7 ms·

Book Bans Turned a Texas Town Upside Down

26 points by nobody9999 4y ago

nobody9999 4y ago
https://archive.ph/8CLXM https://archive.ph/8CLXM
cdot2 4y ago
I dont have a problem with parents wanting school libraries to only have appropriate books. I think the presentation by the media as "book banning" is pretty ridiculous.
- paulgb 4y ago
  Do you have a problem with a religious parent deciding the definition of “appropriate” in the context of their religion, and foisting that belief on kids of other religions or no religion?
  - Dalewyn 4y ago
    Haven't really read TFA because I can't be arsed to deal with NYT and ther asinine style of writing, so I'm assuming we're talking about a public school district and its associated public libraries. Being public libraries, I assume there are official channels with which to convey opinions to the powers that be, and proper procedures that must be followed to permit or not permit books from being included in a library's collection. What's more, being public, it's reasonable to assume the libraries are funded in majority from taxpayer money. So personally: If the taxpayers who provide the money for the library are unsatisfied with the library's book selection, file formal complaints, and the books are subsequently removed as applicable, I see no problem. And ultimately: Taxpayers (aka voters) have the ultimate and absolute authority to just rescind funding for public libraries and/or school districts with objectional collections if they refuse to comply with complaints and other such requests and demands.
    - jleyank 4y ago
      Careful these taxpayers don’t decide there’s undesirable people present like they’re deciding there’s undesirable thoughts present. That never turns out too well: https://www.ushmm.org/collections/bibliography/1933-book-burnings https://www.ushmm.org/collections/bibliography/1933-book-bur.... Protect freedom so as to avoid being one left standing when the music pauses. Cue Pink Floyd.
    - orwin 4y ago
      And what if the other taxpayers want those books? Because that's what TFA is about. Like i said in another comment, while i haven't read most of the books discussed, I've read 'a modern romance' (Streisand effect mostly tbh), and 'a handmaid's tale'. Those are infinitely less stressful to read than 1984 (especially the last part which still traumatize me 17 years after) or even worse: Howard Buten books, which were so fundamental in my development, but the most stressful read. Of you think those should be banned from school libraries, why not, but please, do we agree this is still banning books. Also the "we put the 'lit' in literature" exposition which shows old, now unbanned classics, Fahrenheit 451 and books burned in public by the local pastor: pure genius.
      - Dalewyn 4y ago
        >And what if the other taxpayers want those books? Because that's what TFA is about. Then they should try convincing more fellow taxpayers, aka voters, to get the things they want passed. In a democracy, majority consensus rules. If you're in a minority and failed to be accomodated by the majority consensus, sucks to be you. >but please, do we agree this is still banning books. Nope, because the books are freely available using your own money. Refusing to have books procured and presented using public funds is not book banning.
        paulgb 4y ago
        > In a democracy, majority consensus rules. I am a fan of democracy but when it comes to a local issue like this, the reality is “consensus of the people who have the most free time rules”. It’s not like there was a vote on whether to ban these books, and my hunch is such a vote would not have passed. > Refusing to have books procured and presented using public funds is not book banning. They literally removed books from shelves and locked them in cabinets, this isn’t just about procurement.
  - makomk 4y ago
    Any definition of "approprite" is going to be in the context of some set of moral beliefs. Why should we treat religious ones differently than secular ones? For example, there's a secular set of beliefs held by all the righteous Twitter users that have had massive effects on what books are in school libraries or that we're even allowed to buy, why should that be any more acceptable because they're secular in nature? I know that the people pushing those beliefs consider them the one true, correct set of moral beliefs that every right-thinking person should hold - so much so thatt they reject the idea of naming them, because that would suggest there could be other correct beliefs. That's not very convincing to anyone who doesn't already share their beliefs though (especially given how often and quickly they shift).
