And Tango Makes Three



“While we firmly support the right of every reader to choose or reject a book for themselves or their families, those objecting to a particular book should not be give the power to restrict other readers’ right to access and read that book. As members of a pluralistic and complex society, we must have free access to a diverse range of viewpoints on the human condition in order to foster critical thinking and understanding. We must protect one of the most precious of our fundamental rights – the freedom to read.” Barbara Jones, Director of ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom

The American Library Association has declared And Tango Makes Three the most challenged book of 2006 to 2010, with the exception of 2009 during which it was the second most challenged. Published by Simon & Schuster Children’s Publishing in 2005, And Tango Makes Three is a children’s book written by Peter Parnell and Justin Richardson and illustrated by Henry Cole. The book received plenty of attention and opposition due to topics of homosexuality, same-sex marriage and adoption found there-within. Even though the story in the book is reported to be true, many of the book’s critics have argued that the book provides misleading information to children. This paper will examine why and how the book raised opposition and how efforts to remove the book were denied by the Federal Court.

The story itself unfolds at the New York’s Central Park Zoo, where many human and animal families can be observed. Special attention is paid to penguin families that usually begin with a pairing of a male penguin to a female penguin. However, two male penguins named Roy and Silo behaved differently from other penguins and spent all of their time together. “They bowed to each other. And walked together. They sang to each other. And swam together. Wherever Roy went, Silo went too.” (p. 10) After observing other penguin couples, Roy and Silo slept in a nest they built out of stones. However, they soon noticed that their nest was lacking an egg. To compensate, Roy found a rock shaped like an egg and the two penguins took turns sitting on it. Mr. Gramzay, the keeper of the penguin area at the zoo, came up with an idea to place an egg in need of care in Roy and Silo’s nest. One of the other penguin couples had two eggs but weren’t able to take care of more than one at a time. Roy and Silo took great care in making sure the egg would hatch by turning it each day so all sides stayed warm. After about a month of sitting and waiting, the egg hatched and the keeper, Mr. Gramzay, named the baby penguin Tango. Tango was the first penguin at the zoo to have two fathers. They took good care of her and raised her well, just like all of the other penguin families have done for their offsprings.

A book is proclaimed challenged by the American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom (OIF) due to reports collected from press reports, librarians, teachers, parents and other individuals. These reports are formal written complains requesting that the book (or other material in question) be restricted or removed. In 2008, OIF received 513 formal complaints. (Morales & Petersen 2009) OIF received fewer formal complaints in 2010, with 348 requests for removal or restriction of material in schools and libraries. However, not all challenges are reported to OIF, and they estimate that their statistics reflect only about 20-25% of all challenges. And Tango Makes Three was challenged due to these top three reasons quoted in formal reports: “homosexuality, religious viewpoint, [and] unsuited to age group.” (Jones 2011)

According to Justin Richardson, co-author of And Tango Makes Three, “We wrote the book to help parents teach children about same-sex parent families. It’s no more an argument in favor of human gay relationships than it is to call for children to swallow their fish whole or sleep on rocks.” (Miller 2006) Richardson explains that the story promotes homosexuality as much as it does swallowing fish whole and sleeping on rocks (which are some of the other behaviors exhibited by penguins in the story). In addition to co-authoring the book, Richardson serves as an associate psychiatry professor at Columbia and Cornell and is a well-known authority on children and sex.

This story has drawn a lot of controversy from different individuals and groups and has been removed from a few select schools and libraries (until this was overturned due to the move’s unconstitutionality). The existence of homosexuality and its status in our society, as well as family structures found within it, has drawn a lot of debate in various niches of the American society. Conservative religious groups that have opposed LGBT social movements have denounced homosexuality in humans and have extended the argument to include the rest of the animal kingdom. (Smith 2004). Additionally, Candi Cushman, the education analyst at Focus on the Family Action, called the book misleading and serving as political agenda geared at children. (Miller 2008).

