Why are book banners showing up at FCPS SB meetings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Agreed. However, our flaw is that in the spirit of sincere thought and rational exchanges, we think/hope these folk will be persuaded. As evidenced by this thread, they won't.

What we should be doing (as some have), is calling them out for encouraging the moral decline of the system. Defining deviancy down.

Young people explore their sexuality. There is nothing deviant about that.

You have done weird hang-ups.

School is not the place to teach that/

That’s why homeschool is an option for all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Agreed. However, our flaw is that in the spirit of sincere thought and rational exchanges, we think/hope these folk will be persuaded. As evidenced by this thread, they won't.

What we should be doing (as some have), is calling them out for encouraging the moral decline of the system. Defining deviancy down.

Young people explore their sexuality. There is nothing deviant about that.

You have done weird hang-ups.

School is not the place to teach that/

School isn’t teaching kids specifically HOW to explore their sexuality, but they are sharing a variety of fictional and nonfictional stories to normalize it.

It’s normal and OK for kids to explore sexuality and their bodies. It’s not “deviant”.

Not every book will be for every kid, but these books will help some kids on their journey. Or give insights to kids who want to understand others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a Democrat. Like many Democrats, I think the graphic novel isnt appropriate for school. Thats fairly obvious from the pics. The lawn boy book, Im holding my opinion until I read it myself as many have said that the passages shared were out of context.

That said, why are so many posters upthread making this blanket “Democrats are pedophiles!!! All of em!!” Type of statements? That is no way to get anyone on your side because it makes you sound judgemental and crazy.

When the people opposing the book's inclusion in public school libraries are called "Trumphumpers", and other Republican candidates are dragged into it, AND the elected officials offering vigorous defense are Democrats, AND there is no news of other Dem elected officials opposing it, people aren't baselessly drawing the conclusion that this is something that modern Democrats support.

If there are Fairfax Democratic party officials or elected officials condemning this, I hope someone will post.

Because the ENTIRE reason why this is even an “issue” right now is because GOP astroturfing groups are pushing these wedge issues as a campaign tactic for upcoming November elections.

That is exactly why they forced outrage NOW vs 2-3 years ago when the books first came out.

You are either being used or trying to use parents to get Youngkin elected. Sorry, VA will not elect a Trumphumper. No matter how many faux issues you can muster up.

This can't be an issue about parenting and what is appropriate for the school library. Try to engage, and you'll be attacked.

For the left, EVERY issue is about politics. Politics IS their religion, sadly. I suspect this poster doesn't have any children in Fairfax County.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Agreed. However, our flaw is that in the spirit of sincere thought and rational exchanges, we think/hope these folk will be persuaded. As evidenced by this thread, they won't.

What we should be doing (as some have), is calling them out for encouraging the moral decline of the system. Defining deviancy down.

Young people explore their sexuality. There is nothing deviant about that.

You have done weird hang-ups.

School is not the place to teach that/

Books to read in high school are how we take kids and (hopefully) turn them into thoughtful mature adults. Sexuality is part of life and it's definitely part of life for high schoolers, whether they're having it or not. I'm fine with the books in question, though I understand good faith disagreement on that, but I'm really troubled by the broader implication that there can be no sex in high school libraries. The culture is awash in sex and actual pornography, a place where high schoolers can see depictions of adult sexuality that AREN'T Pornhub is really important, now more than ever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Agreed. However, our flaw is that in the spirit of sincere thought and rational exchanges, we think/hope these folk will be persuaded. As evidenced by this thread, they won't.

What we should be doing (as some have), is calling them out for encouraging the moral decline of the system. Defining deviancy down.

Young people explore their sexuality. There is nothing deviant about that.

You have done weird hang-ups.

School is not the place to teach that/

Books to read in high school are how we take kids and (hopefully) turn them into thoughtful mature adults. Sexuality is part of life and it's definitely part of life for high schoolers, whether they're having it or not. I'm fine with the books in question, though I understand good faith disagreement on that, but I'm really troubled by the broader implication that there can be no sex in high school libraries. The culture is awash in sex and actual pornography, a place where high schoolers can see depictions of adult sexuality that AREN'T Pornhub is really important, now more than ever.

I don't think getting rid of smutty books in FCPS libraries means the end of Family Life Education. These books don't pass the smell test. I can understand why those who have a knee-jerk reaction to defend everything FCPS does and the all-Democratic School Board that's responsible for the oversight of FCPS might try to move the goal posts here, but it's not going to make those particular books less objectionable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Agreed. However, our flaw is that in the spirit of sincere thought and rational exchanges, we think/hope these folk will be persuaded. As evidenced by this thread, they won't.

