Anonymous wrote:This is an odd question. Are you not familiar with the fact that books are written about anything and everything? Whatever topic she didnt want her 11 year old exposed to is what that book was about. Sex, rape, drugs, suicide, violence, death, who knows maybe it was conservative economics or new age philosophy. You can of course debate which of these is worth censoring or not, but without knowing the exact book, you cant judge. Its normal for parents to want to understand what their child is consuming in all forms.

Anonymous wrote:I think it depends on whether your kid is reading at grade level or not. When I was in elementary school, everybody (teachers, parents, school librarians, public librarians etc) was so excited about how far above grade level my reading skills were, and kept challenging me with “harder” material that I was definitely not emotionally or psychologically ready for. In hindsight I was definitely very behind on the social-emotional scale. There are things I read when I was eight, ten, twelve….that just shattered my heart, terrified me, made me feel uncomfortable and alone, and therefore ashamed, and have stuck with me through the decades. As a kid I was unable to express these feelings, and adults just saw a “very smart” young girl who understood and was stoic and seemed unbothered and “wise beyond her years” etc. about what she was reading. I wish I’d had more guardrails

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But the elephant in the room is that you think by censoring these books the child isn’t exposed to the problem subjects. Naïveté on a pretty startling scale.

I read Flowers in the Attic at age 9. If I had not, I would not have been exposed to child abuse of that nature or incest until I was older.

Ultimately, I was fine, but parents restricting content isn't always naive. There are shades of grey here.

Really? You don't...read the news?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But the elephant in the room is that you think by censoring these books the child isn’t exposed to the problem subjects. Naïveté on a pretty startling scale.

I read Flowers in the Attic at age 9. If I had not, I would not have been exposed to child abuse of that nature or incest until I was older.

Ultimately, I was fine, but parents restricting content isn't always naive. There are shades of grey here.

Really? You don't...read the news?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But the elephant in the room is that you think by censoring these books the child isn’t exposed to the problem subjects. Naïveté on a pretty startling scale.

I read Flowers in the Attic at age 9. If I had not, I would not have been exposed to child abuse of that nature or incest until I was older.

Ultimately, I was fine, but parents restricting content isn't always naive. There are shades of grey here.

Really? You don't...read the news?

Anonymous wrote:May be it was a shitty book. The amount of junk written for kids is just insane. I can totally relate to curating the flow. I can't do much about whatever my child picks from the school library, but at least I have some control over public library check outs to introduce books that I would consider a must.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But the elephant in the room is that you think by censoring these books the child isn’t exposed to the problem subjects. Naïveté on a pretty startling scale.

I read Flowers in the Attic at age 9. If I had not, I would not have been exposed to child abuse of that nature or incest until I was older.

Ultimately, I was fine, but parents restricting content isn't always naive. There are shades of grey here.

Really? You don't...read the news?

Anonymous wrote:Someone gave mine the Hunger Games books when she was in second grade. I knew if she read them she'd have nightmares - she wasn't yet mature enough for them. I put them on a high shelf and told her when she was older and they wouldn't give her nightmares she could read them. I gave them to her in 5th grade, I think.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But the elephant in the room is that you think by censoring these books the child isn’t exposed to the problem subjects. Naïveté on a pretty startling scale.

I read Flowers in the Attic at age 9. If I had not, I would not have been exposed to child abuse of that nature or incest until I was older.

Ultimately, I was fine, but parents restricting content isn't always naive. There are shades of grey here.

Really? You don't...read the news?

Anonymous wrote:So I was at the library the other day and a girl who looked about 11 years old came in with a woman who was presumably her mom. She picked out a book for school her and brought it to her mom and her mom kept insisting the book is inappropriate and wouldn't let her check out the book. Just why. What the fuсk was she afraid of her kid reading? It's not like she was checking out a porn magazine.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But the elephant in the room is that you think by censoring these books the child isn’t exposed to the problem subjects. Naïveté on a pretty startling scale.

I read Flowers in the Attic at age 9. If I had not, I would not have been exposed to child abuse of that nature or incest until I was older.

Ultimately, I was fine, but parents restricting content isn't always naive. There are shades of grey here.