Book bans do nothing that is good for society at all. There it is. That’s the statement that feels so obvious but now I feel so odd for having to push it out as if it’s not common sense. Now to be clear, there is a difference between banning them and keeping them out of reach for people that are not of appropriate age to consume them, but I’m talking about the former here.
Also, just to get it out the way. This is not going to be about how banning books is on the road to burning them like a certain fascist German regime or how it’s a gigantic betrayal of the first amendment of the highest order. That is because those opinions, while I do not disagree with them, are entirely reactionary and missing one of the bigger issues that book bans present.
Book bans are the death of intellectualism and complex discussion perpetrated by whoever is electing to have them banned. Books provide so much perspective and give so much access to the multitude and expansive space that is the human experience.
And keeping people from being able to access those packaged experiences and perspectives is not only a harm intellectually for people to actually know and understand things outside of their purview, but it actively harms their ability to be empathetic, especially being robbed of these experiences at a young age.
Books give us so much and to take all that away to shield people, not just children at this point, from things you don’t think that they should know is a ridiculous notion born from the most restrictive and backwards ideas when it comes to the dissemination of ideas.
And while we’re on the subject, trying to shield children from information, especially in the age of the Internet where many parents are not actually checking on what their children are consuming (a normal and healthy way because repression doesn’t solve anything either), then they will get it anyway and more than likely not know what to do with it.
The problem with restricting access to books (or any information for that matter) that is not based on reasonable standards on who participates in the consumption of certain content, it turns into a contest on who can restrict and keep as many perspectives from their children as possible, which is ridiculous and getting entirely out of hand.
The other part of it is that the people requesting these book bans are not actually reading the books nor do they understand the context in which they are required for their child to experience them to learn about something important.
Whether it be “Catcher in the Rye” or a book about the Stonewall Riots, people should have access to books that wouldn’t hurt them with the information or perspectives it could provide.
But, then again, it all depends on what you think is harmful to people, especially children. That, however, is an entirely different conversation.
Book bans, burnings, and just restriction of information freely given to the public is a net negative in our society. It feels simple to say, but every day, everything around here gets a little more complex.