3 ms·

>> However, the state is second, only behind Texas, in actual book bans The bans in the article you cited are done at the school district level, not the state

>> However, the state is second, only behind Texas, in actual book bans The bans in the article you cited are done at the school district level, not the state level. Holding the executive branch of government of Florida responsible for those decisions would be similar to blaming the Biden administration for the actions of Florida's executive branch. It also appears that the link you cited confuses curriculum selection with book banning. There's a range of what can be called a book ban. For example, when the novel Ulysses was banned, people who sold the book were arrested and imports of the book into the US were seized. That's definitely a book ban. Nothing of the sort is happening in Florida. There are also cases where local school districts remove titles from school libraries, but those books can still be borrowed from public libraries, sold in book stores, or purchased or read online. If that's a book ban, it's not a book ban in the same sense that the ban of Ulysses was a book ban. Then there are decisions by local school districts about what material should be used to teach classes in the schools in that district. For me, exercising control over school curriculum is not a book ban and is in no way similar to seizing copies of books and arresting people for selling those books.

joshuamorton 4y ago
Districts are banning books they believe they need to to comply with state law.
- rufus_foreman 4y ago
  Which books are banned under state law?
  - joshuamorton 4y ago
    Ones which 1. Are complained about by a parent and 2. Are obscene Note that 2 is open to interpretation, so this justification has been used to ban classics like beloved and the kite runner, as school librarians can face criminal penalties if they don't do what (a single) parent asks.
    - rufus_foreman 4y ago
      >> Note that 2 is open to interpretation The same is true for federal law. From https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/obscenity https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/obscenity: "Federal law strictly prohibits the distribution of obscene matter to minors. Any transfer or attempt to transfer such material to a minor under the age of 16, including over the Internet, is punishable under federal law." Is that book banning? Do you think federal laws against providing pornography to minors should be overturned?
      - joshuamorton 4y ago
        The important thing is how the law is interpreted. In Florida, "Obscene" is being interpreted (and in some cases written into statute) as far more than just pornagraphic, with the express intent that people like you can motte-bailey like this and claim that it's "just" banning pornography, when it isn't. For example, the graphic novel "Gender Queer" has been banned under the broad brush of "pornography" in Florida, when it's educational and certainly not intended to grant anyone sexual satisfaction. The key thing is that cis- and hetero-normative "obscenity", like an anatomy textbook is likely acceptable, but the same images in a book that described queerness would not be. Specifically, to use your source, none of the books banned in Florida would pass the Miller test as all of them taken as a whole, posses "serious artistic, political, or scientific value", and few are "prurient" in nature, nor do they describe sexual conduct in a "patently offensive" way. To use the examples from above, Kite Runner and Beloved are both critically acclaimed, award-winning novels, to claim they have no artistic merit is...simply wrong.
        LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
        > cis- and hetero-normative "obscenity", like an anatomy textbook If it's heteronormative to merely show anatomy (and presumably describe mating) then I don't understand why that's worth calling out. It's no insult to anyone to say that male-female relationships are the most common and the only ones that produce children. We don't need to represent everything as equally likely to say that it's okay. As for cis, I struggle to see how anatomy would intersect with gender-identity at all. Bodies are male or female, and may be intersex. > graphic novel "Gender Queer" has been banned under the broad brush of "pornography" in Florida, when it's educational This feels like a problem of having to find a category. If there was an 'unapproved medical advice' category it would be more descriptive. As for its educational content, it recommends - not merely discusses but actively recommends - drugs and breast-binding for something that many (most?) parents do not think is a medical condition. > nor do they describe sexual conduct in a "patently offensive" way. In looking it up and reading it I discovered that the author said "It's been two years since it was published, why are they mad about it now?" and the answer to that is schools. The book wasn't being protested when it was available for sale, and in public libraries, only when it was placed in school libraries. I think the 'patently offensive' element here is specifically that it's being placed in schools even though many parents don't want it and even explicitly over their objections.

joshuamorton 4y ago

Districts are banning books they believe they need to to comply with state law.

rufus_foreman 4y ago
Which books are banned under state law?
- joshuamorton 4y ago
  Ones which 1. Are complained about by a parent and 2. Are obscene Note that 2 is open to interpretation, so this justification has been used to ban classics like beloved and the kite runner, as school librarians can face criminal penalties if they don't do what (a single) parent asks.
  - rufus_foreman 4y ago
    >> Note that 2 is open to interpretation The same is true for federal law. From https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/obscenity https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/obscenity: "Federal law strictly prohibits the distribution of obscene matter to minors. Any transfer or attempt to transfer such material to a minor under the age of 16, including over the Internet, is punishable under federal law." Is that book banning? Do you think federal laws against providing pornography to minors should be overturned?
    - joshuamorton 4y ago
      The important thing is how the law is interpreted. In Florida, "Obscene" is being interpreted (and in some cases written into statute) as far more than just pornagraphic, with the express intent that people like you can motte-bailey like this and claim that it's "just" banning pornography, when it isn't. For example, the graphic novel "Gender Queer" has been banned under the broad brush of "pornography" in Florida, when it's educational and certainly not intended to grant anyone sexual satisfaction. The key thing is that cis- and hetero-normative "obscenity", like an anatomy textbook is likely acceptable, but the same images in a book that described queerness would not be. Specifically, to use your source, none of the books banned in Florida would pass the Miller test as all of them taken as a whole, posses "serious artistic, political, or scientific value", and few are "prurient" in nature, nor do they describe sexual conduct in a "patently offensive" way. To use the examples from above, Kite Runner and Beloved are both critically acclaimed, award-winning novels, to claim they have no artistic merit is...simply wrong.
      - LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
        > cis- and hetero-normative "obscenity", like an anatomy textbook If it's heteronormative to merely show anatomy (and presumably describe mating) then I don't understand why that's worth calling out. It's no insult to anyone to say that male-female relationships are the most common and the only ones that produce children. We don't need to represent everything as equally likely to say that it's okay. As for cis, I struggle to see how anatomy would intersect with gender-identity at all. Bodies are male or female, and may be intersex. > graphic novel "Gender Queer" has been banned under the broad brush of "pornography" in Florida, when it's educational This feels like a problem of having to find a category. If there was an 'unapproved medical advice' category it would be more descriptive. As for its educational content, it recommends - not merely discusses but actively recommends - drugs and breast-binding for something that many (most?) parents do not think is a medical condition. > nor do they describe sexual conduct in a "patently offensive" way. In looking it up and reading it I discovered that the author said "It's been two years since it was published, why are they mad about it now?" and the answer to that is schools. The book wasn't being protested when it was available for sale, and in public libraries, only when it was placed in school libraries. I think the 'patently offensive' element here is specifically that it's being placed in schools even though many parents don't want it and even explicitly over their objections.