New Jersey's leading school librarian proponent of illegal obscenity (in NJ) for school children, the one who got ALA engaged in long-term inoculation of NJ legislators and in bullying school boards around the state to accept illegal obscenity in school libraries, including her own school's library, just announced publicly:
Book banners hate it when we say it, but there’s no p[]rn in school libraries. @veronikellymars explains the realities of the publishing and library professions. https://bookriot.com/books-dont-just-appear-on-library-shelves/
"Book banners," they invariably call anyone who questions any book. Always using language to advance a political goal. At least one New Jersey legislator answering to New Jersey citizens instead of Chicago's ALA, NJ Representative Dawn Fantasia, has responded to Martha Hickson's "there’s no p[]rn in school libraries" comment by saying:
Any adult who thinks "educational s[]x ed" includes instructing children to lubricate foreign objects and insert said items into their rectums for pleasure, or who encourages underage girls to take and distribute topless selfies, has lost their way. Truly remarkable.Lady, all of your screws are loose.@Moms4Liberty @SexHarassed @CoboKristen @ChristinaMB122 @wakeupnj @fight4newjersey
Source: https://x.com/DawnFantasia_NJ/status/1841199775095673234 quote tweeting https://x.com/NHVfREADom/status/1841125020094857719 run by Martha Hickson in which she included: "A teen at yesterday’s hearing explains why: 'Educational content is not considered obscene; [that’s] why every s[]x ed & health teacher in the state of NJ has not been arrested.'"
What does this have to do with "white supremacy"? It's because the people from Chicago promoting inappropriate material for children nationwide despite the law can and will say anything to deflect from the truth. Like Kelly Jensen, pictured at right, who Martha Hickson promoted in her X post.
Quoting now from that BookRiot article by Kelly Jensen:
And, as always, we know this is not about materials in the public or school libraries. It’s about control, removal, and erasure of any and all materials outside of a singular white supremacist view of the world.
She is openly saying white supremacy is the reason parents challenge books. She's saying it's the parents attempting to "control" schools, ignoring Chicago's ALA is controlling schools, having pushed for that for about 60 years, such as by making up the "right to read" to take rights away from parents and by inserting "age" into the Library Bill of Right that's in nearly every library nationwide.
By the way, Kelly Jensen is so two faced that she trains librarians to block Christians from using public meeting rooms. This is the expert Martha Hickson is promoting and Senator Answer Zwicker is repeating:
- "Author Urges Library Staff to 'Bow Out' on August 5th for Kirk Cameron & BRAVE Books Nationwide 'See You at the Library' Events; The First Amendment Ensures Institutions Respect Freedoms, Defines Rights for Expression and Belief, and Protects and Promotes Respect for Others' Rights Too," by Haley Kennington, Kennington Report, 1 August 2023.
So the woman calling parents white supremacists for attempting to remove books from schools under the law is the same person telling librarians, "For libraries that are hosting the Kirk Cameron Brave Book events, it is time to have a plan to let staff bow out that day...."
ALA itself trains librarians to block Christians from reading books in library public meeting room. Yes, the same ALA that drafted NJ's "Freedom to Read Act" that Andrew Zwicker "wrote":
- "Library 2.0's 'Banned Books and Censorship' Conference Discusses How to Thwart Parents & Concerned Citizens From Challenging Banned LGBTQ+ Books Featuring Explicit Images & Language; 'It Makes It Too Easy for Parents or Community Members to Find Those Kinds of Books. Don't Make It Necessarily Easy for Those Groups to Find.' - Valerie Byrd Fort on Using 'Dummy Covers' on Books," by Haley Kennington, Kennington Reports, 22 June 2023.
Back to Kelly Jensen, now notice how the person decrying white supremacy also repeatedly states no school books are ever obscene. That's because the opposite is true, but she thinks if you repeat a lie often enough it becomes the truth:
Let’s say hypothetically that an agent sold an editor an obscene book. First, that reflects on the agent and editor's inability to understand what the obscenity law is; but more realistically, it simply would not happen because the number of books acquired by agents and then editors is already minuscule and extremely curated.
