Not in Front of the Children: Indecency, Censorship, and the Innocence of Youth by Marjorie Heins

by Marjorie Heins

The first comprehensive history of the debate about censorship designed to protect children and winner of the ALA's 2002 Eli Oboler Award for best-published work in the area of intellectual freedomFrom Huckleberry Finn to Harry Potter, Internet filters to the V-chip, censorship is often based on the assumption that children and adolescents must be protected from "indecent" information that might harm their development -- whether in art, in literature, or on a Web site. But where does this assumption come from, and is it true? In Not in Front of the Children, a pathbreaking history of "indecency" laws and other restrictions aimed at protecting youth, Marjorie Heins suggests that the "harm-to-minors" argument rests on shaky foundations.

Genres: Nonfiction, History, Sexuality, Politics, Law, Sociology, Psychology

Paperback

First published January 1, 2001

Reviews

[Erika · Rating 3 out of 5]

Censorship has been used throughout the years to "protect" children, women, the mentally deficient and the socially inferior classes who are simply to fragile or vulnerable to be exposed to dangerous and challenging ideas.

This book takes a look at the history of the censorship and the attempts to control the expression of ideas and thoughts using the threat to and protection of the innocent. Even if no one can ever clearly explain and prove what that threat is.

It was a bit hard to get through at times due to all the legalese, scientific studies and court cases that are referred to which makes for dry reading, but in between all of that was some really good, eye opening points about censorship in our country through the years.

I came into this with a pretty clear cut idea of what I thought about censorship and using it to protect children, and while my opinions on this haven't really changed I at least have a better appreciation for how complicated the issue is.

[Amy Bailey · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very thorough and easy-to-follow account of the history of censorship in the U.S. (with also a brief section of worldwide historical significance). At times I found myself wishing it was over, as much of the history of intellectual freedom is the same issues rehashed by different generations. However, this is a valuable read for anyone interested in issues surrounding intellectual freedom, especially those regarding children and young adults, as well as professionals in library or teaching professions who may come into contact with individuals nervous about or vehemently opposed to intellectual freedom for children.

[Kirsten · Rating 4 out of 5]

The premise of the book is to examine censorship and ideas of why we think children need to be protected from sexuality and sex and raunch, and the ideas behind that. Going all the way back to Plato - she refers to Plato as puritanical, which I thought was nicely anachronistic. Shouldn't we go in chronological order and refer to the Puritans as platonic?

[Jonathan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very dense history of censorship law in the U.S. and Britain primarily. This is not a light read, but it's a good one, recommended to anyone studying the subject. Very thorough.

[Eli · Rating 5 out of 5]

Out of all the books and research I've done on censorship and First Amendment issues, this one is the most easily-digestible, comprehensive, and non-dogmatic. A must-read for Free Speech advocates.

[6655321 · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book is a mess. There *are* some good sections but Heins never analyzes anything or falls back on truisms to focus almost exclusively on "the Child" as a pure figure corrupted by the evils of sexuality, drug use, violence on (whatever media expression exists in the time period). The thing is since there is no theory work (other than the first 20 pages which are about the arising of the idea of children as something that is worth investing concern in rather than being sold to apprenticeship or put to work as soon as possible) so we have this idea of "censorship" as a restriction of "freedom" in the name of "children" who may be exposed to "trauma" (to be fair to Heins in the last chapter she summarizes research on television exposure and violence which seems weirdly out of place). To draw out this dissatisfaction: LGBT information on the internet is frequently brought up as something that (concerned parents groups) want to restrict and sexual information in general (especially on the internet) is something that is a hot button but there is no argument about the value of sexuality in Heins work or one why Left to Right on the political spectrum individuals show a massive discomfort regarding non-straight sexuality. Or with high school book controversies she wants to produce a cardboard cutout (called concerned parents) who want to ban books because they contain themes parents are uncomfortable with but she gives no *context* for this because there is a difference between Jehovah's Witnesses & various Christian Fundamentalists who want Harry Potter out of school libraries and parents concerned about the depiction of race in say Huck Finn. This is the sort of ACLU fear of "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" that can be like "we shouldn't ban any political expression" (litigates for Nazis to march through a neighborhood of Holocaust survivors). It's not that there is anything *good* about state regulation but Heins ignores context, history, and the identities of people protesting pretty much always to put things in neat boxes labeled (sexuality), (violence), (profanity).

[Angela · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really enjoyed the information and discussion about "harmful" ideas for children and how American thinking on this has developed (or not). Found the sections about sex ed materials particularly interesting; also the historical background (e.g. when did we begin thinking of kids as innocent and pure? hint: Christianity had a lot to do with it, because the ancients tended to think children were basically disgusting). A lot of legal information but presented in a pretty engaging way. Highly recommended.

[Tyler Malone · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book really is a remarkable piece of work. Sure, a lot of same characters and platitudes come in a little too often, but the thesis, should taboos be restricted by governments or corporations, is incredibly compelling, because, as the book demonstrates, the threshold of harm seems limitless when freedoms to “harm” ourselves are taken away ; most times restricting these things changes the path that society flows. If you’re interested in an expansive bibliography and a book that really maps out, sometimes a little to legally, the history of censorship, give Marjorie’s book a read.

[Colleen · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is loaded with information and is accessible in its style and layout. Heins brings a lot of reason and insight to an complex issue, as well as facts,and historical precedent. Some of the parts I liked best, though, are when she discusses how certain aspects of the issue of what our children watch aren't as fundamentally human as we might think- like the presumption of childhood sexual innocence. If you think about these issues, this is worth every page.

[Caroline · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was interesting but a little hard to get through. If I hadn't had to read it for class, I may have not finished it... oh wait, I didn't finish it. Oops.

Hiens does a really thorough job of detailin the legislative nad judicial history of censorship, of many media, laws and legislation.

[C.E. G · Rating 2 out of 5]

Read this for my independent study. Kind of dry and repetitive legal history of censorship and children. Makes the good but not groundbreaking point that censorship is more about socializing youth than protecting them from psychological harm, and that adults are often uncomfortable with children's sexuality and sexuality in general.

[First Second Books]

I posted more about this book on the First Second blog, so what I’ll say here is: this is a fascinating book that traces the path of the legal wars on the ‘freedom of speech’ part of the first amendment, with special attention on how the judgments were continually aimed at ‘protecting children’ despite children rarely being a part of the matter at hand.

[Marissa · Rating 4 out of 5]

I used this for a research paper, and it helped immensely. The book is really well-researched and keeps you interested, until it becomes a bit repetitive. The subject remains intriguing, but the focus of the book strays a little toward the end, when it almost becomes a summary of legal cases involving censorship. Nevertheless, I would recommend it.

[Erin · Rating 3 out of 5]

A fairly read-able legal history. I disagree with her decision to conflate pornography and erotica, but on the whole it s a well researched history. A valuable resources of youth services librarians.

[Salsabrarian]

An in-depth look at censorship law through the ages, changing social attitudes towards children, and the problematic efforts of determining what's good or bad for children. Very deep but some interesting points raised.

[Susana · Rating 4 out of 5]

much data. but well worth the mental strain.

[Brian S. Wise · Rating 2 out of 5]

The book is frequently difficult to read, because Heins' writing style is boxy and somewhat unpleasant.

[Christine · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good overview, if a bit dry, of sex ed, press freedom, and media freedom.

[Virginia · Rating 5 out of 5]

A former Professor of mine wrote this. I truly enjoyed reading it...it was informative and interesting.

[Sarah · Rating 3 out of 5]

Part of my reading for Intro Education research paper on censorship in children's books. Interesting subject.