Is censorship a ‘necessary evil’?

As part of my studies on the subjects of banned books and censorship, I was asked to consider whether or not censorship was a “necessary evil” in a library or classroom. In answering this question, I think we need to differentiate between selecting materials based on professional standards, and purposefully choosing not to purchase a book because we’re afraid of backlash.

There is nothing wrong with not purchasing a book if it doesn’t meet the needs of our service base: if it’s meant for older readers, for example, than the readers we serve. But we owe it to our readers to seek out books that are developmentally appropriate while offering diverse perspectives.

And care must also be taken not to use customer demographics as an easy excuse. Taking for example, books that center or acknowledge people in the LGBTQAI+ community: As librarians, we may not want to admit to ourselves that we are censoring materials by not purchasing them in the first place, so we may invent an excuse that there are “no readers” in our service area who identify as LGBTQAI+. (And when saying this, I’m assuming the perspective of a librarian who is not, themself, a member of the LGBTQAI+ community.) But telling ourselves this, doesn’t take into account that population statistics may suggest otherwise. A study by the Williams Institute, in 2017, indicated that, in California, 10 percent of students in the state’s public middle and high schools identified as LGBTQ.

This hypothetical librarian who is not, themself, queer, may not know of any readers in the community who are LGBTQAI+ because these readers have not accepted the personal risk of making themselves visible in a potentially hostile environment. That librarian needs to ask themself: what has been done to signal, however subtly, that the library is “safe” for people who may be facing harassment in the broader community? Is there something the librarian can do to signal welcome and inclusivity?

Among suggestions for “defensive librarianship” from Children & Libraries, “It’s easy to create a welcoming space with subtle touches. Unobtrusive stickers on monitors, small flags, a pronoun pin on your lanyard, even choices of colors can create an environment that feels safe to marginalized people” (Walters, 2022, p. 6).

And even if there truly is no presence of this type among a library’s service readership: well, surely all the more reason to promote greater empathy by exposing readers to the viewpoints of people who are not like them.

It’s important to remember that exposing children to stories that feature LGBTQIA+ characters isn’t about exposing children to details of sexual practices; rather it’s about “understanding, empathy, acceptance, and respecting basic human rights” (Dorr & Deskins, 2018, p. xxii).

References:
Dorr, C. & Deskins, L. (2018). LGBTQAI+ books for children and teens. ALA Editions.

Walters, J. (2022). Out of many, one: Practicing defensive librarianship. Children & Libraries, 20(4), pp. 5-7.

Williams Institute. (2017). LGBTQ youth in California’s public schools. UCLA School of Law. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/lgbtq-youth-ca-public-schools/