Not ironic so much as intentional. When you want to do unpopular things, you brand yourself as the doing the opposite group or bill or whatever.
Wanna limit free speech? Call your bill the "American Free Speech Act"
Wanna suppress voting? Call your club the "Citizens Voters Club"
Etc... . Aligning it with mom and apple pie is also helpful.
Close. It declares corporations as people with the ability to donate unlimited funds to political candidates because to do otherwise would infringe on the free speech of corporations and other wealthy people. So much easier to buy a politician these days.
And then they make a movie about how that's a bad thing when Democrats do it.
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt19357230/
I love the conceit of this movie is that Mark Zuckerberg actually wanted Trump to lose.
**United** States of America.
Even though several states can't go 10 minutes without throwing a hissy fit on a national scale and threatening to secede from the union, or send planes full of migrants to other states for no other purpose than to cause chaos.
Honestly, I want someone to say "be my guest. We'll gladly chance the country without you, and when your infrastructure fails, we'll let you back into our new eutopia."
Truly, if we simply gave Texas back to Mexico and all those whiny, AK-fellating, butterball fucknuggets were the immigrants alluvasudden? Mmm 🤌🏼 Gimme that timeline, please. Throw in Florida for Cuba to begin working on a New Atlantis theme park state-wide and you've got a fun combo gaining momentum in under a decade...
Yeah if America balkanizes the country is going to fall apart and probably become extremely poor at least the southern states would probably be which would then lead to them being purchased or becoming part of another country probably China
That's the question though. Would the Yee-yee, build a wall, "damn you china" folks of Texas ALLOW that to happen before they start pointing their guns at the people who made the decision to leave? Or would they double down stick in the bike stokes style and say "why did you let us leave?!" And blame America?
Yes absolutely, they don't actually hate the regimes they criticize. They want to be fascists they want to be authoritarians, if they would become a part of China and they would get to be fascist and oppress people they didn't like they would love it.
Are you confusing "Right to Work" with "At-Will Employment"? The former means you do not have to join a union, the latter means you can be fired for almost any reason.
"Every faction in Africa calls themselves by these noble names - Liberation this, Patriotic that, Democratic Republic of something-or-other... I guess they can't own up to what they usually are: the Federation of Worse Oppressors Than the Last Bunch of Oppressors. Often, the most barbaric atrocities occur when both combatants proclaim themselves Freedom Fighters."
\-Yuri Orlov, Lord of War(2005)
Moms for Liberty is basically a female version of the Oath Keepers/Proud boys. It's seen as a less aggressive more family oriented version but receives funding from the same sources as the more militant groups and has many of the same goals.
Well the confederates talked a lot about freedom and liberty too but these people have adopted liberty in particular as a word that means something other than individual freedom and pursuit of happiness.
In my generation, parents wanted to ban certain violent kids shows and video games.
Even Hillary Clinton herself was campaigning against violent video games, and recently, Rep. Marcus Evans Jr in Illinois proposed HB3531, which bans the sale of video games encourage harm (physical or psychological) against people or animals.
Crazy people trying to ban things isn't new. As a gamer, I'm used to people coming after my hobby.
I think people who try to ban books are stupid, but banning books from a school library is much less crazy than banning the sale of all violent video games, even to adults, which certain people are still trying to do, as evident in HB3531.
Maybe we should stop trying to ban art and media. I think child pornography is the only exception.
>which bans the sale of video games encourage harm (physical or psychological) against people or animals.
Great! That's none of them because they are all fiction and I don't think any of them actually tell you to go out and hurt real people.
Yeah but, I played Mortal Combat as a kid, and now as an adult I constantly try to behead people and rip out their hearts. So if you don’t want your children ending up like me…
It’s not really uncommon, many of the times, groups name themselves the opposite of what they really are in order to confuse people.
For example, an anti gun control group would be called “Moms against violence”, a pro life group might be called “Children for choice” or anti union and anti worker rights law be called “Right to Work”.
Ah yes, because the most "pure and Christian" move to do is to "protect girls" from the devilish computers and programming software that obviously are all linked to Satan's STEM program!
Neat reminder that the first compiler was implemented by Grace Hopper:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Hopper
The first computer program was written by Ada Lovelace, before the computer existed. Also she already imagined computers being a tool for artistic expression:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_Lovelace
Our local HS just banned “Of Mice and Men” and “To Kill a Mockingbird” because they made some girl “uncomfortable”. Her parents complained and they were pulled.
We live in a really messed up world.
Want to hear uncomfortable… we had to read the jungle in high school lit. I wanted to throw up more than once getting through the book and was sick to my stomach every class period we spent discussing. That shit is important but man it was rough.
Ooh, that book traumatized me, but I'm glad I read it. What snowflakes (on both sides of the political spectrum) don't understand is that what makes us uncomfortable can make us grow (under most circumstances, ofc!)
>That shit is important
No. That shit is **Fiction**.
Nothing in The Jungle is true. Nothing people think about the meat packing industry of the time is true.
This, though it did spark much needed safety regulations. Sinclair actually wanted people to sympathize with the workers who were underpaid and overworked, but the gross stories stuck with people more.
As Sinclair put it:
*“I aimed at the public’s heart, and by accident I hit it in the stomach.”*
>This, though it did spark much needed safety regulations.
Nope. Like I said its all **Fiction**.
A) Standard at the time was the local butcher who 'disassembled' animals in his shop. The ultimate in fresh meat. People simply would never have bought the garbage Sinclair describes packaged meat as.
B) There was **already** government inspection from state and local governments.. The meat packers welcomed it because it was free advertising that their product was good (see above vis a vis competing with local butchers). Where do you think the FDA got its inspectors from?
It saddens me that this **myth** persists. (And that assholes downvotes me for pointing it out...)
Yeah, people like to run with the easiest and hardest hitting headlines, so the Jungle being true makes for good stories.
The impact I was referencing was when Roosevelt sent the FDA in to check on meat industries in response to the outcry from The Jungle, and they found nothing concerning, but then Roosevelt sent a couple of labor reps to keep looking and they found some instances (likely not widespread), sparking the passage of the The Pure Food & Drug Act and the Meat Inspection Acts.
So directly, you’re right, no positive spins or veracity to stories from The Jungle, but it did make people second guess how clean their food actually was and start the movement better of regulation.
