Access to sexual information, though, is a fundamental human right. So why does the subject – and the very concept of access – attract so much vicious opposition? The Intellectual Freedom Round Table is proud to present Dr. Marty Klein, who will describe the highly effective nationwide attack on sexual information and expression – and why it’s an attack on pluralism and secular democracy. Librarians are frequently on the hot seat when these issues arise in communities. Come hear how to respond to the “protecting the children” arguments and how to protect everyone’s access to sexuality-related material.
Source: Libraries, Librarians, and America's War on Sex, by Jen Hammond, OIF Blog, 1 July 2009.
By way of full disclosure, I had an excellent conversation with one of the authors of one of the named books. See "Dear Felice Picano, 'The Joy of Gay Sex,' Co-Author." He believes, "If someone asks for a book about sex and is not ready, they’ll giggle or be grossed out. No loss."
Has the ALA forgotten the US Supreme Court? If "protecting the children" is wrong, isn't "protecting young library users" also wrong? Isn't the US Supreme Court wrong? See US v. ALA:
"The interest in protecting young library users from material inappropriate for minors is legitimate, and even compelling, as all Members of the Court appear to agree."
The ALA obviously disagrees. If the ALA opposes "protecting the children," and the US Supreme Court unanimously favors "protecting young library users," is the ALA not indirectly mocking the Court? Is there any reason communities should think the ALA, or any organization mocking the Court, is authoritative?
Should any community ever again be guided by ALA policies in this area? Am I the "vicious opposition" for bringing this to the attention of those communities so they can make their own informed decisions?
So here is the ALA's latest effort to ensure no librarian protects children from inappropriate material:
[Note: Ironically, the Office for Intellectual Freedom does not allow comments on its blog.]One of the most frequently challenged genres of book is the sex-ed book. It’s Perfectly Normal, by Robie Harris, The New Joy of Gay Sex, by Charles Silverstein, and What’s Happening to My Body?, by Lynda Madaras all regularly appear on the Office for Intellectual Freedom’s Top 10 lists of most frequently challenged books.
Access to sexual information, though, is a fundamental human right. So why does the subject – and the very concept of access – attract so much vicious opposition? The Intellectual Freedom Round Table is proud to present Dr. Marty Klein, who will describe the highly effective nationwide attack on sexual information and expression – and why it’s an attack on pluralism and secular democracy. Librarians are frequently on the hot seat when these issues arise in communities. Come hear how to respond to the “protecting the children” arguments and how to protect everyone’s access to sexuality-related material.
Dr. Marty Klein is a Sociologist, Certified Sex Therapist, & Policy Analyst in California. The author of five books, he has been an expert witness, invited defendant, or consultant on many important state and federal censorship cases. From the ACLU and Planned Parenthood to Pure Romance and ABC’s 20/20, audiences agree that Marty’s talks are consistently thought-provoking and entertaining. Join us for what promises to be one of the most provocative programs at the 2009 ALA Annual Conference. The program will be held at 1:30 p.m. in McCormick Place W178 on Saturday, July 11th.
NOTE ADDED 17 JANUARY 2013:
On the subject of protecting children from harm that the ALA mocks, the President of the United States surrounded himself with children and issued almost two dozen Executive Orders relating to gun control saying:
- "Unveiling Gun Control Initiative, Obama Cites 'Common-Sense Measures'; President Obama Shared the Stage with Schoolchildren As He Announced a Gun Control Plan to Combat Violence. Top Of the List: Banning Assault Weapons and High-Capacity Magazines, Making Schools Safer, and Improving Mental Health Services," by Linda Feldmann, The Christian Science Monitor, 16 January 2013, emphasis added, graphic above credit this source.
That said, recall the ALA said, "Come hear how to respond to the 'protecting the children' arguments." Contrast the President who correctly places such great emphasis on protecting the children:
"OBAMA: Thank you, everybody. Please -- please have a seat.
Good afternoon, everybody. Let me begin by thanking our vice president, Joe Biden, for your dedication, Joe, to this issue, for bringing so many different voices to the table, because while reducing gun violence is a complicated challenge, protecting our children from harm shouldn't be a divisive one.
....
The only way we will be able to change is if their audience, their constituents, their membership says this time must be different, that this time we must do something to protect our communities and our kids.
....
And most of all, I think about how when it comes to protecting the most vulnerable among us, we must act now, for Grace, for the 25 other innocent children and devoted educators who had so much left to give; for the men and women in big cities and small towns who fall victims to senseless violence each and every day; for all the Americans who are counting on us to keep them safe from harm.
Let's do the right thing. Let's do the right thing for them and for this country that we love so much.
Thank you. Let's sign these orders.
- "TRANSCRIPT: Obama Remarks on Gun Violence," by President Obama, FoxNews, 16 January 2013, emphasis mine.
.
