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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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 .

No, most kids in high school are minors and remain the responsibility of parents. The parents retain authority over the kids until they reach 18 or are emancipated. How the parents choose to set boundaries for their kids is beside the point. The point here is that parents have that power, and regardless of whether teachers or librarians agree or disagree with how certain parents choose to exercise their power, it's destructive to try and pit children against their parents.

Truly, you have a very misguided view about public education. You have a choice as to whether to send your kids to public school (as opposed to private or homeschool), but once you make that choice, most of your control over your child’s education ends. You do not get to dictate the math curriculum used. You do not get to dictate the subjects taught in science. You do not get to dictate what foreign languages will be available. You do not get to decide to at your child should be able to earn a standard diploma without taking any history at all. If you want that level of control, public school is not for you.

Maybe if you're totally unengaged in your child's education.

If you talk to your kids about what they're learning, review their work, send them to tutoring, teach them yourself you still have tons of control over their education. You can assign them books to read, and pick the math curriculum you teach.

Same if you have them take APs and CLEPs.

If you're passive in life you and your progeny are doomed to mediocrity. People in my community are heavily involved in their kids education, which is why they succeed in school.

There go the goalposts! 😆

This discussion is about what happens within public schools. What you do outside of school to review homework, get them extra tutoring and force them to read certain books in their free time is utterly irrelevant to your level of control over what happens inside the school.

And yes, you can have your kids take AP classes, but you do not get to dictate what is taught in those classes, or what books your AP student can access in the school library.

Nope, no shifting of goal posts, the assertion was "nce you make that choice, most of your control over your child’s education ends". That statement is false. Obviously you have less control of what is in the classroom, but you have control for the other 16 hours of the day.

It's not like I can't provide incentives or disincentives over behavior I don't like in my kids AP classroom or library. Be it with staff or my own child.

I'm guessing you're not a tiger mom!

This entire discussion is about something happened inside the school, not what you do the other 16 hours of the day. No one else cares about that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing in the first 26 pages of this discussion has given me reason to believe the outrage over this display is not, at its core, that certain parents do not want their kids to be exposed to ideas that might undermine messaging from their parents that being gay is wrong, blacks people are just a little bit lesser than white people, and the holocaust wasn’t really so bad. Maybe that will change in the next 26 pages, but I doubt it.

The fact that I don't want public school libraries actively promoting books that contain graphic sexual acts to freshmen doesn't make me a bigot. And FWIW I think anyone who wants to ban Maus is a loon.

And before someone starts in about the internet, my child doesn't have a smartphone and doesn't have unrestricted, unmonitored access to the internet at home. My parents let me have unrestricted internet access starting in middle school when my school gave me a laptop and I've learned from their mistake.

What do you think will happen to your child if they see a copy of Gender Queer sitting in a library display? What, specifically, is your fear?

That kids will be exposed to unhealthy ideas about sexuality and be more tempted to engage in sexual activity before they are ready.

Being something other than cis-het is “unhealthy”?

There are significant health disparities. Some of which may be due to coping mechanisms, others due to culture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That was the title of a sign in the Langley High library displaying some of the books that the Trumpkins don’t want kids reading like “Beloved” and “Maus.” Of course some Langley parents complained and the principal issued a groveling letter apologizing for “poor judgement” and removing the display.

Seriously, WTF? It was a clever way to encourage kids to read! And do these parents have any idea how many teachers and administrators are going to steer clear of the school when they hear how heavy-handed the parents can be?

C’mon, people. Surely you can find a better way to channel your energy.

People are such babies. Those complaining parents should be ashamed of themselves. Good on the Librarian. F Censorship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing in the first 26 pages of this discussion has given me reason to believe the outrage over this display is not, at its core, that certain parents do not want their kids to be exposed to ideas that might undermine messaging from their parents that being gay is wrong, blacks people are just a little bit lesser than white people, and the holocaust wasn’t really so bad. Maybe that will change in the next 26 pages, but I doubt it.

The fact that I don't want public school libraries actively promoting books that contain graphic sexual acts to freshmen doesn't make me a bigot. And FWIW I think anyone who wants to ban Maus is a loon.

And before someone starts in about the internet, my child doesn't have a smartphone and doesn't have unrestricted, unmonitored access to the internet at home. My parents let me have unrestricted internet access starting in middle school when my school gave me a laptop and I've learned from their mistake.

What do you think will happen to your child if they see a copy of Gender Queer sitting in a library display? What, specifically, is your fear?

That kids will be exposed to unhealthy ideas about sexuality and be more tempted to engage in sexual activity before they are ready.

