MAGAts Take Next Step in Thought-Control Project: Book Bans
Texas and Florida lead the nation in banning any book that does not tell the Great White Man Story
Efforts are underway by state legislators in Texas and Florida to ban a wide variety of books from school libraries, doctor’s offices and even a child’s home. Other states are following with similar legislative efforts.
Book banning is an antiquated attempt to limit the materials and points of view the reading public may access. The true effect will be to push reading underground for young people while boosting free loan services operated by public libraries and paid reading services like Kindle.
Nevertheless, book banning is back. And we will pretend, for the purposes of this essay, that the internet does not exist.
Lists vary, but this year includes some 850 unique titles and thousands of books currently under scrutiny by banning efforts in the United States. The intent as expressed by MAGA partisans is to protect children from “inappropriate and harmful materials.”
But free speech proponents argue that this is a thinly veiled attempt by far-right conservatives to erase independent thinking among young people.
; a greatly expanded definition of “pornography”; historical and fictional works regarding the experiences of Black, Latino and Native Americans; any books about race, gender or abortion; any books related to slavery; and LGBTQ+ works of any kind.
It does not take much intellectual curiosity to realize that this list represents a broad attempt to erase ethnicity, race, gender, original nations, the history of slavery, and LGBTQ+ folks from children’s minds. In other words, pretty much anything that diminishes the Great White Man myth emergent among the far-right in the United States.
While Florida and Iowa banned the most titles this past school year — 4,500 in Florida and over 3,600 in Iowa — since the Red Scare of the 1950s.
As of this writing, SB 412 has been passed by the Texas state legislature and is awaiting the governor’s signature. This new law would work to eliminate printed materials deemed “harmful” to minors and, at the same time, strip protections for teachers, librarians and parents who share “obscene” materials with children.
Persons found to have “exposed” minors to such materials will be prosecuted. These persons include school librarians, teachers, nurses and doctors, members of the clergy, and even a child’s parents. Yes, that’s right, doctors may not use flyers with line-drawings to help explain sexual health issues to young people. Parents may not use “explicit” materials to teach their own children about sex, even those sex education books with child-friendly drawings of sexual organs.
This legislation would override existing law prohibiting the dissemination of inappropriate materials to minors. But SB 412 goes further by (1) greatly expanding the range of adults who may be prosecuted, and (2) eliminating “affirmative defense,” a standard legal defense that provides exceptions for adults using these materials for educational, scientific or health-related purposes.
SB 13, another proposed Texas law, would require school boards to appoint a parent council to assess and moderate which books school libraries may be allowed to purchase. Is the book profane or indecent, and does it meet prevailing community values? Another proposed law would impact public libraries by requiring them to check children’s identification to verify their age when checking out ‘harmful” materials.
There remains some controversy about which parties will be responsible for reviewing submitted titles. Librarians argue is it not their job to determine which books are profane or indecent, or worse whether they reflect “prevailing community values.” But librarians point out that they already assess books for appropriate ages, and make these available on different shelves or in separate rooms.
When Books are Banned
Right-wing groups argue that “sexuality explicit” materials can be very harmful to children. These groups argue that such materials used in the context of school sex education classes can become a “gateway” for children to seek out pornography or become victims of predatory adults. That’s right: school sex education is a form of grooming.
The emphasis seems to be primarily on “pictorial materials,” a standard that would label even sex education books as “pornography.”
Titles most frequently targeted:
- by Maia Kobabe
- , by John Steinbeck
- by Jodi Picoult
- by John Green
- by Stephen Chbosky
- by Patricia McCormick
- by Jay Asher
- by Ellen Hopkins
- by Ellen Hopkins
- by Khaled Hosseini
- by Margaret Atwood
- by Sara Gruen
- by Ellen Hopkins
- by Sarah J. Maas
- by Sarah J. Maas
- by Sarah J. Maas
- by Sarah J. Maas
- by Sherman Alexie
- by Toni Morrison
- by Alice Walker
- t by Sarah J. Maas
Jodi Picoult, author of , the most commonly banned title of the 2023–2024 school year, points out what she believes is the reason for the ban:
“Nineteen Minutes is banned not because it’s about a school shooting, but because of a single page that depicts a date rape and uses anatomically correct words for the human body. It is not gratuitous or salacious, and it is not — as the book banners claim — porn.”
