Youngkin is a book banner

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT writes an entire article about schools all over the country having this book in their libraries, but the troll keeps on trolling. Too funny.

Don't subscribe to the NYT, it's paywalled. And even so it's probably still anecdotal. Do better. Show some actual data showing how many schools ordered that book for their students. I only trust data, not your "feelings" or your factless anecdotes.

Until you show some actual data all you have are factless claims.

PP, I (not a book banner) posted the entire NYT article upthread. You can read it there. Nobody paid any attention to the book until the so-called Moms for Liberty somehow came across it and decided that 2 or 3 out-of-context drawings would be the very thing to further their campaign against LGBTQ people and public schools.

"Moms for Liberty" somehow "found" the book. What are the chances of far right wing activists just happening to stumble upon that particular book in some random school library. I'd give it 1:1,000,000 odds. Higher odds if one of them brought it in their purse to plant it before "finding" it. Hate to be cynical but the far right "anti-woke" is so far off the rails these days I wouldn't put anything past them.

So I guess you're (deliberately) ignoring this part:

The award brought “Gender Queer” to the attention of librarians across the country, who often look to such prizes when deciding what books to order. High schools and some middle school libraries around the country began stocking it.

The book was banned in dozens of school districts and removed from libraries across the country, including Alaska, Iowa, Texas and Pennsylvania.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/01/books/maia-kobabe-gender-queer-book-ban.html

No worries. We're all used to you lying through your teeth in order to discredit reality.

So, it's an award-winning book, which many school librarians chose to add to their school's library, but you find one or two drawings in this book, completely out of context, to be indefensibly shocking, and therefore it should be unavailable in any school library (or maybe any library at all).

You're not going to stop with this book, and you're not going to stop with books. Everyone knows that. In fact, some of the people advocating for banning books on LGBTQ topics have already moved on to advocating for banning the existence of LGBTQ people.

NP.

What drawings ?

here https://rumble.com/v23pvjy-shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-was-stocked-in-school-librarie.html

For older HS teens, most of that seemed OK. Nothing wrong with pictures of same-sex people kissing.

The fellatio drawing is problematic. Straight or gay, I’m not sure graphic fellatio images belong in school libraries.

It’s not actually fellatio and no genitalia is shown.

It’s clear we’re not dealing with the smartest tools in the shed here. You obviously haven’t bothered to actually watch the video.

Again, if you actually read the book you’d understand that it’s not a penis.

Holy f@ckballs - you think since it’s not ACTUALLY a penis the depiction of someone sucking a strap on is therefore ok?
This is what we’re dealing with folks. Irrational people.

Yes, it makes a difference. If it were actual genitalia it’d be a different story, but it’s not.

Dildos appear on TV and movies all of the time.

There is no rational conversation to be had here. Clearly.

+1
That's because we're dealing with "handwavey" gaslighting trolls who refuse to watch the video in question. It's not even worth bothering with them at this point. Everyone knows they're lying through their teeth.

You think the depiction of a non-realistic dildo is the same as the depiction of an actual penis?

It’s a piece of plastic.

ITS A GRAPHIC NOVEL. Nothing in there is technically realistic. So the dildo and penis are identical.

Yep. You're basically wanting to ban a novel-length comic book. I'd be embarrassed, if I were you. Unfortunately the people who actually banned Maus (another novel-length comic book) were not embarrassed.

It’s a book depicting oral sex, aimed at teenagers. I’m embarrassed for you that you think this is appropriate for schools. If you don’t want boundaries with your own kids fine - whip out a dildo and show them how to do it. The rest of us know it’s not something that kids should find in the school libraries.

So if I start mouthing a banana is that “oral sex”?

If you show that to my child, you're a creepy pedo pervert

It’s crude but it’s not oral sex.

If you show that to my child, you are a creeper pedo. I don't care how you show it - in a cartoon book, in person, on TV. I'd probably call police if you showed it to my child.

Let that be your guide - could you end up in JAIL if you performed the crap in these books in front of children.

Ok, drama queen. No one is getting arrested for mouthing a banana in high school.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT writes an entire article about schools all over the country having this book in their libraries, but the troll keeps on trolling. Too funny.

Don't subscribe to the NYT, it's paywalled. And even so it's probably still anecdotal. Do better. Show some actual data showing how many schools ordered that book for their students. I only trust data, not your "feelings" or your factless anecdotes.

Until you show some actual data all you have are factless claims.

PP, I (not a book banner) posted the entire NYT article upthread. You can read it there. Nobody paid any attention to the book until the so-called Moms for Liberty somehow came across it and decided that 2 or 3 out-of-context drawings would be the very thing to further their campaign against LGBTQ people and public schools.

"Moms for Liberty" somehow "found" the book. What are the chances of far right wing activists just happening to stumble upon that particular book in some random school library. I'd give it 1:1,000,000 odds. Higher odds if one of them brought it in their purse to plant it before "finding" it. Hate to be cynical but the far right "anti-woke" is so far off the rails these days I wouldn't put anything past them.

So I guess you're (deliberately) ignoring this part:

The award brought “Gender Queer” to the attention of librarians across the country, who often look to such prizes when deciding what books to order. High schools and some middle school libraries around the country began stocking it.

The book was banned in dozens of school districts and removed from libraries across the country, including Alaska, Iowa, Texas and Pennsylvania.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/01/books/maia-kobabe-gender-queer-book-ban.html

No worries. We're all used to you lying through your teeth in order to discredit reality.

So, it's an award-winning book, which many school librarians chose to add to their school's library, but you find one or two drawings in this book, completely out of context, to be indefensibly shocking, and therefore it should be unavailable in any school library (or maybe any library at all).

You're not going to stop with this book, and you're not going to stop with books. Everyone knows that. In fact, some of the people advocating for banning books on LGBTQ topics have already moved on to advocating for banning the existence of LGBTQ people.

NP.

What drawings ?

here https://rumble.com/v23pvjy-shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-was-stocked-in-school-librarie.html

For older HS teens, most of that seemed OK. Nothing wrong with pictures of same-sex people kissing.

The fellatio drawing is problematic. Straight or gay, I’m not sure graphic fellatio images belong in school libraries.

It’s not actually fellatio and no genitalia is shown.

It’s clear we’re not dealing with the smartest tools in the shed here. You obviously haven’t bothered to actually watch the video.

Again, if you actually read the book you’d understand that it’s not a penis.

Holy f@ckballs - you think since it’s not ACTUALLY a penis the depiction of someone sucking a strap on is therefore ok?
This is what we’re dealing with folks. Irrational people.

Yes, it makes a difference. If it were actual genitalia it’d be a different story, but it’s not.

Dildos appear on TV and movies all of the time.

There is no rational conversation to be had here. Clearly.

+1
That's because we're dealing with "handwavey" gaslighting trolls who refuse to watch the video in question. It's not even worth bothering with them at this point. Everyone knows they're lying through their teeth.

You think the depiction of a non-realistic dildo is the same as the depiction of an actual penis?

It’s a piece of plastic.

ITS A GRAPHIC NOVEL. Nothing in there is technically realistic. So the dildo and penis are identical.

Yep. You're basically wanting to ban a novel-length comic book. I'd be embarrassed, if I were you. Unfortunately the people who actually banned Maus (another novel-length comic book) were not embarrassed.

