The process began with a standard reconsideration request under the Hays Public Library's Objections to Books or Materials Policy. I asked for a sexually explicit book to be placed in the Adult section or in a future Parenting section. The book, Sex is a Funny Word (Cory Silverberg) was on the shelf in the Young Adult section, accessible to 9 years old and up.
After working through the reconsideration process, the request was denied. The Director then took action and moved it to Children's section of the library—exposing preschoolers and early elementary grade students browsing open shelves near computers and play areas to pages and pages of instructions and encouragement to masturbate, intended as sex education for children too young to read the text or understand the illustrations.
I appealed the Director's denial to the Board of Directors per library policy. After nearly an hour in Executive session and a statement by the Board attorney, the Board Chair asked if anyone wanted to appeal the Director's decision to place this book in the Children's section.
The silence was deafening
The board denied the appeal by sitting in total silence, some looking at the table and some staring straight ahead. .By doing so, the board assumed responsibility for the new placement of Sex is a Funny Word in the Children's section at the Hays Public Library.
In the December meeting where I made my appeal to the Board, some members did speak up during discussion. One member asking "Why did we put this book in the Children's section?" The Director responded "That's where it is in some other libraries." The Mayor stated "How can we know which books are ok" and "maybe we need to get some professionals in here to help decide which books are ok?" In this meeting, total silence.
The copyright page of the book shows that the title is for ages "7-10," however there is no objective criteria that the publisher is required to follow when making that determination. The library then relies on the publisher's designation to defend placement of the book, completely ignoring Community Standards as required by Kansas law (Read more about the Policy Shell Games here) and common sense when it comes to exposing children to mature themes.
This was not neutral curation. The director had the option to maintain status quo by denying the request for reconsideration and leaving the book where it was. Instead, action was taken, Choosing the youngest patron section possible in total disregard for the book's content including graphic descriptions and illustrations of sexual organs, encouragement of masturbation, and presentation in a colorful illustrated format appealing to prurient curiosity for children.
There's more....
.jpeg)
The text has much of the same verbiage as Sex is A Funny Word, but with even more detail and graphic descriptions of how "after a bit, a person's vagina becomes moist" and "after a bit, a person's penis becomes erect."
This book in the Children's section lists different kinds of intercourse, including vaginal, oral, and anal intercourse. The intention of these two titles is sex education, but the placement in a section where children who cannot read the material negates any educational value of the materials.
The industry standard for a child's book is 32 pages, in part because a parent has to read to the book to the child and the child's attention span is well researched and limited. "It's Perfectly Normal" has 128 pages, and Sex is a Funny Word has 157 pages. Books of this length are not typically provided for reading to a child, and both of these books are written to appeal to those above the age range for the Children's section.
.jpeg)
WHY?
What does Kansas law say?
K.S.A. 21-6401 defines "obscene" via the three-prong Miller v. California test (1973).The test looks at the whole work (not just one part). It uses local community standards (not national ones) for the first two parts. Kansas laws (like K.S.A. 21-6401 on promoting obscenity and K.S.A. 21-6402 on material harmful to minors) build directly on this Miller test to define and regulate obscene or harmful content, especially to kids.
Any material is "obscene" if all three prongs are met:
(A) The average person applying contemporary community standards would find that the material or performance, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest.
- Prurient interest = shameful or morbid interest in nudity, sex, or excretion (Roth v. United States, 1957; reaffirmed in Miller v. California, 1973)
What is the intention of these excerpts from Sex is a Funny Word?
- pg 25: "Sex is something people can do to feel good in their bodies" → Introduces sex primarily as a source of physical pleasure.
- pg 28: "Part of sex is feeling joy and pleasure." → Reinforces pleasure as central to sex.
- pg 46: "If I could be naked all the time I would" → Normalizes desire for constant nudity.
- pg 48: "Some people love the feeling of being naked. When you are naked you can see and touch your body without clothes getting in the way." → Links nudity directly to unrestricted touching and visual pleasure.
