Showing posts with label MeghanCoxGurdon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MeghanCoxGurdon. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 17, 2019

Librarians Hate White People; Make Social Justice Racism Top Goal Nationwide, Remove Literacy

Librarians hate white people and use that racism to encourage other librarians to spread that hate into communities nationwide, and naturally Library Journal promotes this racism:


If you look at any United States library’s collection, especially those in higher education institutions, most of the collections (books, journals, archival papers, other media, etc.) are written by white dudes writing about white ideas, white things, or ideas, people, and things they stole from POC and then claimed as white property with all of the “rights to use and enjoyment of” that Harris describes in her article. When most of our collections filled with this so-called “knowledge,” it continues to validate only white voices and perspectives and erases the voices of people of color. Collections are representations of what librarians (or faculty) deem to be authoritative knowledge and as we know, this field and educational institutions, historically, and currently, have been sites of whiteness.
Library collections continue to promote and proliferate whiteness with their very existence and the fact that they are physically taking up space in our libraries. They are paid for using money that was usually ill-gotten and at the cost of black and brown lives via the prison industrial complex, the spoils of war, etc. Libraries filled with mostly white collections indicates that we don’t care about what POC think, we don’t care to hear from POC themselves, we don’t consider POC to be scholars, we don’t think POC are as valuable, knowledgeable, or as important as white people. To return to the Harris quote from above, library collections and spaces have historically kept out Black, Indigenous, People of Color as they were meant to do and continue to do. One only has to look at the most recent incident at the library of my alma mater, Barnard College, where several security guards tried to kick out a Black Columbia student for being Black.
  • Source: "Whiteness As Collections," by Sofia Leung, "Libraries. Social Justice. Critical Race Theory," 15 April 2019, emphasis added, hyperlink in original.
Graphic of original tweet, since deleted.

The hate is so great that it has expressly become the American Library Association's [ALA] top goal, even to the point where literacy is expressly set aside by ALA's Public Library Association [PLA]:
At the September 2017 Board meeting, members reviewed the strategic plan and discussed critical issues facing public libraries today and the changing library landscape. Through these discussions, a need to update PLA’s vision to reflect the evolution of  collective thinking by the association’s board, leaders and members and the state of the library field emerged along with three recommended changes to the strategic plan goals: 1) add Equity, Diversity, & Inclusion as a goal; 2) separate Leadership & Transformation into two individual goals; and 3) remove Literate Nation as a goal.
Look below at the goal statement and its objectives from the "PLA Strategic Plan 2018–2022":
  1. force "social justice" or "EDISJ" into all aspects of the library association, 
  2. force the useful librarians to "advocate and apply EDISJ principles in their libraries and communities"—whether or not the communities want to be indoctrinated, and 
  3. force out librarians who do not go along by applying ideological tests "that demonstrate progress in key EDISJ areas."

Source: "PLA Strategic Plan 2018–2022"

For example, inherently unsafe Drag Queen Story Hour, where libraries invite unvetted drag queens to read to children in libraries, is all about "social justice" masquerading as advancing literacy.  But literacy was explicitly removed as an ALA goal, as shown above.  Well, if children aren't of concern to ALA anymore, at least ALA will defend illegal aliens in the US Supreme Court—but do we citizens just sit back and let them do as they wish to and in our communities?

Here's another racist tweet, this one right from ALA itself about "Whiteness in Children's Literature":


It's been boiling for years, but now it's so out in the open that @Twitter @verified blue checkmark accounts are noticing and mocking ALA, including Wall Street Journal's Book Critic and author of "The Enchanted Hour: The Miraculous Power of Reading Aloud in the Age of Distraction" (Harper), Meghan Cox Gurdon:















Mocking this is not the right attitude.  What needs to happen is the racist, anti-White, anti-American "social justice" warriors need to be removed from America's libraries and replaced with librarians, real librarians, really serving their communities, not indoctrinating them with racism and hate conveniently called "social justice" or "equity" or "diversity."  Ditto for the social justice warriors serving on board of trustees.  I encourage people to run or apply for those board positions and replace the haters who answer only to ALA, not their own communities.

And stop funding libraries until the ALA influence has been exorcised:

Removing ghost of Judith Krug and her ACLU/ALA/porn legacy.
Photo Credit:  Kevin DuJan; Used with permission.