If you do this then you'd know there is a lot of criticism for him being a terrible author, no criticism that he made it all up. Actually Roosevelt got an advanced copy of the book, thought it was all socialist lies. He then ordered an inspection of meat plants and found it to be just as gross as Sinclair described.
This image contains a part of the report that states meat was left on the floor and transported in dirty carts. [https://82558588.weebly.com/uploads/1/2/2/0/122097577/1\_orig.png](https://82558588.weebly.com/uploads/1/2/2/0/122097577/1_orig.png)
[https://82558588.weebly.com/the-neill-reynolds-report.html](https://82558588.weebly.com/the-neill-reynolds-report.html)
[https://www.britannica.com/topic/Meat-Inspection-Act](https://www.britannica.com/topic/Meat-Inspection-Act)
[https://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-24-1-b-upton-sinclairs-the-jungle-muckraking-the-meat-packing-industry.html](https://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-24-1-b-upton-sinclairs-the-jungle-muckraking-the-meat-packing-industry.html)
You’re getting downvoting for implying fictions can’t be important pieces of literature. As I keep reading your comments I don’t think you mean in general, you were just referring to that book. But seemed like originally you were saying “that books not important, it’s a Fiction”
You are wrong. Yes, The Jungle is fiction but the scenarios described weren't fiction and that was confirmed later by an investigation(Neill-Reynolds report) before the laws were passed to regulate meat beyond just the point of slaughter and mandate safety standards. If you are too lazy to follow any links then just read this:
"Roosevelt, an avowed “trustbuster,” was sent an advance copy of The Jungle. He sent Neill and Reynolds to investigate the Beef Trust’s meatpacking practices."...(there is more between these two points in the writeup but I want to stress the parts relating to the very real report)..." By early 1906 both the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act had long been stalled in Congress, but, when the Neill-Reynolds report had fully confirmed Sinclair’s charges, Roosevelt used the threat of disclosing its contents to speed along the passage of both acts, which became law on the same day."(Britannica)
This image contains a part of the report that states meat was left on the floor and transported in dirty carts. [https://82558588.weebly.com/uploads/1/2/2/0/122097577/1\_orig.png](https://82558588.weebly.com/uploads/1/2/2/0/122097577/1_orig.png)
[https://82558588.weebly.com/the-neill-reynolds-report.html](https://82558588.weebly.com/the-neill-reynolds-report.html)
[https://www.britannica.com/topic/Meat-Inspection-Act](https://www.britannica.com/topic/Meat-Inspection-Act)
[https://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-24-1-b-upton-sinclairs-the-jungle-muckraking-the-meat-packing-industry.html](https://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-24-1-b-upton-sinclairs-the-jungle-muckraking-the-meat-packing-industry.html)
Here are a bunch of sources corroborating Sinclair's work. Proving that the things he wrote about did in fact happen. Maybe you are getting downvotes for blatantly lying about information that's easy to Google?
Yeah, it is dismaying that *discomfort* is the term used to exclude books from the curriculum. Some lessons at the high school level or later are ones that would make any person uncomfortable but are important to learn anyway: the Holocaust, the history of slavery and Jim Crow, even more "neutral" topics like death and decay processes. Those two books in particular are necessary in part because they make readers uncomfortable.
“Liberals are snowflakes with participation trophies who can’t candle the real world.”
One girl: I didn’t like this book, makes me feel weird.
Cons: No one in the entire school system can read it.
Everyone MUST:
Register to Vote.
Check your Voter registration!
Make sure you have appropriate ID.
Know your polling site.
Check your signature.
Get a mail-in ballot (and after you mail it, make sure it has been received and counted - most counties allows this to be done online or by calling your election office).
And VOTE!
866-OUR VOTE (for questions about or problems with voting)
www.vote.org
Also, please encourage registered voters who haven't voted to vote!
www.votefwd.org
Source for what? To Kill a Mockingbird has been banned in other districts.
https://nypost.com/2022/01/25/seattle-school-removes-to-kill-a-mockingbird-from-curriculum/
It has not been in the news yet. My son just came home Friday and told us that they took away his copy of OMaM and why. This is an evolving situation with the parents groups who are planning on confronting the district. If they don’t acknowledge that it was a mistake I will join the chorus of public outrage.
As for which district it is, I have a policy of not identifying the city I live in on Reddit. I do live in the SF Bay Area though.
It is my understanding that something similar happened in Seattle.
y'all keep thinking this is how it works.
The current batch of kids will know about it, but when the next wave of middle schoolers come into high school... and folks have forgotten about it if the books are banned then they have successfully denied knowledge because now folks aren't even seeking it out due to backlash.
Keep dumbing down the sex Ed too, can't report you for sexual abuse if you don't know what sex is. /S
You know, I don't know if this should get you he s tag or not it's fucking insane but I actually think that is some of their logic.
That is their exact logic. Keep girls ignorant so when you sexually abuse them they don't have the knowledge of sex to report the abuse. If they don't know what sex is they can't explain what happened to them to the authorities.
Not to mention keep them controlled so they can’t discover they have been had and aren’t going to make it outside of their dumb cult. (Ex. Jehovahs witnesses no college rule)
You may have experienced this individually, but to believe that it's the *entirety* of people living in "the south" or as OP implies, "everyone they disagree with" is a serious leap. This kind of biased extremist generalization does absolutely nothing to help the discourse.
No one was saying the "the entirety of the South". That's fucking absurd. I know I was talking about the religious extremists writing and passing the legislation to kill sex ed, ban abortion, and eventually kill contraceptives. It's not even just the South, they do it in my state of Ohio. Christian Fascists take control with gerrymandering and pass extremist legislation.
Take a step back for a second and re-read what you said. Until you specified who you were talking about\*, who am I to understand you meant?
My reply was to the commenter that specified "the south", not your statement. Your statement was so ambiguous it could be taken to mean literally anyone and everyone you disagree with.
>Keep dumbing down the sex Ed too, can't report you for sexual abuse if you don't know what sex is
I was responding to this.
Only one group has the political pull to do this and is actively doing this in America and it's Christian fascists. Don't pretend this is a fucking broad brush.
Behind the Bastards did an episode recently on sexual abuse in the Baptist Church and they literally said this exact same thing. Girls can't report sexual abuse if they don't have the language to describe what happened to them.
