Library Lawsuit over Sexually Explicit Material for Children?

As the guardian of written words, how can a librarian be so inept at contextual clues? The request to move access to a separate location sexually explicit and graphic books to a separate area within a library. Is this an attempt to frame social justice issues by garnering public attention to their LGBTQ agenda? When a simple compromise could have fixed the problem, without the attention.


One of the books in question is Titled, "Let's Talk About it." It's an instructional manual for sex and describes different ways children can have sex.

Another book in question discovered at the public library was "Dating and Sex: A Guide for the 21st Century Teen Boy. This book was also located in a designated area for pre-teens. And this photo depicts what content can be found in the book where children as young as 11 can view its content.



So this begs the question as to why these books were not moved to a more age-appropriate area of the library. Where 11 year old children could not have access to it?


Louisiana Association of School Librarians actually uses the word censorship to describe age-appropriate shelving. Vis: “Moving books written for teens and housed in the teen section on topics of sex education and sexual identity to the adult section of a library is censorship.”

However, Louisiana Law contradicts this statement. RS 14:91.11. Under section §91.11. Sale, exhibition, or distribution of material harmful to minors: Louisiana Law lists, "Material harmful to minors" is defined as any paper, magazine, book, newspaper, periodical, pamphlet, composition, publication, photograph, drawing, picture, poster, motion picture film, videotape, video game, figure, phonograph record, album, cassette, compact disc, wire or tape recording, or other similar tangible work or thing which exploits, is devoted to or principally consists of, descriptions or depictions of illicit sex or sexual immorality for commercial gain, and when the trier of fact determines that each of the following applies:

(a) The material incites or appeals to or is designed to incite or appeal to the prurient, shameful, or morbid interest of minors.

(b) The material is offensive to the average adult applying contemporary community standards with respect to what is suitable for minors.

(c) The material taken as a whole lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors.


These books are being asked to be moved, not removed from the library littered with drawings of naked people engaging in different forms of sexual expression. Please be reminded these books were written with children in mind. The issue is however that there is a certain segment of society that believes that moving these books to a more age-appropriate section of the library is a form of censorship.


As for the content of these books written for children, people who posted images of the material on social media were quickly banned under their pornography terms of service. Why are these books not put in a more appropriate age-restricted area? Social media however had uproar with parents insisting they be moved to a more secure area of the library. And once word got out, several groups defended the librarians' stance, as well as many parents, went on the offensive against the library. Some parents accused the librarian of being a groomer, pedophile, etc. That is, after all, social media. However, the librarian took offense and decided to file a defamation suit against the individuals who brought attention to the issue.


It is ironic that the same group of people who are standing up for the First Amendment in the form of freedom of speech are actively trying to silence individuals who exercise that same right. Freedom of Speech is not a one-sided issue. The person initiating the lawsuit is attempting to silence those that exposed her inattention to detail on the issues of the legal statutes currently in place in Louisiana law.


The librarian in question has raised more than $90,000 in defense of her defamation lawsuit, because she spent a week crying because, "A Facebook post accused her of fighting to keep “sexually erotic and pornographic” materials in the library’s children’s section, and a meme accused Jones, (the librarian) of advocating teaching anal sex to 11-year-olds. Negative comments joined the attacks and inflamed an already volatile situation."


After researching Facebook Posts, this is the closest post that was found to start this lawsuit.



According to the librarian's statement, "Nobody is putting pornography and children's sections of the library. Stop that false narrative." However, a reasonable adult would find the content of the book as well as the description of the book to be sexually explicit, and more importantly not age appropriate for where the book is located in the library. Incidentally, the book is in a portion of the library where children as young as 11 years old can have access to what is in this book.


In her lawsuit claiming defamation she claims, "she is in immediate danger of irreparable harm, as Defendants' harassment and defamation is ongoing and continuous." She is also requesting, that the "Court enter an immediate order, without hearing, prohibiting Defendants from making any mention of Plaintiff Amanda Jones on social media, including, but not limited to, Facebook, and from contacting Plaintiff in any way, including by social media and including making contact with or tagging Plaintiff through her Facebook page the Livingston or from contacting her through the Louisiana Association of School Librarians Facebook page; and prohibiting Defendants from contacting Plaintiff's employer or coming within one hundred (100) yards of her place of employment; or of coming within one hundred (100) yards of the PlaintifI°s person; or from contacting plaintiff's employer. and also ordering Defendants to remove any and all references to Plaintiff Amanda Jones on any and all of their social media accounts, including but not limited to Facebook and Twitter, whether it be their personal account or operated under another name or business name. including Citizens for a New. Louisiana and Bayou State of Mind.


Does the above sound like someone who supports free speech? Because her argument to keep a sexually explicit book on the shelves where young children can have access to information that is not age-appropriate is due to free speech.


What do you think? If you want to help the individuals who exposed this librarian for her allegedly inappropriate response you can donate to their GoFundMe account. On his account, people can view the photographs of what is included in the book, as well as a detailed description of what is included in the books in question. The main question people should be asking do parents have the right to go against what a government facility is housing in their library and exposing their children to. Or should they simply remain silent as children are exposed to sexually explicit material.?

WE C U want to know the truth about what is happening in your city, town, and country. We bring you the truth regarding the issues that affect your daily lives so that you can make an informed decision that may affect you or your family. If you like our articles, please give us a heart and share. We are free speech advocates and will defend the First Amendment even when it may not be public opinion. If you have a comment please sign onto our site and leave one. If you want to keep free speech alive, please consider donating to our cash app $WecuNews, where even a single dollar is helping us. God Bless you all. And remember The First Amendment is for everyone.






406 views5 comments