The question that never seems to get asked in any of this “censorship/ban” conversation: Why are authors of YA and child books writing books with such controversial content? Should they? And why are the publishers encouraging them?
This never used to be a problem because both authors and publishers just knew better than to “go there.” Now, it’s like a race to go there. Whatever restraint existed has been blown up, and it has left parents scrambling to hold back the flood when the authors and publishers used be the gatekeepers.
Why are authors of YA and child books writing books with such controversial content?
A better question would be to ask what makes them controversial according to some in the first place. YA means a young adult, so a teenager to someone in their early twenties. As such, YA books will naturally have content in them which said demographic finds relatable, including, you guessed it, sex (which in turn makes them "controversial)! This is only controversial because a loud group of people wish to be a moral police.
Should they?
Yes.
Why are the publishers encouraging them?
Publishers encourage authors to write books which make them money.
This never used to be a problem because both authors and publishers just knew better than to “go there
This part is just not true. In the US there have been moral outcries over literature targeted for kids or teenagers since mass publishing came into relevancy.
Why are authors of YA and child books writing books with such controversial content?
In large part because something being controversial says very little about whether or not it is suitable for children. For example, books about gay or transgender people are often considered to be controversial and plenty of people argue that such books are not suitable for children. But why? Gay and transgender people exist. Reading a book about it isn’t going to turn someone gay or transgender. Similarly, books that involve romance and and even cut to black sex scenes are common enough in the YA space and rarely controversial until the people involved are queer. In effect, this controversy is controversial because the people who don’t think this kind of thing is a problem don’t understand why someone else thinks that it is.
And on the other side of the controversy is people who recognize things such as gay and transgender people actually exist and that they, like literally everyone else on the planet, like to read stuff featuring characters who are similar to them! A transgender kid worried that they’ll never find a romantic partner is going to want a bit of escapist YA reading for exactly the same reason that countless other kids who have no idea how to go about the whole romance thing. A gay kid will want to read stories set in a word where things work out for a gay kid. For that matter, more than a few queer kids might unexpectedly find themselves in reading a book, potentially skipping over a great deal of very dangerous, heartbreaking work that is so often required. And these people generally recognize that, sure, some parent might have a reason to disagree and begrudgingly admit that said parent has a right to do so, but why would that right extend to anyone else’s kids? After all, if such a book were banned, you’re right back at the same problem only now the roles are reversed.
Who is really helped by this? Certainly not the queer kids, or the other children who might read such a book and realize that queer people are just people.
The question that never seems to get asked in any of this “censorship/ban” conversation: Why are authors of YA and child books writing books with such controversial content? Should they? And why are the publishers encouraging them?
This never used to be a problem because both authors and publishers just knew better than to “go there.” Now, it’s like a race to go there. Whatever restraint existed has been blown up, and it has left parents scrambling to hold back the flood when the authors and publishers used be the gatekeepers.
A better question would be to ask what makes them controversial according to some in the first place. YA means a young adult, so a teenager to someone in their early twenties. As such, YA books will naturally have content in them which said demographic finds relatable, including, you guessed it, sex (which in turn makes them "controversial)! This is only controversial because a loud group of people wish to be a moral police.
Yes.
Publishers encourage authors to write books which make them money.
This part is just not true. In the US there have been moral outcries over literature targeted for kids or teenagers since mass publishing came into relevancy.
By “controversial content”, do you mean the existence of queer and trans people in the world and an inclusive narrative?
In large part because something being controversial says very little about whether or not it is suitable for children. For example, books about gay or transgender people are often considered to be controversial and plenty of people argue that such books are not suitable for children. But why? Gay and transgender people exist. Reading a book about it isn’t going to turn someone gay or transgender. Similarly, books that involve romance and and even cut to black sex scenes are common enough in the YA space and rarely controversial until the people involved are queer. In effect, this controversy is controversial because the people who don’t think this kind of thing is a problem don’t understand why someone else thinks that it is.
And on the other side of the controversy is people who recognize things such as gay and transgender people actually exist and that they, like literally everyone else on the planet, like to read stuff featuring characters who are similar to them! A transgender kid worried that they’ll never find a romantic partner is going to want a bit of escapist YA reading for exactly the same reason that countless other kids who have no idea how to go about the whole romance thing. A gay kid will want to read stories set in a word where things work out for a gay kid. For that matter, more than a few queer kids might unexpectedly find themselves in reading a book, potentially skipping over a great deal of very dangerous, heartbreaking work that is so often required. And these people generally recognize that, sure, some parent might have a reason to disagree and begrudgingly admit that said parent has a right to do so, but why would that right extend to anyone else’s kids? After all, if such a book were banned, you’re right back at the same problem only now the roles are reversed.
Who is really helped by this? Certainly not the queer kids, or the other children who might read such a book and realize that queer people are just people.
Right? Back in Mark Twain’s day authors and publishers knew their place.
(Hint: This isn’t new. You just hear about it more easily these days.)