Banning books in schools (3 Viewers)

Users who are viewing this thread

    Optimus Prime

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Sep 28, 2019
    Messages
    11,065
    Reaction score
    14,229
    Age
    47
    Location
    Washington DC Metro
    Offline
    Excellent article I thought deserved its own thread
    =========================

    On the surface, it would appear that book censors and censored authors like myself can agree on one thing: Books are powerful.

    Particularly books for children and teens.

    Why else would people like me spend so much time and energy writing them?

    Why else would censors spend so much time and energy trying to keep them out of kids’ hands?

    In a country where the average adult is reading fewer and fewer books, it’s a surprise to find Americans arguing so much about them.

    In this election year, parents and politicians — so many politicians — are jumping into the fray to say how powerful books can be.

    Granted, politicians often make what I do sound like witchcraft, but I take this as a compliment.

    I’ll admit, one of my first thoughts about the current wildfire of attempted censorship was: How quaint.

    Conservatives seemed to be dusting off their playbook from 1958, when the only way our stories could get to kids was through schools and libraries.

    While both are still crucial sanctuaries for readers, they’re hardly the only options. Plenty of booksellers supply titles that are taken off school shelves.

    And words can be very widely shared free of charge on social media and the rest of the internet. If you take my book off a shelf, you keep it away from that shelf, but you hardly keep it away from readers.

    As censorship wars have raged in so many communities, damaging the lives of countless teachers, librarians, parents and children, it’s begun to feel less and less quaint.

    This is not your father’s book censorship…..

    Here’s something I never thought I’d be nostalgic for: sincere censors. When my first novel, “Boy Meets Boy,” was published in 2003, it was immediately the subject of many challenges, some of which kept the book from ever getting on a shelf in the first place.

    At the time, a challenge usually meant one parent trying to get a book pulled from a school or a library, going through a formal process.

    I often reminded myself to try to find some sympathy for these parents; yes, they were wrong, and their desire to control what other people in the community got to read was wrong — but more often than not, the challenge was coming from fear of a changing world, a genuine (if incorrect) belief that being gay would lead kids straight to ruination and hell, and/or the misbegotten notion that if all the books that challenged the (homophobic, racist) status quo went away, then the status quo would remain intact.

    It was, in some ways, as personal to them as it was to those of us on the other side of the challenge.

    And nine times out of 10, the book would remain on the shelf.

    It’s not like that now. What I’ve come to believe, as I’ve talked to authors and librarians and teachers, is that attacks are less and less about the actual books.

    We’re being used as targets in a much larger proxy war.

    The goal of that war isn’t just to curtail intellectual freedom but to eviscerate the public education system in this country.

    Censors are scorching the earth, without care for how many kids get burned.

    Racism and homophobia are still very much present, but it’s also a power grab, a money grab. The goal for many is a for-profit, more authoritarian and much less diverse culture, one in which truth is whatever you’re told it is, your identity is determined by its acceptability and the past is a lie that the future is forced to emulate.

    The politicians who holler and post and draw up their lists of “harmful” books aren’t actually scared of our books.

    They are using our books to scare people.

     
    Last edited:
    Just to be clear: Y'all believe that any book of any kind should be allowed on any school library shelf regardless of its content and regardless of what the grade levels of the schools are?

    Because, if not . . . if you believe that some books are inappropriate to be placed on a school library shelf, or inappropriate for some grade levels, then we are not debating "censorhip," but discussing selectivity of books.

    We are debating who does the selecting.
     
    This could have gone in a few threads
    =================
    At first glance, the plight of Katherine Rinderle, a fifth-grade teacher in Georgia, might seem confusing. Rinderle faces likely termination by the Cobb County School District for reading aloud a children’s book that touches on gender identity.

    Yet she is charged in part with violating policy related to a state law banning “divisive concepts” about race, not gender.

    This disconnect captures something essential about state laws and directives restricting classroom discussion across the country: They seem to be imprecisely drafted to encourage censorship.

