Reply to Hannah Natanson at it again

Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)

Reply to "Hannah Natanson at it again"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]This is the important type of research that Natanson is undertaking as a Post reporter.  Rather than pay any attention to declining academic achievement, decade-long overcrowding that has gone ignored at several FCPS high schools, or what exactly Dr. Michelle Reid means when she says she is committed to ensuring "equal outcomes" for FCPS students, Natanson quibbles with a local parent upset about a book that its own author has said was not intended for children:

"She zeroed-in on the same scene of oral sex that troubled Burkman in Texas. [i]She became convinced, wrongly, that “Lawn Boy” shows fellatio taking place between an adult and a boy. In fact, the book describes a man in his 20s meeting another man in his 20s and remembering the consensual sexual encounter they shared in fourth grade.[/i]"

Thanks so much for that critical clarification, Hannah.  You are a rock star.  [/quote]

Nothing wrong with calling out RWNJ lies when they are being used to attack our schools and children. 
[/quote]

You LWNJs have gone so far down the rabbit hole (and maybe other holes as well) that you don’t even realize that what you’re “clarifying” is still wildly inappropriate. [/quote]

Do your kids have smartphones? Because if "wildly inappropriate" is your concern, I have something to tell you about those phones, sweetie.[/quote]

What you are describing is what kids can view online for themselves via their phones, adult performances, performed by adults. The discussion is the appropriateness of material, who, in the author's own words, is designed for an adult audience (voyeur material for MAPS) depicting sex acts between prepubescent children (age 10). Key words, sex acts between prepubescent children, which is why many adults that read the material (starting on page 99 in Lawn Boy which a reasonable person could confused for pedophilia) think you are sick. Furthermore, anyone reading this thread, and then reads the passage I just mentioned, will realize that those defending the book, and making claims to the contrary, are liars.

Well, if they have scenes of two ten years olds giving each other oral sex, the police would likely be involved as it would clearly be child porn. I don’t think the argument that a concern about child porn is overblown because it’s everywhere and easily accessible, because it isn’t. Most looking for that stuff do so by going on the dark web. Why make its accessibility easier and seek children being exposed to it?[/quote]

Going in the dark web to view child porn and see 2boxes in a graphic novel are so completely different. And then comparing that to the hours of sex student can watch in their phones without restriction is also completely different. These three things are not the same.[/quote][/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics