BEAUFORT COUNTY, S.C. — On Tuesday evening, the Beaufort County Board of Education addressed the contentious issue surrounding five books that had recently come under scrutiny.

These titles were already subject to restriction by the local education board after a parent’s grievance prompted their reassessment by the South Carolina Board of Education.

The concerned parent has submitted a total of 96 books for evaluation, questioning whether they should remain accessible, be removed, or face restrictions in school libraries.

Under the restricted status, the books can still be found on school library shelves, but students require parental approval to borrow them.

The parent’s appeal to the South Carolina Board of Education cited a potential breach of state regulation 43-170 by these five books.

The state put the decision in Beaufort County Board of Education’s hands.

“This regulation simply requires that sexually explicit material, graphic sexual acts, pornographic descriptions and age-inappropriate depictions of sex not be placed in the hands of minors in schools,” said Ivie Szalai, the Beaufort County parent who pushed for the books to reviewed again.

At the board meeting, several parents and community members showed up once again for the ongoing debate.

That included some for and against banning books.

The five books back under review included:

• “The Handmaid’s Tale” by Margaret Atwood
• “Oryx and Crake” by Margaret Atwood
• “Milk and honey” by Rupi Kaur
• “November 9” by Colleen Hoover
• “Perfect” by Ellen Hopkins

One Beaufort County resident, who is a retired public and private school guidance counselor, made a comment that the majority of books brought forward for review in South Carolina contained themes that target sexual content.

She said the books under challenge in the county targeted even deeper themes.

“The challenged books disproportionately involve stories and authors from LGBTQ+, and black indigenous and people of color,” she said.

Szalai claimed that her reasoning for bringing the books forward was not to attack any specific groups of people, but to address the content and whether it fit into the state’s regulations.

“Tonight is not about politics. It is not about race. It is about sexual orientation. And it certainly is not about erasing anyone’s identity, no matter what others may claim.  My efforts have never been to take away anyone’s voice representation or history.  This has always been about one thing. The content and whether that content is appropriate for minors,” Szalai said.

The five books are currently restricted to the high school level.

The decision was made by a committee organized of parents, community members, teachers, librarians and educators, and was created to read and review the original 96 books brought forward.

After reading each book in its entirety, the committee voted on whether the books were appropriate for certain age groups, as well as if they should keep, restrict or remove the books from school shelves.

Some community members that spoke out against removing the five books from the shelves on Tuesday served on the book challenge committee.

“I believe the complainant genuinely wants to help children, said Mary Foster, a parent to a now graduated Beaufort County student.  But as an educator and parent myself, I find it preposterous that books are the thing we believe children need protection from.”

Foster also served on the book challenge committee.

“Here we are still talking about removing books that our community has reviewed and wanted to leave in our schools. We have demonstrated time and time again that the vast majority of this community trusts our teachers and librarians.  We want our children to have access to as many books as possible, and we recognize that not every book is for every reader.  We are aware that parents can opt their children out of reading any book they choose, and we do not believe that one parent knows what’s best for our children,” Foster continued.

Another community member added on that “parental choice of one should not take away parental choice of another”.

Another community member, who is an associate professor at the University of South Carolina Beaufort, said the books in question may be seen as graphic, but argued the messages inside contained real life themes that were important for some student’s education.

“The books have literary merit, and they have readers who really need them.  Reducing these full and complex books to sex scenes misses the point.  If one hasn’t read Atwood’s Handmaid’s Tale, you might get the impression from the forums that the book is kind of trashy. But you read it in its entirety, you realize the novel is about so much more. Freedom, obligation, complex choices and memory,” he said.

He claimed that “Milk and Honey” by Rupi Kaur could also be considered as a book of literary merit.

“To say the book is just about sex, it’s a claim that the book itself actually really refutes,” he said.  “The book takes the reader through a narrative arc of familial sexual abuse, a relationship with a lover, a breakup in the process of healing and redirection of energy.  It’s about self-determination. At the end of the day, even with others in her own family trying to steal that right from her.”

He presented a copy of “Milk and Honey” that he bought second-hand. He ended his comment by showing the board a small poem in the book that had a handwritten note from the previous reader.

He claimed the written note from the reader showed the importance of the book remaining on school shelves.

“On page 26 there’s a poem. ‘The rape will tear you in half, but it will not end you.’ and the reader I bought it from wrote, ‘Remember this’ in the margin of the book.

The board upheld their vote to keep all five books restricted.