This week, 22 September thru 28 September, is Banned Books Week. According to the American Library Association (ALA) …
Banned Books Week (September 22-28, 2019) is an annual event celebrating the freedom to read. Typically held during the last week of September, it spotlights current and historical attempts to censor books in libraries and schools. It brings together the entire book community â librarians, booksellers, publishers, journalists, teachers, and readers of all types â 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 was launched in the 1980s, a time of increased challenges, organized protests, and the Island Trees School District v. Pico (1982) Supreme Court case, which ruled that school officials canât ban books in libraries simply because of their content.
And yet … and yet, schools and libraries are still banning books. Take a look at some that were banned just last year …
- George by Alex Gino â banned because it features a transgender character
- A Day in the Life of Marlon Bundo by Jill Twiss â banned for LGBTQ content, political & religious viewpoints
- Captain Underpants series by Dav Pilkey â banned because it includes a same-sex couple, and also was felt to âencourage disruptive behaviour’
Are you starting to see a pattern here? How the heck are we ever to break the chain of homophobia if we donât allow young people to be exposed to the LGBT community???
- Drama by Raina Telgemeier â banned because it features LGBTQ characters
- Thirteen Reasons Why by Jay Asher â banned because it deals with teen suicide
- Skippyjon Jones series by Judy Schachner â banned because the lead character, a Siamese cat, âdepicts cultural stereotypesâ
- This Day in June by Gayle E. Pitman â banned because of illustrations of a Pride parade
Good grief.
In 2018, more than half the books that drew complaints did so because they contained LGBTQ content, according to ALA. Other reasons include profanity, sexually explicit content, religious viewpoints and materials that candidly portray injustices and inequality experienced by people of color.
Now, mind you I do understand that there is such a thing as age-appropriate content, and I wouldnât necessarily want a third-grade child to be reading Mein Kampf. But, to ban books because they might open a young readers mind to the possibility that there are other acceptable lifestyles and viewpoints besides the ones they are exposed to at home is simply narrow-minded bigotry.
In 2017, The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini was banned because some felt it would âlead to terrorismâ and âpromote Islamâ. How is that not racist and Islamophobic? In the same year, To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee was challenged because of the use of the âN-wordâ. Heck, when I was 10 years old, I was bedridden for a period of time, and every evening my father would read to me from Catcher in the Rye!!! I suppose todayâs society would be aghast, yes?
In 2016, the Little Bill series written by Bill Cosby was banned because of the sexual allegations against Mr. Cosby … not because of anything in the books, and frankly I have read those books to my granddaughter and it is an excellent series. But some, it seems, would throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Some that have been banned in yearâs past … makes no sense at all …
- The Giving Tree by Shel Silverstein was banned because it was interpreted as being sexist. Some readers believe that the young boy continually takes from the female tree, without ever giving anything in return. As the boy grows up, he always comes back to the tree when he needs something, taking until the tree has nothing left to give him.
- The Lorax by Dr. Seuss was banned … this one will really make you roll your eyes … because it was believed to portray logging in a poor light and would turn children against the foresting industry.
- Where the Wild Things Are by Maurice Sendak has been challenged numerous times, as it is considered by some âtoo darkâ, and psychologically damaging and traumatizing to young children due to Maxâs inability to control his emotions and his punishment of being sent to bed without dinner.
Today, with the far-right evangelicals attempting to impose their own beliefs on society as a whole … a group that is anti-LGBT, anti-womenâs rights, anti-immigrants, anti-everyone-who-is-not-Christian … it is more important than ever that we guard against censorship in our schools and libraries. Books open pathways in our minds, delight us with the unknown, and teach … teach us about other cultures, other lifestyles. I find it frightening that some communities would stifle the knowledge and pleasure that is to be found in books of all sorts. Censorship is just another form of bigotry.
For those who might not have been aware, this week, September 23-29, is Banned Books Week. Because I seem to have slipped back into the rabbit hole and cannot bring myself to write about any of the detritus swirling about in cyberspace today, I am instead writing about Banned Books Week.
Thirteen Reasons Why has been challenged and banned for discussing suicide. Well, guess what folks? Not discussing something doesnât make it go away! Suicide among teens is a very real concern, for the teen years are a time of transition, a time when hormones are going crazy and life is confusing. It happens. Kids kill themselves. Not talking about it doesnât make it go away! Parents rarely talk to their kids about suicide, fearing that an open, frank discussion might put the idea into their head. Perhaps this book is just the ticket for giving kids a better grasp of how to deal with their problems, what to do when they feel there is no other way out.




Mr. Zawadski has filed a lawsuit and is represented by Lambda Legal, an LGBT rights law firm and advocacy organization based in New York. The owners of the funeral home, Ted and Henrietta Brewer, deny that they refused to pick up the body or that they made the comment, but their attorney offers no other explanation.
It has been my experience that people of one âminorityâ are generally more tolerant of all, but such is not the case with Roger Jimenez of Verity Baptist Church in Sacramento, California. While most in our nation are mourning the murders of 49 people in a nightclub in Orlando, Florida last weekend, Jimenez had this to say, âI think thatâs great. I think that helps society. You know, I think Orlando, Fla., is a little safer tonight. The tragedy is that more of them didnât die. The tragedy is â Iâm kind of upset that he didnât finish the job!â What a JERK!
Point in case:Â Last week, Mr. Gohmert gave a speech to the House of Representatives stating that in the event of an asteroid colliding with earth, we would need to establish a space colony by putting people in a “space ship that can go, as Matt Damon did in the movie [The Martian], plant a colony somewhere, we can have humans survive this terrible disaster about to befall, if you could decide what 40 people you put on the spacecraft that would save humanity, how many of those would be same-sex couples? You’re wanting to save humankind for posterity, basically a modern-day Noah, you have that ability to be a modern day Noah, you can preserve life. How many same-sex couples would you take from the animal kingdom and from humans to put on a spacecraft to perpetuate humanity and the wildlife kingdom?”