Why are any schools allowing this in their libraries?

[tabbycatstripy]

There was a mini scandal over a Catholic school in Southwark last month, with complaints to the Archbishop from a Tory MP (Eliot Colburn), after an invitation to a writer to come and promote his books and talk to the kids was withdrawn because his books were judged by the diocese to be ‘outside what is permissible in a Catholic school’. Complaints were made to Ofsted, the governors were dismissed by the diocese, and apparently the HT, who wanted the visit to go ahead, was at odds with the church.

So far so normal.

Twitter then went crazy in support of this writer, saying the books were lovely, fun, inclusive, with hardly any sexual content, and it was all so homophobic.

Anyway, I just saw an extract from the book:

twitter.com/dolphinmaria/status/1503490597931339785?s=21&t=0ZURhjXM1Ln6esoraw6Ilw

Why does a Tory MP (or any adult) think this content is suitable for adolescents?

Why is any librarian placing books in KS3 collections that talk this explicitly about (and trivialise) anal sex, oral sex, and porn?

The op may be referencing a different school, but the Southwark school I know where there was a controversy about this author visiting was a Catholic Primary School, not a secondary. In that context the book and author visit was wholly inappropriate. I would have no issue with this being in a KS4 section of a school library, but I would not want it in my dd's primary school library, or to have this author visit her school.

I also completely understand how the way the Lord's Prayer is treated is offensive to Christians and they have the right not to invite that offensive content into their schools.

@tabbycatstripy

‘So if they did put that on a sixth form shelf and a parent found out and wanted to challenge them around legality what would they do?’

They could take it to the governors, complain to Ofsted or - ultimately, if the issue wasn’t resolved - have the matter heard in court to establish whether the school has acted unlawfully.

Lol, Okay. So that's exactly what happened in this case plus an MP (you know, the ones who make the laws you understand so well) and the law seems to come down on the opposing side to you.

So perhaps you don't understand it as much as you think you do? That are else you don't agree with it in which case why are you using it as a defence?

‘ It’s also incredibly regressive to equate exposure to gay people (all fine) with exposure to over sexualised stuff like this. What about books where gay people bring up kids together in suburbia! That would be radical representation. This isn’t suitable for a school at all.’

I agree. It’s reductive.

‘So that's exactly what happened in this case plus an MP (you know, the ones who make the laws you understand so well) and the law seems to come down on the opposing side to you.’

Plus an MP what?

@AuntyPonsonby

That looks like an account of fairly standard schoolboy homophobic bullying to me. I'm pretty sure that the rest of the book portrays the bullies negatively. That's what's important. I really have no problem with the language at all, and I think your moral panic is a little bit ridiculous.

Oh FFS. I'm utterly fed up with seeing objections to children viewing sexually explicit content dismissed as a 'moral panic'.

@tabbycatstripy

‘So that's exactly what happened in this case plus an MP (you know, the ones who make the laws you understand so well) and the law seems to come down on the opposing side to you.’

Plus an MP what?

An MP in addition to the other things you listed. They all seem to think that book is lawful.

‘An MP in addition to the other things you listed. They all seem to think that book is lawful.’

An MP was just convicted of sexually assaulting a teenage boy. I don’t care if they think the book is appropriate or not. I don’t.

Good book. Deals with difficult themes. Uses the occasional shocking phrase and is situated on the curriculum so that language can be critiqued in a safe environment

Not comparable to a book sitting in a kids’ library with a whole passage of highly sexualised content, that kids can read without guidance or critique

School libraries will hold copies of all the books which are used in class. So actually any student could pick up and read Of Mice and Men at any point.

@tabbycatstripy

‘What I'm gathering from this, is that you do not trust professionals other than those who hold the same moral values as you.’

I treat other professionals as I expect them to treat me: with ordinary professional respect, putting the interests of the students and my legal responsibilities before that professional respect.

Except you're not treating me, a professional Librarian with 20 years experience in this area, with any kind of respect. You have chosen to ignore that libraries have a selection criteria that helps us to chose the books that are most suitable for the readership we are serving. If this is a school then that will include all of the statuary criteria you have mentioned. This selection criteria will have been agreed by the Head and Governors.

If you disagree with the choice of book then you need to ask to see the criteria that this book was selected against. If it was selected inappropriately against the criteria then it needs to be removed. If it was selected appropriately against the criteria but it is decided that this is not the sort of book the school wants on their shelves then the whole selection criteria needs to be re-examined. This could potentially lead to other books that are set texts or particular favourites of teachers being removed.

‘School libraries will hold copies of all the books which are used in class. So actually any student could pick up and read Of Mice and Men at any point.’

That’s true. But it doesn’t present highly sexualised content like this one does. It uses (if I remember rightly) one racial slur (and some people argue children shouldn’t be exposed to that word at all).

But as above, schools have specific statutory responsibilities to make sure materials are age-appropriate and to have regard to the fact that exposing children to sexualised materials is not done carelessly, or it can amount to grooming and CSE. I don’t think this book meets that threshold, but I think it’s inappropriate for students in the earlier years of secondary.

‘If you disagree with the choice of book then you need to ask to see the criteria that this book was selected against.’

No, you are mistaken. If I have a safeguarding concern it is my statutory duty to report it, and your appeal for me to respect your judgment (stranger on internet) over my own would be inappropriate in a school setting.

@tabbycatstripy

‘School libraries will hold copies of all the books which are used in class. So actually any student could pick up and read Of Mice and Men at any point.’

That’s true. But it doesn’t present highly sexualised content like this one does. It uses (if I remember rightly) one racial slur (and some people argue children shouldn’t be exposed to that word at all).

But as above, schools have specific statutory responsibilities to make sure materials are age-appropriate and to have regard to the fact that exposing children to sexualised materials is not done carelessly, or it can amount to grooming and CSE. I don’t think this book meets that threshold, but I think it’s inappropriate for students in the earlier years of secondary.

Please see my previous message about selection criteria.

Rhubarb, we’re going to continue to disagree so I’ll leave it there.

@tabbycatstripy

‘If you disagree with the choice of book then you need to ask to see the criteria that this book was selected against.’

No, you are mistaken. If I have a safeguarding concern it is my statutory duty to report it, and your appeal for me to respect your judgment (stranger on internet) over my own would be inappropriate in a school setting.

Yes, report it.

And then they will look at how the book got into the library and this will lead them to a the agreed selection criteria. And if it is deemed that the book should not be there then the selection criteria should be changed.

If I were your school librarian and not a stranger on the internet, then I'm still not sure you would respect my professional judgement.

‘The people who wanted the author banned believe his books promote a "lifestyle choice" (homosexuality). Do you agree that this was a good reason for the cancellation?’

Sorry, I missed this (wasn’t swerving at all). I don’t think homosexuality is a “lifestyle choice”. I would welcome a gay author of books I thought were appropriate to the target age group coming to talk to kids about inclusion.

In a Catholic school there is another issue, and that is that they have a duty to uphold Catholic teachings. And practising Catholics often do think homosexuality is sinful (although many don’t), and it’s possible a writer visit would step over a line there. I think there would still be merit in it if the material was appropriate.

‘If I were your school librarian and not a stranger on the internet, then I'm still not sure you would respect my professional judgement.’

No, we would disagree. You think American Psycho should be on school shelves. I think that’s bonkers. So we would have a massive clash of opinion there.

@tabbycatstripy

Rhubarb, we’re going to continue to disagree so I’ll leave it there.

It's not disagreement. I agree that some material should not be in a school library (as I said at the very beginning).

But these choices are made by professionals, with experience, having read the book, using an agreed criteria that includes safeguarding. That's the part you seem to be missing. It's not just about knee jerk reactions to individual books and authors.

@tabbycatstripy

‘If I were your school librarian and not a stranger on the internet, then I'm still not sure you would respect my professional judgement.’

No, we would disagree. You think American Psycho should be on school shelves. I think that’s bonkers. So we would have a massive clash of opinion there.

See my post above. You gave American Psycho as a specific example. I have deliberately not mentioned any specific title because it may or may not fit with the selection criteria for the specific collection.

‘But these choices are made by professionals, with experience, having read the book, using an agreed criteria that includes safeguarding. That's the part you seem to be missing. It's not just about knee jerk reactions to individual books and authors.’

But the bit you are missing is that our statutory responsibilities apply to us as individuals. We don’t get to say “someone else thinks this is fine” if we don’t. We are obligated to raise any and all safeguarding concerns, which is exactly as it should be, because it mitigates against the dangers of herd behaviour that puts kids in danger.

‘The librarian thinks it’s okay and there’s a set of criteria’ does not exonerate me if I ignore a risk to a child.

@tabbycatstripy

‘But these choices are made by professionals, with experience, having read the book, using an agreed criteria that includes safeguarding. That's the part you seem to be missing. It's not just about knee jerk reactions to individual books and authors.’

But the bit you are missing is that our statutory responsibilities apply to us as individuals. We don’t get to say “someone else thinks this is fine” if we don’t. We are obligated to raise any and all safeguarding concerns, which is exactly as it should be, because it mitigates against the dangers of herd behaviour that puts kids in danger.

‘The librarian thinks it’s okay and there’s a set of criteria’ does not exonerate me if I ignore a risk to a child.

Are you actually reading any of my posts properly?

1. Books are selected on an agreed with the school criteria.
2. If you suspect a risk from the collection, report it.
3. The book and the criteria will then be examined and a decision made.

There has to be a process to be followed otherwise any old rubbish will end up on the shelves for anyone to read (e.g. American Psycho) and then there really will be trouble. Who could defend the position that 'well we thought it would be ok?'. Same with Risk Assessments. They need to be done so that it's not just someone's opinion that going for a walk is too dangerous for the children.

I am reading them, yes. You objected (initially) to my insistence that I would report my own concern, appealing to my professionalism, and I pointed out that I would still have a responsibility to report, and now we agree.

There we go.

Criteria can be wrong. They can be misapplied. Things get missed.

In my opinion, this is an example of someone missing something, or having bad judgment about what is appropriate for kids. That’s all.

@tabbycatstripy

There was a mini scandal over a Catholic school in Southwark last month, with complaints to the Archbishop from a Tory MP (Eliot Colburn), after an invitation to a writer to come and promote his books and talk to the kids was withdrawn because his books were judged by the diocese to be ‘outside what is permissible in a Catholic school’. Complaints were made to Ofsted, the governors were dismissed by the diocese, and apparently the HT, who wanted the visit to go ahead, was at odds with the church.

So far so normal.

Twitter then went crazy in support of this writer, saying the books were lovely, fun, inclusive, with hardly any sexual content, and it was all so homophobic.

Anyway, I just saw an extract from the book:

twitter.com/dolphinmaria/status/1503490597931339785?s=21&t=0ZURhjXM1Ln6esoraw6Ilw

Why does a Tory MP (or any adult) think this content is suitable for adolescents?

Why is any librarian placing books in KS3 collections that talk this explicitly about (and trivialise) anal sex, oral sex, and porn?

Nope. Never said don't report. I'd never say don't report. If you have a concern then you report it. First rule of safeguarding.

I was relaying information on how this book will have been chosen which is what you asked in the first place.

‘I was relaying information on how this book will have been chosen which is what you asked in the first place’

Did I? I don’t believe I did ask that.

I see what you mean. No (and obviously!) the question was rhetorical. I think a librarian who chooses this book for selection in a school (not for older teens but for younger ones) is showing poor judgment. They are bound by the same legislation and safeguarding policies as teachers and they need to do better than this.

Why is any librarian placing books in KS3 collections that talk this explicitly about (and trivialise) anal sex, oral sex, and porn?

A quote from your original post.