Abstraction and Distraction

From my perspective, Cleanup Samuels Library (CSL) came into existence as a response to a very specific matter: sexualized content in juvenile books that is, by definition, pornographic. At the June 6, 2023, Warren County Board of Supervisors (BOS) meeting, many people came to the podium to address the BOS. Many CSL supporters read specific passages from the books that were the subject of recall forms that they or others had submitted.

CSL speakers addressed specific harms and risks of sexualizing children, the long-term harmful effects of pornography and increased likelihood of addiction due to exposure at a young age, and even the disturbing story of a “little bit of poop” in some delicious-looking brownies that made everybody squirm a bit knowing how easy that would be to pull off.

On the other hand, it appeared to me that CSL detractors addressed themselves not to the specific texts and concepts CSL supporters were presenting (i.e., sexually explicit passages, harms of early sexualization, and pornography) but to abstract topics such as freedom of speech, censorship, book banning, and religious fanaticism. No CSL detractor stood to make a counterpoint that a cited text was not pornographic, that early exposure to sexual content was not harmful, or that pornographic addiction was not a developmental risk.

I think the same pattern can be observed in the anti-CSL Op-Ed letters on the matter. This is, strictly speaking, rational; however, it is also diversion; people will naturally nod in agreement that free speech is “good,” book-banning religious zealots are “bad,” and library programs are wonderful for the community. However, people will NOT naturally nod in agreement that the sexualization of juveniles is good (anywhere, but certainly not at the public library using taxpayer funds), so the anti-CSL cannot and do not campaign explicitly FOR what CSL is explicitly AGAINST.

Hence the abstractions and distractions: They wave the American flag, cite the constitution, laud the wonderful programs the library has, and say “freedom, baby,” but do not under any circumstances deign to address the specific citations and statements that are the actual object of CSL’s focus, or their claimed harmful impact on juveniles.

For those standing off a distance from the front lines of this war of words, I urge you: do not be so distracted by how much you love a good brownie that you don’t take time to try to understand why your neighbor is trying to get your attention and being so specific, not abstract, about what’s in it, who made it, what their intentions are, and to convey something about the rational choices to be made to protect our youth from sexualization at the public library.

Richard Jamieson
North River District, Warren County

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in the letters published on this page are solely those of the respective authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Royal Examiner’s editorial team, affiliates, or advertisers. The Royal Examiner does not endorse or take responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or validity of any statements made by the authors. The statements and claims presented in the letters have not been independently verified by the Royal Examiner. Readers are encouraged to exercise their own judgment and critical thinking skills when evaluating the content. Any reliance on the information provided in the letters is at the reader’s own risk.

While the Royal Examiner makes every effort to publish a diverse range of opinions, it does not guarantee the publication of all received letters. The Royal Examiner reserves the right to edit letters for clarity, length, and adherence to editorial guidelines. Moreover, the Royal Examiner does not assume any liability for any loss or damage incurred by readers due to the content of the letters or any subsequent actions taken based on these opinions.

In submitting a letter to the editor, authors grant the Royal Examiner the right to publish, edit, reproduce, or distribute the content in print, online, or in any other form.

We value the engagement of our readers and encourage open and constructive discussions on various topics. However, the Royal Examiner retains the right to reject any letter that contains offensive language, personal attacks, or violates any legal regulations. Thank you for being a part of our vibrant community of readers and contributors, and we look forward to receiving your diverse perspectives on matters of interest and importance.