Book Bans: The Effect of Censorship on Inclusive Literature

One morning, I awoke to the sight of a white rabbit outside my door, a pocket watch hanging from his paw. I rushed out of my green-gabled house and hopped in my car. Down Privet Drive, I maneuvered, Truffula trees bending over the road so close I could reach up an arm and graze their fluffy leaves. The rabbit kept running, hopping along a yellow brick road. But as I whipped the wheel around a corner, my eyes flew open, and I awoke with a start. My magical morning was just a dream. In the real world, yellow brick roads rarely end in sparkling emerald cities, and magic white rabbits don’t lead readers anywhere other than empty library shelves once filled with books that are now banned.

To many, a paragraph riddled with literary references feels nostalgic and familiar, yet for young people in the United States today, such references might feel extraterrestrial depending on the state or school district in which they reside. Now, young readers in the United States must wade through censorship, book bans, and controversy in order to find diverse literature at their local libraries. Across certain regions of the United States, libraries have become epicenters of censorship, beginning with book bans and ending with the attempted systematic removal of diversity from public education and U.S. media. 

In an increasingly hostile political climate, book bans are yet another source of highly politicized tension. Conservative viewpoints typically revolve around a desire to protect “innocence” and Christian values, ideas manifested in GOP-backed book bans in states such as Florida and Texas. Contrastingly, progressive viewpoints emphasize the need for diversity, equity, and inclusion on library shelves and are thus against the vast majority of book bans, with some states, such as Illinois, going so far as to pass legislation banning book bans.  

When considering statistics on U.S. book bans, controversy appears to be stamped on the cover of nearly every book representing diversity and inclusion. Forty-one percent of banned books contain LGBTQIA+ themes or characters, and forty percent contain primary or secondary characters of color. Through local and state-wide censorship campaigns typically initiated by those with conservative viewpoints, these trends represent a growing movement to remove access to media that depicts diverse experiences, especially ones that relate to racism, gender, and sexuality. 

“Gender Queer” by Maia Kobabe portrays a microcosmic example of conservative censorship, specifically that of transgender/nonbinary literature. In the graphic novel, the main character grapples with their gender identity and describes their experience of coming out as non-binary in a ciscentric world. Not surprisingly, conservative action groups were quick to latch onto the novel, calling it “pornographic” and “sexually explicit,” both polarizing terms consistently used to pull gender-affirming literature from shelves. Conservative groups employ strong language such as the aforementioned terms to further their agenda of purity culture and weaponized evangelicalism, a persistent theme throughout the vast majority of book ban campaigns. Author Maia Kobabe speaks to the concerns surrounding attacks on the novel, “When you remove those books from the shelf, or you challenge them publicly in a community, what you’re saying to any young person who identified with that narrative is, ‘We don’t want your story here.’” This concern mirrors that of many others: the erasure of diverse and inclusive literature equals the erasure of representation for vulnerable, questioning young people.  

Growing up in a heteronormative, ciscentric world can look very different for children from different backgrounds and families. While some families accept and encourage pro-LGBTQIA+ stances, many others would scoff at the idea of their child coming out as gay or non-binary. As such, representation in public spaces is critical. According to a study from 2015, 75.2% of LGBTQIA+ students enrolled in schools with an inclusive curriculum believed that their peers were accepting of queer people, while only 39.5% of students enrolled in schools without an inclusive curriculum thought the same. Acceptance and representation not only expose students to diverse viewpoints but are also critical for the mental health of queer students. Statistically, students who feel accepted in their communities and schools possess lower rates of depression, anxiety, and suicidal behavior, all of which represent significant issues for queer youth today.

Through the attempted removal of progressive and diverse books, conservative individuals contribute not only to the erasure of diversity but also to growing efforts for cultural heterogeneity in the United States. Books are a representation of modern issues and controversies, and by facilitating their systematic removal, conservative groups reveal their growing fear of a national shift toward progressivism. Increasing numbers of immigrants, a new highly democratically aspirant Gen Z voting bloc, and national movements, such as Black Lives Matter, contribute to conservative fears of expanding progressivism, an idea conservatives hope to contain by banning progressive literature.

Across the globe, literature represents an integral piece of culture and society, whether it be arguing for political reform, encouraging social movements, or simply drawing attention to cultures different from one’s own. By opening the pages of a book, readers open their minds to the culture and world around them. 

