4 ms·

Is "The Life of Rosa Parks" inappropriate for children? Should it not be available in school libraries? Clearly I would agree that Fifty Shades of Grey should

Is "The Life of Rosa Parks" inappropriate for children? Should it not be available in school libraries? Clearly I would agree that Fifty Shades of Grey should probably not be available in a school library. I would debate, given its historical significance, whether Mein Kampf should be included. But a book about the life of Rosa Parks should be mandatory in school libraries. I'm a UK resident, and might not be understanding things correctly. We don't do book banning or excluding over here.

gjsman-1000 3y ago
> We don't do book banning or excluding over here. Really? If I wrote a book entitled “The Darwin Option: A retrospective and brutally honest view about why Darwin was right about women,” you wouldn’t protest if it was put in the school library where an edgy 13-year-old could read it?
- MarcScott 3y ago
  Isn't this just an Appeal to Extremes argument? I already stated a book that shouldn't be in school libraries, one that is debatable, and one that should probably be included in libraries. My point about book banning or excluding, was that in the UK, as far as I am aware, we don't have any centralised list of books that can't be in a public or school library. It is left to the judgement of the librarian and not central or local government.
  - gjsman-1000 3y ago
    > "Isn't this just an Appeal to Extremes argument?" An Appeal to Extremes is not always inaccurate, nor always a fallacy. > "My point about book banning or excluding, was that in the UK, as far as I am aware, we don't have any centralised list of books that can't be in a public or school library. It is left to the judgement of the librarian and not central or local government." And you assume the government doesn't, or would not, put heavy pressure on any school or librarian that would dare have a book by David Duke on the shelves? Whether it be the UK or California? I actually like Florida because they make it clear and explicit instead of unclear and implicit, even if the results are identical but censoring different views. A written law, versus an unwritten rule.
    - MarcScott 3y ago
      First off, thank you for the debate. It's what I come to HN for. Out of interest, of the list in the first table, are there any books that you agree should not be accessible to young people? I find it interesting that parental pressure, probably heavily influenced by political, cultural and religious leanings, can influence what a library can have in it's inventory. Should the Quran be available in libraries in Wyoming? Should the Bible be available in libraries in Pakistan?
      - gjsman-1000 3y ago
        > Out of interest, of the list in the first table, are there any books that you agree should not be accessible to young people? I don't know about each individual book listed; but I would like to sidestep that and address the fact idea that "parental pressure, probably heavily influenced by political, cultural and religious leanings, can influence what a library can have in it's inventory." This has always been true, and I believe, always will be true. Even the liberal free world has its limits beyond which you will experience outrage if you speak a certain thought. If Alex Jones wrote a book about Frog Biology, even the most astute "we must not ban books!" parent would immediately shout that has no place in the school. If David Duke wrote a book about understanding the Jewish race, once again, even the most "we must not ban books!" parent would immediately scream that should be purged from the shelves. I think many of the same individuals would be extremely opposed to a hypothetical book written by Trump entitled "Being a Good President and Fulfilling Your Civic Duties." Heck, what about "Andrew Tate's Guide to Being a Cool Dude?" What about "James Damore's guide to Diversity in Action at Google?" There is no disagreement, truly, that some books or ideas are beyond the pale. I