***The Iowa Standard is an independent media voice. We rely on the financial support of our readers to exist. Please consider a one-time sign of support or becoming a monthly supporter at $5, $10/month - whatever you think we're worth! If you’ve ever used the phrase “Fake News” — now YOU can actually DO something about it! You can also support us on PayPal at newsdesk@theiowastandard.com or Venmo at Iowa-Standard-2018 or through the mail at:
PO Box 112
Sioux Center, IA 51250
The Sioux Center Library checked out an adult sexually explicit book to a 13-year-old kid in August. The incident led to the child’s parents asking the library to come up with a policy that would keep the book, which even the author states is for adults only, out of the hands of kids. Whether that meant a policy to prohibit kids from checking out adult sexual material or removing the book completely, the parents went to the library board in hopes of a solution.
However, the Sioux Center Library board voted 8-1 to keep the book, which states “F (expletive) me like you hate me,” shelved in the adult section and openly available to minors.
The Sioux Center Library also stocks a book called “Identical” in the 12-year-old section of the library. This book goes into graphic detail about how a father sexually abuses his 9-year-old daughter, while the 9-year-old’s twin sister watches.
So, what was Sioux Center Library’s solution to parents’ concerns about such graphic content being made available to their children? Not to even go halfway in protecting kids.
Beginning in January, the library plans to offer a voluntary youth access card procedure. Because it requires parents to opt in, any child whose parent is unaware that the procedure exists will automatically be left unprotected. It also fails to clearly inform parents that if they grant access to the “young adult” (12-year-old) and adult sections of the library, their kids will have open access to sexually explicit content. The procedure fails to distinguish sexually explicit content from other materials and avoids using the words “sexually explicit” altogether, effectively obscuring the nature of what the policy is meant to address.
The procedure also appears to conflict with the library’s current collection development policy of unrestricted library access to every person, regardless of age. However, the library already departs from that policy by filtering internet access on computers and providing parents with children’s checkout records. So why is the Sioux Center Library willing to distance itself from ALA guidelines like this, but not willing to keep graphic sexual content out of the hands of kids?
The procedure effectively punishes kids if their parents choose to allow them only age-appropriate access. Should parents choose to prevent their children from checking out adult books, those children will be automatically barred from using already-filtered library computers and from checking out puzzles, games, and video games. These restrictions are not caused by system constraints — they exist because the library is choosing to impose them. This feels decidedly more punitive than protective.
Why should a family attempting to keep a book that states “F (expletive) me like you hate me” out of a child’s hands also lose the ability to check out games and puzzles? Well, at the December 18 board meeting, the decision to bar children from games was defended by citing that the word “butt” was present in a single game, a response that trivializes and sidesteps parents’ real concerns about graphic sexual content.
The Sioux Center Library has every right — and perhaps a basic duty — to prevent children from reading a book that states “F (expletive) me like you hate me.”
But they won’t.
They have every right to prevent children from reading a book that goes into graphic detail about a father sexually abusing his 9-year-old daughter in front of her twin sister.
But they won’t.
Many books shelved in the section intended for 12-year-olds — misleadingly labeled the “young adult” section — contain graphic sexual content. Most parents would never expect sexually explicit material to be housed there. Yet the library continues to avoid policy changes that would relocate such material to the adult section, where it belongs. As a result, this band-aid procedure set to begin in January leaves parents with little real choice: allow access to graphically explicit content or restrict their children to books far below their reading level.
Meanwhile, children continue to have access to a book that states, “F (expletive) me like you hate me.” And a book in the 12-year-old section that graphically details a father sexually abusing his 9-year-old daughter multiple times while her twin sister watches. This is the reality parents are being asked to accept — while games, puzzles and even access to already-filtered computers are restricted in the name of “protection.” That contradiction is indefensible. Half-measures — or worse, symbolic gestures — are not protection, and this so-called “procedure” fails to address the problem in any meaningful way.
READ MORE:
Good coverage of this issue. Patrons should publicly back trustee Teri Hubbard.
When will it ever end? Probably when Hell freezes over. No one on the Right is telling adults who to love or how to live. No one is attempting book bans or censorship. But there seems to be a misunderstanding of where the line should be drawn. All we are saying is leave the minor children alone. They do not need to be sexualized by pedophile adults. Let them grow up and maintain their innocence until at least the age of 16. They will figure out soon enough how to screw their lives up without the education experts and librarians fast-tracking them to social disaster at five years old.