Public libraries - Conservatives team with politicians to remove books & board members

[Pommer]

you accusing me of being racist?

Not at all.
We live in a racist society, we’re imbued with racial memes and “common-knowledge” from an early age.
It’s hard to witness my own racism unless I give myself room to see how my reactions to POC are less about my interactions with such people and more to do with the “education” which our society has informed me, (often incorrectly).
It can be disconcerting to realize that a certain interaction by me was based on the “common knowledge” of my youth rather than with the truth of the situation before me, and I must take proactive steps to remember to deal with the persons in front of me as the individuals that they are, rather than the internal “go-to” attitudes that society has placed within me.

I was once uneducable in regards to racism because I thought I could see it, if it presented itself.
But as I look back along the whole of my life, I missed a whole lot because my internal definition of “racism” was still massively influenced by my upbringing and the passive-racism of my local environs.

I was speaking of myself, not anyone else.
I am the product of the society that reared me, though I am striving to be better in spite of that.

 

[Merrill]

You would think that nobody was against that, even the conservative-minded library censors.

And yet, perhaps there is some science that is off-limits to some Christian thinking. Should we ban books claiming that Young Earth Theory is scientific? Are books denying the validity of Darwin's Theory of Evolution worthy of a place in public libraries?

I gather that quite a lot of sex education is contentious in America. Would I be right in thinking that many of the books removed by conservative-minded library committees related to sexual topics deemed unsuitable for children, even those based on well-supported, coherent arguments, based on logic, science, and data?

I said I was done with discussions on CRT and "systemic racism", not done with this thread

but to your point above

"library censor" is interesting terminology --are you implying that all texts should be allowed in schools, and any attempt at limiting anything is "censorship"? (seriously how many times does this point need to be made?)

"Should we ban books claiming that Young Earth Theory is scientific? Are books denying the validity of Darwin's Theory of Evolution worthy of a place in public libraries?"

Schools and librarians determine the appropriate scope of science textbooks, and evaluate such texts based on the quality of content, and rigor of the science explained. Young Earth Creationism is more of a theological concept, and not appropriate for inclusion in a high-school geology textbook, etc. Likewise, the Theory of Evolution has scientific backing, and it is accepted in some Christian denominations. Excluding that concept from the curriculum would be wrong

Likewise, ideological concepts that are not based on science should be excluded from textbooks. Stuff like

1. Queer theory
2. Transgenderism (denying the reality of biological sex, asserting that biological sex is "non-binary", and other nonsense claims)
3. Low-quality texts on things like climate change, which take a hysterical, activist stance, and make grandiose, unproven claims, or non-falsifiable assertions (and no, I am not saying climate change isn't happening, or that humans are not contributing, but there is a lot of bad, politically-driven nonsense out there)

If you don't want people teaching your kids that evolution is fake, or that the Earth is 6000 years old, you need to accept the fact that people also don't want their kids told that there are 79 genders, men can have babies, and that the Earth is going to burn up by 2035

as for the texts dealing with sexual issues found in schools, it is a case-by-case basis. Books like "Lawn Boy" which feature pedophilia, or books like "This Book is Gay" which tell kids how to cruise online for anonymous sex with strangers, etc. are obviously inappropriate. If you want your kids reading that stuff, you go buy it and give it to them.

 

[BCP1928]

I said I was done with discussions on CRT and "systemic racism", not done with this thread

but to your point above

"library censor" is interesting terminology --are you implying that all texts should be allowed in schools, and any attempt at limiting anything is "censorship"? (seriously how many times does this point need to be made?)

"Should we ban books claiming that Young Earth Theory is scientific? Are books denying the validity of Darwin's Theory of Evolution worthy of a place in public libraries?"