Being something other than cis-het is “unhealthy”?

There are significant health disparities. Some of which may be due to coping mechanisms, others due to culture.

Rejection by parents and other relatives has a good bit to do with the health disparities too, especially in regard to mental health.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That was the title of a sign in the Langley High library displaying some of the books that the Trumpkins don’t want kids reading like “Beloved” and “Maus.” Of course some Langley parents complained and the principal issued a groveling letter apologizing for “poor judgement” and removing the display.

Seriously, WTF? It was a clever way to encourage kids to read! And do these parents have any idea how many teachers and administrators are going to steer clear of the school when they hear how heavy-handed the parents can be?

C’mon, people. Surely you can find a better way to channel your energy.

People are such babies. Those complaining parents should be ashamed of themselves. Good on the Librarian. F Censorship.

x1 million

Total losers to bully librarians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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 .

No, most kids in high school are minors and remain the responsibility of parents. The parents retain authority over the kids until they reach 18 or are emancipated. How the parents choose to set boundaries for their kids is beside the point. The point here is that parents have that power, and regardless of whether teachers or librarians agree or disagree with how certain parents choose to exercise their power, it's destructive to try and pit children against their parents.

Truly, you have a very misguided view about public education. You have a choice as to whether to send your kids to public school (as opposed to private or homeschool), but once you make that choice, most of your control over your child’s education ends. You do not get to dictate the math curriculum used. You do not get to dictate the subjects taught in science. You do not get to dictate what foreign languages will be available. You do not get to decide to at your child should be able to earn a standard diploma without taking any history at all. If you want that level of control, public school is not for you.

Maybe if you're totally unengaged in your child's education.

If you talk to your kids about what they're learning, review their work, send them to tutoring, teach them yourself you still have tons of control over their education. You can assign them books to read, and pick the math curriculum you teach.

Same if you have them take APs and CLEPs.

If you're passive in life you and your progeny are doomed to mediocrity. People in my community are heavily involved in their kids education, which is why they succeed in school.

There go the goalposts! 😆

This discussion is about what happens within public schools. What you do outside of school to review homework, get them extra tutoring and force them to read certain books in their free time is utterly irrelevant to your level of control over what happens inside the school.

And yes, you can have your kids take AP classes, but you do not get to dictate what is taught in those classes, or what books your AP student can access in the school library.

Nope, no shifting of goal posts, the assertion was "nce you make that choice, most of your control over your child’s education ends". That statement is false. Obviously you have less control of what is in the classroom, but you have control for the other 16 hours of the day.

It's not like I can't provide incentives or disincentives over behavior I don't like in my kids AP classroom or library. Be it with staff or my own child.

I'm guessing you're not a tiger mom!

This entire discussion is about something happened inside the school, not what you do the other 16 hours of the day. No one else cares about that.

Ha clearly it bothers your that parents can undermine all of this.

[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

Guess what, news flash, get ready... the kids who are ready to read those books and choose to pick them out are pretty darn close to not needing your say in what they read, they are a year or two away from being legal adults themselves, loosen the grip granny, the kids are going to be alright. And not trying to tell you how to be a parent, but if your teens are anything like the teens at my school they are already doing very, very adult things, let's hope they've read enough books to know how to keep themselves safe.

[Anonymous]

Do you monitor which books your highschoolers borrow from the public library? Or do you insist that they only borrow from the juvenile/kids' section? How about the teen section? Is that out of bounds?

[Anonymous]

The librarian was unprofessional. We all know it. She introduced politics into the library. It was wrong of her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The librarian was unprofessional. We all know it. She introduced politics into the library. It was wrong of her.

So, politics isn't allowed in a library? Where can politics be discussed in a high school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The librarian was unprofessional. We all know it. She introduced politics into the library. It was wrong of her.

So, politics isn't allowed in a library? Where can politics be discussed in a high school?

Debate club.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Incidents such as these will have a chilling effect on what teachers teach in our local schools and how librarians and others do their jobs--and it will no doubt push some school professionals to leave their jobs. But perhaps that is the point...

If you have a few minutes, read this insightful article in WP into how teachers around the country are altering their teaching plans to accommodate this sudden parental interest in what is taught in schools.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/02/14/critical-race-theory-teachers-fear-laws/

I am the 8:39 PP, but this is the point. It is the "othering" of parents by teachers and adults in schools. It is the us versus them mentality that is problematic, especially when teachers have zero responsibility for our children.

Okay Moms for Liberty parent. Were your parents so involved in micromanaging your public school experience? I’m guessing they weren’t.

This!

