Censorship harms those we should be trying to protect
A weekday briefing from veteran Rhode Island reporters, focused on the things that matter most in the Ocean State.
Enter Email
Sign Up
According to
Advertisement
Book bans also frequently target books with LGBTQ+ characters, according to Pen America.
Advertisement
Pen America also states that books that depict rape or sexual violence were banned in a quarter of the more than 3,000 books targeted from June 2022 to July 2023. Silencing stories of rape and sexual violence silences survivors of rape and sexual violence. Banning books by and about the survival of rape and sexual assault perpetuates harm on those who have suffered the most. Authors can find power in telling their stories, factually or through fiction. Readers can find solace and community in these same stories. We are harming them by removing their stories from libraries.
The
My question is: Who are we protecting? If not our LGBTQIA teens, our BIPOC children, our public library staff, our school librarians, our children's book authors, our survivors of sexual assault, then who? And why?
The bills that have been put forward do not mandate that any child, adolescent, student, or parent be required to read any book. The bills don't mandate libraries purchase any book or type of book. They don't require that authors and illustrators write or draw or create any specific book or type of book. In fact, they make clear that reconsideration requests made by those with a vested interest in the public library or school library can still continue. And library staff will be protected by not just the
Advertisement
Let Rhode Island continue to grow and change in the direction of
Nicole P. Dyszlewski is one of the leaders of the Rhode Island Freedom to Read Coalition, and a professor and assistant dean at Roger Williams University School of Law in Bristol, R.I.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time Magazine
2 hours ago
- Time Magazine
History Can Teach Modern Activists About Coalition Building
In an era of doomscrolling and political anxiety, collective action and grassroots political organizing remain a powerful antidote to despair and disempowerment, and a force for change and progress. That has helped spur opponents of President Donald Trump to take to the streets. Protests throughout the spring and summer have demonstrated significant (and even international) opposition to the Trump Administration's agenda, particularly its attempts to consolidate power and undermine key institutions and services. And many marginalized populations (including migrants, the poor, people of color, women, and LGBTQIA+ folks) have been disproportionately impacted. Yet, commentators also have noted that, like many protests during Trump's first presidency, participants at protests such as the "No Kings" protest were overwhelmingly white (and older). This is problematic because history suggests that collective action is far more durable and effective when it transcends racial, class, age, and gender boundaries. From the Mississippi Freedom Movement to various Rainbow Coalitions, collaboration and coalition-building across social positions—despite the challenges and potential for tension—attract participants with a wider toolkit of resources, opportunities, and tactics. Multiracial and cross-class coalitions may be underemphasized in the historical record, but they existed and had a profound impact in the 1960s. In Chicago, for example, white working-class migrants from the South, known as the Young Patriots Organization, worked closely with the Illinois Black Panther Party and the Puerto Rican Young Lords Organization to fight against racism and poverty through protests and community programs. Drawing on the blueprint from Black and Latino community organizing, the Young Patriots successfully involved previously disenfranchised poor whites in their activism. The group developed free health clinics that treated thousands of people in the Uptown neighborhood, which was then known as 'hillbilly haven.' The Young Patriots' work demonstrated the power of organizing across social boundaries to create new, more powerful blocs that could bolster communities. Yet, cultivating such coalitions often presented difficult challenges. No group epitomized this better than the Mississippi Freedom Movement during the southern civil rights push. This effort emerged from the activism on college campuses that produced the creation of groups such as the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), which was formed in 1960 and was known for organizing sit-ins and the Freedom Summer voter outreach project in 1964. Though Black college students founded SNCC and largely led the group, their organizing enabled them to recruit over 1000 Northern white college students to the cause. In 1964, the group turned its focus to Mississippi, where, despite the apparent dismantling of overt racial restrictions thanks to the newly passed federal Civil Rights Act, state and local laws empowered white officials to erect barriers to voter registration. Further, whites used the threat of racist violence, tacitly approved by elites, to stifle efforts to empower the Black population. SNCC allied with other national Civil Rights organizations to form