The author makes a good point about the irony of it all.
"...due to the internet, kids inevitably find adult materials on their own. Having an education in sexuality, sexual identity, and human diversity before they see that stuff — so they can distinguish fact from fantasy — is the only true way to protect children. Books like "Pride Puppy" prevent the premature sexualization of kids, by answering questions about queer identity in age-appropriate ways. If adults don't answer children's curiosity, kids go looking on their own. Left to their own devices and a search engine, children find materials they're not mature enough to handle."
Parents who are objecting to these books are contributing to "the premature sexualization" of kids by depriving them of seeing LBGTQ individuals in a more realized way.
So if somebody published a book on how to machine assemble and fire an AR-15 it should be available in the school library?Needs to be repeated for all the social conservatives. Especially this part:
"If adults don't answer children's curiosity, kids go looking on their own."
What does manufacturing semi-auto firearms have to do with sex education?So if somebody published a book on how to machine assemble and fire an AR-15 it should be available in the school library?
So if somebody published a book on how to machine assemble and fire an AR-15 it should be available in the school library?
What does manufacturing semi-auto firearms have to do with sex education?
I was talking about a book. Would you want such a book banned from public schools.What does manufacturing semi-auto firearms have to do with sex education?
I knew it was about a book.I was talking about a book. Would you want such a book banned from public schools.
Quit desperately trying to change the subject it's pathetic.
"Can you treat someone with "love, kindness, and respect" while simultaneously insisting their identity is so poisonous that it cannot be acknowledged?
The right's lawyer argued that censoring these books wasn't about disrespecting queer people, but protecting "children's innocence." It's a nonsense argument, however, as it assumes there's a "respectful" way to erase people. But it was also quite silly, as if hiding these books would shield children from the knowledge that LGBTQ identities exist. (An unspoken corrollary is the false view they can prevent children from growing up queer.) The case illustrates the animating futility at the heart of the MAGA movement: they will never manifest their dream of a past "great" America, when "queer" wasn't a thing. Such a period never existed, but especially not in an era when queer people are visible in pop culture, the internet, and the general community. The government can force teachers not to say "gay" in school, but kids are going to hear about it everywhere else.
During arguments, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson made this point most clearly, asking the plaintiffs' lawyers how far this parental right to "opt out" should go. She asked if a gay teacher would be allowed to have a wedding photo on her desk? Or if a student group put up "love is love" posters in the hallway? Or if a trans teacher insisted that the students use their preferred name and pronouns? On this last point, the conservative lawyer insisted the teacher has no right to tell students how to address them. This answer gave the game away. It's standard practice for teachers to dictate how students address them: First name or last name? Miss or Mrs? Only trans people, in this lawyer's determination, don't deserve this basic respect from students.
...The irony here is that, due to the internet, kids inevitably find adult materials on their own. Having an education in sexuality, sexual identity, and human diversity before they see that stuff — so they can distinguish fact from fantasy — is the only true way to protect children. Books like "Pride Puppy" prevent the premature sexualization of kids, by answering questions about queer identity in age-appropriate ways. If adults don't answer children's curiosity, kids go looking on their own. Left to their own devices and a search engine, children find materials they're not mature enough to handle."
Link
Children aren't stupid. They see LGBTQ people in the world. They know they exist, or will know. It's damaging to them to deprive them of the opportunity to see them as fully realized human beings.
Simple thinking is never a good way to describe human behavior or the human mind. Humans are higher animals and our brains are extremely complex. There are few "black and white" statements you can make about them. Those that do are not qualified.
So then why did you moan about sex education?I knew it was about a book.
I was asking should it be there or should it be removed?What dies a book about manufacturing firearms have to do with being in a grade school library?
I'm not talking about the subject of sex education the threat is not about the subject of sex education and about what books can be permitted in the library.Its not a relevant subject, that sex education is.
Private manufacturing of semi-auto firearms is forbidden by the ATF so that book has no place in any school library.So then why did you moan about sex education?
I was asking should it be there or should it be removed?
I'm not talking about the subject of sex education the threat is not about the subject of sex education and about what books can be permitted in the library.
So anyway you're all for Banning books just if they say things you don't agree with.
No it isn'tPrivate manufacturing of semi-auto firearms is forbidden by the ATF so that book has no place in any school library.
This says you need a license. If you need a license and can get one it most certainly is not forbidden.Does an individual need a license to make a firearm for personal use? | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
No, a license is not required to make a firearm solely for personal use. However, a license is required to manufacture firearms for sale or distribution. The law prohibits a person from assembling a non–sporting semiautomatic rifle or shotgun from 10 or more imported parts, as well as firearms...www.atf.gov
We're not talking about sex education we're talking about presence of books in libraries I'm not taking this bait Lisa you've tried to lure me away with it multiple times.Sex education is a matter of public school curriculum, starting at the age of puberty.
The L G and B are about sexual preferences why are people so determined to have kids read about these? What is there to say ?
No I still contend that removal from the library is not Banning.
Simple thinking is never a good way to describe human behavior or the human mind. Humans are higher animals and our brains are extremely complex. There are few "black and white" statements you can make about them. Those that do are not qualified.
So if someone brings the book to school because their parents bought it for me it's going to be confiscated?Removed by law, thus banned.
And if some kids are they'll find out.That they're human. They have lives that extend beyond sexuality.
Because they don't want their kids reading about how to hook up with adults on Grindr?Ironically, the parents objecting to them are focusing on the sexuality, in essence, doing the very sexualization they criticize the books for doing.
If that's all they were doing it wouldn't be objectionable. You didn't read them you don't know what's in them.The books are showing them to be real people, like anybody else. The parents don't like this.
Taught what? What's in these books do you even know? No you don't because you didn't read them and you don't know. You just assumed it's hatred because you can't come up with anything.One cringes at the thought of what the kids are being taught about this at home.
And if some kids are they'll find out.
Because they don't want their kids reading about how to hook up with adults on Grindr?
If that's all they were doing it wouldn't be objectionable. You didn't read them you don't know what's in them.
Taught what? What's in these books do you even know? No you don't because you didn't read them and you don't know. You just assumed it's hatred because you can't come up with anything.
Your opinion on this is very poorly informed.
I wouldn't care if these books were for heterosexual people I would still think they were inappropriate.Why dont You don't want kids thinking that LGBTQ folks are fully realized people re-enforced?
They can learn that from their classmates and sometimes even teachers when I was in sixth grade I didn't have a how to manual on performing oral sex but I did know some of my teachers were gay.It seems quite possible that parents who don't want their kids learning that LBGTQ folks are fully realized don't see them as fully realized people.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?