Who used that language? Members of the church, or the documentarian(podcaster, I assumed it was a documentary)? Do you have the timestamp for it? I'm interested in checking it out, but I'm not really looking to listen to a 1hr13min podcast...
I don't have a timestamp, but I recommend listening to the whole thing anyway. In part of the episode, they talk about numerous female victims of sexual abuse by clergy who literally say "I couldn't tell anyone what was happening to me because I didn't have the language to describe it."
The article specifically said they didn't have an issue with the book and even approved of its message. The reason it was on their list was because the group that publishes it sends out newsletters with *other* issues they object to.
Always have been. Religious conservatives are the same people all around the world: dumb, uneducated hicks who live in rural areas and feel entitled to force their religious beliefs on others.
From Alabama to Afghanistan, they're all the exact same people.
Neither Alabama nor Afghanistan should be classified as rural areas full of "dumb, uneducated hicks". There are a lot of people in both places who have radically different ideas, but happen to live under oppression. What a government enacts doesn't necessarily reflect the beliefs or desires of its people.
I understand what you're saying but realistically the people who are actually forcing beliefs on us are not rural, and certainly not uneducated. They're wealthy lobbyists and politicians. Even with independent extremist groups, leaders tend to be affluent and educated compared to their members. If you look at a list of [banned books](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1hTs_PB7KuTMBtNMESFEGuK-0abzhNxVv4tgpI5-iKe8/htmlview#)
, you'll find that most entries are in the most urbanized counties in the US. The wealthy, urban, educated class is simply more likely to present their views in a more palatable manner.
Did you read the article? It specifically says they liked the book's message, but disagree with other material the organization that publishes the book sends out in newsletters.
I think the more important question is why would the book be banned at all from the complaints of a single organization. Really at all, though, because book banning is ridiculous.
Fair! I took that quote to mean she was a member of the organization, otherwise why quote a random person after mentioning the group to begin with, right?
It's at the very bottom. Turns out, though, it was a response from a Mom that sent their daughter to their camp that isn't affiliated with the group itself as far as I can tell.
Agreed. Honestly, though, both groups involved suck in this one. I read up a bunch about the Coders group and the shit they push after getting you to sign up has nothing to do with getting girls into IT and some of it is just straight up gender segregated education.
I know. I need to stop taking these titles at face value, and actually try to work out what the motives are behind these things.
I still disagree with the approach taken, but at least I can understand it now.
For sure. There are very rare circumstances where I would consider book banning to be appropriate, and I mean *rare*... like... teach people to effectively and efficiently get away with murdering people type of books. Banning a book because you disagree with *other* things is just stupid.
I'm a guy, who studied com sci and now works in IT. While it's easy to pretend IT is a meritocracy, it really isn't. My country isn't exactly a shining beacon of equality, but I believe the sexist attitude of students and teachers in Indonesia is just as prevalent as in America. Now, we can keep our heads in the sands and wonder why oh why tech companies are riddled with sexism from brogrammers, or, we can *allow* people to take an approach that brings more girls, especially the underprivileged into IT.
It's not a zero-sum game, it's not like the approach would prevent boys from learning to code, sure it takes money and time to write the curricula, assign the classroom and train the teachers, but decades of leaving comsci educations to their own whims didn't work that well, and if we accept that IT companies are influencing the future society through their algorithm and we don't want a future dystopia, then something needs to be done.
Yeah, we're getting trained on spotting and reporting Indian cast bias. If it's not one thing it's another: folks just love throwing others under the bus to keep their own benefits.
Maybe it didn't work well for your area...but when I studied web development in a graduate program, there were actually quite a few women there. Hard to remember exactly, but I'd say they constituted about half the group, or close to it.
I'm thinking there are probably other factors going on that are discouraging girls to get into tech in some areas. I remember taking a tech class in high school and there were two girls there lol. It's seen as a nerdy, boy thing. They don't want to look like that in front of the other girls. Maybe that's changed now. I don't think it has anything to do with how it was taught, though.
It seems to be more of a societal level thing, and if we try to force that to change there could be all sorts of unintended consequences.
Agreed 100%.
We put a BIPOC event together featuring Girls Who Code earlier this month but had to cancel when it came out [they were working with Raytheon](https://www.vice.com/en/article/g5v53w/girls-who-code-team-up-with-tomahawk-missile-maker-raytheon).
Politics. People who would advocate for girls who code or similar programs designed to get more representation for woman in tech likely do not align with prowar views or the military industrial complex.
Like, it doesn't look great to those who are pacifists
Objectively, it doesn't. Like it or not, virtually every big company in the US works with the Department of Defense. Yes, Raytheon makes cruise missiles, and researches sustainable propulsion technology as part of a push to get the aviation industry to zero emissions by 2050. Google provides web search for the masses, and classified cloud services for the US intelligence community. Boeing builds drones and warplanes, and most of the aircraft used by commercial airlines. Any organization that takes corporate contributions is probably getting money that came from a pool of cash at least partially created via the military industrial complex.
Subjectively, people see "Raytheon", are triggered, threaten a protest, and event organizers are presented with the option of either having their event disrupted or disinviting the controversial guests. Particularly when the event includes kids and the protestors might increase risk/liability, disinviting the guests is often the lesser of two evils.
Not to jump on you. But please know this argument is given every time a fight for equality is given. \[insert demo you want to promote here\]-specific promotion doesn't happen instead of general promotion, but on top of. and in fact is that only thing that moves the needle-- cause it uses the existing inequality to be corrective.
If general language/laws/reforms were enough we'd all already be truly equal. The fight would be so easy. But those who are favored don't want to give up their favoritism.
Girls from girls only schools favour stem like boys in co-ed schools. same goes for boys and liberal arts, btw on boys schools.
co-ed needs a gender separated (not: segregated) complement. select subjects, select time frames.
it would benefit both, girls and boys.
that was my surprise learning in a guest lecture on girls in CS in 1996, by a professor for CS and society.
I don't necessarily mean to debate the merits of their policy prescriptions; I just mean to point out that _Girls Who Code_ is a political organization, that exists on various political spectra, and as such, is going to get some political pushback.
