Seriously with the book banning ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Sex Ed is not porn.
Most Americans want the PORN out of the schools.

You still haven’t answered - name an elementary, middle, or high school that has Hustler magazine or equivalent or porn dvds in their library. Name one.

Not whom you are replying to but I would count explicit sexual content in books as pornographic.

You would be wrong.

See the definition in the comment above. Printed materials such as books can be pornographic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Sex Ed is not porn.
Most Americans want the PORN out of the schools.

You still haven’t answered - name an elementary, middle, or high school that has Hustler magazine or equivalent or porn dvds in their library. Name one.

Not whom you are replying to but I would count explicit sexual content in books as pornographic.

You would be wrong.

See the definition in the comment above. Printed materials such as books can be pornographic.

Not if they have artistic merit. Miller Test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Why do some posters here seem to want porn in schools?

I think you believe that you’re telling us some awful truth, but those of us who volunteer in our kids’ libraries and have read the books your side is banning know you’re full of sit.

Furthermore, your repeated linkage of “porn” and “schools” really tells on you.

Funny how Mr. Steele deletes the posts that shows it and school boards don't let it be read out loud.

So, now you have an issue with censorship? Funny how that works.

It's his show he can do whatever he want.

But if not appropriate on this website or school board meeting, not for the children's.

The "children's" weren't reading that book. It was in a high school.

And since 99.999 % of high schoolers have phones, they have access to true porn 24/7.

So don't give us that crap about how you want to protect the little darlings from porn.

Well some of us don't give our children smartphones or let them have unfiltered access to the Internet.

Exactly. Just get the porn out of our schools.

There’s no porn in schools. It’s a right wing lie, and you enjoy being led around by the nose.

There's definitely porn in schools. I came across some very explicit romance novels in the high school library when I was a teen. And yes, I'm just as much against hetero bodice rippers in school libraries as I am against LGBT explicit material.

Bodice rippers aren't porn.

High schoolers are old enough to read them. Most won't bother.

Bodice rippers aren't porn. Meanwhle they have actual porn on their phones which 90% of the parents can't be bothered to do anythging about.

I would consider explicit sex scenes in books to be pornographic. Maybe we just disagree on the definition of porn. I'm pretty sure most people who are against explicit sexual content in library books are also doing their best to keep their children away from Internet porn. Everyone I know who is concerned about these books does not allow their children to use smartphones, social media, or unsupervised/unfiltered Internet.


"printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic or emotional feelings."

Written materials do indeed fall under this definition.

Ah, so you haven’t actually read Gender Queer. Glad you finally accidentally fessed up.

[Anonymous]

If we can't even agree on what counts as pornographic, I don't know if we can really have a productive conversation. I don't think there is any excuse for having explicit sexual content in schools, whether it's visual or written. There's nothing that can change my mind on that. And it's honestly disturbing that so many people don't see a problem with explicit sexual content being available to minors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If we can't even agree on what counts as pornographic, I don't know if we can really have a productive conversation. I don't think there is any excuse for having explicit sexual content in schools, whether it's visual or written. There's nothing that can change my mind on that. And it's honestly disturbing that so many people don't see a problem with explicit sexual content being available to minors.

This is why there we have 1st Amendment, to shut down people like you.

These books aren't running up and attacking people, forcing kids to read them. Your kid would have to SEEK IT OUT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If we can't even agree on what counts as pornographic, I don't know if we can really have a productive conversation. I don't think there is any excuse for having explicit sexual content in schools, whether it's visual or written. There's nothing that can change my mind on that. And it's honestly disturbing that so many people don't see a problem with explicit sexual content being available to minors.

We can't have a productive conversation. And the disagreements lie - among other places - on what constitutes "explicit sexual content." The book banners think that a depiction of two women holding hands is explicit. They think that the merest nod to gay and/or trans people's existence is pornographic and explicit.

And even to get more subtle, they think any depiction of or acknowledgement of sex - no matter the context - makes a work inherently inappropriate.

What do you do with that? Just burn all the books I guess if we let the most extreme book banners set the standards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we can't even agree on what counts as pornographic, I don't know if we can really have a productive conversation. I don't think there is any excuse for having explicit sexual content in schools, whether it's visual or written. There's nothing that can change my mind on that. And it's honestly disturbing that so many people don't see a problem with explicit sexual content being available to minors.

