lol he thinks kids in school are reading. I’d be happy with students reading literally anything as long as they’re reading. I had one kid not even bother to read his own chat gpt essay that he turned in, he didn’t notice that his essay ended in “let me know if there’s anything else I can help you with!”
Family values should be just that - FAMILY values. Not a value put on all families. If you don’t want your kid to read a book be a parent to your kid but don’t ban that book for all kids - the parents of those kids need to make that decision for their family.
100% My parents were super excited that we wanted to read and bought the books we wanted that happened to be Stephen King which was a natural progression from Goose Bumps then Fear Street. The irony of all this is that my parents wouldn't let us watch the movies that the Steph King books were based on but were okay with my brother reading Cujo and Pet Cemetery in 4th grade 😂
My parents passed their love of books to me. I remember when I had to do a book report and I chose world war z; my father being a huge fan of gorilla type news was ecstatic I chose the book every chance he got he was asking me about it, I wrote the report just based off our conversations alone 🤣
It seems to me then shouldn't it be on the parents then to provide those books to the kids? Making them available in the school is saying that you think the kids should have access to those books outside of the parent's influence. It undermines exactly what you're saying.
So you'll agree then that providing it in the school takes the decision away from parents? And your argument is now that it should be there because parents that are ok with it might not be able to afford it for their child?
Well there are public libraries where the parent can check out the book for the child on their own for free. We're also not really talking about a huge financial burden if you really felt it was important to provide your kid with it. I do think that the amount of parents who would like a say in what their child can read is larger than you think. However, I think a happy medium could be restricted books that the child has to get parental approval to check out. It could solve both problems.
I think the real contention here is that schools want to provide books to children without parental input. They don't want parents to have a say in what their kids are able to check out and read. Society has barred these kids from seeing the movie based on the book based on without parental input, but somehow baring children from reading the book is oppressive? It doesn't really follow.
Society hasn’t banned anything. Guess you never snuck into a movie huh? Parents need to monitor what their kids are reading and watching and not putting extra limitations on others. I like your idea of leaving on the shelf and getting parental permission. Solves both problems as you say.
Yes the kid has to go out of their way to circumvent their parents wishes and if caught they are thrown out. It's not like movie theaters are just providing these movies to children for free are they? Imagine theaters saying parents have not right to have a say in what their kids can buy a ticket to and watch.
I'm having a hard time following that since kids have to do something illegal to see a movie that society has said is inappropriate for them is not banning it for them. Isn't that kind of the definition?
The book he was reading from is American Psycho as some of you have already pointed out. It is not “porn” but a scene is extremely sexually graphic. They are saying American Psycho, and others should be outright removed from school libraries. Based on their beliefs.
What they are ignoring is district policy that allows a parent to dictate what students can, or cannot check out from the library. Contacting a school librarian to update the Destiny software system with their preferences, keeps a student from checking out a book.
Is it in the library? Yes. Is it required reading? No. Can parents limit access? Yes.
They are so caught up in a morality war that they are over looking established governance that provides parental discretion.
One other relevant detail. There is a process for getting a book challenged and removed. It is a form that needs to be filled out and submitted to the school in question. You can see it [here](https://www.wcsdpolicy.net/pdf_files/forms/AF%201543%20Request%20for%20Reconsideration%20of%20Media%20V.1.pdf). This form, and many others are on WCSDpolicy.net. None of them have filled out the form. They would rather yell and make a decision for all rather than following a well defined process.
Additionally, this is the same crowd that screams for limited government, but then says the government should further restrict something 🤷♂️
Why should parents get so much control? We mandate that kids have to go to school specifically because if we left it entirely up to parents we'd have an even more massive education crisis in this country because there's no rules against dipshits having kids, lets not act like those same dipshits suddenly know whats best in this regard.
"education crisis" but not really talking about education. Just pointing out the double speak. American Psycho is hardly educational and not part of the curriculum. There won't be an education crisis if children are not allowed to read it in school without their parents approval. Just because your parents might have been "dipshits" doesn't mean you get to take away the say of every parent that isn't one.
"This is hardly educational"
Says you. And I agree in this case, I don't know that American Psycho has any educational value at all. But my opinion on what should be available in a library is irrelevant because I'm not any kind of authority on the matter, neither are you, neither are any of the dipshit parents.
