4 ms·

Were any of these books in the kids' section? That could be one reason. Also, we shouldn't dilute the meaning of the term "book banners" to refer to anyone who

Were any of these books in the kids' section? That could be one reason. Also, we shouldn't dilute the meaning of the term "book banners" to refer to anyone who doesn't want a particular book in a particular place (even if that place is a public library). In the US, we are spoiled to have zero actually banned books. Anyone who wants to is free to purchase any book they want, as long as it's for sale somewhere. People who don't want books that have sexual content (which a disproportionate number of sexuality-focused books do) in the kids' section might be fine with those books existing in a different section, or in a private bookstore. True "book banners" would want to enforce a ban on them existing anywhere. This is a subset — and quite possibly a small one — of the former group.

0x3444ac53 1y ago
No. It seems like there was an age appropriate sexual health book for 9-12 year olds https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_Perfectly_Normal https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_Perfectly_Normal I have another comment on this thread where I linked a lot of related information about this.
- apparent 1y ago
  That was the only book that patrons sought to have removed from the kids' section? Thanks for the wikipedia link. The criticism section is particularly enlightening: > In a 2023 Slate article, Aymann Ismail, who until then had considered most attempts to ban books hysterical, was taken aback by the book's explicitness.
  - 0x3444ac53 1y ago
    The important thing to note is that the book is being called "pornography" by the Clean Up Samuels group. It is explicit, but it is not pornographic. There are many many other books they want to ban completely simply because they features trans or gay characters. While digging for this there does seem to be a young adult novel about a young gay man that does feature sexually explicit content (although it doesn't appear pornographic at all). The library keeps it in the "New Adults section. Which requires that anyone under age get explicit permission from their guardian to access, and they even created a new kind of library card to help moderate said access.
    - apparent 1y ago
      By "access" you mean check out to take home, or take off the shelf to peruse?
      - 0x3444ac53 1y ago
        Does it really matter? If a parent is so intent on restricting their child's access to certain text, then maybe they should accompany their child to the library. This feels less and less like you're interested in discussing this and more like you're grasping for some kind of "gotcha" argument. I'm probably not going to respond again unless it feels productive.
        apparent 1y ago
        I guess I feel like you're not engaging in good faith when you use ambiguous terms like "access" in order to make it seem like books are inaccessible to kids, when in fact they aren't. If you think that asking to clarify that is a "gotcha" question, so be it. I view the original statement as intentionally misleading, and aimed to be kind in asking for a clarification instead of just calling out your misleading statement.
        pseudalopex 1y ago
        Access is a common term although ambiguous. Libraries were not expected to confine children to the children's section in my childhood. I saw a few restricted sections like they described in recent years. Policy prohibited children without permission entering. None had full time guards however. Deterrence seemed to rely on what would happen if caught. Like many rules and laws.
    - ryandrake 1y ago
      Your distinction between "explicit" and "pornographic" is important, and often not well understood (or actively ignored) by book opponents. There is nothing wrong with explicit, but age appropriate content. You can't really properly teach someone about sex without getting explicit, after all. A book that says "When two people love each other, they go into the bedroom together, and uhhhhh.... , and then a baby arrives!" is not really doing the job.
  - 0x3444ac53 1y ago
    It seems that reference is actually slightly cherry picked. The article it is lifted from [0], is the author reflecting on his own discomfort with the text, the same discomfort he believes drives the people wanting it be be banned. Ultimately he makes the case that books like this are actually ultimately a good thing. [0]: https://slate.com/human-interest/2023/09/banned-books-list-its-perfectly-normal-facebook.html https://slate.com/human-interest/2023/09/banned-books-list-i...
    - pseudalopex 1y ago
      And the comment cherry picked from the criticism section. It said Most of the parents who challenged the book disagreed with the concept of the book because they thought sexual education was not age appropriate for their children.[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=It%27s_Perfectly_Normal&oldid=1224511009#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=It%27s_Perfectly_...
AlotOfReading 1y ago
It's not just "sexual content". Take a look at any of the ban lists, like the one provided by the ACLU (https://www.aclu.org/cases/e-k-v-department-of-defense-education-activity?document=Exhibit-14 https://www.aclu.org/cases/e-k-v-department-of-defense-educa...) from earlier this year. Many of the books are related to slavery, civil rights, climate change, and media literacy, and the orders banning them apply to schools on every military base around the world.
- 0x3444ac53 1y ago
  I dug up the list https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44517341 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44517341
sapphicsnail 1y ago
What counts as sexual content? Does any book with gay or trans characters count because that's what people are trying to ban. Maybe we should ban the Bible from libraries because it has plenty of sexual content as well.
- apparent 1y ago
  I think part of the issue is that books about sexuality are much more likely than regular kid books to have sexually explicit illustrations. Some depict fellatio or other sex acts. Most people don't want their kids to have access to such content, regardless of the type of sexual act shown. I certainly fall into that camp.
  - pseudalopex 1y ago
    Sexual education books are much more likely to have explicit illustrations. Stories about gay or trans characters are not. Both are challenged often.

