Before Reform gained control of Essex county council in the May elections, Chris Taylor and members of the Rochford LGBTQ+ community already felt they were witnessing a growing tide of political rhetoric around identity.

But they were still shocked when the county’s new leadership moved to ban Pride events in 74 libraries, scaling back events of “any particular groups or themes”, a decision they said was “straight out of Trumpland”.

“It communicates the fact that we’re not welcome,” said Taylor, who recently launched a petition against the “Orwellian” ban on pride events in Essex libraries.

Reform councils across England, from Essex and Durham to Leicestershire and Kent, have imposed bans on flying the pride flag and holding pride events in public spaces, as well as, in some cases, defunding pride events previously sponsored by local authorities.

Essex county council said libraries were “safe spaces for everybody” and LGBTQ+ books and displays would continue, but added the promotion of library events aimed at specific groups was under review.

Reform councils have stopped flying Pride flags outside civic centres and county halls and restricted council flagpoles exclusively to union, national, county or armed forces flags at council buildings under its control.

Since learning of Essex council’s proposed changes to its libraries, Taylor, 38, has contacted Reform councillors with concerns but has yet to receive a response. With Essex Pride approaching, one LGBTQ+ resident told Taylor they had wanted to attend the library with their child, but expressed safety concerns.

“There does seem to be a bit a resurgence of anti-acceptance toward the community in the area,” added Taylor. “It’s a bit alarming.”

In Sunderland and Gateshead, Reform-led councils have withdrawn funding for Pride events and ended the practice of flying Pride flags on council buildings, while South Tyneside council has restricted the flag’s display at South Shields town hall to a single day at the start of Pride month.

Drew Dalton, an outreach manager at Out North East, which runs Pride events across Sunderland, Gateshead and South Tyneside and recently opened One Centre, the north-east’s first LGBT community centre in Gateshead, said the organisation had been preparing for Reform victories for months.

He said Sunderland and Gateshead’s decisions to stop flying Pride flags, alongside funding cuts, had left the organisation feeling it had lost “money”, “visibility” and “a great number of allies” in council chambers.

Dalton said: “We’ve spent a long time building up relationships and we lost them overnight in the local elections.”

The group has been forced to move events away from council-owned land and venues in anticipation of further restriction, Dalton said. “We had to future-proof everything we were doing,” he said. “It’s become that type of era where you have to watch your step.”

He said concerns within the LGBTQ+ community extended beyond council policy. Promotional signs had been repeatedly torn down for a smaller Pride event supported by the organisation, while people attending the One Centre hub had expressed anxiety about the wider climate.

“I don’t want to paint us as all scared,” he said. “There’s also a lot of righteous anger about what’s going on. And there’s the beginnings, which is wonderful to see, of people starting to pull together.”

Dalton said the political climate was reshaping Pride events. “We’ll probably look back at the latter half of the 2010s as a period when Pride became much more of a party. This year we’re not even having concerts. We’re having a rally in Sunderland. That tells you how the dynamic has shifted.”

Gateshead council, defending the changes, said it would only fly the union flag and St George’s Cross from council buildings but would continue to support civic, cultural and community events.

Wakefield council said it had adopted a more consistent approach focused on civic, national and military service flags, while Kent county council said it did not fly “cause-specific or community campaign flags” on its buildings.

Warwickshire Pride said they had “severely” felt the impact of the Reform administration since the party had won local elections in 2025. “From not permitting the Pride flag to fly, to announcing that Warwickshire Pride should not receive council funding, and this week saying [they] want LGBTQ+ books and information banned from Warwickshire’s libraries and schools, we are seeing hate towards our charity rise as a direct result,” said the charity’s chair, Daniel Browne.

Browne had requested the Pride and Trans flag fly at the county council on behalf of Warwickshire Pride, but was not surprised when the requests were declined. However, when the county council’s chair changed from Reform to Conservative, it was decided the flag would be raised this month.

Reform’s actions have affected the communities they serve, Browne said. The charity’s services include coffee mornings, LGBTQ+ counselling, youth groups and social events, where attenders have said as a direct result of the changes they have experienced increased anxiety, self-harming behaviours and hate incidents.

