Common sense would tell you that exposing children the sexually explicit material would not and does not improve psychological health. The arguments made in favor of this are ridiculous. Children need to be allowed to be children. For those that are suffering with mental health issues, they deserve real care not this. This needs to stop once and for all.
But in any case, what's the point of this (false) statement? Postman contends that in the middle ages, children entered into adulthood at about the age of 9, because they had by then, being generally illiterate like their parents, been through all that adults could teach. It is certainly the case that children as young as 9 were hanged for theft in the middle ages. Is that your preferred model of child rearing, raising, and education?
That's not actually true. See "The Disappearance of Childhood" by Neil Postman for a thorough discussion of the topic. He views childhood as having been invented sometime after the middle ages, when social, as opposed to craft literacy, emerged with the development of the printing press. It existed for a few centuries, but is now being destroyed by the destruction of print culture.
Thank you for this well-reasoned, well-expressed piece. I find they 'bundle' so much sexualized content into accessible books in the name of inclusivity, and it's never addressed by school boards when challenged.
Excellent commentary. The ignorance of the "open library" idiots is exceeded only by their unwillingness to actually acknowledge the garbage being put in libraries. Librarians are among the most Woke of all professions.
Thank you. I am so tired of my liberal friends' naive posts about the horrors of book banning without the nuance of "age-appropriate content for schools." They have no idea what is actually going on! I am a lifelong Democrat and a mental health professional who specializes in trauma. This material does not belong in the schools.
Highschool kids can handle sexual images and for fuck sake they can and do watch actual porno on their phones and computers... Our obsession with sex is laughable
Just because they can watch porn on their phones is not a justification to sexualize children. Ubiquitous porn is a degradation designed to destabilize and desensitize our youth. School is for learning how to read, write, etc. Not to preoccupy the minds of children who have their adult lives to navigate sex. And by the way porn is not a victimless recreation. Most women and young girls do not want to be degraded for the whole world to see in perpetuity.
Many become addicted to drugs just to perform. And many are used and cast aside for your fleeting pleasure.
Seriously???! And in Darien?! What has this world come to? Now we’ll all have to pod/home school our grandchildren to make sure their minds aren’t sexually abused. Tell me public education in the US is not a cesspool! Disgusting.
Suggest you send your piece to a place where people will believe you, agree with your observations and recommendations, and are in a position to do something to effect the changes you desire. Try:
It's curious...I study censorship in MA public libraries: https://insidelowell.com/books-actually-banned-in-massachusetts/ . If MA passed a law like the proposed Connecticut law, would it be possible to find my local MA libraries to be not in compliance with the law if they refused to buy what is currently the most banned book in MA, "Gay Shame: The Rise of Gender Identity and the New Homophobia"? https://www.thetimes.com/culture/books/article/gay-shame-gareth-roberts-review-lrtg8jq76 . Likely this book is not available in any library in Connecticut, either. If this law passes, all right thinking people in Connecticut should flood the libraries with requests for the book, and then, when they refuse to purchase it, file a class action lawsuit. Bring it!
I believe that the text of the proposed bill is here: https://www.cga.ct.gov/2025/TOB/S/PDF/2025SB-00523-R00-SB.PDF . It's the first clause: " (1) prohibit public and school libraries from excluding or censoring books because of the origin, background or views of the material or of its authors, or solely because a person finds such books offensive;". Right now, it's pretty clear that the reason no copy has been purchased in MA it that the librarians requested find the views offensive. "All" you have to do is take them to court claiming, and you can substantiate it, that that was the reason they refused to buy the book. A favorable review from "The Times" should always be adequate, they can't say it's insufficiently well known or not of sufficient quality or any of the usual excuses.
You say you want reliable data? Okay, how about this?
Svedin CG, Donevan M, Bladh M, Priebe G, Fredlund C, Jonsson LS. (2023). Associations between adolescents watching pornography and poor mental health in three Swedish surveys. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. Sep;32(9):1765-1780. doi: 10.1007/s00787-022-01992-x.
"The repeated cross-sectional surveys did not find any consistent associations across years between poor mental health and ever having watched pornography or the frequency of watching pornography.”