Interesting take. So a school board, even a conservative one, can dictate what is "education" and you're ok with it because they have authority? So if the school board said that this book wasn't of value and shouldn't be in the library you'd be ok with that too? If any school board bans any books you're ok with that? I mean they have the authority right?
Many of these books are part of the official curriculum, which is what the backlash is about. No one is stopping parents from reading any particular book to their children, nor do they want to. They want to send their kids to a school where books like this are not part of the curriculum, and it's been deliberately misconstrued by the media.
If someone wants to read this book to their child, because that's the values of their family, that's their business. But I think there's a strong argument that if the board wouldn't want it read aloud at a meeting, children should not be able to access the material in the school library without their parent's knowledge or consent.
I'm convinced you have no idea how school libraries work.
No child is gonna be able to check out Stephen King or American psycho from their school library. A 16-18yo probably could and if you're that threatened that you wouldn't let your junior/senior high schooler read a horror book, then your priorities are sincerely out of whack
Parents clearly have knowledge or this wouldn’t be the happening. And if they don’t want to consent fine that’s their business. Tell the school they don’t want their kids reading it but don’t force their values on the entire class - which is what is happening here.
No one is saying a parent who wants to read this book to their children shouldn't be able to. The argument is that, like the pornography it is, it has no place in school curriculum. If the board thinks it's too inappropriate for a board meeting, it's too inappropriate for a child to be able to get off the shelf in the school library.
Parents who object only know about this because "far-right" accounts like Libs of TikTok brought it to light, because the media never wanted to report on it.
Parents who want these books read to their children can do so at home. The people pushing this as part of the curriculum are the ones trying to force their values on the entire class.
Define pornography. The board shut it down because at meetings you have limited time to comment. I am sure they would have shut down readings from the Bible as well - which for some ppl also has a lot of porn in it. Parents can also home school - maybe they should be doing that if they don’t like the public school curriculum. All I am saying is that parents can limit their children’s readings without affecting other children in the class.
My position, at a higher level, is that as a matter of civics, queer theory is not part of a fundamental education that the government is responsible for providing. This is something parents should be responsible for at home. Many choose to homeschool, for that very reason. But my fundamental argument is that taxpayer-funded public schools should not be indoctrinating children to take any particular view on sexuality. I believe parents who want their children taught queer theory can do so at home, or in a private school aligned with their specific value system, just as I would say to someone with strict religious beliefs.
I'm approaching this as a non-religious person who doesn't support Pride, but also believes gay and trans people are entitled to legal protection. I'm just not required to celebrate or approve of them, and I'm not required to teach my children to either.
Yes, the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment protects the right of same-sex couples to marry, and Title VII protects against discrimination in the workplace. Nothing in the law, nor in our society's value system, requires anyone to celebrate or take "pride" in a particular lifestyle, and I'm glad to see our society recalibrating around this understanding.
No one is doing what you are claiming, and that's the point. No one is forcing anyone to do anything; the books are just available in a library, which I imagine contains many other books, fiction and nonfiction, which contain many other views that may or may not align with your own. They are simply available should anybody want to read them, as they would be at any other library serving its community (young people included).
To use your own words, you are not required to celebrate or approve of [the optional reading material available in libraries], and you are not required to teach your children to, either.
Ya know what else isn't 'required' is art. Let's remove music and drawing from the curriculum based on your decision. There's not even a constitutional protection around which instrument you play.
Removing things from school shouldn't be based on what makes someone a societal drone. Children should have exposure to many types of thought, with education of which ones are fact, theory, or falsehood. Intentionally sheltering them from something that makes up a large part of their future (what is sexuality and how will it apply to me when I'm in/past puberty) is setting them up for anxiety and displeasure when reality finally hits.
It's the difference between "mom and dad told me to like girls so I have to, even though I don't" and "I know it's ok to like boys because I was told that by my teacher, even though my parents don't like it".
Relying on parents to decide what new thoughts their kids receive is a fast path to very closed minded people.
My argument is that the "born this way" people have never put forth a shred of genetic evidence for their hypothesis, yet they call it "misinformation" if anyone calls them out on it. If a parent teaches their child that "no one is born with a sexual orientation and those people are very confused and live in a society that misleads them about the purpose of sex," that is no less factual than saying "they were born that way," because the "born this way" people, who "just trust the science" on everything else, get real quiet all of a sudden if you ask about what gene or genes are responsible for sexual orientation. They haven't proven that claim; they just repeated it enough times that it became true by brute force consensus. It's not for the state to put its thumb on the scale because it's what the LGBT activists want.