Books are one of the most prolific forms of media in the United States today, and yet, in a country so large and diverse, citizens of states such as Florida and Texas find themselves struggling to locate books that tackle controversial or cultural themes. In 2022, Florida schools voted to remove around 300 books from their library shelves, the vast majority of which included LGBTQIA+ themes or tackled issues of race, racism, and/or other forms of diversity. While the Florida government maintains its position that they do not ban books in Florida, local school districts would say otherwise. Thirty-one percent of Florida counties included schools that voted to ban books in their school libraries, so while it might be true that Florida’s state government is not banning books, Florida’s local institutions are banning them on such a large scale that it draws attention to the entire state as a hotbed of censorship. This debate is further exacerbated by the fact that Florida’s state government is largely run by the Republican Party. Consequently, this results in little governmental pushback or regulation against censorship since the party is unlikely to act directly against its supporters for fear of losing partisan support in elections and statewide government initiatives.

Despite the implications of widespread censorship, book bans represent a localized problem for U.S. citizens. A favorite book being removed from a library in one’s own city hits closer to home than a nationwide statistic, no matter how shocking. As such, the clearest path forward for concerned individuals is to take action locally, whether it be voting in local elections, speaking at school board meetings, or supporting one’s own public library. Advocating for the accessibility and inclusion of banned books in local libraries and public schools is a direct way to make one’s voice heard in personally meaningful locations. However, in order to address book bans as a U.S. issue, federal or state-level governmental legislation is required, and getting legislators to pass policies about something as partisan as book bans is about as difficult as performing legitimate literary witchcraft. 

Generally, public education standards are set on the state level, thereby allowing states to possess differing degrees of leniency regarding censorship. Despite this concession, federal action is not impossible. In 1982, with the Supreme Court ruling in Island Trees Union Free School District vs. Pico, the Supreme Court ruled that states were prohibited under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution from removing or banning books on a state level due to their content. 

While the federal government is capable of passing legislation regarding book bans, it is extremely difficult to reach a consensus among legislators over a highly controversial issue and take action over a power that generally resides in the states. Education standards vary greatly among states; even adjacent states can have monumentally different educational standards (e.g., Virginia is ranked 11th in national public education systems while West Virginia is ranked 47th). So, while federal legislation is not an entirely unattainable goal, concerned citizens will likely find more meaningful avenues for change in their own local communities. 

U.S. citizens have very few ways of legitimately enacting change without voting. Registering to vote and turning out to vote in all national and local elections is a definitive way for voters to further an anti-censorship agenda and ensure candidates who support their values and who will fight for their beliefs are holding public office.

Whether they have been legislated against or not, book bans are not about banning the books themselves but rather the ideas they represent. As the Generation Z voter bloc continues to grow and influence national politics, the Republican Party is experiencing a loss in support from younger people. Desperate attempts to censor inclusive literature represent a last-ditch effort to stymie progressive ideologies in future generations. 

Vigorous movements to remove progressive ideologies through the form of book bans not only reveal the central fears of the conservative party but will ultimately fail to contain the ideas they attempt to restrict. Ideas are highly theoretical, and as such, they will run through book bans like grains of sand through Jafar’s hourglass. For youth who identify with the experiences contained in banned books (e.g., racism, gender identity, puberty), the ideas in banned books are ever-present regardless of whether they can be found on local shelves. Bryant High School student Deeya in Arkansas writes, “​​Hiding away things that make us uncomfortable doesn’t make them go away. Even if we don’t talk about it, racism, sexual assault, genocide, and many other complex issues will still exist.” Students want to learn and experience the world, and banning books containing diversity, inclusion, and controversial themes restricts students’  access to the diverse and inclusive education they deserve. 

While the progressive ideas represented in banned books are impossible to eliminate in popular media, book bans greatly weaken representation in the lives of vulnerable youth. The growing heterogeneity of U.S. media is magnified by attempts to censor diverse and inclusive literature, specifically that which includes themes of gender, sexuality, and racism. Book bans are a trail of breadcrumbs on the way to the witch’s cottage of conservative censorship, and as the United States becomes increasingly more divided along partisan lines, book bans will continue to be a controversial issue that, unfortunately, places vulnerable groups at risk. So, the next time you wake up and find yourself driving down a yellow brick road or following a white rabbit down a hole into Wonderland, remember the author’s voices that led you there and consider the implications of silencing them.