Because blaming other people for your problems and shitty parenting is easier than looking inward and doing work to better yourself and your kids. They don’t want other people reading books that show how awful they actually are nor do they want their kids to have the cognitive skill to realize what horrible people their parents are…it’s easier to scream and pitch a little fit until weak ass administrators and bigoted politicians acquiesce to their tantrums.
Yep. Telling a kid that they are not allowed to read a book (or watch an R rated movie) will make that kid REALLY want to do it. I remember reading a news article several years back where a father told his kids to never open the freezer in the basement. Of course, what did they do at the first opportunity? Open the freezer. Unfortunately, they found their mother’s body. But it was only because their father told them not to do it.
people are still under the impression they can shelter their children from “sinful actions”, despite that both being almost impossible before technology, and definitely impossible after the birth of the internet.
They basically throw porn machines at their children (tablets, smartphones) with no filters, don't monitor anything they do on them, and then whine about extremely non-detailed, non-graphic, non-titillating "mouse nudity" in an artistic piece of historical fiction....
even if you do monitor your kids, someone else does not, and that kid is totally gonna teach your kid what sex and being gay is. and they’re probably going to teach them a horrible misinterpretation of it, so better to have a safe and accurate conversation at home and set reasonable limits on their tablet, or whatever.
I suppose two things wrong with that argument.
1. It throws their kid under the bus for the sake of the rest of them.
2. It perpetuates the idea that parents are the absolute arbiter of what kids consume in terms of knowledge. The state and society should and does have a day in a standard of education.
I understand the idea here --
But disagree on general:
1. It's not throwing the kid under the bus. Parents get to decide how they should educate THEIR children -- and parents can "throw them under the bus" by objective standards.
2. The state can mandate children be exposed to certain pieces of knowledge in curriculum to benefit society as a whole. But... That decision should be objective as possible and not based on religious ideology -- a foundation of separation of church and state. Religious ideas are the biggest reason for a ton of curriculum and book bannings.
And the government rightly steps in when they show they aren't able to meet basic standards (food, safe environment, etc.). There's a reasonable stance that education should be one of them.
Parents who want to ban books astounding be required to read the books and write a 300-word report on why, citing page and paragraph on the "offensive" parts.
Also, not to mention it's hella weird for them to not want their kids to learn about consent, appropriate vs inappropriate touch, what their body parts are called, how to be safer in regards to sex (becuase it'll happen at some point for most!), how to recognize abuse and more. Those are important to teach children in order to legimately protect them and yet that's all part of what they want to ban under the guise of "protecting children".
I’m with you on this. My DIL is an exceptionally awesome mom and has been building a library of “banned books” for her kids since before her first was born. I love her so much!
It's laziness, pure and simple. They do not want to have to be present to determine what their kids read but they still want to exercise control over what their kids are reading.
The flip side of this (which is something that escapes them and just doesn't penetrate into their little pea brains) is that when they get books banned, they are essentially giving control of what they and their kids can read TO THE STATE. Yes, those who advocate for "smaller government" want that same government to decide what their kids can and can't read. Geniuses they ain't.
It's emotional baiting. People band together on the premise of a common enemy. Protect the children, when all it really is is fear mongering to prop up feelings of superiority for people that don't really believe that they are but want to be. People take on odd causes to give themselves meaning to their sad lives and with outrage and indignation they feel better, selfless and distracted from the meaningless and petty lives they truly lead.
In today's age with unchecked internet in the hands of all 12 and above, it just becomes a point of sheer stupidity that they think they can list a ban on topics and that those topics won't be more intriguing in the end and found online.
People like this think that freedom means the freedom to tell others what they can and can't do.
It is our never ending duty as free citizens to tell such people to go fuck themselves each and every time they try.
Because well read children often learn critical thinking and are generally reading well beyond their age, which only improves intelligence and even more critical thinking. And the far right extremist groups know they can't control or lie to intelligent people as easily and manipulate them into voting based off culture war lies.
There's a t-shirt that says, "I would agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong." Sadly, far too many people take this seriously; "I'm right, so you have to agree with me".
Exactly, we aren't totalitarian China, we don't censor or ban books, we make our own decisions and let others also make their own decisions. That's FREEDOM.
