2 ms·

Probably because most of what you posted is, in your words, "less factual versions of reality"

by bavell 3y ago

dangus 3y ago
Well, you’ve put zero effort into refuting my version of reality, simply saying that I’m wrong with no supporting detail. When refuted this article I at least gave you examples to work with.
- bavell 3y ago
  That's fair, and it's also exactly one of the issues discussed in this thread. Namely, that refuting "misinformation" is an order of magnitude harder than spreading it. I can tell we have deep disagreements, and it would take entirely too much time and effort to try and convince you otherwise (which is probably unachievable in this sort of forum anyways). I'll just say that I disagree with the framing of your points around school curriculum and Florida censorship. The framing is the most uncharitable interpretation of what's actually going on, which is why I referred to your "less factual versions of reality".
  - afpx 3y ago
    You didn’t really clear things up.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - dangus 3y ago
    I’m curious on what the generous reading of the bill is. https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1467/?Tab=BillText https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1467/?Tab=BillTex... It allows individual parents to DDoS the school with objections to individual materials, forcing hearings led by a vaguely defined “unbiased” individual. It requires librarians to undergo state level training to choose materials. How bad this is really depends on the content of the training (do any of us know what that is?). We all know who controls the state government of Florida. It doesn’t have to be overt censorship to be a bad bill that disincentivizes schools from carrying books with controversial topics and has the effective result of censorship. If a school wants to avoid a procedural nightmare they just can’t carry some materials at all. Here’s a quote directly from Ron DeSantis’ website championing the bill: > “Recently I discovered one of the most disturbing, pornographic books in my child’s high school in Orange County,” said Alicia Farrant, Parent, Orange County. “After some research, I learned that an alarming percentage of high school and middle school library books contain similar material. It is appalling that removal of pornographic and sexually explicit books has even been cause for debate.” https://www.flgov.com/2022/03/25/governor-ron-desantis-signs-bill-that-requires-curriculum-transparency/ https://www.flgov.com/2022/03/25/governor-ron-desantis-signs... In other words, some parent was mad that a book discussed sex. A glaring omission is the title of the material, it’s just an anonymous unknown scapegoat. Now the it is undoubtedly banned thanks to the objection of one parent. Now students have one less resource that gives them information and perspective about the changes happening to their body and their journey to adulthood. Now parents can easily get books removed based on their personal objections rather than their value to the school community as a whole.
- notacoward 3y ago
  This is exactly the "censorship" the right obsesses about. Not the real kind, as in the examples you cited. What they want is the ability to make any claim they want with zero support, and when asked for any "turn the tables" by putting the entire burden on their interlocutor - who might, as in this case, have met it already. They call denial of that "censorship" even if it very much isn't. That's just giving zero credence to zero proof or effort. They need periodic reminders that the right to speak freely does not include the right to be heard, believed, or even taken seriously. It's only censorship when you can't speak even on your own platform.

Probably because most of what you posted is, in your words, "less factual versions of reality"

by bavell 3y ago

Probably because most of what you posted is, in your words, "less factual versions of reality"

Well, you’ve put zero effort into refuting my version of reality, simply saying that I’m wrong with no supporting detail. When refuted this article I at least gave you examples to work with.

bavell 3y ago
That's fair, and it's also exactly one of the issues discussed in this thread. Namely, that refuting "misinformation" is an order of magnitude harder than spreading it. I can tell we have deep disagreements, and it would take entirely too much time and effort to try and convince you otherwise (which is probably unachievable in this sort of forum anyways). I'll just say that I disagree with the framing of your points around school curriculum and Florida censorship. The framing is the most uncharitable interpretation of what's actually going on, which is why I referred to your "less factual versions of reality".
- afpx 3y ago
  You didn’t really clear things up.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- dangus 3y ago
  I’m curious on what the generous reading of the bill is. https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1467/?Tab=BillText https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1467/?Tab=BillTex... It allows individual parents to DDoS the school with objections to individual materials, forcing hearings led by a vaguely defined “unbiased” individual. It requires librarians to undergo state level training to choose materials. How bad this is really depends on the content of the training (do any of us know what that is?). We all know who controls the state government of Florida. It doesn’t have to be overt censorship to be a bad bill that disincentivizes schools from carrying books with controversial topics and has the effective result of censorship. If a school wants to avoid a procedural nightmare they just can’t carry some materials at all. Here’s a quote directly from Ron DeSantis’ website championing the bill: > “Recently I discovered one of the most disturbing, pornographic books in my child’s high school in Orange County,” said Alicia Farrant, Parent, Orange County. “After some research, I learned that an alarming percentage of high school and middle school library books contain similar material. It is appalling that removal of pornographic and sexually explicit books has even been cause for debate.” https://www.flgov.com/2022/03/25/governor-ron-desantis-signs-bill-that-requires-curriculum-transparency/ https://www.flgov.com/2022/03/25/governor-ron-desantis-signs... In other words, some parent was mad that a book discussed sex. A glaring omission is the title of the material, it’s just an anonymous unknown scapegoat. Now the it is undoubtedly banned thanks to the objection of one parent. Now students have one less resource that gives them information and perspective about the changes happening to their body and their journey to adulthood. Now parents can easily get books removed based on their personal objections rather than their value to the school community as a whole.
notacoward 3y ago
This is exactly the "censorship" the right obsesses about. Not the real kind, as in the examples you cited. What they want is the ability to make any claim they want with zero support, and when asked for any "turn the tables" by putting the entire burden on their interlocutor - who might, as in this case, have met it already. They call denial of that "censorship" even if it very much isn't. That's just giving zero credence to zero proof or effort. They need periodic reminders that the right to speak freely does not include the right to be heard, believed, or even taken seriously. It's only censorship when you can't speak even on your own platform.