We can't have a productive conversation. And the disagreements lie - among other places - on what constitutes "explicit sexual content." The book banners think that a depiction of two women holding hands is explicit. They think that the merest nod to gay and/or trans people's existence is pornographic and explicit.

And even to get more subtle, they think any depiction of or acknowledgement of sex - no matter the context - makes a work inherently inappropriate.

What do you do with that? Just burn all the books I guess if we let the most extreme book banners set the standards.

Exactly. Book banners stupidly don't want kids to know anything about sex.

Florida schools banning Shakespeare! I am glad I grew up in the 70s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If we can't even agree on what counts as pornographic, I don't know if we can really have a productive conversation. I don't think there is any excuse for having explicit sexual content in schools, whether it's visual or written. There's nothing that can change my mind on that. And it's honestly disturbing that so many people don't see a problem with explicit sexual content being available to minors.

Because we know sex can be good and healthy. Kids do need to know all about it by the time they hit puberty.

And reading about it us a safe way to explore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Why do some posters here seem to want porn in schools?

I think you believe that you’re telling us some awful truth, but those of us who volunteer in our kids’ libraries and have read the books your side is banning know you’re full of sit.

Furthermore, your repeated linkage of “porn” and “schools” really tells on you.

Funny how Mr. Steele deletes the posts that shows it and school boards don't let it be read out loud.

So, now you have an issue with censorship? Funny how that works.

It's his show he can do whatever he want.

But if not appropriate on this website or school board meeting, not for the children's.

The "children's" weren't reading that book. It was in a high school.

And since 99.999 % of high schoolers have phones, they have access to true porn 24/7.

So don't give us that crap about how you want to protect the little darlings from porn.

Well some of us don't give our children smartphones or let them have unfiltered access to the Internet.

Exactly. Just get the porn out of our schools.

There’s no porn in schools. It’s a right wing lie, and you enjoy being led around by the nose.

There's definitely porn in schools. I came across some very explicit romance novels in the high school library when I was a teen. And yes, I'm just as much against hetero bodice rippers in school libraries as I am against LGBT explicit material.

Bodice rippers aren't porn.

High schoolers are old enough to read them. Most won't bother.

Bodice rippers aren't porn. Meanwhle they have actual porn on their phones which 90% of the parents can't be bothered to do anythging about.

I would consider explicit sex scenes in books to be pornographic. Maybe we just disagree on the definition of porn. I'm pretty sure most people who are against explicit sexual content in library books are also doing their best to keep their children away from Internet porn. Everyone I know who is concerned about these books does not allow their children to use smartphones, social media, or unsupervised/unfiltered Internet.


"printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic or emotional feelings."

Written materials do indeed fall under this definition.

Well dang, we've had "porn" in schools for decades by this definition and I was assigned "porn" in honors English in highschool and read "porn" from my school library in middle school, back in the early 90s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Why do some posters here seem to want porn in schools?

I think you believe that you’re telling us some awful truth, but those of us who volunteer in our kids’ libraries and have read the books your side is banning know you’re full of sit.

Furthermore, your repeated linkage of “porn” and “schools” really tells on you.

Funny how Mr. Steele deletes the posts that shows it and school boards don't let it be read out loud.

So, now you have an issue with censorship? Funny how that works.

It's his show he can do whatever he want.

But if not appropriate on this website or school board meeting, not for the children's.

The "children's" weren't reading that book. It was in a high school.

And since 99.999 % of high schoolers have phones, they have access to true porn 24/7.

So don't give us that crap about how you want to protect the little darlings from porn.

Well some of us don't give our children smartphones or let them have unfiltered access to the Internet.

Exactly. Just get the porn out of our schools.

There’s no porn in schools. It’s a right wing lie, and you enjoy being led around by the nose.

There's definitely porn in schools. I came across some very explicit romance novels in the high school library when I was a teen. And yes, I'm just as much against hetero bodice rippers in school libraries as I am against LGBT explicit material.

Bodice rippers aren't porn.

High schoolers are old enough to read them. Most won't bother.

Bodice rippers aren't porn. Meanwhle they have actual porn on their phones which 90% of the parents can't be bothered to do anythging about.

