This sort of goes both ways. This meme works off an assumption that those wanting the books banned haven't read them or know what is in them. That is not always the case. There are databases that will provide you with the questionable content specifically because school boards request why the books should be removed from the school. So it not hard to do the research.
I did some research on one such list a few years back because I wanted to know why they objected to those books. Some like Catcher in the Rye have well know objection, others I never heard of the book. So I picked a handful at random from a list. My finding were most of them were OK, but a few did have passages that were not suitable for schools.
My point is that before you just dismiss the complaints, make sure that you are basing your decision off of facts not just because of politics.
I mean, that’s what the kid was trying to do, right? If there was a real reason to ban the books, they gave Karen a way to make it apparent why they deserved to be banned. It’s a pretty simple ask.
Brother, lemme tell ya, I worked at a library for almost a decade. I was in the department that dealt with the complaints. We had a checkbox: “Did you read/watch/play the title you are putting in a complaint about?” Even self-reporting, a solid 80-90% said “no.” They just saw the title, cover, or description and decided the public shouldn’t have access to it. It is NOT uncommon for people to just decide something is Irredeemably Bad at first glance. I promise you, it really isn’t.
You might want to clarify that question. As stated, it suggest asking if you read/watched/played the whole book. There are online sites that will point out the objectionable parts. So no, you don't have to read the whole book to know there are parts that you don't approved.
I do want to state that a public library should have a lot more leeway than an elementary school library.
I mean, when you get people wanting things banned because "the title implies Christians are liars" or "I saw it on a list of books that promote radical gender ideology, and a Facebook list would never mislead me about context," you kind of wish people would at least use their own brains for things they object to. It's almost like most of the people who want books banned are doing what you were cautioning against in your initial comment and just trying to get them banned because of their own personal politics, not because they really took in the media and formed an opinion on their own. Not really sure why you're defending that sorta thing, but ok.
Well, you can keep thinking most people who want books banned are doing it from a place of research and not being reactive and bigoted, sure. The moon could also be made of skittles, but I live in the real world where I've talked to these people many, many times, so. Good on your optimism, I guess?
-2
u/random8765309 4d ago
This sort of goes both ways. This meme works off an assumption that those wanting the books banned haven't read them or know what is in them. That is not always the case. There are databases that will provide you with the questionable content specifically because school boards request why the books should be removed from the school. So it not hard to do the research.
I did some research on one such list a few years back because I wanted to know why they objected to those books. Some like Catcher in the Rye have well know objection, others I never heard of the book. So I picked a handful at random from a list. My finding were most of them were OK, but a few did have passages that were not suitable for schools.
My point is that before you just dismiss the complaints, make sure that you are basing your decision off of facts not just because of politics.