- pg 60: "Some nipples are sensitive, and some are not. Nipples can feel very good to touch" (with illustrations labeled kids and grown-ups) → Explicitly states that touching nipples feels "very good."
- pg 61: "Like nipples, some people's breasts are sensitive and can feel good when they are touched" (illustrations of kids and grown-ups) → Extends pleasure claim to breasts, including children's bodies.
- pg 62: "Like other holes in the body, the anus is usually very sensitive, which means it can feel good to touch but can also hurt if we are rough with it" (illustrations) → Describes anal touching as potentially pleasurable, normalizes that touching may be "rough."
- pg 64: "The clitoris can be very sensitive, and touching it can feel warm and tingly" (illustrations of vulva/clitoris/vagina) → Describes clitoral stimulation as producing pleasurable sensations.
- pg 66: "Like the clitoris, the penis can be very sensitive, and touching it can feel warm and tingly" (illustrations of penises, some erect) → Describes penile stimulation as pleasurable, with visual depictions of erection.
- pg 107: "You may have discovered that touching some parts of your body, especially the middle parts, can make you feel warm and tingly. Grown-up call this kind of touch masturbation. Masturbation is when we touch ourselves, usually our middle parts, to get that warm and tingly feeling." → Explicitly defines and normalizes masturbation as a pleasurable self-touching activity.
- pg 108: "When you were younger, you may have discovered that it felt good to touch yourself. You may have done this even when you weren't alone." → Suggests masturbation can occur in non-private (that means PUBLIC) settings and feels good.
- pg 60–66: Detailed descriptions and illustrations of touching nipples, breasts, anus, clitoris, and penis, with statements that these areas "can feel very good" or "warm and tingly" when touched.
- pg 107–108: Explicit definition and normalization of masturbation as touching "middle parts" to achieve pleasurable "warm and tingly" feelings, including the suggestion that children may have done this publicly when younger.
- Comic Book Style Illustrations: Labeled drawings of children's and adults' genitals (penis, vulva, clitoris), nipples, breasts, and anus—some showing erection or sensitivity focus.
- The book is presented as educational (sex education, body positivity, boundaries), but the excerpts focus heavily on pleasure from touching genitals, masturbation, and nudity rather than purely biological or safety-focused information.
- For the target audience of the children's section, detailed pleasure-based discussions of masturbation and genital sensitivity lack serious educational value. These passages go beyond basic anatomy into explicit arousal descriptions.
- The illustrations of children's genitals and statements normalizing childhood masturbation ("when you were younger, you may have discovered...") could be seen as lacking serious value for very young children who could only be toddlers or Kindergartners in younger years.
The pleasure-centric focus on masturbation and genital touching, described using words like "clitoris" and "anus" could lead a reasonable person to find that—taken as a whole—the book lacks serious educational value for children especially when considering that some of age ranges viewing books in the children's section are not old enough to read the book at all, let alone be mature enough for the content. The prurient emphasis outweighs any redeeming value for preschoolers and early elementary ages.
Reckless = Disregard for Substantial Risk
Promoting obscenity; promoting obscenity to minors. (a) Promoting obscenity is recklessly: (1) Manufacturing, mailing, transmitting, publishing, distributing, presenting, exhibiting or advertising any obscene material or obscene device;
(2) possessing any obscene material or obscene device with intent to mail, transmit, publish, distribute, present, exhibit or advertise such material or device;
(3) offering or agreeing to manufacture, mail, transmit, publish, distribute, present, exhibit or advertise any obscene material or obscene device;
(b) Promoting obscenity to minors is promoting obscenity, as defined in subsection (a), where a recipient of the obscene material or obscene device or a member of the audience of an obscene performance is a child under the age of 18 years.
The statute requires only "recklessness"—disregarding a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the conduct will promote obscenity to minors.
(e) Evidence that materials or devices were promoted to emphasize their prurient appeal shall be relevant in determining the question of the obscenity of such materials or devices. There shall be a rebuttable presumption that a person promoting obscene materials or obscene devices did so knowingly or recklessly if:
(1) The materials or devices were promoted to emphasize their prurient appeal;
The book's repeated emphasis on how touching genitals, nipples, breasts, anus, and masturbation produces pleasurable sensations ("feel good," "warm and tingly," "very good") constitutes promotion emphasizing prurient appeal.
With this action, the disregard for risk was obvious. The book was moved from a section for teenagers to a section for Elementary students and pre-school ages. By placing it in the Children's section rather than simply denying the reconsideration request and keeping it in Young Adult (reserving access for older minors while shielding younger ones), the Director showed knowing disregard for the substantial risk of escalated exposure to children by promoting the book to an audience even more likely to experience that prurient appeal defined in Kansas law. The board's denial of appeal ratified this choice, showing collective disregard for the now increased risk of exposure to even younger children, including Pre-K.
In Ellis County—in a conservative Kansas community—graphic depictions of sexual organs and masturbation in a children's book would offend prevailing standards.
"Educational" claims crumble for preschoolers: no serious value justifies exposing 4-year-olds to mature sexual concepts.
Legal Definitions in Multiple Statutes
Support Consistent Interpretation
During public statement, the library's attorney stated that K.S.A. 21-6402 (Harmful to Minors) does not apply to libraries, meaning that any criminal prosecution could not use that statute as a basis. That is correct, however a more protective and productive clarification would have included the overlap in definitions with K.S.A. 21-6401.
The definitions in the Harmful to Minors statute (K.S.A. 21-6402) overlay heavily with the Promotion of Obscenity to Minors statute (K.S.A. 21-6401) and help interpret what counts as prohibited content under the broader, non-commercial latter statue that does apply to libraries. By disregarding the intention and spirit of the legal definitions included in K.S.A. 21-6402, the attorney may have missed an opportunity to educate the Board and Director, as well as the public, regarding the statute that shares those definitions and the policy requirements in following the law with regard to promoting obscenities to minors.
K.S.A. 21-6402's definitions flow into K.S.A. 21-6401's analysis—helping establish that content like these books about masturbation and genital-pleasure sections could be "obscene" for younger ages in a non-commercial setting like a public library. That overlap strengthens any recklessness argument under 21-6401(b) and weakens the library's conditional defense if policies don't adequately restrict access.
The shared concepts are almost identical: prurient appeal, patently offensive sexual depictions (including masturbation and lewd exhibition of genitals), and lack of serious value. Material that are obscene under 21-6401 (full Miller test) will always qualify as "harmful to minors" under 21-6402's variable standard (inspired by Ginsberg v. New York).
Courts interpreting K.S.A. 21-6401 can look to 21-6402's definition as persuasive guidance for what Kansas considers "patently offensive" or lacking value to minors. The explicit pleasure-focused language and illustrations of sexual organs in the excerpts (e.g., masturbation defined as touching "middle parts" for "warm and tingly" feelings, genital sensitivity resulting in sexual pleasure, public masturbation) make it easier to argue that Sex is a Funny Word and It's Perfectly Normal meet K.S.A. 21-6401's stricter obscenity test when made accessible to young children.
No one has to prove it would harm small children to see these books
Kansas courts have never required "scientifically certain" proof of harm for such laws to apply, in line with Ginsberg v. New York, 1968. A reasonable belief in risk suffices. Placing explicit material in the Elementary school section ignores that risk entirely and robs parents of any choice over what their children see at the public library.
The policies of the library make it very difficult for parents to exercise the responsibility they are entitled to, both in the Community and by law.
The library policy states that children younger than 9 years old must have a parent or legal guardian present, but that means that a daycare provider can bring in 5 or 6 children under the age of 8 after school and it's not realistic that one adult can see what the children are seeing when excitedly browsing through books, expecting turtles flying space ships but seeing a drawing of erect penis instead.