Italics in original. So no book is ever obscene because Jelly Kensen says so, and laws like NJS 2C:34-3 Obscenity for Person Under 18 don't matter to her. "It simply would not happen." Or as Andrew Zwicker put it, "None of these books has been deemed obscene." Or as Martha Hickson put it, "there’s no p[]rn in school libraries."
Books cannot contain obscenity because it is against the law. Obscenity has a standard, court-issued definition, by which agents and publishers (as well as their legal teams!) must abide. It's the three-prong, 60-some-word Miller Test. Even if one of those two books in our hypothetical situation were obscene, the legal department of the publisher would catch this before it ever went to press.
Italics and hyperlinks in original. So again, "[b]ooks cannot obtain obscenity." This time because the "Miller Test" applies, she says.
I love how she links to Wikipedia and not a constitutional expert like Eugene Volokh:
- "Removal of Books With 'Lascivious Content' from School Libraries Likely Constitutionally Permissible; So Holds a Federal District Court, Also Stressing That 'This Case Does Not Involve Banning Books': 'A School District Does Not "Ban" a Book When ... It "Decides Not to Continue Possessing [a] Book On its Own Library Shelves,"'" by Eugene Volokh, The Volokh Conspiracy, 9 August 2022.
And she completely and intentionally ignores that the Pico case applies in schools, not the older Miller case, per attorney Stuart Baggish who has successfully prosecuted obscenity cases.
"Even if [the] books ... were obscene, the legal department of the publisher would catch this...." Now that's just flat out lying, and she presents herself as an expert on publishing. And there's more:
But there are not obscene books being acquired and published through traditional routes, and it's rare to find them in self-published material…because it is against the law to publish or distribute such material.
She completely and intentionally misses the point that books that are in schools that, yes, are not obscenity under the Miller case, may still be immediately removed under the Pico case, and in some jurisdictions may still be considered obscenity, such as under NJS 2C:34-3. Her next statement goes for the throats of parents:
The obscenity arguments dramatically performed in board rooms would be better suited to thinking about what kind of obscene material is readily accessible on any teenager's internet-capable phone.
So parents are overdramatic when they oppose their children being harmed by school librarians to satisfy ALA's 60-year political goals. Further, she adds, those are not the droids you are looking for. Look at the iPhones and Androids your kids have, those are the 'Droids, it's way worse than what's in Pico, so just ignore Pico and gosh darn-it, do better parenting! So publicly funded p[]rn is okay because parents punt on protection.
Parents are in for another spanking:
The rampant mis/dis/mal information about libraries and the materials in them coming from a small set of voices does not bestow those individuals any authority, experience, or knowledge of how to do the work of those trained professionals. Instead, they subvert the reality of the situation: it's their job to actually parent their children and not expect the library to do it for them.
There's another intentional lie buried in there so you don't see it. See it? "A small set of voices" versus "trained professionals." First, librarianship is a job, not a profession. Second, the "professional" training comes from the MLIS degree. ALA accredits MLIS schools and has required for accreditation that library schools teach diversity, equity, and inclusion in every single class of the MLIS degree. So essentially graduates are accredited Marxists.
Further, diversity and inclusion are the very excuses ALA uses to "reframe" "s[]xually inappropriate material." Librarians are to "reframe" "s[]xually inappropriate material" as diversity and inclusion. So diverse and inclusive materials means to "trained professional" librarians materials that are "s[]xually inappropriate," they know it, but they are going to lie to parents and claim DEI.
Listen to US Senator Mike Lee from Utah demonstrate and explain this in detail: https://www.c-span.org/video/standalone/?c5085234/user-clip-sen-lee-comments. That's not a "professional," that's what Senator Mike Lee calls a "gr[]mer." His words, a US Senator, during a US Senate hearing on "banned books." Per the Senator, librarians are trained gr[]mers. They are spreading this across America via state and federal "Right to Read" or "Freedom to Read" or "Libraries For All" legislation.
"[A] small set of voices." What does that mean? It's a constant theme of ALA. The theme is that a few vocal parents are in the vast minority, they are prudes, Christofascists, white supremacists, censors, and so on, so just ignore that small group. They're crazy. Even NJ Senator Vin Gopal called parents "extremists," something ALA people repeat repeatedly, "Extremists who continue to spread misinformation and want to ban books won’t win in New Jersey - just as they attempted against me last year and lost by 20+ points."