What we should be doing (as some have), is calling them out for encouraging the moral decline of the system. Defining deviancy down.

Young people explore their sexuality. There is nothing deviant about that.

You have done weird hang-ups.

School is not the place to teach that/

School isn’t teaching kids specifically HOW to explore their sexuality, but they are sharing a variety of fictional and nonfictional stories to normalize it.

It’s normal and OK for kids to explore sexuality and their bodies. It’s not “deviant”.

Not every book will be for every kid, but these books will help some kids on their journey. Or give insights to kids who want to understand others.

A school should not be a place to explore sexuality. That should be in the privacy of one's bedroom or home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Agreed. However, our flaw is that in the spirit of sincere thought and rational exchanges, we think/hope these folk will be persuaded. As evidenced by this thread, they won't.

What we should be doing (as some have), is calling them out for encouraging the moral decline of the system. Defining deviancy down.

Young people explore their sexuality. There is nothing deviant about that.

You have done weird hang-ups.

School is not the place to teach that/

Books to read in high school are how we take kids and (hopefully) turn them into thoughtful mature adults. Sexuality is part of life and it's definitely part of life for high schoolers, whether they're having it or not. I'm fine with the books in question, though I understand good faith disagreement on that, but I'm really troubled by the broader implication that there can be no sex in high school libraries. The culture is awash in sex and actual pornography, a place where high schoolers can see depictions of adult sexuality that AREN'T Pornhub is really important, now more than ever.

I don't think getting rid of smutty books in FCPS libraries means the end of Family Life Education. These books don't pass the smell test. I can understand why those who have a knee-jerk reaction to defend everything FCPS does and the all-Democratic School Board that's responsible for the oversight of FCPS might try to move the goal posts here, but it's not going to make those particular books less objectionable.

You'd do well to at least imagine that the people you're arguing with have honest, thoughtful reasons for their beliefs. I'm not a partisan Democrat and I've got no particular feelings about the school board. I'm just a parent, who looked at the books and thinks they're appropriate for high schoolers. This is surely a fault of people on both sides of this question, but the assumption that I must be a knee jerk defender of the school board makes you seem like someone so closed minded that it's pointless to talk to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Agreed. However, our flaw is that in the spirit of sincere thought and rational exchanges, we think/hope these folk will be persuaded. As evidenced by this thread, they won't.

What we should be doing (as some have), is calling them out for encouraging the moral decline of the system. Defining deviancy down.

Young people explore their sexuality. There is nothing deviant about that.

You have done weird hang-ups.

School is not the place to teach that/

Books to read in high school are how we take kids and (hopefully) turn them into thoughtful mature adults. Sexuality is part of life and it's definitely part of life for high schoolers, whether they're having it or not. I'm fine with the books in question, though I understand good faith disagreement on that, but I'm really troubled by the broader implication that there can be no sex in high school libraries. The culture is awash in sex and actual pornography, a place where high schoolers can see depictions of adult sexuality that AREN'T Pornhub is really important, now more than ever.

The same can be said of opiates, other drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, and vaping. American culture is awash with combinations of these things.

Should kids explore heroin, smoking, beer, and vapes at school too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a Democrat. Like many Democrats, I think the graphic novel isnt appropriate for school. Thats fairly obvious from the pics. The lawn boy book, Im holding my opinion until I read it myself as many have said that the passages shared were out of context.

That said, why are so many posters upthread making this blanket “Democrats are pedophiles!!! All of em!!” Type of statements? That is no way to get anyone on your side because it makes you sound judgemental and crazy.

When the people opposing the book's inclusion in public school libraries are called "Trumphumpers", and other Republican candidates are dragged into it, AND the elected officials offering vigorous defense are Democrats, AND there is no news of other Dem elected officials opposing it, people aren't baselessly drawing the conclusion that this is something that modern Democrats support.

If there are Fairfax Democratic party officials or elected officials condemning this, I hope someone will post.

Because the ENTIRE reason why this is even an “issue” right now is because GOP astroturfing groups are pushing these wedge issues as a campaign tactic for upcoming November elections.

That is exactly why they forced outrage NOW vs 2-3 years ago when the books first came out.

You are either being used or trying to use parents to get Youngkin elected. Sorry, VA will not elect a Trumphumper. No matter how many faux issues you can muster up.

It's an issue because this book was placed in school libraries, parents found out about it and then members of the school board defended it. Frisch even took to Twitter to equate the book's inclusion in public libraries to the support of the LGBTQIA+ community.

