Just got disturbing email regarding English class for my rising freshman

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is insane to me that you all believe you can/should censor the content your high schoolers are exposed to. Get a life.

No one is censoring

Switching the book to the optional reading list instead of the required reading with teacher led discussions is not censoring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is insane to me that you all believe you can/should censor the content your high schoolers are exposed to. Get a life.

Exposed to?
Or required to see and discuss at the direction of an adult?

+1
It’s insane to me that the PP above you would think this is normal.

These are not the things that are focused on during the classroom discussion. Ask any of your children. If it was even discussed, it was for a moment.

This. It is, as usual, much ado about nothing from people with no actual knowledge but *so much* fear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I remember my friend and I sneaking into the library’s Young Adult fiction to read Judy Blume’s “Forever” when I was in the sixth grade. This was after I had asked the children’s librarian why it wasn’t there and she said it was for older girls and not me. Made me go read it faster.

By freshman year, we had read many more books in that section.

Did not make me go out and have sex early. In fact, I was a late bloomer on that front.

My friends and I passed a paperback copy of this around in 6th grade! I remember sitting on the grass behind the school during recess, every one of us confused about what "came" meant, lol. We had no clue.

I read it in the library so I didn't have to check it out. I still remember what the male protagonist did with the aftershave. Ewww!
It was a pretty awkward and vulgar book in a lot of ways. I never warmed to any Judy Blume kid books. They all seemed to be about awkward people - that didn't make me feel informed or better prepared.

Here is why this is a different argument from book banning:
No one is asking the REMOVE The Poet X (or Forever) from the library.
They are saying “why ASSIGN a book that requires notification of explicit content as THE book that is being used by the entire class in a teacher-led unit as part of the curriculum?”
No one is trying to prevent YOUR kid (or mine if they are curious) from reading it and giggling in a corner and passing it around so that their friends can read the titillating graphic scenes and gawk as PP described.
What is being objected to is grownups pushing the book onto kids as part of the instructional classroom curriculum.
It’s not unreasonable to suggest there are a lot of books out there (without explicit sexual content and profanity on nearly every page and offensive slander of a major religion) that can accomplish the academic objectives of the poetry unit for a freshman English class.
And yes, it’s won many awards.
So assign it to seniors, who are mature enough to handle it. Teach it in an intro to English that every college freshman takes-fine.
But high school freshman are 14-15. I question the eagerness to choose this book. The kids are uncomfortable and if there are teachers who are enthusiastically sharing this content, that tells me to be cautious. Maybe as cautious as parents should be/have been around the Langley coach.

Virginia is conservatives are a few years behind conservatives elsewhere. The first step is parental opt out. The next step is allowing parents to challenge books at the school board level. After that come the statewide bans

Parents can already challenge books in FCPS.

Educate yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is insane to me that you all believe you can/should censor the content your high schoolers are exposed to. Get a life.

Exposed to?
Or required to see and discuss at the direction of an adult?

Do you not think having a discussion on content is better than just stumbling upon it on their own?

Have your 14 year old dsughter have that discussion in class with the Langley football coach.

Better yet, give her a writing assignment on the book for the middle aged male English teacher to take home, copy and perv on.

It is astonishing that people think this is an acceptable choice for a required class reading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is insane to me that you all believe you can/should censor the content your high schoolers are exposed to. Get a life.

Exposed to?
Or required to see and discuss at the direction of an adult?

Do you not think having a discussion on content is better than just stumbling upon it on their own?

Have your 14 year old dsughter have that discussion in class with the Langley football coach.

Better yet, give her a writing assignment on the book for the middle aged male English teacher to take home, copy and perv on.

It is astonishing that people think this is an acceptable choice for a required class reading.

So you're assuming teachers are perverts and you'd rather your kid learn stuff from that famously safe space, the internet. Okay. Good plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah this is the equivalent of prop 65 warnings for hazardous substances that appear on everything in California. Thanks Youngkin!

Worst moronic governor in Virginia’s history

Yeah because giving a heads up to parents about what their kids might be assigned to read is sooo dumb. But then people like you complain when parents are disconnected. Which is it?

It is dumb. Schools are in charge of educating our children, not parents. Parents should stay in their lane and leave education to the professionals. If left to their own devices, parents would indoctrinate their children in weird fantasies and superstitions like some zombie from 2,000 years ago died for their sins and is their savior.

Wrong on so many levels.

You should not be allowed anywhere near a school based on your lack of basic understanding of rights in the US.

The first amendment of the Constitution of the United States guarantees
First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The Constitution of Virginia goes further in protecting religious rights:

"Article I. Bill of Rights
Section 16. Free exercise of religion; no establishment of religion
That religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and, therefore, all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity towards each other. No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but all men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain their opinions in matters of religion, and the same shall in nowise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities. And the General Assembly shall not prescribe any religious test whatever, or confer any peculiar privileges or advantages on any sect or denomination, or pass any law requiring or authorizing any religious society, or the people of any district within this Commonwealth, to levy on themselves or others, any tax for the erection or repair of any house of public worship, or for the support of any church or ministry; but it shall be left free to every person to select his religious instructor, and to make for his support such private contract as he shall please."


The Virginia code 1-240.1 protects parents rights to direct their kids' education by clearly and simply stating: A parent has a fundamental right to make decisions concerning the upbringing, education, and care of the parent's child.

If you don't understand basic human rights on religion and parenting enshrined in the US Constitution, the Virginia Constitution and the Virginia Code, then you should not be part of any curriculum decisions or education policy.

[Anonymous]

Teacher is female, if that makes a difference.

[Anonymous]

OP: We share in your shock & disgust. Have you considered sending your child to a private, parochial, or other type of non-whacked out school ?

Please do not permit these child abusers to expose, desensitize, and indoctrinate your child into this type of vile brainwashing. Absolutely disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP: We share in your shock & disgust. Have you considered sending your child to a private, parochial, or other type of non-whacked out school ?

Please do not permit these child abusers to expose, desensitize, and indoctrinate your child into this type of vile brainwashing. Absolutely disgusting.

Because religious schools and institutions have a *great* record of not sexually abusing kids 🤦.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah this is the equivalent of prop 65 warnings for hazardous substances that appear on everything in California. Thanks Youngkin!

Worst moronic governor in Virginia’s history

Yeah because giving a heads up to parents about what their kids might be assigned to read is sooo dumb. But then people like you complain when parents are disconnected. Which is it?

It is dumb. Schools are in charge of educating our children, not parents. Parents should stay in their lane and leave education to the professionals. If left to their own devices, parents would indoctrinate their children in weird fantasies and superstitions like some zombie from 2,000 years ago died for their sins and is their savior.

Wrong on so many levels.

You should not be allowed anywhere near a school based on your lack of basic understanding of rights in the US.

The first amendment of the Constitution of the United States guarantees
First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The Constitution of Virginia goes further in protecting religious rights:

"Article I. Bill of Rights
Section 16. Free exercise of religion; no establishment of religion
That religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and, therefore, all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity towards each other. No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but all men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain their opinions in matters of religion, and the same shall in nowise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities. And the General Assembly shall not prescribe any religious test whatever, or confer any peculiar privileges or advantages on any sect or denomination, or pass any law requiring or authorizing any religious society, or the people of any district within this Commonwealth, to levy on themselves or others, any tax for the erection or repair of any house of public worship, or for the support of any church or ministry; but it shall be left free to every person to select his religious instructor, and to make for his support such private contract as he shall please."


The Virginia code 1-240.1 protects parents rights to direct their kids' education by clearly and simply stating: A parent has a fundamental right to make decisions concerning the upbringing, education, and care of the parent's child.

If you don't understand basic human rights on religion and parenting enshrined in the US Constitution, the Virginia Constitution and the Virginia Code, then you should not be part of any curriculum decisions or education policy.

I’m guessing you’re fun at parties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I remember my friend and I sneaking into the library’s Young Adult fiction to read Judy Blume’s “Forever” when I was in the sixth grade. This was after I had asked the children’s librarian why it wasn’t there and she said it was for older girls and not me. Made me go read it faster.

By freshman year, we had read many more books in that section.

Did not make me go out and have sex early. In fact, I was a late bloomer on that front.

My friends and I passed a paperback copy of this around in 6th grade! I remember sitting on the grass behind the school during recess, every one of us confused about what "came" meant, lol. We had no clue.

I read it in the library so I didn't have to check it out. I still remember what the male protagonist did with the aftershave. Ewww!
It was a pretty awkward and vulgar book in a lot of ways. I never warmed to any Judy Blume kid books. They all seemed to be about awkward people - that didn't make me feel informed or better prepared.

It’s not unreasonable to suggest there are a lot of books out there (without explicit sexual content and profanity on nearly every page and offensive slander of a major religion)

What book are you objecting to? Not The Poet X which has very little profanity, a few pages out of 361 in which kissing is described and one on which teenagers decide not to have sex, and a Catholic priest who is gentle, understanding, helps a family in need, and corrects misunderstandings about Catholic teaching.

My guess is that teachers using this book are going to choose from the hundreds of poems that don’t touch on sex for analysis, and any reading aloud.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Poet X by Elizabeth Acevedo.

Excellent book! My kid read it in 9th grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Poet X by Elizabeth Acevedo.

That’s a hard no.

Why?

Because my kids are too young to be required to read pornography?

You should read a dictionary. This book is not “pornography”.

I’m sorry—how is it not exactly??? I’ve read it. Have you?

I read it and you're either a liar or do not know what pornography is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Poet X by Elizabeth Acevedo.

That’s a hard no.

So you've read it?

The Poet X should not be a class required book due to the desecration of the most sacred part of Catholicism, the Eucharist.

FCPS would not allow a book anywhere near a classroom that denigrated Mohammed in the same way that this book desecrates the Eucharist.

Leave it as a classroom book for kids to choose on their own, but remove it from the class reading lists.

My kids class read it in 10th grade. Thankfully no right-wing nuts stopped it from happening.

[Anonymous]

Leave out all the bs, we have to get kids ready for the real world not this fantasy reading bs. Literature can be done at home if parents choose to do so. We needs people to read and write technical and business documents not fantasy novels and made up writings.