The truth is the exact opposite. The professional gr[]mers (remember, a US Senator exposed this) led by Chicago's ALA is the small set of loud voices. Not the parents. The vast majority are the parents who oppose explicit books in public schools. Of sure ALA took a poll showing most oppose book banning, but that's not the issue. A Harris and Rasmussen poll and others show the vast majority of the public opposes explicit books in public schools. So "a small set of voices" is yet more gaslighting to get parents to feel alone and to back done and to let school children continue to be indoctrinated.
Here comes the DARVO, Divide, Attack, Reverse Victim and Oppressor:
And, as always, we know this is not about materials in the public or school libraries. It's about control, removal, and erasure of any and all materials outside of a singular white supremacist view of the world. See the latest attempts to get books pulled even in Little Free Libraries–the lies compound and the goalposts of the movement continue to move.
Hyperlink in original, though I used an archived link to avoid an email request block. The division is those having a worldview of "control, removal, and erasure." Parents thus set up are then attacked as "singular white supremacists." The reversing of victim and oppressor is the one case she found where two people merely expressed an interest in Little Free Libraries, so it's really a fake claim of attempted book banning, and just to reverse victim and oppressor, because a weak/fake case is all she's got.
It's giant gaslighting. It's misdirection. Parents have every right to have cases and laws like Pico and 2C:34-3 applied in schools without "professional librarians" using their DEI training to saw anything goes and they know better. Actually state residents know what's better for the state's children, way better than some Chicago, Illinois, organization that has been working for sixty years to harm as many children as possible. I know, sounds shocking because we all think librarians are angels, but those days have been over for sixty years.
NOTE ADDED 15 OCTOBER 2024:
1) In reaction to the above post, Kelly Jensen "Buttered Jorts (fka kelly jensen 🐱🐰)" has doubled down on her white supremacy claim, even shouting about it (by using all caps), proving I'm right over the target, and we all know by now "inclusive books" means ones ALA trains librarians are "s*xually inappropriate for minors" but are to be "reframed" as inclusive:
"You ARE a white supremacist when you ban inclusive books :)
So, to her, banning s*xually inappropriate materials for minors from schools makes you a white supremacist. Why? Because she is hiding that parents have every legal right to remove such books. Only the shouting bullying of people who claim they are professionals using claimed professional sources are dissuading people from doing what's right and what's common sense to protect children from harm. Are we going to let librarians bully us like this?
2) And if you don't cower, you get personally attacked. In reaction to the above post, Kelly Jensen directs her DARVO directly at me. She apparently reads my blog despite blocking me on social media. I've been at this for a quarter century so I suppose I have a following among librarians who block me. One could say she's obsessed with me, I suppose. After she divided and attacked parents again ("Kids are humans who have rights, too, and it's a parent's job to parent"), she then reversed victim and oppressor by making herself the victim—of me! DARVO all over again.
"Dan's obsession with me is truly frightening. https://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2024/10/people-who-say-no-books-are-obscene.html"
She's claiming no school books are ever obscene and parents who say otherwise are white supremacists, I report on that, then it's time to attack the messenger and claim he's obsessed and it's "truly frightening."
What's "truly frightening" is the grip American Library Association has over American libraries and the public employees who serve those libraries so much so that children are regularly and gleefully indoctrinated nationwide while their parents and legislators are gaslit. And that ALA obsession is six decades old and expanding exponentially. That's what's frightening.
One final thought. Kelly Jensen just made the claim that no schools have inappropriate material by praising the publishing industry. She described in detail how wonderful and hard working they are, so no way illegal obscenity could slip through the cracks. "If you’re counting, it's likely you have already lost how many guardrails are already in place and we haven't even gotten to the library shelf yet," she says.
Really? Guardrails? Okay, then explain how Kamala Harris's publisher, Chronicle Books, allowed SMART ON CRIME to bypass all the guardrails and be loaded with multiple major incidents of plagiarism, even stealing from substandard Wikipedia.
EXCLUSIVE: Kamala Harris plagiarized at least a dozen sections of her criminal-justice book, Smart on Crime, according to a new investigation. The current vice president even lifted material from Wikipedia.
— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) October 14, 2024
We have the receipts. 🧵
—
URL of this page:
