Local News: Wyoming school district inches closer to removing sexually explicit books
The Natrona County School District introduced a proposed policy change this week that could lead to the removal of sexually explicit books from the school libraries
The Natrona County School District in Casper, Wyoming presented proposed policy changes that would add definitions regarding “learning resources” which deals with a book controversy with sexually explicit books currently available in the district’s high school libraries. The item was presented to the Board of Education at its Nov. 14 meeting.
The draft Board Policy 6233 is titled Controversial Issues which was last revised in 2000 and last reviewed in 2013. Additionally, a draft administrative regulation was also presented.
It was noted at the meeting that the policy was presented under a first reading with a vote expected on Nov. 28. It was also noted that the board will only vote on the policy, not the administrative regulations.
Like previous meetings, several public comments were made with 11 speakers on the policy. There were 29 speakers at an Oct. 10 meeting and 14 at the Oct. 24 meeting.
The difference this time is that those wanting to keep the sexually explicit books outnumbers those opposed to them, by a 7-4 margin, at the Nov. 14 meeting. Those opposed to the sexually explicit books outnumbered those supporting them 24-5 on Oct. 10 and 8-6 on Oct. 24.
Before moving forward, what is the controversy? As I previously reported, both stories linked above, several books were formally challenged by parents, but the school district chose not to remove them. In particular were “Gender Queer” and “Trans Bodies, Trans Selves,” both of which include sexually explicit images and content that is freely available in the high school libraries for minors to see.
Those books were summarized, with photos, by Cowboy State Daily. You can decide for yourself if it’s pornography, but take note the “explicit content” warning by Cowboy State Daily which read: “The following story and photos depict mature subject matter. Cowboy State Daily gently blurred nude images, but in the original books… the nude images are generally uncensored. Read at your own discretion.”
Further illustrations can be found here. Take note, the Cowboy State Daily warning would apply to that link as well.
The decision to keep those books was announced in September, but transparency (as always) is hard to come by for government. That decision was made by a reconsideration committee of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats whose salaries are derived from the theft of the citizens (otherwise known as taxation). There was no recorded vote by the Board of Education.
However, a formal appeal of that decision was filed last week by the Natrona County chapter of Moms for Liberty which will force the NCSD board to make a decision.
The Policy Changes
The policy change adds “learning resources” to the subject of controversial issues. It adds:
“The District seeks to provide library materials that would be of the greatest support to its educational objectives for the minor students in the District. The District’s libraries do not exist to provide universal coverage but instead to provide materials aimed at its pedagogical goals and for the interest, information, and enlightenment of students, not adults. The school library is not a public forum, nor is the goal to encourage views from private speakers/authors. Since school libraries are viewed as places for voluntary inquiry, library materials must be treated differently from primary learning resources materials used in the classroom. This policy provides criteria for the selection of library supplementary learning resources, focused on maximizing transparency with parents and community members while meeting student needs to provide supplemental enrichment in their learning with appropriate materials.”
Several definitions are added:
“Library learning resource materials - are for independent use by students and faculty outside of the District’s primary learning material. While primary learning resources and supplementary learning resources are both considered instructional resources, they are not the same, and the terms shall not be used interchangeably.”
“Sexually explicit images - any pictorial, three-dimensional material, or graphic novel depicting human masturbation, sexual intercourse, sexual acts, or direct physical stimulation.”
“Circulation - supplementary learning resources found in a library/media center that are available for students to review or checkout.”
It adds language regarding avoiding inappropriate material:
“The District recognizes there exists a vast array of materials with educational content. It is the District’s objective to choose material that provides educational content appropriate to students in the District over material that may provide similar content but with elements that contain sexually explicit images.”
It also adds language regarding opportunity for parent review:
“In recognizing that parents hold an essential role in the education of their children and have the right to guide what their children read, each library shall maintain a list of materials onsite or on the school library website that shows what is in circulation for students.”
The administrative regulation states a recognition of avoiding inappropriate materials and adds regulations on what materials will not be available based on grade level.
At elementary schools:
● sexually explicit images or depictions of sexual acts or simulations of such acts
● sexually explicit or implied written descriptions of sexual acts
At middle schools:
● sexually explicit images or sexually explicit acts or simulations of such acts
● following age recommendations of 14 or younger using standard reviewing sources, such as, Booklist, Voya, or School Library Journal
At high schools:
● sexually explicit images or sexually explicit acts or simulations of such acts
It states a prioritization process:
“When learning resources are being selected for the library, the librarian or library media technician, must consult with the school principal when there is questionable supplementary learning resource that may be considered in contradiction of this policy or administrative regulation prior to making the purchase. The principal, in consultation with the Director of Teaching and Learning, is responsible in making the determination as to whether or not to approve the purchase of the supplementary learning resource material in question.”
It notes that there is a reconsideration process as well as the same language as the policy regarding parental review. It also adds other parental considerations:
“In school libraries, students are afforded the opportunity to self-select texts as part of literacy development. While librarians are trained in selecting materials in accordance with Board Policy and Administrative Regulation the ultimate determination of appropriateness for a minor lies with the parent. School librarians are to encourage parents to share any considerations regarding their students’ book selections. Parents may contact the campus librarian directly and complete a form for library book or content opt-out decisions. School librarians will honor and accommodate individual requests by parents, within reason, which may include restricting specific titles or books.”
