Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The committees reviewing the books will allow them to remain in the few library collections that have them. The problem is that the damage will have been done…damage being ginning up this entire manufactured controversy to pull more voters for the GOP side. Because most people, like commenters here, have emotional reactions that are precisely the intent of this manufactured controversy…they’re based on information taken out of context and entirely misrepresented.

They may, or may not be, porn. But, they are salacious and obscene. Ask yourself, why did the graphic pics depicting sexual acts have to be in the graphic novel? Why did the author have to put in such graphic language describing sex between young kids?

+1. Defending the indefensible seems to be what this crowd lives for, whether it’s filth in school libraries or their CRT-fueled student surveys.

Anonymous wrote:

The committees reviewing the books will allow them to remain in the few library collections that have them. The problem is that the damage will have been done…damage being ginning up this entire manufactured controversy to pull more voters for the GOP side. Because most people, like commenters here, have emotional reactions that are precisely the intent of this manufactured controversy…they’re based on information taken out of context and entirely misrepresented.

They may, or may not be, porn. But, they are salacious and obscene. Ask yourself, why did the graphic pics depicting sexual acts have to be in the graphic novel? Why did the author have to put in such graphic language describing sex between young kids?

Because most people, like commenters here, have emotional reactions that are precisely the intent of this manufactured controversy…they’re based on information taken out of context and entirely misrepresented.

Anonymous wrote:

The committees reviewing the books will allow them to remain in the few library collections that have them. The problem is that the damage will have been done…damage being ginning up this entire manufactured controversy to pull more voters for the GOP side. Because most people, like commenters here, have emotional reactions that are precisely the intent of this manufactured controversy…they’re based on information taken out of context and entirely misrepresented.

They may, or may not be, porn. But, they are salacious and obscene. Ask yourself, why did the graphic pics depicting sexual acts have to be in the graphic novel? Why did the author have to put in such graphic language describing sex between young kids?

The committees reviewing the books will allow them to remain in the few library collections that have them. The problem is that the damage will have been done…damage being ginning up this entire manufactured controversy to pull more voters for the GOP side. Because most people, like commenters here, have emotional reactions that are precisely the intent of this manufactured controversy…they’re based on information taken out of context and entirely misrepresented.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Books at fcps high schools promoting pedophilia and pornography, true?

Can anyone verify if this is true?

Wow. That graphic novel. How is cartoon pedophilia legal much less approved to be in schools? Wtf???

You are completely nuts.

There is no “pedophilia” in either book.

A cartoon drawing of a sexual act is not pornography unless it is objectively indented to sexually arouse the reader. Is it prurient and salacious? It is ridiculous to claim so. No kid - not even in 7th grade, is turning to page 46 of a graphic novel about queerness in order to get off. Actual porn is right in his hands on his phone. It’s not 1923.

Apparently the school board agrees that it is. The books were both pulled.

The books were pulled and the review process triggered. This is not the SB agreeing that they are inappropriate. It is forming a committee as laid out in the regulation about school library material challenges.

Fine with me. In general, I am anti censorship but I am certainly not going to die on the hill of “Lawn Boy.”

I personally don't think it's worth defending, but on the other hand, it is worth defending as it will just lead to parents combing over tons of books in the library, trigging these challenges, and tying up educators who are just trying to get kids reading and back in the groove of school this year. Censorship is a slippery slope.

Frankly, there are TONS of great books out there for kids to read. The books in question don't fit into the category of "great books." If you want your kid to read them, buy them or go to a public library.

I am a former educator and not keen on book banning, but I also believe schools should be selective about the books they purchase for their libraries given limited funding.

Why aren’t they “great”?

Because they are way too sexually explicit for a high school library. They are porn.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Friends, you know the GOP trolls have been running rampant on this board for the past year, right?

It’s alarming because their voices are so amplified…the rest of us are just trying to cope with COVID and raising our kids and working, and these nutters have the time to manufacture these controversies and drive our elected leaders bonkers with them…worse, then cause the schools to make these reactionary decisions because the outsized amplification makes it seem like these are real people part of a real movement. Regular Fairfax voters and parents are shaking our heads wondering who invited all the lunatics?