Social Joy Reid Defends Books with Pedophilia in Public School Librairies

[Islam Imamate]

How about we just leave romance and sexuality out of grade school curriculum? What’s so hard about that?

I didn't say anything about the curriculum, lots of stuff exists in public schools beyond the curriculum. Neither Gender Queer or All Boys Aren't Blue were ever part of any curriculum as far as I can see. In fact one teacher was reprimanded simply for bringing the book Gender Queer to read for herself. Be honest, your interest and that of groups like Moms 4 Liberty extends well beyond the curriculum and is about dictating what cultural norms are and aren't acceptable in public schools in general. In your eyes a teacher on a slow day showing a Disney princess movie is "introducing sexuality to kids" even though its rated PG and the vast majority of parents would see it as age appropriate. In fact the only reason a movie like Aladdin is PG and not G is because of the action sequences, not the kiss.

Considering the average amount of books in each library, even the ones that DID ban one book we're talking about one title out what, tens of thousands? So 1% of districts ban 1 title out of their thousands.

I don't know exactly what I'd consider it to be an issue worth paying attention to, but a lot more than it is now.

I think the point you're missing is that we're witnessing a nationwide effort by a vocal minority that seeks to dictate the acceptable cultural norms to the majority through these kinds of books challenges and that in practice when it comes to public school libraries this is the real issue especially given the fact that state legislatures are going out of their way to empower such folks. You can say its not a big deal and on some level I don't entirely disagree, obviously housing policy and the safety net are far more important policy issues. But its certainly a bigger deal than the fact that some school libraries have they/them memoirs in them though I'm sure you'd disagree with that despite the evidence to the contrary.

 

[mkess101]

But its certainly a bigger deal than the fact that some school libraries have they/them memoirs in them though I'm sure you'd disagree with that despite the evidence to the contrary.

Honestly, I wouldn't say I disagree (nor agree). I don't find either to be a big deal. Interesting for discussion on a forum I guess (I mean, here I am LOL) but beyond that nothing that will have any real impact.

But again, there isn't "evidence" in terms of outcomes for either of these things. Do you have a study that shows a negative impact on the lives of students (or even if you want to specify gay or trans POC or whatever) if they can't check out the All Boys Aren't Blue book from their school library?

Let's not toss around the word "evidence" as though it has no meaning. In the end the goal is giving kids the best education and educational experience possible, right? So I've yet to see evidence that having these specific titles in school libraries brings us closer to that goal.

 

[Islam Imamate]

But again, there isn't "evidence" in terms of outcomes for either of these things. Do you have a study that shows a negative impact on the lives of students (or even if you want to specify gay or trans POC or whatever) if they can't check out the All Boys Aren't Blue book from their school library?

Let's not toss around the word "evidence" as though it has no meaning. In the end the goal is giving kids the best education and educational experience possible, right? So I've yet to see evidence that having these specific titles in school libraries brings us closer to that goal.

Nowhere did I ever argue that these books are necessary for a proper education, in fact I've argued the opposite. What I have argued is that a nationwide effort to enforce a specific cultural vision upon schools by challenging books that deal with certain themes is a graver threat to the education of students than merely having they/them memoirs in their library. I would point to the fact that conservatives cannibalized a school that was set up precisely for them simply because Michelangelo's David was shown to students without permission as evidence that this approach to coddling kids backfires. That kind of attitude is absolutely a threat to education generally and specifically in states that have doubled down on the culture wars like Florida and Texas where much of this activity is taking place. I don't see how that's a controversial take but this is the WR after all.

 

[Super_Nintendo]

"bu-bu-bu-but they're just teaching that gays exist!"

"He found out his son was “trans” when he received a letter from the Kindergarten referring to him as “Ruby” and using she/her pronouns"

the whole point of these books is to abuse children and turn them into damaged human beings

 

[PhitePhan]

Well polygamy is illegal AFAIK so no on that one.

I don't think saying some kid had 2 dads to a group of 8 year olds really delves into adult sexuality because young kids don't process adult relationships through a sexual lens.

If you read a kid a story and mention the mom and dad I don't think you're talking about sexuality either.

I don’t think legality has much bearing on moral decisions or what is necessarily developmentally appropriate for children. Imagine polygamy isn’t illegal, teach kids about it?

When you tell a kid about two penguin dads, you introduce a concept that can be confusing, and which automatically requires extra explanation for context. If we don’t give context of some kind, then the child has an incomplete view that can be harmful (eg lack of understanding about the risks of homosexuality). So this child is introduced to two penguin dads at six years old, and goes about life thinking favorably about this idea, “two dads is normal, they look so happy, no problems there.”

Unfortunately, two dads isn’t normal, and that lifestyle comes with significant risk. I don’t see why we would expose to kids to an idea that brings with it significant risk… can you explain why we need to introduce kids to a lifestyle associated with high rate of STDs, infidelity, substance abuse?