The Public Library policy is that all ages have access to all materials, because to do otherwise would be censorship, but that's not accurate
In Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629 (1968), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a New York law which established the concept of "variable obscenity"—material can be regulated differently for children than for adults. The ruling affirmed the state's power to protect minors' welfare and support parental authority in child-rearing, without invading protected First Amendment expression for adults or minors in a way that amounts to censorship.
The Court held that the restriction was constitutionally permissible because it targeted only minors and did not interfere with adults' rights to obtain or distribute the material.
In short, the case stands for the idea that narrowly tailored limits on minors' access to sexually explicit (but not fully obscene-for-adults) material are not impermissible censorship—they serve compelling state interests in child protection. This reasoning has influenced later laws on "harmful to minors" materials, including in Kansas where the definitions of obscene materials in K.S.A. 21-6401 Promotion of Obscenity to Minors are cross-referenced with K.S.A. 21-6402 Harmful to Minors
Why are these books in the Children's section?
If a book is in a section where the children are too young to be educated by it, and it's not censorship to move it, why is it there?
Moving books with illustrations of sexual organs and descriptions of sexual activity to a parenting section would show the library's commitment to:
- Alignment with Parental Authority: The U.S. Supreme Court in Ginsberg v. New York (1968) affirmed that "parents' claim to authority in the rearing of their children is basic in our society" and that states (and by extension, public institutions) may enact reasonable measures to support parents in discharging that responsibility (390 U.S. at 639). The Court emphasized that while ideal supervision of children's reading is left to parents, "the knowledge that parental control or guidance cannot always be provided and society's transcendent interest in protecting the welfare of children justify reasonable regulation" (id. at 640). Variable standards for minors' access to sexually explicit materials are not censorship but a way to reinforce parental discretion.
- Practical Support for Existing Policy: Hays Public Library's Parent’s Guide and Service Policy already place responsibility for guiding children's exposure on parents/guardians. Moving the books to a Parenting section (Adult) would allow parents to be more responsible for what their children view in the library and prevent accidental access which opens the library up to scrutiny in application of obscenity standards by Kansas law.
- Community Standards and Precedents: In Ellis County and similar Kansas communities, concerns about young children's unsupervised access to explicit illustrations (e.g., couples in sexual positions or pleasure-focused descriptions of genital touching) are common. Other libraries have successfully implemented similar relocations, restricted access, or parental-consent mechanisms for sensitive topics without violating intellectual freedom principles. Moving sex education books to a Parenting section maintains open access while addressing developmental appropriateness for children, consistent with expert guidance on delaying detailed sexual content.
- No Impact on Intellectual Freedom: The books would not be removed, restricted for adults/older patrons, or labeled as "banned." This respects the Library Bill of Rights while honoring the Court's view in Ginsberg that such targeted supports for parents are constitutional and beneficial.
These books would not be considered offensive in a Parenting section where parents could decide when their child is ready for this information and images or the promotion of masturbation and sexual activity. In the Children's section, they are highly offensive and without any educational value because of the misplacement with regard to ages served in that area.
Parents don't have to prove to the Library Board of Directors that the materials are offensive. The Library Board has to prove to parents that the library can be trusted to protect parent's rights to decide when their child is exposed to sexual materials.
Kansas libraries are taxpayer-funded public institutions. Parents entrust them to actively protect children's moral development. Parents expect to exercise their own rights to decide what sexual materials their children will see and when they will see them.
It defies common sense that books written and illustrated the way that these books are would be purposely placed in view of young children under the guise of "education" when many of the kids in that age group can barely read, and others are not old enough to read yet at all.
It's not about whether a court of law would determined if the materials fail the Miller test. It shouldn't come to that, and it wouldn't come to that if Community standards were respected or even considered at all.
When boards and directors completely disregard the exposure of young children to sexual materials—especially after formal challenge—they don't potentially violate just the statute, but the trust of families and the community as a whole.
Sources cited:
Objections to Books or Materials Policy
Obscenity to Minors Under K.S.A. 21-6401
Join World Library Association:
WorldLibraryAssociation.org
Legal Defense for SLAPP Suits Against Free Speech