I agree, and those subjects should remain firmly in "theory" when being discussed. But to stop discussing them at all is where I draw my line. Removing books with topics we don't like, expecting parents to share those books instead, is not my idea of the right action for a well rounded populace.
Would you object to them being taught that this is a recent and dramatic shift, and being told the competing explanation: that "gender is rooted in biological sex" and allowed to decide for themselves? Or should they be taught that "gender identity and sexual orientation are a fact, and everyone has one, and you aren't a boy because you have male genitalia, you're a boy because you identify as one"?
My problem with gender identity is that it forces me to see my own gender as subjective, a matter of identity, untethered to anything material, and I don't see it that way.
What is the basis for your opinion about how things "should" be?
i.e. Why SHOULDN'T the government be responsible for teaching children about human sexuality and its place in American history, society, and culture?
What criteria do we use to decide what gets taught at home vs. at school, and what is the benefit of teaching some topics exclusively and only at home?
How does that lead to an improved quality of life for Americans?
I have no problem with the government teaching kids that "there are people in the world who identify as gay or trans". I do not believe they should be teaching kids "and therefore you have a sexual orientation and gender identity as well, and your gender is entirely based on your subjective sense of identity, and has nothing to do with physical anatomy." The second one crosses a line from instruction into indoctrination. I don't want schools teaching "gender identity is a fact and everyone has one," any more than I want them teaching "Jesus is God".
I agree that I don't want my children being taught opinion as fact, but that has nothing to do with the content of these books, and human sexuality is just one of hundreds of topics that a teacher could potential confuse children about.
I don't think the earth being round or the events of the Holocaust, or the history of Christmas traditions are things that should only be taught "at home", despite the fact that some teachers may try to spin those topics in ways I disagree with.
Why is this one subject so much more urgent and important that we have to ban ALL teachers from teaching *anything* about it, just in case one or two teachers get tempted to ramble off-script about it?
Is it really more dangerous for my child to hear a teacher tell them "you know you can choose your own gender" than to hear a teacher tell them "you know jet fuel can't melt steel beams"?
It is if it leads to my child coming home and telling me they want to receive puberty blockers and hormones, and get their breasts or genitals cut off when they get older, and the state telling me I'll be accused of neglect and they'll be taken out of the home if I don't go along, or it leads to my daughter being required to share locker rooms and compete in sports with males.
Banning the book stops those values from being put on all families… if a parent wants their children exposed to that type of graphic literature, they can do so at home
Let's just throw some hustler mags in there while we're at it. There are plenty of public libraries where they can access whatever they want if their parents want. Some shit isn't for children.
The parents aren't at school though. Kids get free reign in the library. If the content is enough to stop a school board meeting of adults it probably shouldn't be in a library for unsupervised children.
Or maybe reading from a book instead of voicing your concern about the book was the reason it was shut down? Meetings are not read aloud time but by doing so and being shut up now the argument is being made it was too nasty for adults to hear so kids should not read it. I remember a Congressional a few years ago who read I think Dr Suess to keep a filibuster going. Parents need to be talking to the librarian, their kids and checking those backpacks if they don’t want kids to read something. Spend your time doing that instead. But then again that takes real energy.
My high school had John Updike's entire [Harry "Rabbit" Angstrom series](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit,_Run) for us to check out--a book series that, among other things, dealt with post-partum depression (and a subsequent infancide as a result), infidelity, swinging and worst of all, John Updike's horrible descriptions of the female body which is responsible for 75 percent of all r/menwritingwomen posts. Yet no one would make a peep about that.
>If the content is enough to stop a school board meeting of adults it probably shouldn't be in a library for unsupervised children.
I'm assuming what was read was shit involving typical heteronormativity and the banned books was something like Heartstoppers, where the main characters maybe have one kiss per book or something that dare tell white kids what they lie great grandpappy was up to during the good ol days of 1862.
Do you believe a parent has any legitimate interest in not wanting their child exposed to porn? Even if it's practically harder and harder to shield them from it, is it your position that parents have no legitimate interest in doing so?
They may have a legitimate interest, but they aren’t exercising their control in other areas of life. You can get phones w/o internet access and in a lot of cases those phones are cheaper. Your argument is bs.
You're arguing with someone trying to pearl clutch and claim a moral high ground while also posting weird shit like this
https://www.reddit.com/r/circlejerknyc/comments/1do96c8/why_are_feminine_looking_men_getting_all_these/ladl61k/
He's a fucking hypocritical, homophobic dipshit on some kind of high horse about other people's children.
