argument top image

Should schools be able to ban books?
Back to question

Children should not read about mature content

Children should not be exposed to topics such as substance abuse, violence, and sex at a young age.
Books Education Mature Content Violence
< (1 of 2) Next argument >

The Argument

Banning books save children from being exposed to graphic content that they may not mature enough for. The content could be traumatizing and disturbing to their mental health. Books can also promote violence and substance use.[1] If a character in a novel is acting violent, readers observe and learn that behavior. For example, the novel "The Catcher in the Rye" by J.D. Salinger has been credited for provoking multiple attempted assassinations and assassinations, such as John Lennon and Ronald Reagen.[2]

Counter arguments

Children should have the option to read mature content so they are not sheltered from lifelike situations. Reading about these situations is a safe way to learn about them but to not be put into harm's way. Mature content in literature can also better equip children to handle difficult situations that they read about. They are prepared and have learned from the successes and mistakes of the characters.


[P1] Reading about violence can provoke someone to cause violence. [P2] Reading about violent acts can be traumatizing for children. [P3] Reading graphic content has the potential to have bad psychological effects. [P4] For children's safety, schools should be able to ban books.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P4] Sheltering children from the realities of life is not helpful.


This page was last edited on Monday, 26 Oct 2020 at 14:35 UTC

Explore related arguments