Let Librarians—and Not Activist Parents—Run the Library: Further Remarks to the Grand Haven Area Public Schools Board of Education

Thank you, Board of Education, for the opportunity to speak to you once more. As I said last time I spoke, my name is Jared Cramer. I’m a class of 2000 graduate of Grand Haven and for the past ten years I have been the priest at St. John’s Episcopal Church here in town.

I must admit that I am disappointed to stand before you once more. I am not disappointed because of you, to be clear. Quite the opposite, I am proud that our district Superintendent and Board of Education continue to support our librarians and the work they do in curating content for our children and enabling parents to be actively engaged in their children’s reading habits. I’m disappointed that a small group of parents in our community continues to believe that their standards for the content of books and how those books are accessed should trump those of library associations and trained professionals.

The claim being employed tonight is that the only concern is about sexual content in books for young teens. I continue to believe that claim is false, but I want to for a moment lift my skepticism and engage that claim directly.

The difficultly with what these parents are asking for is the question of who will set the standard for what qualifies as sexual content. The parents leading this charge are now using Michigan Law 722.675 as their standard—however, they are not taking the time to read the entirety of the law. To be considered sexually explicit in this law, sexual matter must meet all the laws criteria, including, “Considered as a whole, it appeals to the prurient interest of minors” and “considered as a whole, it lacks serious literary, artistic, political, educational, and scientific value for minors.” On the clear wording of this law, the books being criticized do not meet the standard set out for the inappropriate dissemination of sexually explicit matter.

Now, if you listen to their criticisms, they will say it is not just about what the law says but it is about sexual organs being used in a sexual way… and maybe also lewd profanity and extreme violence… so you can see how slippery the slope has already become. What constitutes lewd profanity instead of just profanity? What makes violence extreme instead of just violent? What do either of those have to do with sexual content, if that is the actual driving concern?

Furthermore, why are these categories highlighted but not other content that may be morally objectionable to young teens, like drug use? Will that be added to the list as well? What about other sins? Is the goal to remove sin from books? Just some sins? Who decides?
What sorts of books would be restricted by the system proposed by these parents?

• The Great Gatsby by F. Scottt Fitzgerald
• The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger
• The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck
• Beloved, by Toni Morrison, which was objected to by a parent at a previous meeting—even though it won the 1987 Pulitzer Prize.
• The Lord of the Flies by William Golding
• Brave New World  by Aldous Huxley
• Go Tell it on the Mountain by James Baldwin
• Rabbit, Run by John Updike
• And Are you there God? It’s Me, Margaret by Judy Blume

Now, are all of these books appropriate in a middle school library? That’s a fantastic question, and one that should be answered by library professionals. Because if instead you have a single box for opting in or opting out of sexual content, with no attention paid to the literary context of that content, then parents will unknowably opt their kids out of the greatest literature of our time.

There is no need for our district to create an entirely new system of categorizing books based upon content some parents find objectionable. As I said to you earlier, there is already a system in place, a professional program at the Library of Congress that uses experts in the field and identifies the proper age of the audience. Our school librarians are trained to use these systems.

And this system works! If a parent believes a book may have been inappropriately categorized, they can raise that concern with the librarian who can determine if it should be moved to a different library. That’s already happened with one book that concerned a parent. And if you, as a parent, want to keep your kid from reading books by Salinger and Steinbeck and Baldwin and Updike, you can do that. Just give that list to the librarian.

Claims that parents don’t have time to find out which books have sexual content are false. Just google the question and you will find plenty of lists of books deemed inappropriate by some people. Whose list should one use when restricting your kid’s reading? Whichever one you, as a parent agree with. The fact that there are so many, and they differ so wildly, just demonstrates the point that there is not a clear line that can be drawn. Instead, you, as a parent, have to be active and engaged. You have to determine what sort of content is appropriate or not appropriate for your child. But you do not, as a parent, have the right to demand that the library flag certain books —without regard to literary content— as objectionable for other children who are not your own.

And why would I, as a parent, want my middle school child someday to have access to this kind of content? Because it helps. By reading in the pages of a book, kids can explore what is going on in their bodies safely.  Because I want my kid, as she grows up, to confront difficult and unsettling content—and then to know she can talk to me about it. And together, we’ll discuss what we believe and how that affects how we live in the world. Please, Board of Education, continue to support parents making these decisions for their own kids. Continue to support our librarians’ goal of helping parents engage with their kids reading habits. And please do not enable one group of parents to create their own category of objectional content for all students in our district.