Opinion: The value of making people uncomfortable
New Brunswick Public Library Service’s “hold” on supposedly controversial sex-education books betrays its purpose, harms those who rely on it the most
An old “controversy” has arisen again over sex education - not in the schools, but rather in the availability of books for younger readers.
We find ourselves immersed once again in the ridiculous debate over the birds and the bees, and the solution is quite simple: those with concerns over children’s exposure to such material need to buzz off.
(The point merits stronger, more vulgar language, but then the opportunity to use a bee pun would have been lost.)
New Brunswick’s public library system has pulled two sex-ed books aimed at kids pending a review after it received a complaint from Miramichi resident Tammy Morrison.
She launched an online petition over her concerns, garnering hundreds of supporters, and filed a complaint in person in Fredericton over Let's Talk About It and Sex is a Funny Word, books designed to educate and inform younger audiences about sex.
Morrison claimed her campaign aims to move the books from sections of libraries for younger readers to the adult section to allow parents to vet the material first.
But to this pearl-clutching parent’s credit, she has admitted it’s really about ensuring such material doesn’t exist.
"I would like to see these books completely gone, but I understand that that is not the way to get things done, because there will just be another book written,” she told Brunswick News.
What Morrison doesn’t seem to realize is that she already has the half-measure she’s seeking: parental approval of material that kids, tweens or teens can sample at public libraries.
Parents have the ability to join their kids when they peruse the stacks. In fact, one can argue that parents have the responsibility to do so, especially when it comes to their pre-teen kids.
But parents can also just drop their kids off at libraries, and that’s a positive thing to do as well. Libraries lend themselves to learning, to culture, to art. They’re positive, peaceful environments.
But when parents or guardians make a choice to allow their kids to be in the library unsupervised, they would or should be well aware there’s material such as these sex-education books available there.
Of course, if a minor seeks out such material, it speaks to a natural curiosity, and such books is specifically designed to educate, to satisfy that curiosity in a meaningful, objective and informative way.
Morrison and other opponents of such books purport to be protecting innocence, to shield impressionable minds from objectionable material.
That’s true in part. They do seek to protect - not the kids, but themselves from the reality of childhood and how it yields to adolescence. Just as the process of growing is challenging for children, it’s also a challenge for parents and guardians. It’s difficult to navigate, and there’s no surefire way to guide kids through it perfectly.
Pretending it’s not happening, though - that’s most definitely the wrong path.
Wrestling with the knowledge kids might discover sexuality, seek to learn about it and even experience it eventually is uncomfortable. Those parents seeking to block that from happening should be aware that what kids are going through is far more uncomfortable for them.
Entering that stage in their lives - and it can come long before adolescence - is confusing, and more often than not, children think they’re different and alone in those thoughts and experiences.
Finding books that answer their questions can be of great comfort, and even moreso by confirming their questions are natural.
Some things in life are supposed to be uncomfortable. It speaks to the challenge those moments present and to their importance.
But the problem here isn’t the books, or over-sensitive parents lobbying for censorship.
It’s the fact that someone in government bureaucracy capitulated to the puritan demands of a vocal minority.
Has anyone who demanded a book be pulled from library shelves or be banned ever come out on the right side of history? How is it possible this same mistake is being made in New Brunswick in the 21st century?
Actually, it should come as no surprise. Book bans at schools are back in vogue in various jurisdictions in the United States again; in fact, one could argue it’s a perpetual problem.
The province public library service employs experienced and specifically trained professionals who know how to categorize books for various age groups, who know the power and importance of books, especially for kids.
A spokesperson for the New Brunswick Public Library Service says reviewing a book after receiving a complaint is policy and a normal process, and that makes sense.
But that spokesperson also noted that with regard to Morrison’s complaint about these two books, the service decided to place “a hold” on them as that review is conducted, suggesting that’s not part of the regular process.
Addendum: A spokesperson with the provincial Department of Post-Secondary Education, Training and Labour contacted the Fredericton Independent on Thursday to note that some confusion arose about the availability of the two books in question.
The library service initially told reporters: “With regards to this specific request, however, NBPLS staff have placed a hold on the two titles in question for review purposes.”
But department spokesperson Geneviève Mallet said that was a poor choice of language, as the book wasn’t restricted or pulled.
“Access to the library materials is not restricted while a book is under reconsideration,” Mallet wrote in an email.
Nevertheless, it seems the complaint made someone at the library service uncomfortable, and rather than focusing on the job at hand and realizing those expressing concerns clearly don’t understand sex education, child development or the dangers of censorship, steps were taken to appease them.
With any luck, library service officials will see the source of their discomfort shift from the complaints to the realization of the potential for their complicity in what could become a book-banning exercise.
Ultimately, experience has shown us that when books are flagged, banned or pulled pending review, the titles experience a boom in orders. The publicity brings attention to the contested tomes, and in this instance, it could also spark the potential for more sex education, not limits on it.
The publishers and authors come out ahead.
Those that lose, though, are kids whose parents refuse to purchase the books for them or - more importantly - can’t afford to do so, spotlighting the importance of libraries in our society.
Don MacPherson can be contacted at ftonindependent@gmail.com.
Anti-intellectualism and persecution mania is receiving a huge boost from right-wing elements the world over at the moment. This particular 'branch' which petitions for the removal of books from libraries grows from the same root that held the branch which once publicly burned them in piles... the familiar refrain of safeguarding the 'purity' of either children or society in general echos the anxieties of a certain European nation in the 1930s.
It is concerning that someone who ought to know better, a person of authority in the Library Service, would entertain or possibly sympathise with such hysterics. These people care not at all for the well-being of children; they are simply zealots attempting to make publicly accessible spaces an ideological battleground.
Thank you for this article!! I'm seeing this attitude more and more these days as I continue on as a parent to 2 kids under 10 years old in the 2020's. The 'I'm going to keep my children unexposed and protected for as long as I possibly can because children need to stay children for as long they possibly can.' attitude to parenting. Its as if these parents are actively trying to send their children off to Neverland for the rest of their lives. You're not helping anyone, society or your kids.
What makes it harder, as you point out in this article, is governments and public services appeasing to these concerns to avoid controversy instead of pushing back or at the very least opening it to debate.