Browne said: “We’re stretched, under attack ourselves, and that’s difficult to navigate, but we remain here for Warwickshire’s LGBTQ+ population and will continue to push back against attempts to erase us or discriminate against us.”

Back in September, in a measure designed to “prevent immorality”, the Taliban closed down the internet in Afghanistan. This was the latest step – after a ban on all girls over the age of 12 receiving an education, and the removal of all books written by women from universities – to restrict citizens’ access to information that the regime might consider dangerous or difficult, or that challenges their ideological monopoly. The effect would have been to ensure that an entire generation of Afghans failed to reach their potential; the connection was partly restored 48 hours later, after widespread condemnation.

It was against this backdrop that I read about the school in Weymouth, Dorset, that had removed American author Angie Thomas’s wildly popular young adult novel The Hate U Give from its Year 10 reading list, apparently in response to the objection of one parent, former Conservative councillor James Farquharson. While copies of the book would continue to be available in the school library, its removal from classrooms sent a worrying message: that one man’s comfort could be considered more important than the rights of an entire student cohort to access literature that might speak directly to them, never mind that it may contain dangerous or difficult ideas.

I spoke to Vicky McNab, whose four mixed-heritage children have attended the school, and who launched a campaign to have the book reinstated (after an internal review, the school confirmed that the book will return to the Year 10 reading list). She shared with me Farquharson’s original letter to the school; he seemed to misunderstand or not appreciate the importance of teaching that racial injustice exists in America, as illustrated in the novel by the killing of a Black teenager by a white police officer.

To avoid such difficult ideas gaining traction in the UK, he suggested it was the school’s duty to “select books that will teach pupils their cultural inheritance”. By implying all students share a single cultural inheritance, he seems to be residing under the belief that we are or should be a monoculture, and the overriding mission of our schools should be to reinforce some sort of nationalistic hegemony to which everyone, regardless of background, must pledge unwavering allegiance. The question then arises: who was he seeking to protect?

The use of my novel, Pigeon English, is also under review at the school, thanks again to Farquharson’s intervention. His objections to my book – which he shared on Facebook having read the first 13 pages and Googled some reviews – centre on its use of profane language and depictions of violence and sexual behaviour. Pigeon English explores some of the same themes as The Hate U Give, social injustice chief among them. It draws on my experiences growing up on a diverse and deprived council estate in Luton in the 1980s and 90s, and on the killing of Damilola Taylor, the Nigerian schoolboy stabbed to death in Peckham, London, in 2000.

The novel was very much directed at an adult readership, which I felt could parse some of its more troubling content and recognise the urgent social questions it posed. I did not predict that it would end up in the hands of schoolchildren or being dissected in classrooms; nor was I consulted when the decision was made in 2015 – rubber-stamped by a Conservative education secretary – to include it on the GCSE curriculum. But its continued use as a set text suggests that teachers see in it an opportunity, rather than a threat. An opportunity to discuss, in the controlled and collaborative space of the classroom, themes and topics of particular relevance to the lives of their students.

This has been borne out by the feedback I have received over a decade of visiting schools up and down the country where Pigeon English is used either as a GCSE text or as a class reader for younger age groups. Teachers report that the book engages their students at a deeper level than other texts at their disposal, while students routinely tell me it is the first book they have studied that represents a world they recognise and includes characters they can relate to. This makes them feel seen as individuals, as well as part of a community bound not just by their real-life familiarity with events similar to some of those described in the book, but by the collegiate experience of reading and studying it together. It might also initiate a connection to the broader world of literature and the arts that can be a lasting source of revelation in their lives.

To deny students that kind of opportunity just because they may have to traverse some difficult terrain along the way would be to inhibit their progress towards fulfilling their own potential. In my conversations with them, I do not see young people who have been traumatised by the experience of reading my book. I see in their smiles the pleasure of emotional engagement, and in their eyes the fire of intellectual challenge. Like it or not, kids relate to difficult content, in ways their parents and the adult world may not entirely understand or approve of. By providing them with opportunities to discuss that content – to find the social and political context, to analyse cause and effect, to unpack the psychology of why good people do bad things – we teach them empathy, resilience and critical thinking, and train them to enter a world where a command of those faculties is more vitally important than it has ever been.

