice of viewing or characterizing normal human behaviors, emotions, or variations as medically or psychologically abnormal, disordered, or diseased." 

Parents who dare to object face smears, job threats, legal action, accusations of harming their children with their "oppressive" views, and are publicly blamed as group for youth suicide rates—despite evidence that social transition and medicalization do not clearly reduce long-term mental health risks and may exacerbate them via medical complications or regret. This is a prime example of systemic organized gaslighting pushed by media and organizations that promote the PSYOP in our public schools and libraries. 

Observable explicit material in children's sections becomes "diversity." 

According to PEN America (organization that tracks book challenges) any challenge to a book is a "book ban." "PEN America has documented nearly 23,000 book bans in public schools nationwide since 2021, a number without precedent. Learn more about the dangerous mix of activist groups and vague legislation has led to this wave of censorship in our latest report. " 

The PEN report states "This right – the right to discover – is being taken from students under the guise of their “protection.” Over the past four years, a misleading campaign to “protect children” alongside advocacy for “parental rights” has been weaponized to diminish students’ First Amendment rights in schools, sow distrust in librarians and educators, and diminish the ability of authors and illustrators to connect with their intended audiences. In this upside down world, any rights of young people as students are somehow subservient to the absolute rights of their parents." 

This is good time to revisit the definitions of gaslighting. 

The American Library Association(ALA) also tracks "book challenges," labeling parental requests to review or relocate explicit titles as "bans" or "censorship". In 2025, ALA reported thousands of challenges, with a large share involving gender/sexuality books. According to the ALA, along with the schools and libraries that subscribe to the organization’s policies, parents expressing concern about sexually explicit materials, including trans ideology, being given to their minor children without parents knowledge or  permission, are not exercising oversight; they are “banning books” or “promoting censorship" while violating children’s “Freedom to Read” whatever the library wants to give them, at any age the school or library chooses, regardless of parental objection.

Questioning rapid-onset gender dysphoria of ROGD (linked to social media and peer influence) or the reversal of decades of sex-based child development knowledge makes one a "Transphobe." 

  

GenSpect.org

The third mechanism of a PSYOP is exploiting authority and repetition. 

Schools, backed by federal guidance in prior administrations, unions, and activist medical groups (The American Medical Association, The American School Counselor Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics) normalize the idea that children as young as preschool can "know" their gender identity contradicts biology, and that parents do not have to be informed by the school. Curricula was developed to teach sex as a spectrum, "chest binders" as harmless, the virtue signal of inclusion, and resolution of gender dysphoria as rare—contrary to historical data where most childhood dysphoria resolved on it's own by age 18.  Repetition via activities, books, clothes, make-up, video games, clubs, events, parades, entertainment, media, movies, cable TV, streaming apps, music, and social media apps creates the "pseudo-reality." 

Thousands of public school classrooms have symbols of LGBTQIA+ ideology visible to students of all ages

ALL DAY EVERY DAY.

If everyone affirms, your child's confusion must surely be innate identity, not social influence or underlying mental issues, and certainly not "confusion." 

This is warfare, not merely manipulation

Intent and scale cannot be ignored.  

Individual gaslighting seeks personal control. Systemic versions are organized campaigns (e.g., coordinated messaging, institutional policies, or elite-driven narratives) designed for much broader impact: silencing dissent, maintaining false hierarchies, or shaping public behavior over a generation. This matches PSYOPS doctrine exactly.

Classic PSYOP objectives

Psychological warfare mechanisms rely on repetition to normalize falsehoods until they feel true, or until reality is questionable (boys can be girls by identifying as female, children get to choose any of 42 genders, day in-day out in classrooms, special events, parades, constant displays) promoted authority (institutions/media heralded as the "trusted" source and parents hearing “Trust the experts” 24 hours a day).

The goal is dependency on the gaslighter’s intentionally altered version of reality. As a predictable consequence of the plan, confused children turn to affirming adults at school. Parents, gas-lit into self-doubt are caused to hesitate ("Am I harming my child by questioning any of this?" and “Would you rather have a dead son than a living daughter?”).

The institution becomes the top of the false hierarchy installed by the PSYOP and parents become the outsiders having to fight straight up a sheer cliff to restore their children and their parental rights.

Now a PSYOP has Control In the Real World

We all face daily organized gaslighting in state-level disinformation, political propaganda, corporate cover-ups, cultural institutions redefining norms until there no longer are any. Terms including grammar standards are altered at will, including pronouns, and new words like “Cis” and “misgendered.” The ALA framing parents as “censors” and all library reviews as "book bans" is an dual example of redefining terms and pathologizing resistance with intention to gaslight parents on a systemic level. 