    - paulgb 4y ago
      > Why should we treat religious ones differently than secular ones? We shouldn’t, that’s my point. I’m not sure what you’re referring to, but if there were secular groups trying to ban books I’d feel the same way.
- albertopv 4y ago
  I'm a parent, what if these books don't bother me and I want them to stay? Who decide what is appropriate? First they came for the books they thought not appropriate...
  - SlickNixon 4y ago
    > first they came... If they "came for" all the books in a particular library, you (as a parent) could check the book you wanted out from another library, or buy it from a bookstore, or download it from a sketchy drive link you find on google, or recover it from an airdrop of literary material dropped into your occupied zone. These books are "banned" in the same way that Starbucks red cups are "banned" in July.
    - halfmatthalfcat 4y ago
      With opinions like these, it's hard to not see how the American experiment is slowly rotting from the inside out.
      - Dalewyn 4y ago
      - SlickNixon 4y ago
        No. The verbiage "banned" is disingenous and you know it. Like "defund Planned Parenthood" vs. "defund the police"* it's just word games. *picking a side here will be left as an exercise to the reader
        trinovantes 4y ago
        > If they "came for" all the books in a particular library The "came for" was a reference to the holocaust [1]. It starts with books in this library but OP was implying these people will escalate to a total book ban. And when books are burned, humans will soon follow [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_... [2] https://www.facinghistory.org/resource-library/where-they-burn-books https://www.facinghistory.org/resource-library/where-they-bu...
- that_guy_iain 4y ago
  Parents can want only appropriate books. But parents getting to decide what is and what is not appropriate for all children isn't something we should strive for. Some parents think books on sexual health are not appropriate, others think books on race relations are not appropriate, some think books speaking badly about Trump's presidency are not appropriate while books that speak positively on his presidency are. Why should one parent's opinions affect another parent's children? It is rather concerning to many people that some people want to decide what children can and can not be taught or allowed to find out about.
  - Dalewyn 4y ago
    >Why should one parent's opinions affect another parent's children? When you start dealing with public institutions, aka Other Peoples' Monies(tm), you don't get to say your way or the highway, one way or another. Anyone is welcome to make their own private school and library as they see fit with their own private money and time. But if you are going to peruse public schools and libraries, opinions from various people (namely the taxpayers, aka voters) have to be gathered and reconciled into a final consensus which may or may not be to your liking.
    - that_guy_iain 4y ago
      At which point, it should be something governed by elected officals and not random people who have opinions. And what we're often seeing is random people at various levels of non-elected roles deciding what is and what is not acceptable speech within a school system.
    - nobody9999 4y ago
      >When you start dealing with public institutions, aka Other Peoples' Monies(tm), you don't get to say your way or the highway, one way or another. Right, so why are you defending folks who are saying "my way or the highway" by denying access to books? If they don't want their children to read such books, then they should, you know, parent and know what their kids are up to, not force their beliefs on everyone else.
- orwin 4y ago
  Okay, if you want to remove books about farts in the kids section (and books about how to get dressed, those are super offensive), why not. But what is appropriate for teens? Because 1984 is way more traumatizing than a Modern romance or Heavy. The last part, with the psychological torture and mind control? Inappropriate, we should remove it from school libraries and stop the book just before the arrestation. Re-edit the book without the last part, which isn't the part we use to attack our political opponents anyway, we will still be able to misuse the word novlang. Name it "appropriate 1984" and put it back on the shelf. I remember I couldn't eat for a day after i read about the arrestation and the subsequent torture in the book, at 14. Remove that part for teenagers please, its safer. And appropriate.
  - jleyank 4y ago
    Forced positive thinking. Double plus good.
- Waterluvian 4y ago
