13 ms·

The books being on the school library or on classroom shelves connotes that the educational custodians of our children, who have literal and legal responsibilit

The books being on the school library or on classroom shelves connotes that the educational custodians of our children, who have literal and legal responsibility for their safety and well being on multiple levels, have approved them. Not so much to promote every idea they contain, but at least that they express things in a way that is psychologically appropriate for kids at their level of development. What kinds of ideas cross this line of appropriateness you or I may disagree on, but the point is that it exists in a school setting, which the article seems to pretty much miss altogether.

TechnoTimeStop 5y ago
Yeah cause Harry Potter should be banned because the Trans-bully-train.... LMFAO
wolverine876 5y ago
We want the kids to use their freedom and free will, and to think for themselves - even or especially when it challenges the adults - and to learn how to do that. It's an essential skill to a democracy (and a free market), and to teach them freedom for all by giving them freedom, instead of teaching them that people should be sheparded. There are limits to what we want middle schoolers exposed to, but I think my approach is different than what you describe.
- rayiner 5y ago
  > We want the kids to use their freedom and free will, and to think for themselves Says who? The cultures who focus on “freedom” for kids are literally being replaced by the ones that socialize their kids to do what they’re supposed to do.
  - wolverine876 5y ago
    What 'cultures' are you talking about? By far the most successful in human history have been modern democratic cultures which, very broadly speaking, focus on freedom. But regardless, the kids should grow into free adults. It's self-evident, as Jefferson said and as much of the world has held to be true for centuries now (again to great success). Are you volunteering to give up your freedom? Then I'll take you up on that and say you may not post such comments (in case anyone is confused, I'm not actually telling the parent what to do).
    - rayiner 5y ago
      > What 'cultures' are you talking about? By far the most successful in human history have been modern democratic cultures which, very broadly speaking, focus on freedom. Not for kids, which is what we’re talking about here. Read Roald Dahl’s books about British education. That’s the culture that built the greatest empire in history. “Freedom” for kids, as opposed to rigid socialization, is a mid-20th century detour. And the cultures that practice it, mainly north Americans and Europeans, are either in decline or are being replaced from the inside by immigrants from cultures that don’t.
      - nec4b 5y ago
        >> Read Roald Dahl’s books about British education. Could you please recommend a specific book for those of us who are interested?
        rayiner 5y ago
        His autobiography is great. Boy.
      - random314 5y ago
        > That’s the culture that built the greatest empire in history. Which created the 3rd world via colonialism. For reference the Mughal empire that generated 25% of the worlds GDP, or any of the great Chinese empires definitely didn't involve colonialism, famines and death and the creation of the poorest colonial economies in the world to demonstrate their greatness.
        rayiner 5y ago
        > Which created the 3rd world via colonialism. For reference the Mughal empire that generated 25% of the worlds GDP C’mon, you know why people formulate this point like that, and not like, “Mughal empire GDP decreased 50% after colonialism.” Between 1000 AD and 1600 AD, British GDP per capita doubled. During that time, Indian GDP per capita increased only 20%. Before European contact, India, China, etc., were stuck at pre-industrial revolution levels. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(P... By the time the Brits got there, Indian GDP per capita was only half as much as Britain’s. The odds that India would have entered an industrial revolution around that same time after centuries of being stuck in the same place is low. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(P...
- hulitu 5y ago
  > We want the kids to use their freedom and free will, and to think for themselves - even or especially when it challenges the adults - and to learn how to do that. No, history has shown that thinking is dangerous. We shall avoid that. Thanks to Netflix and Spotify the mind of the child can be occupied 24h a day. The last thing a child shall do is to challenge the establishment. > It's an essential skill to a democracy (and a free market), and to teach them freedom for all by giving them freedom, instead of teaching them that people should be sheparded. And who will collect our data then ? Who will fight the wars to give to reach people more ? > There are limits to what we want middle schoolers exposed to, but I think my approach is different than what you describe. There are no limits. Every limit can be achieved and left behind. The purpose of educational system is to destroy the mind of the child so he accepts what is given to him and never asks questions. And, when he asks questions only stupid questions are allowed. No "why"s and no critique.
boplicity 5y ago
Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be where people are drawing the line lately, especially in "conservative" areas. It's hard to argue there's anything but racism (or xenophobia) going on when they ban a book such as A Big Mooncake for Little Star.[0] [0] https://twitter.com/pacylin/status/1440318317806317569 https://twitter.com/pacylin/status/1440318317806317569