In addition to these organizations, parents and administrators at various schools and libraries across the country have removed, restricted access to or moved And Tango Makes Three. These restrictions and publicity surrounding the book’s contents caught attention of the American Library Association (ALA) who gathered enough reports to call it the most challenged book of 2006, 2007, and 2008. Although it was second most challenged book in 2009, it climbed back to first spot in 2010. (Jones 2011) According to Barbara Jones report published for ALA in April 2011, “those seeking to remove the book have described it as “unsuited for age group,” and cited “religious viewpoint” and “homosexuality” as reasons for challenging the book.” (Jones, p. 1)

Select parents and public institutions have also used aforementioned arguments in order to limit access to or altogether eliminate the book. In 2006 for example, parents of students at the Shiloh Elementary School, attempted to place the book in a restricted part of the library where guardian’s permission was needed in order to view or check the book out. The school’s superintendent denied their request. (Suhr 2006)

During the same year at Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, the school’s superintendent, Peter Gorman, ordered for the book to be removed from the school’s libraries. Once concerns rose regarding the procedure protocol for handling challenged books Gorman allowed a committee to review the decision. (Suhr 2006)

The Loudon County Public Schools removed the book from libraries’ circulations following an order made by school’s superintendent Dr. Edgar B. Hatrick who used a parent’s complain against the book as the basis for claims. He acted in this direction even though the principal and school staff of Sterling, Virginia (a town served by the Loudon County Public Schools system) deemed the book suitable for children. (Chandler 2008) However, after receiving pressure from the community, Hatrick returned the book into circulation claiming that procedural errors voided the process.

Parents in Ankeny, Iowa also wanted to restrict the book at their school’s library by granting access to parents only. The lawyer representing the school’s district advised the parents that such a decision would not hold up in court. At this point, PEN America and ALA sent letters of support to the school’s board in order to keep the book’s access unrestricted. (WCF Courier 2008)

Another parent in Calvert County near Washington D.C. attempted to remove the book from children’s area and place it area specifically designated for “alternative” or “non-traditional” families. (Johnson & Goodman 2008) However, the library’s board of trustees denied the request by appealing to the Library Bill of Rights, which states that “materials should not be excluded because of the origin, background, or views of those contributing to their creation.” (ALA 2004) Their decision for denying the removal of the book could have been inspired by an advisory letter written by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sent to the Trustees. The letter argued that unrestricted access to books at public libraries was protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. “The Freedom to view, along with the freedom to speak, to hear, and to read, is protected by the First Amendment… In a free society, there is no place for censorship of any medium or expression.” (ALA 2004)

About a month later, another parent claiming that the book was “presenting issues of sexuality to children too young to understand them” challenged the book again. The parent insisted that the book belonged with adult books on sexuality and that it furthermore should be labeled with a “red dot” to alert parents to controversial content. However, ACLU cited historical judicial decisions supporting unrestricted access to a book in public libraries. (Jeon 2008)

Judicial decisions mentioned by ACLU include Board of Education v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853 (1982), in which the court found that the Constitution does not allow suppression of ideas, Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U.S. 844 (1997) and Kreimer v. Bureau of Police, 958 F.2d1242, 1255 (3d Cir. 1992), in both of which the court deemed that the right to receive information and ideas is protected by the First Amendment and is “the quintessential locus of the receipt of information”, and lastly, Sund v. City of Wichita Falls, 121 F. Supp. 2d 530 (N.D. Texas 2000) in which the Federal Court found it unconstitutional to move controversial children’s books to another section due to the book being challenged. Furthermore, the Federal Court stated that parents can restrict their children’s access to certain material, but they should not prevent all children in the community from doing so. “Where First Amendment rights are concerned, those seeking to restrict access to information should be forced to take affirmative steps to shield themselves from unwanted materials; the onus should not be on the general public to overcome barriers to their access to fully protected information.” (Jeon 2008)

Barbara Jones, the director of ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom, echoes the Federal Court’s decision in the aforementioned cases in the opening quote of this paper where she states that although the choice to read a book is in the hands of readers and their families, restricting access of a book to society is unconstitutional. The freedom to read is protected and guaranteed by the Constitution and is viewed to be of public interest by the ALA and the Association of American Publishers.