    That invites parents and administrators to seek to apply bans to teachers haphazardly, forcing teachers to err on the side of muzzling themselves rather than risk unintentionally crossing fuzzy lines into illegality.


    “Teachers are fearful,” Rinderle told us in an interview. “These vague laws are chilling and result in teachers self-censoring."

    In short, when it comes to all these anti-woke laws and the MAGA-fied frenzy they’ve unleashed, the vagueness is the point.


    As CNN reported, the district sent Rinderle a letter in May signaling its intent to fire her for a lesson using “My Shadow Is Purple.”

    The book is written from the perspective of a child who likes both traditionally “boy” things like trains and “girl” things like glitter. Its conclusion is essentially that sometimes blue and pink don’t really capture kids’ full interests and personalities — and that everyone is unique and should just be themselves.


    The district’s letter, which we have obtained, criticized Rinderle for teaching the “controversial subject” of “gender identity” without giving parents a chance to opt out. She was charged with violating standards of professional ethics, safeguards for parents’ rights and a policy governing treatment of “controversial issues.”

    But Rinderle and her lawyer, Craig Goodmark, argue that the policy on “controversial issues” is extremely hazy. They point out that it prohibits “espousing” political “beliefs” in keeping with a 2022 state law that bans efforts to persuade students to agree with certain “divisive concepts" that don’t reasonably apply here.


    After all, in that law, those “divisive concepts” are all about race. Among them are the ideas that the United States is “fundamentally racist" and that people should feel “guilt” or bear “responsibility” for past actions on account of their race. It’s not clear how this policy applies to Rinderle’s alleged transgression.


    What’s more, we have learned that this action was initiated by a parent’s troubling email to the district, provided to us by Rinderle and her lawyer, in which the parent notes that teachers were told to avoid “divisive” concepts.

    The parent then writes, “I would consider anything in the genre of ‘LGBT’ and ‘Queer’ divisive.”……….

    “Divisive” is a one way power projection as described by conservatism in this country, it’s ALL ABOUT ME and fork YOU especially if I piss you off while flexing My Liberty, too bad, so sad. :oops:
     
    There have been multiple reports of one person (or is it 10?) objects is enough to remove the book for review. This as compared to thousands who don’t object. This is not to imply that it’s happening everywhere, and technically the book is supposed to be removed until it is reviewed, but if you have fervent “conservatives” preaching to “conservative” school boards, all bets are off, as to if this book returns to the shelves. In the scenario I’ve described, it’s a small majority, the tail wagging the dog. I’ll also argue that if we allow this to happen collectively we deserve it, including all the bad shirt that falls on us As a result of near sided, oppressive thinking. You could even say it was ordained for multiple reasons, but namely selfish, intolerant, human beings, who are either too lazy or think that finding consensus is too difficult, and don’t like not being able to dictate to the majority. :oops:
    A temporary removal for review is not the same as removing the book permanently. Why would a district not take the time to look into a complaint that a parent felt strongly enough to lodge? Who is working for whom?

    If it ever did happen that a librarian removed a book that was perfectly appropriate for children because one parent complained then that librarian was wrong. Not just because of the fact that only one person complained and the book was perfectly appropriate. She was mainly wrong for assuming that she alone had the power to decide.
     
    Just to be clear: Y'all believe that any book of any kind should be allowed on any school library shelf regardless of its content and regardless of what the grade levels of the schools are?

    Because, if not . . . if you believe that some books are inappropriate to be placed on a school library shelf, or inappropriate for some grade levels, then we are not debating "censorhip," but discussing selectivity of books.

    We are debating who does the selecting.
    The selection would have to be dictated by the school board with input from the parents. This is why moderate, liberal parents would not want to see a “conservative” school board. This all boils down to how active the group of parents are and how they lean politically.