The proponents of the book ban legislation point out that “prevailing community values” will be defined by each locale in that local district attorneys will decide whether to bring charges against alleged violators. So for example, few charges are expected to be brought in Austin, while district attorneys in El Paso or Gaines and many other deep red rural communities are likely to bring charges against far more alleged violators.
According to , a leading advocate for literary freedom, there were 10,046 instances of book bans during the 2023–2024 school year across 43 states and 415 public school districts. This involved 4,231 unique titles, which is more than three times as many as the prior year.
The reports that book challenges nearly doubled nationally in 2024 and are:
“…evidence of a growing, well-organized, conservative political movement, the goals of which include removing books about race, history, gender identity, sexuality, and reproductive health from America’s public and school libraries.”
To state that American literature and the freedom to read are under assault from far-right actors now encouraged by the corrupt administration in Washington DC would be a serious understatement.
The national test for “obscenity” was long-ago established by the Supreme Court, and at that time, few school library books were targeted.
Prior to the most recent few years and states wading into the censorship arena, “obscenity” in the United States was guided by the Miller Test. The three-pronged test is named after the 1973 Supreme Court case, Miller v. California, and includes these three elements:
- Does the work, as judged by “the average person, applying contemporary community standards,” taken as a whole, appeal to the prurient (inappropriately sexual) interest?
- Does the work depict or describe, in an explicit, “patently offensive way,” sexual conduct or excretory functions as defined by state laws?
- Does the work, taken as a whole, lack serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value?
Generally, a work is deemed obscene under this test only if it meets all three criteria.
Note that acquisition systems were already in place for school libraries across the country. Many locally-elected school boards oversee school library selections. Free speech proponents argue that many of the books cited as problematic are only available in high school libraries, or upper school grades nine through twelve, where they are considered more appropriate for readers of this age.
In addition, most school districts respect parents’ rights and objections to certain materials, and permit them to remove their child from any class or restrict them from reading certain books. These conversations usually happen at the school level and have generally proved unproblematic.
Opponents to censorship legislation like that in Texas and increasingly in other states argue that teachers, librarians and now even parents will be harassed by a state of fear. As a result, many will over-correct and eliminate or avoid any book that may be in any way questionable.
And this may well be the unstated goal of this far-right censorship project.
The burning of books has a long history as a tool utilized by authorities both secular and religious, in their efforts to suppress dissenting or heretical views that are believed to pose a threat to the prevailing order. Today, with many other sources of information available through online sources, this has become a nebulous process at best.
The Real Problem: Too Many Educated Readers
If our public school education in reading and writing was not as good as it is, we would not have this problem today. There would be far fewer readers, and very likely far fewer books published. Then there is the pesky First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
But Congress does not oversee local school boards. According to the , every public school district is governed by a local school board, elected by members of their community. The board members (sometimes called trustees) represent their constituents’ diverse opinions and values, and they are residents of the school district they serve.
They are also very good at erasing children of Black, Latino or Native American descent, adolescent boys and girls struggling to understand how their bodies are changing, and any child who is gay-curious, queer or leaning nonbinary.
Of course state laws like those in Texas, Florida and Iowa effectively override local school boards and the actions they are permitted to take. Any serious disputes will be taken up by the courts, and if a class action were to develop from multiple states, the matter would eventually be decided by the Supreme Court.
Gender Queer by Maia Kobabe
The graphic memoir by Maia Kobabe, published in 2020, quickly rose to the top of the “most challenged books” list as far right extremists rallied to identify it as “the most dangerous book in America.” This despite the fact that many of these far-right actors clearly never bothered to read the book. While extremely well done as a graphic literary work, the book is certainly both graphic (in the literal sense) and queer.