It’s a book depicting oral sex, aimed at teenagers. I’m embarrassed for you that you think this is appropriate for schools. If you don’t want boundaries with your own kids fine - whip out a dildo and show them how to do it. The rest of us know it’s not something that kids should find in the school libraries.

Nah, it's a book about the author and their gender identity. Not a topic that I, personally, am particularly interested in, but I don't expect every book in every library to be aimed at my personal interests and meet with my personal approval. Here's what I do, when I'm not interested in a book that's in a library: I don't read it.

Someone sucking a dildo is a sex act. There is no other “context” that you can put around it. I’m starting to think you are really really slow, and now I’m starting to feel bad for arguing with someone who clearly has a disability.

Ah, ableism in addition to transphobia.

If someone was actually discriminating against you, you’d have a point. But they’re not, so your point is moot.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT writes an entire article about schools all over the country having this book in their libraries, but the troll keeps on trolling. Too funny.

Don't subscribe to the NYT, it's paywalled. And even so it's probably still anecdotal. Do better. Show some actual data showing how many schools ordered that book for their students. I only trust data, not your "feelings" or your factless anecdotes.

Until you show some actual data all you have are factless claims.

PP, I (not a book banner) posted the entire NYT article upthread. You can read it there. Nobody paid any attention to the book until the so-called Moms for Liberty somehow came across it and decided that 2 or 3 out-of-context drawings would be the very thing to further their campaign against LGBTQ people and public schools.

"Moms for Liberty" somehow "found" the book. What are the chances of far right wing activists just happening to stumble upon that particular book in some random school library. I'd give it 1:1,000,000 odds. Higher odds if one of them brought it in their purse to plant it before "finding" it. Hate to be cynical but the far right "anti-woke" is so far off the rails these days I wouldn't put anything past them.

So I guess you're (deliberately) ignoring this part:

The award brought “Gender Queer” to the attention of librarians across the country, who often look to such prizes when deciding what books to order. High schools and some middle school libraries around the country began stocking it.

The book was banned in dozens of school districts and removed from libraries across the country, including Alaska, Iowa, Texas and Pennsylvania.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/01/books/maia-kobabe-gender-queer-book-ban.html

No worries. We're all used to you lying through your teeth in order to discredit reality.

So, it's an award-winning book, which many school librarians chose to add to their school's library, but you find one or two drawings in this book, completely out of context, to be indefensibly shocking, and therefore it should be unavailable in any school library (or maybe any library at all).

You're not going to stop with this book, and you're not going to stop with books. Everyone knows that. In fact, some of the people advocating for banning books on LGBTQ topics have already moved on to advocating for banning the existence of LGBTQ people.

NP.

What drawings ?

here https://rumble.com/v23pvjy-shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-was-stocked-in-school-librarie.html

For older HS teens, most of that seemed OK. Nothing wrong with pictures of same-sex people kissing.

The fellatio drawing is problematic. Straight or gay, I’m not sure graphic fellatio images belong in school libraries.

It’s not actually fellatio and no genitalia is shown.

It’s clear we’re not dealing with the smartest tools in the shed here. You obviously haven’t bothered to actually watch the video.

Again, if you actually read the book you’d understand that it’s not a penis.

Holy f@ckballs - you think since it’s not ACTUALLY a penis the depiction of someone sucking a strap on is therefore ok?
This is what we’re dealing with folks. Irrational people.

Yes, it makes a difference. If it were actual genitalia it’d be a different story, but it’s not.

Dildos appear on TV and movies all of the time.

There is no rational conversation to be had here. Clearly.

+1
That's because we're dealing with "handwavey" gaslighting trolls who refuse to watch the video in question. It's not even worth bothering with them at this point. Everyone knows they're lying through their teeth.

You think the depiction of a non-realistic dildo is the same as the depiction of an actual penis?

It’s a piece of plastic.

ITS A GRAPHIC NOVEL. Nothing in there is technically realistic. So the dildo and penis are identical.

Yep. You're basically wanting to ban a novel-length comic book. I'd be embarrassed, if I were you. Unfortunately the people who actually banned Maus (another novel-length comic book) were not embarrassed.

It’s a book depicting oral sex, aimed at teenagers. I’m embarrassed for you that you think this is appropriate for schools. If you don’t want boundaries with your own kids fine - whip out a dildo and show them how to do it. The rest of us know it’s not something that kids should find in the school libraries.

Nah, it's a book about the author and their gender identity. Not a topic that I, personally, am particularly interested in, but I don't expect every book in every library to be aimed at my personal interests and meet with my personal approval. Here's what I do, when I'm not interested in a book that's in a library: I don't read it.

Someone sucking a dildo is a sex act. There is no other “context” that you can put around it. I’m starting to think you are really really slow, and now I’m starting to feel bad for arguing with someone who clearly has a disability.

Sucking on a finger is also a sex act, but it’s not porn.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT writes an entire article about schools all over the country having this book in their libraries, but the troll keeps on trolling. Too funny.

Don't subscribe to the NYT, it's paywalled. And even so it's probably still anecdotal. Do better. Show some actual data showing how many schools ordered that book for their students. I only trust data, not your "feelings" or your factless anecdotes.

Until you show some actual data all you have are factless claims.

PP, I (not a book banner) posted the entire NYT article upthread. You can read it there. Nobody paid any attention to the book until the so-called Moms for Liberty somehow came across it and decided that 2 or 3 out-of-context drawings would be the very thing to further their campaign against LGBTQ people and public schools.

"Moms for Liberty" somehow "found" the book. What are the chances of far right wing activists just happening to stumble upon that particular book in some random school library. I'd give it 1:1,000,000 odds. Higher odds if one of them brought it in their purse to plant it before "finding" it. Hate to be cynical but the far right "anti-woke" is so far off the rails these days I wouldn't put anything past them.

So I guess you're (deliberately) ignoring this part:

The award brought “Gender Queer” to the attention of librarians across the country, who often look to such prizes when deciding what books to order. High schools and some middle school libraries around the country began stocking it.

The book was banned in dozens of school districts and removed from libraries across the country, including Alaska, Iowa, Texas and Pennsylvania.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/01/books/maia-kobabe-gender-queer-book-ban.html

No worries. We're all used to you lying through your teeth in order to discredit reality.

So, it's an award-winning book, which many school librarians chose to add to their school's library, but you find one or two drawings in this book, completely out of context, to be indefensibly shocking, and therefore it should be unavailable in any school library (or maybe any library at all).

You're not going to stop with this book, and you're not going to stop with books. Everyone knows that. In fact, some of the people advocating for banning books on LGBTQ topics have already moved on to advocating for banning the existence of LGBTQ people.

NP.

What drawings ?

here https://rumble.com/v23pvjy-shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-was-stocked-in-school-librarie.html

For older HS teens, most of that seemed OK. Nothing wrong with pictures of same-sex people kissing.

The fellatio drawing is problematic. Straight or gay, I’m not sure graphic fellatio images belong in school libraries.

It’s not actually fellatio and no genitalia is shown.

It’s clear we’re not dealing with the smartest tools in the shed here. You obviously haven’t bothered to actually watch the video.

Again, if you actually read the book you’d understand that it’s not a penis.

Holy f@ckballs - you think since it’s not ACTUALLY a penis the depiction of someone sucking a strap on is therefore ok?
This is what we’re dealing with folks. Irrational people.

Yes, it makes a difference. If it were actual genitalia it’d be a different story, but it’s not.