  Be sure to imagine a world where someone with very very different opinions than yours is the one who decides what “appropriate” is.
  - lelanthran 4y ago
    > Be sure to imagine a world where someone with very very different opinions than yours is the one who decides what “appropriate” is. I assume poster is already living in that world, where what is appropriate is decided by people with very different opinions.
  - tomohawk 4y ago
    - nosianu 4y ago
      > School employees should not get to silence what parents are saying by their cry bullying. You reversed what is actually happening. It is the parents who want to silence the teachers, and the books. The parents can say anything they want. You omit that they want a lot more than just being able to say it.
      - tomohawk 4y ago
        No, NYT reversed what is actually going on. This is the government trying to silence parents. The school is a government entity, and has the power associated with being part of the government. When the parents object, its a bit rich for the government to say that their rights are being infringed by uppity parents.
        kthejoker2 4y ago
        Can you at least have the humility to quit pretending to represent "parents" as a monolithic group? I'm a Texan, I'm a parent with 4 kids in school, I think your side is ridiculously fascist.
    - 4y ago
- nl 4y ago
  This was a public (not school) library. And they were children's books, written to be appropriate for children: “Larry the Farting Leprechaun,” “Gary the Goose and His Gas on the Loose,” “Freddie the Farting Snowman” and “Harvey the Heart Had Too Many Farts,” along with “My Butt Is So Noisy!” and “I Broke My Butt!” If someone doesn't want their 5 year old to read about farts, then don't borrow the books. If someone else wants their children to enjoy reading funny books let them.
  - TrueGeek 4y ago
    And the parents that don’t want their kids reading “Ruby Bridges Goes to School” certainly have their own agenda that says quite a bit about America. If the school / library bans the book and the answer is “if you want YOUR kid to read it buy it yourself” then now we’ve got the problem of the next generation growing up with some kids learning only half of our history.
- nobody9999 4y ago
  Except TFA isn't about school libraries. It's about public libraries.
- vic-traill 4y ago
  The parents are responsible for what their child reads. To me, that doesn't translate to defining what other parent's children get to read. If some folks think fart/butt books are not appropriate for their children, that's fine. They should tell their kids that, and follow up to make sure the child's behaviour reflects that view. [Edit: fixed typo]
defrost 4y ago
Speaking of book bans and their follow on consequences, in news today: Five Hong Kong speech therapists jailed over children's books denounced as 'brainwashing exercise' > Five Hong Kong speech therapists were sentenced on Saturday to 19 months in jail for conspiracy to publish seditious children's books, featuring cartoons of sheep and wolves that prosecutors had deemed anti-government. > The five were convicted on Wednesday under a colonial-era sedition law in a case denounced by rights campaigners as a "brazen act of repression", which the Hong Kong government has rejected. > The defendants, who had pleaded not guilty, were accused of publishing three books featuring cartoons of sheep fighting against wolves. [0] https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/five-hong-kong-speech-therapists-jailed-over-childrens-books-denounced-as-brainwashing-exercise/sz2vplygg https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/five-hong-kong-speech-th... [1] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-09-10/five-hong-kong-speech-therapists-jailed-for-brainwash-children/101426502 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-09-10/five-hong-kong-speech...
- song 4y ago
  Here are the books roughly translated in English - https://ko-fi.com/post/Childrens-picture-book-1--Sheep-Village-Cleaner-A0A75FQTZ https://ko-fi.com/post/Childrens-picture-book-1--Sheep-Villa... - https://ko-fi.com/post/Childrens-book-2--Guardians-of-the-Sheep-Village-T6T45FR5E https://ko-fi.com/post/Childrens-book-2--Guardians-of-the-Sh... - https://ko-fi.com/post/Childrens-book-3--The-Twelve-Warriors-of-Sheep-V-K3K45FR8L https://ko-fi.com/post/Childrens-book-3--The-Twelve-Warriors... I haven't found the original version in Chinese.
- tomohawk 4y ago
  That's quite a bit different than activist school employees puting pornographic materials in the school libraries for children to read, and then saying parents are 'bullying' them. Here's a different take than the NYT: https://texasscorecard.com/state/parents-continue-testifying-against-pornographic-books-in-school-libraries/ https://texasscorecard.com/state/parents-continue-testifying...
  - sofixa 4y ago
    As per the TFA, the books aren't pornographic and have been in libraries for literally decades.
mgbmtl 4y ago
"Strategies on how to lodge complaints against books are traded on Facebook and shared among branch chapters of parental rights groups. One of the most influential of these groups is the Florida-based Moms for Liberty" Yet another old-school bullying campaign, amplified by Facebook.
- tommica 4y ago
  "Moms for Liberty to read books, no not that book"
  - cle 4y ago
    It is about the "liberty" for parents to instill their values in their children, on their terms. This is a perfectly reasonable desire from parents, but removing books from libraries is certainly too heavy-handed. Responsible parents monitor and control the information their kids can access--websites, movies, music, etc. I think a more reasonable approach here would be to advocate for a mechanism in libraries to allow parents to review and control what information their own children have access to, but not others'. (If that doesn't already exist?)
    - morelisp 4y ago
      Children have rights.
      - cle 4y ago
        I don't think anyone's disputing that.
        morelisp 4y ago
        If you believe it's reasonable for "parents to instill their values in their children, on their terms" then you are disputing that.
        4y ago
ogogmad 4y ago
What's the difference between this and deplatforming? I'm not necessarily against either. How's a media company like Facebook or Twitter different from a library? Both disseminate information. The latter is owned by the public. I'm honestly just asking. If you think about it, it's not really against free speech, because you can still obtain a book through other means. A lot of people on this website think that social media companies should prevent the spread of disinformation on their platforms, and defend this view against allegations of censorship by saying that since it's a private company censoring someone's speech on their own platform, it's not a violation of free speech. Also, I'm trying to see where the line should be drawn: Pornography shouldn't be allowed in public libraries, no?
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  > How's a media company like Facebook or Twitter different from a library? Both disseminate information. The latter is owned by the public. I'm honestly just asking. What are you asking? You answered it. > The latter is owned by the public.
- morelisp 4y ago
  > Pornography shouldn't be allowed in public libraries, no? Why not? Arguably, a library is the best place to place pornography within a proper context as an entertainment/leisure media with social and cultural repercussions and that necessitates additional education to engage with in a healthy way. And to the extent public libraries are supposed to be a socialized equivalent of private libraries - you don't think rich people have a shelf full of porn? I think America would have much saner attitudes towards sex if most people's first encounter with porn was in a public and literary context rather than the seedy isolated mess it usually is. (Note that "allowed" is different than "must be in" - a library may choose not to circulate anything for many reasons including low demand and difficulty of handling/maintaining the materials, both of which I imagine is the case. Nonetheless I also suspect virtually all public libraries have some pornography in their collection and plenty probably also in circulation.)
orwin 4y ago
I get why the discussion is a lot about the books for children and not teens, because those bans in public library seems ridiculous. But i have an issue with banning the books for teens. I admit i did not read a lot of those in TFA (two, maybe three, i'll have to look at the title translation), but at least i read some, and can compare to a lot of books i read when I was a teen. The comparison makes it even more ridiculous to me. I have the distinct impression than those moms advocating for the ban just didn't read a lot of books, to be perfectly honest. It's not a dig, i have friends who don't read, and when i first met my now best friend, he had only read a single book in his life, at 15. But if they did, they would know that exposure from books is a lot more soft than from any picture, video, sound or real life. And sometimes, it leads to "wow, that's what he meant" epiphanies, which are the best.
anotherevan 4y ago
The Great Bible Battle https://www.patreon.com/posts/40531144 https://www.patreon.com/posts/40531144
- nicolas_t 4y ago
  Thanks for this, that was an entertaining read.

