4 ms·

Yes, see my linked article elsewhere in the thread. The libraries wanted to make porn available to kids, the republicans said if they did that they would try t

Yes, see my linked article elsewhere in the thread. The libraries wanted to make porn available to kids, the republicans said if they did that they would try to pull their funding, and the libraries called them on it.

Jwarder 4y ago
Because we all know that banning photo books that include that statue of David protects your children.
- thepasswordis 4y ago
  The basic chain of events is: Teachers wanted to have books like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cd5VUhMrF4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cd5VUhMrF4 available in classrooms (this is on the MO 'banned books' list). Parents (obviously) objected to this, but the teachers/librarians dug their heels in. Due to a loss of trust, parents started demanding oversight into everything that the schools/libraries were making available, and that's how you end up with absolutely crazy things like banning photos of the statue of David.
  - saalweachter 4y ago
    TLDW: Erika Moen (web cartoonist) wrote a book called "Let's Talk About It: The Teen's Guide to Sex, Relationships and Being Human"; in the chapter on sexting she advises teens that pictures they send to people can never be deleted and therefore they should crop out their faces and any identifying birthmarks, etc, before sending one. A concerned parent read this passage at a school board meeting to protest this books inclusion in the library. Hilarity ensues.
  - positron6000 4y ago
    but this is about public libraries, not school libraries. also, the linked video is from Alaska, not Missouri.
slater 4y ago
"The libraries wanted to make porn available to kids" I couldn't find that mentioned anywhere in the linked article...?
- thepasswordis 4y ago
  https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/new-rule-to-block-missouri-library-funding-set-to-go-into-effect-may-30/article_2f11c261-112b-5bd1-8b87-912ff9561adf.html https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/new-ru...
positron6000 4y ago
> libraries wanted to make porn available to kids this is an extremely bad faith interpretation of librarians upholding the first amendment.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> The libraries wanted to make porn available to kids Assuming that you consider every single one of the titles on this list to be “porn”, but while many of them might be dubiously appropriate for (especially young) children, I don’t think very many of them meet any reasonable definition of “porn”. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AVW8q-B4uSZIJ3mLqc5tY8DZyojI1KLIVBQzSCb7lbg/edit#gid=0 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AVW8q-B4uSZIJ3mLqc5t...
Forgeties79 4y ago
> The libraries wanted to make porn available to kids I see you skipped the “nuance” part of the request.

Jwarder 4y ago

Because we all know that banning photo books that include that statue of David protects your children.

thepasswordis 4y ago
The basic chain of events is: Teachers wanted to have books like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cd5VUhMrF4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cd5VUhMrF4 available in classrooms (this is on the MO 'banned books' list). Parents (obviously) objected to this, but the teachers/librarians dug their heels in. Due to a loss of trust, parents started demanding oversight into everything that the schools/libraries were making available, and that's how you end up with absolutely crazy things like banning photos of the statue of David.
- saalweachter 4y ago
  TLDW: Erika Moen (web cartoonist) wrote a book called "Let's Talk About It: The Teen's Guide to Sex, Relationships and Being Human"; in the chapter on sexting she advises teens that pictures they send to people can never be deleted and therefore they should crop out their faces and any identifying birthmarks, etc, before sending one. A concerned parent read this passage at a school board meeting to protest this books inclusion in the library. Hilarity ensues.
- positron6000 4y ago
  but this is about public libraries, not school libraries. also, the linked video is from Alaska, not Missouri.

slater 4y ago

"The libraries wanted to make porn available to kids" I couldn't find that mentioned anywhere in the linked article...?

thepasswordis 4y ago
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/new-rule-to-block-missouri-library-funding-set-to-go-into-effect-may-30/article_2f11c261-112b-5bd1-8b87-912ff9561adf.html https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/new-ru...

positron6000 4y ago

> libraries wanted to make porn available to kids this is an extremely bad faith interpretation of librarians upholding the first amendment.

dragonwriter 4y ago

> The libraries wanted to make porn available to kids Assuming that you consider every single one of the titles on this list to be “porn”, but while many of them might be dubiously appropriate for (especially young) children, I don’t think very many of them meet any reasonable definition of “porn”. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AVW8q-B4uSZIJ3mLqc5tY8DZyojI1KLIVBQzSCb7lbg/edit#gid=0 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AVW8q-B4uSZIJ3mLqc5t...

Forgeties79 4y ago

> The libraries wanted to make porn available to kids I see you skipped the “nuance” part of the request.