Dildos appear on TV and movies all of the time.

There is no rational conversation to be had here. Clearly.

+1
That's because we're dealing with "handwavey" gaslighting trolls who refuse to watch the video in question. It's not even worth bothering with them at this point. Everyone knows they're lying through their teeth.

You think the depiction of a non-realistic dildo is the same as the depiction of an actual penis?

It’s a piece of plastic.

ITS A GRAPHIC NOVEL. Nothing in there is technically realistic. So the dildo and penis are identical.

Yep. You're basically wanting to ban a novel-length comic book. I'd be embarrassed, if I were you. Unfortunately the people who actually banned Maus (another novel-length comic book) were not embarrassed.

It’s a book depicting oral sex, aimed at teenagers. I’m embarrassed for you that you think this is appropriate for schools. If you don’t want boundaries with your own kids fine - whip out a dildo and show them how to do it. The rest of us know it’s not something that kids should find in the school libraries.

Nah, it's a book about the author and their gender identity. Not a topic that I, personally, am particularly interested in, but I don't expect every book in every library to be aimed at my personal interests and meet with my personal approval. Here's what I do, when I'm not interested in a book that's in a library: I don't read it.

Someone sucking a dildo is a sex act. There is no other “context” that you can put around it. I’m starting to think you are really really slow, and now I’m starting to feel bad for arguing with someone who clearly has a disability.

Ah, ableism in addition to transphobia.

+1

Hates gay people and craps on people with disabilities. Klassy!

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT writes an entire article about schools all over the country having this book in their libraries, but the troll keeps on trolling. Too funny.

Don't subscribe to the NYT, it's paywalled. And even so it's probably still anecdotal. Do better. Show some actual data showing how many schools ordered that book for their students. I only trust data, not your "feelings" or your factless anecdotes.

Until you show some actual data all you have are factless claims.

PP, I (not a book banner) posted the entire NYT article upthread. You can read it there. Nobody paid any attention to the book until the so-called Moms for Liberty somehow came across it and decided that 2 or 3 out-of-context drawings would be the very thing to further their campaign against LGBTQ people and public schools.

"Moms for Liberty" somehow "found" the book. What are the chances of far right wing activists just happening to stumble upon that particular book in some random school library. I'd give it 1:1,000,000 odds. Higher odds if one of them brought it in their purse to plant it before "finding" it. Hate to be cynical but the far right "anti-woke" is so far off the rails these days I wouldn't put anything past them.

So I guess you're (deliberately) ignoring this part:

The award brought “Gender Queer” to the attention of librarians across the country, who often look to such prizes when deciding what books to order. High schools and some middle school libraries around the country began stocking it.

The book was banned in dozens of school districts and removed from libraries across the country, including Alaska, Iowa, Texas and Pennsylvania.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/01/books/maia-kobabe-gender-queer-book-ban.html

No worries. We're all used to you lying through your teeth in order to discredit reality.

So, it's an award-winning book, which many school librarians chose to add to their school's library, but you find one or two drawings in this book, completely out of context, to be indefensibly shocking, and therefore it should be unavailable in any school library (or maybe any library at all).

You're not going to stop with this book, and you're not going to stop with books. Everyone knows that. In fact, some of the people advocating for banning books on LGBTQ topics have already moved on to advocating for banning the existence of LGBTQ people.

NP.

What drawings ?

here https://rumble.com/v23pvjy-shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-was-stocked-in-school-librarie.html

For older HS teens, most of that seemed OK. Nothing wrong with pictures of same-sex people kissing.

The fellatio drawing is problematic. Straight or gay, I’m not sure graphic fellatio images belong in school libraries.

It’s not actually fellatio and no genitalia is shown.

It’s clear we’re not dealing with the smartest tools in the shed here. You obviously haven’t bothered to actually watch the video.

Again, if you actually read the book you’d understand that it’s not a penis.

Holy f@ckballs - you think since it’s not ACTUALLY a penis the depiction of someone sucking a strap on is therefore ok?
This is what we’re dealing with folks. Irrational people.

Yes, it makes a difference. If it were actual genitalia it’d be a different story, but it’s not.

Dildos appear on TV and movies all of the time.

There is no rational conversation to be had here. Clearly.

+1
That's because we're dealing with "handwavey" gaslighting trolls who refuse to watch the video in question. It's not even worth bothering with them at this point. Everyone knows they're lying through their teeth.

You think the depiction of a non-realistic dildo is the same as the depiction of an actual penis?

It’s a piece of plastic.

ITS A GRAPHIC NOVEL. Nothing in there is technically realistic. So the dildo and penis are identical.

Yep. You're basically wanting to ban a novel-length comic book. I'd be embarrassed, if I were you. Unfortunately the people who actually banned Maus (another novel-length comic book) were not embarrassed.

It’s a book depicting oral sex, aimed at teenagers. I’m embarrassed for you that you think this is appropriate for schools. If you don’t want boundaries with your own kids fine - whip out a dildo and show them how to do it. The rest of us know it’s not something that kids should find in the school libraries.

So if I start mouthing a banana is that “oral sex”?

If you show that to my child, you're a creepy pedo pervert

It’s crude but it’s not oral sex.

If you show that to my child, you are a creeper pedo. I don't care how you show it - in a cartoon book, in person, on TV. I'd probably call police if you showed it to my child.

Let that be your guide - could you end up in JAIL if you performed the crap in these books in front of children.

The only person who would be "showing" the book "Gender Queer" to your child would be their own self, if they were interested in taking the book down from a library shelf. If you're worried about that, talk to your child about only reading library books that have been pre-cleared and approved by you.

Imagine being a teen in PP’s house. Can’t have a phone. Can’t go to the library.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT writes an entire article about schools all over the country having this book in their libraries, but the troll keeps on trolling. Too funny.

Don't subscribe to the NYT, it's paywalled. And even so it's probably still anecdotal. Do better. Show some actual data showing how many schools ordered that book for their students. I only trust data, not your "feelings" or your factless anecdotes.

Until you show some actual data all you have are factless claims.

PP, I (not a book banner) posted the entire NYT article upthread. You can read it there. Nobody paid any attention to the book until the so-called Moms for Liberty somehow came across it and decided that 2 or 3 out-of-context drawings would be the very thing to further their campaign against LGBTQ people and public schools.

"Moms for Liberty" somehow "found" the book. What are the chances of far right wing activists just happening to stumble upon that particular book in some random school library. I'd give it 1:1,000,000 odds. Higher odds if one of them brought it in their purse to plant it before "finding" it. Hate to be cynical but the far right "anti-woke" is so far off the rails these days I wouldn't put anything past them.

So I guess you're (deliberately) ignoring this part:

The award brought “Gender Queer” to the attention of librarians across the country, who often look to such prizes when deciding what books to order. High schools and some middle school libraries around the country began stocking it.

The book was banned in dozens of school districts and removed from libraries across the country, including Alaska, Iowa, Texas and Pennsylvania.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/01/books/maia-kobabe-gender-queer-book-ban.html

No worries. We're all used to you lying through your teeth in order to discredit reality.

So, it's an award-winning book, which many school librarians chose to add to their school's library, but you find one or two drawings in this book, completely out of context, to be indefensibly shocking, and therefore it should be unavailable in any school library (or maybe any library at all).

