Moms Against Libraries (middle school, masters, course, science)

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by Ceece

No books would be threatened with a school library ban if book selections were done better in the first place. There's only room for so many books, so be selective. And by selective I mean keep it wholesome and age appropriate, that should be any schools go-to position. I don't see the point inviting major controversy no matter what, that's not the job of public schools no matter what anyone thinks.

And forget the argument that "for some kids it's the only place they can read/learn about xyz". So be it. If schools do their jobs those kids will learn how to educate themselves about anything they want. Schools don't exist to teach people all they need to know in life, they exist to prepare them to learn for the rest of their lives.

I agree with you, Ceece. When I was placed on the committee to review complaints about challenged books (I was a middle school principal), one of my biggest concerns was what was age-appropriate.

[YorktownGal]

Originally Posted by ElijahAstin

Quote:
This chapter is about sex. Therefore it has sex in it. WELL, DUH. If you are a younger reader and you feel you aren't ready for the finer details of same-sex pairings, then simply skip this whole chapter.

HOWEVER, before you do, I'd like to remind you that we taught you all about straight sex when you were ELEVEN YEARS OLD during sixth grade. The fact that they didn't also teach you what same-sex couples do is nothing less than institutionalized homophobia. Straight sex was presented as the norm to make five percent of the population feel abnormal. Is there something icky about gay sex? Is there something wrong with it? I challenge any politician to discuss this with me. I WILL RUIN THEM.

This chapter is simply all the stuff teachers SHOULD be saying if they want to be inclusive of people with same-sex feelings..

You were taught about straight sex at ELEVEN YEARS OLD because that's when most girls begin menstruation. If girls started menstruation much later, boys' sex ed would start later too.

You aren't taught about sexual positions or pleasure, you're taught about the menstruation and the possible pregnancy resulting from its beginning in girls.

[phetaroi]

Sex ed, and the content about sex found in school libraries is a tricky proposition.

I've sat on committees that were charged with deciding which challenged books should be allowed in middle school libraries, and which shouldn't. There were times I sided with the parents who challenged a particular book because I felt that the book was not age-appropriate to 12-14 year olds. There were times I voted against the parents who challenged a particular book.
And, by the way, on the committee each of us had to read the books being challenged.

One of the most challenged books has traditionally been "The Giver". I could understand why some parents of middle school children were uncomfortable with the book, but I voted to leave it is middle school libraries in my district. But there were books that I thought were over the line. For example, a novel that depicted a teenaged girl being violently raped on a pool table. I don't think it's appropriate at the middle school level. But, for parents who approve of that kind of book there are bookstores, public libraries, online book sources, etc.

But, Elijah...kids aren't taught "all about" straight sex in public schools. School boards and state school boards struggle with this issue, and it isn't an easy one. Parents do have some rights about what their children should be learning in school. Or at least they ought to.

[YorktownGal]

Originally Posted by phetaroi

One of the most challenged books has traditionally been "The Giver". I could understand why some parents of middle school children were uncomfortable with the book, but I voted to leave it is middle school libraries in my district.

"The Giver" is an odd book about a totalitarian government where one person alone holds the emotion knowledge. There is state mandated infanticide of weak babies. When twins are born, one is killed. At the end of the book, it's unclear if the "giver" lives or dies.

My kids were assigned it in middle school. It's like "A Single Shard", not terrible books, but not worthwhile either. There are better books available. By middle school, students should be reading Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet", "the Hobbit", "Johnny Tremain", "Carry On, Mr. Bowditch", etc.

When we lived in Boston, middle school assigned books on the Salem witch trials. The books were based on historical facts which reflect Boston's history/culture. It made sense for students to read.

"The Giver" adds nothing of value. "A Single Shard" at least teaches about persistence.

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by YorktownGal

You were taught about straight sex at ELEVEN YEARS OLD because that's when most girls begin menstruation. If girls started menstruation much later, boys' sex ed would start later too.

You aren't taught about sexual positions or pleasure, you're taught about the menstruation and the possible pregnancy resulting from its beginning in girls.

Originally Posted by phetaroi

But, Elijah...kids aren't taught "all about" straight sex in public schools. School boards and state school boards struggle with this issue, and it isn't an easy one. Parents do have some rights about what their children should be learning in school. Or at least they ought to.

Yeah, I’m just not outraged. I don’t disagree that parents should have a voice about what books are available to their children in school libraries, and I don’t think it would be objectively wrong or homo/transphobic to decide the particular book is appropriate for high schoolers but not middle schoolers. But I don’t think the overwhelming majority of outraged parents are having that sort of nuanced debate. They’re afraid “the gays” and “the tran****” are going to “groom” their children to become sexually deviant monsters.

