Why are book banners showing up at FCPS SB meetings

[Anonymous]

Since the SB meeting was broadcast, this woman violated federal indecency law. Feel free to file a complaint with the FCC:

https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us

Unless you think this isn’t an offensive thing to show and read on public access/ FCPS educational TV. Like this woman apparently didn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Since the SB meeting was broadcast, this woman violated federal indecency law. Feel free to file a complaint with the FCC:

https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us

Unless you think this isn’t an offensive thing to show and read on public access/ FCPS educational TV. Like this woman apparently didn’t.

You first. You claim she's a nuisance but you could always make her a martyr as well, dumbass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anything good came out of these past 18 or so months, it's that parents were and are actually watching school board work sessions and meetings in large numbers.

And how do parents keep doing that if people are celebrating a woman who is reading porn with no heads up during a work session? Some of us are watching or listening and monitoring young kids. Now we can’t watch because members of the community are using the meeting to broadcast porn? You think the FCC isn’t getting complaints and won’t fine someone?

FCPS— the first county in the nation to have to broadcast SB meeting on a time delay.

Who are here people cheering for a women bringing this into my house? There is a Tim and a place. And it’s with adults only present. Not 7 year olds.

I think that's kind of the point she was trying to make: this type of content should be for adults only. No for minors.

Believe it or not, you guys are in agreement; you just might draw the line at a different age as to when its appropriate. But you both believe its not suitable for certain age groups

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anything good came out of these past 18 or so months, it's that parents were and are actually watching school board work sessions and meetings in large numbers.

And how do parents keep doing that if people are celebrating a woman who is reading porn with no heads up during a work session? Some of us are watching or listening and monitoring young kids. Now we can’t watch because members of the community are using the meeting to broadcast porn? You think the FCC isn’t getting complaints and won’t fine someone?

FCPS— the first county in the nation to have to broadcast SB meeting on a time delay.

Who are here people cheering for a women bringing this into my house? There is a Tim and a place. And it’s with adults only present. Not 7 year olds.

I think that's kind of the point she was trying to make: this type of content should be for adults only. No for minors.

Believe it or not, you guys are in agreement; you just might draw the line at a different age as to when its appropriate. But you both believe its not suitable for certain age groups

Except she’s the one who broadcast it to first graders. So, it’s not a philosophical discussion. She did actual harm to many real kids. But hey, GOP agenda advanced, so who cares about the kids hurt in the process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anything good came out of these past 18 or so months, it's that parents were and are actually watching school board work sessions and meetings in large numbers.

And how do parents keep doing that if people are celebrating a woman who is reading porn with no heads up during a work session? Some of us are watching or listening and monitoring young kids. Now we can’t watch because members of the community are using the meeting to broadcast porn? You think the FCC isn’t getting complaints and won’t fine someone?

FCPS— the first county in the nation to have to broadcast SB meeting on a time delay.

Who are here people cheering for a women bringing this into my house? There is a Tim and a place. And it’s with adults only present. Not 7 year olds.

I think that's kind of the point she was trying to make: this type of content should be for adults only. No for minors.

Believe it or not, you guys are in agreement; you just might draw the line at a different age as to when its appropriate. But you both believe its not suitable for certain age groups

If that was her point, why put it on FCPS Educational TV, thus making it available to Kers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since the SB meeting was broadcast, this woman violated federal indecency law. Feel free to file a complaint with the FCC:

https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us

Unless you think this isn’t an offensive thing to show and read on public access/ FCPS educational TV. Like this woman apparently didn’t.

You first. You claim she's a nuisance but you could always make her a martyr as well, dumbass.

1. I did

2. Making a martyr out of someone broadcasting indecent material on the school’s public access channel is peak GOP in 2021. Fortunately, we don’t tend to like your sort around here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since the SB meeting was broadcast, this woman violated federal indecency law. Feel free to file a complaint with the FCC:

https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us

Unless you think this isn’t an offensive thing to show and read on public access/ FCPS educational TV. Like this woman apparently didn’t.

You first. You claim she's a nuisance but you could always make her a martyr as well, dumbass.

1. I did

2. Making a martyr out of someone broadcasting indecent material on the school’s public access channel is peak GOP in 2021. Fortunately, we don’t tend to like your sort around here.

I guess we'll be finding out over the next few years, cowboy. You've alienated far more people than you realize.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anything good came out of these past 18 or so months, it's that parents were and are actually watching school board work sessions and meetings in large numbers.

And how do parents keep doing that if people are celebrating a woman who is reading porn with no heads up during a work session? Some of us are watching or listening and monitoring young kids. Now we can’t watch because members of the community are using the meeting to broadcast porn? You think the FCC isn’t getting complaints and won’t fine someone?

FCPS— the first county in the nation to have to broadcast SB meeting on a time delay.

Who are here people cheering for a women bringing this into my house? There is a Tim and a place. And it’s with adults only present. Not 7 year olds.

I think that's kind of the point she was trying to make: this type of content should be for adults only. No for minors.