You're not going to stop with this book, and you're not going to stop with books. Everyone knows that. In fact, some of the people advocating for banning books on LGBTQ topics have already moved on to advocating for banning the existence of LGBTQ people.

NP.

What drawings ?

here https://rumble.com/v23pvjy-shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-was-stocked-in-school-librarie.html

For older HS teens, most of that seemed OK. Nothing wrong with pictures of same-sex people kissing.

The fellatio drawing is problematic. Straight or gay, I’m not sure graphic fellatio images belong in school libraries.

It’s not actually fellatio and no genitalia is shown.

It’s clear we’re not dealing with the smartest tools in the shed here. You obviously haven’t bothered to actually watch the video.

Again, if you actually read the book you’d understand that it’s not a penis.

Holy f@ckballs - you think since it’s not ACTUALLY a penis the depiction of someone sucking a strap on is therefore ok?
This is what we’re dealing with folks. Irrational people.

Yes, it makes a difference. If it were actual genitalia it’d be a different story, but it’s not.

Dildos appear on TV and movies all of the time.

There is no rational conversation to be had here. Clearly.

+1
That's because we're dealing with "handwavey" gaslighting trolls who refuse to watch the video in question. It's not even worth bothering with them at this point. Everyone knows they're lying through their teeth.

You think the depiction of a non-realistic dildo is the same as the depiction of an actual penis?

It’s a piece of plastic.

ITS A GRAPHIC NOVEL. Nothing in there is technically realistic. So the dildo and penis are identical.

Yep. You're basically wanting to ban a novel-length comic book. I'd be embarrassed, if I were you. Unfortunately the people who actually banned Maus (another novel-length comic book) were not embarrassed.

It’s a book depicting oral sex, aimed at teenagers. I’m embarrassed for you that you think this is appropriate for schools. If you don’t want boundaries with your own kids fine - whip out a dildo and show them how to do it. The rest of us know it’s not something that kids should find in the school libraries.

Nah, it's a book about the author and their gender identity. Not a topic that I, personally, am particularly interested in, but I don't expect every book in every library to be aimed at my personal interests and meet with my personal approval. Here's what I do, when I'm not interested in a book that's in a library: I don't read it.

Someone sucking a dildo is a sex act. There is no other “context” that you can put around it. I’m starting to think you are really really slow, and now I’m starting to feel bad for arguing with someone who clearly has a disability.

Sucking on a finger is also a sex act, but it’s not porn.

Sucking on a finger can be a sex act, or can be a way to remove chicken grease from your fingers. Or to suck the blood off of a cut. Or a way to comfort yourself.
Sucking a dildo has one intent and one intent only.
I fear for your children. I really do.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT writes an entire article about schools all over the country having this book in their libraries, but the troll keeps on trolling. Too funny.

Don't subscribe to the NYT, it's paywalled. And even so it's probably still anecdotal. Do better. Show some actual data showing how many schools ordered that book for their students. I only trust data, not your "feelings" or your factless anecdotes.

Until you show some actual data all you have are factless claims.

PP, I (not a book banner) posted the entire NYT article upthread. You can read it there. Nobody paid any attention to the book until the so-called Moms for Liberty somehow came across it and decided that 2 or 3 out-of-context drawings would be the very thing to further their campaign against LGBTQ people and public schools.

"Moms for Liberty" somehow "found" the book. What are the chances of far right wing activists just happening to stumble upon that particular book in some random school library. I'd give it 1:1,000,000 odds. Higher odds if one of them brought it in their purse to plant it before "finding" it. Hate to be cynical but the far right "anti-woke" is so far off the rails these days I wouldn't put anything past them.

So I guess you're (deliberately) ignoring this part:

The award brought “Gender Queer” to the attention of librarians across the country, who often look to such prizes when deciding what books to order. High schools and some middle school libraries around the country began stocking it.

The book was banned in dozens of school districts and removed from libraries across the country, including Alaska, Iowa, Texas and Pennsylvania.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/01/books/maia-kobabe-gender-queer-book-ban.html

No worries. We're all used to you lying through your teeth in order to discredit reality.

So, it's an award-winning book, which many school librarians chose to add to their school's library, but you find one or two drawings in this book, completely out of context, to be indefensibly shocking, and therefore it should be unavailable in any school library (or maybe any library at all).

You're not going to stop with this book, and you're not going to stop with books. Everyone knows that. In fact, some of the people advocating for banning books on LGBTQ topics have already moved on to advocating for banning the existence of LGBTQ people.

NP.

What drawings ?

here https://rumble.com/v23pvjy-shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-was-stocked-in-school-librarie.html

For older HS teens, most of that seemed OK. Nothing wrong with pictures of same-sex people kissing.

The fellatio drawing is problematic. Straight or gay, I’m not sure graphic fellatio images belong in school libraries.

It’s not actually fellatio and no genitalia is shown.

It’s clear we’re not dealing with the smartest tools in the shed here. You obviously haven’t bothered to actually watch the video.

Again, if you actually read the book you’d understand that it’s not a penis.

Holy f@ckballs - you think since it’s not ACTUALLY a penis the depiction of someone sucking a strap on is therefore ok?
This is what we’re dealing with folks. Irrational people.

Yes, it makes a difference. If it were actual genitalia it’d be a different story, but it’s not.

Dildos appear on TV and movies all of the time.

There is no rational conversation to be had here. Clearly.

+1
That's because we're dealing with "handwavey" gaslighting trolls who refuse to watch the video in question. It's not even worth bothering with them at this point. Everyone knows they're lying through their teeth.

You think the depiction of a non-realistic dildo is the same as the depiction of an actual penis?

It’s a piece of plastic.

ITS A GRAPHIC NOVEL. Nothing in there is technically realistic. So the dildo and penis are identical.

Yep. You're basically wanting to ban a novel-length comic book. I'd be embarrassed, if I were you. Unfortunately the people who actually banned Maus (another novel-length comic book) were not embarrassed.

It’s a book depicting oral sex, aimed at teenagers. I’m embarrassed for you that you think this is appropriate for schools. If you don’t want boundaries with your own kids fine - whip out a dildo and show them how to do it. The rest of us know it’s not something that kids should find in the school libraries.

Nah, it's a book about the author and their gender identity. Not a topic that I, personally, am particularly interested in, but I don't expect every book in every library to be aimed at my personal interests and meet with my personal approval. Here's what I do, when I'm not interested in a book that's in a library: I don't read it.

Someone sucking a dildo is a sex act. There is no other “context” that you can put around it. I’m starting to think you are really really slow, and now I’m starting to feel bad for arguing with someone who clearly has a disability.

Ah, ableism in addition to transphobia.

+1

Hates gay people and craps on people with disabilities. Klassy!

So PP does have an intellectual disability. Thanks for confirming. I was 99% sure!

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT writes an entire article about schools all over the country having this book in their libraries, but the troll keeps on trolling. Too funny.

Don't subscribe to the NYT, it's paywalled. And even so it's probably still anecdotal. Do better. Show some actual data showing how many schools ordered that book for their students. I only trust data, not your "feelings" or your factless anecdotes.

Until you show some actual data all you have are factless claims.

PP, I (not a book banner) posted the entire NYT article upthread. You can read it there. Nobody paid any attention to the book until the so-called Moms for Liberty somehow came across it and decided that 2 or 3 out-of-context drawings would be the very thing to further their campaign against LGBTQ people and public schools.