think you would admit yourself that you would not want an Alex Jones Biology book to be where a child could find it even if it had no sexually explicit or otherwise harmful content other than the ideas inside of it. If you are opposed to any of my above hypotheticals (David Duke's Guide to Jews), you are admitting that sharing some ideas is harmful and should be stopped, like it or not. The only question is what content and what ideas is considered harmful. And of course, what standards determine what content should not be permitted. Florida has picked their standards - it's traditional religious opposition to LGBTQ+ content. Note that it's not even Christian opposition - There was an incident just last week with Islamic people in Canada burning the Rainbow flag (because there is only one religion on earth that still actively stones gays). They've chosen general religious values, as they generally apply across many religions' teachings. Like it? Don't like it? Don't pretend like either side doesn't have things they don't want to censor. It's what to censor, not whether we censor.
  - tourmalinetaco 3y ago
    The problem is your wording was poor at best. You said “ I'm a UK resident, and might not be understanding things correctly. *We don't do book banning or excluding over here.*”. This makes it sound as though NO book is EVER banned or excluded. Which is blatantly false.[0] If you had meant “we don't have any centralised list of books that can't be in a public or school library”, then you should have said that. Not make a false general statement. Though I’d be pleasantly surprised to hear that there are laws in place to prevent local/central government bans, considering the UK’s history of such things. Wikipedia doesn’t list such a law, although it does list that the last banned book was unbanned by your government in 1992, and that none have been added since. [0] - https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/apr/20/third-of-uk-librarians-asked-to-censor-or-remove-books-research-reveals https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/apr/20/third-of-uk-li...
    - MarcScott 3y ago
      I did actually make that point in this comment - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36528598 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36528598 and I apologise for my poor choice of wording.
      - tourmalinetaco 3y ago
        I suggest editing your initial comment with that clarification as to nip confusion in the bud. You made a good point, but it’s easy to miss/ignore your argument when your final sentence comes off as ”holier-than-thou” and dismissive.
  - nonethewiser 3y ago
    > Isn't this just an Appeal to Extremes argument? Not banning anything is an extreme position. It literally cannot be anymore extreme in its permissiveness so any example is valid.
gillytech 3y ago
many books are given innocent sounding titles while pushing revisionist historical information or outright racist views. A book about Rosa Parks seems on its face to be a good thing. But if you inspect the contents you may find objectionable and false information, not conducive to the development of children. What if there were 10 Rosa Parks books reviewed and were deemed fine, and that one was filled with false ideological nonsense? I find this article disingenuous.
- MarcScott 3y ago
  Thank you. I haven't read the book, so I have no idea from which stance it views her life. It very well might be a racist book, and contain false information. Now I am going to have to read it, to make my own judgement.
electromech 3y ago
The data set lists the book as "Banned Pending Investigation," and I don't see more info as to why or what that means.
nonethewiser 3y ago
You misunderstand my point. If some books should be banned then banning books isnt an inherently bad thing. So we should stop saying “they are banning books!” to suggest something wrong is happening. Its a weak argument that should die. We have banned books from children’s libraries for a long time and should continue to do so.

