You may or may not have seen this book in the news recently. A school board in Delaware tried to add it to a high school summer reading list. Some objected, claiming the book contained too much profanity. Others claimed the real reason the book was being challenged was because the main character is a lesbian. The school board finally came to a compromise, of sorts- they decided not to have a reading list at all. 
 That odd occurrence piqued my interest, as well as the fact that the book deals with the controversial (and instead of controversial you could say "hyper-emotionally-charged") issue of "homosexual reparative therapy". (The idea that homosexuality needs to be cured has recently come under almost universal condemnation, including from Christians. It's sort of puzzling that it was ever so popular to begin with, since it's based on a theologically-flawed notion. Basically, for something to be a sin, it has to be a choice, so sexual orientation can never be a sin in and of itself. But that's all I have to say about that.*) I was curious to see how the author dealt with such a sore subject. 
 There's a lot I liked about that book. First off, Emily Danforth is an excellent writer. The pictures she paints with words are exquisite and she draws you completely into Cam's life, until you feel, for better or worse, completely invested in finding out what happens to her. Also, Ms. Danforth is really incredibly fair. It's all too common for battle lines to be drawn up between "gays and Christians"**, each side stereotyping and belittling the other until discussion has ended and it's all just name-calling. With the title of this book and it's premise, I knew that there was the possibility that the book would be nothing more than an innocent young girl being attacked by rabid Westboro Baptist Church clones, misquoting Bible verses at her and telling her that she was going to hell. But this book was much more thoughtful and thought provoking than that. Most of the people in Cam's life are genuinely good-intentioned and want to help her. It's clear, of course, that the writer thinks that they are helping her incorrectly (Miseducation after all), but she doesn't over simplify the issue. 
 The most frustrating part of the book was the shoddy theology. Cam calls the method used at the school she is sent to "pseudo-scientific", but it was clear that the spiritual side of things was "pseudo-theological" as well. A Christian character in the book would say something that actually made sense, only to veer off down some weird rabbit hole. But perhaps that wasn't entirely inaccurate? I already said that I think reparative therapy is theologically flawed, so I can't say it's unfair that Ms. Danforth included bad theology in her book. I just wonder, for the sake of my own curiosity, whether she knew it was bad theology. 
 As for things I didn't like about the book; the teenage angst was strong with this one. I take a fifteen-year-old lesbian girl telling me that she's in love about as seriously as I take a fifteen-year-old straight girl telling me she is in love (which is to say, I don't). And Cam sometimes falls into the standard YA-novel-girl role; "I'm different, nobody understands me, being me makes my life so hard." Yes, she is a lesbian and this does explain some of the angst, but a lot of it is pretty standard YA drivel. 
 But the worst part of the book, by far, was the criminality. Some of Cam's favorite pastimes include shoplifting, breaking and entering, drinking underage, and smoking pot. All of which I would be fine with, if it was actually part of the story development, but it's mostly not. It's just there. It's treated like part of a normal, healthy, wholesome high school experience (as opposed to the unhealthy experience of going to Christian school, where the kids are repressed and choose not to smoke pot. The horror.) These behaviors are never really explained either. They begin before Cam's parents die and before she kisses her best friend. The only role they really play in the plot development is one rather nasty character later using them as ammunition against Cam, but they are treated just like that, ammunition, not like she actually did anything wrong. The author seems to completely ignore the fact that she could have just as easily written a (albeit less interesting) book where Cam gets arrested after the first few chapters and spends the rest of the book in juvie. 
 So to bring it back full circle, I would have hated reading this book in high school. It would have annoyed me that the book focuses on Cam's sexuality rather than her kleptomania and drug abuse and I would have felt like the school board was tacitly agreeing with the MTV image of all high school by assigning us the book. For those same reasons I could completely understand why some parents and teachers wouldn't be cool with having this book in the curriculum. What's fascinating, however, is that neither side is talking about those things. At all. The opponents of the book complained about the language. Why would they do that when there were so many more legitimate things to complain about, unless they hadn't even read the book? And the proponents never seem to acknowledge any questionable material in the book and that opponents are only concerned about the fact that the character is a lesbian. Have they read it either? Make your own conclusions but I think it says something about the state of education in America. 
 *It's not. Not even close. But back to the review. 
 ** Again, as if the two terms are mutually exclusive.