The author of a book on gay male sexuality is speaking out after his work was caught in an imbroglio over its inclusion in a Missouri public library.
The library's CEO told the Bay Area Reporter that the book will be removed due to the presence of "explicit photographs that seemed unrelated to the text they should have been illustrating," but Winston Gieseke, the author of "Bang Like a Porn Star: Sex Tips from the Pros," feels he's being scapegoated.
Gieseke, a 53-year-old gay man who lives in Palm Springs, first found out about the controversy when a Google News alert for his name brought up a web article from KMOV-TV in St. Louis.
The article states that residents came to a St. Charles City-County Library Board of Trustees meeting to demand the book be removed from circulation, charging that it is obscene.
Gieseke told the B.A.R. December 12 that he agreed with concerns that the one copy of the book in the library might have been placed too low on the shelf. However he disagreed with the characterization that it is obscene.
"The book is not meant for children," he said. "The book is more entertaining than it is, you know, porn. It does not have any business in the hands of children, so that's not a good idea, but any library worth its salt should have a little something to offend everyone."
The move to remove "Bang Like a Porn Star: Sex Tips from the Pros" from the library comes as calls to remove books — particularly LGBTQ-themed books — from libraries reaches a fever pitch. Last year saw the most-ever recorded attempts to censor books in America's libraries, according to the American Library Association.
According to the ALA, a record 2,571 unique titles were targeted for censorship in 2022, a 38% increase from the 1,858 unique titles targeted for censorship in 2021. Of those titles, the vast majority were written by or about members of the LGBTQIA+ community and people of color.
Obscenity precedent was set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in Miller v. California, decided by the liberal Warren court in 1971. In the Miller case, the court ruled 5-4 that obscene materials are not protected by the First Amendment, but lessened the definition of "obscene material."
For something to be obscene, and thus not covered by the First Amendment, it must appeal to the "prurient interest," that is, sexual appetites; lack "serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value;" and describe "in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law."
All three of these prongs have to be satisfied for expression to be legally obscene.
The book is the only work Gieseke has authored. He did so, back in 2019, because "I had seen so many sex books — whether it's how to bottom, or how to be a good kisser — and they are always written by so-called experts and I've always wondered who these experts are," he said.
"I thought it'd be fun to go out [and talk] to people who've had sex for a living," Gieseke said. "So, I thought of porn stars, some of which I knew from previous jobs, some of which I've found on Twitter [now X] and I interviewed various people and got their thoughts on how to do things and put it into a book, so everyone could learn how to bang like a porn star."
When asked if in the course of his investigations he'd found anything that surprised him, Gieseke said, "There were little things that surprised me — some people were really into talking and some people, when I expressed curiosity about how that [sexual] act is even possible, they would send photos of them doing that, which was kind of fun. A bunch of nice guys — it didn't seem controversial to me when I was writing it, to be honest."
Gieseke told the B.A.R. that he'd heard the St. Charles City-County Library Board of Trustees bought 10 more copies of the book as part of its deliberative process of whether the book should be banned from the library.
'Explicit photographs'
In a lengthy statement to the B.A.R. December 13, Jason Kuhl, the CEO of the St. Charles City-County Library, gave an impassioned defense of libraries' role in America. He also confirmed that the library did indeed order additional copies for a review of the contents.
"We ensure everyone has free and equal access to information and everyone can choose for themselves what they want to read, view, or hear," Kuhl stated. "The public library is a cornerstone of a strong community and a strong democracy. As former Kentucky governor Wendell Ford once said, 'If information is the currency of democracy, then libraries are its banks.'"
Nonetheless, Kuhl stated that a committee decided to remove all copies of the book from circulation after all existing requests to borrow it from the library had been filled. (Twenty people are waiting, Kuhl stated.)
"During the committee's review, they learned that the item did, indeed, have explicit photographs that seemed unrelated to the text they should have been illustrating," Kuhl stated. "They also learned that this item was purchased because it was the only item readily available at the time about sexuality and sexual health for gay men. It contains important information about health, safety, and consent that are not contained elsewhere in our collection and to remove it would be to erase this topic altogether.
"They also learned the item had been checked out several times since it was purchased over five years ago and has a list of 20 people waiting," he added.
Kuhl had a rebuke for those who felt the book was not in line with St. Charles County values.
"A common refrain is that the materials in question don't reflect the values of the residents of St. Charles County," he stated. "Yet, cumulatively they have been checked out hundreds of times by those very residents. Do they not count as true St. Charles County residents? Are their tax dollars somehow worth less? The answer, of course, is obvious if you're approaching it from an apolitical, unbiased point of view as we always do."
When asked if the "explicit photographs" was the sole reason, Kuhl expounded in a follow-up email.
"There were many factors, but the number of explicit photographs that weren't there to illustrate and enhance what was in the text was one of them," he stated. "The item is also now five years old, which is pretty dated when it comes to topics related to health, and there is now newer information in the collection. Around 10% of our collection turns over each year (last year we added around 55,000 items to the collection and removed around 45,000), so replacing older items with newer ones on the same topic is common.
"Regardless of the attention this item received, it likely would have been a candidate for routine weeding from the collection based upon age and use in the near future," Kuhl added.
Gieseke, reached for comment after the B.A.R. received a response on the fate of the book, stated, "I disagree with his comment that the book contained 'explicit photographs that seemed unrelated to the text they should have been illustrating.' Of course they were related. Oftentimes in a tongue-in-cheek manner, but always related.
"And I find it deliciously hypocritical that they're waiting to remove the book until after the 20 people who placed a hold have finished reading it," he added. "If the book is so incendiary with all its unrelated nudity, why aren't they pulling it immediately? That's like saying 'We've determined this item is poisonous, but since 20 of you requested it, we're going to let you eat it before we pull it from the market.'"
Gieseke had said during the earlier interview that "I don't believe in censorship."
"Like I said, not everything is appropriate for everyone, so I would not expect a child to look at a book with lots of male nudity in it, but that said, the book should be able to exist," Gieseke said.
LGBTQ Agenda is an online column that appears weekly. Got a tip on queer news? Contact John Ferrannini at [email protected]
Due to the upcoming holidays, the LGBTQ Agenda column will return Tuesday, January 9.
Never miss a story! Keep up to date on the latest news, arts, politics, entertainment, and nightlife. Sign up for the Bay Area Reporter's free weekday email newsletter. You'll receive our newsletters and special offers from our community partners.
Support California's largest LGBTQ newsroom. Your one-time, monthly, or annual contribution advocates for LGBTQ communities. Amplify a trusted voice providing news, information, and cultural coverage to all members of our community, regardless of their ability to pay -- Donate today!