Here's PLA training the troops for insertion into our communities:


Lastly, racist librarian Sofia Y Leung has "protected" or "locked" her Twitter account:

Racist librarian Sofia Y. Leung "protected"
her Twitter account.




NOTE ADDED 22 APRIL 2019:

Library Journal has deleted its tweet that was the subject of this story:


The tweet had about 400 likes and retweets when it was deleted, I can't be sure of the exact number.  I liked and retweeted it when I was the first or second person to do so.  It also had about 10,000 comments, almost all comments mocking the tweet and librarians for their blatant racist hate.  That's likely why it was deleted, although it had to be one of the most "popular" @LibraryJournal tweets ever.  My guess is the tweet was removed since it gave the impression Library Journal supported the tweet, as opposed to merely tweeting what some racist MIT university librarian wrote.  While I have seen regular racist hate at the American Library Association on which it thrives, I have never observed it at Library Journal, so I'm giving LJ the benefit of the doubt.


NOTE ADDED 9 MAY 2019:

Added graphic of original tweet since original tweet has been deleted.


—
URL of this page: 
safelibraries.blogspot.com/2019/04/librarians-hate-white-people.html

On Twitter: 
@ALA_PLA @ALALibrary @dangainor @Harry1T6 @LibraryJournal @iowahawkblog @jccpalmer @MeghanGurdon @RonColeman @sofiayleung @thealexvanness @yannispappas

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, April 27, 2014

School Boards and Challenged Books in Three Minutes; Discussion Urged, Not Weird Arguments; School Bullies Parent Saying She's Squashing Her Child's Sexual Being

Here is a three minute speech for a school board of education on challenged books.  It is three minutes because that is all the time the public is allowed to speak, in this case, at the West Essex Regional School District Board of Education meeting, and in this case regarding "The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao" by Junot Díaz.  But it applies to all schools across the nation, all challenges.

What can I say in three minutes that will make a difference?  I can say the censorship bullies are intentionally misleading and prove it, I can give out copies of the linked attachments for further consideration, and I can urge people to discuss book challenges in a civil fashion instead of "weird arguments," as popular young adult fiction writer Lauren Myracle puts it after graciously apologizing for maligning Wall Street Journal book reviewer Meghan Cox Gurdon.


Who Am I?

Greetings members of the school board, school parents, and guests.  I'm Dan Kleinman, Library Watchdog at SafeLibraries in Chatham, NJ.  I am here today to speak about the recent school book challenge in consideration of how the community has responded and should respond.  I am the nation's leader on the censorship bullying coming from the American Library Association [ALA] as acknowledged by the author of the Children's Internet Protection Act who said I was a "trusted source" on ALA's misinformation.  International press AFP called my website "a clearing house for information about challenging books."  I've even been on the cover of USA Today.


Why Am I Here?

I am here to provide truthful information about the process of discussing book challenges.  So far what I see in this community is personal attacks on the mother who brought the challenge where such attacks come from outside groups, media, students, and even the school itself, as illustrated in her statement below.  The knee jerk reaction is cries of "censorship."  As Dan Gerstein put it, "The ... elites have convinced themselves that they are taking a stand against cultural tyranny.  ....  [T]he reality is that it is those who cry 'Censorship!' the loudest who are the ones trying to stifle speech and force their moral world-view on others."

In this community many people are afraid to speak up for common sense precisely because of the censorship bullies.  What is really needed is reasoned discussion, free from the shouting voices trying to bully people into being afraid to stand up for what we all know is right.  I am going to illustrate that to you today, as best as I can in the three minutes I'm allowed to speak.  To help make my points, I have handouts here with the reliable references supporting what I am saying.  You will not see these sources from anything ALA or its local acolytes sends you so please read them.

My hope is you'll listen to what I have to say and decide to consider the matter seriously instead of unwittingly kowtowing to the voices shouting "censorship" and "book banning."  Indeed, the reason they shout "censorship" is to intimidate people into never challenging a book in the first place, but people have every right and duty to challenge their government, including public schools.  Your children should take precedence over your fear of being falsely labelled a censor.


The Declining Values in Young Adult Fiction Is Not a Left or Right Issue

The first thing to know is the declining values in young adult fiction is not a left or right issue.  I say that because the first ad hominem argument people make to support inappropriate materials in schools is that the challenger is Christian or conservative.  In reality, everyone opposes inappropriate materials for children.  For example, Naomi Wolf, the non-Christian, non-conservative author of The Beauty Myth, wrote in the New York Times how shocked parents would be at the downward spiral in young adult fiction.

