Skip to main content

Imaginary and Dangerous


 

Alas. Someone is wrong on the internet.


(Well-known cartoon by XKCD) 


It has come to my attention that there are people in Howard County that don’t believe in Banned Books Week. They think it’s imaginary. 

Now, there are plenty of things that one is not obligated to believe. Religious beliefs. Things which are a matter of opinion. But, for Heaven's sakes, facts which are clearly available and documented are not in that category.

From the website of the American Library Association:

Banned Books Week celebrates the freedom to read and spotlights current and historical attempts to censor books in libraries and schools. For 40 years, the annual event has brought together the entire book community — librarians, booksellers, publishers, journalists, teachers, and readers of all types — in shared support of the freedom to seek and to express ideas, even those some consider unorthodox or unpopular. The books featured during Banned Books Week have all been targeted for removal or restriction in libraries and schools. By focusing on efforts across the country to remove or restrict access to books, Banned Books Week draws national attention to the harms of censorship.

Banned Books Week has be around since 1982 and is championed by librarians, publishers, journalists, teachers, and a diverse community of readers. But for the purposes of some local online posters, it’s “imaginary.”

Why do you think that is? 

It may help to know that this line of thinking was used to attack Board of Education candidate Dan Newberger, because he spoke to the issue of banned books in a recent League of Women Voters Candidate Forum. 

Take a listen.

It seems to me that the suggestion that Banned Books Week is “imaginary” is a way of “disappearing” a larger concept. A small faction of our community is trying to “disappear” representation for LGBTQ+ students and families in our schools. Mr. Newberger, championing age-appropriate literature which is welcoming and affirming, stands in their way. It is easier to claim that his words are “imaginary” or “dangerous” than to have an honest discussion of what they truly believe.

There are plenty of things that one is not obligated to believe. Many things are, legitimately, a matter of opinion. But, this widely-circulated statement puts it well:

"Agree to disagree" is reserved for things like "I don't like coffee." Not racism, homophobia, and sexism. Not human rights. Not basic common decency. We do not have a difference of opinion. We have a difference in morality.

Or, from American writer James Baldwin:

We can disagree and still love each other unless your disagreement is rooted in my oppression and denial of my humanity and right to exist.  

Here are some things you will need to swallow in order to believe the attack on candidate Newberger:

  • Banned Books Week is imaginary
  • America’s librarians nationwide are unqualified to read and vet books
  • School librarians in Howard County are unqualified to research and choose age-appropriate books
  • People who disagree with this are dangerous
So, essentially, intellectual freedom is at stake in this BOE election. And, intertwined with that is whether we are going to meet the needs of LGBTQ+ students with the same care and acceptance as we do straight, cisgender students.

There are other issues worth addressing in our schools. I hope voters can see this attack on Dan Newberger for what it is: an inflammatory diversionary tactic which is meant to inflame emotions instead of engaging in crucial discussions about what our schools truly need.

The entire League of Women Voters candidate forum is available on YouTube. The BOE portion begins at 4:17:45.  Do your own research. Form your own opinions. But don’t lose sight of the most basic truth at stake here: facts are facts, even if you don’t like them or they make you uncomfortable.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Teacher Gifts

Today is the last day of school before the Winter Break. It’s a good time to remember the far-reaching nature of our public school system. You may not have children. You may have sent your children to independent schools. It matters not. You will be impacted one way or another. Yesterday I read a long thread on Facebook about several waves of illness in the schools right now. There’s influenza A and norovirus, I believe. And of course there’s COVID. Apparently in some individual schools the rate of illness is high enough for school admin to notify parents.  When I was little the acceptable holiday gift for a teacher was one of those lovely floral handkerchief squares. (I don’t know what it was for male teachers. They were rare in my elementary years.) These days the range of teacher gifts is wider and I have fond memories of Target gift cards which I have written about before. I think it’s safe to say that giving one’s teacher Influenza, norovirus, or COVID is not the ideal holiday...
1 comment
Read more

F ³: We Are Not Entitled

  A college student went missing. His family and friends were distraught. The community was encouraged to be on the lookout and spread the word.  Days passed.  They must have been agonizing days for those who cared about the missing student. Thoughts that foul play had been involved cannot have been far from their thoughts.  Then, at last, the student was found. Alive. The news was shared with the public.  So. Much. Relief. A family had been reunited with their child. Even though we know that life is complicated, I think it is okay to accept this as a happy ending and leave it at that.  But the world of social media says no. For every expression of joy at the news came questions and even judgement. It became clear to me that some folks felt entitled to an explanation. They wanted the backstory. It’s as though they felt that, by enlisting the help of the public on social media, the authorities now owed them all the details. Television dramas often weave curr...
2 comments
Read more

Separate and Unequal

  Remember “Separate but equal”? Remember how that really meant that Black schools languished in  broken-down buildings without adequate heat or toilet facilities, with cast-off, ragged learning materials, underfunded and largely ignored? The Supreme Court struck that down in 1954. The evidence was clear that separate was not equal. Plessy v Ferguson had led to - - no, endorsed - - deeply unequal schooling and opportunities. We tend to think of Brown v Board as being purely about racial integration. It was not.  It was about the logical consequences of segregation. And they were not, not, not equal. The ruling in 1954 didn’t transform public education for non-whites into a land of milk and honey by any means. But it articulated some essential truths in a way that made including everyone a legal precedent which could be relied upon and built upon. It was better than what came before it but it rested upon unsteady ground. It did not necessarily change the hearts or minds ...
1 comment
Read more