Believe it or not, you guys are in agreement; you just might draw the line at a different age as to when its appropriate. But you both believe its not suitable for certain age groups

DP. There is a time, place and manner element that you (and she) are ignoring here. The regular public libraries circulate romance (and other) novels with graphic sexual scenes in them. They are intended or mature readers (although younger readers could get access to them), and are perfectly appropriate for public library circulation. They would not, however, be appropriate to read aloud at a county board meeting for attempted shock value.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anything good came out of these past 18 or so months, it's that parents were and are actually watching school board work sessions and meetings in large numbers.

And how do parents keep doing that if people are celebrating a woman who is reading porn with no heads up during a work session? Some of us are watching or listening and monitoring young kids. Now we can’t watch because members of the community are using the meeting to broadcast porn? You think the FCC isn’t getting complaints and won’t fine someone?

FCPS— the first county in the nation to have to broadcast SB meeting on a time delay.

Who are here people cheering for a women bringing this into my house? There is a Tim and a place. And it’s with adults only present. Not 7 year olds.

I think that's kind of the point she was trying to make: this type of content should be for adults only. No for minors.

Believe it or not, you guys are in agreement; you just might draw the line at a different age as to when its appropriate. But you both believe its not suitable for certain age groups

DP. There is a time, place and manner element that you (and she) are ignoring here. The regular public libraries circulate romance (and other) novels with graphic sexual scenes in them. They are intended or mature readers (although younger readers could get access to them), and are perfectly appropriate for public library circulation. They would not, however, be appropriate to read aloud at a county board meeting for attempted shock value.

Presumably then they are inappropriate for school libraries as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anything good came out of these past 18 or so months, it's that parents were and are actually watching school board work sessions and meetings in large numbers.

And how do parents keep doing that if people are celebrating a woman who is reading porn with no heads up during a work session? Some of us are watching or listening and monitoring young kids. Now we can’t watch because members of the community are using the meeting to broadcast porn? You think the FCC isn’t getting complaints and won’t fine someone?

FCPS— the first county in the nation to have to broadcast SB meeting on a time delay.

Who are here people cheering for a women bringing this into my house? There is a Tim and a place. And it’s with adults only present. Not 7 year olds.

I think that's kind of the point she was trying to make: this type of content should be for adults only. No for minors.

Believe it or not, you guys are in agreement; you just might draw the line at a different age as to when its appropriate. But you both believe its not suitable for certain age groups

DP. There is a time, place and manner element that you (and she) are ignoring here. The regular public libraries circulate romance (and other) novels with graphic sexual scenes in them. They are intended or mature readers (although younger readers could get access to them), and are perfectly appropriate for public library circulation. They would not, however, be appropriate to read aloud at a county board meeting for attempted shock value.

Presumably then they are inappropriate for school libraries as well.

DP. A graphic description of deaths during the Holocaust could easily be inappropriate for a school board meeting broadcast to homes of all ages, but would be appropriate in a high school history class. Different contexts have different rules, and the attempts to equate them throughout this thread (i.e. nothing in the library you couldn't have at work or that would bother DCUM's advertisers) are ridiculous. A school board meeting isn't a school library.

[Anonymous]

Double and triple down.

These are your Democrats people.

[Anonymous]

DP. A graphic description of deaths during the Holocaust could easily be inappropriate for a school board meeting broadcast to homes of all ages, but would be appropriate in a high school history class. Different contexts have different rules, and the attempts to equate them throughout this thread (i.e. nothing in the library you couldn't have at work or that would bother DCUM's advertisers) are ridiculous. A school board meeting isn't a school library.

I don't think someone describing the Holocaust or showing pics of it would have been screamed at by the School Board or required a five minute recess.

And, by the way, why would someone be bringing the Holocaust to the attention of the School Board. Oh, wait, maybe there is a member who could benefit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Double and triple down.

These are your Democrats people.

The sad thing is these folks think they are being clever with this type of rhetorical jiu jitsu. Normal people see through it as an obvious attempt to deflect and avoid dealing with the problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Double and triple down.

These are your Democrats people.

The sad thing is these folks think they are being clever with this type of rhetorical jiu jitsu. Normal people see through it as an obvious attempt to deflect and avoid dealing with the problem.

We cannot convince someone into having a moral compass. It's like throwing a bouncing ball at a wall. It will never catch it. It will just keep.coming.back. with more devil's advocacy, arguing and arguing for arguments sake really. I think they enjoy the banter, plus feeling like one of the group think Borg and repeating whatever they heard from the cube. "Resistance is futile!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

DP. A graphic description of deaths during the Holocaust could easily be inappropriate for a school board meeting broadcast to homes of all ages, but would be appropriate in a high school history class. Different contexts have different rules, and the attempts to equate them throughout this thread (i.e. nothing in the library you couldn't have at work or that would bother DCUM's advertisers) are ridiculous. A school board meeting isn't a school library.

I don't think someone describing the Holocaust or showing pics of it would have been screamed at by the School Board or required a five minute recess.

And, by the way, why would someone be bringing the Holocaust to the attention of the School Board. Oh, wait, maybe there is a member who could benefit.