“Stuff Some Adults Don’t Want You to Read” at Langley

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also - have not read the book but found that cartoon page online. Seems like the theme is that the character did not actually enjoy this - and suggested not doing it. What a thing to teach children ... that they can say no! Wow, radical.

Yes, the book doesn’t actually promote sex at all.

Ooh, now tell us all about Lawn Boy. With quotes.
DP

Two kids exploring their bodies. Like playing doctor.

Not exactly. From "Lawn Boy":

"What if I told you I touched another guy's d**k? What if I told you I sucked it? I was 10 years old, but it's true. I sucked Doug Goble's d**k, the real estate guy, and he sucked mine, too."

"Gender Queer":

"I can't wait to have your c**k in my mouth. I am going to give you the blowjob of your life, and then I want you inside me."

And when the Fairfax mom read these excerpts at a SB meeting - she was told to stop because "There are children in the audience here"! Oh, the irony.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The woman who stirred this all up in the first place is one of the three named people suing over the ffx mask mandate. She is a Republican operative w ties to Cato, National Review, etc. She is a parent to a 1st and 4th grader, not a Langley parent, yet all the news sources are quoting her and she is getting air time. She is also one of the parents who show up in the Guy Fawkes mask at sb meetings. I’m all for free speech, but it really pisses me off that one voice is getting so much press and that the media keeps calling her “parent” in regards to the Langley story when she is not a Langley parent.

I believe her kids will be going to Langley - she was on the 8th grade tour there. She has every right to speak out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The woman who stirred this all up in the first place is one of the three named people suing over the ffx mask mandate. She is a Republican operative w ties to Cato, National Review, etc. She is a parent to a 1st and 4th grader, not a Langley parent, yet all the news sources are quoting her and she is getting air time. She is also one of the parents who show up in the Guy Fawkes mask at sb meetings. I’m all for free speech, but it really pisses me off that one voice is getting so much press and that the media keeps calling her “parent” in regards to the Langley story when she is not a Langley parent.

I believe her kids will be going to Langley - she was on the 8th grade tour there. She has every right to speak out.

No. She does not have a rising 9th grader. She may have a friend who has a rising 9th grader, but she does not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also - have not read the book but found that cartoon page online. Seems like the theme is that the character did not actually enjoy this - and suggested not doing it. What a thing to teach children ... that they can say no! Wow, radical.

Yes, the book doesn’t actually promote sex at all.

Ooh, now tell us all about Lawn Boy. With quotes.
DP

Two kids exploring their bodies. Like playing doctor.

Not exactly. From "Lawn Boy":

"What if I told you I touched another guy's d**k? What if I told you I sucked it? I was 10 years old, but it's true. I sucked Doug Goble's d**k, the real estate guy, and he sucked mine, too."

"Gender Queer":

"I can't wait to have your c**k in my mouth. I am going to give you the blowjob of your life, and then I want you inside me."

And when the Fairfax mom read these excerpts at a SB meeting - she was told to stop because "There are children in the audience here"! Oh, the irony.

Right. They were just kids exploring their bodies. Just like some kids “play doctor”.

GQ - it was a dildo. And in the end they decided they weren’t into it.

I’m ok with HS kids hearing it. Not a first grader.

[Anonymous]

It all makes you wonder how these perpetually angry Langley moms would cope if they ever had something real to worry about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The woman who stirred this all up in the first place is one of the three named people suing over the ffx mask mandate. She is a Republican operative w ties to Cato, National Review, etc. She is a parent to a 1st and 4th grader, not a Langley parent, yet all the news sources are quoting her and she is getting air time. She is also one of the parents who show up in the Guy Fawkes mask at sb meetings. I’m all for free speech, but it really pisses me off that one voice is getting so much press and that the media keeps calling her “parent” in regards to the Langley story when she is not a Langley parent.

Wow, she sounds like a total lunatic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It all makes you wonder how these perpetually angry Langley moms would cope if they ever had something real to worry about.

It's so interesting - and typical - that parents whose kids don't even go to Langley are always the ones doing 99% of the nasty commentary. So triggered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have found this whole thread an insightful discussion of the pros and cons of banning books in schools. Most posters have been civil and sincere (with some exceptions, of course, because this is DCUM after all). Wouldn't it be nice if our kids could have this very same discussion with their peers at school guided by an experienced adult like a librarian? Teaching critical thinking is one of the things our schools have traditionally done best. Let's not shut it down.