0x3444ac53 1y ago

No. It seems like there was an age appropriate sexual health book for 9-12 year olds https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_Perfectly_Normal https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_Perfectly_Normal I have another comment on this thread where I linked a lot of related information about this.

apparent 1y ago
That was the only book that patrons sought to have removed from the kids' section? Thanks for the wikipedia link. The criticism section is particularly enlightening: > In a 2023 Slate article, Aymann Ismail, who until then had considered most attempts to ban books hysterical, was taken aback by the book's explicitness.
- 0x3444ac53 1y ago
  The important thing to note is that the book is being called "pornography" by the Clean Up Samuels group. It is explicit, but it is not pornographic. There are many many other books they want to ban completely simply because they features trans or gay characters. While digging for this there does seem to be a young adult novel about a young gay man that does feature sexually explicit content (although it doesn't appear pornographic at all). The library keeps it in the "New Adults section. Which requires that anyone under age get explicit permission from their guardian to access, and they even created a new kind of library card to help moderate said access.
  - apparent 1y ago
    By "access" you mean check out to take home, or take off the shelf to peruse?
    - 0x3444ac53 1y ago
      Does it really matter? If a parent is so intent on restricting their child's access to certain text, then maybe they should accompany their child to the library. This feels less and less like you're interested in discussing this and more like you're grasping for some kind of "gotcha" argument. I'm probably not going to respond again unless it feels productive.
      - apparent 1y ago
        I guess I feel like you're not engaging in good faith when you use ambiguous terms like "access" in order to make it seem like books are inaccessible to kids, when in fact they aren't. If you think that asking to clarify that is a "gotcha" question, so be it. I view the original statement as intentionally misleading, and aimed to be kind in asking for a clarification instead of just calling out your misleading statement.
        pseudalopex 1y ago
        Access is a common term although ambiguous. Libraries were not expected to confine children to the children's section in my childhood. I saw a few restricted sections like they described in recent years. Policy prohibited children without permission entering. None had full time guards however. Deterrence seemed to rely on what would happen if caught. Like many rules and laws.
  - ryandrake 1y ago
    Your distinction between "explicit" and "pornographic" is important, and often not well understood (or actively ignored) by book opponents. There is nothing wrong with explicit, but age appropriate content. You can't really properly teach someone about sex without getting explicit, after all. A book that says "When two people love each other, they go into the bedroom together, and uhhhhh.... , and then a baby arrives!" is not really doing the job.
- 0x3444ac53 1y ago
  It seems that reference is actually slightly cherry picked. The article it is lifted from [0], is the author reflecting on his own discomfort with the text, the same discomfort he believes drives the people wanting it be be banned. Ultimately he makes the case that books like this are actually ultimately a good thing. [0]: https://slate.com/human-interest/2023/09/banned-books-list-its-perfectly-normal-facebook.html https://slate.com/human-interest/2023/09/banned-books-list-i...
  - pseudalopex 1y ago
    And the comment cherry picked from the criticism section. It said Most of the parents who challenged the book disagreed with the concept of the book because they thought sexual education was not age appropriate for their children.[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=It%27s_Perfectly_Normal&oldid=1224511009#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=It%27s_Perfectly_...

AlotOfReading 1y ago

It's not just "sexual content". Take a look at any of the ban lists, like the one provided by the ACLU (https://www.aclu.org/cases/e-k-v-department-of-defense-education-activity?document=Exhibit-14 https://www.aclu.org/cases/e-k-v-department-of-defense-educa...) from earlier this year. Many of the books are related to slavery, civil rights, climate change, and media literacy, and the orders banning them apply to schools on every military base around the world.

0x3444ac53 1y ago
I dug up the list https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44517341 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44517341

sapphicsnail 1y ago

What counts as sexual content? Does any book with gay or trans characters count because that's what people are trying to ban. Maybe we should ban the Bible from libraries because it has plenty of sexual content as well.

apparent 1y ago
I think part of the issue is that books about sexuality are much more likely than regular kid books to have sexually explicit illustrations. Some depict fellatio or other sex acts. Most people don't want their kids to have access to such content, regardless of the type of sexual act shown. I certainly fall into that camp.
- pseudalopex 1y ago
  Sexual education books are much more likely to have explicit illustrations. Stories about gay or trans characters are not. Both are challenged often.