As noted by opinion blogger , Kobabe “explores eir gender journey to finding a nonbinary identity and comfort in asexuality.” In a review of the book by a New Jersey school district, Price quotes from the school board meeting:
“What action are you requesting the district consider? The book needs to be removed asap as well as those responsible for purchasing this book and distributing it to the library need to be investigated and charged accordingly.”
The complaints from book banners? That the graphic memoir includes “sexually explicit drawings,” and that “there are images of pedophilia and child pornography,” none of which is true. Some of the challengers have demanded that criminal charges be brought against any librarian who dares to have Gender Queer on school library shelves.
So far, although police are showing up in school libraries across the country, not a single district attorney has deemed it necessary to bring charges against a school librarian.
Price suggests that there is nothing legally obscene in the book, nor anything sexually titillating. The story follows the author’s difficult journey through adolescence and his struggle with sexual identity.
I have personally reviewed the book and found a few pages that most certainly set-off book banners’ alarm bells, but not for the reasons they claim. At 240 pages in length, I found five pages that we can be sure sparked the controversy:
Page 12: An image of a blood-stained menstrual napkin as Kobabe, then an eleven year old girl, is confused and horrified over her first period.
Page 60–61: Kobabe recalls xe was “11 or 12 years old” when he began masturbating (shown fully clothed), imagined having a penis, and also imagined lying naked with a boy. The boys are shown backside naked and kissing.
Page 124: Kobabe is sent to a gynecologist for er first pelvic exam. Xe recalls xirs intense embarrassment about removing xirs clothes, and in one panel we see er in full frontal nudity with cartoon breasts and pubic hair.
Pages 138–139: Kobabe comes across a web comic that displays a bullet vibrator and the girl promoter reflecting on her first orgasm and what a “lovely” experience it was. Kobabe wonders if xe has even had an orgasm, xe buys the vibrator, but can’t figure out what to do with it.
Pages 166–167: Kobabe, now in his twenties, is shown working at the local library when he receives a series of texts from a boy xe has been dating. The boy tells about buying a strap-on dildo and they anticipate using it. The boy also texts about giving Kobabe a “blow job” and having er “cock in my mouth.” The next panel shows Kobabe imagining sex with the boy, where xe is wearing the dildo and xirs boyfriend is sucking on the plastic toy. Xe quickly gives up on this idea, since he cannot imagine why this would be interesting.
None of this material meets the “obscene” standard as set forth by the 1973 Supreme Court case, Miller v. California. Nor is there anything that can be construed as “sexually explicit drawings” or “pedophilia and child pornography.” That is, unless you find a cartoon image of a young girl’s breasts and public hair sexually stimulating.
The attacks on this and similar books are not about obscenity, but rather attempts to erase those who celebrate LGBTQ+ identities.
xirself wrote in 2021, “[r]emoving or restricting queer books in libraries and schools is like cutting a lifeline for queer youth, who might not yet even know what terms to ask Google to find out more about their own identities, bodies and health.”
Who Reads?
Until the development of the printing press, books were read only by the privileged classes, news was disseminated in the public square, and common folks in most parts of the world were illiterate. Secular and religious authorities did not worry about dissenting or heretical views among commoners except as hearsay in the public square.
Printed books and the development of widespread literacy changed all that. Now far-right extremists must contend with a wide variety of books read by many, many people. Diverse people with diverse opinions, points of view and personal identities.
Someone needs to tell the book banners that their mythical world of the Great White Man is gone. Now common folks are able to obtain and read books and develop their own ideas. The far-right is horrified.
As in Ray Bradbury’s 1953 dystopian novel, , a book repeatedly banned, the state approved information source is television. This is a medium wherein large corporate entities can be pressured to conform while far-right alternative news stations are promoted and utilized for official communication.
The far-right need not go through the trouble of banning or, as in Bradbury’s work, burning books. All they need to do is lower school reading standards to such a point where few know how to read.
Vic Caldarola is the founder and lead facilitator of the , a men’s mindfulness discussion program. He holds a PhD in Communication Studies.