Not if the librarian is self-righteous enough to believe that they know better than the parents in terms of deciding what books the kids should read. Remember that parents have the ultimate sovereignty over the education of their kids. Having met certain very-basic requirements for child welfare, the parents are free to educate their kids how they see fit. Teachers and librarians must realize that this authority is the natural outcome of a free and liberal society.

Parental authority is the "natural outcome of a free and liberal society"? What does that even mean?

PS. You're going to be in for a lot of surprises when your offspring (assuming you even have any) begin to develop their own thoughts.

I can't believe I have to explain this. In a free and liberal society, assuming you know what that means, parents have sovereignty over their children. The parents generally get to decide how their children are raised and educated, and not third parties, including the government. This right arises out of the fact that children do not have the capacity for autonomy and the responsibility for the child falls to the parents. As a reminder, a liberal society is one where the individual has sovereignty and governments derive their power from individuals and not the other way around. Certain delegations of responsibilities from individuals to the government such as education is not absolute or even durable - it can be withdrawn at any moment.

Your PS line shows you still don't understand the issue at hand, which is not about the books, or about the natural friction that arises between children and parents, or even about the friction between parents and teachers/librarians. It's about how this teacher/librarian is seeking to undermine the relationship between children and parents with this inflammatory sign. This behavior is evil and should not be applauded.

Sorry, you are just plain wrong. When your kid goes to school, you lose control of controlling every message. Your job as a parent is to teach your kids your values and how to think clearly and critically, Your job is not to band them from information you find uncomfortable.

The librarian does not GAF about you and other parents. She is putting on a display of banned books that school boars, many of them not even parents, have banned. This has been done forever.

Then that librarian should not be working in a school or library. Those are not banned books. Not wanting kids to read certain books at a certain age is not the same as banning books, just like not giving kids beer is not the same as banning beer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only way the message undermines parents is if parents want to ban books. From almost adults in high school. As if they aren't going to find out about what they want to learn about on TikTok, or their friends showing them TikTok, or the big Google machine anyway. I am actually astounded that parents this controlling exist in an educated area.

Nope, this message could have been about anything. I am a parent who don't particularly care about these books in question. I would buy whatever book my kids want to read, incliding the ones on that table. It's not about the books, it's the divisive rhetoric.

[Anonymous]

Certain parents are in for a very rude awakening when they discover they can no longer completely control their children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Certain parents are in for a very rude awakening when they discover they can no longer completely control their children.

No worries - you're free to buy or check out all the graphic sex novels you'd like for your kids. Read them aloud, even. But don't delude yourself into thinking that you're somehow a better parent for doing so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rofl. Morons.

There's a fantastically funny video circulating with a guy interviewing people for their opinions on whether or not a book should be banned from school libraries. He lists all of the atrocities in the book... genocide, rape, profanity, murder, etc. and these people's faces get more and more horrified. He finally asks if they agree the book should be banned and all eagerly agree. Then his "gotcha" moment is when he says something like "excellent, so if you'll sign this petition, we'll get the Bible banned."

Do public school libraries have copies of the Bible in them? Genuinely curious about that.

Of course. All the different versions and translations, yes. And other religious texts from other religions too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t imagine parents complaining about that at almost any other public FCPS high school.

I think we just have a handful of troublemaker parents who love to get national attention on these things. It’s not the first time they’ve overreacted.

+1

Brava! THIS!

+1
For the PPs who are shocked that the principal didn't stand up for the librarian, she likely had no choice n the matter since the parent chose to disclose and discuss on SM.

[Anonymous]

Cheap trick on the part of the library!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is yet another way that schools are making it an us (parents) versus them (adults in schools) mentality. Perpetuating the notion our kids, while at school, are independent and unaccountable to their parents is troubling. Or, at the worst indefensible, when "teaching" that their parents are morally wrong or "bad" because parents beliefs are counter to what is being normalized at school. I do not want to dictate what schools teach my kids, I just want schools to reiterate to our children that parents have the biggest stake in their lives. And, no matter what, their parents and what their parents provide, encourage, and instill in kids are the biggest indicators of success - not replaceable by anything a school can, nor should, do for children. Parenting is hard enough these days without having to fight and counter what adults, who are not in any way (legally, financially, emotionally) responsible for our children, are "teaching."

https://fordhaminstitute.org/national/commentary/educations-enduring-love-affair-luxury-beliefs

This is high school. Yes, but then their minds are independent. They should be free to read what they want in a school library. Adding support for the librarian .