The “Freedom to Read” section of the Intellectual Freedom Manual affirms that librarians and publishers should “make available the widest diversity of views and expressions, including those which are unorthodox or unpopular with the majority.” Although they do not need to endorse everything found in the materials that they provide, conflict of public interest may occur when “their own political, moral or aesthetic views [are established] as a standard for determining what books should be published or circulated.” Other public conflicts may occur if publishers or librarians determine material’s acceptability on basis of personal history or political affiliations, if tastes of individuals were coerced or confined and writer’s artistic expression inhibited. Furthermore, it is not in public interest to label books exclusively (as would be the case with of the “red dot” parent in Calvert County) as that would characterize and subject the book to judgment prior to being read.

In addition to providing guidelines on how to effectively serve public’s interests and support a Constitutional right, the ALA addresses the responsibilities of publishers and librarians toward protecting the freedom to read. This can be accomplished by acting as “guardians of the people’s freedom to read”, challenging encroachments and providing material that address the widest array of views and expressions.

The freedom to read is regarded in finest light by the ALA, the Association of American Publishers, as well as by librarians, publishers and the majority of America’s population. This right is important to cherish, preserve and protect in order to ensure that everyone has an equal chance in providing and utilizing opinions, information and ideas. It is equally important to take on the responsibility of acting as guardians of people’s freedom to read, challenging unlawful restrictions and requests for a material’s removal. Although And Tango Makes Three has been at the top of ALA’s most challenged book list from 2006 to 2010, efforts to remove the book from public schools and libraries have been met with combined efforts supporting the Constitutional freedom to read right by organizations such as ACLU, the ALA, the Association of American Publishers, librarians and citizens countrywide. Additionally, as the Federal Court upholds, the freedom to choose which books to read is in the hands of the reader and their families. It is unconstitutional to remove material from public domain in order to restrict access to information.

“We state these propositions neither lightly nor as easy generalizations. We have stake out a lofty claim for the value of books. We do so because we believe that they are good, possessed of enormous variety and usefulness, worthy of cherishing and keeping free. We realize that the application of these propositions may mean the dissemination of ideas and manner of expression that are repugnant to many persons. We do not state these propositions in the comfortable belief that what people read is unimportant. We believe rather that what people read is deeply important; that ideas can be dangerous; but that the suppression of ideas is fatal to a democratic society. Freedom itself is a dangerous way of life, but it is ours.” The Freedom to Read, Intellectual Freedom Manual, 2004

- Dragana D.

References:
American Library Association. (2004). Freedom to Read. Intellectual Freedom Manual.

Chandler, M. A. (2008). Two Guys and a Chick Set Off Tiff Over School Library Policy.

Jeon, D.A. (2008). Letter to Commissioner Parran and Mr. Hine of the Calvert County Board of

Johnson, J., Goodman, C. (2008). Library Backs Book On Same-Sex Parents. The Washington

Jones, B. (2011). “And Tango Makes Three” Waddles Its Way Back to the Number One Slot as
America’s Most Frequently Challenged Book. ALA. Retrieved from:

Miller, J. (2008). New Love Breaks Up a 6-Year Relationship at the Zoo. New York Times.

Morales, M., Petersen, J. (2009). Attempts to Remove Children’s Book on Male Penguin Couple
Parenting Chick Continue. ALA. Retrieved from:

Richardson, J., Parnell, P. (2005). And Tango Makes Three. Simon & Schuster Books for Young
Readers.

Suhr, J. (2006). Parents Want Gay Penguins Book Blocked. The Boston Globe. Retrieved from:

Smith, D. (2004). Love That Dare Not Squeak Its Name. New York Times. Retrieved from:

WCF Courier. (2008). Ankeny Couple Wants Penguin Book Restricted. Retrieved from:

Comments

Post a Comment