26 points by nobody9999 4y ago

https://archive.ph/8CLXM https://archive.ph/8CLXM

I dont have a problem with parents wanting school libraries to only have appropriate books. I think the presentation by the media as "book banning" is pretty ridiculous.

paulgb 4y ago
Do you have a problem with a religious parent deciding the definition of “appropriate” in the context of their religion, and foisting that belief on kids of other religions or no religion?
- Dalewyn 4y ago
  Haven't really read TFA because I can't be arsed to deal with NYT and ther asinine style of writing, so I'm assuming we're talking about a public school district and its associated public libraries. Being public libraries, I assume there are official channels with which to convey opinions to the powers that be, and proper procedures that must be followed to permit or not permit books from being included in a library's collection. What's more, being public, it's reasonable to assume the libraries are funded in majority from taxpayer money. So personally: If the taxpayers who provide the money for the library are unsatisfied with the library's book selection, file formal complaints, and the books are subsequently removed as applicable, I see no problem. And ultimately: Taxpayers (aka voters) have the ultimate and absolute authority to just rescind funding for public libraries and/or school districts with objectional collections if they refuse to comply with complaints and other such requests and demands.
  - jleyank 4y ago
    Careful these taxpayers don’t decide there’s undesirable people present like they’re deciding there’s undesirable thoughts present. That never turns out too well: https://www.ushmm.org/collections/bibliography/1933-book-burnings https://www.ushmm.org/collections/bibliography/1933-book-bur.... Protect freedom so as to avoid being one left standing when the music pauses. Cue Pink Floyd.
  - orwin 4y ago
    And what if the other taxpayers want those books? Because that's what TFA is about. Like i said in another comment, while i haven't read most of the books discussed, I've read 'a modern romance' (Streisand effect mostly tbh), and 'a handmaid's tale'. Those are infinitely less stressful to read than 1984 (especially the last part which still traumatize me 17 years after) or even worse: Howard Buten books, which were so fundamental in my development, but the most stressful read. Of you think those should be banned from school libraries, why not, but please, do we agree this is still banning books. Also the "we put the 'lit' in literature" exposition which shows old, now unbanned classics, Fahrenheit 451 and books burned in public by the local pastor: pure genius.
    - Dalewyn 4y ago
      >And what if the other taxpayers want those books? Because that's what TFA is about. Then they should try convincing more fellow taxpayers, aka voters, to get the things they want passed. In a democracy, majority consensus rules. If you're in a minority and failed to be accomodated by the majority consensus, sucks to be you. >but please, do we agree this is still banning books. Nope, because the books are freely available using your own money. Refusing to have books procured and presented using public funds is not book banning.
      - paulgb 4y ago
        > In a democracy, majority consensus rules. I am a fan of democracy but when it comes to a local issue like this, the reality is “consensus of the people who have the most free time rules”. It’s not like there was a vote on whether to ban these books, and my hunch is such a vote would not have passed. > Refusing to have books procured and presented using public funds is not book banning. They literally removed books from shelves and locked them in cabinets, this isn’t just about procurement.
- makomk 4y ago
  Any definition of "approprite" is going to be in the context of some set of moral beliefs. Why should we treat religious ones differently than secular ones? For example, there's a secular set of beliefs held by all the righteous Twitter users that have had massive effects on what books are in school libraries or that we're even allowed to buy, why should that be any more acceptable because they're secular in nature? I know that the people pushing those beliefs consider them the one true, correct set of moral beliefs that every right-thinking person should hold - so much so thatt they reject the idea of naming them, because that would suggest there could be other correct beliefs. That's not very convincing to anyone who doesn't already share their beliefs though (especially given how often and quickly they shift).
  - paulgb 4y ago
    > Why should we treat religious ones differently than secular ones? We shouldn’t, that’s my point. I’m not sure what you’re referring to, but if there were secular groups trying to ban books I’d feel the same way.
albertopv 4y ago
I'm a parent, what if these books don't bother me and I want them to stay? Who decide what is appropriate? First they came for the books they thought not appropriate...
- SlickNixon 4y ago
  > first they came... If they "came for" all the books in a particular library, you (as a parent) could check the book you wanted out from another library, or buy it from a bookstore, or download it from a sketchy drive link you find on google, or recover it from an airdrop of literary material dropped into your occupied zone. These books are "banned" in the same way that Starbucks red cups are "banned" in July.
  - halfmatthalfcat 4y ago
    With opinions like these, it's hard to not see how the American experiment is slowly rotting from the inside out.
    - Dalewyn 4y ago
    - SlickNixon 4y ago
      No. The verbiage "banned" is disingenous and you know it. Like "defund Planned Parenthood" vs. "defund the police"* it's just word games. *picking a side here will be left as an exercise to the reader
      - trinovantes 4y ago
