Youngkin is a book banner

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fully support kids watching porn or whatever they want to do on their own time. I do not restrict my kids' technology use. I also keep an open dialog with them about dating and sex (if they want to talk about it - not compelled). I see no reason why books about graphic sexual maneuvers need to be in school libraries.

They … aren’t.

And most of this is aimed at things like “Heather has two mommies.”

false. The book genderqueer at the forefront of this literally has an image of a naked adult male with an erection touching a boy’s penis. Why do you want this anywhere let alone in school?

Huh? That isn't in Gender Queer...

Your news source is crap.

DP. I guess you really think people are stupid and won’t fact check you. Idiot.

https://theiowastandard.com/shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-is-stocked-in-school-libraries-across-iowa/?amp

Are you talking about the Plato reference? Now you hate Plato?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Graph depictions of how to how have anal sex is not ok for school children at school. Sorry, OP.

If you choose to instruct your children about that, it can certainly be done in your home. No one cares.

I dispute your premise. This doesn’t exist in school materials and you know it.

DP. So you clearly haven't bothered to watch the video that was put out with actual pictures from these books, found in school libraries.

EXACTLY. There’s NOTHING ok about graphic depictions of sex.

Some people here apparently have an inappropriate agenda.

+100
The gaslighting here is so typical. Apparently, if we don't want our kids exposed to inappropriate sexual material, there is something wrong with US. But nothing wrong with those who insist their kids SHOULD be exposed to it. What a joke. No wonder no one takes LW extremists seriously.

Makes me wonder if they were molested as children, or exposed to inappropriate sexual things as children and that's why they lack normal sexual boundaries. I simply was never, ever exposed to any graphic sexual content from an adult or at school except once and it made me incredibly uncomfortable. And no, I was not a virgin. But it was skeevy and inappropriate at school. Just freaking gross!!!!

+1
Which is how normal people feel. People who are dead-set on exposing kids to this material are not normal.

Nobody is "exposing" this material to teens. The books are sitting in a HS library and a teen has to proactively go check them out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Graph depictions of how to how have anal sex is not ok for school children at school. Sorry, OP.

If you choose to instruct your children about that, it can certainly be done in your home. No one cares.

I dispute your premise. This doesn’t exist in school materials and you know it.

DP. So you clearly haven't bothered to watch the video that was put out with actual pictures from these books, found in school libraries.

EXACTLY. There’s NOTHING ok about graphic depictions of sex.

Some people here apparently have an inappropriate agenda.

+100
The gaslighting here is so typical. Apparently, if we don't want our kids exposed to inappropriate sexual material, there is something wrong with US. But nothing wrong with those who insist their kids SHOULD be exposed to it. What a joke. No wonder no one takes LW extremists seriously.

Makes me wonder if they were molested as children, or exposed to inappropriate sexual things as children and that's why they lack normal sexual boundaries. I simply was never, ever exposed to any graphic sexual content from an adult or at school except once and it made me incredibly uncomfortable. And no, I was not a virgin. But it was skeevy and inappropriate at school. Just freaking gross!!!!

+1
Which is how normal people feel. People who are dead-set on exposing kids to this material are not normal.

Nobody is "exposing" this material to teens. The books are sitting in a HS library and a teen has to proactively go check them out.

The deliberately obtuse act is doing you no favors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fully support kids watching porn or whatever they want to do on their own time. I do not restrict my kids' technology use. I also keep an open dialog with them about dating and sex (if they want to talk about it - not compelled). I see no reason why books about graphic sexual maneuvers need to be in school libraries.

They … aren’t.

And most of this is aimed at things like “Heather has two mommies.”

false. The book genderqueer at the forefront of this literally has an image of a naked adult male with an erection touching a boy’s penis. Why do you want this anywhere let alone in school?

Huh? That isn't in Gender Queer...

Your news source is crap.

DP. I guess you really think people are stupid and won’t fact check you. Idiot.

https://theiowastandard.com/shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-is-stocked-in-school-libraries-across-iowa/?amp

Are you talking about the Plato reference? Now you hate Plato?

Tell us you haven't bothered to watch the video without actually telling us. Nice gaslighting.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that extreme examples are used now to gain support for the bill, but once passed, it allows banning books that aren’t extreme and just represent views Youngkin doesn’t like.

Exactly. That’s the problem with putting books like Gender Queer and This Book is Gay in school libraries. If parents can’t trust their schools to keep this material out of their schools, they will ask their lawmakers to do it. And that creates bad law. It shouldn’t be happening, but the people defending this material have created the opening.

Agreed. I support free speech but I don’t support the government providing sexually explicit material to children.

"I support free speech but" = "I don't support free speech"

I suggest you educate yourself. I support protected speech as currently defined by the Supreme Court which includes many exceptions including threats, defamation, selling state secrets, and obscenity.

So, obscenity. Are you saying that (for example) a Pulitzer-Prize-winning novel appeals to prurient interest and is patently offensive lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value, and therefore Governor Youngkin should be able to ban it? That's certainly an interesting point of view.

Of course not you halfwit. Youngkin nor any other politician should not be able to ban books. Youngkin is not banning the book, nor is he banning adults providing sexually explicit books to their children. He is banning the use of taxpayer dollars to provide sexually explicit content to children in public schools.

Why are you so invested in the state funds being used to provide sexual content to other people children?

"Providing sexual content to other people's children" is a super weird way to describe having books in school libraries.

If you dislike Gender Queer, here's what you can do: don't read it. Libraries are full of books you haven't read. This can be another one.

And no one is stopping you from reading genderqueer to your children.


I noticed that you failed to explain why you are fighting so hard to have schools provide sexual content to other people’s kids. Why is that?

Why would I read Gender Queer to my children? My children can read it for themselves, if they want to. Or not, if they don't. Why are you afraid of your children having access to the book Gender Queer in their school library?

This sentiment is very frightening and sad. These poor children.

This is about not exposing children to very graphic sex.

I will start asking parents before play dates if they give kids sexually graphic books or endorse them. I need to screen for creepers. I don't want my child near your house.

Any kid in HS with a phone will have access to much MUCH more sexual content than these books. The kids who would take the effort to physically go to the library and check these books out are the kids who need these books. Hearing another LGTBQ experience can be validating.

Why do kids need sex manuals?

Teens might have questions about logistics that are maybe not covered in FLE.

"Logistics?" Why do they need information about "logistics?"

Have you ever had trouble working through your own sexuality or gender?

Have you ever come out?

Have you ever had gay sex?

1) It's helpful to have those things normalized.
2) Some tips might actually be helpful.

Oh please.

These things can't be "normalized," because they are not. Exposing kids to this in school will only drag down more children. But some of you apparently don't care about that.

What do you mean by "drag down more children"? Make these teens gay?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Graph depictions of how to how have anal sex is not ok for school children at school. Sorry, OP.

If you choose to instruct your children about that, it can certainly be done in your home. No one cares.

Why not? In the Sex Ed. course both my teens took, how to properly have heterosexual intercourse was discussed (consent, emotions, precautions like condoms & other birth control, lubricants).

Why should cis-het teens be instructed properly and not LGBTQ teens?

We all know why....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fully support kids watching porn or whatever they want to do on their own time. I do not restrict my kids' technology use. I also keep an open dialog with them about dating and sex (if they want to talk about it - not compelled). I see no reason why books about graphic sexual maneuvers need to be in school libraries.

They … aren’t.

And most of this is aimed at things like “Heather has two mommies.”

false. The book genderqueer at the forefront of this literally has an image of a naked adult male with an erection touching a boy’s penis. Why do you want this anywhere let alone in school?

Huh? That isn't in Gender Queer...

Your news source is crap.

DP. I guess you really think people are stupid and won’t fact check you. Idiot.

https://theiowastandard.com/shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-is-stocked-in-school-libraries-across-iowa/?amp

Weird that "The Iowa Standard" website, pretending to be a news site, did not exist until March 31, 2019. Reeks of fake news. And for being a "news" site it is incredibly weak on details and specifics to actually back up its claims.

You’re just going to dig your heels in, aren’t you?

+1
In the face of proof that these pornographic images are indeed in Gender Queer (and other books), the poster is now moving the goalposts to demand a different source. Too bad the WaPo and NYT - two sources I'm sure the PP would approve of - don't have the guts to display these pictures.

You sound nuts.

Your kid have a phone? Then they have a world of porn at their fingertips.

That's the same argument as illegal guns are easy to obtain, therefore there shouldn't be gun laws.

Exactly. I guess we just tell our kids to "stay away" from guns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Graph depictions of how to how have anal sex is not ok for school children at school. Sorry, OP.

If you choose to instruct your children about that, it can certainly be done in your home. No one cares.

Why not? In the Sex Ed. course both my teens took, how to properly have heterosexual intercourse was discussed (consent, emotions, precautions like condoms & other birth control, lubricants).

Why should cis-het teens be instructed properly and not LGBTQ teens?

Because heterosexual intercourse is how the species procreates, thus making it a part of science and biology. That is the only role of "sex education" in schools.

That is not the only role of "sex education" in schools. It's not a science class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fully support kids watching porn or whatever they want to do on their own time. I do not restrict my kids' technology use. I also keep an open dialog with them about dating and sex (if they want to talk about it - not compelled). I see no reason why books about graphic sexual maneuvers need to be in school libraries.

They … aren’t.

And most of this is aimed at things like “Heather has two mommies.”

false. The book genderqueer at the forefront of this literally has an image of a naked adult male with an erection touching a boy’s penis. Why do you want this anywhere let alone in school?

Huh? That isn't in Gender Queer...

Your news source is crap.

DP. I guess you really think people are stupid and won’t fact check you. Idiot.

https://theiowastandard.com/shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-is-stocked-in-school-libraries-across-iowa/?amp

Are you talking about the Plato reference? Now you hate Plato?

Tell us you haven't bothered to watch the video without actually telling us. Nice gaslighting.

Here's some more "pornography" for you to ban:

https://collections.mfa.org/objects/153710
https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/253349
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/G_1843-1103-15
https://harvardartmuseums.org/collections/object/292377

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Graph depictions of how to how have anal sex is not ok for school children at school. Sorry, OP.

If you choose to instruct your children about that, it can certainly be done in your home. No one cares.

Why not? In the Sex Ed. course both my teens took, how to properly have heterosexual intercourse was discussed (consent, emotions, precautions like condoms & other birth control, lubricants).

Why should cis-het teens be instructed properly and not LGBTQ teens?

Because heterosexual intercourse is how the species procreates, thus making it a part of science and biology. That is the only role of "sex education" in schools.

That is not the only role of "sex education" in schools. It's not a science class.

DP. Yes, actually, that is the only role of sex ed. To describe the scientific biological changes in our bodies as we go through puberty, to describe the scientific reproductive systems of human beings, and to describe the scientific sexually transmitted diseases that one can contract without practicing safe sex or abstinence. That's it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fully support kids watching porn or whatever they want to do on their own time. I do not restrict my kids' technology use. I also keep an open dialog with them about dating and sex (if they want to talk about it - not compelled). I see no reason why books about graphic sexual maneuvers need to be in school libraries.

They … aren’t.

And most of this is aimed at things like “Heather has two mommies.”

false. The book genderqueer at the forefront of this literally has an image of a naked adult male with an erection touching a boy’s penis. Why do you want this anywhere let alone in school?

Huh? That isn't in Gender Queer...

Your news source is crap.

DP. I guess you really think people are stupid and won’t fact check you. Idiot.

https://theiowastandard.com/shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-is-stocked-in-school-libraries-across-iowa/?amp

Weird that "The Iowa Standard" website, pretending to be a news site, did not exist until March 31, 2019. Reeks of fake news. And for being a "news" site it is incredibly weak on details and specifics to actually back up its claims.

You’re just going to dig your heels in, aren’t you?

+1
In the face of proof that these pornographic images are indeed in Gender Queer (and other books), the poster is now moving the goalposts to demand a different source. Too bad the WaPo and NYT - two sources I'm sure the PP would approve of - don't have the guts to display these pictures.

You sound nuts.

Your kid have a phone? Then they have a world of porn at their fingertips.

Exactly.

Happy to give their kids a phone/porn 24x7, but not a book in a high school library for an unrepresented group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In any case, it's quite clear what the book-banners are objecting to, and it's not a couple of drawings on a book on a school library bookshelf. First comes targeting books by/for/about LGBTQ people; then comes targeting LGBTQ people.

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In any case, it's quite clear what the book-banners are objecting to, and it's not a couple of drawings on a book on a school library bookshelf. First comes targeting books by/for/about LGBTQ people; then comes targeting LGBTQ people.

Yes, sure. You are so right. Lobbying to get pornographic images out of our school libraries definitely = "targeting LGBTQ people."

Yes, you and the other book-banners are targeting LGBTQ people.

No. We're targeting LGBT books in schools. And we're not going to stop.

Which negatively affects LGBTQ kids. You are hurting kids with your bigotry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fully support kids watching porn or whatever they want to do on their own time. I do not restrict my kids' technology use. I also keep an open dialog with them about dating and sex (if they want to talk about it - not compelled). I see no reason why books about graphic sexual maneuvers need to be in school libraries.

They … aren’t.

And most of this is aimed at things like “Heather has two mommies.”

false. The book genderqueer at the forefront of this literally has an image of a naked adult male with an erection touching a boy’s penis. Why do you want this anywhere let alone in school?

Huh? That isn't in Gender Queer...

Your news source is crap.

DP. I guess you really think people are stupid and won’t fact check you. Idiot.

https://theiowastandard.com/shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-is-stocked-in-school-libraries-across-iowa/?amp

Are you talking about the Plato reference? Now you hate Plato?

Tell us you haven't bothered to watch the video without actually telling us. Nice gaslighting.

Here's some more "pornography" for you to ban:

https://collections.mfa.org/objects/153710
https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/253349
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/G_1843-1103-15
https://harvardartmuseums.org/collections/object/292377

Do any of those images depict strap-ons and blow jobs on minors? Are they available in public school libraries? You are a complete dunce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

DP. Yes, actually, that is the only role of sex ed. To describe the scientific biological changes in our bodies as we go through puberty, to describe the scientific reproductive systems of human beings, and to describe the scientific sexually transmitted diseases that one can contract without practicing safe sex or abstinence. That's it.