8 ms·

The difference is that librarians already provide a "SafeSearch" by curating material at libraries. This is more similar to if Texas tried to mandate that Googl

The difference is that librarians already provide a "SafeSearch" by curating material at libraries. This is more similar to if Texas tried to mandate that Google SafeSearch at libraries should now include a ban on any LGBTQ images. Contrary to what you might imagine, checking out and shelving books is not the only things librarians do – they also curate and trim material, a bit like cultivating a garden. Libraries are a fine-tuned system that maximizes freedom of expression and ideas in a reasonably curated manner. It existed long before the Internet, and legislators tampering with that is always alarming.

gjsman-1000 5y ago
Would the legislators intervening be permissible in your view if the legislators believe that the librarians are doing a poor job at curation? An example of this is the right's claim that many of these banned books are almost pornographic in nature and inappropriate for almost any age. From the right's perspective, the legislators are intervening because the librarians are failing at their curation and safety job.
- quadrifoliate 5y ago
  Yes, that would be a perfectly reasonable legislation. The burden would be on the legislators to clearly articulate their viewpoint, and provide reasonable justification for why those materials are inappropriate for any age. Currently, some of the 850 "suspicious titles" they are "looking into" include books like We Are All Born Free: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Pictures [1]. This does not lead me to conclude that their chief concern is safety and curation. ---------------------------------------- [1] https://www.npr.org/2021/10/28/1050013664/texas-lawmaker-matt-krause-launches-inquiry-into-850-books https://www.npr.org/2021/10/28/1050013664/texas-lawmaker-mat...
  - netizen-936824 5y ago
    Safety? Absolutely! But safety of what? Their own ideas and ideals at the cost of everyone else's.
- at-fates-hands 5y ago
  >> An example of this is the right's claim that many of these banned books are almost pornographic in nature. I'm pretty sure illustrations of people having sex and an illustration of a younger child giving an older child oral sex falls into that category: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FBdP1kYXoAA_c0T?format=jpg&name=small https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FBdP1kYXoAA_c0T?format=jpg&name=... People lost their minds when a woman read several pages from the book "Gender Queer" by Maia Kobabe.
  - SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago
    What’s the context of those images? It seems perfectly appropriate for highschool.
    - cik2e 5y ago
      I've seen people downplaying the contents book using arguments like "these kids are already looking at porn, so who cares?" Whatever, I don't have an issue with that. Been there, done that. But how about this one? What if you're one of the many kids who want to but can't get laid in high school? Seeing teenage sex normalized by the school itself could lead to all kinds of additional insecurities.
      - SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago
        If you’re a teenager who is having an emotional, strongly negative response to seeing fictional acts of sexual behavior in a comic because you can’t have actual sex, that is a perfect opportunity for you to reach out to adults in your life so you can have a clearly sorted talk about how to have a healthy relationship with sex and intimacy.
        mixmastamyk 5y ago
        It takes two to tango.
        5y ago
akira2501 5y ago
> Libraries are a fine-tuned system that maximizes freedom of expression and ideas in a reasonably curated manner. Is there a difference between the freedom of expression of children and of adults? If so, wouldn't parents have a right to limit the freedoms of their own children according to their families moral and religious beliefs? I wonder if maybe the issue is that in a school setting, the librarians are operating as if the children are their only charges? I'm entirely ignorant on these points and don't have children, so this is just a question from that perspective: Are librarians doing enough to announce their editorial decisions and to explain them to parents? Should they be required to? Should libraries share with parents the list of books their children have checked out? Should libraries allow parents to curate a list of books they do not want their children to checkout? Is there a better middle ground here?
- germinalphrase 5y ago
  Parents should teach their children to use “good judgement” according to their family values with regard to what books they choose to check out from the library. Creating some kind of list system (with all the additional overhead involved) seems silly to me.
- sdfhdigfhonio 5y ago
  >If so, wouldn't parents have a right to limit the freedoms of their own children according to their families moral and religious beliefs? I will sidestep your question main question and instead nitpick your choice of words. Families do not have moral and religious beliefs. People have moral and religious beliefs. The fact that the parents believe something absolutely does not imply that the children believe the same or that they should believe the same. To your main point, I generally don't care about the right of parents to make decisions for their children. Parents are entrusted with children because it appears children do best when raised by their parents. If there were evidence that children do better if they are taken from their parents at birth, I would support doing so.

