5 ms·

> one of them is not appropriate for elementary schools because it includes essays debating which sexual acts are appropriate for feminists to perform and other

by miyoji 4mo ago

> one of them is not appropriate for elementary schools because it includes essays debating which sexual acts are appropriate for feminists to perform and other adult topics. Why is it "authoritarianism" to say that a book like that doesn't belong in my kids' school library? Who exactly are you to say what is or isn't appropriate for elementary school libraries? It's authoritarian because it's about people with authority (parents, teachers), telling people without (students) what kinds of media they are and aren't allowed to consume, which is about controlling which ideas they're allowed to think about. You don't like children thinking or learning about sex, but there is no moral or rational reason for that. You just don't like it, and you wish to use your authority to impose your preferences on people who have no power to stop you. That's authoritarian. And no, I don't think parents should be able to control their children's media diets, the idea that parents get to control their children is itself authoritarian. You don't own your kids.

AlexandrB 4mo ago
You should think this through. The logical endpoint is that all age based content restrictions are "authoritarian". So it should be ok to stock movies like Martyrs[1] or Men Behind the Sun[2] in elementary school libraries, because who are parents and teachers to decide whether seeing a woman flayed to death or a child vivisected is something that a 6 year old should be allowed to see? My real takeaway here is that you probably don't have children. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martyrs_(2015_film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martyrs_(2015_film) [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men_Behind_the_Sun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men_Behind_the_Sun
- grahamburger 4mo ago
  That type of media was never in schools to begin with. The problem here is that schools and districts made their own, informed curation decisions, and those decisions are being overridden by zealous parents informed only by their religious and political persuasions.
  - AlexandrB 4mo ago
    The implication here is that schools are making these decisions on a neutral, apolitical basis - but this is not really possible, is it? As many on the left would say: "everything is political". So what we're discussing is (yet another) front in the "culture war", this time about what ideas and values children should be exposed to. Let's just be honest about that at least.
    - grahamburger 4mo ago
      > schools are making these decisions on a neutral, apolitical basis - but this is not really possible, is it? Well, sure, but it's not possible for the religious parent groups to be apolitical either (nor do they make any attempt at even ostensible neutrality). Teachers and administrators are well trained, often have or have had children, and are generally a part of the community where they work and teach. It's not like they are 'coastal elites' making lefty decisions for the community; by and large, they share similar worldviews to the kids and their parents. I think we should give them more of our trust in making these decisions.
      - throwitaway222 4mo ago
        I guess you're not aware of the "Libs of TikTok" account?
        grahamburger 4mo ago
        Not really, no. How it is relevant?
    - cauch 4mo ago
      I think a better frame is: will the children be less socially adjusted if they are exposed to the book? While "everything is political", I can still see some differences. What was presented as "banned on neutral, apolitical basis base" in the previous comment can be seen as political at some level, but they are way less political than "let's ban this book because I don't want my children to be exposed to lefties ideas". It feels like there is an order of magnitude less importance to "maintaining our children unexposed to others' point of view" in the cases of left-wing book-banning than in the right-wing side. After all, right-wing book banning often works on "leftie keywords" or themes (gender study stuffs, inclusivity, ...) while I don't think there is a real movement to ban books because they use too much of "right-wing keywords" (free market stuffs, nationalism, ...).
- miyoji 4mo ago
  > You should think this through. The logical endpoint is that all age based content restrictions are "authoritarian". I do think that. It's rude to assume that I haven't thought my position through. > So it should be ok to stock movies like Martyrs[1] or Men Behind the Sun[2] in elementary school libraries, because who are parents and teachers to decide whether seeing a woman flayed to death or a child vivisected is something that a 6 year old should be allowed to see? Sure. > My real takeaway here is that you probably don't have children. I don't, but I was one, and I accessed all kinds of stuff on the internet that my parents and teachers didn't want me to see. Including gross violence and sex stuff. It didn't kill me. It didn't even hurt me. I'm fine. I'm a better person for having exposed myself to those things than I would be if I'd been sheltered from them.
  - throwitaway222 4mo ago
    But now in a vacuum you're advocating from your position (not being a parent) but being a human, that because you turned out ok, that everyone else will. There is no numbers, no statistics, just your anecdote here. Which is ok, but that's why two people immediately called your opinion out as being extreme.
    - miyoji 4mo ago
      > There is no numbers, no statistics, just your anecdote here. Which is ok, but that's why two people immediately called your opinion out as being extreme. No one else provided any, either. If you have strong evidence that exposure to media you don't like is bad for your children, please provide it. If you don't have any, my anecdote is better evidence than you've provided. Two people calling out an opinion as extreme does not make it extreme, and an opinion being extreme does not make it wrong.
throwitaway222 4mo ago
This take is pretty extreme. > Who exactly are you to say what is or isn't appropriate for elementary school libraries? parents If you want to go full anti-authoritarian, you are literally advocating anarchy. One in which you have no right to jail someone for killing someone else. There are many moral systems! Some of them are based in Christian ethics, which many people prescribe to. In fact it's the one the United States is based on. You can also choose something like liberalism. Many or most people would at least agree that "killing randon people at random times" being advocated in a book is not a good thing. And if that's not a good thing, then there is a moral judgement to be made to "ban" said book. I'm not saying that book exists, but if it did - would you "ban" it? No one "owns" another person, but there are many other forms of relationships between people that allows for one person to dictate a media diet for another.
- neetle 4mo ago
  > parents Parent-based rights arguments are perfectly adequate for the 80%, but degenerate in some horrific ways for the rest of the population. We need community-level input on how to raise kids so that the leftover 20% don’t just get fucked up by parents that “know best for their kid”. Anecdotally know of a few times where kids were taught that their molestation was their own fault (both sub-10yo), and had friends whose parents actively pushed them to kill themselves
  - throwitaway222 4mo ago
    So that has nothing to do with what I said. Parents, and if 80% of parents are good people, then it makes sense that parents have a say what is in the school library. It also makes sense that if a parent is abusing a child, a teacher will see it. I don't have a solution for you for all types of families, but this doesn't change that miyoji's take is fairly extreme.