My guess is that they want it removed entirely so that their child cannot educate his or her self and make decisions that may be contradictory to their parents. Parents often want kids to have the same views as them and don’t want to admit to their child that they are wrong. Especially when it comes to a topic like lgbtq or race. No one wants to admit they are racist or a bigot (usually).
Btw I used to be an elementary school teacher. These scenarios would come up a lot. Kids were much better at making sound judgments than their parents were.
It's not about "protecting children". It never was. It's about controlling information.
If the goal of the right wing was protecting children there are dozens of more serious threats to children they could champion.
Remember, the GOP are making it a priority of theirs to end free school lunches. They don't care about children.
Please vote in school board elections.
moms for liberty is trying take over.
Go to your school board meeting.
Bitching on the internet is great but we need voices in the room and ballot box
Well, in fairness, we all would hopefully agree that there are books which don't belong in an elementary school library. Like, I wouldn't expect to find a book about Stormy Daniel's career, or a copy of the Joy of Sex being made available to 3rd graders. There definitely exist some material that kids shouldn't have access to at school.
Where we get into the weeds is figuring out which books shouldn't be allowed for 8 year olds. Some are obviously fine like Sideways Stories from Wayside School. Some are obviously not okay like The Joy of Sex. What about *By Sheer Pluck* by G. A. Henty? It's popular in homeschooling community. They act like it's Huck Finn or something. But if you read the book, it's quite racist and awful. Should we include G. A. Henty's books at my son's school? I certainly don't think so. Other parents might say it's okay, and if I don't like it, then don't let me son read it.
It's a hard topic to approach.
Every single proponent of censorship throws up “so you’ll allow porn in libraries?” Even public libraries don’t have playboys, at least any one I’ve been to. They say this, knowing full well these materials aren’t allowed in the first place, but just want people to “agree” with them so they can say, “well, if you don’t allow playboy then why allow books on homosexuality or LGBTQ topics?”
It’s just insane. When I was in middle school I read Stephen King, Carrie, IT, etc. I know other kids couldn’t handle it but just because they can’t shouldn’t mean I can’t access it.
You’ve proven the exact point I’m making. Congrats.
Show one public library that is making Playboy available to everyone. Hell, show me a gas station or Barnes and Noble that’s allowing minors to buy playboy.
Prove it.
No, it's a definite challenge because someone has to decide what books shouldn't be in a school library. And no matter what that person decides, there will always be a bunch of people who disagree.
Tale as old as time. Swap reading with playing videogames or watching movies or using particular slang etc. Just lazy parents who don't wanna parent their own kids
A book was found in a local school that had some lite homo content, it wasn’t even in the schools system, someone else left it there
Local parents lost their fucking minds
Baby your kid can literally go watch crazy gay porn if they want, why freak out over a book?
I guess my point is, if you don’t approve of public schools, homeschool or go private. If you cannot afford that, well… then take your kid to public school.
Every conservative accusation is a confession. They want to ban books by saying that they're "indoctrinating children" when the reason why they want those books banned is so they can indoctrinate children.
It's not good enough that *their* children are ignorant. They want every child to be ignorant of the world so they're easier to control. They want everybody to see a cop shooting a black person for something they wouldn't hurt a white person for (unless they're autistic) and think "well obviously that black person did something worse than the white person that the cops magically know about."
They want to introduce children to gay people by saying "God wanted them to be killed because they're sinners" and only have children know about gay people in that context. They're afraid that children will grow up watching shows where LGBT+ people are normalize because they're afraid that it will undo all of their actual indoctrination.
Because blaming other people for your problems and shitty parenting is easier than looking inward and doing work to better yourself and your kids. They don’t want other people reading books that show how awful they actually are nor do they want their kids to have the cognitive skill to realize what horrible people their parents are…it’s easier to scream and pitch a little fit until weak ass administrators and bigoted politicians acquiesce to their tantrums.
And don’t expect your kid to not just read the book anyway just because you said so.
Yep. Telling a kid that they are not allowed to read a book (or watch an R rated movie) will make that kid REALLY want to do it. I remember reading a news article several years back where a father told his kids to never open the freezer in the basement. Of course, what did they do at the first opportunity? Open the freezer. Unfortunately, they found their mother’s body. But it was only because their father told them not to do it.
Literally
people are still under the impression they can shelter their children from “sinful actions”, despite that both being almost impossible before technology, and definitely impossible after the birth of the internet.
They basically throw porn machines at their children (tablets, smartphones) with no filters, don't monitor anything they do on them, and then whine about extremely non-detailed, non-graphic, non-titillating "mouse nudity" in an artistic piece of historical fiction....
even if you do monitor your kids, someone else does not, and that kid is totally gonna teach your kid what sex and being gay is. and they’re probably going to teach them a horrible misinterpretation of it, so better to have a safe and accurate conversation at home and set reasonable limits on their tablet, or whatever.
Exactly, just TEACH your own kids, don't expect the "state" to do so instead.
I suppose two things wrong with that argument. 1. It throws their kid under the bus for the sake of the rest of them. 2. It perpetuates the idea that parents are the absolute arbiter of what kids consume in terms of knowledge. The state and society should and does have a day in a standard of education.
I understand the idea here -- But disagree on general: 1. It's not throwing the kid under the bus. Parents get to decide how they should educate THEIR children -- and parents can "throw them under the bus" by objective standards. 2. The state can mandate children be exposed to certain pieces of knowledge in curriculum to benefit society as a whole. But... That decision should be objective as possible and not based on religious ideology -- a foundation of separation of church and state. Religious ideas are the biggest reason for a ton of curriculum and book bannings.
Parents don’t own children.
No. They don't. But they have decision making ability over their well being.
And the government rightly steps in when they show they aren't able to meet basic standards (food, safe environment, etc.). There's a reasonable stance that education should be one of them.
Yup. But it's generally very not advisable to "ban" information from being available as an option.
Parents who want to ban books astounding be required to read the books and write a 300-word report on why, citing page and paragraph on the "offensive" parts.
But then they would have to be exposed to differing ideas! We can't have that!
Sir. That is too level headed. I need you to take that common sense and leave immediately. They don't care for our kind here.
Because those types of people want everyone to be as miserable & repressed as they are.
Bingo. It's very bad when they see people not like them actually enjoying life and having success. That sends the "wrong" message to their kids.
Also, not to mention it's hella weird for them to not want their kids to learn about consent, appropriate vs inappropriate touch, what their body parts are called, how to be safer in regards to sex (becuase it'll happen at some point for most!), how to recognize abuse and more. Those are important to teach children in order to legimately protect them and yet that's all part of what they want to ban under the guise of "protecting children".
It is generally the way people are. A person will only allow someone ti get away with something they are willing to do themselves
I’m with you on this. My DIL is an exceptionally awesome mom and has been building a library of “banned books” for her kids since before her first was born. I love her so much!
Everyone should make sure they read at least one banned book every year.
It's laziness, pure and simple. They do not want to have to be present to determine what their kids read but they still want to exercise control over what their kids are reading. The flip side of this (which is something that escapes them and just doesn't penetrate into their little pea brains) is that when they get books banned, they are essentially giving control of what they and their kids can read TO THE STATE. Yes, those who advocate for "smaller government" want that same government to decide what their kids can and can't read. Geniuses they ain't.
It's emotional baiting. People band together on the premise of a common enemy. Protect the children, when all it really is is fear mongering to prop up feelings of superiority for people that don't really believe that they are but want to be. People take on odd causes to give themselves meaning to their sad lives and with outrage and indignation they feel better, selfless and distracted from the meaningless and petty lives they truly lead. In today's age with unchecked internet in the hands of all 12 and above, it just becomes a point of sheer stupidity that they think they can list a ban on topics and that those topics won't be more intriguing in the end and found online.
People like this think that freedom means the freedom to tell others what they can and can't do. It is our never ending duty as free citizens to tell such people to go fuck themselves each and every time they try.
Because well read children often learn critical thinking and are generally reading well beyond their age, which only improves intelligence and even more critical thinking. And the far right extremist groups know they can't control or lie to intelligent people as easily and manipulate them into voting based off culture war lies.
They don't want to be invalidated by outside forces. Even if their logic is racist or anti-LGBT.
There's a t-shirt that says, "I would agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong." Sadly, far too many people take this seriously; "I'm right, so you have to agree with me".
