> there were 95 books in the school library which were being questioned by some parents. Instead of removing just those books, and being accused of book banning
Would those parents really have support in your community if they were named and shamed?
Would those parents really have support in your community if they were named and shamed?
That doesn't make the school caving on the topic any more forgivable, but we can't trivialize how difficult small but dedicated groups in a local community can make things either. The community typically only shows up to worry about it after a bad decision is imminent, the small group shows up 24/7/365 pushing the issue.
I'm not saying their feelings aren't sincerely held. My point is they need community support to ban books in a public school.
What the school board did here is sneak out of the battle, which would continue long after community says "no" once.
That's where naming and shaming comes in. In a small community, there is a long-term cost to trying to game inattention.
Maybe it's not something that can be said for every community, but the same point would apply here in reverse.
That isn't most places, and it isn't that the majority is that extreme almost anywhere. But you can't make assumptions about people having the same point of view as you, or that otherwise reasonable good people believe things you consider only reasonable.
The root cause is unfortunately lost in the ensuing battle between library-defending parents and library-critiquing parents, but the ultimate fault in this situation lies in the needless and self-destructive politicization of librarian training and the lack of standards for younger librarians. They seem to lack the common sense that loud politicking is not exactly befitting of a library, nor beneficial for their ulterior motive of gradual ideological persuasion. Another sad case of politicking and safe-space-signaling ideation being prioritized over preserving institutions and professional integrity.