Major publishers sue Florida over ‘unconstitutional’ school book ban

[ThatRobGuy]

Second, no books have been banned. If I open an Italian restaurant and I choose not to serve enchiladas, I haven't banned enchiladas. Everyone is free to get enchiladas elsewhere.

I would say perhaps a better analogy for this situation would be one of materials that are age-restricted.

For instance, if rules are handed down that says that you can't look at a Playboy if you're under 18 (and they don't stock those out on regular magazine racks and only keep them in special places where you have to show ID and get a clerk to get it for you), they haven't banned playboy, they've simply made it inaccessible to minors by way of not keeping out in an easy place where any kid could pick it up and start thumbing through the pages.

Same deal with this. Some of the illustrated works as the forefront of this debate contain content that would get the "18+" restriction slapped on it if it was being sold as just a regular "illustrated work" in a comic book store. Not sure why some of these books are getting a pass or being portrayed as something "above that" or "more deep and meaningful" just because they have LGBTQ themes.

I'm pretty sure you can have a book promoting LGBTQ inclusion without having to feature things going in and out of orifices and fluids being secreted.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

So if there's a book that they don't want their children to read, they must be free to tell their children 'Don't read that book'. I'm sure you'd be annoyed if it was my decision as to what your children could and couldn't read.

Why is the onus always on the parents who DON'T want their kids to see it to have to somehow accomplish the impossible task of "24-7 live monitoring" of their adolescents?

Why is the onus never on the parents who want their kids to have access to get it for them?

It seems as if that would be a more plausible solution would it not?

For instance, with R-Rated movies, the movie theater doesn't leave admissions wide open (and everyone says "if parents don't want their kids to see this movie, they should just tell their kid not to go to it"), they put an age restriction in place, and if parents specifically want their kid to be able to see it, they have to be accompanied by a parent or guardian.

Seems like a similar system may be logical for some of the books in question being that they have content that's much more sexually oriented than R-rated movies, and use the same kinds of language that would get an R-rating for a movie.

I know book stores and comic book shops have a rating system, and for the types of content featured in some of the illustrated books in question, a person would have to show ID in order to purchase the book and it'd be stored in plastic wrap.


"Just tell your kids not to do it" isn't a system we'd trust for a myriad of other things.

Should gun ranges and comedy clubs start implementing that policy? Let anyone in regardless of age, if the parents don't want them exposed to this, it's on them to tell their kids not to go (because we all know how well 12-15 year olds heed their parents instructions when they know their parents aren't right there with them)

 

[Bradskii]

It's not the Florida government that is banning these books, it's decent parents who don't want garbage for their kids to read.

Then tell them not to read it.

In Florida, we like to err on the side of helping the students know decency, so our rule is "if you want to let your students read garbage then buy yourself for them or go to the public library to get a copy. Simple as that.

Down here we explain to our kids, within reason, what they are allowed to do and what they cannot do. So if there's a book in the school library that I wouldn't want my kids to read, I'd tell them that I don't want them to read it and I'd explain why.

If I was really paranoid and didn't trust my children then I'd ask the school to give me a list of all the books they checked out each week. But that would, in my opinion, wouldn't be conducive to the trust that I'd be trying to develop between us. And I would certainly get a lot of feedback from other parents as to whether I think I should dictate what their kids have available to them in the library.

All of this is, of course, to be considered in an age appropriate manner. So I wouldn't want my 7 year old son reading what I thought was suitable for my 12 year old daughter.

That works just fine down here. Maybe you could try it as well.

 

[Bradskii]

Seems like a similar system may be logical for some of the books in question...

If you want to have an age restriction in the school library because you can't trust your kids then go for it. Say that you want books noted that they are for 14 and over and if anyone younger than that wants go read one then their parents get a text asking for permission.

 

[Pommer]

Why is the onus always on the parents who DON'T want their kids to see it to have to somehow accomplish the impossible task of "24-7 live monitoring" of their adolescents?

Why is the onus never on the parents who want their kids to have access to get it for them?

It seems as if that would be a more plausible solution would it not?

DQSH is opt-in.
One has to be aware of it to want to go, thus Libraries will create posters that advertise such events…so that everybody will know when the event will take place and decide if this would be a fun thing to take the kids to, to spur the little tykes’ interest in reading and learning out of books.

Since it’s so open and well advertised, even those who wouldn’t dare to be seen in the same library as a drag queen, can decide that maybe the museum is a better venue.