    Have you read Hand Maiden’s Tale? A good depiction of a religiously dominated dystopian fascist future. Yes there is a sexual element involved, because of very low rates of fertility, fertile women are hired on to have sex with the husband (but that is not an explicit element) and bear children for the couple. Now I’d say this is not suitable for anything below 9th grade. And I understand a parent’s concern regarding sex and their kids, but maybe a solution would be to make certain books need parental permission to access?
     
    Imagine teaching children that some people are different, and being different is okay

    I read some of the one star Amazon reviews and they are definitely a vibe of Dads who hit their young son if he says he likes pink or My Little Pony
     
    Just to be clear: Y'all believe that any book of any kind should be allowed on any school library shelf regardless of its content and regardless of what the grade levels of the schools are?

    Because, if not . . . if you believe that some books are inappropriate to be placed on a school library shelf, or inappropriate for some grade levels, then we are not debating "censorhip," but discussing selectivity of books.

    We are debating who does the selecting.
    no one believes that.
    Just to be clear, ANY book should be reviewed because ONE parent thinks its offensive/explicit?
     
    Imagine teaching children that some people are different, and being different is okay

    I read some of the one star Amazon reviews and they are definitely a vibe of Dads who hit their young son if he says he likes pink or My Little Pony
    they think if their son is gay, he failed as a dad. its more about them than the child..
     
    The selection would have to be dictated by the school board with input from the parents. This is why moderate, liberal parents would not want to see a “conservative” school board. This all boils down to how active the group of parents are and how they lean politically.
    Yes, each school district's policies and decisions on books would be different, depending on the needs of the community. That is exactly how it is supposed to work. So why all the angst about it? Why all the outrage porn stories about individual school districts making such decisions as if that is a shocking idea?
    Have you read Hand Maiden’s Tale? A good depiction of a religiously dominated dystopian fascist future. Yes there is a sexual element involved, because of very low rates of fertility, fertile women are hired on to have sex with the husband (but that is not an explicit element) and bear children for the couple. Now I’d say this is not suitable for anything below 9th grade. And I understand a parent’s concern regarding sex and their kids, but maybe a solution would be to make certain books need parental permission to access?
    That is the solution that Texas has come up with.
     
    Just to be clear: Y'all believe that any book of any kind should be allowed on any school library shelf regardless of its content and regardless of what the grade levels of the schools are?

    Because, if not . . . if you believe that some books are inappropriate to be placed on a school library shelf, or inappropriate for some grade levels, then we are not debating "censorhip," but discussing selectivity of books.

    We are debating who does the selecting.

    I think many here don't share the same strict views you do on this issue, but that isn't to say that there shouldn't be any oversight. Your stance on this, and other areas, are a stark contradiction to your self-identity as a libertarian. It's possible, however, that you actually mean the air-quotes from of libertarian adopted by many conservatives to indicate you support freedom in all its forms that benefit or relate to you, specifically.

    A libertarian would oppose, in most cases, censorship and restrictions to information. Libertarians don't think kids need to be protected from homosexuality and libertarians don't oppose free expression of gender and identity.

    I don't care that you are actually a conservative, or an air-quotes libertarian, just pointing out I see the fundamental contradictions. It also helps to accurately frame you correctly as a Trump acolyte. Notable, as Trump isn't a libertarian and shouldn't appeal to libertarians.
     
    A temporary removal for review is not the same as removing the book permanently. Why would a district not take the time to look into a complaint that a parent felt strongly enough to lodge? Who is working for whom?

    If it ever did happen that a librarian removed a book that was perfectly appropriate for children because one parent complained then that librarian was wrong. Not just because of the fact that only one person complained and the book was perfectly appropriate. She was mainly wrong for assuming that she alone had the power to decide.
    You hit on the issue, what I feel is appropriate, vs what you feel, versus what the majority feels, vs what the majority of the school board feels. What we see today is an orchestrated move by conservatives to ban books that are “divisive” their definition of divisive, along with their definition of “woke” which is completely inaccurate, manipulative, and evasive.
    The only way to gain a consensus is talking about the blemishes of the country, the way people were mistreated and are still being mistreated today. I’m not saying you in particular but throw off that Christian straight jacket. An ironic element about this comment is that many/most (?) Christians are wearing custom jackets of their making that has little to do with the Christianity I grew up with. Such intolerance and misplaced superiority. :unsure:
     
    Libertairians believe less gov't the better. Conservatives pretend to want that, but they lean more towrds the Authorian rule than Libertairian when it comes to Gov't control.
     
    Yes, each school district's policies and decisions on books would be different, depending on the needs of the community. That is exactly how it is supposed to work. So why all the angst about it? Why all the outrage porn stories about individual school districts making such decisions as if that is a shocking idea?

    That is the solution that Texas has come up with.
    The angst is about conservative school boards acting on the anti-woke agenda, and repressive views on sexuality Involving the arts, literature, etc.
     
    Its just so damn funny that Conservatives will come up with all this CANCEL CULTURE, WOKE, SNOWFLAKE sayings towards liberals, but when you actually look into it, they are the ones who delv into more than anyone.. I remember when they threw a fit because some crazy moms wanted Dr Suess taken out of the library, now they are having a "hold my beer" moment by being WAAY worse.
     
    no one believes that.
    No one believes what?
    Just to be clear, ANY book should be reviewed because ONE parent thinks its offensive/explicit?
    Why the flip not? I'm not talking about a full investigation by the school board taking weeks or months while children are deprived of an important book.

    If a parent calls the front office and says "I have a concern about a book in the library," the receptionist will transfer the call to the librarian. The review can be as simple as the Librarian taking the book off the shelf and flipping through it while the parent is on hold.

    After looking at it, the librarian might say, "this book seems fine to me. I'll show it to my principal and tell her your concern, but in my opinion it is perfectly appropriate." Or . . . she might say, "Yikes! This book literally has a drawing of a child performing oral sex explicitly. It's not my decision, but I'll take it to my principal immediately. Thanks for pointing this out!"

    Or . . . she might say, "sure this has explicit descriptions of young boys having oral sex with each other. In context it is fine. It is very important that your fifth grader have access to this book. But you are welcome to talk to my principal about it."

    Have you seen the videos of parents going to a school board meeting and reading aloud books that are available in their child's library and being gaveled down for inappropriate speech?
     
    Imagine teaching children that some people are different, and being different is okay

    I read some of the one star Amazon reviews and they are definitely a vibe of Dads who hit their young son if he says he likes pink or My Little Pony

    Here are some of the one-star reviews. Can you tell me which has be most vibe of Dads who hit their young sons if he says he likes pink or My Little Pony?

    From the United States​


    Tony

    1.0 out of 5 stars Stop lying to your children
    Reviewed in the United States on April 29, 2023

    There are 2 genders of which it is not your choice to pick, end of story. Stop lying to your children. The fact that children's books like this even exist is a representation of how far removed from sanity this world is.

    23 people found this helpful


    Helpful

    Report

    Jim D

    1.0 out of 5 stars Confusing message
    Reviewed in the United States on June 26, 2023

    If his dad's shadow is emotional, why can't he be just like his dad being both strong and caring? Also he can appreciate though his mom is a woman she took can be strong in her own way.

    By interjecting the alphabet soup of "genders" into the conversation, this book only served to confuse and groom vulnerable young minds who have not yet gone through puberty.

    9 people found this helpful


    Helpful

    Report

    IrishFiveOh

    1.0 out of 5 stars Far left garbage
    Reviewed in the United States on May 6, 2023

    This type of material should not be available to children. The hysteria over gender identity has caused people like the author to hop on the bandwagon, seemingly without any remorse. There are two genders and they are binary. Do not buy this garbage.

    20 people found this helpful


    Helpful

    Report

    MARIE

    1.0 out of 5 stars Gross
    Reviewed in the United States on June 27, 2023

    Stay away from my child and all children. This is sick. There are only two genders and this world is beyond insane! Get this off the market.

