[Children] have special need of knowledge as a resource to make sense of new things. Those who are deprived of knowledge of certain attitudes or forms of behavior and, therefore, prevented from thinking about why they might be harmful, are the ones most likely to take such attitudes or commit such acts. To deprive children of the opportunity to read about confusing or painful matters like those that they might actually be experiencing will either make literature irrelevant to them or else leave them feeling they are alone in their thoughts or experiences. ([emphasis added] 102-3)This is pretty much the thesis of this blog, that to deprive people (and especially children and teens) of the option of reading books that highlight certain attitudes and beliefs (possibly contradictory to their own) is not helpful, but more harmful in the long run. I understand that parents are only trying to protect their children, in most circumstances. As Reimer and Nodelman say,
"In trying to protect children, however, these adults may well be doing more harm than good" (102).
"It also deprives adults of the opportunity to discuss these matters with children, and to share their own attitudes with them. Without such discussions, adults might actually diminish their control over children rather than increase it" (103).
Thanks for listening.