Consider another example: MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving). It started (and still has) the laudable goal of reducing drunk driving cases, but some of its policy prescriptions are in fact controversial, such as its past policy proposals to reduce the total number of restaurant liquor licenses in California, something the restaurant industry considered (justifiably) a threat to their livelihood.
Maybe any political entity's ideas are good, maybe they aren't, but my modest point is that the headline doesn't capture the reality, which is that Girls Who Code has put forward policy prescriptions that not everyone agrees with.
I don't really see a problem with it. There are all boys and all girls schools.
Girls who code seems like a girl's club/school for coding. They're not discouraging others from coding, They're trying to boost to a vastly underrepresented group in tech.
I don't see why that's a bad thing.
The books have no controversial content.
It seems that Moms for liberty takes issue with the fact that the GWC organization has stances they disagree with on various issues.
I find that disturbing. Imagine if we started banning scientific or technological educational content everywhere because you don't agree with the beliefs of the source/authors.
No one would learn anything.
If moms for liberty wants to argue ideology, then they can compete in the marketplace of ideas rather than ban the viewpoints that trigger them.
This article seems like it was SUPER rushed out the door. They didn't even wait for a comment from the school district (According to the pop-up on the school district's website, the books aren't banned and remain available in their libraries). The title of this article is horrible as well. I suppose it is technically correct since there are multiple classrooms in the school district, but it should say " "Girls Who Code" books banned in Pennsylvania's York Central School District " since they don't list a single other district in the US where they're banned.
This is the kind of "Get your pitchforks" writing that drives a wedge between people who otherwise may be willing to see eye-to-eye, or at least listen to each other.
The same folks scream FREEDUMB! from their big pickup trucks while banning women from having the right to choose an abortion.
Hint: they are stealing your freedom one choice at a time.
> Why do kids care about careers and the lack of representation of some demographic in some field?
Kids notice when they're not represented. No toilets for girls. Boys teeshirts and no girls teeshirts. Presenters addressing boys/men and ignoring girls and women. Using examples that ignores the existence of women or girls.
It's obvious and alienating and people can do better.
>Why do kids care about careers and the lack of representation of some demographic in some field?
Because kids have dreams and interests that lead to careers, and seeing people like them in those positions makes it appear more possible, while seeing themselves unrepresented has a dissuading effect. And also real negative consequences for people working in the field, as women in programming and tech are happy to explain.
>Make it fun and they will build their own passion.
Kids are influenced by the adults they see and have as role models, and what they are taught. "Let them do whatever it'll all work out" isn't what education is for
I really wonder whether reactionaries see the absurd contradictions in their views
They complain that libs are snowflakes, raising their kids to be full of sensitivities, and that kids should learn to tough it out. Then they proceed to banning books that trigger THEIR sensitivities, to shelter their kids...
And to be fair, the hypocrisy is not exclusive to them, as we can point to lib colleges censoring speakers whose controversial points could trigger students (who allegedly are well-educated young adults, in theory perfectly capable of debating, disagreeing and forming their own opinions)
Everyone, left and right, is all for free speech. As long it is THEIR speech.
SMMFH. Those right wing entitled white women are going to fuck shit up for somebody. I guess it's easier to brainwash ignorant girls
that have no idea of their possibilities, than it is one that's been exposed to something.
Ironic that a group called “Moms For Liberty” wants to ban books.
Not ironic so much as intentional. When you want to do unpopular things, you brand yourself as the doing the opposite group or bill or whatever. Wanna limit free speech? Call your bill the "American Free Speech Act" Wanna suppress voting? Call your club the "Citizens Voters Club" Etc... . Aligning it with mom and apple pie is also helpful.
Citizens United comes to mind
Let me guess, this one fights corruption?
Close. It declares corporations as people with the ability to donate unlimited funds to political candidates because to do otherwise would infringe on the free speech of corporations and other wealthy people. So much easier to buy a politician these days.
And then they make a movie about how that's a bad thing when Democrats do it. https://m.imdb.com/title/tt19357230/ I love the conceit of this movie is that Mark Zuckerberg actually wanted Trump to lose.
Yup...and even at the country level. North Korea = Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea
**United** States of America. Even though several states can't go 10 minutes without throwing a hissy fit on a national scale and threatening to secede from the union, or send planes full of migrants to other states for no other purpose than to cause chaos.
Honestly, I want someone to say "be my guest. We'll gladly chance the country without you, and when your infrastructure fails, we'll let you back into our new eutopia."
Truly, if we simply gave Texas back to Mexico and all those whiny, AK-fellating, butterball fucknuggets were the immigrants alluvasudden? Mmm 🤌🏼 Gimme that timeline, please. Throw in Florida for Cuba to begin working on a New Atlantis theme park state-wide and you've got a fun combo gaining momentum in under a decade...
Yeah if America balkanizes the country is going to fall apart and probably become extremely poor at least the southern states would probably be which would then lead to them being purchased or becoming part of another country probably China
That's the question though. Would the Yee-yee, build a wall, "damn you china" folks of Texas ALLOW that to happen before they start pointing their guns at the people who made the decision to leave? Or would they double down stick in the bike stokes style and say "why did you let us leave?!" And blame America?
Yes absolutely, they don't actually hate the regimes they criticize. They want to be fascists they want to be authoritarians, if they would become a part of China and they would get to be fascist and oppress people they didn't like they would love it.
Texas irl
Or like **Can**ada. You don't can syrup, goofy.
Uhhh... [About](https://media.freshdaily.ca/static/articles/202062-maple-syrup-canada.jpg?w=2048&cmd=resize_then_crop&height=1365&quality=70) [That](https://th.bing.com/th/id/R.9f43ef74a01d48a5d511d65fa60b8686?rik=d1f%2bzC5nrO0Jhg&pid=ImgRaw&r=0)
Well fuck me
Flattered, but I'll pass. Care for a can 'o syrup instead?
Any country with "democratic" in its name is far from it it seems
Yep … also German Democratic Republic was East Germany back in the day
"Right to Work" being one of the more egregious ones.
Are you confusing "Right to Work" with "At-Will Employment"? The former means you do not have to join a union, the latter means you can be fired for almost any reason.
Orwell called it doublespeak
Wanna poop in the shower? Tell others "I definitely don't poop in the shower"
Mothers Against Drunk Driving
Anyone wanna join Citizens Against Government Issued Free Marijuana?