 

[mkess101]

Nowhere did I ever argue that these books are necessary for a proper education, in fact I've argued the opposite. What I have argued is that a nationwide effort to enforce a specific cultural vision upon schools by challenging books that deal with certain themes is a graver threat to the education of students than merely having they/them memoirs in their library. I would point to the fact that conservatives cannibalized a school that was set up precisely for them simply because Michelangelo's David was shown to students without permission as evidence that this approach to coddling kids backfires. That kind of attitude is absolutely a threat to education generally and specifically in states that have doubled down on the culture wars like Florida and Texas where much of this activity is taking place. I don't how that's a controversial take but this is the WR after all.

I'm not sure exactly what you were trying to say about the school being "cannibalized" because kids saw that statue. You'd have to explain more what actually happened and the relevance. (Not saying it's not relevant, I just don't quite get what you're saying happened. A school for "them"? For who?)

I don’t think legality has much bearing on moral decisions or what is necessarily developmentally appropriate for children. Imagine polygamy isn’t illegal, teach kids about it?

When you tell a kid about two penguin dads, you introduce a concept that can be confusing, and which automatically requires extra explanation for context. If we don’t give context of some kind, then the child has an incomplete view that can be harmful (eg lack of understanding about the risks of homosexuality). So this child is introduced to two penguin dads at six years old, and goes about life thinking favorably about this idea, “two dads is normal, they look so happy, no problems there.”

Unfortunately, two dads isn’t normal, and that lifestyle comes with significant risk. I don’t see why we would expose to kids to an idea that brings with it significant risk… can you explain why we need to introduce kids to a lifestyle associated with high rate of STDs, infidelity, substance abuse?

I would say in the context of 2 males actually being fathers to children, the promiscuity aspect is removed and thus the std, promiscuity etc is removed.

 

[RoastBeast]

holy shit, this is still going? like what else is there to say, are the libs importing excuses from mars?

Notice how weak the arguments from the left are in comparison to the right? That's when you know who is right and wrong here. Their arguments have been downright embarrassing to say the least.

Apparently not only do schools now need to be in charge of teaching kids about morals, sexuality, sexual satisfaction and false gender theory but they also need to provide them the ability to read graphic sexual depictions of incestual molestation and sodomy because there is no other way to "educate" them other than through books that describe molestation as well as books that come complete with pictures of boys blowing each other.

In their minds, people MUST ensure that they expose other people's children to this material because it's good for them and there is no way to convey the message other than through these sexually explicit books. According to these radical leftists, there is no other way to educate children other than through these means. If you disagree, then you hate books and hate education. Kind of reminds you of the old "if you disagree, you're a Nazi" routine.

The issue with liberals is they cannot separate their own brain with the brain of a child. They think that the material their 30 year old mind can process and be educated with is the same material that children should be exposed to. They want 9 year olds to be exposed to adult themes to better "educate" them. Sounds pretty creepy, doesn't it?

 

[Hog-train]

When you tell a kid about two penguin dads, you introduce a concept that can be confusing, and which automatically requires extra explanation for context. If we don’t give context of some kind, then the child has an incomplete view that can be harmful (eg lack of understanding about the risks of homosexuality). So this child is introduced to two penguin dads at six years old, and goes about life thinking favorably about this idea, “two dads is normal, they look so happy, no problems there.”

Unfortunately, two dads isn’t normal, and that lifestyle comes with significant risk. I don’t see why we would expose to kids to an idea that brings with it significant risk… can you explain why we need to introduce kids to a lifestyle associated with high rate of STDs, infidelity, substance abuse?

I have zero problems with a gay married couple adopting kids.

There are tons of foster kids and orphans in this country that need a home. Better to be raised by a gay couple than have no parents at all. And they're probably going to try harder as well because it's so hard for a gay couple to adopt. That tells me they really want to be parents.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I'm not sure exactly what you were trying to say about the school being "cannibalized" because kids saw that statue. You'd have to explain more what actually happened and the relevance. (Not saying it's not relevant, I just don't quite get what you're saying happened. A school for "them"? For who?)

Reread the post, obviously when I say "them" in that context I'm talking about conservatives in general. Here's an article that story. From the piece:

Tallahassee Classical School, a Christian school that opened in 2020, gained attention when its former principal, Hope Carrasquilla, resigned after parents were angered that sixth graders were shown a photo of the nude Renaissance sculpture David.

While some parents found the sculpture of a nude man "phonographic," it is considered one of the most iconic pieces of Renaissance art. The school's board chair Barney Bishop told CBS News that David is taught to students every year, but the administration notifies parents first and this year, a letter was not sent out.

Bishop said 97% of parents agreed to the lesson this year, but the 3% of parents who did not agree were "entitled to have that opinion."