I would consider explicit sex scenes in books to be pornographic. Maybe we just disagree on the definition of porn. I'm pretty sure most people who are against explicit sexual content in library books are also doing their best to keep their children away from Internet porn. Everyone I know who is concerned about these books does not allow their children to use smartphones, social media, or unsupervised/unfiltered Internet.


"printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic or emotional feelings."

Written materials do indeed fall under this definition.

Well said. Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm pretty sure most people who are against explicit sexual content in library books are also doing their best to keep their children away from Internet porn. Everyone I know who is concerned about these books does not allow their children to use smartphones, social media, or unsupervised/unfiltered Internet.

Do you only know parents of young children? Because the ones I know who are rallying against books are doing it because they think their kid might turn gay. And all these kids (teens) have smartphones with unlimited internet access.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure if this is what my spouse shared with me, but please get the full story before you comment. I do know one of these books available to 13 year olds shows an explicit drawing of someone giving a blow job. I’m no prude and I think we should exercise extreme caution censoring books, but I don’t want my kid reading that. And no, my kid also doesn’t have unfettered access to the internet.

+1 I don’t support censorship of anything but restricting age inappropriate books is not only acceptable but sensible. But some of the radical fringe insist 9 years should be exposed to graphic imagery.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Why do some posters here seem to want porn in schools?

I think you believe that you’re telling us some awful truth, but those of us who volunteer in our kids’ libraries and have read the books your side is banning know you’re full of sit.

Furthermore, your repeated linkage of “porn” and “schools” really tells on you.

Funny how Mr. Steele deletes the posts that shows it and school boards don't let it be read out loud.

So, now you have an issue with censorship? Funny how that works.

It's his show he can do whatever he want.

But if not appropriate on this website or school board meeting, not for the children's.

The "children's" weren't reading that book. It was in a high school.

And since 99.999 % of high schoolers have phones, they have access to true porn 24/7.

So don't give us that crap about how you want to protect the little darlings from porn.

Well some of us don't give our children smartphones or let them have unfiltered access to the Internet.

Exactly. Just get the porn out of our schools.

There’s no porn in schools. It’s a right wing lie, and you enjoy being led around by the nose.

There's definitely porn in schools. I came across some very explicit romance novels in the high school library when I was a teen. And yes, I'm just as much against hetero bodice rippers in school libraries as I am against LGBT explicit material.

Bodice rippers aren't porn.

High schoolers are old enough to read them. Most won't bother.

Bodice rippers aren't porn. Meanwhle they have actual porn on their phones which 90% of the parents can't be bothered to do anythging about.

I would consider explicit sex scenes in books to be pornographic. Maybe we just disagree on the definition of porn. I'm pretty sure most people who are against explicit sexual content in library books are also doing their best to keep their children away from Internet porn. Everyone I know who is concerned about these books does not allow their children to use smartphones, social media, or unsupervised/unfiltered Internet.


"printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic or emotional feelings."

Written materials do indeed fall under this definition.

Well said. Thank you.

No, stupidly said.

Descriptions of people falling in love and having sex is not porn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Sex Ed is not porn.
Most Americans want the PORN out of the schools.

You still haven’t answered - name an elementary, middle, or high school that has Hustler magazine or equivalent or porn dvds in their library. Name one.

Not whom you are replying to but I would count explicit sexual content in books as pornographic.

You would be wrong.

See the definition in the comment above. Printed materials such as books can be pornographic.

But not simply because they have explicit sexual content. See: Tropic of Cancer. Lady Chatterley's Lover.

I really don't understand this GOP obsession with sex. Personally I find graphic violence to be much more obscene and disturbing than sexual content.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If we can't even agree on what counts as pornographic, I don't know if we can really have a productive conversation. I don't think there is any excuse for having explicit sexual content in schools, whether it's visual or written. There's nothing that can change my mind on that. And it's honestly disturbing that so many people don't see a problem with explicit sexual content being available to minors.

Honestly it's disturbing what YOU consider explicit sexual content and that you never differentiate between a 17 year old and a 7 year old in your definition of minor.

Most 17 year olds have seen unclothed bodies. Most have probably also have seen simulated acts in movies.

For sure they've seen graphic violence in movies, which in my humble opinion is 1000x more disturbing than a simulated sex scene or a written description of the same.

Why aren't you people up in arms about the violence your kids are exposed to? Why aren't you people trying to ban graphically violent books? What is your obsession with keeping teenagers from knowing anything about sex?