Štulhofer, A., Tafro, A. & Kohut, T. (2019). The dynamics of adolescents’ pornography use and psychological well-being: a six-wave latent growth and latent class modeling approach. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 28, 1567–1579, doi: 10.1007/s00787-019-01318-4
"To explore possible links between adolescent pornography use and psychological well-being more systematically, this study focused on parallel dynamics in pornography use, self-esteem and symptoms of depression and anxiety. A sample of 775 female and 514 male Croatian high school students [...] was used for the analyses. [...] We observed no significant correspondence between growth in pornography use and changes in the two indicators of psychological well-being over time in either female or male participants.”
McKee, Alan (2010) Does pornography harm young people? Australian Journal of Communication, 37(1), pp. 17-36.
"Our survey shows that age of first exposure to pornography does not correlate with negative attitudes towards women.”
• Luder, MT., Pittet, I., Berchtold, A. et al. (2011). Associations Between Online Pornography and Sexual Behavior Among Adolescents: Myth or Reality?. Arch Sex Behav 40, 1027–1035. doi: 10.1007/s10508-010-9714-0
"This study aimed to compare the sexual behavior of adolescents who were or were not exposed to online pornography, to assess to what extent the willingness of exposure changed these possible associations, [...] We conclude that pornography exposure is not associated with risky sexual behaviors and that the willingness of exposure does not seem to have an impact on risky sexual behaviors among adolescents."
And to put it all in perspective:
• Diamond, Milton (1999). "The Effects of Pornography: An International Perspective". In: Elias, James; Bullough, Vern L.; Elias, Veronica Diehl; Brewer, Gwen; Douglas, Jeffrey J.; Jarvis, Will (eds.). Porn 101: Eroticism, Pornography, and the First Amendment.
"A last thought: I believe it part of natures' evolutionary heritage that sexually erotic scenes be part of any individual's development. Since until recent times, privacy has been a luxery only afforded to the very few and then to the very rich. Only in modern times are children expected to develop without witnessing their parents or others, and certainly animals, in sexual activities. As such a basic feature of evolution, reproduction would not be left completely to chance. Attraction of so many to pornography and other sexual themes is most likely our biological and social heritage from this fundemental aspect of life. It is only culture and politics which makes it seem unusual."
"The concern that countries allowing pornography and liberal anti-obscenity laws would show increased sex crime rates due to modeling or that children or adolescents in particular would be negatively vulnerable to and receptive to such models or that society would be otherwise adversely effected is not supported by evidence."
McKee, Alan (2010) Does pornography harm young people? Australian Journal of Communication, 37(1), pp. 17-36.
"Our survey shows that age of first exposure to pornography does not correlate with negative attitudes towards women. Studies with non-explicit representations of sexuality show that young people who seek out sexualised representations tend to be those with a pre-existing interest in sexuality. These studies also suggest that current generations of children are no more sexualised than previous generations, that they are not innocent about sexuality, and that a key negative effect of this knowledge is the requirement for them to feign ignorance in order to satisfy adults’ expectations of them." (McKee, 2007c, p. 119)."
"[...]for children, their parents’ expectations caused more problems for them than the information they encountered about sex. Children are quite aware that parents want them to be ignorant about sex; and they consciously perform this ignorance for them. [...] More than this, the need to pretend to be innocent for their parents was one of the most distressing things about their experience with sexuality in the media: ‘for some, much of the embarrassment … seemed to derive from having to pretend that they did not know about such things, in order to keep their parents happy’ (Buckingham and Bragg, 2005, p. 62)."
I can personally testify to the last point. At the age of ten I found a sexy book that someone had left in the guest room and read it with intense curiosity. Just as indicated by the studies above, the only negative aspect of this experience was anxiety about being discovered with it by my parents, thinking they might not approve. That was over fifty years ago and I'm still (not) waiting to be traumatized by this purportedly "inappropriate" exposure. I've also never been in trouble with the law in any way nor even caused an unwanted pregnancy.
BS. We all know that "peer review" and "evidence-based" have become meaningless terms, corrupted to serve the agendas of the industries. Go back to watching the porn you are trying to justify.
Common sense would tell you that exposing children the sexually explicit material would not and does not improve psychological health. The arguments made in favor of this are ridiculous. Children need to be allowed to be children. For those that are suffering with mental health issues, they deserve real care not this. This needs to stop once and for all.
I think that it's not so much the exposing as the aggressively pushing it on them which is the real problem.