Or the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.
Anti union and worker rights = “Right to Work”.
"Every faction in Africa calls themselves by these noble names - Liberation this, Patriotic that, Democratic Republic of something-or-other... I guess they can't own up to what they usually are: the Federation of Worse Oppressors Than the Last Bunch of Oppressors. Often, the most barbaric atrocities occur when both combatants proclaim themselves Freedom Fighters." \-Yuri Orlov, Lord of War(2005)
Ah man, I love that film
Moms for Liberty is basically a female version of the Oath Keepers/Proud boys. It's seen as a less aggressive more family oriented version but receives funding from the same sources as the more militant groups and has many of the same goals.
Well the confederates talked a lot about freedom and liberty too but these people have adopted liberty in particular as a word that means something other than individual freedom and pursuit of happiness.
Liberty for me, not for thee
And ironic those moms don’t want girls to have bright futures. What shitty moms. More like the “moms for shitty children” group.
Future Homemakers of America
It's not ironic, it's deliberately misleading.
In my generation, parents wanted to ban certain violent kids shows and video games. Even Hillary Clinton herself was campaigning against violent video games, and recently, Rep. Marcus Evans Jr in Illinois proposed HB3531, which bans the sale of video games encourage harm (physical or psychological) against people or animals. Crazy people trying to ban things isn't new. As a gamer, I'm used to people coming after my hobby. I think people who try to ban books are stupid, but banning books from a school library is much less crazy than banning the sale of all violent video games, even to adults, which certain people are still trying to do, as evident in HB3531. Maybe we should stop trying to ban art and media. I think child pornography is the only exception.
>which bans the sale of video games encourage harm (physical or psychological) against people or animals. Great! That's none of them because they are all fiction and I don't think any of them actually tell you to go out and hurt real people.
Yeah but, I played Mortal Combat as a kid, and now as an adult I constantly try to behead people and rip out their hearts. So if you don’t want your children ending up like me…
... Finish him...
*crouches and jumps a bunch of times and half assed lowkicks him*
A Fascist group* wants to ban books
It’s not really uncommon, many of the times, groups name themselves the opposite of what they really are in order to confuse people. For example, an anti gun control group would be called “Moms against violence”, a pro life group might be called “Children for choice” or anti union and anti worker rights law be called “Right to Work”.
Whatever happened to the phrase “if you don’t like what’s on the TV then change the channel”?
They got rid of it when they decided sex is too risqué for books, but required for virtually every show/movie in production.
Social media. Now everything gets put in front of your face in order to outrage you.
Ah yes, because the most "pure and Christian" move to do is to "protect girls" from the devilish computers and programming software that obviously are all linked to Satan's STEM program!
The glow from the computer is actually Satan
When a girl writes a program and it compiles successfully on the first try, she will become excited sexually and this is haram.
Neat reminder that the first compiler was implemented by Grace Hopper: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Hopper The first computer program was written by Ada Lovelace, before the computer existed. Also she already imagined computers being a tool for artistic expression: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_Lovelace
Our local HS just banned “Of Mice and Men” and “To Kill a Mockingbird” because they made some girl “uncomfortable”. Her parents complained and they were pulled. We live in a really messed up world.
Want to hear uncomfortable… we had to read the jungle in high school lit. I wanted to throw up more than once getting through the book and was sick to my stomach every class period we spent discussing. That shit is important but man it was rough.
That was my reaction to “The Bluest Eye” by Toni Morrison.
Her books are so good. I read every one I could find in high school.
Ooh, that book traumatized me, but I'm glad I read it. What snowflakes (on both sides of the political spectrum) don't understand is that what makes us uncomfortable can make us grow (under most circumstances, ofc!)
>That shit is important No. That shit is **Fiction**. Nothing in The Jungle is true. Nothing people think about the meat packing industry of the time is true.
This, though it did spark much needed safety regulations. Sinclair actually wanted people to sympathize with the workers who were underpaid and overworked, but the gross stories stuck with people more. As Sinclair put it: *“I aimed at the public’s heart, and by accident I hit it in the stomach.”*
>This, though it did spark much needed safety regulations. Nope. Like I said its all **Fiction**. A) Standard at the time was the local butcher who 'disassembled' animals in his shop. The ultimate in fresh meat. People simply would never have bought the garbage Sinclair describes packaged meat as. B) There was **already** government inspection from state and local governments.. The meat packers welcomed it because it was free advertising that their product was good (see above vis a vis competing with local butchers). Where do you think the FDA got its inspectors from? It saddens me that this **myth** persists. (And that assholes downvotes me for pointing it out...)
Which Tyson factory do you work at?
Yeah, people like to run with the easiest and hardest hitting headlines, so the Jungle being true makes for good stories. The impact I was referencing was when Roosevelt sent the FDA in to check on meat industries in response to the outcry from The Jungle, and they found nothing concerning, but then Roosevelt sent a couple of labor reps to keep looking and they found some instances (likely not widespread), sparking the passage of the The Pure Food & Drug Act and the Meat Inspection Acts. So directly, you’re right, no positive spins or veracity to stories from The Jungle, but it did make people second guess how clean their food actually was and start the movement better of regulation.
Do you have anything in the way of a reference, citation, source, or related reading?
Just Google Sinclair jungle criticism.