Handout 1:


New York City Removes Inappropriate Books From Hundreds of Schools

Even in ultraliberal New York City, the public spoke up when the school included a sexually inappropriate book for students in the curriculum.  The book was selected as a result of its being listed by the American Library Association as one of the top books of the year for "reluctant" young readers.  Nevertheless, it was pulled from hundreds of schools, so pulling a book from a school is no problem in the right circumstance.

Handout 2:
  • "City's Ed. Boobs," by Carl Campanile, New York Post, 13 October 2003.
  • http://www.plan2succeed.org/nypost-citys_ed_boobs13oct03by_carl_campanile.htm


Even the American Library Association Says "Get It Out of There" 

Here's something you won't hear from the American Library Association nowadays.  Even its own de facto leader, Judith Krug, the creator of the Banned Books Week hoax, said, "On rare occasion, we have situations where a piece of material is not what it appears to be on the surface and the material is totally inappropriate for a school library.  In that case, yes, it is appropriate to remove materials.  If it doesn't fit your material selection policy, get it out of there."

Handout 3:


Despite the Shouting Voices, Most People Oppose Sexually Explicit Material in Schools

Most people oppose books with explicit language in school libraries.  62%, according to a recent Harris Poll.  That's another reason for shouting "censorship."  They want you to think you're alone in wanting to keep inappropriate material from children. For example, in 2009, ALA labelled all 460 parents bringing book challenges as "censors."  Even a self-described progressive librarian said this was wrong since occasionally books are challenged for good cause and removed.  The truth is, of course, that you are in the majority and you are not a censor if you decide to keep inappropriate material from children.  I urge you to get over your fear of being bullied and falsely called a censor.  Apply your school anti-bullying policy to the ALA and those who act in a similar fashion.

Handout 4:
  • "Most Americans Opposed to Banning Any Books," by Harris Interactive, The Harris Poll, 12 April 2011.
  • http://www.harrisinteractive.com/NewsRoom/HarrisPolls/tabid/447/ctl/ReadCustom%20Default/mid/1508/ArticleId/754/Default.aspx


It's Parenting, Not Censorship

Besides, it's parenting we are talking about, not censorship.  The idea that this is censorship came from Judith Krug of the American Library Association, and she was a board member of the Illinois American Civil Liberties Union who joined ALA and created all the new anything-goes rules.  They are ACLU's anything-goes rules, pushed into ALA, and now they are being pushing into your community.  Does the ACLU control your school or do you?

Handout 5:


School Superintendents Oppose Sexually Inappropriate Material in Schools, Even If ALA Recommends It

You don't need to kowtow to outside groups like the American Library Association.  Even a book on ALA's list of top books for "reluctant" young readers gets rejected, and one superintendent exposed the false cries of "censorship."  The super showed some spine and acted to protect the children, not the American Library Association or its local acolytes.

Handout 6:
  • "Book Ruckus Divides Montgomery County Residents," by Jim Warren, Lexington Herald-Leader, 29 November 2009 (the link appears to be dead so I'm linking where I quoted the matter, and notice the many comments, including by young adult book authors like Ellen Hopkins and Chris Crutcher).
  • http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2009/11/kentucky-school-superintendent-exposes.html


Schools Oppose Book Review Sites Like Scholastic for Hiding Information About the Potential for Sexually Inappropriate Material for Children

How many times do you hear how the book is so highly rating by all the book reviewing sources?  A lot, right? As if the ratings are more important than common sense.  Well one school principal finally noticed this and ordered his teachers to stop relying on the rating services.  He then removed a book from the school.  So if you are being told the book got excellent reviews, now you know educators have noticed the reviews lack key information.

Handout 7:
  • "'Lush' Causes Uproar by Parents," by Cortney Mumaugh, Putnam County Sentinel, 15 December 2010. 
  • http://putnamsentinel.com/Content/News/Local-News/Article/-Lush--causes-uproar-by-parents/1/1/7817


ALA Censors and Blacklists Common Sense Media for Providing Book Ratings About the Potential for Sexually Inappropriate Material for Children

We learned above how book ratings groups like Scholastic and ALA's own Booklist leave out material educators and parents can use to determine the potential for sexually inappropriate material for children.  There is one major group that provides that, namely, Common Sense Media.  Aren't we told it is parental responsible for what their children read, not others?  You've heard that, right?  Well there's a major web site for parents and teachers to learn about books.  It's ALA's own Great Websites for Kids.  Your school or local public library links to this, right?  Parents, we hear, are supposed to be responsible for their own children and only their own children, right?  So they use ALA's Great Websites for Kids to makes judgements, right?  Guess what.  ALA censored the Common Sense Media site from its Great Websites for Kids then blacklisted Common Sense Media so no other librarian anywhere would ever refer anyone to it for book ratings.  An ALA "Intellectual Freedom Committee" did this, no less.

