Why are book banners showing up at FCPS SB meetings

[Anonymous]

“ I’ve seen it. It’s a drawing that shows people participating in oral sex. I don’t think that image is appropriate in a school. I’m honestly disturbed that some people are okay with this.”

+1
And I am a pro gay rights Democrat. Truly baffled as to how people can look at those pics and say yes this is fine to have in school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“ I’ve seen it. It’s a drawing that shows people participating in oral sex. I don’t think that image is appropriate in a school. I’m honestly disturbed that some people are okay with this.”

+1
And I am a pro gay rights Democrat. Truly baffled as to how people can look at those pics and say yes this is fine to have in school.

You have seen ONE page from an entire book. One page. One page that shows people engaging in play with a sex toy. There is not even an actual penis pictured. It is cartoonish and awkward and involves the MC realizing that e doesn’t want to do what e fantasized about, so the two people agree to try something else. It’s about open communication, consent, and respect.

Apparently you just see the penis. That’s sad. But people who have actually read the book (see reviews on Goodreads) have a different view.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ I’ve seen it. It’s a drawing that shows people participating in oral sex. I don’t think that image is appropriate in a school. I’m honestly disturbed that some people are okay with this.”

+1
And I am a pro gay rights Democrat. Truly baffled as to how people can look at those pics and say yes this is fine to have in school.

You have seen ONE page from an entire book. One page. One page that shows people engaging in play with a sex toy. There is not even an actual penis pictured. It is cartoonish and awkward and involves the MC realizing that e doesn’t want to do what e fantasized about, so the two people agree to try something else. It’s about open communication, consent, and respect.

Apparently you just see the penis. That’s sad. But people who have actually read the book (see reviews on Goodreads) have a different view.

I’m not okay with kids seeing penises in books at school, except perhaps in a science book. I’m not okay with kids seeing images that depict sex acts. I don’t think that attitude makes me an outlier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ I’ve seen it. It’s a drawing that shows people participating in oral sex. I don’t think that image is appropriate in a school. I’m honestly disturbed that some people are okay with this.”

+1
And I am a pro gay rights Democrat. Truly baffled as to how people can look at those pics and say yes this is fine to have in school.

You have seen ONE page from an entire book. One page. One page that shows people engaging in play with a sex toy. There is not even an actual penis pictured. It is cartoonish and awkward and involves the MC realizing that e doesn’t want to do what e fantasized about, so the two people agree to try something else. It’s about open communication, consent, and respect.

Apparently you just see the penis. That’s sad. But people who have actually read the book (see reviews on Goodreads) have a different view.

That’s not okay in school! Do you really think most parents are okay with this?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ I’ve seen it. It’s a drawing that shows people participating in oral sex. I don’t think that image is appropriate in a school. I’m honestly disturbed that some people are okay with this.”

+1
And I am a pro gay rights Democrat. Truly baffled as to how people can look at those pics and say yes this is fine to have in school.

You have seen ONE page from an entire book. One page. One page that shows people engaging in play with a sex toy. There is not even an actual penis pictured. It is cartoonish and awkward and involves the MC realizing that e doesn’t want to do what e fantasized about, so the two people agree to try something else. It’s about open communication, consent, and respect.

Apparently you just see the penis. That’s sad. But people who have actually read the book (see reviews on Goodreads) have a different view.

I’m not okay with kids seeing penises in books at school, except perhaps in a science book. I’m not okay with kids seeing images that depict sex acts. I don’t think that attitude makes me an outlier.

DP. If your high schooler is interested in seeing sexual images, they can find far worse thing elsewhere very easily. This book has the image in the context of a positive message about sexual respect and staying within your comfort zone rather than feeling pressured to do something you don’t want to do. That is a good thing for teens to be exposed to.

[Anonymous]

DP. If your high schooler is interested in seeing sexual images, they can find far worse thing elsewhere very easily. This book has the image in the context of a positive message about sexual respect and staying within your comfort zone rather than feeling pressured to do something you don’t want to do. That is a good thing for teens to be exposed to.

Then you have no trouble with the woman reading from those books and showing the pictures.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

DP. If your high schooler is interested in seeing sexual images, they can find far worse thing elsewhere very easily. This book has the image in the context of a positive message about sexual respect and staying within your comfort zone rather than feeling pressured to do something you don’t want to do. That is a good thing for teens to be exposed to.

Then you have no trouble with the woman reading from those books and showing the pictures.

Trumphumpers are dumb AF. They still don’t get “context”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is one library for the school

How does that work of the schools are housed in different buildings?

I think there is a larger issue here of MS and Hs libraries serving different populations. And this would be an issue with many, many books. Just too mitre for 7th graders. I’m also not sure about the wisdom of 7th graders and seniors mingling at school. It seems like that would cause problems. I always though SSs we’re still segregated. I didn’t think they threw the kids from the two schools together.

That sounds like a bad set up. Glad we have a separate MS and HS.

Robinson, one of the secondary schools where these books are available, has 7-12 in the same building and a single library for the entire school. Good idea or not, that’s the way it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

DP. If your high schooler is interested in seeing sexual images, they can find far worse thing elsewhere very easily. This book has the image in the context of a positive message about sexual respect and staying within your comfort zone rather than feeling pressured to do something you don’t want to do. That is a good thing for teens to be exposed to.

Then you have no trouble with the woman reading from those books and showing the pictures.