The Public Debate
The Nov. 14 meeting saw more condescension and derogatory remarks from those who want to keep the perverted books in the libraries. Those opposed to the books thanked the board for the policy and argued what was presented was a fair compromise. What should be noted is the board has not adopted the policy and made it clear there could be changes by the Nov. 28 meeting.
Those wanting to keep the sexually explicit books available to minors said the district “did not reach out to stakeholders” and claimed there was no transparency. They argued this policy was a “knee-jerk reaction.”
What should be noted is that the parents who have been seeking to have the pornographic material removed from the school libraries have been trying to do so for about a year, and the unelected committee that originally kept the books in did so without any transparency. With regards to this policy, there is now two weeks for public review.
The purveyors of perverted material called those opposed to smut liars and homophobic.
Tanis Lovercheck-Saunders, who supports the sexually explicit material, said:
“I think almost everyone in here knows that the real reason behind trying to ban these books… has to do with the fact that they are representations of the LGBTQ community. If it was more than that, there would be a lot more than those two books on there.”
Tina Dean, who also supports minors having access to the books, said those opposed to the books “don’t care about telling the truth” and called it “the same nonsense used by bigoted Americans ever since they noticed that gay people were gradually becoming accepted.”
Dean goes on to tacitly admit she knows the books in question are not educational as she said: “Imagine what we could do for the students if the crowds were this big for subjects pertaining to their education and furthering their success in life”
Additionally, Dean said the State of Wyoming has a Romeo and Juliet law allowing 15-year-olds to have consensual sex with 18-year-olds, therefore, it is right for the government schools to teach and promote sexual activity among students.
However, Jamie Lean, who opposes the books, said the age of consent is 17 years old in Wyoming. In my review, Wyoming’s age of consent is indeed 17, but it does have a Romeo and Juliet law that allows a 4-year difference that would allow Dean’s example to occur. So, I guess they’re both right. But law and morality are two different things.
Lean said:
“I’m here to tell you that we’re not here to ban books. What we’re asking you to do is to create a policy that allows us to have an opt-in program for parents that don’t mind if their students read that kind of vulgar material, they have a form they can sign that says, ‘Yes, that is fine,’ and that that literature be kept in a separate section that the librarian has to give them authorization to or retrieve the book themselves. I think that’s a far compromise.”
Renea Redding, who also opposes the books, commended the board and noted the prohibition of sexually explicit images. Redding said:
“As a community, if we put this kind of stuff in front of children, I would ask the question: How can people be ok with putting this kind of stuff in front of children? And if you’re ok with putting stuff like this in front of children, we’re not teaching. And this is what you guys are here for. You’re here to help our students learn and put their best foot forward.”
The Board’s Response
The board members who commented on the policy began with the obligatory statements that they don’t condone bullying and they value and respect the “LGBTQ” community.
Clark Jensen, the vice chair, said:
“I have a mixture of feelings concerning these two books. First, in general, I oppose the cancel culture and censorship…. We can’t just ban something because we don’t agree with it or because we’re offended by it. If we ban one book, which one is next….”
“On the other hand, just because a book is not found in a public school library does not mean it is banned or unavailable. Plus, there is a line we should not cross in our public schools. We will not all agree on where that line is, but some books and some subjects do not deserve space in our public school libraries. We should legitimately ban pornography from our public libraries, which obviously is not easy to define based on previous public comments. Plus, it is not possible to have all possible books on all possible subjects in our library….”
“I consider parents, not public school systems, to be the ultimate authority figure in regards to teaching their children about sexuality and value systems. Sex education, in general, falls into a category where values may differ greatly from one family to another. We need to be very careful that we do not undermine the value systems of families in our community.”
Jensen came to the conclusion the books should not be available in the schools.
Dave Applegate, the board’s treasurer, said the appropriate age for the books is 17-plus, and “I don’t think you have to say it’s pornographic, but I think it’s mature level, 17-plus.”
The board received legal advice from it’s attorney, Applegate said, and “removing books from a high school library does not impinge on First Amendment rights,” and “age appropriate material and educational suitability are defensible reasons for what books are purchased and managed in school libraries.”
Applegate said ultimately books of this nature should either be available for 17-plus with an opt-in from parents, or such books shouldn’t be in the libraries at all. He said: “The policy says let’s just not have mature material, and I do tend to lean that direction. But we have two weeks to talk about it.”
Trustee Kianna Smith said she doesn’t “want it to look like we’re rushing into things,” and “there very well could be changes” before the Nov. 28 vote. She said she leaned being against the policy.
Still, Nothing Surprising from Government Schools
I want to finish by reiterating some of what I concluded with in my piece about the Oct. 24 meeting. This is an issue only because we’ve decided the government should be schooling kids. It’s been stated several times that this issues sets up “competing rights.”
There is no such thing as “competing rights.” There are individual rights that we all have, regardless of what subgroup the government wants to put us in as it constantly divides us. However, when we allow the government to control every aspect of our lives, including schooling, then we allow the central planners to setup these “competing rights.”
Of course, sexually explicit books have no place in the school system. Beyond the moral depravity of these books, they simply are not academically worthy. That’s probably the most offensive thing about them. Put aside the transgender issue, the homosexual aspect. They simply are not academic. And the government has no place in teaching sex education at all. All sex education is moral education. We live in a society with many different moral beliefs. So-called “comprehensive” nor “abstinence only” sex education should be in the schools at all. But alas, the government schools shouldn’t exist in the first place.
Regardless, nothing should surprise us about this controversy. This should be expected when we allow the government to raise children. And that’s exactly what we’re doing when we allow government schools to exist.