gjsman-1000 5y ago

Would the legislators intervening be permissible in your view if the legislators believe that the librarians are doing a poor job at curation? An example of this is the right's claim that many of these banned books are almost pornographic in nature and inappropriate for almost any age. From the right's perspective, the legislators are intervening because the librarians are failing at their curation and safety job.

quadrifoliate 5y ago
Yes, that would be a perfectly reasonable legislation. The burden would be on the legislators to clearly articulate their viewpoint, and provide reasonable justification for why those materials are inappropriate for any age. Currently, some of the 850 "suspicious titles" they are "looking into" include books like We Are All Born Free: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Pictures [1]. This does not lead me to conclude that their chief concern is safety and curation. ---------------------------------------- [1] https://www.npr.org/2021/10/28/1050013664/texas-lawmaker-matt-krause-launches-inquiry-into-850-books https://www.npr.org/2021/10/28/1050013664/texas-lawmaker-mat...
- netizen-936824 5y ago
  Safety? Absolutely! But safety of what? Their own ideas and ideals at the cost of everyone else's.
at-fates-hands 5y ago
>> An example of this is the right's claim that many of these banned books are almost pornographic in nature. I'm pretty sure illustrations of people having sex and an illustration of a younger child giving an older child oral sex falls into that category: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FBdP1kYXoAA_c0T?format=jpg&name=small https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FBdP1kYXoAA_c0T?format=jpg&name=... People lost their minds when a woman read several pages from the book "Gender Queer" by Maia Kobabe.
- SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago
  What’s the context of those images? It seems perfectly appropriate for highschool.
  - cik2e 5y ago
    I've seen people downplaying the contents book using arguments like "these kids are already looking at porn, so who cares?" Whatever, I don't have an issue with that. Been there, done that. But how about this one? What if you're one of the many kids who want to but can't get laid in high school? Seeing teenage sex normalized by the school itself could lead to all kinds of additional insecurities.
    - SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago
      If you’re a teenager who is having an emotional, strongly negative response to seeing fictional acts of sexual behavior in a comic because you can’t have actual sex, that is a perfect opportunity for you to reach out to adults in your life so you can have a clearly sorted talk about how to have a healthy relationship with sex and intimacy.
      - mixmastamyk 5y ago
        It takes two to tango.
        5y ago

akira2501 5y ago

> Libraries are a fine-tuned system that maximizes freedom of expression and ideas in a reasonably curated manner. Is there a difference between the freedom of expression of children and of adults? If so, wouldn't parents have a right to limit the freedoms of their own children according to their families moral and religious beliefs? I wonder if maybe the issue is that in a school setting, the librarians are operating as if the children are their only charges? I'm entirely ignorant on these points and don't have children, so this is just a question from that perspective: Are librarians doing enough to announce their editorial decisions and to explain them to parents? Should they be required to? Should libraries share with parents the list of books their children have checked out? Should libraries allow parents to curate a list of books they do not want their children to checkout? Is there a better middle ground here?

germinalphrase 5y ago
Parents should teach their children to use “good judgement” according to their family values with regard to what books they choose to check out from the library. Creating some kind of list system (with all the additional overhead involved) seems silly to me.
sdfhdigfhonio 5y ago
>If so, wouldn't parents have a right to limit the freedoms of their own children according to their families moral and religious beliefs? I will sidestep your question main question and instead nitpick your choice of words. Families do not have moral and religious beliefs. People have moral and religious beliefs. The fact that the parents believe something absolutely does not imply that the children believe the same or that they should believe the same. To your main point, I generally don't care about the right of parents to make decisions for their children. Parents are entrusted with children because it appears children do best when raised by their parents. If there were evidence that children do better if they are taken from their parents at birth, I would support doing so.