Seriously with the book banning ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:pornography:

: the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement
2
: material (such as books or a photograph) that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement
3
: the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction


None of these books are meant to arouse. They are meant to inform. Sounds like you need to be "informed"

The strap-on dildo scene is meant to inform? Lol. Come on man.

I posted at the bottom of the page just before this. Yes, book banner, it is meant to inform. It is meant to inform teens and young adults about how to have conversations about sex experiences. “That didn’t work for me” “It didn’t work for me either.” It’s been about a year since I read Genderqueer (though I have read it and you have OBVIOUSLY have not) and I believe both of the depicted people say it didn’t feel sexy or right and they were going to approach it differently. It’s not meant to titillate. It’s not meant to arouse. It’s depicting how two people with those sexualities and bodies might approach sexual behavior and how they, like everyone who starts out, have to figure out where their boundaries are, what feels sexy, etc.

Further, you won’t find that book in elementary schools. Middle, maybe. High school, maybe. Will you even find a lot of kids checking it out? Probably not. Is the conversation those two characters have a good one to see? Yes, yes it is. Now go read it or stop posting dullard comments until you do.

Then let’s talk about the 1000+ books about women’s history and Black history that have been banned.

No books have been banned and more than Maxim or Penthouse have been banned. The collections have simply been curated. But you know this. You simply want gay porn read and CRT taught in schools.

When people talk about how stupid Republicans are, your post is a good example of why that kind of thing is said. - the pp you quoted.

I'm a Democrat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:pornography:

: the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement
2
: material (such as books or a photograph) that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement
3
: the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction


None of these books are meant to arouse. They are meant to inform. Sounds like you need to be "informed"

The strap-on dildo scene is meant to inform? Lol. Come on man.

I posted at the bottom of the page just before this. Yes, book banner, it is meant to inform. It is meant to inform teens and young adults about how to have conversations about sex experiences. “That didn’t work for me” “It didn’t work for me either.” It’s been about a year since I read Genderqueer (though I have read it and you have OBVIOUSLY have not) and I believe both of the depicted people say it didn’t feel sexy or right and they were going to approach it differently. It’s not meant to titillate. It’s not meant to arouse. It’s depicting how two people with those sexualities and bodies might approach sexual behavior and how they, like everyone who starts out, have to figure out where their boundaries are, what feels sexy, etc.

Further, you won’t find that book in elementary schools. Middle, maybe. High school, maybe. Will you even find a lot of kids checking it out? Probably not. Is the conversation those two characters have a good one to see? Yes, yes it is. Now go read it or stop posting dullard comments until you do.

Then let’s talk about the 1000+ books about women’s history and Black history that have been banned.

You make some good points. The counterpoint is that porn doesn't belong in schools.

We all agree. Which is why there isn't porn in schools.

Show the strap-on dildo pages to 100 people and 95 of them will tell you it's porn. The other 5 are leftists.

Can I show them the images from the sex ed books as well? Are those porn?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:pornography:

: the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement
2
: material (such as books or a photograph) that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement
3
: the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction


None of these books are meant to arouse. They are meant to inform. Sounds like you need to be "informed"

The strap-on dildo scene is meant to inform? Lol. Come on man.

I posted at the bottom of the page just before this. Yes, book banner, it is meant to inform. It is meant to inform teens and young adults about how to have conversations about sex experiences. “That didn’t work for me” “It didn’t work for me either.” It’s been about a year since I read Genderqueer (though I have read it and you have OBVIOUSLY have not) and I believe both of the depicted people say it didn’t feel sexy or right and they were going to approach it differently. It’s not meant to titillate. It’s not meant to arouse. It’s depicting how two people with those sexualities and bodies might approach sexual behavior and how they, like everyone who starts out, have to figure out where their boundaries are, what feels sexy, etc.

Further, you won’t find that book in elementary schools. Middle, maybe. High school, maybe. Will you even find a lot of kids checking it out? Probably not. Is the conversation those two characters have a good one to see? Yes, yes it is. Now go read it or stop posting dullard comments until you do.

Then let’s talk about the 1000+ books about women’s history and Black history that have been banned.

You make some good points. The counterpoint is that porn doesn't belong in schools.

We all agree. Which is why there isn't porn in schools.

Show the strap-on dildo pages to 100 people and 95 of them will tell you it's porn. The other 5 are leftists.

Can I show them the images from the sex ed books as well? Are those porn?

As you said, those are sex ed. So sure. But if you show them porn like what's in Genderqueer, they'll rightly say it's porn.

[Anonymous]

I think I just became in favor of book banning

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think I just became in favor of book banning

This is pretty typical for leftists because they believe in critical theory. In their warped minds, Hamas is oppressed and, therefore, anything that might otherwise be an atrocity, is justice. It's insane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:pornography:

: the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement
2
: material (such as books or a photograph) that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement
3
: the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction


None of these books are meant to arouse. They are meant to inform. Sounds like you need to be "informed"

The strap-on dildo scene is meant to inform? Lol. Come on man.

I posted at the bottom of the page just before this. Yes, book banner, it is meant to inform. It is meant to inform teens and young adults about how to have conversations about sex experiences. “That didn’t work for me” “It didn’t work for me either.” It’s been about a year since I read Genderqueer (though I have read it and you have OBVIOUSLY have not) and I believe both of the depicted people say it didn’t feel sexy or right and they were going to approach it differently. It’s not meant to titillate. It’s not meant to arouse. It’s depicting how two people with those sexualities and bodies might approach sexual behavior and how they, like everyone who starts out, have to figure out where their boundaries are, what feels sexy, etc.

Further, you won’t find that book in elementary schools. Middle, maybe. High school, maybe. Will you even find a lot of kids checking it out? Probably not. Is the conversation those two characters have a good one to see? Yes, yes it is. Now go read it or stop posting dullard comments until you do.

Then let’s talk about the 1000+ books about women’s history and Black history that have been banned.

No books have been banned and more than Maxim or Penthouse have been banned. The collections have simply been curated. But you know this. You simply want gay porn read and CRT taught in schools.

When people talk about how stupid Republicans are, your post is a good example of why that kind of thing is said. - the pp you quoted.

I'm a Democrat.

Totally believable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think I just became in favor of book banning

I must be missing something. What does this have to do with removing books from libraries?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think I just became in favor of book banning

Wow, that’s a terribly bad faith presentation. https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/possible-teach-in-at-oakland-schools-would-present-palestinian-perspective-to-students/

Here’s the lesson plan linked via the above article. It appears to teach what Senator Wiener claims about as much as the Florida book bans are about porn. https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1yHuTs87SSfWaM6qeM6y3RXgEOzjiKF_c75fLMN-2fZk/mobilebasic#h.pg1gql1c1zfc

I’m so sick of people misrepresenting arguments and pretending to take the high road.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think I just became in favor of book banning

I must be missing something. What does this have to do with removing books from libraries?

Nothing whatsoever. Some people just can’t talk about anything besides Israel/Palestine (and they have to lie about it, too, apparently).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think I just became in favor of book banning

Wow, that’s a terribly bad faith presentation. https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/possible-teach-in-at-oakland-schools-would-present-palestinian-perspective-to-students/

Here’s the lesson plan linked via the above article. It appears to teach what Senator Wiener claims about as much as the Florida book bans are about porn. https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1yHuTs87SSfWaM6qeM6y3RXgEOzjiKF_c75fLMN-2fZk/mobilebasic#h.pg1gql1c1zfc

I’m so sick of people misrepresenting arguments and pretending to take the high road.

The book literally says "I is for Intifada" - sorry, you think it's oversensitive thinking that might not be appropriate in schools right now? You think maybe Jewish students and parents might wish a different book were chosen to teach the alphabet?

This thread is a debate between people who trust teachers and librarians and those who are so concerned about various works that they want to take away those people's power to bring reading and lessons to kids. I'm as far from a Moms for Liberty person as you can be - and yet when a topic comes up that touches off my triggers, I start understanding why people get upset about the books that hit them where it hurts. Then I start thinking maybe the public SHOULD have more influence over what books are being taught to kids. I don't think I is for Intifada is appropriate for kids, for example.

[Anonymous]

I guess Republicans who are super kinky in real life think everyone is like this and must ban all the books. See Florida GOP leader with three kids and a three way relationship. You know their kids have been exposed to way more than ready
Ing a library book would teach them!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think I just became in favor of book banning

Wow, that’s a terribly bad faith presentation. https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/possible-teach-in-at-oakland-schools-would-present-palestinian-perspective-to-students/

Here’s the lesson plan linked via the above article. It appears to teach what Senator Wiener claims about as much as the Florida book bans are about porn. https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1yHuTs87SSfWaM6qeM6y3RXgEOzjiKF_c75fLMN-2fZk/mobilebasic#h.pg1gql1c1zfc

I’m so sick of people misrepresenting arguments and pretending to take the high road.

You mean the way leftists misrepresent the curation of school library collections as "book bans?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think I just became in favor of book banning

Wow, that’s a terribly bad faith presentation. https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/possible-teach-in-at-oakland-schools-would-present-palestinian-perspective-to-students/

Here’s the lesson plan linked via the above article. It appears to teach what Senator Wiener claims about as much as the Florida book bans are about porn. https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1yHuTs87SSfWaM6qeM6y3RXgEOzjiKF_c75fLMN-2fZk/mobilebasic#h.pg1gql1c1zfc

I’m so sick of people misrepresenting arguments and pretending to take the high road.

You mean the way leftists misrepresent the curation of school library collections as "book bans?"

Curation should be done librarians for the benefit of the schoolchildren - not Fox News addled nincompoops who've never read a book on their own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think I just became in favor of book banning

Wow, that’s a terribly bad faith presentation. https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/possible-teach-in-at-oakland-schools-would-present-palestinian-perspective-to-students/

Here’s the lesson plan linked via the above article. It appears to teach what Senator Wiener claims about as much as the Florida book bans are about porn. https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1yHuTs87SSfWaM6qeM6y3RXgEOzjiKF_c75fLMN-2fZk/mobilebasic#h.pg1gql1c1zfc

I’m so sick of people misrepresenting arguments and pretending to take the high road.

You mean the way leftists misrepresent the curation of school library collections as "book bans?"

Curation should be done librarians for the benefit of the schoolchildren - not Fox News addled nincompoops who've never read a book on their own.

Can you vote a single example of a parent walking into a school and unilaterally taking books out of a library? If not, your simply spouting nonsense. And I don't know about anyone else here, but I'm a Democrat. As such, I don't watch much Fox News.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think I just became in favor of book banning

Wow, that’s a terribly bad faith presentation. https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/possible-teach-in-at-oakland-schools-would-present-palestinian-perspective-to-students/

Here’s the lesson plan linked via the above article. It appears to teach what Senator Wiener claims about as much as the Florida book bans are about porn. https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1yHuTs87SSfWaM6qeM6y3RXgEOzjiKF_c75fLMN-2fZk/mobilebasic#h.pg1gql1c1zfc

I’m so sick of people misrepresenting arguments and pretending to take the high road.

You mean the way leftists misrepresent the curation of school library collections as "book bans?"

Curation should be done librarians for the benefit of the schoolchildren - not Fox News addled nincompoops who've never read a book on their own.

Can you vote a single example of a parent walking into a school and unilaterally taking books out of a library? If not, your simply spouting nonsense. And I don't know about anyone else here, but I'm a Democrat. As such, I don't watch much Fox News.

cite