This is the ALA that is saying parents need to be informed while it shapes the messages so parents miss out on exactly what concerns them.  This is one of the smoking guns of why the American Library Association is not to be trusted; it actively works to mislead you, parents and schools, while acting as some kind of authority.

Handout 8:


Author Supports Wall Street Journal Book Reviewer Who Dared to Suggest Young Adult Books Might Be Inappropriate For Children

As you know, even a hint of a challenge to reading material in schools brings out administrative malfeasance, howls of protest, cries of censorship, and personal attack.  It is all designed to intimidate and bully others into never saying a peep about materials inappropriate for children.  Your school has an anti-bullying policy, right?  So why is such bullying allowed here?  Hopefully not because you agree with or are perpetrating the bullying.

The backlash can be so bad that few brave authors are willing to speak out in defense of those simply speaking the truth about books for children, as Meghan Cox Gurdon did in the Wall Street Journal where she suggested, as I pointed out above, book reviews are incomplete and uninformative.

Handout 9:


Reasoned Discussion, Free From the Shouting, Bullying Voices Crying Censorship, Is What Is Needed to Address School Book Challenges; A Great Example is Author Lauren Myracle Apologizing to Wall Street Journal Book Reviewer Meghan Cox Gurdon

I hope you can see book challenges in schools should be conducted fairly and in an atmosphere of truth and honesty, not shouting.  After all, most people oppose inappropriate material in schools and schools remove inappropriate material all the time, yes even in New Jersey.  Even ALA itself says if a book does not meet a school's book selection policy, "get it out of there."  And school principals and superintendents are not fooled by uninformative book reviews or ALA books lists and awards and neither should you, especially were ALA censors and blacklists sources that contain information about the potential for sexually inappropriate material in children's books.  ALA has dirty hands.

As an example of the kind of positive atmosphere in which book challenges should be discussed, I urge you to read the transcript of the National Public Radio discussion of Meghan Cox Gurdon and her Judy Bloom-like critic and author Lauren Myracle.  Lauren apologized to Meghan for jumping on the censorship bandwagon.  I urge you to read this.  Then I urge you to set aside the shouting and the bullying and the false arguments about how well rated the materials are and how some parents are censors and instead focus on amicably resolving the issue in a manner that best suits the community and its children, not the bullies.
"I lashed out at you," Myracle said.  "When people get outraged they get angry, and then it becomes this weird argument instead of a discussion. ...  I should welcome people who aren't on the same page with love and generosity. ...  And I didn't with you.  And I'm sorry."

Handout 10:

Conclusion

I could say so much more, but that concludes my three minutes of fame.  Thank you for this opportunity to speak and provide handouts.  I welcome any questions now or in the future and will be happy to appear at local PTO meetings or the like.

# # #   30   # # #


STATEMENT FROM SCHOOL PARENT DALE LAZAROVITCH REGARDING THE BULLYING SHE AND HER CHILD/STUDENT IS EXPERIENCING FROM THE SCHOOL ITSELF FOR MERELY ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT SCHOOL BOOKS–SHE IS TOLD SHE IS SQUASHING HER SON'S "SEXUAL BEING" AND THE ENGLISH DEPARTMENT HEAD ROLLS HER EYES DURING THE STUDENT'S BOE SPEECH:

I attended my local BOE meeting to voice my concerns regarding a book that my 10th grade son was reading.  My son came to me with an excerpt of the book and said to me that the language was disgusting and the topic was inappropriate for 10th graders.  My son made a copy of a chapter of the book and highlighted what he thought was inappropriate and I brought it to the attention of the board and administration.

I asked them if they could read the passage out loud, then I would drop the issue.  I also asked them who picked the book, and if anyone had read the book prior to putting it the classroom.  I was told that the head of English Dept did read the book, felt that it was ART and very appropriate.

