Cobb County School Superintendent Chris Ragsdale announced yesterday that six more books have been removed from school media centers due to sexually explicit content. The announcement comes as part of the school district’s ongoing book review process, which has so far resulted in the removal of 26 titles.
The Details: Speaking at a public meeting, Ragsdale cited concerns over graphic sexual content in the latest round of books removed. The titles include several from the popular A Court of Thorns and Roses series, along with Iron Fire. He emphasized that the books were found to contain material deemed inappropriate for unrestricted access by students, particularly younger ones.
This decision follows earlier removals of 20 books for similar reasons. Ragsdale stated that the district’s media collections include more than one million items, and that the books being removed represent a small fraction of the overall library materials.
In Context: The removal of books from school libraries has sparked significant debate within the district. While some parents and community members support the removals, citing a desire to limit children’s exposure to sexually explicit material, others have expressed concerns about potential censorship and the narrowing of available literature for students.
Ragsdale encouraged those who disagree with the decision to review the content of the books themselves, suggesting the use of bookstores, public libraries, or online resources to access the material. He noted that parents remain free to provide their children with these books at home but stated the district’s role is to manage what is available within public school settings.
Why It Matters: This issue is part of a broader conversation happening in school districts across the country, where decisions about which books are made available to students have become increasingly contentious. Advocates for removing the books argue that schools should not provide access to materials they believe are inappropriate for children, while opponents argue that restricting access could limit students’ exposure to diverse ideas and narratives.