gjsman-1000 3y ago

> We don't do book banning or excluding over here. Really? If I wrote a book entitled “The Darwin Option: A retrospective and brutally honest view about why Darwin was right about women,” you wouldn’t protest if it was put in the school library where an edgy 13-year-old could read it?

MarcScott 3y ago
Isn't this just an Appeal to Extremes argument? I already stated a book that shouldn't be in school libraries, one that is debatable, and one that should probably be included in libraries. My point about book banning or excluding, was that in the UK, as far as I am aware, we don't have any centralised list of books that can't be in a public or school library. It is left to the judgement of the librarian and not central or local government.
- gjsman-1000 3y ago
  > "Isn't this just an Appeal to Extremes argument?" An Appeal to Extremes is not always inaccurate, nor always a fallacy. > "My point about book banning or excluding, was that in the UK, as far as I am aware, we don't have any centralised list of books that can't be in a public or school library. It is left to the judgement of the librarian and not central or local government." And you assume the government doesn't, or would not, put heavy pressure on any school or librarian that would dare have a book by David Duke on the shelves? Whether it be the UK or California? I actually like Florida because they make it clear and explicit instead of unclear and implicit, even if the results are identical but censoring different views. A written law, versus an unwritten rule.
  - MarcScott 3y ago
    First off, thank you for the debate. It's what I come to HN for. Out of interest, of the list in the first table, are there any books that you agree should not be accessible to young people? I find it interesting that parental pressure, probably heavily influenced by political, cultural and religious leanings, can influence what a library can have in it's inventory. Should the Quran be available in libraries in Wyoming? Should the Bible be available in libraries in Pakistan?
    - gjsman-1000 3y ago
      > Out of interest, of the list in the first table, are there any books that you agree should not be accessible to young people? I don't know about each individual book listed; but I would like to sidestep that and address the fact idea that "parental pressure, probably heavily influenced by political, cultural and religious leanings, can influence what a library can have in it's inventory." This has always been true, and I believe, always will be true. Even the liberal free world has its limits beyond which you will experience outrage if you speak a certain thought. If Alex Jones wrote a book about Frog Biology, even the most astute "we must not ban books!" parent would immediately shout that has no place in the school. If David Duke wrote a book about understanding the Jewish race, once again, even the most "we must not ban books!" parent would immediately scream that should be purged from the shelves. I think many of the same individuals would be extremely opposed to a hypothetical book written by Trump entitled "Being a Good President and Fulfilling Your Civic Duties." Heck, what about "Andrew Tate's Guide to Being a Cool Dude?" What about "James Damore's guide to Diversity in Action at Google?" There is no disagreement, truly, that some books or ideas are beyond the pale. I think you would admit yourself that you would not want an Alex Jones Biology book to be where a child could find it even if it had no sexually explicit or otherwise harmful content other than the ideas inside of it. If you are opposed to any of my above hypotheticals (David Duke's Guide to Jews), you are admitting that sharing some ideas is harmful and should be stopped, like it or not. The only question is what content and what ideas is considered harmful. And of course, what standards determine what content should not be permitted. Florida has picked their standards - it's traditional religious opposition to LGBTQ+ content. Note that it's not even Christian opposition - There was an incident just last week with Islamic people in Canada burning the Rainbow flag (because there is only one religion on earth that still actively stones gays). They've chosen general religious values, as they generally apply across many religions' teachings. Like it? Don't like it? Don't pretend like either side doesn't have things they don't want to censor. It's what to censor, not whether we censor.
- tourmalinetaco 3y ago
  The problem is your wording was poor at best. You said “ I'm a UK resident, and might not be understanding things correctly. *We don't do book banning or excluding over here.*”. This makes it sound as though NO book is EVER banned or excluded. Which is blatantly false.[0] If you had meant “we don't have any centralised list of books that can't be in a public or school library”, then you should have said that. Not make a false general statement. Though I’d be pleasantly surprised to hear that there are laws in place to prevent local/central government bans, considering the UK’s history of such things. Wikipedia doesn’t list such a law, although it does list that the last banned book was unbanned by your government in 1992, and that none have been added since. [0] - https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/apr/20/third-of-uk-librarians-asked-to-censor-or-remove-books-research-reveals https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/apr/20/third-of-uk-li...
  - MarcScott 3y ago
    I did actually make that point in this comment - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36528598 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36528598 and I apologise for my poor choice of wording.
    - tourmalinetaco 3y ago
      I suggest editing your initial comment with that clarification as to nip confusion in the bud. You made a good point, but it’s easy to miss/ignore your argument when your final sentence comes off as ”holier-than-thou” and dismissive.
- nonethewiser 3y ago
  > Isn't this just an Appeal to Extremes argument? Not banning anything is an extreme position. It literally cannot be anymore extreme in its permissiveness so any example is valid.

gillytech 3y ago

many books are given innocent sounding titles while pushing revisionist historical information or outright racist views. A book about Rosa Parks seems on its face to be a good thing. But if you inspect the contents you may find objectionable and false information, not conducive to the development of children. What if there were 10 Rosa Parks books reviewed and were deemed fine, and that one was filled with false ideological nonsense? I find this article disingenuous.

MarcScott 3y ago
Thank you. I haven't read the book, so I have no idea from which stance it views her life. It very well might be a racist book, and contain false information. Now I am going to have to read it, to make my own judgement.

electromech 3y ago

The data set lists the book as "Banned Pending Investigation," and I don't see more info as to why or what that means.

nonethewiser 3y ago

You misunderstand my point. If some books should be banned then banning books isnt an inherently bad thing. So we should stop saying “they are banning books!” to suggest something wrong is happening. Its a weak argument that should die. We have banned books from children’s libraries for a long time and should continue to do so.