Originally Posted by YorktownGal

"The Giver" is an odd book about a totalitarian government where one person alone holds the emotion knowledge. There is state mandated infanticide of weak babies. When twins are born, one is killed. At the end of the book, it's unclear if the "giver" lives or dies.

My kids were assigned it in middle school. It's like "A Single Shard", not terrible books, but not worthwhile either. There are better books available. By middle school, students should be reading Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet", "the Hobbit", "Johnny Tremain", "Carry On, Mr. Bowditch", etc.

When we lived in Boston, middle school assigned books on the Salem witch trials. The books were based on historical facts which reflect Boston's history/culture. It made sense for students to read.

"The Giver" adds nothing of value. "A Single Shard" at least teaches about persistence.

The Giver is a perfectly fine book for middle schoolers. It’s a more modern late tween/early adolescent retelling of 1984. Would I insist that my children be assigned the book? Not at all. But I can’t think of any specific item of literature that I would deem 100% essential at the expense of any other age-appropriate book.

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by YorktownGal

"The Giver" is an odd book about a totalitarian government where one person alone holds the emotion knowledge. There is state mandated infanticide of weak babies. When twins are born, one is killed. At the end of the book, it's unclear if the "giver" lives or dies.

My kids were assigned it in middle school. It's like "A Single Shard", not terrible books, but not worthwhile either. There are better books available. By middle school, students should be reading Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet", "the Hobbit", "Johnny Tremain", "Carry On, Mr. Bowditch", etc.

When we lived in Boston, middle school assigned books on the Salem witch trials. The books were based on historical facts which reflect Boston's history/culture. It made sense for students to read.

"The Giver" adds nothing of value. "A Single Shard" at least teaches about persistence.

Okay. That's one viewpoint.

So why do you think it's such a popular book over the years?

And because you don't like it should it be banned from public schools?

I'm a Buddhist. How about banning the bible from public schools?

You see how that works?

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by ElijahAstin

Yeah, I’m just not outraged. I don’t disagree that parents should have a voice about what books are available to their children in school libraries, and I don’t think it would be objectively wrong or homo/transphobic to decide the particular book is appropriate for high schoolers but not middle schoolers. But I don’t think the overwhelming majority of outraged parents are having that sort of nuanced debate. They’re afraid “the gays” and “the tran****” are going to “groom” their children to become sexually deviant monsters.


The Giver is a perfectly fine book for middle schoolers. It’s a more modern late tween/early adolescent retelling of 1984. Would I insist that my children be assigned the book? Not at all. But I can’t think of any specific item of literature that I would deem 100% essential at the expense of any other age-appropriate book.

I'm glad you addressed "The Giver", and hope YorktownGal noted that here we have 2 people each with a different view about that specific book. Walter Farley books are just not hacking it nowadays.

[YorktownGal]

Originally Posted by phetaroi

Okay. That's one viewpoint.

So why do you think it's such a popular book over the years?

And because you don't like it should it be banned from public schools?

I'm a Buddhist. How about banning the bible from public schools?

You see how that works?

Never said I wouldn't ban it - my kids read the "Giver" for school. It was more of a big nothing for me.

Not terrible, but not great either.

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by YorktownGal

Never said I wouldn't ban it - my kids read the "Giver" for school. It was more of a big nothing for me.

Not terrible, but not great either.

Okay, fine. But out of 4 questions I asked, you answered 0.

[YorktownGal]

Originally Posted by YorktownGal

Never said I wouldn't ban it - my kids read the "Giver" for school. It was more of a big nothing for me.

Not terrible, but not great either.

That's badly worded - start over - I never said I would ban it. I didn't mind my kids reading it.

As for:

Originally Posted by phetaroi

Okay. That's one viewpoint.

1. So why do you think it's such a popular book over the years?

2. And because you don't like it should it be banned from public schools?

3. I'm a Buddhist. How about banning the bible from public schools?

You see how that works?

1. I volunteered at my kids' school library. Honestly, I have no idea why the "Giver" is so popular.

2. No I wouldn't ban the "Giver." The librarian and I disliked on the Barbie series for preschool & first graders. OTOH, the girls sure loved those pink Barbie books. Much to my horror (/s), Barbie remained on the shelf.

3. There were no Bibles on the library shelves. Never mind, there are different versions of the Bible so deciding which one to use would be an issue. I doubt any student would check out a Bible, Talmud or Koran anyway.