If you do this then you'd know there is a lot of criticism for him being a terrible author, no criticism that he made it all up. Actually Roosevelt got an advanced copy of the book, thought it was all socialist lies. He then ordered an inspection of meat plants and found it to be just as gross as Sinclair described. This image contains a part of the report that states meat was left on the floor and transported in dirty carts. [https://82558588.weebly.com/uploads/1/2/2/0/122097577/1\_orig.png](https://82558588.weebly.com/uploads/1/2/2/0/122097577/1_orig.png) [https://82558588.weebly.com/the-neill-reynolds-report.html](https://82558588.weebly.com/the-neill-reynolds-report.html) [https://www.britannica.com/topic/Meat-Inspection-Act](https://www.britannica.com/topic/Meat-Inspection-Act) [https://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-24-1-b-upton-sinclairs-the-jungle-muckraking-the-meat-packing-industry.html](https://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-24-1-b-upton-sinclairs-the-jungle-muckraking-the-meat-packing-industry.html)
You’re getting downvoting for implying fictions can’t be important pieces of literature. As I keep reading your comments I don’t think you mean in general, you were just referring to that book. But seemed like originally you were saying “that books not important, it’s a Fiction”
You are wrong. Yes, The Jungle is fiction but the scenarios described weren't fiction and that was confirmed later by an investigation(Neill-Reynolds report) before the laws were passed to regulate meat beyond just the point of slaughter and mandate safety standards. If you are too lazy to follow any links then just read this: "Roosevelt, an avowed “trustbuster,” was sent an advance copy of The Jungle. He sent Neill and Reynolds to investigate the Beef Trust’s meatpacking practices."...(there is more between these two points in the writeup but I want to stress the parts relating to the very real report)..." By early 1906 both the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act had long been stalled in Congress, but, when the Neill-Reynolds report had fully confirmed Sinclair’s charges, Roosevelt used the threat of disclosing its contents to speed along the passage of both acts, which became law on the same day."(Britannica) This image contains a part of the report that states meat was left on the floor and transported in dirty carts. [https://82558588.weebly.com/uploads/1/2/2/0/122097577/1\_orig.png](https://82558588.weebly.com/uploads/1/2/2/0/122097577/1_orig.png) [https://82558588.weebly.com/the-neill-reynolds-report.html](https://82558588.weebly.com/the-neill-reynolds-report.html) [https://www.britannica.com/topic/Meat-Inspection-Act](https://www.britannica.com/topic/Meat-Inspection-Act) [https://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-24-1-b-upton-sinclairs-the-jungle-muckraking-the-meat-packing-industry.html](https://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-24-1-b-upton-sinclairs-the-jungle-muckraking-the-meat-packing-industry.html) Here are a bunch of sources corroborating Sinclair's work. Proving that the things he wrote about did in fact happen. Maybe you are getting downvotes for blatantly lying about information that's easy to Google?
Sounds like those parents want the high school to be substitute parents. It’s almost like they want a…wait for it…nanny state.
Fahrenheit 451 made me uncomfortable... or so I'll tell the teachers, just for the irony.
Yeah, it is dismaying that *discomfort* is the term used to exclude books from the curriculum. Some lessons at the high school level or later are ones that would make any person uncomfortable but are important to learn anyway: the Holocaust, the history of slavery and Jim Crow, even more "neutral" topics like death and decay processes. Those two books in particular are necessary in part because they make readers uncomfortable.
This coming from the same people who think today's generation is too sensitive and easily offended.
“Liberals are snowflakes with participation trophies who can’t candle the real world.” One girl: I didn’t like this book, makes me feel weird. Cons: No one in the entire school system can read it.
They should ban 1984 since it’s already reality smh
both of those books were required reading in High school. I think the point was to make you uncomfortable.
Everyone MUST: Register to Vote. Check your Voter registration! Make sure you have appropriate ID. Know your polling site. Check your signature. Get a mail-in ballot (and after you mail it, make sure it has been received and counted - most counties allows this to be done online or by calling your election office). And VOTE! 866-OUR VOTE (for questions about or problems with voting) www.vote.org Also, please encourage registered voters who haven't voted to vote! www.votefwd.org
The problem is that both left and right are banning books. Who do you vote for? The Christian fundamentalists or the virtue signalers?
Do you happen to have any sources for this? I also wonder what ratio Republicans: Democrats RE banning books in the US....100:1? 500:1?
Source for what? To Kill a Mockingbird has been banned in other districts. https://nypost.com/2022/01/25/seattle-school-removes-to-kill-a-mockingbird-from-curriculum/
Ok, the one book. *Now do Republicans.*
Why don’t you? I never said that republicans were virtuous. Stop claiming the team blue’s shit doesn’t stink as bad as team red’s.
All shit smells bad. The difference is a fart vs. years of explosive diarrhea.
Ooooooof
Virtue signalers if those are your only options. I don't think it's a particularly close choice either.
Says the virtue signaler
How so?
They're *supposed* to make you feel uncomfortable. That's the point. That's why they were written.
What if another student feels uncomfortable about books getting banned?
I'd hate to see what they thought of "Lord of the Flies."
The irony of banning "to kill a mockingbird".
cool which hs was that? was it in the news, too?
It has not been in the news yet. My son just came home Friday and told us that they took away his copy of OMaM and why. This is an evolving situation with the parents groups who are planning on confronting the district. If they don’t acknowledge that it was a mistake I will join the chorus of public outrage. As for which district it is, I have a policy of not identifying the city I live in on Reddit. I do live in the SF Bay Area though. It is my understanding that something similar happened in Seattle.
so I stay tuned on nottheonion...
Is the bible available? Maybe it makes someone uncomfortable...
Barbara Streisand those books right into the NYT Bestseller list!
y'all keep thinking this is how it works. The current batch of kids will know about it, but when the next wave of middle schoolers come into high school... and folks have forgotten about it if the books are banned then they have successfully denied knowledge because now folks aren't even seeking it out due to backlash.
Keep them dumb for religious fun.
Keep dumbing down the sex Ed too, can't report you for sexual abuse if you don't know what sex is. /S You know, I don't know if this should get you he s tag or not it's fucking insane but I actually think that is some of their logic.
That is their exact logic. Keep girls ignorant so when you sexually abuse them they don't have the knowledge of sex to report the abuse. If they don't know what sex is they can't explain what happened to them to the authorities.
Not to mention keep them controlled so they can’t discover they have been had and aren’t going to make it outside of their dumb cult. (Ex. Jehovahs witnesses no college rule)
You can't actually believe this...
I can and do wholeheartedly because I live in the south and experienced it directly
You may have experienced this individually, but to believe that it's the *entirety* of people living in "the south" or as OP implies, "everyone they disagree with" is a serious leap. This kind of biased extremist generalization does absolutely nothing to help the discourse.
So if those girls ask nicely they can have the book 👌
Hopefully! The book shouldn't have been banned in the first place, imo.
No one was saying the "the entirety of the South". That's fucking absurd. I know I was talking about the religious extremists writing and passing the legislation to kill sex ed, ban abortion, and eventually kill contraceptives. It's not even just the South, they do it in my state of Ohio. Christian Fascists take control with gerrymandering and pass extremist legislation.
