Parents and Teachers Clash Over "Sexually Explicit" Material
Parents and Teachers Clash as School Board Addresses “Sexually Explicit” Material
Lexington School Board discusses new guidelines at monthly meeting following the controversial removal of two books from Lylburn Downing Middle School last month
(Rockbridge County residents crowd a middle school cafeteria during a controversial meeting of the Lexington City School Board, Oct. 3, 2023. Photo- The Spectator)
Finding seats where they could, parents, teachers, camera crews, and reporters gathered Tuesday evening at Lylburn Downing Middle School (LDMS), eager to learn whether the Lexington City School Board condoned what many are labeling a children’s “book ban.”
Calls to attend the October 3, 2023 board meeting grew after educators removed two books — Kiss Number 8 by Colleen Venable and It’s Perfectly Normal by Robie Harris — from that same middle school last month.
The first book, a graphic novel which a local fourth-grade teacher had urged the board to remove due to content she deemed sexually explicit and anti-Christian, prompted waves of both praise and condemnation from the Rockbridge County community.
Despite the impassioned views of Tuesday’s attendees, School Board Chair Tim Diette clarified during the LIVESTREAMED board meeting that “no action will be taking place today” regarding the policies discussed. “That means if you did not get the chance to comment today,” Diette continued, “you can provide a comment over the next month…about what actions you’re hoping we take in November.”
While further action is pending board approval, Superintendent Rebecca Walters presented an extensive draft of proposed reforms to the Lexington City Schools (LCS) book-selection and -maintenance process. Following the board’s discussion of this proposal, they opened the session to public comment, which 33 attendees had signed up for.
The “essential question” before the board, Walters declared, is “How are books and materials currently selected for our school libraries?”
Currently, the school librarian — “with input from other faculty” — selects material after “considering the interests of the readers, reviewing recommended and award-winning books, reviewing diverse authors and experiences,” and supporting the Virginia Standards of Learning.
Walters acknowledged that “not every book is read before it is added to the collection,” and that “[t]he middle school library is a bit of a ‘gray area’ where the challenge is providing books…that will meet the needs and interests of 10-14 year olds,” the age range of most LDMS students.
During the public comments session that followed, multiple speakers acknowledged that their children or grandchildren are within that age range at LDMS.
Elizabeth Braman, whose letter originally sparked the controversy, has five children currently enrolled in LCS. Questioning “the judgment and intentions of anyone” who approves of Kiss Number 8’s content, Braman declared on Tuesday, “These books should never have been chosen for this library in the first place.”
“My family cannot be part of any organization that would…provide a book to children that sexualizes Jesus on the cross,” Braman continued.
(Page from Kiss Number 8 criticized in Elizabeth Braman’s open letter)
Critics of the book's removal, however, defended the judgment of library professionals.
Jemma Levy, a Lexington resident, said that librarians “have specialized training, advanced degrees, and must be accredited by the ALA [American Library Association]. This is why we trust them to make decisions about materials in the school library, because they have skills, knowledge, and insight that laypeople do not.”
“To deny other children’s access to that book is appalling,” Levy continued.
Parent and VMI librarian Elizabeth Kocevar-Weidinger told the board that the LDMS library catalog is fully searchable [and] fully transparent, by anyone. Each book is justified by professionally established reading…and interest levels,” which guides “professionally trained library specialists in selecting the materials.”
Others, like Anne Russek, whose granddaughter attends LDMS, questioned the parameters being used in libraries to determine what is appropriate for the middle school age group. Russek cited inconsistent definitions of “young adult” across disciplines: the age range covers anywhere from 10-24 years within the medical and international community, while the ALA defines “Young Adult” (YA) at a narrower 12-18 years.
“The literary community has taken great liberty to redefine that term [YA]...which takes the term child away from children,” Russek said.
Definitions of terms continued to confront the school board last night.
A state law adopted by LCS in December 2022 defines “sexually explicit content” as “any description…picture, photograph, drawing…or similar visual representation depicting sexual bestiality, a lewd exhibition of nudity,...sexual conduct, or sadomasochistic abuse…coprophilia, urophilia, or fetishism.”
