Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm back after reading Gender ***** this past weekend. (I think it's interesting that apparently I'm the only one who's actually taken the time to read both books before opining on their appropriateness for a high school library.) In any case, you'll recall my conclusion that Lawn Boy was okay for a teenage reader. I feel differently about the second book, which I think is more appropriate for a college-aged reader. I did not find anything personally offensive about Kobabe's memoir, but this one crosses a line, and that's a shame, because I do think that it's important for LGBTQ students to find representation on the library shelves. In my opinion, this book could be redesigned for an adolescent reader fairly easily, and probably should be.
While you may think it is appropriate for your teenager to read that does not mean it is appropriate to have on a public school library shelf. The one page (I think it’s pg 91) .... in context, out of context, or all by itself, no matter how you want to discuss it..... makes Lawn Boy inappropriate. If the school board told woman she could not read the page out loud at the board meeting because children were present, especially since the only ones there were high school students, then it is certainly not appropriate for any bookshelf in the school district. It does not matter if it is in your mind okay for 18-year old seniors, because it must also be appropriate for 14-year old freshmen - and it is not. Whether or not you find it personally offensive is immaterial. Lots and lots of people, including Chinese people, did not find the drawing of a Chinese man in To Think I Saw on Mulberry Street offensive but that didn’t stop it from being removed from public school bookshelves around the nation. All it takes for a book to be required to removed from public school libraries is one offensive word, one offensive drawing, or one offensive scene. Lawn Boy meets that requirement.
Gender ***** is just beyond inappropriate, it actually crosses over into pornographic. You don’t need to read the whole thing, just take a look at the pictures, which are in a tweet I link in an earlier post. I don’t have an issue with LGTBQ coming-of-age books in a school library, but just like ones with heterosexual characters it needs to be age appropriate for EVERY single child who attends that school.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
The irony of cutting her off because 'there are children in the audience', when the woman's complaint is that these books are available to children in their school, is unbelievable.
So, to you, people need to wake up and realize that it's much better for kids to learn about what sex acts are, such as anal sex, from other kids, such as the older ones, than it is to learn about it in books at school? Probably that is the way kids learned about the various sex acts, because in no way were their parents going to put it in their heads there are other ways adults like to have sex besides in the missionary position, assuming parents ever brought up the birds and the bees to them!
Our public schools are grooming children. Think about that.
Unless they're shy and rejected a lot kids are going to find out about the various sex acts with no need for grooming. The perverted adults will leave the shy, homely and rejected kids alone, fortunately.
The one is a graphic novel. Did you bother to look at the pictures? It is pornography and providing it to children is against Virginia law.
Go ahead look, this tweet has samples of pages in the graphic novel. It is bad enough that the content of both books are essentially textbook grooming, but the pictures are flat out pornographic. I am speechless that anyone approved this book for minors, and someone whose job is to protect children did.
Yes I read the article and the books have been pulled and should be reviewed and removed if necessary.
There are systems in place.
They are not textbook grooming.
I read Valley of the Dolls in my early teens -- it did not groom me to take pills and have random sex. I also read Love Story....sam;e thing.
You don't get groomed by a two books in a library of thousands of books.
That's silly..
Sounds like you came from the generation of Sex and drugs. Of course that generation thought acid, heroin, and cocaine were acceptable. Probably the dumbest generation of the last century.
Status:
"Let this year be over..."
(set 19 days ago)
Location: Where my bills arrive
19,219 posts, read 17,085,392 times
Reputation: 15538
Quote:
Originally Posted by LS Jaun
Sounds like you came from the generation of Sex and drugs. Of course that generation thought acid, heroin, and cocaine were acceptable. Probably the dumbest generation of the last century.
Its amazing how stereotypes get applied to every generation from Boomers to Millennials the posters point is valid there have always been "those books" that were perceived to be an unsavory influence on the young minds. Have you stopped to realize what these kids are seeing every day on their phones which are unfiltered (for the most part) and unchecked by the same parents that get up in arms over a book...
School libraries have a proceed to vet books and procedures to review a book that a parent views inappropriate. The process allows those parents with kids in the schools to submit a book for review, censure, removal etc and a committee reviews and votes based on the merit of the argument and the actual problem. It does not rubber stamp every complaint and every book is not automatically approved for the libraries.
It wasn't so long ago that To Kill a Mockingbird was "second on a list of books receiving the most complaints from private organizations" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Kill_a_Mockingbird.
Of course in the last 4 years it seems anything that doesn't fit into Conservatives right leaning views is indoctrinations, communism, grooming; I haven't seen Communism and its variants used so much since I read about the McCarthy Hearings in the 50's.
So, to you, people need to wake up and realize that it's much better for kids to learn about what sex acts are, such as anal sex, from other kids, such as the older ones, than it is to learn about it in books at school? Probably that is the way kids learned about the various sex acts, because in no way were their parents going to put it in their heads there are other ways adults like to have sex besides in the missionary position, assuming parents ever brought up the birds and the bees to them!
What is wrong about sexual experimentation without the benefit of a book of instructions?
Literally billions of people have learned that way -- and I think that the great majority of people have not been harmed.
I am definitely not opposed to sex education in school, as long as it sticks to the how's of reproduction and how to protect kids from pregnancy and STDs -- and also to teach how to say No and what kinds of sex are not okay (meaning any kind of sex that includes one person forcing or coercing any kind of sex). It is when a school encourages sexual experimentation of ANY kind (heterosexual or other) that I draw the line. Call me old-fashioned, but I don't think "101 Ways to Have and Enjoy Sex" is an appropriate subject for schools to teach -- and especially not before high school!
Unless they're shy and rejected a lot kids are going to find out about the various sex acts with no need for grooming. The perverted adults will leave the shy, homely and rejected kids alone, fortunately.
And you know the bold for a fact?
Somehow, I doubt the bold VERY much, as I think the "shy, homely and rejected kids" would be the easiest to seduce, as I think that they would be the most likely to suffer from a lack of self-esteem and respond to any kind of affection. (And, again, I am talking about any adult pervert, heterosexual or otherwise!)
Sounds like you came from the generation of Sex and drugs. Of course that generation thought acid, heroin, and cocaine were acceptable. Probably the dumbest generation of the last century.
What generation is that....
Because you read about a subject doesn't mean you end up participating in the acts or adopting the lifestyle.
That's not how books work.
And -- the parents have every right to question the content and initiate a review of these books and the contents of these books.
But to suggest the parent was justified in publicly stating the content she has objections to in a venue that was not meant to cite specific passages or pictures from the book in a meeting where parents were not give an option to remove their children (younger than high school age).....and to suggest there is a whole programming of kids based on two books --- it is ridiculous.
As the school board said, they have a review process for books, they removed the books, will have their committee read the book and have a meeting to specifically address those books...without under age kids in the room so that there can be an honest dialogue of the content and the objections to the content.
If after that process the parent had not been satisfied she could easily contact the school board with her concerns and ask for their involvement.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