Unless there’s a mandatory and compulsory Drag Queen Story Hour, this “solution” is socially lazy.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

DQSH is opt-in.
One has to be aware of it to want to go, thus Libraries will create posters that advertise such events…so that everybody will know when the event will take place and decide if this would be a fun thing to take the kids to, to spur the little tykes’ interest in reading and learning out of books.

Since it’s so open and well advertised, even those who wouldn’t dare to be seen in the same library as a drag queen, can decide that maybe the museum is a better venue.

Unless there’s a mandatory and compulsory Drag Queen Story Hour, this “solution” is socially lazy.

This thread is talking about the "Florida Book Bans" and not DQSH, correct?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

If you want to have an age restriction in the school library because you can't trust your kids then go for it. Say that you want books noted that they are for 14 and over and if anyone younger than that wants go read one then their parents get a text asking for permission.

But given the illustrations and subject matter of the books, would any illustrated work with the same subject matter and a comic book store be given a 14+ rating?

The author merely saying "this is for 14 and up" isn't the same thing as an independent rating.

Or are you just mentioning the 14+ thing as a hypothetical example?

 

[Larniavc]

hehe I remember a father ted episode where their proteseting a movie made the movie a bigger success and got yelled at by higher ups.

Careful now. Down with this sort of thing.

 

[Larniavc]

Six major book publishers have teamed up to sue the US state of Florida over an “unconstitutional” law that has seen hundreds of titles purged from school libraries following rightwing challenges.

Since it went into effect last July, countless titles have been removed from elementary, middle and high school libraries, including American classics such as Brave New World by Aldous Huxley, For Whom the Bell Tolls by Ernest Hemingway and The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain.

Contemporary novels by bestselling authors such as Margaret Atwood, Judy Blume and Stephen King have also been removed

The suit contends the book removal provisions violate previous supreme court decisions relating to reviewing works for their literary, artistic, political and scientific value as a whole while considering any potential obscenity; and seeks to restore the discretion “of trained educators to evaluate books holistically to avoid harm to students who will otherwise lose access to a wide range of viewpoints”.

DeSantis has attempted to portray the issue as “a hoax”, arguing that because the state has empowered parents to make objections, and is not directly making the challenges itself, it is not responsible for books subsequently removed from shelves.

See also this (I believe ongoing) case:

Penguin Random House sues Pensacola-area Florida school district over book bans​

Isn't this just another example of lazy parents who can't be bothered to raise their kids to mind their parents and expecting government funded agencies to pick up the slack?

I guess it's much easier to get the government sponsored agency to do the moral guidance these day- no wonder America is in such a state. What ever happened to personal parental responsibility? If a parents reaction to issues they feel strongly about is to simply say "meh, get the government sponsored agency to do it, I'm watching tele" it's no these kids look to outside sources for moral and ethical guidance.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Isn't this just another example of lazy parents who can't be bothered to raise their kids to mind their parents and expecting government funded agencies to pick up the slack?

I guess it's much easier to get the government sponsored agency to do the moral guidance these day- no wonder America is in such a state. What ever happened to personal parental responsibility? If a parents reaction to issues they feel strongly about is to simply say "meh, get the government sponsored agency to do it, I'm watching tele" it's no these kids look to outside sources for moral and ethical guidance.

I fail to see where it's different than any number of other things where they implement age-based restrictions based on parents calling on the government to assist.

In practical terms, how is this any different (apart from the political affiliation dynamics) than some parents wanting the government to crack down on social media with regards to certain types of content?

In both cases, they're an acknowledgement that "hey, I can't be stuck to my kids like glue 24/7 looking over their shoulder, so I'd prefer they not have easy-access to XYZ" as well as the pragmatic acknowledgement that "adolescents tend to not listen to what their parents told them when the parents are not around".

 

[Larniavc]

I fail to see where it's different than any number of other things where they implement age-based restrictions based on parents calling on the government to assist.

In practical terms, how is this any different (apart from the political affiliation dynamics) than some parents wanting the government to crack down on social media with regards to certain types of content?

In both cases, they're an acknowledgement that "hey, I can't be stuck to my kids like glue 24/7 looking over their shoulder, so I'd prefer they not have easy-access to XYZ" as well as the pragmatic acknowledgement that "adolescents tend to not listen to what their parents told them when the parents are not around".

It’s about personal parental responsibility. I might raise my son in a very different way to my neighbour but I don’t seek to impose my way onto them.

There are books at his school that I don’t want him to read so I ask him not to and trust him when he says he doesn’t.

