Scott's Pretty Two (but actually 3) Points

Scott's Pretty Three Points
1. Banners of Books / Book Banners want to shelter children from realities of the world. In some ways, it is the possibly positive idea of children not seeing very violent things, such as

    a. Exposing children to the trauma of rape at the beginning of "the Color Purple"

    b. Exposing children to the violence of sexual assault seen in "yolo"

however, this can be perverted when it talks about older teens who are sexually and mentally aware enough to consume these stories and should learn empathy to disenfranchised individuals of this nature. Additionally, there should exist resources for children who have gone through traumatic instances to know that their lives are valid and they are not alone.

More pervasively, parents who dislike BIPOC joy and love, the idea of white people being seen as oppressive, LGBTQ joy an love, the idea of straight people being seen as oppressive, female joy and love, the idea of men being seen as oppressive, try to cover up these realities from their children. But all these things are out there, and in giving these books to young minds we better equip them not only for a nicer world but the true world. 

Banning books reinforces the awful ideology of American exceptionalism and specifically white middleclass heteronormative male protestant exceptionalism. Anything that threatens this ideology is deemed as heretical and banned because parents do not want the world to change. But the world IS changing, and in many ways it is changing for the better. Showing children these books not only validates their own lives but lets them be nicer to each other in showing narratives other than the dominant oppressive one.

As a very attractive young man once said, "Reality makes you smarter."

2. Book Banners contort the truth while many of the books we read try to illuminate it. (Of course, this goes along with sheltering children, but the problem stems from) Book Banners lying. We often say, "well they [the Book Banners] obviously haven't read the book" in their scathing comments on the book. Notably

    a. People blame "The Hate U Give" as being anti-police when Starr literally ends the novel stating she is not anti-police.

    b. People say that "The Bronx Masquerade" features "drug abuse". 

    c. People say that "Drama" is inappropriate when the most sexual content gets is kissing. (sex isn't even mentioned)

In classic fear and scare tactics, Book Banners exaggerate materials in a book in order to get it off the shelves. But in actuality, these books tend to treat the subject matter truthfully, honestly, and sincerely so that kids are more receptive to these ideas. We can push all LGBTQ content into sexual, and we can push all racial content into violently political when neither is the case. There are just people trying to live their lives as themselves, and seeing books that try to engage the subject honestly get deemed as needlessly political is a shame.

3. Book Banners want to talk about hearing "both sides/the other side of an issue" for some strange Socratic ideal when they're playing Devil's Advocate that argues against the happiness of innocent people. People do not want to hear about a Devil's Advocate saying murder is okay, so why should kids need to read books that support racial violence and racial segregation or sexual violence and sexual segregation?

I am totally willing to buy "I am Rosa Parks" just to show to an assembly and say, "this was banned for not showing the other side of the issue". 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think many of Kate Messner's points in the Ringel article are appropriate for this discussion, like: 
"When we say ‘This book is inappropriate,’ we’re telling those children ‘your situation … your family … your life is inappropriate" (Ringel 5)
"“For now,” the librarian said, “I just need the 10 and 11-year-olds biggest worry to be about friendships, summer camps, and maybe their first pimple or two.” Messner responded by emphasizing a broader obligation that parents, teachers, writers, and publishers all share. “We don’t serve only our children,” Messner said. “We serve children in the real world”" (Ringel 6).
 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why Ban Bronx Masquerade?

As I was reading Nikki Grimes’ Bronx Masquerade, I could not figure out why this book was banned. While I am vehemently against the idea of banning books as a whole, usually I can at least identify why some parties want to censor certain stories. I understand why The Color Purple was banned by conservative forces for its depiction of sexual assault and homosexuality even if I believe that those things have no right to be censored by interest groups with no connection to those experiences. Bronx Masquerade perplexed me, however, as most of its more mature themes are in the background. It did not linger on some of these heavy topics in a way that I thought could lend some to censor it. The bulk of the story explores the writings of Mr. Ward’s students. While many have tragic backgrounds that deal with heavy topics, they are all referenced and referred to in the past tense. None of these darker ideas are lingered on or shown in the present like in The Color Purple. For example, one of the...
Read more

Charlotte is Dead and Why That is Real

 Here is the first passage I read from my copy of George . It is the last statement of the FAQ (AOTAWTS). (It should be understood that Alex is talking explicitly as the author.) It is the last page of my copy before the About the Author section. I recommend reading all of this section. " I'm so glad I understand transgender people now. Okay. This isn't a question, but I'm adding it here anyway. George is only one story. It is the story of a white, middle-class transgender girl growing up near New York City, written by a white, middle-class genderqueer person who grew up on Staten Island, New York. Every transgender story is different, just as we are all different. Race, money, disability, and other realities further impact these differences . I will add that you don't need to understand someone to respect them, so while I'm glad you have a greater insight into Melissa's experience, I hope you also learned from Mom, Kelly, Scott, Jeff, Rick, Ms. Udell, amd...
Read more

Two Main Insights for CRT Dialogue

1. Banning books is a way to push the white supremacist agenda, as seen through the case in York, PA when they banned 270+ books about black and brown experiences. This was also demonstrated through the specific banning of The Hate U Give for reasons such as youth activism and revolution.  2. Keeping books on separate shelves makes people feel invalidated about their life experiences, whether that includes their sex, gender, race, or sexuality. This is especially prevalent for young minds that are not fully developed, because if they see themselves as "other," they will begin to believe it. 
Read more