There are many things those who would ban books could be said to lack – reason, perspective, humility – but I would suggest it is their deficit of courage that defines them; or, to put it another way, their fear of discomfort. Perhaps it is the same fear that decrees the heroes of our novels should be sympathetic and relatable, that art should only depict humanity at its best and least offensive. But what can we really learn about ourselves by avoiding the messy and imperfect reality?

When Caravaggio’s Madonna di Loreto was unveiled in 1606 it scandalised Rome; not because it dared to put a face to the newborn Christ but because it showed the dirty feet of the peasants who knelt to venerate him. Centuries later, do those same prudish sensitivities still prevail? I have learned more about the human condition from looking at those dirty feet than from the halo around the holy infant’s head.

When I think about my own formative reading experiences, an instructive discomfort pertains to them all. The discomfort of learning that Jim was enslaved in Huckleberry Finn; of discovering that Paddy Clarke’s parents were unhappy in their marriage, just like mine were; of observing, in Slaughterhouse-Five, that the human capacity for cruelty, if left unchecked, could reduce entire cities to ashes. The discomfort of simply trying to figure out, aged 17, what the fuck Ulysses was about was joyful and life-changing. From those discomforts my character was formed; they gave rise to my intellectual curiosity and emotional inquisitiveness, to my sensitivity to injustice, and to my deep compassion for humanity in all its flawed and magnificent diversity. They connected me to the world; and if you feel a part of something, rather than estranged from it, you’re more likely to want to work in its best interests.

The modern trend towards avoiding discomfort – medicating against it with performative bigotry and Labubus, with flag worship and chatbot therapists – steals away our vigilance and opens the door to tyranny. To see this, we need only look at the success Nigel Farage and Reform UK are enjoying in fomenting distrust and division for their own political ends. People denied the practice of sitting with their discomfort become, inevitably, desensitised to the discomfort of others. This leads to a deficit of empathy.

Discomfort and disorder are the world’s prevailing forces, and books remain one of the best tools we have at our disposal for preparing young people to navigate them. A good teacher – and schools up and down the country are full of them, national assets too often underappreciated and taken for granted – will guide a student through their discomfort, helping them to find clarity of thought within it. This way, a school becomes a breeding ground for empathy. If we are to survive the culture wars, these breeding grounds will be essential.

• Pigeon English by Stephen Kelman (Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, £9.99). To support the Guardian, order your copy at guardianbookshop.com. Delivery charges may apply.

A former Meta executive who wrote an explosive exposé making allegations about the social media company’s dealings with China and its treatment of teenagers is said to be “on the verge of bankruptcy” after publishing the book.

An MP has claimed in parliament that Mark Zuckerberg’s company was trying to “silence and punish” Sarah Wynn-Williams, the former director of global public policy at Meta’s precursor, Facebook, after her decision to speak out about her time at the company.

Louise Haigh, the former Labour transport secretary, said Wynn-Williams was facing a fine of $50,000 (£37,000) every time she breached an order secured by Meta preventing her from talking disparagingly about the company.

Wynn-Williams made a series of claims about the social media company’s behaviour and culture in her book Careless People, published this year. It also contained allegations of sexual harassment denied by the company. It states she was fired for “poor performance and toxic behaviour”.

However, the former diplomat was barred from publicising the memoir after Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, secured a ruling preventing her from doing so. She subsequently appeared before a US Senate judiciary subcommittee, in which she said Meta worked “hand in glove” with Beijing over censorship tools – something the company has denied.

Pan Macmillan, which published the memoir, said it had sold more than 150,000 copies across all formats. The book was also named in The Sunday Times‘ bestselling hardbacks of 2025 so far. The paperback edition is due to be published early next year.

New York magazine has previously reported that Wynn-Williams was paid an advance for the book of more than $500,000 (£370,000).