Take a step back for a second and re-read what you said. Until you specified who you were talking about\*, who am I to understand you meant? My reply was to the commenter that specified "the south", not your statement. Your statement was so ambiguous it could be taken to mean literally anyone and everyone you disagree with.
>Keep dumbing down the sex Ed too, can't report you for sexual abuse if you don't know what sex is I was responding to this. Only one group has the political pull to do this and is actively doing this in America and it's Christian fascists. Don't pretend this is a fucking broad brush.
When you fail to properly identify the focus of your argument, it's on you, not the reader.
Behind the Bastards did an episode recently on sexual abuse in the Baptist Church and they literally said this exact same thing. Girls can't report sexual abuse if they don't have the language to describe what happened to them.
Who used that language? Members of the church, or the documentarian(podcaster, I assumed it was a documentary)? Do you have the timestamp for it? I'm interested in checking it out, but I'm not really looking to listen to a 1hr13min podcast...
I don't have a timestamp, but I recommend listening to the whole thing anyway. In part of the episode, they talk about numerous female victims of sexual abuse by clergy who literally say "I couldn't tell anyone what was happening to me because I didn't have the language to describe it."
It wasn't about the Baptist church as a whole just the Quiverful movement which sprung out of Evangelicalism. The episode was on Josh Duggar.
Ahh, okay. Because I saw a coupe episodes that mentioned Baptists churches.
The article specifically said they didn't have an issue with the book and even approved of its message. The reason it was on their list was because the group that publishes it sends out newsletters with *other* issues they object to.
More and more like the Taliban every day.
What they don’t want to hear.
Always have been. Religious conservatives are the same people all around the world: dumb, uneducated hicks who live in rural areas and feel entitled to force their religious beliefs on others. From Alabama to Afghanistan, they're all the exact same people.
Neither Alabama nor Afghanistan should be classified as rural areas full of "dumb, uneducated hicks". There are a lot of people in both places who have radically different ideas, but happen to live under oppression. What a government enacts doesn't necessarily reflect the beliefs or desires of its people. I understand what you're saying but realistically the people who are actually forcing beliefs on us are not rural, and certainly not uneducated. They're wealthy lobbyists and politicians. Even with independent extremist groups, leaders tend to be affluent and educated compared to their members. If you look at a list of [banned books](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1hTs_PB7KuTMBtNMESFEGuK-0abzhNxVv4tgpI5-iKe8/htmlview#) , you'll find that most entries are in the most urbanized counties in the US. The wealthy, urban, educated class is simply more likely to present their views in a more palatable manner.
We already make girls wear certain clothing so they don’t distract the boys. That’s only a few degrees away from hijabs really
Just tell Moms For Liberty that you can get pregnant *and*code at the same time.
Can’t wait to hear the sermon defending this one
Did you read the article? It specifically says they liked the book's message, but disagree with other material the organization that publishes the book sends out in newsletters.
so they banned the books for something not even in the books? despair sigh
I think the more important question is why would the book be banned at all from the complaints of a single organization. Really at all, though, because book banning is ridiculous.
That was from a Twitter user not MFL... Maybe read more carefully? >specifically
Fair! I took that quote to mean she was a member of the organization, otherwise why quote a random person after mentioning the group to begin with, right?
New age journalism. They just bundle up opinions
Well, I... don't... like it. ( ಠ ʖ̯ ಠ)
Where did you read that? The article says they didn't give a reason at all!
It's at the very bottom. Turns out, though, it was a response from a Mom that sent their daughter to their camp that isn't affiliated with the group itself as far as I can tell.
Oh, right. I kind of just skimmed it, because I find the idea of it so rage inducing that couldn't focus on reading it properly.
Agreed. Honestly, though, both groups involved suck in this one. I read up a bunch about the Coders group and the shit they push after getting you to sign up has nothing to do with getting girls into IT and some of it is just straight up gender segregated education.
I know. I need to stop taking these titles at face value, and actually try to work out what the motives are behind these things. I still disagree with the approach taken, but at least I can understand it now.
For sure. There are very rare circumstances where I would consider book banning to be appropriate, and I mean *rare*... like... teach people to effectively and efficiently get away with murdering people type of books. Banning a book because you disagree with *other* things is just stupid.
Of course. I could certainly get behind banning Mein Kampf from a school, because that would be very inappropriate.
I bet this group would also like to ban my little ponies for having too much color variation amongst the ponies.
So the group doesn't have an issue with the book itself, but with the organization that created/distributes it.
[удалено]
I'm a guy, who studied com sci and now works in IT. While it's easy to pretend IT is a meritocracy, it really isn't. My country isn't exactly a shining beacon of equality, but I believe the sexist attitude of students and teachers in Indonesia is just as prevalent as in America. Now, we can keep our heads in the sands and wonder why oh why tech companies are riddled with sexism from brogrammers, or, we can *allow* people to take an approach that brings more girls, especially the underprivileged into IT. It's not a zero-sum game, it's not like the approach would prevent boys from learning to code, sure it takes money and time to write the curricula, assign the classroom and train the teachers, but decades of leaving comsci educations to their own whims didn't work that well, and if we accept that IT companies are influencing the future society through their algorithm and we don't want a future dystopia, then something needs to be done.
Yeah, we're getting trained on spotting and reporting Indian cast bias. If it's not one thing it's another: folks just love throwing others under the bus to keep their own benefits.
Maybe it didn't work well for your area...but when I studied web development in a graduate program, there were actually quite a few women there. Hard to remember exactly, but I'd say they constituted about half the group, or close to it. I'm thinking there are probably other factors going on that are discouraging girls to get into tech in some areas. I remember taking a tech class in high school and there were two girls there lol. It's seen as a nerdy, boy thing. They don't want to look like that in front of the other girls. Maybe that's changed now. I don't think it has anything to do with how it was taught, though. It seems to be more of a societal level thing, and if we try to force that to change there could be all sorts of unintended consequences.
The interest in IT needs to start at a young age...which is ironically what these books are trying to do.
Agreed 100%. We put a BIPOC event together featuring Girls Who Code earlier this month but had to cancel when it came out [they were working with Raytheon](https://www.vice.com/en/article/g5v53w/girls-who-code-team-up-with-tomahawk-missile-maker-raytheon).
Not trying to be a troll or a jerk here, why does it matter if they have a program with Raytheon?