I was also told that I was "hovering and overprotecting my son," as well as "squashing his sexual being."

I didn't respond in public to the head of English, because I didn't want to stoop to her level.  I questioned why the kids are not reading books to enhance their vocabulary to better prepare for the SAT/ACT tests.  I was told that it was more important to expose our kids to other cultures (implied that we live in a very wealthy community) and that vocabulary building was as important.

What I really don't understand is that the school has such a tough non bullying policy for the students, yet when a parent has a question or a challenge such as this,  I feel like I am being bullied.

I don't understand why the BOE and the administration will not respond to my requests.  I understand that there are policies in place, but a simple email with an update from the meeting would be the least they can do.

I also found out that we as parents can opt out of books (a little too late for most), but my son turned in his book and was given a replacement.  I was also told that next year that because my son will be in AP english we will not be able to challenge a book.  I responded, that was not a concern because the AP curriculum is not picked by the head of the English department, but by the AP board.

My son did speak at the BOE meeting regarding the book choice, and the head of the English Dept was rolling her eyes at him and implied that I wrote his speech.  By all means at 16 years old I do not have to put words in his mouth.  He is the one that brought this to my attention, and as his mother I am his best advocate.

I never asked the school to ban or censor the book, I asked them to make the best choices for our kids.


NOTE ADDED 29 APRIL 2014:

I attended the above meeting.  I really messed up my speech, or rather the three minutes I was allotted was not a lot and I rushed.  What a mess.

Someone filmed me (via iPhone) and I am certain ALA is reviewing that now as I see my email, never sent by me to ALA, is being read by Chicago, IL, ALA employees using ALA email servers.  So the school has definitely contacted ALA, an organization that, among other things, is the nation's leading facilitator of porn: http://tinyurl.com/DirtyDozenALA.

That said, the bullying of students and parents by the school itself is FAR, FAR WORSE than what I have reported above.  If I get a chance I will be reporting more on this soon, perhaps publishing several people directly describing their ordeal.

If I recall correctly, a girl was, did I get this right, ordered to read some sexually inappropriate part of a book in front of the class?  She opted out of reading it so she was placed in the back of the room, facing away from the class, told to wear head phones and to occupy herself on the computer while the class discussed the racy book?  It was something like that.  That's bullying.  It is also a failure to comply with the law to provide an adequate education.

But oh, it gets even worse.  One of her friends was acting on behalf of her coach, engaged her in text messaging, then her text messages, her private text messages, where emailed to many teachers?  Did I get that right?  And her father is being investigated by the school?

Oh, it was EXPLOSIVE!

Someone in the audience hinted I should be sued for supposedly making defamatory statements about the bullying the school is doing, then it turns out the bullying is WAY WORSE than what I reported.  And there were anti bullying signs right in the next room!  If you don't read that racy book, you AND your family will be bullied to teach others NEVER to dare challenge the government!

Oh I hope I get the time to do a full report on this.  Just wait.  This kind of bullying I see in school after school, setting aside the privacy invasion and the parental investigation, each one following ALA advice to keep the kids reading the inappropriate material by giving "alternate" material to the complainers and by bullying them.

Oh I can't wait to write about this.


Posted by at 2 comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,
Location: West Essex High School, 65 West Greenbrook Road, North Caldwell, NJ 07006, USA

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

False Censorship Claims Exposed by WSJ Author Attacked for Exposing Truth About Young Adult Books; Meghan Cox Gurdon Decries Incomplete and Uninformative Book Reviews

False censorship claims have been exposed by a Wall Street Journal contributor named Meghan Cox Gurdon.  Notice how she exposes the false cries of censorship and how she notes current book reviewers are "incomplete and uninformative":

  • "Librarians Defend Teen Gore," by Tessa Berenson, FrumForum, 7 June 2011.
    "I did not expect this degree of hysteria," Gurdon said.  "And I really, really did not expect that people who work in the book industry would be so seemingly incapable of understanding a simple argument.  As a critic, I am describing what is in the literature, and the fact that it is different now than it was, say, 30 years ago.  These are cultural developments that are worth acknowledging and worth noticing."
    ....
    "I come out 'anti-reading' because I have the temerity to criticize what is in some of the books that are being sold to teenagers," Gurdon retorted.  Indeed she believes that one of the roots of the problem in the book industry lies in incomplete and uninformative reviews:  "One of the things that I think is missing from a lot of these reviews is that they very, very seldom address some of the more disturbing content that is in books."