Parents who sent their kid to get a classical education were mad that their kids saw one of the greatest works of the Western canon without permission which helped pushed out the school principal even while the school suffered from excessive turnover. This is what giving a tiny minority of parents a heckler's veto gets you.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Notice how weak the arguments from the left are in comparison to the right? That's when you know who is right and wrong here. Their arguments have been downright embarrassing to say the least.

Bizarre take. What, exactly, is the rightist argument? Just "seems self-evident to me that the gov't should control this, and we don't need any evidence or logic," no?

 

[mkess101]

Reread the post, obviously when I say "them" in that context I'm talking about conservatives in general. Here's an article that story. From the piece:

Parents who sent their kid to get a classical education were mad that their kids saw one of the greatest works of the Western canon without permission which helped pushed out the school principal even while the school suffered from excessive turnover. This is what giving a tiny minority of parents a heckler's veto gets you.

Ahh okay the way it was worded was kinda weird but I understand what you're saying now. As for the school, sure that's a stupid reason to protest and throw a fit that gets someone fired and causes turnover (though the article states the admin fired the principal over "multiple issues" so who knows if this was the lone reason or not). Sometimes people do stupid things. The article mentions FL law but doesn't mention any national groups having gotten involved, just a small group of parents that were upset. When you say giving a "heckler's veto"...does that mean your stance is that parents have to simply shut up and accept whatever the school their kid attends decides to do?

The admin said only 3% of parents objected. Those few parents had no ability to fire the principal or change curriculum. They were free to voice their thoughts, the school was free to tell them "This is what we teach. If you don't like it, send your kid elsewhere." Especially given it's a private school. The school was the one who took action.

I might think it dumb that a parent would object to a 6th grader seeing Michaelangelo's "David"...but I'm not going to tell them they don't have the right to voice that dumb view.

 

[Super_Nintendo]

i was under the impression we could use the g word if it's not against anyone on sherdog and not slanderous to a specific celebrity.

but if it's general to say school teachers or even a political party we can.

 

[Super_Nintendo]

 

[Super_Nintendo]

these communists think they own your children...

 

[S Class]

Someone should check that teacher's internet history.

 

[Fox by the Sea]

imagine having creeps like this in charge of your kids' education

 

[Rob Battisti]

imagine having creeps like this in charge of your kids' education

“They are professionals and shouldn’t have to suffer the school boards interference”

 

[Islam Imamate]

Ahh okay the way it was worded was kinda weird but I understand what you're saying now. As for the school, sure that's a stupid reason to protest and throw a fit that gets someone fired and causes turnover (though the article states the admin fired the principal over "multiple issues" so who knows if this was the lone reason or not). Sometimes people do stupid things. The article mentions FL law but doesn't mention any national groups having gotten involved, just a small group of parents that were upset. When you say giving a "heckler's veto"...does that mean your stance is that parents have to simply shut up and accept whatever the school their kid attends decides to do?

No but naturally you'll uncharitably interpret my post.

As I said before I am all for school choice so that parents have options if they disagree with how the local school is run, I just don't think its good to empower a minority of parents to harass schools because a 12 year old was exposed to The Creation of Adam and that in general its this impulse that represents the threat to education and not they/them memoirs in school libraries.

The admin said only 3% of parents objected. Those few parents had no ability to fire the principal or change curriculum. They were free to voice their thoughts, the school was free to tell them "This is what we teach. If you don't like it, send your kid elsewhere." Especially given it's a private school. The school was the one who took action.

I might think it dumb that a parent would object to a 6th grader seeing Michaelangelo's "David"...but I'm not going to tell them they don't have the right to voice that dumb view.

It wasn't a private school, it was a charter school.

The parents didn't have the power to unilaterally fire the principal but they helped create the conditions that led to her being ousted. There was more going on behind the scenes as both the principal and her employer mention but its clear that the incident with Michelangelo's David and the public attention the school received is what helped tip things against the principal.

 

[Fox by the Sea]

“They are professionals and shouldn’t have to suffer the school boards interference”

yeah they're professionals alright
i can't say which kind cause i'd get banned

 

[Rob Battisti]

No but naturally you'll uncharitably interpret my post.

As I said before I am all for school choice so that parents have options if they disagree with how the local school is run, I just don't think its good to empower a minority of parents to harass schools because a 12 year old was exposed to The Creation of Adam and that in general its this impulse that represents the threat to education and not they/them memoirs in school libraries.

It wasn't a private school, it was a charter school.

The parents didn't have the power to unilaterally fire the principal but they helped create the conditions that led to her being ousted. There was more going on behind the scenes as both the principal and her employer mention but its clear that the incident with Michelangelo's David and the public attention the school received is what helped tip things against the principal.

By school choice do you mean just leaving that school or like we agreed upon earlier the right to vote the board in?