"Moms for Liberty" somehow "found" the book. What are the chances of far right wing activists just happening to stumble upon that particular book in some random school library. I'd give it 1:1,000,000 odds. Higher odds if one of them brought it in their purse to plant it before "finding" it. Hate to be cynical but the far right "anti-woke" is so far off the rails these days I wouldn't put anything past them.

So I guess you're (deliberately) ignoring this part:

The award brought “Gender Queer” to the attention of librarians across the country, who often look to such prizes when deciding what books to order. High schools and some middle school libraries around the country began stocking it.

The book was banned in dozens of school districts and removed from libraries across the country, including Alaska, Iowa, Texas and Pennsylvania.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/01/books/maia-kobabe-gender-queer-book-ban.html

No worries. We're all used to you lying through your teeth in order to discredit reality.

So, it's an award-winning book, which many school librarians chose to add to their school's library, but you find one or two drawings in this book, completely out of context, to be indefensibly shocking, and therefore it should be unavailable in any school library (or maybe any library at all).

You're not going to stop with this book, and you're not going to stop with books. Everyone knows that. In fact, some of the people advocating for banning books on LGBTQ topics have already moved on to advocating for banning the existence of LGBTQ people.

NP.

What drawings ?

here https://rumble.com/v23pvjy-shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-was-stocked-in-school-librarie.html

For older HS teens, most of that seemed OK. Nothing wrong with pictures of same-sex people kissing.

The fellatio drawing is problematic. Straight or gay, I’m not sure graphic fellatio images belong in school libraries.

It’s not actually fellatio and no genitalia is shown.

It’s clear we’re not dealing with the smartest tools in the shed here. You obviously haven’t bothered to actually watch the video.

Again, if you actually read the book you’d understand that it’s not a penis.

Holy f@ckballs - you think since it’s not ACTUALLY a penis the depiction of someone sucking a strap on is therefore ok?
This is what we’re dealing with folks. Irrational people.

Yes, it makes a difference. If it were actual genitalia it’d be a different story, but it’s not.

Dildos appear on TV and movies all of the time.

There is no rational conversation to be had here. Clearly.

+1
That's because we're dealing with "handwavey" gaslighting trolls who refuse to watch the video in question. It's not even worth bothering with them at this point. Everyone knows they're lying through their teeth.

You think the depiction of a non-realistic dildo is the same as the depiction of an actual penis?

It’s a piece of plastic.

ITS A GRAPHIC NOVEL. Nothing in there is technically realistic. So the dildo and penis are identical.

Yep. You're basically wanting to ban a novel-length comic book. I'd be embarrassed, if I were you. Unfortunately the people who actually banned Maus (another novel-length comic book) were not embarrassed.

Imagine I published a graphic comic book of Mickey Mouse f**king Minnie Mouse, with really explicit details; maybe giving it to her in a**, followed by a Dirty Sanchez. Hell, Mickey could even f**k Goofy, Donald, and even his dog Pluto for good measure.

It’s just a comic, right? They are not real, right? Not even human.

Would that be OK for all public school libraries? The PP above keeps making idiotic arguments.

Fellatio drawings do not belong in school libraries. Parents who feel otherwise can buy whatever images they want, to give to their kids at home.

What if I invented a hypothetical to support my argument, because there are no real examples to support my argument?

If you STILL don’t get it (or you are mentally incapable, as I suspect is the case), then why don’t you go ahead and POST the fellatio image from Gender Queer, right here, in this thread, and see what happens?

It’s just a drawing, right?
It’s only a cartoon, right?
It’s not a penis, just a dildo, right?
It’s perfectly fine for children in every public school library, right?

So, what’s the problem?

It’s perfectly fine in _high school_ libraries.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT writes an entire article about schools all over the country having this book in their libraries, but the troll keeps on trolling. Too funny.

Don't subscribe to the NYT, it's paywalled. And even so it's probably still anecdotal. Do better. Show some actual data showing how many schools ordered that book for their students. I only trust data, not your "feelings" or your factless anecdotes.

Until you show some actual data all you have are factless claims.

PP, I (not a book banner) posted the entire NYT article upthread. You can read it there. Nobody paid any attention to the book until the so-called Moms for Liberty somehow came across it and decided that 2 or 3 out-of-context drawings would be the very thing to further their campaign against LGBTQ people and public schools.

"Moms for Liberty" somehow "found" the book. What are the chances of far right wing activists just happening to stumble upon that particular book in some random school library. I'd give it 1:1,000,000 odds. Higher odds if one of them brought it in their purse to plant it before "finding" it. Hate to be cynical but the far right "anti-woke" is so far off the rails these days I wouldn't put anything past them.

So I guess you're (deliberately) ignoring this part:

The award brought “Gender Queer” to the attention of librarians across the country, who often look to such prizes when deciding what books to order. High schools and some middle school libraries around the country began stocking it.

The book was banned in dozens of school districts and removed from libraries across the country, including Alaska, Iowa, Texas and Pennsylvania.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/01/books/maia-kobabe-gender-queer-book-ban.html

No worries. We're all used to you lying through your teeth in order to discredit reality.

So, it's an award-winning book, which many school librarians chose to add to their school's library, but you find one or two drawings in this book, completely out of context, to be indefensibly shocking, and therefore it should be unavailable in any school library (or maybe any library at all).

You're not going to stop with this book, and you're not going to stop with books. Everyone knows that. In fact, some of the people advocating for banning books on LGBTQ topics have already moved on to advocating for banning the existence of LGBTQ people.

NP.

What drawings ?

here https://rumble.com/v23pvjy-shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-was-stocked-in-school-librarie.html

For older HS teens, most of that seemed OK. Nothing wrong with pictures of same-sex people kissing.

The fellatio drawing is problematic. Straight or gay, I’m not sure graphic fellatio images belong in school libraries.

It’s not actually fellatio and no genitalia is shown.

It’s clear we’re not dealing with the smartest tools in the shed here. You obviously haven’t bothered to actually watch the video.

Again, if you actually read the book you’d understand that it’s not a penis.

Holy f@ckballs - you think since it’s not ACTUALLY a penis the depiction of someone sucking a strap on is therefore ok?
This is what we’re dealing with folks. Irrational people.

Yes, it makes a difference. If it were actual genitalia it’d be a different story, but it’s not.

Dildos appear on TV and movies all of the time.

There is no rational conversation to be had here. Clearly.

+1
That's because we're dealing with "handwavey" gaslighting trolls who refuse to watch the video in question. It's not even worth bothering with them at this point. Everyone knows they're lying through their teeth.

You think the depiction of a non-realistic dildo is the same as the depiction of an actual penis?

It’s a piece of plastic.

ITS A GRAPHIC NOVEL. Nothing in there is technically realistic. So the dildo and penis are identical.

Yep. You're basically wanting to ban a novel-length comic book. I'd be embarrassed, if I were you. Unfortunately the people who actually banned Maus (another novel-length comic book) were not embarrassed.

It’s a book depicting oral sex, aimed at teenagers. I’m embarrassed for you that you think this is appropriate for schools. If you don’t want boundaries with your own kids fine - whip out a dildo and show them how to do it. The rest of us know it’s not something that kids should find in the school libraries.

Nah, it's a book about the author and their gender identity. Not a topic that I, personally, am particularly interested in, but I don't expect every book in every library to be aimed at my personal interests and meet with my personal approval. Here's what I do, when I'm not interested in a book that's in a library: I don't read it.

Someone sucking a dildo is a sex act. There is no other “context” that you can put around it. I’m starting to think you are really really slow, and now I’m starting to feel bad for arguing with someone who clearly has a disability.

Ah, ableism in addition to transphobia.

+1

Hates gay people and craps on people with disabilities. Klassy!

So PP does have an intellectual disability. Thanks for confirming. I was 99% sure!

Using “intellectual disability” as a put down is crapping on all people with disabilities. It’s like using the r word.

Homophobe & enjoys crapping on people with disabilities. Klassy.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT writes an entire article about schools all over the country having this book in their libraries, but the troll keeps on trolling. Too funny.

Don't subscribe to the NYT, it's paywalled. And even so it's probably still anecdotal. Do better. Show some actual data showing how many schools ordered that book for their students. I only trust data, not your "feelings" or your factless anecdotes.

Until you show some actual data all you have are factless claims.

PP, I (not a book banner) posted the entire NYT article upthread. You can read it there. Nobody paid any attention to the book until the so-called Moms for Liberty somehow came across it and decided that 2 or 3 out-of-context drawings would be the very thing to further their campaign against LGBTQ people and public schools.

"Moms for Liberty" somehow "found" the book. What are the chances of far right wing activists just happening to stumble upon that particular book in some random school library. I'd give it 1:1,000,000 odds. Higher odds if one of them brought it in their purse to plant it before "finding" it. Hate to be cynical but the far right "anti-woke" is so far off the rails these days I wouldn't put anything past them.

So I guess you're (deliberately) ignoring this part:

The award brought “Gender Queer” to the attention of librarians across the country, who often look to such prizes when deciding what books to order. High schools and some middle school libraries around the country began stocking it.

The book was banned in dozens of school districts and removed from libraries across the country, including Alaska, Iowa, Texas and Pennsylvania.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/01/books/maia-kobabe-gender-queer-book-ban.html

No worries. We're all used to you lying through your teeth in order to discredit reality.

So, it's an award-winning book, which many school librarians chose to add to their school's library, but you find one or two drawings in this book, completely out of context, to be indefensibly shocking, and therefore it should be unavailable in any school library (or maybe any library at all).

You're not going to stop with this book, and you're not going to stop with books. Everyone knows that. In fact, some of the people advocating for banning books on LGBTQ topics have already moved on to advocating for banning the existence of LGBTQ people.

NP.

What drawings ?

here https://rumble.com/v23pvjy-shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-was-stocked-in-school-librarie.html

For older HS teens, most of that seemed OK. Nothing wrong with pictures of same-sex people kissing.

The fellatio drawing is problematic. Straight or gay, I’m not sure graphic fellatio images belong in school libraries.

It’s not actually fellatio and no genitalia is shown.

It’s clear we’re not dealing with the smartest tools in the shed here. You obviously haven’t bothered to actually watch the video.

Again, if you actually read the book you’d understand that it’s not a penis.

Holy f@ckballs - you think since it’s not ACTUALLY a penis the depiction of someone sucking a strap on is therefore ok?
This is what we’re dealing with folks. Irrational people.

Yes, it makes a difference. If it were actual genitalia it’d be a different story, but it’s not.

Dildos appear on TV and movies all of the time.

There is no rational conversation to be had here. Clearly.

+1
That's because we're dealing with "handwavey" gaslighting trolls who refuse to watch the video in question. It's not even worth bothering with them at this point. Everyone knows they're lying through their teeth.

You think the depiction of a non-realistic dildo is the same as the depiction of an actual penis?

It’s a piece of plastic.

ITS A GRAPHIC NOVEL. Nothing in there is technically realistic. So the dildo and penis are identical.

Yep. You're basically wanting to ban a novel-length comic book. I'd be embarrassed, if I were you. Unfortunately the people who actually banned Maus (another novel-length comic book) were not embarrassed.

It’s a book depicting oral sex, aimed at teenagers. I’m embarrassed for you that you think this is appropriate for schools. If you don’t want boundaries with your own kids fine - whip out a dildo and show them how to do it. The rest of us know it’s not something that kids should find in the school libraries.

Nah, it's a book about the author and their gender identity. Not a topic that I, personally, am particularly interested in, but I don't expect every book in every library to be aimed at my personal interests and meet with my personal approval. Here's what I do, when I'm not interested in a book that's in a library: I don't read it.

Someone sucking a dildo is a sex act. There is no other “context” that you can put around it. I’m starting to think you are really really slow, and now I’m starting to feel bad for arguing with someone who clearly has a disability.

Sucking on a finger is also a sex act, but it’s not porn.

Sucking on a finger can be a sex act, or can be a way to remove chicken grease from your fingers. Or to suck the blood off of a cut. Or a way to comfort yourself.
Sucking a dildo has one intent and one intent only.
I fear for your children. I really do.

Sucking on a finger in a sexual way is not porn.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT writes an entire article about schools all over the country having this book in their libraries, but the troll keeps on trolling. Too funny.

Don't subscribe to the NYT, it's paywalled. And even so it's probably still anecdotal. Do better. Show some actual data showing how many schools ordered that book for their students. I only trust data, not your "feelings" or your factless anecdotes.

Until you show some actual data all you have are factless claims.

PP, I (not a book banner) posted the entire NYT article upthread. You can read it there. Nobody paid any attention to the book until the so-called Moms for Liberty somehow came across it and decided that 2 or 3 out-of-context drawings would be the very thing to further their campaign against LGBTQ people and public schools.

"Moms for Liberty" somehow "found" the book. What are the chances of far right wing activists just happening to stumble upon that particular book in some random school library. I'd give it 1:1,000,000 odds. Higher odds if one of them brought it in their purse to plant it before "finding" it. Hate to be cynical but the far right "anti-woke" is so far off the rails these days I wouldn't put anything past them.

So I guess you're (deliberately) ignoring this part:

The award brought “Gender Queer” to the attention of librarians across the country, who often look to such prizes when deciding what books to order. High schools and some middle school libraries around the country began stocking it.

The book was banned in dozens of school districts and removed from libraries across the country, including Alaska, Iowa, Texas and Pennsylvania.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/01/books/maia-kobabe-gender-queer-book-ban.html

No worries. We're all used to you lying through your teeth in order to discredit reality.

So, it's an award-winning book, which many school librarians chose to add to their school's library, but you find one or two drawings in this book, completely out of context, to be indefensibly shocking, and therefore it should be unavailable in any school library (or maybe any library at all).

You're not going to stop with this book, and you're not going to stop with books. Everyone knows that. In fact, some of the people advocating for banning books on LGBTQ topics have already moved on to advocating for banning the existence of LGBTQ people.

NP.

What drawings ?

here https://rumble.com/v23pvjy-shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-was-stocked-in-school-librarie.html

For older HS teens, most of that seemed OK. Nothing wrong with pictures of same-sex people kissing.

The fellatio drawing is problematic. Straight or gay, I’m not sure graphic fellatio images belong in school libraries.

It’s not actually fellatio and no genitalia is shown.

It’s clear we’re not dealing with the smartest tools in the shed here. You obviously haven’t bothered to actually watch the video.

Again, if you actually read the book you’d understand that it’s not a penis.

Holy f@ckballs - you think since it’s not ACTUALLY a penis the depiction of someone sucking a strap on is therefore ok?
This is what we’re dealing with folks. Irrational people.

Yes, it makes a difference. If it were actual genitalia it’d be a different story, but it’s not.

Dildos appear on TV and movies all of the time.

There is no rational conversation to be had here. Clearly.

+1
That's because we're dealing with "handwavey" gaslighting trolls who refuse to watch the video in question. It's not even worth bothering with them at this point. Everyone knows they're lying through their teeth.

You think the depiction of a non-realistic dildo is the same as the depiction of an actual penis?

It’s a piece of plastic.

ITS A GRAPHIC NOVEL. Nothing in there is technically realistic. So the dildo and penis are identical.

Yep. You're basically wanting to ban a novel-length comic book. I'd be embarrassed, if I were you. Unfortunately the people who actually banned Maus (another novel-length comic book) were not embarrassed.

It’s a book depicting oral sex, aimed at teenagers. I’m embarrassed for you that you think this is appropriate for schools. If you don’t want boundaries with your own kids fine - whip out a dildo and show them how to do it. The rest of us know it’s not something that kids should find in the school libraries.

Nah, it's a book about the author and their gender identity. Not a topic that I, personally, am particularly interested in, but I don't expect every book in every library to be aimed at my personal interests and meet with my personal approval. Here's what I do, when I'm not interested in a book that's in a library: I don't read it.

Someone sucking a dildo is a sex act. There is no other “context” that you can put around it. I’m starting to think you are really really slow, and now I’m starting to feel bad for arguing with someone who clearly has a disability.

Ah, ableism in addition to transphobia.

+1

Hates gay people and craps on people with disabilities. Klassy!

So PP does have an intellectual disability. Thanks for confirming. I was 99% sure!

Using “intellectual disability” as a put down is crapping on all people with disabilities. It’s like using the r word.

Homophobe & enjoys crapping on people with disabilities. Klassy.

It’s not a put down. There is clearly something wrong with PP. It’s just a statement of fact. I’ll back off because it’s not fair to argue with someone who is at a disadvantage.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT writes an entire article about schools all over the country having this book in their libraries, but the troll keeps on trolling. Too funny.

Don't subscribe to the NYT, it's paywalled. And even so it's probably still anecdotal. Do better. Show some actual data showing how many schools ordered that book for their students. I only trust data, not your "feelings" or your factless anecdotes.

Until you show some actual data all you have are factless claims.

PP, I (not a book banner) posted the entire NYT article upthread. You can read it there. Nobody paid any attention to the book until the so-called Moms for Liberty somehow came across it and decided that 2 or 3 out-of-context drawings would be the very thing to further their campaign against LGBTQ people and public schools.

"Moms for Liberty" somehow "found" the book. What are the chances of far right wing activists just happening to stumble upon that particular book in some random school library. I'd give it 1:1,000,000 odds. Higher odds if one of them brought it in their purse to plant it before "finding" it. Hate to be cynical but the far right "anti-woke" is so far off the rails these days I wouldn't put anything past them.

So I guess you're (deliberately) ignoring this part:

The award brought “Gender Queer” to the attention of librarians across the country, who often look to such prizes when deciding what books to order. High schools and some middle school libraries around the country began stocking it.

The book was banned in dozens of school districts and removed from libraries across the country, including Alaska, Iowa, Texas and Pennsylvania.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/01/books/maia-kobabe-gender-queer-book-ban.html

No worries. We're all used to you lying through your teeth in order to discredit reality.

So, it's an award-winning book, which many school librarians chose to add to their school's library, but you find one or two drawings in this book, completely out of context, to be indefensibly shocking, and therefore it should be unavailable in any school library (or maybe any library at all).

You're not going to stop with this book, and you're not going to stop with books. Everyone knows that. In fact, some of the people advocating for banning books on LGBTQ topics have already moved on to advocating for banning the existence of LGBTQ people.

NP.

What drawings ?

here https://rumble.com/v23pvjy-shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-was-stocked-in-school-librarie.html

For older HS teens, most of that seemed OK. Nothing wrong with pictures of same-sex people kissing.

The fellatio drawing is problematic. Straight or gay, I’m not sure graphic fellatio images belong in school libraries.

It’s not actually fellatio and no genitalia is shown.

It’s clear we’re not dealing with the smartest tools in the shed here. You obviously haven’t bothered to actually watch the video.

Again, if you actually read the book you’d understand that it’s not a penis.

Holy f@ckballs - you think since it’s not ACTUALLY a penis the depiction of someone sucking a strap on is therefore ok?
This is what we’re dealing with folks. Irrational people.

Yes, it makes a difference. If it were actual genitalia it’d be a different story, but it’s not.

Dildos appear on TV and movies all of the time.

There is no rational conversation to be had here. Clearly.

+1
That's because we're dealing with "handwavey" gaslighting trolls who refuse to watch the video in question. It's not even worth bothering with them at this point. Everyone knows they're lying through their teeth.

You think the depiction of a non-realistic dildo is the same as the depiction of an actual penis?

It’s a piece of plastic.

ITS A GRAPHIC NOVEL. Nothing in there is technically realistic. So the dildo and penis are identical.

Yep. You're basically wanting to ban a novel-length comic book. I'd be embarrassed, if I were you. Unfortunately the people who actually banned Maus (another novel-length comic book) were not embarrassed.

It’s a book depicting oral sex, aimed at teenagers. I’m embarrassed for you that you think this is appropriate for schools. If you don’t want boundaries with your own kids fine - whip out a dildo and show them how to do it. The rest of us know it’s not something that kids should find in the school libraries.

Nah, it's a book about the author and their gender identity. Not a topic that I, personally, am particularly interested in, but I don't expect every book in every library to be aimed at my personal interests and meet with my personal approval. Here's what I do, when I'm not interested in a book that's in a library: I don't read it.

Someone sucking a dildo is a sex act. There is no other “context” that you can put around it. I’m starting to think you are really really slow, and now I’m starting to feel bad for arguing with someone who clearly has a disability.

Ah, ableism in addition to transphobia.

+1

Hates gay people and craps on people with disabilities. Klassy!

So PP does have an intellectual disability. Thanks for confirming. I was 99% sure!

Using “intellectual disability” as a put down is crapping on all people with disabilities. It’s like using the r word.

Homophobe & enjoys crapping on people with disabilities. Klassy.

It’s not a put down. There is clearly something wrong with PP. It’s just a statement of fact. I’ll back off because it’s not fair to argue with someone who is at a disadvantage.

Just like the r word.

Youngkin groupies are klassy.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT writes an entire article about schools all over the country having this book in their libraries, but the troll keeps on trolling. Too funny.

Don't subscribe to the NYT, it's paywalled. And even so it's probably still anecdotal. Do better. Show some actual data showing how many schools ordered that book for their students. I only trust data, not your "feelings" or your factless anecdotes.

Until you show some actual data all you have are factless claims.

PP, I (not a book banner) posted the entire NYT article upthread. You can read it there. Nobody paid any attention to the book until the so-called Moms for Liberty somehow came across it and decided that 2 or 3 out-of-context drawings would be the very thing to further their campaign against LGBTQ people and public schools.

"Moms for Liberty" somehow "found" the book. What are the chances of far right wing activists just happening to stumble upon that particular book in some random school library. I'd give it 1:1,000,000 odds. Higher odds if one of them brought it in their purse to plant it before "finding" it. Hate to be cynical but the far right "anti-woke" is so far off the rails these days I wouldn't put anything past them.

So I guess you're (deliberately) ignoring this part:

The award brought “Gender Queer” to the attention of librarians across the country, who often look to such prizes when deciding what books to order. High schools and some middle school libraries around the country began stocking it.

The book was banned in dozens of school districts and removed from libraries across the country, including Alaska, Iowa, Texas and Pennsylvania.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/01/books/maia-kobabe-gender-queer-book-ban.html

No worries. We're all used to you lying through your teeth in order to discredit reality.

So, it's an award-winning book, which many school librarians chose to add to their school's library, but you find one or two drawings in this book, completely out of context, to be indefensibly shocking, and therefore it should be unavailable in any school library (or maybe any library at all).

You're not going to stop with this book, and you're not going to stop with books. Everyone knows that. In fact, some of the people advocating for banning books on LGBTQ topics have already moved on to advocating for banning the existence of LGBTQ people.

NP.

What drawings ?

here https://rumble.com/v23pvjy-shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-was-stocked-in-school-librarie.html

For older HS teens, most of that seemed OK. Nothing wrong with pictures of same-sex people kissing.

The fellatio drawing is problematic. Straight or gay, I’m not sure graphic fellatio images belong in school libraries.

It’s not actually fellatio and no genitalia is shown.

It’s clear we’re not dealing with the smartest tools in the shed here. You obviously haven’t bothered to actually watch the video.

Again, if you actually read the book you’d understand that it’s not a penis.

Holy f@ckballs - you think since it’s not ACTUALLY a penis the depiction of someone sucking a strap on is therefore ok?
This is what we’re dealing with folks. Irrational people.

Yes, it makes a difference. If it were actual genitalia it’d be a different story, but it’s not.

Dildos appear on TV and movies all of the time.

There is no rational conversation to be had here. Clearly.

+1
That's because we're dealing with "handwavey" gaslighting trolls who refuse to watch the video in question. It's not even worth bothering with them at this point. Everyone knows they're lying through their teeth.

You think the depiction of a non-realistic dildo is the same as the depiction of an actual penis?

It’s a piece of plastic.

ITS A GRAPHIC NOVEL. Nothing in there is technically realistic. So the dildo and penis are identical.

Yep. You're basically wanting to ban a novel-length comic book. I'd be embarrassed, if I were you. Unfortunately the people who actually banned Maus (another novel-length comic book) were not embarrassed.

Imagine I published a graphic comic book of Mickey Mouse f**king Minnie Mouse, with really explicit details; maybe giving it to her in a**, followed by a Dirty Sanchez. Hell, Mickey could even f**k Goofy, Donald, and even his dog Pluto for good measure.

It’s just a comic, right? They are not real, right? Not even human.

Would that be OK for all public school libraries? The PP above keeps making idiotic arguments.

Fellatio drawings do not belong in school libraries. Parents who feel otherwise can buy whatever images they want, to give to their kids at home.

What if I invented a hypothetical to support my argument, because there are no real examples to support my argument?

If you STILL don’t get it (or you are mentally incapable, as I suspect is the case), then why don’t you go ahead and POST the fellatio image from Gender Queer, right here, in this thread, and see what happens?

It’s just a drawing, right?
It’s only a cartoon, right?
It’s not a penis, just a dildo, right?
It’s perfectly fine for children in every public school library, right?

So, what’s the problem?

What is the problem? That's a good question. I think the answer is: the problem, FOR YOU, is the existence of people who are gender queer.

You still didn’t post the image you keep trying (and failing) to defend.

Personal attacks are the hallmarks of a non-existent argument.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NYT writes an entire article about schools all over the country having this book in their libraries, but the troll keeps on trolling. Too funny.

Don't subscribe to the NYT, it's paywalled. And even so it's probably still anecdotal. Do better. Show some actual data showing how many schools ordered that book for their students. I only trust data, not your "feelings" or your factless anecdotes.

Until you show some actual data all you have are factless claims.

PP, I (not a book banner) posted the entire NYT article upthread. You can read it there. Nobody paid any attention to the book until the so-called Moms for Liberty somehow came across it and decided that 2 or 3 out-of-context drawings would be the very thing to further their campaign against LGBTQ people and public schools.

"Moms for Liberty" somehow "found" the book. What are the chances of far right wing activists just happening to stumble upon that particular book in some random school library. I'd give it 1:1,000,000 odds. Higher odds if one of them brought it in their purse to plant it before "finding" it. Hate to be cynical but the far right "anti-woke" is so far off the rails these days I wouldn't put anything past them.

So I guess you're (deliberately) ignoring this part:

The award brought “Gender Queer” to the attention of librarians across the country, who often look to such prizes when deciding what books to order. High schools and some middle school libraries around the country began stocking it.

The book was banned in dozens of school districts and removed from libraries across the country, including Alaska, Iowa, Texas and Pennsylvania.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/01/books/maia-kobabe-gender-queer-book-ban.html

No worries. We're all used to you lying through your teeth in order to discredit reality.

So, it's an award-winning book, which many school librarians chose to add to their school's library, but you find one or two drawings in this book, completely out of context, to be indefensibly shocking, and therefore it should be unavailable in any school library (or maybe any library at all).

You're not going to stop with this book, and you're not going to stop with books. Everyone knows that. In fact, some of the people advocating for banning books on LGBTQ topics have already moved on to advocating for banning the existence of LGBTQ people.

NP.

What drawings ?

here https://rumble.com/v23pvjy-shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-was-stocked-in-school-librarie.html

For older HS teens, most of that seemed OK. Nothing wrong with pictures of same-sex people kissing.

The fellatio drawing is problematic. Straight or gay, I’m not sure graphic fellatio images belong in school libraries.

It’s not actually fellatio and no genitalia is shown.

It’s clear we’re not dealing with the smartest tools in the shed here. You obviously haven’t bothered to actually watch the video.

Again, if you actually read the book you’d understand that it’s not a penis.

Holy f@ckballs - you think since it’s not ACTUALLY a penis the depiction of someone sucking a strap on is therefore ok?
This is what we’re dealing with folks. Irrational people.

Yes, it makes a difference. If it were actual genitalia it’d be a different story, but it’s not.

Dildos appear on TV and movies all of the time.

There is no rational conversation to be had here. Clearly.

+1
That's because we're dealing with "handwavey" gaslighting trolls who refuse to watch the video in question. It's not even worth bothering with them at this point. Everyone knows they're lying through their teeth.

You think the depiction of a non-realistic dildo is the same as the depiction of an actual penis?

It’s a piece of plastic.

ITS A GRAPHIC NOVEL. Nothing in there is technically realistic. So the dildo and penis are identical.

Yep. You're basically wanting to ban a novel-length comic book. I'd be embarrassed, if I were you. Unfortunately the people who actually banned Maus (another novel-length comic book) were not embarrassed.

It’s a book depicting oral sex, aimed at teenagers. I’m embarrassed for you that you think this is appropriate for schools. If you don’t want boundaries with your own kids fine - whip out a dildo and show them how to do it. The rest of us know it’s not something that kids should find in the school libraries.

+1
Not to mention the other pornographic examples shown in the video that these trolls refuse to watch/engage with. So telling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These books are not “porn”.

1st Place Winner! for Best Gaslighting

Exactly. The trolling has become so grotesque, it's now comical. No wonder no one takes these idiots seriously.
DP