David Frum of FrumForum, that was a truly outstanding blog post.  Thank you very much to you and Tessa Berenson.

Here is the article that started this kerfuffle:

By the way, even school superintendents have noted how useless book reviews can be:


See also:



NOTE ADDED JUNE 9 2011:

Meghan Cox Gurdon was interviewed on public radio.  Listen to her here:
  • "Is Teen Fiction Too Dark?," by Kerri Miller interviewing Meghan Cox Gurdon, Minnesota Public Radio, 9 June 2011.
    Young adult literature is a booming genre in the publishing industry, but one reviewer says we should be concerned about how dark and lurid the offerings for adolescent readers have become.

Also, this blog post is getting multiple hits per minute thanks to my comment appended to:

Entirely relevant is this from an extremely popular librarian blog and all the comments by the librarians thereunder:
  • "Surreptitious Censorship,” by Will Manley, Will Unwound, 8 June 2011. 
    Here’s an issue that I’ve often wondered about but never written about.  It involves intellectual freedom.  Intellectual freedom is often presented as a black and white issue.  You are either a supporter of intellectual freedom or you are a censor.  There seems to be no middle ground.

    ....

    Why are librarians so afraid of having a book challenged?  Patrons or groups of patrons who challenge library books are simply exercising their First Amendment right to the "petition their government."  What's wrong with that?  Intellectual freedom issues should be hashed out in the public arena, not behind the closed doors of some librarian’s office.

    [And here's a sample comment, this from "Deb"]:

    Back in the early 90s there were great debates about having public Internet in libraries.  One of the favorite arguments put forth by librarians at the time was that libraries needed to have and control public access to the Internet so that they could make sure that people got their information from "good" sites – i.e. librarian approved.  There were discussions of how libraries could limit access to selected sites the way that they limited selection of reference books to those vetted and approved by "experts" – i.e. peer reviewed and published by the correct presses.  It wasn't about intellectual freedom, it was about selection, and making sure that we protected our public and users from the crap that was out there.  Then Congress decided to force Internet filtering and Bam! it was suddenly an intellectual freedom issue, and now libraries were supposed to let anyone access anything, including providing porn to children and pedophiles as protected first amendment speech.  Of course it's hypocrisy.  The ALA as an organization is the embodiment of hypocrisy.  And yes, I am a card-carrying member.  So I, too, am a hypocrite, because I know that I will never change the organization, and that they don’t work for me, my library, or the community we serve.  But they are the only game in town.  Better the devil you know than no devil at all.  I have always considered it hypocritical to market ourselves to families and entice children in with storytimes, etc.; then tell parents that we don't recognize parental authority and that we will provide x-rated movies to their kids in the name of intellectual freedom.  Personally, I do not think ALA and OIF know what this term means.

    As to selection – it is necessary because unlike the Library of Congress, most libraries do not have the time, the money, the staff, or the space to acquire every item ever published.  So, we have to pick and choose.  Of course personal taste enters into it.  We went to library school and took classes in how to do collection development, and we have convinced the people that hired us that we know more than the average bear about how to pick books for the library.  But what it comes down to is, we pick the ones that we think will be a good fit, and our personal tastes have everything to do with it.  Even if we are deliberately picking something that we personally dislike, we still consider our own reaction to it before we decide.  That's called being human.  Unless and until we automate the acquisitions process and let computers pick the books, we are always going to have human emotional content in our selection process.  Heck, even when the computers do start doing selection for us, we will probably end up with the emotional responses of the guy who programmed the computer.

If you like these kinds of issues, please consider subscribing to my SafeLibraries blog or to Will Manley's Will Unwound.


NOTE ADDED 22 JUNE 2011:

A Disobedient Girl,
by Ru Freeman
Another author has spoken out in support of Meghan Cox Gurdon.  Read what she is saying carefully.  You hear all these critics and the American Library Association saying children must be exposed to dark themes so they will learn about them.  Well this author, Ru Freeman (@RuFreeman), says the exact opposite.
  • "I'm With Meghan Cox Gurdon," by Ru Freeman, The Huffington Post, 21 June 2011, bold and red emphasis mine, italics and hyperlinks in original:
    As the parent of three avid readers, I agree with Meghan Cox Gurdon's point that what is considered "banning" in the book trade is known in the parenting world as doing our job.  In a piece in the Wall Street Journal this week, she writes:

    It is a dereliction of duty not to make distinctions in every other aspect of a young person's life between more and less desirable options.  Yet let a gatekeeper object to a book and the industry pulls up its petticoats and shrieks "censorship!"

