Want to test an author or a reader’s blood pressure? Talk about censoring books. Three things came together in the past week, inspiring me to choose this as a blog topic:

First: I saw an article about banning a particular book from a school library. I have not read the book, but it seemed to be about teaching kids to be comfortable with their bodies and sexuality. The contentious issue cited (though there might be more than one) was the book has a picture of a naked woman in it, studying her genitals.

Second: The same week, a small social media firestorm happened over an award-winning romance that depicted a historical event in a way some people felt was incorrect and disrespectful to its victims. The organization that provided the award was getting flak for it.

Third: I have been reading a book (Love Your Enemies: How Decent People Can Save America from the Culture of Contempt by Arthur C. Brooks) that talks about how destructive it is to handle conflict with the weapon of contempt. Because I am an author, this quote in particular stuck with me: “By defining ourselves in terms of unbridgeable differences (political affiliation, etc) we put our common human stories out of reach for those who disagree with us. Likewise, by defining those with whom we disagree as nothing more than a set of disembodied characteristics (again, political affiliation, etc) we put their humanity out of our own reach.”

In my author capacity, I go out of my way to be non-political. However, like most everyone, I am trying to cope with the divisiveness, anger and helplessness causing strife in our countries, communities, families and friendships. When I stumble on a quote like the one above that connects to stories and their importance to our quality of life, how we live our lives, it gets me thinking.

When I saw the flurry of social media reactions to the two books, I wondered how much of those posts were driven by confirmation bias on either side, versus a firsthand examination of the books. Testing this out for myself, I checked out the romance. I’m familiar with the historical event in question, and I’ve read several different scholarly treatments on it. At least where I am in the book so far, the hero’s viewpoint on it was based on assumptions similar to those shared in the time period (he didn’t have the benefit of hindsight we do). He also seemed to be struggling morally with what had happened. We’ll see where it goes from there. As of yet, it hasn’t elicited any strong feelings from me.

That said, I have no problem with someone being offended by it or thinking the topic should have been handled differently. What concerns me is when public opinion is so vitriolic it discourages free, respectful and open discussion about a book’s content. That’s usually the way censorship and book banning/removal get their foot in the door. There’s an awesome quote from the play 1776 that reflects my thoughts on that: “In all my years I ain't never heard, seen nor smelled an issue that was so dangerous it couldn't be talked about.”

Stories communicate ideas in so many wonderful and diverse ways. When an inordinate amount of time and effort is spent trying to remove access to ideas, my alarm flags go up. Now, that said, there is no strong opinion I hold that doesn’t start with a hard look in a mirror. What do I mean by that?

I recently read a book where I disagreed with the beliefs in it so stringently, I told a friend I wanted to drown it in a bathtub so no one could be exposed to the ideas. But I did not, because prohibiting information from reaching people is saying, “I know better than you. I have the right to decide for you, what you can read, what you can think. You’re not smart enough to know what’s right – I am.”

And to reframe a fabulous line from Jamie Fraser in Outlander, when he saved Claire from the judges at a witch trial: “And if you're tellin' me that ye consider your own authority to be greater than that of the Almighty, then I must inform ye that I'm not of that opinion, myself.” [Er…please ignore my husband’s assertion of how often I say I’m right and he’s wrong – spousal arguments are exempt from this discussion, lol.]

If I support the free and respectful debate of ideas and differing opinions, then I have to reflect that in my behavior, no matter how I feel about a story. I can’t stand back and do nothing when a book I dislike is pulled, banned or condemned, and yet vociferously oppose the same thing happening to a book whose ideas I like. Inaction is as much a statement as action.

If I don’t like a book, I’m not going to recommend it to anyone. End of story (no pun or threat intended - grin). If I want to talk about why I don’t like it, I’m going to give other people the chance to express their opinion and not personally attack them for that differing viewpoint.

I write BDSM Romance, a genre that some believe supports a lifestyle that is immoral or deviant behavior (whatever that means). Far more people held that opinion decades ago than do so now. That’s because books like mine started reaching more people. They had the opportunity to learn about it, ask questions, make up their own minds. In short, an open dialogue started happening.

So going back to that historical romance – how much more productive and interesting a dialogue would occur if we had a respectful interchange on why the author chose to present the event the way she did? Get the chance to hear her thoughts. She might not agree with why some people are upset, but I’m willing to bet if that discussion happened, it would result in everyone feeling more enlightened by the discussion. Especially if we made a sincere effort to hear one another’s stories/viewpoints, rather than treating one another with ideologically driven contempt. Understanding is often far more important than agreement.

Years ago, someone sent me an email about a side character in my book Natural Law, a nurse who helped Mac and Violet during a life-threatening crisis. The reader was upset because she felt I’d presented a racist stereotype of the nurse. I explained that the character was based on my mother’s grateful description of the labor nurse who helped deliver me. As soon as that was clarified, she felt much better, because she realized my description of this character had not been driven by what she’d assumed it was. In short, we connected and had a discussion, person to person.

At book conferences—wonderful immersion events for authors and readers--we talk about stories, reading, characters, family, emotions, how we go through life. Our ideologies, the things that can divide us, aren’t how we define ourselves at these events. We connect to one another, regardless of our differences in backgrounds, orientation, etc, on what the stories make us feel, the joy and thoughts they give us. I love that, because it tells me we are SO much more than our differences. As this book Love Your Enemies says, the “why” of who we are is so much more unifying than the “what.”

And the “why” makes for a far more interesting story, about every one of us.

* * *

Did you know that the BDSM GoodReads group is featuring Vampire Guardian as their August Book of the Month? Go Join the Group and the discussion - Link here: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/..."