A Colorado library patron recently challenged a children’s picture book about a gay wedding, Uncle Bobby’s Wedding. Librarian Jamie LaRue has posted his response to the patron, which takes the form of a long, thoughtful, and patient essay. A few choice excerpts:
You feel that a book about gay marriage is inappropriate for young children. But another book in our collection, “Daddy’s Roommate,” was requested by a mother whose husband left her, and their young son, for another man. She was looking for a way to begin talking about this with son. Another book, “Alfie’s Home,” was purchased at the request of another mother looking for a way to talk about the suspected homosexuality of her young son from a Christian perspective. There are gay parents in Douglas County, right now, who also pay taxes, and also look for materials to support their views. We don’t have very many books on this topic, but we do have a handful.
In short, most of the books we have are designed not to interfere with parents’ notions of how to raise their children, but to support them. But not every parent is looking for the same thing.
[...]
What harm has this book done to anyone? Your seven year old told you, “Boys are not supposed to marry.” In other words, you have taught her your values, and those values have taken hold. That’s what parents are supposed to do, and clearly, exposure to this book, or several, doesn’t just overthrow that parental influence. It does, of course, provide evidence that not everybody agrees with each other; but that’s true, isn’t it?
[...]
Finally, then, I conclude that “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding” is a children’s book, appropriately categorized and shelved in our children’s picture book area. I fully appreciate that you, and some of your friends, strongly disagree with its viewpoint. But if the library is doing its job, there are lots of books in our collection that people won’t agree with; there are certainly many that I object to. Library collections don’t imply endorsement; they imply access to the many different ideas of our culture, which is precisely our purpose in public life.
Quillblog might have been tempted to just go with, “We’re not here to cater to your bigotry,” but LaRue’s is undoubtedly the more admirable and effective approach.
As a librarian who faced a similar challenge to the children’s book And Tango Makes Three, I applaud both LaRue’s calmness and eloquence. Sadly, my experience is that the people who make these challenges are not, on the whole, the sort of people who value reasoned discourse.