    Books transform lives.  That is why we write.  We write through the pain or memory of our own experience, we write through the gratitude or sorrow of others.  Every time we put finger to keyboard we write to tell a story that has the potential to change a person's life.  If we didn't have that expectation, the effort would be simply a form of public masturbation.  Which brings us to the question of how any book that is filled with gore that runs the gamut from rape to incest to addiction to murder and every variance in between, without any of those things being absolutely essential to the development of character or plot, can be lauded as being a solid addition to the life of the mind for a child.

    How can any writer claim, as Sherman Alexie claims, that he writes the particular kinds of books that he writes for teenagers not because he wants to "protect them" because, he says, it is "far too late for that," but to "give them weapons -- in the form of words and ideas -- that will help them fight their monsters."  Mr. Alexie, gushes that he "writes in blood because I remember what it felt like to bleed."

    Well.  This country has sent thousands of its youth to die, and still some of us control-freak adults get off our posteriors and do our best to prevent the next "one" kid who is about to be turned into a killing machine.  What we don't do is present the kids around us with handbooks for how to become better murderers.  This country has spent its money substituting the regurgitation of facts for knowledge and still some of us interfering know-it-all adults lobby our schools to do things differently.  We certainly don't sit on the sidelines and congratulate our little oafs for just, you know, doing what kids these days are "supposed to be doing."  There are pederasts and psychopaths alive and kicking in the ether that is so easily accessed by our kids, but some of us adults believe it is a good thing to teach our kids how to navigate that world without exposing them to the pathologies of depraved adults.

    What we don't do is give them an alphabetized, cross reference index that points them to each heinous website.  And, just like the patron of the Boone County Library in Kentucky (who tried to get Cheryl Rainfield's book Scars off the shelves) points out, and this is close to my heart, we don't give a young anorexic girl a great ball-by-ball account of how to starve herself to death.  Because, you see, 40-60 percent of high school girls have considered that particular form of suicide and 2.3 percent of them have died from it while undergoing treatment, which leaves a nice healthy figure of those who were never diagnosed and never received treatment.

    Kids one block removed from my neighborhood in wealthy suburban Philadelphia go to bed hungry and, trust me, having been a hungry kid, I don't think they are begging to read about starvation.  I have been the child at the receiving end of violence and I would give my life to protect my own from such violence, and that includes the violence of the words and images that, once they take up residence in our heads, cannot be erased.  I can assure you that, growing up, I did not sit around wishing I could read about the hardships I was undergoing.  No.  I read Joyce, Blyton, Donne, Harper Lee and Shakespeare.  I held on to longing, fairytale, a human communion with whatever it was that I recognized as the divine and the beauty of language.  I read about snow and Santa Claus and sailing boats, having adventures and bringing down capitalist bastards a la Yury Olesha in The Three Fat Men.

    Suffering is just that, suffering.  There is nothing glorious or noteworthy about it.  If you've truly experienced it, it hurts.  Bad.  And the last thing you ever want to do is to inflict it upon a child.  The last thing that one should do for a child who has suffered is to introduce them to a little more of the same.  Here's to all those adults who, having undertaken to have children of their own, choose to care for all children by keeping their faith with the real-life dream of childhood, who try each day to hold the coordinates steady for them as the adults in our lives tried their best to hold them steady for us a long time ago.  Ms. Gurdon should take a bow for having the guts to tell it like it is.


NOTE ADDED 27 JUN 2011:

Meghan Cox Gurdon has written again!  Look how she tells the truth about the American Library Association and its false claims of "danger" used to force its will on communities!  Look how she illustrates how the "free speech" people use ad hominem attack freely—I see this all the time:

  • "My 'Reprehensible' Take on Teen Literature; Raise Questions About Self-Mutilation and Incest As a Young-Adult Theme and All Hell Breaks Loose," by Meghan Cox Gurdon, Wall Street Journal, 28 June 2011, emphasis mine.
    If the American Library Association were inclined to burn people in effigy, I might well have gone up in smoke these past few days.  ALA members, mostly librarians and other book-industry folk, are concluding their annual conference today in New Orleans, and it's a fair bet that some of them are still fuming about an article of mine that appeared in these pages earlier this month.