Adults should act like adults. Children should get to have childhoods. Blurring this distinction has been terrible for everyone.
Hard to do when you're dealing with 'progressive' parents who don't know the meaning of the word No. That's where this nonsense is coming from.
You are aware that for most of this country's history children were treated more as little adults than as a special category of person, right?
But in any case, what's the point of this (false) statement? Postman contends that in the middle ages, children entered into adulthood at about the age of 9, because they had by then, being generally illiterate like their parents, been through all that adults could teach. It is certainly the case that children as young as 9 were hanged for theft in the middle ages. Is that your preferred model of child rearing, raising, and education?
That's not actually true. See "The Disappearance of Childhood" by Neil Postman for a thorough discussion of the topic. He views childhood as having been invented sometime after the middle ages, when social, as opposed to craft literacy, emerged with the development of the printing press. It existed for a few centuries, but is now being destroyed by the destruction of print culture.
Thank you for this well-reasoned, well-expressed piece. I find they 'bundle' so much sexualized content into accessible books in the name of inclusivity, and it's never addressed by school boards when challenged.
Excellent commentary. The ignorance of the "open library" idiots is exceeded only by their unwillingness to actually acknowledge the garbage being put in libraries. Librarians are among the most Woke of all professions.
Thank you. I am so tired of my liberal friends' naive posts about the horrors of book banning without the nuance of "age-appropriate content for schools." They have no idea what is actually going on! I am a lifelong Democrat and a mental health professional who specializes in trauma. This material does not belong in the schools.
Highschool kids can handle sexual images and for fuck sake they can and do watch actual porno on their phones and computers... Our obsession with sex is laughable
Just because they can watch porn on their phones is not a justification to sexualize children. Ubiquitous porn is a degradation designed to destabilize and desensitize our youth. School is for learning how to read, write, etc. Not to preoccupy the minds of children who have their adult lives to navigate sex. And by the way porn is not a victimless recreation. Most women and young girls do not want to be degraded for the whole world to see in perpetuity.
Many become addicted to drugs just to perform. And many are used and cast aside for your fleeting pleasure.
Seriously???! And in Darien?! What has this world come to? Now we’ll all have to pod/home school our grandchildren to make sure their minds aren’t sexually abused. Tell me public education in the US is not a cesspool! Disgusting.
Suggest you send your piece to a place where people will believe you, agree with your observations and recommendations, and are in a position to do something to effect the changes you desire. Try:
President Donald J. Trump, Jr.
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
It's curious...I study censorship in MA public libraries: https://insidelowell.com/books-actually-banned-in-massachusetts/ . If MA passed a law like the proposed Connecticut law, would it be possible to find my local MA libraries to be not in compliance with the law if they refused to buy what is currently the most banned book in MA, "Gay Shame: The Rise of Gender Identity and the New Homophobia"? https://www.thetimes.com/culture/books/article/gay-shame-gareth-roberts-review-lrtg8jq76 . Likely this book is not available in any library in Connecticut, either. If this law passes, all right thinking people in Connecticut should flood the libraries with requests for the book, and then, when they refuse to purchase it, file a class action lawsuit. Bring it!
I believe that the text of the proposed bill is here: https://www.cga.ct.gov/2025/TOB/S/PDF/2025SB-00523-R00-SB.PDF . It's the first clause: " (1) prohibit public and school libraries from excluding or censoring books because of the origin, background or views of the material or of its authors, or solely because a person finds such books offensive;". Right now, it's pretty clear that the reason no copy has been purchased in MA it that the librarians requested find the views offensive. "All" you have to do is take them to court claiming, and you can substantiate it, that that was the reason they refused to buy the book. A favorable review from "The Times" should always be adequate, they can't say it's insufficiently well known or not of sufficient quality or any of the usual excuses.
The proposed CT legislation contains one of the best materials reconsideration policies I have ever read. I hope it passes!
Have you actually read it? And if you have, what do you think it will accomplish that existing Connecticut law doesn't do already?
I have read it. I am in NH so am not familiar with what you already have in CT. Can you post a link here?
Our policies here are all local and do n NOT work.
You say you want reliable data? Okay, how about this?
Svedin CG, Donevan M, Bladh M, Priebe G, Fredlund C, Jonsson LS. (2023). Associations between adolescents watching pornography and poor mental health in three Swedish surveys. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. Sep;32(9):1765-1780. doi: 10.1007/s00787-022-01992-x.