I don’t try to force my school to remove said books by offloading my responsibility into the local council.

 

[Hvizsgyak]

Mark Twain is a fringe exception?

Mark Twain is garbage?

Mark Twain is garbage?

Okay, lets break down so it's easy for you to understand the full context of my statement. Huck Finn, Tom Sawyer, Brave New World and other books are just books. One book can be interchanged for another and no harm will occur in the student's academic career. Here are a list of books that seem not to offend people: Pride and Prejudice,1984, Lord of the Rings, The Book Thief, Lord of the Flies, The Kite Runner, To Kill a Mockingbird, The Hunger Games, Of Mice and Men, Fahrenheit 451, Green Eggs and Ham, Alice in Wonderland, The Secret Garden, The Odyssey, Anne of Green Gables, The Count of Monte Cristo, Ender's Game, Where the Wild Things Are, Winnie the Pooh, Goodnight Moon, Don Quixote, Great Expectations ...

Do you see what I mean? Some of these might be a little controversial too but let the school board and state determine what it wants its public school kids to read. In some states it might be different, who knows. So don't make such a fuss. There will be parents in some states allowing their student to read Tom Sawyer, Huckleberry Finn or Brave New World, okay?

 

[Hvizsgyak]

Then tell them not to read it.

Down here we explain to our kids, within reason, what they are allowed to do and what they cannot do. So if there's a book in the school library that I wouldn't want my kids to read, I'd tell them that I don't want them to read it and I'd explain why.

If I was really paranoid and didn't trust my children then I'd ask the school to give me a list of all the books they checked out each week. But that would, in my opinion, wouldn't be conducive to the trust that I'd be trying to develop between us. And I would certainly get a lot of feedback from other parents as to whether I think I should dictate what their kids have available to them in the library.

All of this is, of course, to be considered in an age appropriate manner. So I wouldn't want my 7 year old son reading what I thought was suitable for my 12 year old daughter.

That works just fine down here. Maybe you could try it as well.

Florida is a brave and bold state. We have thrown out the modern child psychology junk and have realized the kids don't know best what's right and what's wrong for them. Why? Because alot of these kids are being raised by kids who don't do much parenting (whether it's because they can't or if it's because they don't want to, that is an argument in itself). So, if the parents won't put guidelines for their kids then the government will through the public school system. Now if we can only hold the liberal teachers feet to the fire to follow instructions here (oops, did I say that out loud ).

 

[ThatRobGuy]

It’s about personal parental responsibility. I might raise my son in a very different way to my neighbour but I don’t seek to impose my way onto them.

There are books at his school that I don’t want him to read so I ask him not to and trust him when he says he doesn’t.

I don’t try to force my school to remove said books by offloading my responsibility into the local council.

Why does only ever seem to apply to this one particular topic?

Perhaps I just have blind spots and haven't noticed, but it sure seems like a lot of the people defending keeping some of these books in schools and just relying on "personal responsibility" don't ever seem to have that stance on anything else.

Many are the same people who were calling for various forms of censorship on a myriad of other issues over the past 5 years based on their own perceptions of "it's too dangerous or inappropriate for other people to hear/see this"

Or to put it more directly, why is "personal responsibility" adequate for sexually explicit illustrated works in libraries that kids might see, but not for a Joe Rogan Podcast or an anti-vaxxers Facebook feed that another adult might see?

"if you don't like it, don't look at it/read it" has not been a consistently held value over the past few years.

 

[JustaPewFiller]

Okay, lets break down so it's easy for you to understand the full context of my statement. Huck Finn, Tom Sawyer, Brave New World and other books are just books. One book can be interchanged for another and no harm will occur in the student's academic career. Here are a list of books that seem not to offend people: Pride and Prejudice,1984, Lord of the Rings, The Book Thief, Lord of the Flies, The Kite Runner, To Kill a Mockingbird, The Hunger Games, Of Mice and Men, Fahrenheit 451, Green Eggs and Ham, Alice in Wonderland, The Secret Garden, The Odyssey, Anne of Green Gables, The Count of Monte Cristo, Ender's Game, Where the Wild Things Are, Winnie the Pooh, Goodnight Moon, Don Quixote, Great Expectations ...

Do you see what I mean? Some of these might be a little controversial too but let the school board and state determine what it wants its public school kids to read. In some states it might be different, who knows. So don't make such a fuss. There will be parents in some states allowing their student to read Tom Sawyer, Huckleberry Finn or Brave New World, okay?

I found another article that explains the law a little more and even gives a link to the law itself.

