Makaila Keyes, a recent Graduate of Courtland High School, has been in the spotlight since she announced she will be taking legal action against the conservative members of the Spotsylvania School Board.
She is suing the board over an alleged FOIA violation, from a January 10th meeting, where superintendent Scott Baker was fired. On January 15th, instead of addressing that, she instead made a speech in favor of keeping explicit literature in schools in opposition to some conservative board members' comments.
Here is how Keyes began her speech:
"When I was in third grade a classmate of mine said to me "you know what? Your darker than me because god burnt you in the toaster". I was nine. I was called the n-word for the first time in middle school, and it certainly was not the last time. By the time I reached high school, the ignorant racist bullying and name calling from my peers had become so commonplace I had developed social anxiety and diminished self esteem. As a black child attending primarily white schools throughout my adolescence, I was an outcast. There were typically only three black people in each of my classes . I felt as if there was something wrong with me. Why couldn't I look like everyone else? Why couldn't I be normal? I made friends but we didn't look alike so it made it difficult for me to relate to them .I found a set of solace in books but most of them were written about white people, by white people, for white people. It wasn't until my sophomore year of high school that I read a book starring black characters. and I was elated that I finally found someone that I was able to relate to and she was in a book."
Keyes says.
Rebuttal: Keyes begins her argument in favor of sexually explicit books by bringing up the fact that she was black, and that she felt that all literature was only written by white people, for white people. Apart from this being completely irrational and irrelevant to the conversation, Keyes goes onto to compare this to the explicit books we that we are talking about. She harks on this key point multiple times, and it makes me wonder, as a black student myself, why Keyes is taking this position when the argument isn't about race, but rather sexually explicit material? The argument she goes onto make is about "representation" and how this is undoubtedly important to the development of child. But to what end is Ms. Keyes willing to defend "representation"? The books in question are already extremely graphic in nature, including depictions of oral, anal, and even non-consensual sex between minors and adults. Keyes give this explanation for why she think we should keep these books in k-12 schools...
No one is forcing children to read about prostitution drugs and homosexuality. That's the glory of books, you pick one up you read the synopsis, and you decide whether you're put it back on the shelf or take it with you . If children are reading about these topics it's because they want to, and it can't be any worse than what they have access to on their cell phones twenty four seven. These subjects you have a problem with are real social concerns. Prostitution, Pornography, and sex are real. Drugs and homelessness are real. Reading about them only introduces children to the real world unless you plan on keeping them sheltered for the rest of their lives. It's not the libraries job to protect children. It's their job to allow exploration, which is why libraries need diverse literature. Not everybody is a straight white Christian. I read the book that was mentioned, "Call Me by Your Name", when I was in high school. At the time it wasn't offered by my high school library because of it's explicit content, so I read it at home instead because if someone wants to read something and it's not offered at the high school library, they're going to go somewhere else to read it.
Rebuttal: Keyes makes the argument that kids should be able to access explicit, and sometimes pornographic materials in school, because they can just access them on the internet anyways. This is very weak, and odd argument, to say the least. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. Just because something is accessible on the internet, doesn't make it right for it to be accessible to children in an educational setting. If we were to take Keyes statements seriously, it would set a really harmful precedent going forward. To what end will Keyes defend the rights of students to access and consume whatever content they want in the classroom? And all of this also neglects the purpose of education, and the real issue that is parental rights. There have been hundreds of parents who have spoken out against having explicit, un-educational books in their child's classrooms, yet they have been subsequently ignored because school boards have faced backlash from race-baiters and LGBT+ activists. Keyes and others hid behind the guise of "gay representation" to keep explicit books in schools--and it worked. Keyes attacks what she calls "Straight white Christians" in the process.
Pornographic books, like 'Call me by your name", that have been adapted into R-rated movies should not be available for students, regardless of if they represent homosexuality, or heterosexuality. This is about centering the focus on education again, not phony representation, or woke activism as Keyes would like. Keyes focuses in on her race, and identity, and uses this emotional argument to justify such a radical position. Pornographic books do not belong in schools, and students don't want them there either.
Keyes will continue to attack conservatives, and board members who stand up for morality, and classical education. But the question should really be posed again--why is pornographic material of any kid, allowed in school?
In my view, it should be removed.
-writer for the SCSU
Kommentare