    The essay, titled "Darkness Too Visible," discussed the way in which young-adult literature invites teenagers to wallow in ugliness, barbarity, dysfunction and cruelty.  By focusing on the dark currents in the genre, I was of course no more damning all young-adult literature than a person writing about reality TV is damning all television, but from the frenzied reaction you would have thought I had called for the torching of libraries.

    Within hours of the essay's appearance it became a leading topic on Twitter.  Indignant defenders of young-adult literature called me "idiotic," "narrow-minded," "brittle," "ignorant," "shrewish," "irresponsible" and "reprehensible."  Authors Judy Blume and Libba Bray suggested that I was giving succor to book-banners. Author Lauren Myracle took the charge a stage further, accusing me of "formulating an argument not just against 'dark' YA [young-adult] books, but against the very act of reading itself."  The ALA, in a letter to The Journal, saw "danger" in my argument, saying that it "encourages a culture of fear around YA literature."

    The odd thing is that I wasn't tracking some rare, outlier tendency.  As book reviewer Janice Harayda observed, commenting on my essay: "Anyone who writes about children's books regularly knows that [Mrs. Gurdon] hasn't made up this trend. . . . Books, like movies, keep getting more lurid."

    ....
    But, to some, those are desirable destinations. Many of the angriest responses to my essay came from people who believe that a major purpose of young-adult fiction is therapeutic.  "YA Saves!" was the rallying hashtag of thousands of Twitter posters who chose to express their ire in 140 characters or less.

    It is true that so-called problem novels may be helpful to children in anguished circumstances.  The larger question is whether books about rape, incest, eating disorders and "cutting" (self-mutilation) help to normalize such behaviors for the vast majority of children who are merely living through the routine ordeals of adolescence.

    There are real-world reasons for caution.  For years, federal researchers could not understand why drug- and tobacco-prevention programs seemed to be associated with greater drug and tobacco use.  It turned out that children, while grasping the idea that drugs were bad, also absorbed the meta-message that adults expected teens to take drugs.  Well-intentioned messages, in other words, can have the unintended consequence of opening the door to expectations and behaviors that might otherwise remain closed.

    .... 
    In the outpouring of response to my essay, I've been told that I fail to understand the brutal realities faced by modern teens.  Adolescence, I've been instructed, is a prolonged period of racism, homophobia, bullying, eating disorders, abusive sexual episodes, and every other manner of unpleasantness.
    Author Sherman Alexie asked, in a piece for WSJ.com titled "Why the Best Kids Books Are Written in Blood": "Does Mrs. Gurdon honestly believe that a sexually explicit YA novel might somehow traumatize a teen mother?  Does she believe that a YA novel about murder and rape will somehow shock a teenager whose life has been damaged by murder and rape?  Does she believe a dystopian novel will frighten a kid who already lives in hell?"

    ....

NOTE ADDED 8 JULY 2011:

Wow!  Get a load of these new stories/podcasts, particularly the apology from author Lauren Myracle:

  • "Questions We Should Be Asking About YA Lit," by Rahma Krambo, Mystic Coffee, 7 July 2011. 
  • "A Spade By Any Other Name," by Thomas M, Liberry Jam, 7 July 2011.
  • "Is Young Adult Fiction Too Dark?," by Tracey Matisak interviewing Meghan Cox Gurdon and Maureen Johnson, WWHY Radio Times, 6 July 2011, podcast available.
  • "YA Author Apologizes To 'Wall Street Journal' Critic," by Neal Conan interviewing Meghan Cox Gurdon and Lauren Myracle, NPR Talk of the Nation, 6 July 2011, podcast available.
    "I lashed out at you," Myracle said.  "When people get outraged they get angry, and then it becomes this weird argument instead of a discussion.  ...  I should welcome people who aren't on the same page with love and generosity.  ...  And I didn't with you.  And I'm sorry."
  • "Gratuitous Violence in YA Literature," by Ru Freeman, Ru Freeman Author & Activist, 2 July 2011.
    To say children benefit from exposure to extreme violence in reality, or imagery?  Yep, bullshit.  Suffering is just suffering.  Bullshit is just bullshit no matter what patriotic utterance is wrapped around it.

And let me remind you of oldies but goodies:


NOTE ADDED 10 JULY 2011:

See also:

.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)