Banning the new version of Anne Frank's diary in schools is not anti-Semitic

Not long ago, I had a discussion with an Israeli who thought it was terrible that some American schools were banning books. When I mentioned that those books were pornographic in nature, targeting kids, in order to confuse them about gender and instruct them on deviant sexual behavior, I was told that Anne Frank's diary was among those books being banned.

So, after seeing a full-page Jerusalem Post article, on the subject, I began to investigate why the new graphic novel version of the original book, Diary of a Young Girl, Anne Frank, published in 1947, is now being banned in certain American schools. 

Many of us read the book as children, and while there were a couple of passages alluding to Anne’s coming-of-age feelings, no one complained that the book was inappropriate for kids.  

In 1947, homosexuality was a mostly forbidden topic, and if one felt tendencies in that direction, they seldom spoke about it and, surely, never publicized it.  Although the issue remains in contention, as to whether or not Otto Frank, Anna’s father, wanted the diary published in its entirety, we know that certain portions were omitted as they related to the very conflicted relationship Anne had with her mother. Whether Otto wanted his daughter’s words unedited, or not, someone, at the time, apparently thought the book should be sanitized in order to protect Anne’s reputation as well as to facilitate the possibility of being the best seller that it ultimately became.

But the graphic novel adaptation of Anne Frank’s Diary, published in 2018, is a whole other kettle of fish. The new version has become the focus of controversy in both Texas and Florida, as parent groups such as “Moms for Liberty,” “No Left Turn in Education,” and other parents throughout the nation have made every effort to ban the book from school libraries, along with other "objectionable" books which are written and drawn for children, but whose message is geared towards the sexualizing of children.

In the case of the Anne Frank book, those who control its publishing and copyright are the ones crying foul. And why wouldn’t they, given that they also have much to lose? Consequently, they are accusing these parent groups of being bigoted and misguided. However, “proponents of removing the book from schools say the graphic adaptation is essentially an obscene version that distorts Frank’s legacy and aids in ‘grooming’ children. Even some Jewish parents and at least one Jewish lawmaker have objected to the book’s presence in schools.”

In fact, Jewish lawmaker, Randy Fine, who serves as a member of the Florida House of Representatives, stated, “To sexualize the diary of Anne Frank in that sort of inappropriate way, is itself, anti-Semitic.”

The objectionable portions center around Anne’s inappropriate affection towards other girls as she expresses her deep desire to experience intimacies with others of her sex. Here is one diary entry, which is deeply troubling to parents, and explains why they are objecting to this kind of content being viewed by their children. 

In further challenging the appropriateness of the book, these parents point to the illustrations, which are meant to be an extrapolation of Anne Frank’s sexual fantasy, as she strolls through a garden depicting female nude statues. Of course, the combination of her words, along with the illustrator’s renderings, create an indelible impression that can so easily serve to foster this kind of thinking as normative.

During these rapidly changing times, which have seen tremendous societal changes as it concerns gender and sexual preference, it’s hard to miss the obvious and well-orchestrated effort, especially in America, to desensitize behaviors that most people have long viewed as deviant, anti-social or even what is classified as criminal. 

One such example is pedophilia – where adults prey on children in order to abuse them sexually. An attempt to desensitize this criminal act has been to change the socially unaccepted name to one that is more palatable. In that endeavor, the acronym of “MAP” was concocted, meaning – Minor Attracted People. It doesn’t sound nearly as evil or stigmatizing, and that is the idea! Take away the shock factor and, perhaps in time, people will come to accept what was once odious behavior that could land someone in jail.  

All of this actually shows just how far we’ve strayed from the concept of protecting and sheltering children from the harsh and cruel realities of a world that has many ugly and distorted paths. Once, parents would whisper to one another or wait until their kids were no longer in the room to discuss certain topics not meant for impressionable ears.

Nowadays, preschoolers are already being exposed to drag queen story hours in many different cities in America. Educational facilities have taken it upon themselves, often in direct opposition to parents’ wishes, to institute programs that discuss such themes as pregnancy prevention, STDs, sexual diversity and other related subjects to children as young as kindergartners. In fact, one website claims that “sex education that begins early is developmentally appropriate.”

Much to the regret of many parents, who still hope to raise their children the old-fashioned way, with biblical morals and godly principles, many progressive political leaders are trying to change laws in their state to favor the rights of children over their parents.  

“A newly revised California bill would make parents’ refusal to ‘affirm’ a child’s transgender identity, grounds for denial of custody or visitation rights. Critics say the bill. As now written, could lead judges to treat, as abusers, parents who are anything less than fully supportive of a child’s claims to be transgender,” according to an article in The Washington Free Beacon.

Is it any wonder that the purveyors of the new version of The Diary of Anne Frank, with its graphic descriptions of how this young girl expressed her sexual desires, are seeking to carve out their own little corner in this sexually super-charged marketplace aimed at children? 

For those who would like to blame opposition to the book as the result of anti-Semitism, a statement issued by Moms for Liberty was clear to point out that the diary is not, itself, objectionable. Only this new version is seen as inappropriate, causing parents to express the need to ban the book. They know, better than anyone, just how vulnerable children are to today’s popular trends, which are responsible for an unparalleled outbreak of gender confusion. 

Yes, anti-Semitism is definitely alive and well, but just not relevant when it comes to the new graphic adaptation of The Diary of Anne Frank. Sadly, the agenda of its promoters is suspect, at a time when we’re witnessing an unprecedented attack on innocent children, the likes of which we’ve never seen.