Haigh highlighted Wynn-Williams’s case in the House of Commons during a debate about employment rights on Monday. She said Wynn-Williams’s decision to speak out had plunged her into financial peril.

“Despite previous public statements that Meta no longer uses NDAs [non-disclosure agreements] in cases of sexual harassment – which Sarah has repeatedly alleged – she is being pushed to financial ruin through the arbitration system in the UK, as Meta seeks to silence and punish her for speaking out,” she said.

“Meta has served a gagging order on Sarah and is attempting to fine her $50,000 for every breach of that order. She is on the verge of bankruptcy. I am sure that the whole house and the government will stand with Sarah as we pass this legislation to ensure that whistleblowers and those with the moral courage to speak out are always protected.”

It is understood that the $50,000 figure represents the damages Wynn-Williams has to pay for material breaches of the separation agreement she signed when she left Meta in 2017. Meta has emphasised that Wynn-Williams entered into the non-disparagement agreement voluntarily as part of her departure.

Meta said that to date, Wynn-Williams had not been forced to make any payments under the agreement.

The company did not wish to comment on Haigh’s intervention. It has previously said that Wynn-Williams’s Senate testimony was “divorced from reality and riddled with false claims” about China and the company’s treatment of teenagers.

Meta has described the book as a “mix of out-of-date and previously reported claims about the company and false accusations about our executives”. It has said she was fired for “poor performance and toxic behaviour” and that an investigation concluded she made misleading and unfounded allegations of harassment.

It said the ruling preventing her from publicising the memoir confirmed the “false and defamatory book should never have been published”.

The ruling stated Wynn-Williams should stop promoting the book and, to the extent she could, stop further publication. It did not order any action by Pan Macmillan.

Wynn-Williams has not spoken in public since appearing at the Senate hearing in April. In a written statement this month, she said she was grateful that the US Senate was continuing to investigate Meta’s behaviour.

“I wish I could say more,” she said. “I urge other tech employees and those who are thinking of whistleblowing to share what they know before more children are harmed.”

Her lawyer confirmed Wynn-Williams “remains silenced about the very matters Congress is investigating, despite clear and unanimous voices from Congress calling on Meta to end their arbitration proceedings which threaten to bankrupt her”.

Appeals court reverses ruling in Texas book ban case

May 27 2025

Dealing a blow to the freedom to read, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has reversed a district court’s preliminary injunction and dismissed free speech claims in Little v. Llano County. The lawsuit, filed in April 2022 by seven Llano, Texas, library patrons, concerns the removal of 17 books from the Llano branch library. Plaintiffs have 90 days following the decision to decide whether to appeal to the Supreme Court.

More News Stories

Majority of attempts to ban books in US come from organised groups not parents

Apr 08 2025

A large majority of attempts to ban books in the US last year came from organised groups rather than parents.

72% of demands to censor books were initiated by pressure groups, government entities and elected officials, board members and administrators, reported the American Library Association (ALA). Just 16% of ban attempts were made by parents, while 5% were brought forward by individual library users.

More News Stories

The public library in Fairhope, Alabama – a picturesque city on the shores of Mobile Bay – has found itself in the crosshairs of battles over library content.

The Alabama public library service board of trustees recently voted to withhold state funding from the Fairhope public library after complaints from conservative parents about books in the teen section. In the same meeting, the board voted to immediately dismiss the executive director of the state library agency, who had been planning to resign.

The board chairperson, John Wahl, who is also the chair of the Alabama Republican party, said board members believe the Fairhope library is in violation of state policies to protect children from inappropriate materials. The books that have been cited by the upset parents include Sold, a National Book Award finalist about a girl who is sold into sexual slavery in India.

The actions come amid a broader national culture war over library content and programs and a surging number of challenges to books on library shelves. The Fairhope library’s defunding is the first measure taken under a new Alabama law and 2024 administrative code changes that say to receive state funding, local libraries must have policies to safeguard youth from “sexually explicit or other material deemed inappropriate for children or youth”.

The American Library Association’s list of the most-challenged books of 2023 included many with LGBTQ+ or sexual content.