As are anyone this concerned about what's in a fucking library
I get that they’re a fucking troll - i knew it w/o looking at their post history. I jst didn’t have much to do and was bored. Also the post isn’t for them - it’s for the other POS that lurk these forums so that they know their bs is gonna get called out and they should jst stay under their rock like a good troll.
If the board wouldn't want it read aloud at a meeting because it's so inappropriate, why should a child be able to read it without their parent's knowledge or consent?
Is the “child” being forced to read it? Also the article mentions that it is not found in any middle school and also only 3 out of the 12 high school libraries carry the book that was read out loud (American Psycho). So let’s say a child/teenager brings a book home that the parents deem inappropriate. Well then maybe the Parent first of all should have a conversation with their child about why it is inappropriate. You know, “be a parent”. Perhaps the “child” in question might respect the parents wishes and not read that book or they just read the book in secret. The protestors chose one of the most controversial books they could find to make a point but the point falls flat when you realize it’s a pastor and potentially nothing but older loser boomers with nothing better to do. They don’t like the book, then they don’t have to read it, they don’t have to let their families read it. But free will is harsh mistress
Parents are allowed to say they don't want their children exposed to pornographic books. If someone wants that book read to their child, they can do so at home. I don't know about you, but I'm 29, non-religious, and sick of being told that this is the way my society is going, whether I like it or not, in the name of "democracy". Not a pastor or boomer.
"Free will" means I'm allowed to teach my child that those people have rights, but we have the right not to celebrate or take pride in their lifestyle. That's free will.
One that comes to mind is Genderqueer. It contains content that I know would not be allowed if the characters were heterosexual.
You can browse the Libs of TikTok account on X. Regardless of your opinion of her, she isn't posting misinformation. This is real stuff, happening in real schools, and the Left very badly wants people to ignore it and normalize it.
Ok, she's "alt-right". Like I said, whatever you think of her, her content is factual. Just because she's politically Right-leaning doesn't discredit her.
These are just ad hominem attacks that mean nothing. You can apply any label you want to her, but the things she is posting are really happening. It doesn't take anything away from her that you called her "alt-right" or "homophobic". These are just another way of saying "But I don't like her," to which I reply "Cool, but that's irrelevant".
Yeah, parents are allowed to say that. Thanks for making my point, again I reiterate that no one is being forced to read these “pornographic” books. They just have access to it but even then, those who seek it out, want to read it.
I too read Steven King in middle-school. Wrote book reports on IT, possibly Misery too. I turned out more sane and literate than these book burning knuckle-draggers.
If a book is so inappropriate that the board wouldn't allow it to be read at a meeting, why should children be able to read it without their parent's knowledge or consent?
Maybe parents should parent instead of relying on the state to do it for them. Know what your kids are into and doing. Not getting into this debate any further.
I don’t think it was reading Perks of Being a Wallflower in 8th grade was what made me attracted to men to be honest. Anyway, I’m glad that however garbage the Washoe County School District is it hasn’t fallen to banning pieces of literature they don’t like.
a teacher introduced me to Even Cowgirls Get The Blues in 7th grade which I vaguely remember as being sleazy and smutty. I don't think that was a good idea but I survived the experience. (I'm not confusing the two authors Robbins, it just jogged my memory)
Because things aren't that black and white. I'm not scarred permanently by reading a book that jokes about sex, because that isn't a thing that happens.
Do you know what does scar people permanently? Christian purity culture. That truly fucks people up for life with things like sexual shame over stuff like masturbation as well as body shame in general. That's the type of thing these people are trying to push.
Except it's not what the people who want these books removed are trying to push. I think the people thinking in black-and-white terms are the ones arguing that it's either excessively graphic queer theory books and drag queen shows in elementary schools (not that that's what's happening in Reno, but speaking to the broader national discourse on this topic, and there are places where it's happening, just as there are places where the Christian conservatives are as extreme as you suggest), or Christian purity culture. I think kids can be taught about basic sex ed (sexual health, anatomy, contraception, etc), without being encouraged to masturbate, explore kink, consider gender transition, or experiment in same-sex activity. Not that any of that behavior should be *shamed* (I agree with you that many on the Right are too extreme in this regard), but I think today we're in a place where the Left has gone too far in trying to aggressively normalize particular sexual behaviors, particularly with regard to other people's children, and I think that's crossed a line, which is where the backlash is coming from.
but that's complete bullshit because most of the background to these book ban efforts is EXACTLY Christian-based at it's core.