"The repeated cross-sectional surveys did not find any consistent associations across years between poor mental health and ever having watched pornography or the frequency of watching pornography.”
Štulhofer, A., Tafro, A. & Kohut, T. (2019). The dynamics of adolescents’ pornography use and psychological well-being: a six-wave latent growth and latent class modeling approach. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 28, 1567–1579, doi: 10.1007/s00787-019-01318-4
"To explore possible links between adolescent pornography use and psychological well-being more systematically, this study focused on parallel dynamics in pornography use, self-esteem and symptoms of depression and anxiety. A sample of 775 female and 514 male Croatian high school students [...] was used for the analyses. [...] We observed no significant correspondence between growth in pornography use and changes in the two indicators of psychological well-being over time in either female or male participants.”
McKee, Alan (2010) Does pornography harm young people? Australian Journal of Communication, 37(1), pp. 17-36.
"Our survey shows that age of first exposure to pornography does not correlate with negative attitudes towards women.”
• Luder, MT., Pittet, I., Berchtold, A. et al. (2011). Associations Between Online Pornography and Sexual Behavior Among Adolescents: Myth or Reality?. Arch Sex Behav 40, 1027–1035. doi: 10.1007/s10508-010-9714-0
"This study aimed to compare the sexual behavior of adolescents who were or were not exposed to online pornography, to assess to what extent the willingness of exposure changed these possible associations, [...] We conclude that pornography exposure is not associated with risky sexual behaviors and that the willingness of exposure does not seem to have an impact on risky sexual behaviors among adolescents."
And to put it all in perspective:
• Diamond, Milton (1999). "The Effects of Pornography: An International Perspective". In: Elias, James; Bullough, Vern L.; Elias, Veronica Diehl; Brewer, Gwen; Douglas, Jeffrey J.; Jarvis, Will (eds.). Porn 101: Eroticism, Pornography, and the First Amendment.
"A last thought: I believe it part of natures' evolutionary heritage that sexually erotic scenes be part of any individual's development. Since until recent times, privacy has been a luxery only afforded to the very few and then to the very rich. Only in modern times are children expected to develop without witnessing their parents or others, and certainly animals, in sexual activities. As such a basic feature of evolution, reproduction would not be left completely to chance. Attraction of so many to pornography and other sexual themes is most likely our biological and social heritage from this fundemental aspect of life. It is only culture and politics which makes it seem unusual."
"The concern that countries allowing pornography and liberal anti-obscenity laws would show increased sex crime rates due to modeling or that children or adolescents in particular would be negatively vulnerable to and receptive to such models or that society would be otherwise adversely effected is not supported by evidence."
McKee, Alan (2010) Does pornography harm young people? Australian Journal of Communication, 37(1), pp. 17-36.
"Our survey shows that age of first exposure to pornography does not correlate with negative attitudes towards women. Studies with non-explicit representations of sexuality show that young people who seek out sexualised representations tend to be those with a pre-existing interest in sexuality. These studies also suggest that current generations of children are no more sexualised than previous generations, that they are not innocent about sexuality, and that a key negative effect of this knowledge is the requirement for them to feign ignorance in order to satisfy adults’ expectations of them." (McKee, 2007c, p. 119)."
"[...]for children, their parents’ expectations caused more problems for them than the information they encountered about sex. Children are quite aware that parents want them to be ignorant about sex; and they consciously perform this ignorance for them. [...] More than this, the need to pretend to be innocent for their parents was one of the most distressing things about their experience with sexuality in the media: ‘for some, much of the embarrassment … seemed to derive from having to pretend that they did not know about such things, in order to keep their parents happy’ (Buckingham and Bragg, 2005, p. 62)."
I can personally testify to the last point. At the age of ten I found a sexy book that someone had left in the guest room and read it with intense curiosity. Just as indicated by the studies above, the only negative aspect of this experience was anxiety about being discovered with it by my parents, thinking they might not approve. That was over fifty years ago and I'm still (not) waiting to be traumatized by this purportedly "inappropriate" exposure. I've also never been in trouble with the law in any way nor even caused an unwanted pregnancy.
BS. We all know that "peer review" and "evidence-based" have become meaningless terms, corrupted to serve the agendas of the industries. Go back to watching the porn you are trying to justify.