        > If they "came for" all the books in a particular library The "came for" was a reference to the holocaust [1]. It starts with books in this library but OP was implying these people will escalate to a total book ban. And when books are burned, humans will soon follow [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_... [2] https://www.facinghistory.org/resource-library/where-they-burn-books https://www.facinghistory.org/resource-library/where-they-bu...
that_guy_iain 4y ago
Parents can want only appropriate books. But parents getting to decide what is and what is not appropriate for all children isn't something we should strive for. Some parents think books on sexual health are not appropriate, others think books on race relations are not appropriate, some think books speaking badly about Trump's presidency are not appropriate while books that speak positively on his presidency are. Why should one parent's opinions affect another parent's children? It is rather concerning to many people that some people want to decide what children can and can not be taught or allowed to find out about.
- Dalewyn 4y ago
  >Why should one parent's opinions affect another parent's children? When you start dealing with public institutions, aka Other Peoples' Monies(tm), you don't get to say your way or the highway, one way or another. Anyone is welcome to make their own private school and library as they see fit with their own private money and time. But if you are going to peruse public schools and libraries, opinions from various people (namely the taxpayers, aka voters) have to be gathered and reconciled into a final consensus which may or may not be to your liking.
  - that_guy_iain 4y ago
    At which point, it should be something governed by elected officals and not random people who have opinions. And what we're often seeing is random people at various levels of non-elected roles deciding what is and what is not acceptable speech within a school system.
  - nobody9999 4y ago
    >When you start dealing with public institutions, aka Other Peoples' Monies(tm), you don't get to say your way or the highway, one way or another. Right, so why are you defending folks who are saying "my way or the highway" by denying access to books? If they don't want their children to read such books, then they should, you know, parent and know what their kids are up to, not force their beliefs on everyone else.
orwin 4y ago
Okay, if you want to remove books about farts in the kids section (and books about how to get dressed, those are super offensive), why not. But what is appropriate for teens? Because 1984 is way more traumatizing than a Modern romance or Heavy. The last part, with the psychological torture and mind control? Inappropriate, we should remove it from school libraries and stop the book just before the arrestation. Re-edit the book without the last part, which isn't the part we use to attack our political opponents anyway, we will still be able to misuse the word novlang. Name it "appropriate 1984" and put it back on the shelf. I remember I couldn't eat for a day after i read about the arrestation and the subsequent torture in the book, at 14. Remove that part for teenagers please, its safer. And appropriate.
- jleyank 4y ago
  Forced positive thinking. Double plus good.
Waterluvian 4y ago
Be sure to imagine a world where someone with very very different opinions than yours is the one who decides what “appropriate” is.
- lelanthran 4y ago
  > Be sure to imagine a world where someone with very very different opinions than yours is the one who decides what “appropriate” is. I assume poster is already living in that world, where what is appropriate is decided by people with very different opinions.
- tomohawk 4y ago
  - nosianu 4y ago
    > School employees should not get to silence what parents are saying by their cry bullying. You reversed what is actually happening. It is the parents who want to silence the teachers, and the books. The parents can say anything they want. You omit that they want a lot more than just being able to say it.
    - tomohawk 4y ago
      No, NYT reversed what is actually going on. This is the government trying to silence parents. The school is a government entity, and has the power associated with being part of the government. When the parents object, its a bit rich for the government to say that their rights are being infringed by uppity parents.
      - kthejoker2 4y ago
        Can you at least have the humility to quit pretending to represent "parents" as a monolithic group? I'm a Texan, I'm a parent with 4 kids in school, I think your side is ridiculously fascist.
  - 4y ago
nl 4y ago
This was a public (not school) library. And they were children's books, written to be appropriate for children: “Larry the Farting Leprechaun,” “Gary the Goose and His Gas on the Loose,” “Freddie the Farting Snowman” and “Harvey the Heart Had Too Many Farts,” along with “My Butt Is So Noisy!” and “I Broke My Butt!” If someone doesn't want their 5 year old to read about farts, then don't borrow the books. If someone else wants their children to enjoy reading funny books let them.
- TrueGeek 4y ago
  And the parents that don’t want their kids reading “Ruby Bridges Goes to School” certainly have their own agenda that says quite a bit about America. If the school / library bans the book and the answer is “if you want YOUR kid to read it buy it yourself” then now we’ve got the problem of the next generation growing up with some kids learning only half of our history.
nobody9999 4y ago
Except TFA isn't about school libraries. It's about public libraries.
vic-traill 4y ago
The parents are responsible for what their child reads. To me, that doesn't translate to defining what other parent's children get to read. If some folks think fart/butt books are not appropriate for their children, that's fine. They should tell their kids that, and follow up to make sure the child's behaviour reflects that view. [Edit: fixed typo]

