4 ms·

The point of libraries is to give access to children who don't necessarily come from privileged family to a diversity of opinions. Removing books from libraries

The point of libraries is to give access to children who don't necessarily come from privileged family to a diversity of opinions. Removing books from libraries shape what information those children can access. Saying that parents can go to a bookstore or to another library misses the point.

hgfhgfdhg 4y ago
- nosianu 4y ago
  That may or may not be the case, but the discussion is not about changing what books are on the recommendation list, but about books getting banned from libraries. Recommendations are very different from bans of something even being available. Something not getting recommended in class does has no influence on its availability in the library.
- detaro 4y ago
  I don't think anyone is calling for libraries to only stock the "recommended California reading list"
lelanthran 4y ago
> The point of libraries is to give access to children who don't necessarily come from privileged family to a diversity of opinions. Removing books from libraries shape what information those children can access. Big deal. We already shape opinions by having a vocal minority successfully shout down dissenting opinions. From the article it's hard to tell whether this is from a vocal minority of the libraries target audience, or a majority opinion.
- Litost 4y ago
  Your comment about "having a vocal minority successfuly shout down dissenting opinions" reminds me of this article I just read by Nassim Taleb (Skin in The Game) which covers "how once an intransigent minority reaches a tiny percentage of the total population, the majority of the population will naturally succumb to their preferences:" https://nassimtaleb.org/2016/08/intolerant-wins-dictatorship-small-minority/ https://nassimtaleb.org/2016/08/intolerant-wins-dictatorship...
bluescrn 4y ago
> Removing books from libraries shape what information those children can access. So does blocking websites. Should school computers also provide unrestricted internet access? Or provide safer filtered access blocking a wide range of the most 'harmful' sites? 'Banned books' sounds dramatic, but is it any worse than blocking social media, porn, and gambling sites on the school network?
- lwkl 4y ago
  Why not? You can have rules about what is appropriate in schools without banning websites. This of course requires an open dialogue with the students. Banning is definitely easier if you don’t care about banning too much.
- kthejoker2 4y ago
  Again, the policies are not the problem. It's deciding what falls under the policy, and where the "boundary of appropriateness" is. One website blocked here in Katy ISD is The Trevor Project, which is a suicide prevention support site for LGBTQ youth. I strongly encourage you to visit this site for 2 minutes and imagine having to explain what policy this site violates. https://www.thetrevorproject.org/ https://www.thetrevorproject.org/ This is a small group of busybodies trying to declare that their "boundary of appropriateness" should apply to all students. That's just a pleasant form of thoughtcrime. A simple solution would be a third category between "appropriate" and "inappropriate " - call it "borderline" - and have an opt in policy for children for these books. Letting each parent decide for their own child what is appropriate is fine. What's happening here is not. Source: Texas school parent, weirded out by casual fascism
  - bluescrn 4y ago
    If internet filters in schools are 'casual fascism', then 'fascism' has no meaning any more. If you genuinely care about child suicide, you'd want to keep children well away from social media for as long as humanly possible. It's harmful enough even to adults!
    - 4y ago
SlickNixon 4y ago
> misses the point The point is for these materials to be widely available. Is there a "banned" book that isn't available on the internet for free? No.

hgfhgfdhg 4y ago

nosianu 4y ago
That may or may not be the case, but the discussion is not about changing what books are on the recommendation list, but about books getting banned from libraries. Recommendations are very different from bans of something even being available. Something not getting recommended in class does has no influence on its availability in the library.
detaro 4y ago
I don't think anyone is calling for libraries to only stock the "recommended California reading list"

lelanthran 4y ago

> The point of libraries is to give access to children who don't necessarily come from privileged family to a diversity of opinions. Removing books from libraries shape what information those children can access. Big deal. We already shape opinions by having a vocal minority successfully shout down dissenting opinions. From the article it's hard to tell whether this is from a vocal minority of the libraries target audience, or a majority opinion.

Litost 4y ago
Your comment about "having a vocal minority successfuly shout down dissenting opinions" reminds me of this article I just read by Nassim Taleb (Skin in The Game) which covers "how once an intransigent minority reaches a tiny percentage of the total population, the majority of the population will naturally succumb to their preferences:" https://nassimtaleb.org/2016/08/intolerant-wins-dictatorship-small-minority/ https://nassimtaleb.org/2016/08/intolerant-wins-dictatorship...

bluescrn 4y ago

> Removing books from libraries shape what information those children can access. So does blocking websites. Should school computers also provide unrestricted internet access? Or provide safer filtered access blocking a wide range of the most 'harmful' sites? 'Banned books' sounds dramatic, but is it any worse than blocking social media, porn, and gambling sites on the school network?

lwkl 4y ago
Why not? You can have rules about what is appropriate in schools without banning websites. This of course requires an open dialogue with the students. Banning is definitely easier if you don’t care about banning too much.
kthejoker2 4y ago
Again, the policies are not the problem. It's deciding what falls under the policy, and where the "boundary of appropriateness" is. One website blocked here in Katy ISD is The Trevor Project, which is a suicide prevention support site for LGBTQ youth. I strongly encourage you to visit this site for 2 minutes and imagine having to explain what policy this site violates. https://www.thetrevorproject.org/ https://www.thetrevorproject.org/ This is a small group of busybodies trying to declare that their "boundary of appropriateness" should apply to all students. That's just a pleasant form of thoughtcrime. A simple solution would be a third category between "appropriate" and "inappropriate " - call it "borderline" - and have an opt in policy for children for these books. Letting each parent decide for their own child what is appropriate is fine. What's happening here is not. Source: Texas school parent, weirded out by casual fascism
- bluescrn 4y ago
  If internet filters in schools are 'casual fascism', then 'fascism' has no meaning any more. If you genuinely care about child suicide, you'd want to keep children well away from social media for as long as humanly possible. It's harmful enough even to adults!
  - 4y ago

SlickNixon 4y ago

> misses the point The point is for these materials to be widely available. Is there a "banned" book that isn't available on the internet for free? No.