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.
No one is telling you your kids can’t read it. They are saying it doesn’t belong in a school library. There is a difference.
They are also saying there are books that are not appropriate for a teacher to make required reading. Again, they are not saying your child is forbidden from reading it, just that they can’t be mandated to read it. There is a difference.
We are no longer in a day and age where books are so difficult or cost prohibitive to obtain that they must be in libraries or schools for people to access them. No one has forbidden these books from being published or sold online.
School libraries, whether school wide or classroom, need to be age appropriate for ALL the children that have access to them. Ones that aren’t can be gotten from other sources.
By reducing the ways kids can access these books they ARE saying they can’t read it.
Because these movements are also targeting public libraries and universities.
It’s quite dishonest to say “feel free to read X, if you can find a copy, good luck” and claim that you’re not trying to stop people from reading certain books.
But the biggest problem with all of this is that it’s not driven by an educational background. It’s not children’s health specialists saying these books are bad, it’s political action groups pretending to be concerned parents. They’re playing politics with the mental health and emotional health of our kids to score political points. It’s pretty disgusting, really.
We all suffered extremely boring reading assignments in school..at least I did in the 1960s. I am a reader and a word person now, but it is despite the stuff that was forced on me, not because of it.
These parents must live on another planet to think banning a book means their kids don't have access to information; most haven't got a clue what their kids and their kids' friends are looking at online. Haven't they ever read a book online? It simple is for the parents to feel good. Making something forbidden simply makes it more appealing.
By reducing the ways kids can access these books they ARE saying they can’t read it.
Because these movements are also targeting public libraries and universities.
It’s quite dishonest to say “feel free to read X, if you can find a copy, good luck” and claim that you’re not trying to stop people from reading certain books.
But the biggest problem with all of this is that it’s not driven by an educational background. It’s not children’s health specialists saying these books are bad, it’s political action groups pretending to be concerned parents. They’re playing politics with the mental health and emotional health of our kids to score political points. It’s pretty disgusting, really.
Okay, so let's use your logic.
We should put porn magazines in middle school libraries since it's what some kids would want to look at once they reach puberty.
Really?
The question here is: where do you draw the line. A school has a responsibility to make decisions based on community standards. That's why we have elected school boards.
Some of you act as if this is all just a simple, easy decision with no dilemas involved. It's not.
We should put porn magazines in middle school libraries since it's what some kids would want to look at once they reach puberty.
Really?
The question here is: where do you draw the line. A school has a responsibility to make decisions based on community standards. That's why we have elected school boards.
Some of you act as if this is all just a simple, easy decision with no dilemas involved. It's not.
Everybody knows the porn magazines were under your older brothers mattress, and there were plenty of naked boobs in National Geographic in the library. I think what everyone objects to now is the gender bending, woke stuff.
Everybody knows the porn magazines were under your older brothers mattress, and there were plenty of naked boobs in National Geographic in the library. I think what everyone objects to now is the gender bending, woke stuff.
Here's the problem with your thinking...just what I underlined.
No, that's exactly where the debate is...along with other non-related topics. It takes 2 sides to debate what's right and wrong.
Did it ever occur to you that there are parents who don't want their children reading conservative books and magazines?
By reducing the ways kids can access these books they ARE saying they can’t read it.
Because these movements are also targeting public libraries and universities.
It’s quite dishonest to say “feel free to read X, if you can find a copy, good luck” and claim that you’re not trying to stop people from reading certain books.
But the biggest problem with all of this is that it’s not driven by an educational background. It’s not children’s health specialists saying these books are bad, it’s political action groups pretending to be concerned parents. They’re playing politics with the mental health and emotional health of our kids to score political points. It’s pretty disgusting, really.
No. It’s me a person with 40+ years of experience in child development, including participating in published research and teaching at a collegiate level, saying it. This over-sexualization of children prior to when they are developmentally ready to deal with it is horrible for them. Undermining normal parental guidance places children at risk for emotional vulnerability, increases uncertainty during early adolescence, and often leads to poor choices including increased suicidal ideation.
Yes, it’s a political battle right now - but it shouldn’t be. Keep quasi-porn out of schools.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
"They are also saying there are books that are not appropriate for a teacher to make required reading. Again, they are not saying your child is forbidden from reading it, just that they can’t be mandated to read it. There is a difference."
- Did you miss the part where I said NONE of the books were required reading for any class, group, or club? None of them.
"We are no longer in a day and age where books are so difficult or cost prohibitive to obtain that they must be in libraries or schools for people to access them. No one has forbidden these books from being published or sold online."
- The ignorance and privilege of this statement is astounding. We live in a day and age where food is so cost prohibitive and difficult to obtain, that school meals are the only ones many kids get. To say everyone has easy access to books is completely ignorant.
"School libraries, whether school wide or classroom, need to be age appropriate for ALL the children that have access to them. Ones that aren’t can be gotten from other sources."
- How many of these books have you actually read? Tell me what part of The Life of Rosa Parks is inappropriate. I've read it, and there is not a single, solitary off color or profane word in the book. Also, actual experts in child development have deemed these books appropriate for certain ages. Just a hunch, but I'm going to guess the people with actual education in these things and who have read the books are better equipped to determine what is appropriate than some mom with a high school diploma who hasn't read a book in 20 years, let alone read the ones that are banned. BTW, parents have always had the right to have the school not allow their kids to check out books.
As someone who has the “actual education in these things” and who has most likely worked with far more impoverished and/or minority children than you have seen in a lifetime, I feel qualified to speak on the subject. While I agree that some of these books being pushed off the shelves are baffling, the problem is that there have been too many books allowed to be put on SCHOOL shelves that are shockingly inappropriate. For whatever reason the ALA has over the last decade or so decided to push the envelope on appropriate books for teens and adolescents. Yes, the books might be the appropriate reading level for the students at the school, the topic of the book might interest students, and it may feature individuals of the same age, but that doesn’t mean it’s developmentally appropriate for kids to read due to how the topic is approached or verbiage/illustration choices.
Some of the emotional distress we are seeing in young people today is a result of being exposed to topics they are developmentally ill equipped to deal with. Yes, there will be kids who will benefit from being exposed to some of those materials, but that needs to be handled on a one-on-one basis, rather than putting the materials in a school library for anyone to stumble upon. Consider it like the DARE program, which's was successful in inner-city schools but actually lead to increases in drug use in suburban and rural schools.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
I remember when the Army Pyrotechnic Manual was pulled off my high school library's shelves. In 1970. Actually it was taken out of my locker, but I digress.
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.