Trumphumpers are dumb AF. They still don’t get “context”.

Biden voter here. Not okay with the book, regardless of the context.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

a speaker at a public forum cannot be fined by the FCC.

Citation?

U.S. Const. amend. I.

Hint: Actual FCC rulings would be a start…but since it appears you pulled that out of your sphincter so we won’t wait on you.

find a single case of the FCC fining a speaker for political comments at a government meeting. You know, the kind of political speech that is the most protected. I'll wait

Oh. Were they “political” comments now?

VA station fined for obscene content:
https://variety.com/2015/biz/news/fcc-slaps-virginia-tv-station-with-325000-indecency-fine-1201458034/

The FCC plans to issue what it says will be the highest fine ever against a TV station for a single incident of airing indecent content, slapping a $325,000 penalty against a Roanoke, Va., TV station for airing a sexually explicit video clip of an adult film website during a news broadcast.

This has no relevance to speech at a public forum, irrespective of whether it is political speech or not. (Note, however, that almost anything said by a member of the public at a school board meeting would count as political speech under 1st Amendment precedent.)

The issue isn’t he speech in the public forum. It was when that speech was broadcast. This is why so many live event are on delay. I would imagine going forward SB meeting won’t be broadcast lie or I’ll be on a delay. Since Republicans can’t control themselves. I guess next up is standing on tables no screaming, like in Loudoun?

if you're trying to fine the speaker, the issue is that it is a government forum set up so that members of the public can address their elected officials. This is the core of political speech protected by the first amendment. There is zero chance that you can come up with an instance of a speaker being fined under these circumstances

Please cite this exception in any ruling.

Was the meeting live streaming? Could she have also violated the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA)? Tsk. Tsk. Tsk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

DP. If your high schooler is interested in seeing sexual images, they can find far worse thing elsewhere very easily. This book has the image in the context of a positive message about sexual respect and staying within your comfort zone rather than feeling pressured to do something you don’t want to do. That is a good thing for teens to be exposed to.

Then you have no trouble with the woman reading from those books and showing the pictures.

Trumphumpers are dumb AF. They still don’t get “context”.

Biden voter here. Not okay with the book, regardless of the context.

But you do understand that such a thing exists? And having mature books available in a HS library is different than a publicly broadcasted school board meeting. Right?

I still stand by my comment though. Trumphumpers are dumb AF and don’t understand context. They’ve repeated that same sentiment countless times on this thread.

[Anonymous]

Yes, it was broadcast and live streamed. Hope she is held accountable for her behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

a speaker at a public forum cannot be fined by the FCC.

Citation?

U.S. Const. amend. I.

Hint: Actual FCC rulings would be a start…but since it appears you pulled that out of your sphincter so we won’t wait on you.

find a single case of the FCC fining a speaker for political comments at a government meeting. You know, the kind of political speech that is the most protected. I'll wait

Oh. Were they “political” comments now?

VA station fined for obscene content:
https://variety.com/2015/biz/news/fcc-slaps-virginia-tv-station-with-325000-indecency-fine-1201458034/

The FCC plans to issue what it says will be the highest fine ever against a TV station for a single incident of airing indecent content, slapping a $325,000 penalty against a Roanoke, Va., TV station for airing a sexually explicit video clip of an adult film website during a news broadcast.

This has no relevance to speech at a public forum, irrespective of whether it is political speech or not. (Note, however, that almost anything said by a member of the public at a school board meeting would count as political speech under 1st Amendment precedent.)

The issue isn’t he speech in the public forum. It was when that speech was broadcast. This is why so many live event are on delay. I would imagine going forward SB meeting won’t be broadcast lie or I’ll be on a delay. Since Republicans can’t control themselves. I guess next up is standing on tables no screaming, like in Loudoun?

if you're trying to fine the speaker, the issue is that it is a government forum set up so that members of the public can address their elected officials. This is the core of political speech protected by the first amendment. There is zero chance that you can come up with an instance of a speaker being fined under these circumstances

Please cite this exception in any ruling.

Was the meeting live streaming? Could she have also violated the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA)? Tsk. Tsk. Tsk.

The FCC isn’t insane enough to ignore the first amendment for there to be any precedent. Everyone knows that speech before government bodies is protected, as much as certain people despise that freedom (remember LCPS trying to fire an employee for expressing their view)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it was broadcast and live streamed. Hope she is held accountable for her behavior.

+1. So tired of our kids being political pawns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ I’ve seen it. It’s a drawing that shows people participating in oral sex. I don’t think that image is appropriate in a school. I’m honestly disturbed that some people are okay with this.”

+1
And I am a pro gay rights Democrat. Truly baffled as to how people can look at those pics and say yes this is fine to have in school.

You have seen ONE page from an entire book. One page. One page that shows people engaging in play with a sex toy. There is not even an actual penis pictured. It is cartoonish and awkward and involves the MC realizing that e doesn’t want to do what e fantasized about, so the two people agree to try something else. It’s about open communication, consent, and respect.

Apparently you just see the penis. That’s sad. But people who have actually read the book (see reviews on Goodreads) have a different view.

I’m not okay with kids seeing penises in books at school, except perhaps in a science book. I’m not okay with kids seeing images that depict sex acts. I don’t think that attitude makes me an outlier.

Well it wasn’t even a penis so…

What about family life education (sex ed)? Kids see penises ~~in elementary schools~~.