Schools and librarians determine the appropriate scope of science textbooks, and evaluate such texts based on the quality of content, and rigor of the science explained. Young Earth Creationism is more of a theological concept, and not appropriate for inclusion in a high-school geology textbook, etc. Likewise, the Theory of Evolution has scientific backing, and it is accepted in some Christian denominations. Excluding that concept from the curriculum would be wrong

Likewise, ideological concepts that are not based on science should be excluded from textbooks. Stuff like

1. Queer theory
2. Transgenderism (denying the reality of biological sex, asserting that biological sex is "non-binary", and other nonsense claims)
3. Low-quality texts on things like climate change, which take a hysterical, activist stance, and make grandiose, unproven claims, or non-falsifiable assertions (and no, I am not saying climate change isn't happening, or that humans are not contributing, but there is a lot of bad, politically-driven nonsense out there)

If you don't want people teaching your kids that evolution is fake, or that the Earth is 6000 years old, you need to accept the fact that people also don't want their kids told that there are 79 genders, men can have babies, and that the Earth is going to burn up by 2035

as for the texts dealing with sexual issues found in schools, it is a case-by-case basis. Books like "Lawn Boy" which feature pedophilia, or books like "This Book is Gay" which tell kids how to cruise online for anonymous sex with strangers, etc. are obviously inappropriate. If you want your kids reading that stuff, you go buy it and give it to them.

I have no idea what you mean by "queer theory" but you spoil your argument by putting a satirical twist on the other two items. If you want to have a serious discussion about how these subjects are taught in school, you have to know more about it than polemics.

 

[Whyayeman]

If you don't want people teaching your kids that evolution is fake, or that the Earth is 6000 years old, you need to accept the fact that people also don't want their kids told that there are 79 genders, men can have babies, and that the Earth is going to burn up by 2035

As Religious Instruction is not allowed in American state schools there has never been a possibility of the Young Earth Theory being taught in them. That is why there was all that nonsense about sneaking it into Science curricula.

I would be interested to learn more about books for children that make these other claims. Frankly I simply won't believe you without some kind of evidence, such as titles and publishers, so that I can look them up.

The issue of censorship is live in some American states where groups of prudes have seized control of library acquisitions and are attempting to subvert the professionals. A proper selection of books will be wider than any sectional interest.

 

[Bradskii]

but please go read the CRT theorists before making a defense of their positions. I don't defend any political or ideological position until I actually understand it...

...and define it to suit your position.

Apart from the fact that I haven't mentioned crt in any of my posts, you seem determined to bring your version of it into every time. There was nothing quoted in your post that didn't clarify what I've been saying. That there is inherent and subconscious bias in all of us. If you want to ignore that, or even deny it, then feel free. But after the colossus amount of evidence you've been given to indicate it, it seems quite perverse to do so.

 

[Merrill]

As Religious Instruction is not allowed in American state schools there has never been a possibility of the Young Earth Theory being taught in them. That is why there was all that nonsense about sneaking it into Science curricula.

I would be interested to learn more about books for children that make these other claims. Frankly I simply won't believe you without some kind of evidence, such as titles and publishers, so that I can look them up.

The issue of censorship is live in some American states where groups of prudes have seized control of library acquisitions and are attempting to subvert the professionals. A proper selection of books will be wider than any sectional interest.

can find this in grammar school libraries in my state

this is just one of many books in this category.

 

[Bradskii]

can find this in grammar school libraries in my state

this is just one of many books in this category.

What's a grammar school in the US? Do you mean elementary?

 

[sjastro]

I'm surprised the Republicans haven't banned Alice in Wonderland which provides a covert criticism of pure mathematics of the times and has a history of being censored for the following reasons.

1. References to Sexual Fantasies: In 1900, New Hampshire banned the book from public schools, accusing it of promoting masturbation and sexual fantasies.
2. Attribution of Human Traits to Animals: In 1931, a government censor in the Chinese province of Hunan banned the book because it portrayed anthropomorphized animals acting on the same level of complexity as humans. The censor believed this was “disastrous” for children and insulting to humans overall.
3. Promoting the Use of Drugs: In 1960, during cultural changes in America, parents believed the book encouraged drug use due to characters openly using drugs and hallucinating scenarios.

