BRISTOL — The Newfound Area School Board has settled a complaint filed last March by rejecting a citizens’ challenge and allowing free access to controversial books in the high school library unless parents who object to the content ask that their children be prevented from reading the books.
Town residents Gary and Linda Phillips had appealed the decision by an anonymous Book Review Committee that allowed “All Boys Aren’t Blue” by George M. Johnson, “Looking For Alaska” by John Green, and “Gender Queer: A Memoir” by Maia Kobabe to remain in the library. In filing their initial complaint last spring, the couple cited what they considered the normalization of sexual experimentation in the books. They wrote that the explicit descriptions serve as “instruction for sex acts” and that they create “unhealthy sexual appetites that not only affects them [but] others they invited to the ‘game of sexual exploitation.’”
Aubrey Freedman of Bridgewater also filed objections to “All Boys Aren’t Blue” and “Gender Queer,” quoting from the books to argue that they could lead to sexual confusion with their messages of “It’s OK to be different” and claiming that they are “celebrating victimhood.” He said the books are inappropriate for a school library.
On each of the complaints, the Book Review Committee had found the books did not meet the statutory definition of obscenity and ordered they remain in the library, with an opt-out form to allow parents to keep individual titles from their children as a compromise that “allows access while respecting parent wishes.”
After the school board voted to endorse the Book Review Committee’s decision, Groton member William Jolly reacted to the 5-2 vote by saying, “I’d like to congratulate my colleagues on supporting pornography for boys and girls.”
Right to know
When asking the school board to review the Book Review Committee’s decision in September, Linda Phillips asked for the identities of the committee members, “so the general public will be more widely informed as to their decision and the values they represent.” The school board withheld their names, but when the Phillipses filed a right-to-know request, the school district attorney advised Superintendent Paul Hoiriis it would be illegal to keep the identities of decision-makers secret.
The identities are now public: Hoiriis, who was high school principal at the time, served on the Book Review Committee with librarian Kerri Zick and teachers John Daly, Sarah Ohl, and Kelsey Heath.
Linda Phillips commented, “The school board’s ignorance of right-to-know laws is disturbing because they clearly lean toward nonpublic disclosures, and it also reflects on how their subcommittees [Wellness and Search Committees] egregiously violated right-to-know laws” by not keeping minutes and withholding information on administrative searches — a matter now before the state’s right-to-know ombudsman.
Controversial content
The school board delayed a decision on the book appeal to give members a chance to read the books. Not all took advantage of the opportunity, but New Hampton member Francine Wendelboe reported on her impressions at the board’s Oct. 28 meeting.
“Looking For Alaska,” she said, glorifies drinking and smoking, which she noted the school district has sought to prevent through grant funding. However, she did not find it as objectionable as the other books.
“’All Boys Aren’t Blue,’ to me, was the most offensive book,” Wendelboe said. “Towards the end of the book is a completely graphic description of sex … and I don’t think any of that has any place in a high school library.”
She also called the book “racist … from beginning to end,” citing statements about “how Black queer men are killed every day in America. … There are white heterosexual, straight guys killed every day in America. … I think it’s a terrible message to be putting in the minds of kids that there are rampant, roving gangs going around killing Black people or queer people. I just think it sends a terrible message. And the library review committee seemed to say, ‘Ah, they can get worse on the internet.’ Well, you know what? I could find how to make crack cocaine on the internet. I could find how to make bombs on the internet. That doesn’t mean we should teach them in our chemistry class, because they can find it on the internet anyway. I think that’s a cop-out, but I think it’s also a cop-out for this board to not give more direction as to what is age-appropriate in our library.”
As for “Gender Queer,” Wendelboe said the graphic novel includes sexually explicit pictures.
“I’m not talking about medical journal-type pictures; I’m talking about a drawing of somebody getting a blow job, to be quite frank. And I don’t know, for a 14-year-old, that’s appropriate for them. … And to be honest with you, in all of these books, I found different things that were offensive to me,” she said, adding, “I think every new parent should have to read this book, because it’s a perfect example of what not to do.”
Jolly commented, “None of this is about banning books or anything like that; none of that nonsense. All this is, is how do we make sure that, if a parent does not want their kid to hear about ‘Alaska’ or any of these other books, how do we make sure that that’s honored? Can we find a way to make it age-appropriate? Or can we find a way to make it so it’s under lock and key?”
Saying he did not like the books, even though he had not read them, Jolly said, “If we’re going to allow [such] books, it should not be an opt-out program that creates a lack of control for the parents, because the parents … may be unaware of books that are, in my mind, inappropriate for kids.
“It should be opt-in, not opt-out.”
Jen Larochelle of Hebron questioned whether the books are a problem.
“Are they offensive, or just offensive to some people who are uncomfortable with their content?” she asked. “Personally, I read these with awe. I cried, I laughed, and at times I was uncomfortable. In short, I engaged with the books and learned a little bit more about my own humanity.”
Larochelle continued, “Here we are tonight, because those individuals who wrote the initial challenge are not satisfied with the outcome. Those individuals are saying that compromise on the part of the school was not good enough, and I am saying there should have been no compromise.”
She quoted from a letter by Pope Francis on the value of reading novels and poems “as part of one’s path to personal maturity.”
“He closes his remarks by saying, ‘Literature can greatly stimulate the free and humble exercise of our use of reason, a fruitful recognition of the variety of human languages, a broadening of human sensibilities, and finally, a great spiritual openness to hearing the Voice that speaks through many voices.’ I urge the board to listen to the appeals, but to vote tonight to reject them and to put these books on the shelves so that all of us can walk in another’s shoes and expand our own humanity.”
Curriculum Coordinator Ariel Maloney used the legislative term “inexpedient to legislate” to describe attempts to control access to books — even through the opt-out method recommended by the book committee.
“I don’t think there’s a way to effectively manage an opt-in or opt-out system,” Maloney said.
She went on to say, “The question of determining what is appropriate is enormously challenging. ‘The Great Gatsby’ features illegal drinking, murder, and cheating. ‘Romeo and Juliet’ features sneaking around past parents, suicide, murder. ‘Of Mice and Men’ features murder again. Classic literature could be seen as being insulting to people who are developmentally challenged, and ‘East of Eden,’ which was one of the books that was being suggested as an alternative, features a woman who literally murders a brothel madam and then takes over, and was, at the time that it was published, seen as being extremely — to quote some references here — ‘repulsive due to its portrayal of violence and sexual sadism.’ I believe there’s actually a scene where a group of young boys raped a child. So I think there is danger in trying to determine what is appropriate, and who is the arbiter of that decision.”
Taking the books one at a time, the school board, with Jolly and Wendelboe voting no, sustained the Book Review Committee’s recommendation to keep the books on the shelf with an opt-out option for parents.
This post was originally published on here