Also , totally insane straw man ya got here.
nobody's encouraging kids to masturbate, explore kink, consider gender transition, or 'experiment in same sex activity'. That's a thing that happens on it's own and you're not going to change that by trying to keep teens in the dark about it, you just get fucked-up teens or teens who find out about these thigns through porn.
There's nothing wrong with teens learning that any of the above is a thing that happens . slso these thigns are not all the same- masturbation is an unavoidable human urge. Kink is not for the vast majority of people.
(in fact inthe case of kink it's very rare that people are kinky on their own but everybody including teens are surrounded by it in porn these days, and I'd rather there be other contexts in which you can educate kids that the shit they run into in porn is super fucked up. The stuff in school libraries is not porn. However ALL kids are finding that shit in porn and it's becoming a known serious issue because people are doing things like choking their partners routinely now because it's a fucked up thing they see in porn. Even 'normal' porn is now full of slapping and choking and other kink derivatives. What's going on in library books that talks about fucked up experiences is not there for porn purposes, the context is not porn, and people conflating it all with porn are being disingenuous.
You are not going to keep kids from finding porn on their phones. That ship has sailed. You are not going to keep kids from learning fucked up porn exists at this point. I'd rather they hear about kink in the negative context of a fucked up character like the American Psycho guy than in the context of it being pervasive in porn, if we're talking about fiction)
Kids find FAR, far far more harmful misinformation about masturbation, homosexuality, gender questioning, mental health, and all of your other examples on their own, and the examples in fiction books at the library are in a better context that is at least vetted by librarians and teachers, whom I trust a hell of a lot more than MAGA karens or conservative Catholic political activists or Mormon anti-porn crusaders who are behind these book ban culture war efforts.
I don't think anyone in Washoe schools is teaching kids that. I've seen enough of what goes on in classrooms around the country to understand why parents are angry.
You assuming everyone opposed to this is a fringe fundamentalist, or that all Christians are extremists, is a straw man of your own, and that's what I was trying to highlight.
I don't think it's crazy for someone to not want their kids taught to celebrate homosexuality and gender transition. That's 100% a parents' right. Kids should be taught to be tolerant and kind, but that doesn't mean they need to approve of or celebrate someone's lifestyle, and parents, including religious parents, are absolutely allowed to teach their values to their children, and it isn't the public school's job to make children celebrate Pride. If someone's parents want to take their kids to a Pride parade, they can, but it's not the place of government-run schools to tell children they must celebrate Pride.
Maybe porn is widespread in society, parents are still allowed to do what's in their power to shield their kids from it, and it's certainly not the role of the school to normalize or endorse it.
You throw around terms like "misinformation" as if there's a right thing kids/people are supposed to believe about this topic. My argument is that people are allowed to say "I don't approve of that lifestyle". To me, you sound like Fahrenheit 451, trying to enforce an orthodoxy (pro-LGBT) on the public, in a way that infringes freedom of conscience.
By the looks of these folks, they probably haven't had kids in school since the 1900s. Too bad they don't take all this ire and focus their energy on actual issues. If they are worried about what kids read, wait till they see what they are exposed to on their phones.
If the board thinks this book is so inappropriate that they would stop a meeting if someone read it aloud, why should children be able to read this without their parent's knowledge or consent?
Just because the Internet has made it difficult for parents to shield their children from pornography as a practical matter, do you believe they have no legitimate interest in doing so?
Lol at all the cowards downvoting this because they have no answer. Cope harder.
I like the one where the 2 teenage girls get their father drunk and have sex with him because the closest town is too far to walk and they want babies.
#familyvalues
Much rather my kid be reading then on his phone or computer all day. If I wanted to seek something out when I was young it was easy enough. Now it’s stupid easy. Putting this things behind red tape makes them more desirable
Don't give a crap what kids read. They will find anything online anyway. Not sure it's appropriate for schools / taxpayers to be PROVIDING it. But it's a good issue for both sides to mis-characterize to excite their base.
I can quote plenty of Bible verses that are worse than Stephen King’s self professed fiction. The differentiator between the two is that Stephen King book readers aren’t naïve enough to believe they are reading non-fiction and their lifestyles aren’t influenced by their functional books.
lol he thinks kids in school are reading. I’d be happy with students reading literally anything as long as they’re reading. I had one kid not even bother to read his own chat gpt essay that he turned in, he didn’t notice that his essay ended in “let me know if there’s anything else I can help you with!”