It's just too bad for the local Democrats that right on the heels of one of their own voting against recognizing 9/11 another one of their own decides that THIS was a great idea.

It's also too bad for the local Democrats that many parents don't want graphic sex novels in their kids schools.

If only they were in favor of it like good McAuliffe supporters are supposed to be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Agreed. However, our flaw is that in the spirit of sincere thought and rational exchanges, we think/hope these folk will be persuaded. As evidenced by this thread, they won't.

What we should be doing (as some have), is calling them out for encouraging the moral decline of the system. Defining deviancy down.

Young people explore their sexuality. There is nothing deviant about that.

You have done weird hang-ups.

School is not the place to teach that/

Books to read in high school are how we take kids and (hopefully) turn them into thoughtful mature adults. Sexuality is part of life and it's definitely part of life for high schoolers, whether they're having it or not. I'm fine with the books in question, though I understand good faith disagreement on that, but I'm really troubled by the broader implication that there can be no sex in high school libraries. The culture is awash in sex and actual pornography, a place where high schoolers can see depictions of adult sexuality that AREN'T Pornhub is really important, now more than ever.

The same can be said of opiates, other drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, and vaping. American culture is awash with combinations of these things.

Should kids explore heroin, smoking, beer, and vapes at school too?

Should they read books about those things? Absolutely. If you tried to ban all books with smoking in the library, you'd be pretty busy and seem totally insane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Agreed. However, our flaw is that in the spirit of sincere thought and rational exchanges, we think/hope these folk will be persuaded. As evidenced by this thread, they won't.

What we should be doing (as some have), is calling them out for encouraging the moral decline of the system. Defining deviancy down.

Young people explore their sexuality. There is nothing deviant about that.

You have done weird hang-ups.

School is not the place to teach that/

Books to read in high school are how we take kids and (hopefully) turn them into thoughtful mature adults. Sexuality is part of life and it's definitely part of life for high schoolers, whether they're having it or not. I'm fine with the books in question, though I understand good faith disagreement on that, but I'm really troubled by the broader implication that there can be no sex in high school libraries. The culture is awash in sex and actual pornography, a place where high schoolers can see depictions of adult sexuality that AREN'T Pornhub is really important, now more than ever.

I don't think getting rid of smutty books in FCPS libraries means the end of Family Life Education. These books don't pass the smell test. I can understand why those who have a knee-jerk reaction to defend everything FCPS does and the all-Democratic School Board that's responsible for the oversight of FCPS might try to move the goal posts here, but it's not going to make those particular books less objectionable.

I literally DGAF about the school board.

I do GAF when GOP astroturfers try to hurt our schools and our kids.

You *legit* don’t like the books? Submit a request for review. Tell your kids not to read them. Don’t spread misinformation (it’s not pedophilia FFS) or throw a tantrum at the school board to get a spot on the RWNJ channels.

It’s intellectually dishonest to play dumb on the GOP’s role here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Agreed. However, our flaw is that in the spirit of sincere thought and rational exchanges, we think/hope these folk will be persuaded. As evidenced by this thread, they won't.

What we should be doing (as some have), is calling them out for encouraging the moral decline of the system. Defining deviancy down.

Young people explore their sexuality. There is nothing deviant about that.

You have done weird hang-ups.

School is not the place to teach that/

Books to read in high school are how we take kids and (hopefully) turn them into thoughtful mature adults. Sexuality is part of life and it's definitely part of life for high schoolers, whether they're having it or not. I'm fine with the books in question, though I understand good faith disagreement on that, but I'm really troubled by the broader implication that there can be no sex in high school libraries. The culture is awash in sex and actual pornography, a place where high schoolers can see depictions of adult sexuality that AREN'T Pornhub is really important, now more than ever.

I don't think getting rid of smutty books in FCPS libraries means the end of Family Life Education. These books don't pass the smell test. I can understand why those who have a knee-jerk reaction to defend everything FCPS does and the all-Democratic School Board that's responsible for the oversight of FCPS might try to move the goal posts here, but it's not going to make those particular books less objectionable.

I literally DGAF about the school board.

I do GAF when GOP astroturfers try to hurt our schools and our kids.

You *legit* don’t like the books? Submit a request for review. Tell your kids not to read them. Don’t spread misinformation (it’s not pedophilia FFS) or throw a tantrum at the school board to get a spot on the RWNJ channels.

It’s intellectually dishonest to play dumb on the GOP’s role here.

So many cliches. Can you go away for a spell while people try to clean up this mess?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a Democrat. Like many Democrats, I think the graphic novel isnt appropriate for school. Thats fairly obvious from the pics. The lawn boy book, Im holding my opinion until I read it myself as many have said that the passages shared were out of context.