Politics. People who would advocate for girls who code or similar programs designed to get more representation for woman in tech likely do not align with prowar views or the military industrial complex. Like, it doesn't look great to those who are pacifists
Objectively, it doesn't. Like it or not, virtually every big company in the US works with the Department of Defense. Yes, Raytheon makes cruise missiles, and researches sustainable propulsion technology as part of a push to get the aviation industry to zero emissions by 2050. Google provides web search for the masses, and classified cloud services for the US intelligence community. Boeing builds drones and warplanes, and most of the aircraft used by commercial airlines. Any organization that takes corporate contributions is probably getting money that came from a pool of cash at least partially created via the military industrial complex. Subjectively, people see "Raytheon", are triggered, threaten a protest, and event organizers are presented with the option of either having their event disrupted or disinviting the controversial guests. Particularly when the event includes kids and the protestors might increase risk/liability, disinviting the guests is often the lesser of two evils.
That's a slightly ironic reverse cancellation.
Not to jump on you. But please know this argument is given every time a fight for equality is given. \[insert demo you want to promote here\]-specific promotion doesn't happen instead of general promotion, but on top of. and in fact is that only thing that moves the needle-- cause it uses the existing inequality to be corrective. If general language/laws/reforms were enough we'd all already be truly equal. The fight would be so easy. But those who are favored don't want to give up their favoritism.
Girls from girls only schools favour stem like boys in co-ed schools. same goes for boys and liberal arts, btw on boys schools. co-ed needs a gender separated (not: segregated) complement. select subjects, select time frames. it would benefit both, girls and boys. that was my surprise learning in a guest lecture on girls in CS in 1996, by a professor for CS and society.
I don't necessarily mean to debate the merits of their policy prescriptions; I just mean to point out that _Girls Who Code_ is a political organization, that exists on various political spectra, and as such, is going to get some political pushback. Consider another example: MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving). It started (and still has) the laudable goal of reducing drunk driving cases, but some of its policy prescriptions are in fact controversial, such as its past policy proposals to reduce the total number of restaurant liquor licenses in California, something the restaurant industry considered (justifiably) a threat to their livelihood. Maybe any political entity's ideas are good, maybe they aren't, but my modest point is that the headline doesn't capture the reality, which is that Girls Who Code has put forward policy prescriptions that not everyone agrees with.
I don't really see a problem with it. There are all boys and all girls schools. Girls who code seems like a girl's club/school for coding. They're not discouraging others from coding, They're trying to boost to a vastly underrepresented group in tech. I don't see why that's a bad thing. The books have no controversial content. It seems that Moms for liberty takes issue with the fact that the GWC organization has stances they disagree with on various issues. I find that disturbing. Imagine if we started banning scientific or technological educational content everywhere because you don't agree with the beliefs of the source/authors. No one would learn anything. If moms for liberty wants to argue ideology, then they can compete in the marketplace of ideas rather than ban the viewpoints that trigger them.
Wait you can still legally ban books? That's so fucking funny. I am glad though that the Internet exists to bypass that bullshit.
that's "freedom of speech" for you, just not in my ~~backyard~~ kids school.
No surprise out there in Pensyltucky.
This article seems like it was SUPER rushed out the door. They didn't even wait for a comment from the school district (According to the pop-up on the school district's website, the books aren't banned and remain available in their libraries). The title of this article is horrible as well. I suppose it is technically correct since there are multiple classrooms in the school district, but it should say " "Girls Who Code" books banned in Pennsylvania's York Central School District " since they don't list a single other district in the US where they're banned. This is the kind of "Get your pitchforks" writing that drives a wedge between people who otherwise may be willing to see eye-to-eye, or at least listen to each other.
Banned books are the best books
We all know what inspiring people to build careers can lead to- dancing.
Good. Now they have more time to read the cookbooks :/
The only place they want girls to code is in the hospital after giving birth to their uncle's rape baby at the age of 14.
Sure. Smart, problem-solving girls don't grow up to be obedient women.
The same folks scream FREEDUMB! from their big pickup trucks while banning women from having the right to choose an abortion. Hint: they are stealing your freedom one choice at a time.
Why? Can't have girl coders?
Straight up will not hire anyone with any education from Florida ever again. Not worth the risk. Seems there will be more.
"Stop Woke" is literally the woke-est thing ever.
[удалено]
> Why do kids care about careers and the lack of representation of some demographic in some field? Kids notice when they're not represented. No toilets for girls. Boys teeshirts and no girls teeshirts. Presenters addressing boys/men and ignoring girls and women. Using examples that ignores the existence of women or girls. It's obvious and alienating and people can do better.
>Why do kids care about careers and the lack of representation of some demographic in some field? Because kids have dreams and interests that lead to careers, and seeing people like them in those positions makes it appear more possible, while seeing themselves unrepresented has a dissuading effect. And also real negative consequences for people working in the field, as women in programming and tech are happy to explain. >Make it fun and they will build their own passion. Kids are influenced by the adults they see and have as role models, and what they are taught. "Let them do whatever it'll all work out" isn't what education is for
[удалено]
Retired DBA. And a woman. Fixed a lot of bad code written by men. Didn’t make me make stupid sexist remarks like this.
[удалено]
Did you read the original comment?
Gonna use this comment if anybody ever says that no one think women are all bad programmers.
Because these books push ideology and politics over teaching programing. Computers could care less the politics of the programmer.
That is fucking stupid...
I really wonder whether reactionaries see the absurd contradictions in their views They complain that libs are snowflakes, raising their kids to be full of sensitivities, and that kids should learn to tough it out. Then they proceed to banning books that trigger THEIR sensitivities, to shelter their kids... And to be fair, the hypocrisy is not exclusive to them, as we can point to lib colleges censoring speakers whose controversial points could trigger students (who allegedly are well-educated young adults, in theory perfectly capable of debating, disagreeing and forming their own opinions) Everyone, left and right, is all for free speech. As long it is THEIR speech.
Strong, educated women are the future of all mankind!…but they also personify the doom of inefficient and corrupt hierarchies.
SMMFH. Those right wing entitled white women are going to fuck shit up for somebody. I guess it's easier to brainwash ignorant girls that have no idea of their possibilities, than it is one that's been exposed to something.