4 ms·

> Removing books from libraries shape what information those children can access. So does blocking websites. Should school computers also provide unrestricted

> 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!
  - kthejoker2 4y ago
    Reread my first paragraph and try again.

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!
- kthejoker2 4y ago
  Reread my first paragraph and try again.