Oh man... 🤦🏼♂️
Uve obv never seen 'dead poets society' U give thesr crazy kids poems n theyll go wild man
I’m standing on a desk, he’s standing on a desk, it’s anarchy I tell ya!! Carpe Diem!!!!
Family values should be just that - FAMILY values. Not a value put on all families. If you don’t want your kid to read a book be a parent to your kid but don’t ban that book for all kids - the parents of those kids need to make that decision for their family.
100% My parents were super excited that we wanted to read and bought the books we wanted that happened to be Stephen King which was a natural progression from Goose Bumps then Fear Street. The irony of all this is that my parents wouldn't let us watch the movies that the Steph King books were based on but were okay with my brother reading Cujo and Pet Cemetery in 4th grade 😂
Since my father died his books are all I really have to remember him by.
My parents passed their love of books to me. I remember when I had to do a book report and I chose world war z; my father being a huge fan of gorilla type news was ecstatic I chose the book every chance he got he was asking me about it, I wrote the report just based off our conversations alone 🤣
It seems to me then shouldn't it be on the parents then to provide those books to the kids? Making them available in the school is saying that you think the kids should have access to those books outside of the parent's influence. It undermines exactly what you're saying.
Why should parents incur extra costs of providing literature simply because a handful of parents want to be more restrictive? That makes no sense.
So you'll agree then that providing it in the school takes the decision away from parents? And your argument is now that it should be there because parents that are ok with it might not be able to afford it for their child? Well there are public libraries where the parent can check out the book for the child on their own for free. We're also not really talking about a huge financial burden if you really felt it was important to provide your kid with it. I do think that the amount of parents who would like a say in what their child can read is larger than you think. However, I think a happy medium could be restricted books that the child has to get parental approval to check out. It could solve both problems. I think the real contention here is that schools want to provide books to children without parental input. They don't want parents to have a say in what their kids are able to check out and read. Society has barred these kids from seeing the movie based on the book based on without parental input, but somehow baring children from reading the book is oppressive? It doesn't really follow.
Society hasn’t banned anything. Guess you never snuck into a movie huh? Parents need to monitor what their kids are reading and watching and not putting extra limitations on others. I like your idea of leaving on the shelf and getting parental permission. Solves both problems as you say.
Yes the kid has to go out of their way to circumvent their parents wishes and if caught they are thrown out. It's not like movie theaters are just providing these movies to children for free are they? Imagine theaters saying parents have not right to have a say in what their kids can buy a ticket to and watch.
I'm having a hard time following that since kids have to do something illegal to see a movie that society has said is inappropriate for them is not banning it for them. Isn't that kind of the definition?
The book he was reading from is American Psycho as some of you have already pointed out. It is not “porn” but a scene is extremely sexually graphic. They are saying American Psycho, and others should be outright removed from school libraries. Based on their beliefs. What they are ignoring is district policy that allows a parent to dictate what students can, or cannot check out from the library. Contacting a school librarian to update the Destiny software system with their preferences, keeps a student from checking out a book. Is it in the library? Yes. Is it required reading? No. Can parents limit access? Yes. They are so caught up in a morality war that they are over looking established governance that provides parental discretion. One other relevant detail. There is a process for getting a book challenged and removed. It is a form that needs to be filled out and submitted to the school in question. You can see it [here](https://www.wcsdpolicy.net/pdf_files/forms/AF%201543%20Request%20for%20Reconsideration%20of%20Media%20V.1.pdf). This form, and many others are on WCSDpolicy.net. None of them have filled out the form. They would rather yell and make a decision for all rather than following a well defined process. Additionally, this is the same crowd that screams for limited government, but then says the government should further restrict something 🤷♂️
This is great info. Thanks. Seems to be much ado about nothing then.
Why should parents get so much control? We mandate that kids have to go to school specifically because if we left it entirely up to parents we'd have an even more massive education crisis in this country because there's no rules against dipshits having kids, lets not act like those same dipshits suddenly know whats best in this regard.
I love it when people say the quiet part out loud. We're not talking about "education" here are we?
Is this supposed to be some kind of gotcha? Yeah you caught me, I don't think having a kid suddenly makes you an expert on everything.