The ALA claim that anyone is banning books or committing censorship with regards to children's access is an more deeply misleading layer of systemic gaslighting and contributes to the PSYOP. There's no truly banned books in the United States. Any book can be ordered at any time, no adult has restricted access to any materials. Moving a book about blow jobs and anal sex out of the children's section and into the adult section is not banning the book, nor is it censorship, according to Ginsberg v. New York (1968). 

That's gaslighting on a whole new level

It all erodes collective trust in evidence, senses, or community standards--classic demoralization warfare.

In public education, this PSYOP manifests through deliberate, repeated efforts by schools, libraries, teachers' unions, medical organizations, and aligned media to promote gender confusion—particularly among impressionable children—while framing resistance as irrational, uncaring, or harmful. The ALA keeps a “hate map” on it’s website to redirect parents away from any resource that might support them in questioning the achieved new reality.

The Kansas State Library Handbook refers to anyone, including parents, as "censors" if they are challenging the placement of a obscene book where children can get to it, and proclaims alignment with the ALA, when the previous 2017 edition referred to Kansas statues as the guidance for policies and compliance. 

The battlefield is the classroom, where perception itself is the prize and the kids are not coming home with trophies.

Public education and children’s libraries in America have functioned as primary medium for one of the most ambitious psychological operations in modern history, fitting every definition and historical comparison. Through coordinated curricula embedded through all levels of education, thousands of ideologically loaded books, calculated undermining of parent's rights, secret social transitions, political enforcement, and institutional gaslighting of both children and parents, an entire generation has been subjected to systematic confusion about biological reality, parental authority, and their own bodies. The inexplicable explosion in gender dysphoria diagnoses, irreversible medical interventions on minors with lifelong complications including sterility, and severed family bonds did not occur organically—it was engineered.

Legacy of a PSYOP

• Key Long-Term Changes:

  • Destruction of trust in schools, libraries, medical institutions, experts, and trusted adults who insisted “gender-affirming care” was settled science and that children were in danger if parents didn't affirm the PSYOP, with disastrously life altering consequences. 
  • Deepened Polarization and Division: PSYOPs thrive on “us vs. them” narratives. Once entrenched, these fractures persist through echo chambers, weakened social cohesion, and hardened ideological lines, making national reconciliation difficult. Families are fractured, communities are divided, and any questions are labeled “hate.”
  • Normalized New Norms and Policies: Operations that begin as messaging can successfully become “common sense” — even when later evidence contradicts it — embedding altered attitudes in policy, culture, education, public behavior and law—boys in girls’ sports and bathrooms, irreversible surgeries on healthy adolescents, and the rewriting of basic biology as “inclusion."
  • Psychological and Cultural Residue: Populations often experience lingering anxiety, moral injury, and a pervasive “psyop realism” — the belief that reality itself is manipulated. Generational effects are common with younger people, whether observers or victims,  carrying transformed worldviews shaped by the operation. Already evident among the American young: elevated mental health crises, physical and emotional regret, escalating suicide rates, de-transition stories and court cases now emerging, and a entire generation taught to distrust their own eyes, their parents, and their bodies.
  • Institutional blowback: Schools and libraries that weaponized “diversity” against biological reality now face plummeting public confidence, lawsuits, and parental exodus to homeschooling and private options. When a PSYOP ends, society rarely returns to its pre-operation state. These coordinated efforts to shape perceptions, beliefs, and behaviors through propaganda, media, disinformation, or targeted messaging leave deep, likely irreversible traces. 

No matter how hard fought the end, a concluded PSYOP does not simply fade away. It reshapes the information environment, incentives, and collective psychology in lasting ways. Recovery requires transparency, counter-narratives, scientific data and time — but once public trust is broken and new norms are installed, reversing the damage is very slow and uncertain. The greatest enduring risk in open societies is the normalization of psychological manipulation itself and a legacy of public doubt.

Just as the husband in Gas Light could not restore his wife’s sanity by simply turning the lamps back up, society cannot undo the damage by quietly shelving a few books or tweaking policies. The surreal environment created by this PSYOP—where parents are villains, doctors “can’t tell” the sex of a newborn, and children are manipulated to reject their own biology—has already reshaped lives and a generation’s understanding of reality.

The only path forward is relentless truth-telling: biological sex is real and binary, most childhood gender distress resolves naturally, and parents—not schools, not libraries, and not political powers—hold primary authority over their children’s upbringing. Public education must be reclaimed from ideological capture before another generation is sacrificed on the altar of this experiment.

Not only must the lamps be turned back on immediately- the entire house must be rebuilt- on reality, evidence, and unequivocal parental rights.

URL of this page: https://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2026/04/has-public-education-become-psyop.html



Follow Kelly on X: @patriotesse

Follow Dan on X: @OccupyLibraries @SafeLibraries @WLibraryA

Join World Library Association:

WorldLibraryAssociation.org

Legal Defense for SLAPP Suits Against Free Speech

SafeLibraries.org - Are Children Safe in Public Libraries?