    5 people found this helpful


    Helpful

    Report

    The Warrior

    1.0 out of 5 stars This book causes confusion.
    Reviewed in the United States on July 1, 2023

    This book is obscene for the age group of 4 to 10. Why are so many adults obsessed with breaking children's minds in today's world?

    4 people found this helpful


    Helpful

    Report

    Ace

    1.0 out of 5 stars A must-read for historians of the next century
    Reviewed in the United States on July 1, 2023

    This book is going to be a museum piece when historians try to unravel what in the actual heck happened here...

    4 people found this helpful


    Helpful

    Report

    Electrocaine XxX

    1.0 out of 5 stars Brainwashing!
    Reviewed in the United States on January 12, 2023

    Abusive trash.

    17 people found this helpful
     
    "NB people?" Notice you talk about sexual attraction in terms of what gender or genders different people can be attracted to. You must because sex is inextricably linked to gender.

    What is the difference between a gay man and a straight man?

    If a man is primarily attracted to transwomen who still have their male parts, is he gay or straight, or something else?

    NB/Enby = non-binary.

    If there is a link, that means there is a connection. The fact that genders fall all along the sexual preference spectrum and sexual preference falls all along the gender spectrum shows that there is no link, i.e. cis men are not linked to a specific sexual preference and gay people are not linked to a specific gender.

    By your rationale, there is a link between sexuality and food because straight, gay, bi, and asexual people all enjoy pizza.
     
    No one believes what?

    Why the flip not? I'm not talking about a full investigation by the school board taking weeks or months while children are deprived of an important book.

    If a parent calls the front office and says "I have a concern about a book in the library," the receptionist will transfer the call to the librarian. The review can be as simple as the Librarian taking the book off the shelf and flipping through it while the parent is on hold.

    After looking at it, the librarian might say, "this book seems fine to me. I'll show it to my principal and tell her your concern, but in my opinion it is perfectly appropriate." Or . . . she might say, "Yikes! This book literally has a drawing of a child performing oral sex explicitly. It's not my decision, but I'll take it to my principal immediately. Thanks for pointing this out!"

    Or . . . she might say, "sure this has explicit descriptions of young boys having oral sex with each other. In context it is fine. It is very important that your fifth grader have access to this book. But you are welcome to talk to my principal about it."

    Have you seen the videos of parents going to a school board meeting and reading aloud books that are available in their child's library and being gaveled down for inappropriate speech?
    But that is not how the groups like Moms for liberty want it. They want groups like them to make the decision, not the librairian or the principle. not even the school board.
    You won't find very many people who think a book about 2 boys having oral sex should be in the library. What people are concerned with is these groups banning books just for the shear mention of the word gay (or insert anything other than straight) or even a having a gay character in the book, or any mention of white people being racist.
     
    NB/Enby = non-binary.

    If there is a link, that means there is a connection. The fact that genders fall all along the sexual preference spectrum and sexual preference falls all along the gender spectrum shows that there is no link, i.e. cis men are not linked to a specific sexual preference and gay people are not linked to a specific gender.

    By your rationale, there is a link between sexuality and food because straight, gay, bi, and asexual people all enjoy pizza.
    An absurd statement. If the overwhelming majority of men enjoyed pizza, but the overwhelming majority of women found the idea of eating pizza disgusting, that would show a link between gender and food choices. Since food choice has never been shown to be related to gender, gender and food are not linked. Same for sexuality.

    The overwhelming majority of biological males identify as straight men, by which they mean that they are attracted to biological females who identify as women. Maybe there are some biological males who identify as straight men who would not differentiate between a woman and a transwoman for purposes of dating and sex. If there are, I've never met one online or IRL who would admit it. After much pulling of teeth, I got one progressive straight man on here to admit that he would not have sex with a person with a penis.

    Maybe instead of demonizing Trans-exclusive radical feminists, progressives should work on straight men progressives who are trans-exclusive, because as far as I know that is all of them. That's why Dylan can't get dates.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom