Just got disturbing email regarding English class for my rising freshman

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just want to be clear, here are things people on this thread are OK with their kids reading about:

Juliet’s nurse sharing that her daughter died so that she could provide breast milk for a rich child.

Teenage boys killing each other.

13 year old girls having sex with boys they met in the last 48 hours

Catholic priests helping impulsive teens commit statutory rape

Suicide

Ostracizing a kid because they wear glasses and are clumsy

Mob violence leading to the death of children

Childhood sex abuse

KKK lynch mobs

Here are things that 14 year olds, particularly boys must be shielded from:

Girls talking about how it feels to be catcalled or groped

Girls fighting back against people who catcall or grope them

Getting a period and using a tampon

A 16 year old girl deciding not to have sex

A 16 year old boy respecting the girl’s boundary and not pushing her to have sex

Masturbation

Catholic priests explaining their faith

Catholic priests helping change abusive family dynamics

Girls reading poetry

One argument is that boys can’t relate to the latter, which makes you wonder, are they able to relate to the former? Are rape, murder, lynch mobs, child sex abuse etc . . . What rhet want their kid relating to?

I should note that I am fine with my kids reading all of these things as long as there is a balance. My sons can read something and understand that it is wrong, or learn to relate to someone different than them through reading.

Well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry OP, you are not going to get much sympathy here.

This is just another drop in mainstream culture becoming more openly sexual. Generally speaking the only groups of people who tend to oppose this trend are religious groups. Therefore, you will see a lot of pushback like the comments you see here.

Right wing religious groups. I don't hear the episcopalians or the methodists complaining. As every one has pointed out, the issue seems to be the newness of the books or the fact there are minorities. None of you express concern with the 'classics', which address similar themes. Of course, I probably give you too much credit. You don't oppose the classics because you never read them or you were too dense to understand what they were actually talking about.

Most of the book selections have nothing to do with literature or critical thinking. They are selected to prove how progressive a teacher or school is vs any really teaching objective.

I know well meaning white liberals want to appear to be so progressive, open minded, cool and these are the same parents who would not let there 10 yr old watch PG13 movies, would freak out if they found out their kid was viewing videos of sexual acts and masturbation and would take the kids phone, and don’t want their kids to date until senior year. And yet somehow they are a ok with reading sexually explicit passages and having them discuss them in class and no doubt telling their squeamish kid who doesn’t want to engage in that convo bc they are uncomfortable that they are being silly and they are lucky they are getting the chance to read these books and discuss

[Anonymous]

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.

I’m glad you’re not awkward! My friends, my kids, and I are all awkward, and it was great to read about someone else who was awkward. I also found reading about people who seemed not to be awkward but were secretly very insecure and anxious gave me a lot of empathy for them. So glad I got to read books about lots of different people in lots of different situations! I’m truly sorry that didn’t resonate with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry OP, you are not going to get much sympathy here.

This is just another drop in mainstream culture becoming more openly sexual. Generally speaking the only groups of people who tend to oppose this trend are religious groups. Therefore, you will see a lot of pushback like the comments you see here.

Right wing religious groups. I don't hear the episcopalians or the methodists complaining. As every one has pointed out, the issue seems to be the newness of the books or the fact there are minorities. None of you express concern with the 'classics', which address similar themes. Of course, I probably give you too much credit. You don't oppose the classics because you never read them or you were too dense to understand what they were actually talking about.

Most of the book selections have nothing to do with literature or critical thinking. They are selected to prove how progressive a teacher or school is vs any really teaching objective.

I know well meaning white liberals want to appear to be so progressive, open minded, cool and these are the same parents who would not let there 10 yr old watch PG13 movies, would freak out if they found out their kid was viewing videos of sexual acts and masturbation and would take the kids phone, and don’t want their kids to date until senior year. And yet somehow they are a ok with reading sexually explicit passages and having them discuss them in class and no doubt telling their squeamish kid who doesn’t want to engage in that convo bc they are uncomfortable that they are being silly and they are lucky they are getting the chance to read these books and discuss

You can't possibly be arguing that a teenager reading a poem about two teenagers making out, deciding not to move on to sex, and stopping is the same as a 10 year old watching videos of people having sex.

If you actually don't get the difference between those two things, you probably shouldn't be raising children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry OP, you are not going to get much sympathy here.

This is just another drop in mainstream culture becoming more openly sexual. Generally speaking the only groups of people who tend to oppose this trend are religious groups. Therefore, you will see a lot of pushback like the comments you see here.

Right wing religious groups. I don't hear the episcopalians or the methodists complaining. As every one has pointed out, the issue seems to be the newness of the books or the fact there are minorities. None of you express concern with the 'classics', which address similar themes. Of course, I probably give you too much credit. You don't oppose the classics because you never read them or you were too dense to understand what they were actually talking about.

Most of the book selections have nothing to do with literature or critical thinking. They are selected to prove how progressive a teacher or school is vs any really teaching objective.