“I think that the GOP chair on the state library board is forcing the removal of books just because of anti-library extremists. I think that’s ignoring the voices of Fairhope taxpayers and library users,” said Amber Frey of Read Freely Alabama, an organization that has opposed the restrictions.

Wahl said his board was not trying to ban the books. But he maintained the state code requires “the actual relocation of these books out of youth sections”.

“We are unapologetic about standing up for Alabama families and putting them in control, even if that means temporarily defunding local libraries until they can be compliant,” Wahl said.

He said parents objecting to the books read excerpts during the meeting to demonstrate why they believe the books do not belong in the teen section.

Clean Up Alabama, a group that along with Moms for Liberty had sought restrictions, praised the decision. “We saw the board step up in the fight to protect our children,” the group said in a statement.

The secretary of the board of the Fairhope public library said they were shocked by the action.

“We’re devastated and really stunned by this. We had no warning that this was going to happen,” Randal Wright said.

Several years ago, the library received complaints against 35 books and went through a review process, Wright said. The director declined to move them after determining they were appropriate for teens.

Wright said they recently received a request to revisit that decision because of the new state policies. She said the board declined to move them.

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

“We had looked at those books, and we stuck by that decision,” Wright said.

Wright said she believed the challenges were filed by a small number of people. The overall community was supportive of its library, she said.

Read Freely Alabama has started a fundraiser for the Fairhope library to try to replace the $42,000 in state funding. The group had raised $8,000 by Friday afternoon.

The state board on Thursday also dismissed Nancy Pack, who has led the library service since 2014. Pack had planned on resigning at the end of September.

Wahl said there had been friction between Pack and some board members who believed she was hostile to the policies they were trying to implement.

Pack has spent more than 30 years as a librarian and has been honored as a distinguished alumna of the University of Tennessee’s school of information sciences.

“Libraries have never been political,” Pack said, adding that the attacks on librarians and libraries have been distressing.

“We have seen more librarians retire rather than go through what we’re having to go through at this time.”

An exposé by a former employee of Meta has become a bestseller despite the social media company banning the author from promoting the book.

Careless People by Sarah Wynn-Williams, a former director of global public policy at Meta’s precursor, Facebook, topped the New York Times bestseller chart and will be fourth on the Sunday Times nonfiction hardback chart this weekend.

The book “sold a staggering 1,000 hardbacks a day in the first three days on sale in the UK, despite Meta’s legal tactics to silence the book’s author”, said Joanna Prior, CEO of publisher Pan Macmillan. “This early success is a triumph against Meta’s attempt to stop the publication of this book.”

The book is fourth on the overall Amazon US chart, and 13th on the Amazon UK chart.

Last Wednesday, Meta won an emergency arbitration ruling which placed a temporary hold on Wynn-Williams promoting the book. The American Arbitration Association’s emergency arbitrator, Nicholas Gowen, said that without emergency relief, Meta would suffer “immediate and irreparable loss”. Meta argued that the memoir is prohibited under a non-disparagement agreement signed by Wynn-Williams.

The book was announced just one week before publication, meaning there was only a week-long window for pre-orders, which are normally open for months and help boost a book’s chart position.

Wynn-Williams’ memoir is her account of seven years she spent at the company. She “had become part of what reads like a diabolical cult run by emotionally stunted men babies, institutionally enabled sexual harassers and hypocritical virtue-signalling narcissists”, writes Stuart Jeffries in an Observer review.

The memoir is an “ugly, detailed portrait of one of the most powerful companies in the world”, wrote Jennifer Szalai in the New York Times. Wynn-Williams “had a front-row seat to some of Facebook’s most ignominious episodes”.

Meta has described the book as “a mix of out-of-date and previously reported claims about the company and false accusations about [its] executives”.

The emergency ruling dictated that Wynn-Williams must stop promoting the book, refrain from “amplifying any further disparaging, critical or otherwise detrimental comments”, and retract previous disparaging comments “to the extent within her control”.

It did not order any action by the publisher. “As publishers, we are committed to upholding freedom of speech and her right to tell her story,” said a spokesperson for Pan Macmillan.