- dillondoyle 5y ago
  Homophobia and transphobia too. https://ncac.org/resource/lgbtq-book-bans-and-challenges https://ncac.org/resource/lgbtq-book-bans-and-challenges https://wgntv.com/news/downers-grove-parents-students-clash-over-removal-of-lgbtq-graphic-novels-from-school-libraries/ https://wgntv.com/news/downers-grove-parents-students-clash-...
kvathupo 5y ago
From the Texas legislator's proposed list of banned books, I fail to see why books such as "Bioethics Beyond the Headlines" or "V for Vendetta" should be banned. Indeed, it does concern me that much of the novels are fictional works portraying the LGBT experience. I can't imagine how alienating it must be to students of that group. As an aside, I find it amusing that Shakespeare is never banned on the grounds of sexual content. Perhaps people don't pay attention in English class?
- UnpossibleJim 5y ago
  |Perhaps people don't pay attention in English class?| Funny enough, I always assumed this same thing of the people who were trying to get Mark Twain books banned for the misuse of language =) People who don't read books are always the ones who are the most afraid of the ideas contained within them, I suppose.
  - hulitu 5y ago
    Mark Twain shall definitely be banned. We don't need satire in school. And no books with racism. We have enough of the later.
- anigbrowl 5y ago
  Some parts of Shakespeare are so wordy that the sexual aspect isn't obvious enough to notice without advanced literary education, but there certainly used to be sanitized versions for school students that omitted more explicit passages on booze, lechery and so on.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- everybodyknows 5y ago
  Most are couched in the slang of Shakespeare's time, an effective filter. How many high schoolers get the Nurse's ribald joke about the very young Juliet learning to "fall backwards" once she had grown older? I didn't, not at all sure our teacher got the meaning either, or if she did, then chose not to explain it ... Check out the Zeffirelli Romeo and Juliet to see it played well.
naasking 5y ago
> but at least that they express things in a way that is psychologically appropriate for kids at their level of development Frankly, we have little real idea what's psychologically appropriate for kids. Consider that over 65% of papers in psychology fail replication. I would be very skeptical of anyone claiming they know what's psychologically good for anyone.
- danielvaughn 5y ago
  You're probably right, but nonetheless, the original commenter's point stands about the state having literal and legal responsibility for peoples children. It makes sense to be conservative in deciding what material to put in the school library.
  - KarlKemp 5y ago
    ""In carrying out searches and other disciplinary functions pursuant to such policies, school officials act as representatives of the State, not merely as surrogates for the parents, and they cannot claim the parents' immunity from the strictures of the Fourth Amendment."" (NJ v TLO) Meaning: schools have the right (and responsibility) to take steps necessary for the safety of children, but those rights are rather limited compared to those of parents, because they must also satisfy the limits set by constitution for all acts of the state and its representative. Banning books is an excellent example since it is almost the textbook definition of a restriction of free speech at the same time as having exceptionally weak arguments for its necessity, ostensibly to prevent psychological harms, which is a dubious concept to begin with.
  - shkkmo 5y ago
    > It makes sense to be conservative in deciding what material to put in the school library. It really doesn't. School is one of the best places we can have people encounter challenging idea and works for the first time. If we coddle people on school and then they are exposed to those ideas on their own (which they will be) then they have fewer resources to aid in processing those ideas and are more likely to end up confused and misinformed.
KarlKemp 5y ago
I don't believe the article is denying the schools' right and responsibilities in protecting children from harm. It is just assuming as much as commonly accepted. Then, it does the same with regards to the "harmfulness" of these books. Or, more specifically, it names some books (Beloved etc) as well as concepts (health education) in a way that assumes its audience will tend to agree that these aren't harmful to children. That it doesn't necessarily extend that belief to all books is clear from the distinction it makes when it separates some books from others that have been "caught up in this net [such as] books about health education, teen pregnancy, civics, philosophy, religion,..."
- drivers99 5y ago
  Sorry to highjack an unrelated comment but your previous one to Scott Adams was to the wrong Scott Adams. You thought he was the author of Dilbert and the one doing the AMA is actually a programmer of classic text adventure games. I couldn’t reply there because that comment was flagged/dead.
barry-cotter 5y ago
> What kinds of ideas cross this line of appropriateness you or I may disagree on, but the point is that it exists in a school setting, which the article seems to pretty much miss altogether. I doubt it. If you consider censorship bad then different justifications for it all add up to [justifications for banning books which can be repurposed as needed]. Reading Clive Barker, Stephen King and history books did me no harm as a pre-teen and I see no reason to believe reading more graphic things would do harm either. Plenty of people reject your argument as nonsense.