That said, why are so many posters upthread making this blanket “Democrats are pedophiles!!! All of em!!” Type of statements? That is no way to get anyone on your side because it makes you sound judgemental and crazy.

When the people opposing the book's inclusion in public school libraries are called "Trumphumpers", and other Republican candidates are dragged into it, AND the elected officials offering vigorous defense are Democrats, AND there is no news of other Dem elected officials opposing it, people aren't baselessly drawing the conclusion that this is something that modern Democrats support.

If there are Fairfax Democratic party officials or elected officials condemning this, I hope someone will post.

Because the ENTIRE reason why this is even an “issue” right now is because GOP astroturfing groups are pushing these wedge issues as a campaign tactic for upcoming November elections.

That is exactly why they forced outrage NOW vs 2-3 years ago when the books first came out.

You are either being used or trying to use parents to get Youngkin elected. Sorry, VA will not elect a Trumphumper. No matter how many faux issues you can muster up.

It's an issue because this book was placed in school libraries, parents found out about it and then members of the school board defended it. Frisch even took to Twitter to equate the book's inclusion in public libraries to the support of the LGBTQIA+ community.

It's just too bad for the local Democrats that right on the heels of one of their own voting against recognizing 9/11 another one of their own decides that THIS was a great idea.

It's also too bad for the local Democrats that many parents don't want graphic sex novels in their kids schools.

If only they were in favor of it like good McAuliffe supporters are supposed to be.

If parents don’t like the books, they can request a review.

Don’t pull these political stunts or you will get called on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Agreed. However, our flaw is that in the spirit of sincere thought and rational exchanges, we think/hope these folk will be persuaded. As evidenced by this thread, they won't.

What we should be doing (as some have), is calling them out for encouraging the moral decline of the system. Defining deviancy down.

Young people explore their sexuality. There is nothing deviant about that.

You have done weird hang-ups.

School is not the place to teach that/

Books to read in high school are how we take kids and (hopefully) turn them into thoughtful mature adults. Sexuality is part of life and it's definitely part of life for high schoolers, whether they're having it or not. I'm fine with the books in question, though I understand good faith disagreement on that, but I'm really troubled by the broader implication that there can be no sex in high school libraries. The culture is awash in sex and actual pornography, a place where high schoolers can see depictions of adult sexuality that AREN'T Pornhub is really important, now more than ever.

I don't think getting rid of smutty books in FCPS libraries means the end of Family Life Education. These books don't pass the smell test. I can understand why those who have a knee-jerk reaction to defend everything FCPS does and the all-Democratic School Board that's responsible for the oversight of FCPS might try to move the goal posts here, but it's not going to make those particular books less objectionable.

I literally DGAF about the school board.

I do GAF when GOP astroturfers try to hurt our schools and our kids.

You *legit* don’t like the books? Submit a request for review. Tell your kids not to read them. Don’t spread misinformation (it’s not pedophilia FFS) or throw a tantrum at the school board to get a spot on the RWNJ channels.

It’s intellectually dishonest to play dumb on the GOP’s role here.

So many cliches. Can you go away for a spell while people try to clean up this mess?

Truth hurts.

I'll be here calling out the astroturfers each and every time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did thre right wing media send out the bat signal to ban books now? Every parent has the right to opt out of books for their kods but the nuts at tonight’s school board meeting want to pray and ban books. The latest idiot wouldn’t stop talking when her time was up and made the Board have to recess. No rules for these sheep. Where did these backwards folks come from?

Looks like Parents Defending Education (full of Koch associates and Trumphumpers) is all over this manufactured "issue":

https://twitter.com/Think_Schultz
https://twitter.com/AsraNomani

The GOP / Koch organizations are forcing these "issues" by sending in professional organizers to local “grassroots” parent groups.

For example, Parents Defending Education is full of Koch associates and Trumphumpers:

https://fedsoc.org/contributors/nicoleneily

https://ij.org/staff/rachel-hannabass/

Trump appointees:
Richey
https://www.edweek.org/policy-politics/trump-and-devos-announce-new-hires-at-education-department/2017/06

Aimee Viana
https://www.edweek.org/policy-politics/the-controversial-couple-heading-trumps-hispanic-education-efforts/2018/09

Nomani is a Trumphumper too:
https://www.npr.org/2016/11/12/501853618/muslim-woman-immigrant-and-trump-supporter

Here are the astroturfers...looking for ways to manipulate FCPS parents for the upcoming election.