defrost 4y ago

Speaking of book bans and their follow on consequences, in news today: Five Hong Kong speech therapists jailed over children's books denounced as 'brainwashing exercise' > Five Hong Kong speech therapists were sentenced on Saturday to 19 months in jail for conspiracy to publish seditious children's books, featuring cartoons of sheep and wolves that prosecutors had deemed anti-government. > The five were convicted on Wednesday under a colonial-era sedition law in a case denounced by rights campaigners as a "brazen act of repression", which the Hong Kong government has rejected. > The defendants, who had pleaded not guilty, were accused of publishing three books featuring cartoons of sheep fighting against wolves. [0] https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/five-hong-kong-speech-therapists-jailed-over-childrens-books-denounced-as-brainwashing-exercise/sz2vplygg https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/five-hong-kong-speech-th... [1] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-09-10/five-hong-kong-speech-therapists-jailed-for-brainwash-children/101426502 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-09-10/five-hong-kong-speech...

song 4y ago
Here are the books roughly translated in English - https://ko-fi.com/post/Childrens-picture-book-1--Sheep-Village-Cleaner-A0A75FQTZ https://ko-fi.com/post/Childrens-picture-book-1--Sheep-Villa... - https://ko-fi.com/post/Childrens-book-2--Guardians-of-the-Sheep-Village-T6T45FR5E https://ko-fi.com/post/Childrens-book-2--Guardians-of-the-Sh... - https://ko-fi.com/post/Childrens-book-3--The-Twelve-Warriors-of-Sheep-V-K3K45FR8L https://ko-fi.com/post/Childrens-book-3--The-Twelve-Warriors... I haven't found the original version in Chinese.
tomohawk 4y ago
That's quite a bit different than activist school employees puting pornographic materials in the school libraries for children to read, and then saying parents are 'bullying' them. Here's a different take than the NYT: https://texasscorecard.com/state/parents-continue-testifying-against-pornographic-books-in-school-libraries/ https://texasscorecard.com/state/parents-continue-testifying...
- sofixa 4y ago
  As per the TFA, the books aren't pornographic and have been in libraries for literally decades.

mgbmtl 4y ago

"Strategies on how to lodge complaints against books are traded on Facebook and shared among branch chapters of parental rights groups. One of the most influential of these groups is the Florida-based Moms for Liberty" Yet another old-school bullying campaign, amplified by Facebook.

tommica 4y ago
"Moms for Liberty to read books, no not that book"
- cle 4y ago
  It is about the "liberty" for parents to instill their values in their children, on their terms. This is a perfectly reasonable desire from parents, but removing books from libraries is certainly too heavy-handed. Responsible parents monitor and control the information their kids can access--websites, movies, music, etc. I think a more reasonable approach here would be to advocate for a mechanism in libraries to allow parents to review and control what information their own children have access to, but not others'. (If that doesn't already exist?)
  - morelisp 4y ago
    Children have rights.
    - cle 4y ago
      I don't think anyone's disputing that.
      - morelisp 4y ago
        If you believe it's reasonable for "parents to instill their values in their children, on their terms" then you are disputing that.
        4y ago

ogogmad 4y ago

What's the difference between this and deplatforming? I'm not necessarily against either. How's a media company like Facebook or Twitter different from a library? Both disseminate information. The latter is owned by the public. I'm honestly just asking. If you think about it, it's not really against free speech, because you can still obtain a book through other means. A lot of people on this website think that social media companies should prevent the spread of disinformation on their platforms, and defend this view against allegations of censorship by saying that since it's a private company censoring someone's speech on their own platform, it's not a violation of free speech. Also, I'm trying to see where the line should be drawn: Pornography shouldn't be allowed in public libraries, no?

lotsofpulp 4y ago
> How's a media company like Facebook or Twitter different from a library? Both disseminate information. The latter is owned by the public. I'm honestly just asking. What are you asking? You answered it. > The latter is owned by the public.
morelisp 4y ago
> Pornography shouldn't be allowed in public libraries, no? Why not? Arguably, a library is the best place to place pornography within a proper context as an entertainment/leisure media with social and cultural repercussions and that necessitates additional education to engage with in a healthy way. And to the extent public libraries are supposed to be a socialized equivalent of private libraries - you don't think rich people have a shelf full of porn? I think America would have much saner attitudes towards sex if most people's first encounter with porn was in a public and literary context rather than the seedy isolated mess it usually is. (Note that "allowed" is different than "must be in" - a library may choose not to circulate anything for many reasons including low demand and difficulty of handling/maintaining the materials, both of which I imagine is the case. Nonetheless I also suspect virtually all public libraries have some pornography in their collection and plenty probably also in circulation.)

orwin 4y ago

I get why the discussion is a lot about the books for children and not teens, because those bans in public library seems ridiculous. But i have an issue with banning the books for teens. I admit i did not read a lot of those in TFA (two, maybe three, i'll have to look at the title translation), but at least i read some, and can compare to a lot of books i read when I was a teen. The comparison makes it even more ridiculous to me. I have the distinct impression than those moms advocating for the ban just didn't read a lot of books, to be perfectly honest. It's not a dig, i have friends who don't read, and when i first met my now best friend, he had only read a single book in his life, at 15. But if they did, they would know that exposure from books is a lot more soft than from any picture, video, sound or real life. And sometimes, it leads to "wow, that's what he meant" epiphanies, which are the best.

anotherevan 4y ago

The Great Bible Battle https://www.patreon.com/posts/40531144 https://www.patreon.com/posts/40531144

nicolas_t 4y ago
Thanks for this, that was an entertaining read.