Even though the author Lewis Carroll a.k.a. the pure mathematician Charles Dodgson has a suspect background involving allegations of pedophilia, there are no instances of this in the book.

 

[Whyayeman]

I'm surprised the Republicans haven't banned Alice in Wonderful which provides a covert criticism of pure mathematics of the times and has a history of being censored for the following reasons.

1. References to Sexual Fantasies: In 1900, New Hampshire banned the book from public schools, accusing it of promoting masturbation and sexual fantasies.
2. Attribution of Human Traits to Animals: In 1931, a government censor in the Chinese province of Hunan banned the book because it portrayed anthropomorphized animals acting on the same level of complexity as humans. The censor believed this was “disastrous” for children and insulting to humans overall.
3. Promoting the Use of Drugs: In 1960, during cultural changes in America, parents believed the book encouraged drug use due to characters openly using drugs and hallucinating scenarios.

Even though the author Lewis Carroll a.k.a. the pure mathematician Charles Dodgson has a suspect background involving allegations of pedophilia, there are no instances of this in the book.

Oh, dear! I hope I haven't planted a seed in their minds!

 

[Whyayeman]

View attachment 350358
can find this in grammar school libraries in my state

this is just one of many books in this category.

And what is the objection to it? Is it obscene? Offensive?

 

[Merrill]

What's a grammar school in the US? Do you mean elementary?

yes, elementary

 

[Merrill]

And what is the objection to it? Is it obscene? Offensive?

Are you being sarcastic?

pretty sure men can't have babies. Should we teach flat-earth too?

 

[BCP1928]

Are you being sarcastic?

pretty sure men can't have babies. Should we teach flat-earth too?

Trans men who still have female reproductive organs can have babies.

 

[sjastro]

And what is the objection to it? Is it obscene? Offensive?

Since I am on Mr Self-Aggrandizement's ignore list I'll respond to you.
He probably finds this offensive as well and if he is true to his convictions should rally for the expulsion of Arnold Schwarzenegger former Republican governor of California from the party for promoting transsexuality.

 

[Aldebaran]

PLEASE STICK TO THE TOPIC
REFRAIN FROM PERSONAL ATTACKS​

 

[essentialsaltes]

Publishers sue state of Idaho over library book bans​

HB 710, enacted last July, forbids anyone under the age of 18 from accessing books deemed “harmful to minors”, including those depicting “sexual conduct”, in school or public libraries.

The ban extends to classics and bestsellers, including The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison, The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood, Game of Thrones by George RR Martin and nonfiction books such as The “What’s Happening to My Body?” Book for Girls by Lynda Madaras. [And A Clockwork Orange by Anthony Burgess, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou and Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut.]

Penguin Random House, Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins, Macmillan, Simon & Schuster, and Sourcebooks filed a lawsuit on Tuesday alongside three authors, a public library district, the US writers’ body the Authors Guild, a teacher, two students and two parents.

The Idaho law “goes even further than previous laws [in other states] by removing classic books from public libraries in addition to schools”, said Dan Novack, associate general counsel at Penguin Random House.

 

[rjs330]

Trans men who still have female reproductive organs can have babies.

Those are called women.

 

[rjs330]

Since I am on Mr Self-Aggrandizement's ignore list I'll respond to you.
He probably finds this offensive as well and if he is true to his convictions should rally for the expulsion of Arnold Schwarzenegger former Republican governor of California from the party for promoting transsexuality.

A comedy?

Yes I suppose thinking men can have babies is a comedy.

 

[BCP1928]

Are you being sarcastic?

pretty sure men can't have babies. Should we teach flat-earth too?

Males can't have babies, but a female living and presenting as a man (i.e. a trans man) retains the reproductive organs of a female and can most definitely have babies.

 

[sjastro]

A comedy?

Yes I suppose thinking men can have babies is a comedy.

Try reading the thread which reveals the context in which the post was written.