TechnoTimeStop 5y ago

Yeah cause Harry Potter should be banned because the Trans-bully-train.... LMFAO

wolverine876 5y ago

We want the kids to use their freedom and free will, and to think for themselves - even or especially when it challenges the adults - and to learn how to do that. It's an essential skill to a democracy (and a free market), and to teach them freedom for all by giving them freedom, instead of teaching them that people should be sheparded. There are limits to what we want middle schoolers exposed to, but I think my approach is different than what you describe.

rayiner 5y ago
> We want the kids to use their freedom and free will, and to think for themselves Says who? The cultures who focus on “freedom” for kids are literally being replaced by the ones that socialize their kids to do what they’re supposed to do.
- wolverine876 5y ago
  What 'cultures' are you talking about? By far the most successful in human history have been modern democratic cultures which, very broadly speaking, focus on freedom. But regardless, the kids should grow into free adults. It's self-evident, as Jefferson said and as much of the world has held to be true for centuries now (again to great success). Are you volunteering to give up your freedom? Then I'll take you up on that and say you may not post such comments (in case anyone is confused, I'm not actually telling the parent what to do).
  - rayiner 5y ago
    > What 'cultures' are you talking about? By far the most successful in human history have been modern democratic cultures which, very broadly speaking, focus on freedom. Not for kids, which is what we’re talking about here. Read Roald Dahl’s books about British education. That’s the culture that built the greatest empire in history. “Freedom” for kids, as opposed to rigid socialization, is a mid-20th century detour. And the cultures that practice it, mainly north Americans and Europeans, are either in decline or are being replaced from the inside by immigrants from cultures that don’t.
    - nec4b 5y ago
      >> Read Roald Dahl’s books about British education. Could you please recommend a specific book for those of us who are interested?
      - rayiner 5y ago
        His autobiography is great. Boy.
    - random314 5y ago
      > That’s the culture that built the greatest empire in history. Which created the 3rd world via colonialism. For reference the Mughal empire that generated 25% of the worlds GDP, or any of the great Chinese empires definitely didn't involve colonialism, famines and death and the creation of the poorest colonial economies in the world to demonstrate their greatness.
      - rayiner 5y ago
        > Which created the 3rd world via colonialism. For reference the Mughal empire that generated 25% of the worlds GDP C’mon, you know why people formulate this point like that, and not like, “Mughal empire GDP decreased 50% after colonialism.” Between 1000 AD and 1600 AD, British GDP per capita doubled. During that time, Indian GDP per capita increased only 20%. Before European contact, India, China, etc., were stuck at pre-industrial revolution levels. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(P... By the time the Brits got there, Indian GDP per capita was only half as much as Britain’s. The odds that India would have entered an industrial revolution around that same time after centuries of being stuck in the same place is low. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(P...
hulitu 5y ago
> We want the kids to use their freedom and free will, and to think for themselves - even or especially when it challenges the adults - and to learn how to do that. No, history has shown that thinking is dangerous. We shall avoid that. Thanks to Netflix and Spotify the mind of the child can be occupied 24h a day. The last thing a child shall do is to challenge the establishment. > It's an essential skill to a democracy (and a free market), and to teach them freedom for all by giving them freedom, instead of teaching them that people should be sheparded. And who will collect our data then ? Who will fight the wars to give to reach people more ? > There are limits to what we want middle schoolers exposed to, but I think my approach is different than what you describe. There are no limits. Every limit can be achieved and left behind. The purpose of educational system is to destroy the mind of the child so he accepts what is given to him and never asks questions. And, when he asks questions only stupid questions are allowed. No "why"s and no critique.

boplicity 5y ago

Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be where people are drawing the line lately, especially in "conservative" areas. It's hard to argue there's anything but racism (or xenophobia) going on when they ban a book such as A Big Mooncake for Little Star.[0] [0] https://twitter.com/pacylin/status/1440318317806317569 https://twitter.com/pacylin/status/1440318317806317569

dillondoyle 5y ago
Homophobia and transphobia too. https://ncac.org/resource/lgbtq-book-bans-and-challenges https://ncac.org/resource/lgbtq-book-bans-and-challenges https://wgntv.com/news/downers-grove-parents-students-clash-over-removal-of-lgbtq-graphic-novels-from-school-libraries/ https://wgntv.com/news/downers-grove-parents-students-clash-...

kvathupo 5y ago

From the Texas legislator's proposed list of banned books, I fail to see why books such as "Bioethics Beyond the Headlines" or "V for Vendetta" should be banned. Indeed, it does concern me that much of the novels are fictional works portraying the LGBT experience. I can't imagine how alienating it must be to students of that group. As an aside, I find it amusing that Shakespeare is never banned on the grounds of sexual content. Perhaps people don't pay attention in English class?