the Council of Federated Organizations (COFO). COFO's voter registration efforts catalyzed the Mississippi Freedom Movement and helped build the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party (MFDP). Working-class African Americans from Mississippi led the MFDP. The party advocated for political representation of Blacks in Mississippi and challenged the white supremacist 'Dixiecrat' politics of the state Democratic Party. Between 1961 and 1966, the coalition of SNCC and the MFDP pamphleteered and organized both on northern college campuses and in impoverished Southern communities. It mobilized and brought into the movement two disparate populations: working-class and poor Southern Black people, as well as white middle- and upper-class Northern college student activists recruited through SNCC. Each group brought unique and robust experiences and tactics. The leaders of SNCC and the MFDP recognized that holding together such a diverse coalition required intentional steps to communicate the stakes of their efforts in language that would resonate with the interests and moral ideology of both groups. The MFDP focused on outreach to working-class and poor Black people in the South by emphasizing how Black political rights directly shaped their quality of life and mattered for the advancement of their interests. The group's pamphlets didn't present the gaining of political rights as a moral good in and of itself, but rather as a means to obtain greater security, resources, and influence. One pamphlet, 'The Congressional Challenge,' argued plainly, 'Congress does not do the things we want because we do not have anyone in Congress to speak for us.' Simultaneously, SNCC helped northern white students understand Black political rights as a matter of moral injustice. Many whites were aware of a lack of Black voter participation in the South but often lacked a deeper understanding of its causes and consequences. The pamphlets the group distributed on Northern college campuses covered the historical and legal aspects of this problem. It explained racial inequality by emphasizing the racism of southern white elites and the rank moral injustice of violence and discrimination. In 1964, the MFDP challenged the all-white Mississippi delegation to the Democratic National Convention, and while it failed to gain seats for its own delegation, the group helped transform the Democratic agenda by cultivating support for Black political rights from liberal Democrats and alienating segregationists. This push and pull reshaped the Democratic voting base and helped force the party to advocate for additional civil rights legislation. These efforts also shone a national spotlight on how the Democratic Party in the South disenfranchised Black people from the political process. In doing so, it permanently shifted the racial politics in the U.S. Yet, despite its major success, MFDP's efforts to coordinate actions between groups with vastly different approaches and interests posed a significant challenge for organizers and participants. Disagreements between white and Black participants about tactics and goals fractured the coalition and eventually SNCC itself. In contrast to other, more mainstream Civil Rights organizations, SNCC leaders began to emphasize Black separatism, which alienated white participants. In 1966, the group banned white members altogether, which undermined its stability, collaborative potential, and impact in the following years. The work of the MFDP and the Young Patriots shows the promises and perils of diverse coalitions as opponents of the Trump Administration look to effectuate change. Their history offers a blueprint for how a good communications strategy, and intentional collaborative outreach can enable the construction of such broad coalitions. Yet, this history also reveals how coalitions between groups with disparate world views and social positions can be as fragile as they are powerful. My own research suggests that too often today, progressive organizers are highly educated whites who fail to build bridges with diverse communities and activists of color. Instead, they frequently direct the burgeoning movement around their assumptions and habits—without cultivating and supporting the people most impacted by the Trump Administration. Even in ostensibly multiracial coalitions, this approach leads to burnout and disengagement for activists of color. This blind spot threatens to torpedo activists' success. But the nuanced collaboration and communications strategy employed by groups like the MFDP and the Young Patriots offers a solution, one that could dramatically increase the chances of achieving activists' goals. Adopting such tactics won't guarantee success or unity. But they offer a far better possibility than many of the methods being employed today. Michael L. Rosino is assistant professor of sociology at Molloy University, studying racial politics, democracy, and media. His most recent book, Democracy is Awkward, is available from the University of North Carolina Press.' Made by History takes readers beyond the headlines with articles written and edited by professional historians. Learn more about Made by History at TIME here. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of TIME editors.
New York Post
3 days ago
- New York Post
DSA leader brags he helped pen Zohran Mamdani's radical trans rights platform — which includes tax-subsidized surgeries
A Democratic Socialists of America leader boasted that the left-wing group helped write Zohran Mamdani's radical trans rights platform — which pledges to turn the Big Apple into an 'LGBTQIA+ Sanctuary City' and punish hospitals for not performing gender reassignment surgery on minors. Members of the DSA touted their apparently close ties with the campaign of the leading mayoral candidate and his staff while speaking at the 'Socialism 2025' conference in Chicago early last month, video from the event shows. 'The Zohran campaign was always eager to work with us. We're like that,' NYC DSA steering committee member Daniel Goulden bragged during a conference panel discussion, gesturing with two crossed fingers to demonstrate their closeness. Advertisement 'We wrote the platform with him. The team was so happy to work with us on this, and now he's going to be mayor,' Goulden laughed, according to the footage. He then trumpeted a plan for the city to pay for trans surgeries for all — and not just in the Big Apple. DSA steering committee member Daniel Goulden boasted that the radical group helped NYC mayor frontrunner Zohran Mamdani write his LGBTQ platform. Democratic Socialists of America Advertisement 'Zohran is literally attempting to do what conservatives say we want to do, which is provide gender affirming care to anyone who wants it for free,' he said, vowing: 'We're gonna fly people in and pay for their hotel rooms.' He added: 'We collaborated with the Zohran Mamdani campaign on his trans rights platform, and what we explicitly wanted to do was to use the power of New York City to provide free gender affirming care … not just to people in New York City but across the country.' Goulden then appeared to downplay the cost of the scheme. 'New York City could provide trans healthcare for every trans person in the country who can't afford it, and it would be a blip on our radar,' he claimed. Advertisement The socialist mayoral frontrunner's own platform, available on his website, includes verbatim many of the far-left trans agenda items Goulding mentioned during the conference panel discussion. For instance, the Mamdani campaign is pledging to declare New York City a 'sanctuary city for LGBTQIA+ people and their families,' if he's elected, and wants to spend $65 million in taxpayer funds for transgender treatment — including for minors. Mamdani has promised to turn NYC into an 'LGBTQIA+ Sanctuary City' if elected mayor. Getty Images Stuart Smith, an investigative analyst with the Manhattan Institute, who initially posted clips from DSA's 'Socialism 2025' YouTube videos on X, pointed out that the $65 million in taxpayer funds that Mamdani wants to earmark to cover trans surgery for anyone who wants it 'won't last too long' given the cost of such procedures. Advertisement The campaign platform also wags its finger at hospital systems that have stopped providing trans surgeries to minors, singling out NYU Langone and accusing it of 'sell[ing] out young trans New Yorkers to the Trump administration' and violating state law. It even went so far as to threaten hospitals who don't agree with their positions, ominously warning it 'will hold private entities abetting Trump's attacks to account' if they refuse to fall in line. 'The Mamdani administration will coordinate with the NYS Attorney General and District Attorneys to investigate and hold public hearings on hospitals that deny trans youth their rightful healthcare and hold them accountable to the law,' the document reads. In New York, voters appear split on trans issues. Last November, Proposal 1, which modified the state constitution to include sexual orientation and gender expression under its equal rights amendment, passed 62.5% to 37.5%, far from a landslide victory. When it comes to President Trump's executive order mandating there were only two genders in the US, male and female, Empire State voters supported it by a margin of 47% to 40%, according to a Siena College poll from February. As for trans athletes competing in girls' sports, a different Siena poll from last April showed that 66% of New York voters said they support high school athletes only being allowed to compete against other members of the gender they were assigned at birth. Goulding, during the DSA conference, went so far as to claim he was close pals with top Mamdani campaign officials. 'DSA has regular meetings with him, let alone his team. His policy director is my friend. I've been working with his campaign manager for well over a year.' Advertisement Asked about the DSA rep's claims, a Mamdani spokesperson denied that Goulden was affiliated with the campaign, saying he doesn't work for them. But the rep didn't respond to a follow-up question about whether DSA played a part in writing the campaign's LGBTQ platform. The campaign, proclaiming it was borrowing from laws in lefty havens like San Francisco and Olympia, Washington, has also pledged to spend $87 million on services and perks for LGBTQ New Yorkers, generally, broken down as follows: $30 million for housing programs $20 million for mental health services $10 million for organizations serving transgender New Yorkers $10 million for administrative and coordination costs $5 million for workforce investments $5 million for new education funding $4.7 million for new healthcare funding $2 million for public defense and other legal system investments Advertisement 'As Mayor, Zohran will unapologetically protect trans New Yorkers and fight back against Trump's discriminatory federal overreaches and funding cuts determined to roll back LGBTQ+ rights,' the campaign spokesperson said in a Monday statement. DSA did not respond to The Post's request for comment.