After reading this definition at Tuesday’s board meeting, Superintendent Walters said that she and LDMS Principal Abbott Keesee had previously “stated that it was our professional opinion that students ages 10-14 should not be exposed to sexually explicit material, as defined in this policy, through materials provided at our school.”
“As a public school library serving elementary or middle school students, I am making a recommendation that we not allow open access to explicit materials. A school library is unlike a public library in that it is not intended to provide everything to every student. Criteria for the selection of material in public school libraries is dependent on the goals and objectives of the educational institution of which the library is a part of. Students can have alternative means to access books or materials that have not been included in the school’s library collection,” Walters continued.
To this end, Walters proposed several policy revisions modeled on ALA standards, ‘includ[ing] a recommendation prohibiting explicitly graphic, violent, vulgar, obscene, and sexually explicit content.”
Kate Shester, a member of the school board, asked Walters multiple questions about her proposal and how one might gauge whether content is “excessive” enough to be prohibited.
“What I may think is excessively violent or obscene,” may not be seen as “excessively violent” to someone else, Shester said.
Shester also asked if books with very important content or messages “may be worth” including in the collection, even if they “have some [explicit] language.”
Michael Saunders, another board member, responded to Shester’s concern by stating that such nuanced consideration would fall to the review committee’s judgment.
The process to review a specific book was also outlined in Walters’ report.
To begin, Walters proposed separating the procedure into two categories: “instructional materials” — which “are used for completion of an assignment or as part of an academic or extracurricular program” — and “library materials.”
While the processes would be nearly identical, the initial “school-level review” following a complainant's “Request for Reconsideration” would involve the principal and either the teacher (for instructional materials) or the librarian (for library materials).
If the two school officials agree with the complainant, the “materials can be removed without moving through the formal review committee process,” Walters explained.
If the two cannot agree, a committee composed of those two individuals and three others — “a teacher, a division employee…and a parent other than the complainant” — will convene.
The complainant can appeal the committee’s decision to the superintendent and then to the school board. Ultimately, “[t]he action taken at the highest level of review will remain in effect for a period of four (4) years,” the policy draft states.
David Toomey, a local opposed to the recent book removal, said during public comment, “I am pleased to see in this draft policy that it sounds like no longer can books be unilaterally removed.”
David Ryan, who expressed his support for Kiss Number 8’s removal, agreed that, “A better system of review should help going forward.”
Some community members shared a concern that the growing scrutiny over content might discourage the library from bringing new books in at all, and one speaker even called the two-person initial review process “anti-democratic.”
Others in attendance spoke about the personal ramifications that this controversy has had on individual members of the LGBTQ community.
Perhaps the most-applauded speech, Alyssa Astphan spoke about the “incredibly challenging” last few weeks for her wife — LDMS librarian Theresa Bridge — and family.
Astphan condemned the ”harassing” and “homophobic” slurs levied against Bridge on social media. “The impact she has had on so many students is immeasurable,” she continued, and “it’s disheartening to read the horrible things people are saying about her when they have no idea…how deeply she cares about her students.”
Barring a couple brief interruptions from disgruntled audience members, the meeting was generally amicable.
In interviews with The Spectator shortly before the meeting began, both Braman and Chris Gavaler — an outspoken defender of Kiss Number 8 — expressed their desire that everyone’s voice be heard.
“What I hope most is that there is a sharing of information,” Braman began. “I am all for debate. I am all for freedom of speech…I’m here to listen, to make sure I understand all the different pieces that people care about in this, and to make a decision on behalf of what's best for my own children.”
“I hope everyone who wants the opportunity to speak can speak. I hope people can in an orderly, friendly way,…state their opinion,” Gavaler told The Spectator. “I have my own preferences and opinions, but we need a verifiable, simple way to determine whether a text is appropriate for the middle school.”
(Chris Gavaler holds up a copy of proposed policy changes during public comment. Photo- The Spectator)