UnpossibleJim 5y ago
|Perhaps people don't pay attention in English class?| Funny enough, I always assumed this same thing of the people who were trying to get Mark Twain books banned for the misuse of language =) People who don't read books are always the ones who are the most afraid of the ideas contained within them, I suppose.
- hulitu 5y ago
  Mark Twain shall definitely be banned. We don't need satire in school. And no books with racism. We have enough of the later.
anigbrowl 5y ago
Some parts of Shakespeare are so wordy that the sexual aspect isn't obvious enough to notice without advanced literary education, but there certainly used to be sanitized versions for school students that omitted more explicit passages on booze, lechery and so on.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
everybodyknows 5y ago
Most are couched in the slang of Shakespeare's time, an effective filter. How many high schoolers get the Nurse's ribald joke about the very young Juliet learning to "fall backwards" once she had grown older? I didn't, not at all sure our teacher got the meaning either, or if she did, then chose not to explain it ... Check out the Zeffirelli Romeo and Juliet to see it played well.

naasking 5y ago

> but at least that they express things in a way that is psychologically appropriate for kids at their level of development Frankly, we have little real idea what's psychologically appropriate for kids. Consider that over 65% of papers in psychology fail replication. I would be very skeptical of anyone claiming they know what's psychologically good for anyone.

danielvaughn 5y ago
You're probably right, but nonetheless, the original commenter's point stands about the state having literal and legal responsibility for peoples children. It makes sense to be conservative in deciding what material to put in the school library.
- KarlKemp 5y ago
  ""In carrying out searches and other disciplinary functions pursuant to such policies, school officials act as representatives of the State, not merely as surrogates for the parents, and they cannot claim the parents' immunity from the strictures of the Fourth Amendment."" (NJ v TLO) Meaning: schools have the right (and responsibility) to take steps necessary for the safety of children, but those rights are rather limited compared to those of parents, because they must also satisfy the limits set by constitution for all acts of the state and its representative. Banning books is an excellent example since it is almost the textbook definition of a restriction of free speech at the same time as having exceptionally weak arguments for its necessity, ostensibly to prevent psychological harms, which is a dubious concept to begin with.
- shkkmo 5y ago
  > It makes sense to be conservative in deciding what material to put in the school library. It really doesn't. School is one of the best places we can have people encounter challenging idea and works for the first time. If we coddle people on school and then they are exposed to those ideas on their own (which they will be) then they have fewer resources to aid in processing those ideas and are more likely to end up confused and misinformed.

KarlKemp 5y ago

I don't believe the article is denying the schools' right and responsibilities in protecting children from harm. It is just assuming as much as commonly accepted. Then, it does the same with regards to the "harmfulness" of these books. Or, more specifically, it names some books (Beloved etc) as well as concepts (health education) in a way that assumes its audience will tend to agree that these aren't harmful to children. That it doesn't necessarily extend that belief to all books is clear from the distinction it makes when it separates some books from others that have been "caught up in this net [such as] books about health education, teen pregnancy, civics, philosophy, religion,..."

drivers99 5y ago
Sorry to highjack an unrelated comment but your previous one to Scott Adams was to the wrong Scott Adams. You thought he was the author of Dilbert and the one doing the AMA is actually a programmer of classic text adventure games. I couldn’t reply there because that comment was flagged/dead.

barry-cotter 5y ago

> What kinds of ideas cross this line of appropriateness you or I may disagree on, but the point is that it exists in a school setting, which the article seems to pretty much miss altogether. I doubt it. If you consider censorship bad then different justifications for it all add up to [justifications for banning books which can be repurposed as needed]. Reading Clive Barker, Stephen King and history books did me no harm as a pre-teen and I see no reason to believe reading more graphic things would do harm either. Plenty of people reject your argument as nonsense.