Chicago Tribune
30-07-2025
- Chicago Tribune
Northwestern University employee sues after protesting cuts to LGBTQ resources
A former Northwestern University staff member is suing the school for allegedly firing him after he publicly opposed new restrictions on resources for LGBTQ students. Matthew Abtahi served as the director of Northwestern's Gender and Sexuality Resource Center until his employment was terminated in April, according to a civil complaint filed July 17 in Cook County Circuit Court. The Windy City Times first reported on the filing Monday. The school's Gender and Sexuality Resource Center offers mental health resources to the LGBTQ community. But earlier this year, the university began to scale back the center's online presence, and Northwestern leadership counciled staff issued directives to remove certain initiatives from the website, the filing said. Northwestern 'instructed staff at the Gender and Sexuality Resource Center, including Mr. Abtahi, to refrain from providing resources that had been traditionally provided to members of Northwestern's gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender community,' the complaint said. Since taking office, President Donald Trump has sought to curtail diversity, equity and inclusion programming at universities nationwide. That's led dozens schools to scrub their websites of messaging highlighting inclusion efforts. 'This last month working with the lawyers and senior leadership at NU has been particularly gutting,' Abtahi wrote in the email. 'Our ability to centralize and provide NU and community-based solutions to the issues LGBTQIA+ students were facing while enrolled was a core part of our work.' A Northwestern spokesperson said the university doesn't comment on pending litigation. In the internal email, Abtahi detailed his conversations with Northwestern's legal counsel, who advised him to remove information from the center's website on the school's all-gender bathrooms, chest-binding education and gender-affirming care on campus. Lawyers also counseled him to remove references to national nonprofits like the Trevor Project and Trans Lifeline, which offer crisis support to transgender individuals. Those organizations use language that has been 'deemed exclusionary' by Northwestern because they are not intended for the general public, Abtahi said in the email. 'The use of civil rights law and discrimination policy to advance these kinds of changes is alarming,' Abtahi wrote. Throughout the university's investigation, Abtahi was never interviewed by officials, the filing said. He was fired about two weeks later. At the time, Abtahi had been set to transition into a new position in alumni engagement, but that offer was rescinded. He was later told not to return to Northwestern's campus, according to the complaint. The filing lists ten counts, including retaliation for opposing discrimination and wrongful termination — accusing the university of violating the Illinois Human Rights Act and the Illinois Whistleblower Act. It seeks compensatory and punitive damages, as well as attorney's fees. 'It's always disspointing when you're forced to escalate matters to the courts,' said Jerry Bramwell, Abtahi's attorney. 'We look forward to presenting our case in court.' The filing offers a glimpse into staff internal pushback at Northwestern as university leaders around the country scramble to adapt to new federal policies. Since taking office, President Donald Trump has sought to curtail diversity, equity and inclusion programming at universities nationwide. That's led dozens schools to scrub their websites of messaging highlighting inclusion efforts. At Northwestern, the Trump administration has frozen more than $790 million in federal research funding, and has yet to communicate with university leadership on why — or how it can restore those dollars. Next week, President Michael Schill is set to testify for the second time before the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce in August in a hearing on antisemitism on college campuses that will be closed to the media. His first appearance to address the issue was in May 2024.
