One political party is removing access to books. They're doing it in the easiest place they can. They will never come for you because you have money and are an adult.
But this is fascism and the people in the thread who are defending it are cool with fascism. They like it because it hurts people they don't like. They will defend fascism with their lives, and many of the people you work with are these people.
At the very least, it seems like a punching bag or soap-box for those pushing their own agendas.
At the end of the day, those who fight for "free speech" are really fighting to control which speech is free and which isn't.
Author John Green said it best in a reaction regarding his first novel, Looking for Alaska being targeted for a ban[0]:
> There's this surreality of the organization in question being called "Moms for Liberty" when what they're trying to do is restrict the liberty of other people's kids to read what librarians and teachers deem appropriate for those other people's kids to read
0: https://www.tiktok.com/@literallyjohngreen/video/71418040147...
For instance, Gone with the Wind was banned in ~~Alameda~~ Anaheim[0], but California is listed as having no banned books.
Students should have access to any books they are likely to have heard of or are of educational value.
[0] https://bbark.deepforestproductions.com/column/2013/04/07/ba...
Slightly different, but more recently in Burbank several other books were banned from being included in curricula amid parent outcry:
https://abc7news.com/to-kill-a-mockingbird-ban-book-bank-bur...
To dang et al part of moderation/admin - Does this post really not meet HN guidelines? Also as a suggestion, whenever a person might choose to flag a post, it would help if there were a drop down menu that listed some options like "Flag it for...<insert frequent reason>", that might indicate to the OP on what the perceived transgression might be; without revealing the name of the flagger, of course. At the time of writing there is just "flag" or "unflag", which lacks nuance. It's been ~24 hours, the flagged status hasn't been lifted, and I'm none the wiser on why.
That is when they're not accusing free speech of being a white supremacist value.
[1] https://truthout.org/articles/after-activist-pressure-amazon...
I don't know what part of the "movement" is growing - is it that more books are being filtered than before, there are more books to sort through but the same ratio is being ratio, or there is just more outside attention on the process?
> It is important to recognize that books available in schools, whether in a school or classroom library, or as part of a curriculum, were selected by librarians and educators as part of the educational offerings to students. Book bans occur when those choices are overridden by school boards, administrators, teachers, or even politicians, on the basis of a particular book’s content.
I see the words "trauma" "weird" "wrong" "disgusting" "sexually" and others in the many replies below, at the same time as multiple downvotes for saying this directly..
Children's libraries are curated by librarians and teachers. There's never been a point in history where "anything goes" in a children's library.
And the internet is not for children? That's my point, social media is targeted at kids. Why is it that people scream "free speech" when hateful content is banned online while at the same calling for the banning of books? They're mad that they can't say whatever they want while simultaneously feeling that other people shouldn't.
But they're making a say in my child's education also. Let parents opt their children out of checking books out. Don't ban my kid from reading them too.
> So what makes this different?
You're seriously comparing the banning of books from libraries to kidnapping and brainwashing kids? Nobody is trying to "genocide a culture" here, people just want to have their own views represented and are being denied. That is an absurd comparison to make.
But I just went to their online catalogue to confirm if that's still the case - of all the authors mentioned, I could only find a single copy of a Jordan Peterson book in a psychology library at a satellite campus. Interestingly, they have a dozen books about Jordan Peterson (both pro and anti, interestingly enough).
Although it's worth pointing out that the article only considered external acts as "banning". Actions of librarians to maintain their collections are not considered censorship and are not publicly tracked anyway.
Nobody came to these parents to tell them "your kid should not be reading X". If parents don't trust/like the curriculum of their local school, AFAIK homeschooling is still an option in the US.
Why should I be allowed to deny your children access to books at school?
It was a high-school level book being read over a broadcast which they wanted to make available for children not at a high school level.
It was being read by a mother of children who weren't in high school, and did not have access to the book.
At some point freedom just becomes hedonism. Eventually hedonism starts to enforce hedonistic mantras on the whole society, it becomes yet another flavor of fascism.
The given quote in the video you linked to was:
"Excited now, he pushed into her, and she squeezed her eyes as tightly as she could, her tongue circling her lips. He pushed harder, his breath heavy and labored. She scratched his back, and he cried out. She bit his ear and pulled his hair."
This is a description of what appears to be heterosexual characters. Nor does it appear to be a "mere depiction". I would reserve that for something like "Heather Has Two Mommies" (a mere description of a homosexual couple) or "Mr. and Mrs. Brown" (a mere description of a heterosexual couple who have befriended a bear from darkest Peru).
My assertion is that I wouldn't expect a book that simply had a gay character in it to receive that response from the school board.
I read the article you published as evidence, and provided the context showing how you were misrepresenting the story to suit whatever false narrative you were pushing. I'm not sure what agenda you have here, but lying to demonstrate something is never a good sign.
Think of how George shoots Lennie in "Of Mice and Men", or the racism in "To Kill a Mockingbird", or why Hester Prynne must wear a scarlet "A", or when Anne Frank talks about her menstruation. Or the details of the meatpacking industry described in "The Jungle".
They are all taught to high school-aged kids. I don't think most people would want all those details described to elementary school kids.
I can't figured out why your assertion is relevant.
While it may be true, surely you don't think that only white hetereosexuals can be portrayed as something other than milquetoast-bland in high school literature.