by miyoji 4mo ago

AlexandrB 4mo ago

You should think this through. The logical endpoint is that all age based content restrictions are "authoritarian". So it should be ok to stock movies like Martyrs[1] or Men Behind the Sun[2] in elementary school libraries, because who are parents and teachers to decide whether seeing a woman flayed to death or a child vivisected is something that a 6 year old should be allowed to see? My real takeaway here is that you probably don't have children. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martyrs_(2015_film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martyrs_(2015_film) [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men_Behind_the_Sun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men_Behind_the_Sun

grahamburger 4mo ago
That type of media was never in schools to begin with. The problem here is that schools and districts made their own, informed curation decisions, and those decisions are being overridden by zealous parents informed only by their religious and political persuasions.
- AlexandrB 4mo ago
  The implication here is that schools are making these decisions on a neutral, apolitical basis - but this is not really possible, is it? As many on the left would say: "everything is political". So what we're discussing is (yet another) front in the "culture war", this time about what ideas and values children should be exposed to. Let's just be honest about that at least.
  - grahamburger 4mo ago
    > schools are making these decisions on a neutral, apolitical basis - but this is not really possible, is it? Well, sure, but it's not possible for the religious parent groups to be apolitical either (nor do they make any attempt at even ostensible neutrality). Teachers and administrators are well trained, often have or have had children, and are generally a part of the community where they work and teach. It's not like they are 'coastal elites' making lefty decisions for the community; by and large, they share similar worldviews to the kids and their parents. I think we should give them more of our trust in making these decisions.
    - throwitaway222 4mo ago
      I guess you're not aware of the "Libs of TikTok" account?
      - grahamburger 4mo ago
        Not really, no. How it is relevant?
  - cauch 4mo ago
    I think a better frame is: will the children be less socially adjusted if they are exposed to the book? While "everything is political", I can still see some differences. What was presented as "banned on neutral, apolitical basis base" in the previous comment can be seen as political at some level, but they are way less political than "let's ban this book because I don't want my children to be exposed to lefties ideas". It feels like there is an order of magnitude less importance to "maintaining our children unexposed to others' point of view" in the cases of left-wing book-banning than in the right-wing side. After all, right-wing book banning often works on "leftie keywords" or themes (gender study stuffs, inclusivity, ...) while I don't think there is a real movement to ban books because they use too much of "right-wing keywords" (free market stuffs, nationalism, ...).
miyoji 4mo ago
> You should think this through. The logical endpoint is that all age based content restrictions are "authoritarian". I do think that. It's rude to assume that I haven't thought my position through. > So it should be ok to stock movies like Martyrs[1] or Men Behind the Sun[2] in elementary school libraries, because who are parents and teachers to decide whether seeing a woman flayed to death or a child vivisected is something that a 6 year old should be allowed to see? Sure. > My real takeaway here is that you probably don't have children. I don't, but I was one, and I accessed all kinds of stuff on the internet that my parents and teachers didn't want me to see. Including gross violence and sex stuff. It didn't kill me. It didn't even hurt me. I'm fine. I'm a better person for having exposed myself to those things than I would be if I'd been sheltered from them.
- throwitaway222 4mo ago
  But now in a vacuum you're advocating from your position (not being a parent) but being a human, that because you turned out ok, that everyone else will. There is no numbers, no statistics, just your anecdote here. Which is ok, but that's why two people immediately called your opinion out as being extreme.
  - miyoji 4mo ago
    > There is no numbers, no statistics, just your anecdote here. Which is ok, but that's why two people immediately called your opinion out as being extreme. No one else provided any, either. If you have strong evidence that exposure to media you don't like is bad for your children, please provide it. If you don't have any, my anecdote is better evidence than you've provided. Two people calling out an opinion as extreme does not make it extreme, and an opinion being extreme does not make it wrong.

throwitaway222 4mo ago

This take is pretty extreme. > Who exactly are you to say what is or isn't appropriate for elementary school libraries? parents If you want to go full anti-authoritarian, you are literally advocating anarchy. One in which you have no right to jail someone for killing someone else. There are many moral systems! Some of them are based in Christian ethics, which many people prescribe to. In fact it's the one the United States is based on. You can also choose something like liberalism. Many or most people would at least agree that "killing randon people at random times" being advocated in a book is not a good thing. And if that's not a good thing, then there is a moral judgement to be made to "ban" said book. I'm not saying that book exists, but if it did - would you "ban" it? No one "owns" another person, but there are many other forms of relationships between people that allows for one person to dictate a media diet for another.

neetle 4mo ago
> parents Parent-based rights arguments are perfectly adequate for the 80%, but degenerate in some horrific ways for the rest of the population. We need community-level input on how to raise kids so that the leftover 20% don’t just get fucked up by parents that “know best for their kid”. Anecdotally know of a few times where kids were taught that their molestation was their own fault (both sub-10yo), and had friends whose parents actively pushed them to kill themselves
- throwitaway222 4mo ago
  So that has nothing to do with what I said. Parents, and if 80% of parents are good people, then it makes sense that parents have a say what is in the school library. It also makes sense that if a parent is abusing a child, a teacher will see it. I don't have a solution for you for all types of families, but this doesn't change that miyoji's take is fairly extreme.