DP here. My parents never had to worry that my school was exposing me to sexual content because frankly that was unimaginable a couple of decades ago. Boundaries have shifted greatly and parents were simply unaware. You say this is a ginned-up effort by the republicans, but from my perspective schools snuck inappropriate content in without informing parents, and what you think is the Republicans striking first is really a reaction to what could be considered an unannounced move by the left first.

What? You never had any books with sexual content in your high school library? Honestly? I don’t believe you. You might not have known about them because you didn’t ever go to the library but this is just not true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It wasn’t just the principal. The Region 1 superintendent (Doug Tyson) issued a separate apology as well. It’s just sad they feel the need to apologize for looking for creative ways to encourage kids to read.

There are many, many other ways to better encourage folks to read than this. C'mon - be better.

Agreed. There are healthy ways to encourage kids to read without putting them against their parents.

+2
And MUCH better written books to encourage kids to read.

Much better written than what? Which books in the Langley display do you believe were poorly written?

Crickets.

Dumb a$$ book banners can't be bothered to actually READ any books. Only ban them.

Beloved had only slightly better writing than the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit edition, but did have more titillation.

LOL, it won a Pulitzer and was a National Book Award finalist, but I’m sure you know better.

The narrative style in Beloved is straight out of 80's cheesefest "Highlander" jumping around in time and space so much and blending multiple viewpoints that the reader might as well be riding in the TARDIS.

Beloved depicts rape and violence towards women, described in such detail, so often, as to cause a reader to wonder if Toni was really condemning it, or if this "feminist" had some sort of bizarre masochistic fetish? Feminist fiction has often left me wondering that. Honestly, Toni Morrison's novels seem more like an attempt to shock, stupefy, and play mind games with her readers than to actually tell stories.

Sure. And slavery was actually a good things for slaves. They were never raped or beaten or brutalized.

What does that have to do with the quality of Toni Morrison's writing?

Toni attempts to manipulate the reader in an obvious manner with zero subtly whatsoever. She may as well write on the cover " I am trying to make you feel dumber than I am! " Unfortunately for Toni, if a reader knows you're trying to manipulate them, no amount of style, imagery, or endorsements from critics is going to work. There is a saying-"A tactic known is a tactic blown".

Try reading her other works and you can see the same tricks at play right away.

You don’t like Toni Morrison. Fine. You certainly don’t have to. But why get worked up if others do? And why ban her book?

[Anonymous]

Yes, we all need more mouse cartoon soft porn in our kids lives! Because if you object to that you must be a nazi right? What happened to common sense? There is plenty of good literature that doesn't involve some of the elements that some of these books decided to incorporate to be sensational.

[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:It wasn’t just the principal. The Region 1 superintendent (Doug Tyson) issued a separate apology as well. It’s just sad they feel the need to apologize for looking for creative ways to encourage kids to read.

There are many, many other ways to better encourage folks to read than this. C'mon - be better.

Agreed. There are healthy ways to encourage kids to read without putting them against their parents.

+2
And MUCH better written books to encourage kids to read.

Much better written than what? Which books in the Langley display do you believe were poorly written?

Crickets.

Dumb a$$ book banners can't be bothered to actually READ any books. Only ban them.

Beloved had only slightly better writing than the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit edition, but did have more titillation.

LOL, it won a Pulitzer and was a National Book Award finalist, but I’m sure you know better.

The narrative style in Beloved is straight out of 80's cheesefest "Highlander" jumping around in time and space so much and blending multiple viewpoints that the reader might as well be riding in the TARDIS.

Beloved depicts rape and violence towards women, described in such detail, so often, as to cause a reader to wonder if Toni was really condemning it, or if this "feminist" had some sort of bizarre masochistic fetish? Feminist fiction has often left me wondering that. Honestly, Toni Morrison's novels seem more like an attempt to shock, stupefy, and play mind games with her readers than to actually tell stories.

Sure. And slavery was actually a good things for slaves. They were never raped or beaten or brutalized.

What does that have to do with the quality of Toni Morrison's writing?

Toni attempts to manipulate the reader in an obvious manner with zero subtly whatsoever. She may as well write on the cover " I am trying to make you feel dumber than I am! " Unfortunately for Toni, if a reader knows you're trying to manipulate them, no amount of style, imagery, or endorsements from critics is going to work. There is a saying-"A tactic known is a tactic blown".

Try reading her other works and you can see the same tricks at play right away.

You don’t like Toni Morrison. Fine. You certainly don’t have to. But why get worked up if others do? And why ban her book?

Kids should be reading better Black authors instead of reading the literary equivalent of M. Night Shyamalan with more graphic sex and violence.