I know well meaning white liberals want to appear to be so progressive, open minded, cool and these are the same parents who would not let there 10 yr old watch PG13 movies, would freak out if they found out their kid was viewing videos of sexual acts and masturbation and would take the kids phone, and don’t want their kids to date until senior year. And yet somehow they are a ok with reading sexually explicit passages and having them discuss them in class and no doubt telling their squeamish kid who doesn’t want to engage in that convo bc they are uncomfortable that they are being silly and they are lucky they are getting the chance to read these books and discuss

This exactly. That is my main issue.

[Anonymous]

This isn’t about Romeo and Juliet. I’d LOVE it if FCPS taught Romeo and Juliet. This is about some crap book our kids have to read. So glad my last kid is a senior so we can be done with FCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t about Romeo and Juliet. I’d LOVE it if FCPS taught Romeo and Juliet. This is about some crap book our kids have to read. So glad my last kid is a senior so we can be done with FCPS.

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just want to be clear, here are things people on this thread are OK with their kids reading about:

Juliet’s nurse sharing that her daughter died so that she could provide breast milk for a rich child.

Teenage boys killing each other.

13 year old girls having sex with boys they met in the last 48 hours

Catholic priests helping impulsive teens commit statutory rape

Suicide

Ostracizing a kid because they wear glasses and are clumsy

Mob violence leading to the death of children

Childhood sex abuse

KKK lynch mobs

Here are things that 14 year olds, particularly boys must be shielded from:

Girls talking about how it feels to be catcalled or groped

Girls fighting back against people who catcall or grope them

Getting a period and using a tampon

A 16 year old girl deciding not to have sex

A 16 year old boy respecting the girl’s boundary and not pushing her to have sex

Masturbation

Catholic priests explaining their faith

Catholic priests helping change abusive family dynamics

Girls reading poetry

One argument is that boys can’t relate to the latter, which makes you wonder, are they able to relate to the former? Are rape, murder, lynch mobs, child sex abuse etc . . . What rhet want their kid relating to?

I should note that I am fine with my kids reading all of these things as long as there is a balance. My sons can read something and understand that it is wrong, or learn to relate to someone different than them through reading.

Well said.

Except she completely ignored societal differences between 2024 and centuries ago, when Romeo and Juliet was written and set in.

Looking at historical events and literature through today's modern standards is intellectually dishonest, immature and lazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry OP, you are not going to get much sympathy here.

This is just another drop in mainstream culture becoming more openly sexual. Generally speaking the only groups of people who tend to oppose this trend are religious groups. Therefore, you will see a lot of pushback like the comments you see here.

Right wing religious groups. I don't hear the episcopalians or the methodists complaining. As every one has pointed out, the issue seems to be the newness of the books or the fact there are minorities. None of you express concern with the 'classics', which address similar themes. Of course, I probably give you too much credit. You don't oppose the classics because you never read them or you were too dense to understand what they were actually talking about.

Episcopalians and methodists are not having the most sacred parts of their religious beliefs denigrated and distained in a classroom required reading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You do you. My kid isn’t reading it. Luckily they have alternatives.

As long as you are consistent with pulling them out when it is time to read Shakespeare and tons of other books.

Shakespeare has tremendous literary and historical value.

This book is the Teen Vogue version of school work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You do you. My kid isn’t reading it. Luckily they have alternatives.

As long as you are consistent with pulling them out when it is time to read Shakespeare and tons of other books.

Shakespeare has tremendous literary and historical value.

This book is the Teen Vogue version of school work.

Have you read The Poet X?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You do you. My kid isn’t reading it. Luckily they have alternatives.

As long as you are consistent with pulling them out when it is time to read Shakespeare and tons of other books.

Shakespeare has tremendous literary and historical value.

This book is the Teen Vogue version of school work.

LOL! You win the Internet.

[Anonymous]

I'd say this was all much ado about nothing, except that would be giving far too much literary credit to the detractors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry OP, you are not going to get much sympathy here.

This is just another drop in mainstream culture becoming more openly sexual. Generally speaking the only groups of people who tend to oppose this trend are religious groups. Therefore, you will see a lot of pushback like the comments you see here.

Right wing religious groups. I don't hear the episcopalians or the methodists complaining. As every one has pointed out, the issue seems to be the newness of the books or the fact there are minorities. None of you express concern with the 'classics', which address similar themes. Of course, I probably give you too much credit. You don't oppose the classics because you never read them or you were too dense to understand what they were actually talking about.

Episcopalians and methodists are not having the most sacred parts of their religious beliefs denigrated and distained in a classroom required reading.

Neither are Catholics.

— Catholic teacher who has read the book.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You do you. My kid isn’t reading it. Luckily they have alternatives.

As long as you are consistent with pulling them out when it is time to read Shakespeare and tons of other books.

Shakespeare has tremendous literary and historical value.

This book is the Teen Vogue version of school work.

So you'd be OK with Sabbath's Theater? It has 'tremendous literary' value.