Publishers sue Florida over book ban law, saying it creates "a regime of strict censorship" in schools

Classics that have been pulled as a result of the law include Maya Angelou's "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings" and Ernest Hemingway's "For Whom the Bell Tolls."

www.cbsnews.com

The linked article give this explanation of the law..

Under the law, any Florida resident can challenge books in a school or classroom library in their county over sexual content. Once challenged, that book "must be removed within 5 school days...and remain unavailable until the objection is resolved," the law reads.

If that is correct, then as a parent, in a county in Florida, I could decide I didn't want my kid to read, "Pride and Prejudice,1984, Lord of the Rings, The Book Thief, Lord of the Flies, The Kite Runner, To Kill a Mockingbird, The Hunger Games, Of Mice and Men, Fahrenheit 451, Green Eggs and Ham, Alice in Wonderland, The Secret Garden, The Odyssey, Anne of Green Gables, The Count of Monte Cristo, Ender's Game, Where the Wild Things Are, Winnie the Pooh, Goodnight Moon, Don Quixote, Great Expectations, etc... basically any book" and challenge them. Then the county would have to remove the book(s) within 5 days until the objection is resolved. Given the speed at which most county government's move that could take awhile.

I can see why the state is saying, "It is not us!! It is the parents"

That is true, the way the law is written it is the parents.

However, it gives basically any parent in FL the power to challenge ANY book and get it banned in their county until that challenge is resolved. Maybe the dictionary with all of its fancy words has some words and definitions in it that I don't like. Maybe I don't like Winnie the Pooh because it has "Pooh" in the title. It sounds easy enough to get any pulled from the shelves in my Florida county school for awhile under this law

All of that being said -

Do I think there are some books that are not appropriate for kids? Yup. I sure do.

But, do I also think the state of FL has gotten itself into a pickle by enacting a law had good intentions but was poorly thought out by enabling any parent enact a ban (either temporary or permanent) on any book and now the state is trying its best to not admit that? Yup, I sure do.

 

[Bradskii]

The author merely saying "this is for 14 and up" isn't the same thing as an independent rating.

Or are you just mentioning the 14+ thing as a hypothetical example?

The publisher will give an age rating. The school librarian can be involved if you want.

Try it to look for solutions rather than problems.

 

[Bradskii]

So, if the parents won't put guidelines for their kids then the government will through the public school system.

So government control over children as opposed to parental control. If you say so...

Down here it's the parents that decide what their children read. They don't decide what someone else's children can read. I don't know why this seems so hard to come to terms with for some people.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

The publisher will give an age rating. The school librarian can be involved if you want.

Try it to look for solutions rather than problems.

I did mention a solution...if the illustrated work involves content that would be age restricted in a comic book store, it should be age restricted in a school library.
(and the author/publisher doesn't get to set their own age restrictions, and independent reviewing entity would handle it just like movies)

Quentin Tarantino (or the movie studio) doesn't get to say "I don't think Kill Bill is all that violent, so it should be PG and parents can just tell their kids not to go", the MPAA gives it a rating, and if it's "R", the box office has to check ID to make sure the person going in is 17.

 

[Bradskii]

I did mention a solution...if the illustrated work involves content that would be age restricted in a comic book store, it should be age restricted in a school library.

So where is the problem? Put it in an age nominated area of the library. And I say age nominated because if the parents don't mind their kid reading it then it should be available. So simply put into place a process whereby it's known that if you are under the nominated age then you will need parental permission to take it out.

But you don't tell other parents what their kids can and cannot read and demand that they ban it from the school.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

So where is the problem? Put it in an age nominated area of the library. And I say age nominated because if the parents don't mind their kid reading it then it should be available. So simply put into place a process whereby it's known that if you are under the nominated age then you will need parental permission to take it out.

But you don't tell other parents what their kids can and cannot read and demand that they ban it from the school.

I'm actually okay with what you mentioned. Seems like a completely reasonable compromise. I'm in.

You think the majority social progressives in the US would go for it? Or would they say "books like these are too deep/meaningful/important to have access restrictions on them"?

(hint: it's 100% the latter)

That's really the "wrench in the gears" in all this. Because the books in question are framed/presented within a "theme" of a topic for which people want to virtue signal their "allyship", they pretend that "normal restrictions shouldn't apply"

So content that, before, everyone would've agreed isn't age appropriate for 14 year olds under any other circumstances, magically becomes restriction-proof simply because it involves a non-cis/non-straight person's "journey/exploration".