Call Me Max: The Utah Edition
In February the Salt Lake Tribune reported a controversy in the Murray School District over the reading of Call Me Max by Kyle Lukoff and Luciano Lozona. Given my particular interest in the challenges to trans stories, I requested records to explore the basis for this challenge. In some ways, this controversy is different than most I see because there is little overt transphobia. Some of the messages I’ve seen sent to other schools and teachers for the same sin of reading a picture book to kids are truly terrifying. Despite this lack of overt transphobia, the parents all hewed to a similar line that the presentation of any information about trans people, or LGBTQ people more broadly, is too sensitive for young years and should require a permission/notification slip. While a softer form of transphobia, it is still transphobia nonetheless.
Call Me Max is a picture book that explains a trans boys experience in an accessible way for young children, written by a trans man. The book was brought in by a 3rd grade trans child and was read to support them with the suggestion that an incident in class motivated this reading. But as the teacher explained to parents, this fit within the equity framework the school was working towards with the intention “to teach students to feel confidence in themselves as well as accepting others.” Now in the process of defending the book reading from parents, the school’s justification for reading the book was not always clear. In part this is because the teacher sought to protect the trans student from potential blowback.
The parent objections basically echoed each other. A number noted that they knew about the equity project and even that they were happy about int, until it went too far. One noted that many of the books taught about racism: “I was glad to know that my children would be learning about such important topics. However, I was not informed at any time that my children would be learning about anything pertaining to gender or sexual identity. … I think that, regardless of any possible differences in personal opinions, we can agree that these are incredibly sensitive topics, ESPECIALLY for children.” Another parent was grateful for diversity but “I did not realize that these books and discussions would also include LGBTQ+ issues.” Other parents echoed these sentiments with assertions that of course they want their child to be accepting and kind to all but that there were certain topics that were just a little too much. And, of course, the topic of trans kids existing are the prime example of too much. Parents repeated refer to any discussion of trans or queer folks as “sensitive” or “touchy” subjects. This tracks with pretty much every challenge to queer-inclusive literature: kids are too young. It doesn’t actually matter how old they are, they are always too young. They can learn about racism because that is important, transphobia is unimportant.
Where this challenge deviates from others, however, is that none of the parents called explicitly for the book to not be read. About the closest anyone came was one who argued that “I do not believe that that book needed to be shared in order to” teach acceptance to kids. Another objected to a page in Max where it discusses how parents decide to call a baby a boy or girl and the baby might object if they could speak. Most parents demanded “transparency” which generally meant notice and explicit consent from parents. One demanded that “a paper sent home to be signed and approved for any topic regarding any form of gender identity or sexuality.” The basis for this demand was framed in terms of the “legal rights” of parents. But the basis was generally vague, as is usually the case with laypeople. There is certainly no constitutional right to this kind of notice. One parent did cite a statute, Utah code 53E-9-203. Unfortunately for the parent, this statute does not support their position. It does require written consent from parents but only where the school is surveying or otherwise attempting to get students to disclose various aspects of their identity or experience, which includes “sexual behavior, orientation, or attitudes.” Discussing a trans-inclusive book does not fall within this statute.
Leaving aside the demand for a second, why do parents want this notification? Some suggested it was necessary so they could prepare to support the curricular goals when kids brought it up at home. But most left it unclear. They simply asserted a right to notice and consent and left the reason hanging. At some level this raises the likelihood that the objection was to the content of the book and notice would allow them to keep the kid home to avoid exposure to “sensitive” and “touchy” subjects like the fact that trans people exist. This is why so many stress the age of their children — this is in 3rd grade! — they fundamentally fear the knowledge imparted by the book and the easiest way to avoid it is to require notice so they can protect their child.
The records show that things escalated from the issue of Max to include a broad attack on the school itself for embracing equity. One broad attack on the school asked rhetorically: “Are you in favor of the school system being revolutionized to incorporate political agendas and to replace basic and common sense teachings of mutual respect and courtesy with those political agendas?” Equity was another way of describing a dangerous political agenda. This represents a form of former President Trump’s white grievance politics because centering marginalized voices is seen as attack on white men. The same writer complained about how “Black Lives Matter and other people” are trying to get rid of a state board of education member “because she is standing up for Utah families and the right of parents to know what their students are being taught.” Cline particularly complains that equity focused education is indoctrination, attacking LGBTQ inclusion in particular.
While certainly not required to do so legally, the school did work to increase its transparency. Though as the assistant principal said: “I am just a bit upset, overwhelemed and confused right now because I shared all of this with all admin, with the board and everyone said it was wonderful until we talked about transgender students.” This equity curriculum was in place all year, so far as I know, and only when trans kids came up did a firestorm break out. This sadly is something I see a lot. While the Tribune story noted the school pulled the equity book bundles, the various emails suggest this was a temporary measure to make sure there was a clear policy in place for this program. I’m informed that at a recent meeting the Board agreed to support returning the book bundles to the libraries and is finalizing clear policies, though I haven’t had a chance to watch this video. From the emails it appears that the administration is still behind this valuable program and saw the shifts as more about clarifying the program to the public than giving in on the demands about notification and consent. Though I should note that my records are limited so I can’t say for certain and things are still in progress and could change.
Records: I don’t usually release my records but given the importance locally I have done so. I received four batches of emails, all related to a different search term. They include many duplicates and all of the emails used in this post are in the first batch. Part 1a, Part1b, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4.