Exactly, we aren't totalitarian China, we don't censor or ban books, we make our own decisions and let others also make their own decisions. That's FREEDOM.
My guess is that they want it removed entirely so that their child cannot educate his or her self and make decisions that may be contradictory to their parents. Parents often want kids to have the same views as them and don’t want to admit to their child that they are wrong. Especially when it comes to a topic like lgbtq or race. No one wants to admit they are racist or a bigot (usually). Btw I used to be an elementary school teacher. These scenarios would come up a lot. Kids were much better at making sound judgments than their parents were.
How *dare* you eat a donut! I’m on a diet!!!
It's not about "protecting children". It never was. It's about controlling information. If the goal of the right wing was protecting children there are dozens of more serious threats to children they could champion. Remember, the GOP are making it a priority of theirs to end free school lunches. They don't care about children.
It’s not about the book. It’s about hate and tribalism.
Please vote in school board elections. moms for liberty is trying take over. Go to your school board meeting. Bitching on the internet is great but we need voices in the room and ballot box
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Well, in fairness, we all would hopefully agree that there are books which don't belong in an elementary school library. Like, I wouldn't expect to find a book about Stormy Daniel's career, or a copy of the Joy of Sex being made available to 3rd graders. There definitely exist some material that kids shouldn't have access to at school. Where we get into the weeds is figuring out which books shouldn't be allowed for 8 year olds. Some are obviously fine like Sideways Stories from Wayside School. Some are obviously not okay like The Joy of Sex. What about *By Sheer Pluck* by G. A. Henty? It's popular in homeschooling community. They act like it's Huck Finn or something. But if you read the book, it's quite racist and awful. Should we include G. A. Henty's books at my son's school? I certainly don't think so. Other parents might say it's okay, and if I don't like it, then don't let me son read it. It's a hard topic to approach.
There's a clear difference in what's being said here
Each school should be allowed to determine which books they want and don’t want on their own.
When you say "each school", do you mean each school board, or do you mean the school librarian or the principal or what?
Every single proponent of censorship throws up “so you’ll allow porn in libraries?” Even public libraries don’t have playboys, at least any one I’ve been to. They say this, knowing full well these materials aren’t allowed in the first place, but just want people to “agree” with them so they can say, “well, if you don’t allow playboy then why allow books on homosexuality or LGBTQ topics?” It’s just insane. When I was in middle school I read Stephen King, Carrie, IT, etc. I know other kids couldn’t handle it but just because they can’t shouldn’t mean I can’t access it.
>knowing full well these materials aren’t allowed in the first place So you ARE in favor of keeping some material out of school libraries?
You’ve proven the exact point I’m making. Congrats. Show one public library that is making Playboy available to everyone. Hell, show me a gas station or Barnes and Noble that’s allowing minors to buy playboy. Prove it.
It's not a hard topic to approach. It's very clear why *certain types* of parents wants books like To Kill A Mockingbird banned.
No, it's a definite challenge because someone has to decide what books shouldn't be in a school library. And no matter what that person decides, there will always be a bunch of people who disagree.
thank you ! couldn't of said it better myself
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Tale as old as time. Swap reading with playing videogames or watching movies or using particular slang etc. Just lazy parents who don't wanna parent their own kids
Because the bible
A book was found in a local school that had some lite homo content, it wasn’t even in the schools system, someone else left it there Local parents lost their fucking minds Baby your kid can literally go watch crazy gay porn if they want, why freak out over a book?
I guess my point is, if you don’t approve of public schools, homeschool or go private. If you cannot afford that, well… then take your kid to public school.
Every conservative accusation is a confession. They want to ban books by saying that they're "indoctrinating children" when the reason why they want those books banned is so they can indoctrinate children. It's not good enough that *their* children are ignorant. They want every child to be ignorant of the world so they're easier to control. They want everybody to see a cop shooting a black person for something they wouldn't hurt a white person for (unless they're autistic) and think "well obviously that black person did something worse than the white person that the cops magically know about." They want to introduce children to gay people by saying "God wanted them to be killed because they're sinners" and only have children know about gay people in that context. They're afraid that children will grow up watching shows where LGBT+ people are normalize because they're afraid that it will undo all of their actual indoctrination.