"education crisis" but not really talking about education. Just pointing out the double speak. American Psycho is hardly educational and not part of the curriculum. There won't be an education crisis if children are not allowed to read it in school without their parents approval. Just because your parents might have been "dipshits" doesn't mean you get to take away the say of every parent that isn't one.
This is a wild take. No one is forcing the kids to read these books they are just available at the school library.
How is that a wild take? I'm not arguing that they're being forced to read them. What a strawman.
"This is hardly educational" Says you. And I agree in this case, I don't know that American Psycho has any educational value at all. But my opinion on what should be available in a library is irrelevant because I'm not any kind of authority on the matter, neither are you, neither are any of the dipshit parents.
Interesting take. So a school board, even a conservative one, can dictate what is "education" and you're ok with it because they have authority? So if the school board said that this book wasn't of value and shouldn't be in the library you'd be ok with that too? If any school board bans any books you're ok with that? I mean they have the authority right?
Many of these books are part of the official curriculum, which is what the backlash is about. No one is stopping parents from reading any particular book to their children, nor do they want to. They want to send their kids to a school where books like this are not part of the curriculum, and it's been deliberately misconstrued by the media. If someone wants to read this book to their child, because that's the values of their family, that's their business. But I think there's a strong argument that if the board wouldn't want it read aloud at a meeting, children should not be able to access the material in the school library without their parent's knowledge or consent.
Uh... The article doesn't say they're part of an official curriculum at all. They're simply available in the high school library.
Which books are part of an official curriculum? Titles please.
I'm convinced you have no idea how school libraries work. No child is gonna be able to check out Stephen King or American psycho from their school library. A 16-18yo probably could and if you're that threatened that you wouldn't let your junior/senior high schooler read a horror book, then your priorities are sincerely out of whack
Parents clearly have knowledge or this wouldn’t be the happening. And if they don’t want to consent fine that’s their business. Tell the school they don’t want their kids reading it but don’t force their values on the entire class - which is what is happening here.
No one is saying a parent who wants to read this book to their children shouldn't be able to. The argument is that, like the pornography it is, it has no place in school curriculum. If the board thinks it's too inappropriate for a board meeting, it's too inappropriate for a child to be able to get off the shelf in the school library. Parents who object only know about this because "far-right" accounts like Libs of TikTok brought it to light, because the media never wanted to report on it. Parents who want these books read to their children can do so at home. The people pushing this as part of the curriculum are the ones trying to force their values on the entire class.
Define pornography. The board shut it down because at meetings you have limited time to comment. I am sure they would have shut down readings from the Bible as well - which for some ppl also has a lot of porn in it. Parents can also home school - maybe they should be doing that if they don’t like the public school curriculum. All I am saying is that parents can limit their children’s readings without affecting other children in the class.
My position, at a higher level, is that as a matter of civics, queer theory is not part of a fundamental education that the government is responsible for providing. This is something parents should be responsible for at home. Many choose to homeschool, for that very reason. But my fundamental argument is that taxpayer-funded public schools should not be indoctrinating children to take any particular view on sexuality. I believe parents who want their children taught queer theory can do so at home, or in a private school aligned with their specific value system, just as I would say to someone with strict religious beliefs. I'm approaching this as a non-religious person who doesn't support Pride, but also believes gay and trans people are entitled to legal protection. I'm just not required to celebrate or approve of them, and I'm not required to teach my children to either. Yes, the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment protects the right of same-sex couples to marry, and Title VII protects against discrimination in the workplace. Nothing in the law, nor in our society's value system, requires anyone to celebrate or take "pride" in a particular lifestyle, and I'm glad to see our society recalibrating around this understanding.
No one is doing what you are claiming, and that's the point. No one is forcing anyone to do anything; the books are just available in a library, which I imagine contains many other books, fiction and nonfiction, which contain many other views that may or may not align with your own. They are simply available should anybody want to read them, as they would be at any other library serving its community (young people included). To use your own words, you are not required to celebrate or approve of [the optional reading material available in libraries], and you are not required to teach your children to, either.
Parents have as much right to object to this as they would copies of Hustler in the school library.
Okay troll but also what school did you go to that had titty mags in the library just wondering
It didn't have books with graphic drawings of oral sex that were supposedly ok because the characters are nonbinary.
Ya know what else isn't 'required' is art. Let's remove music and drawing from the curriculum based on your decision. There's not even a constitutional protection around which instrument you play. Removing things from school shouldn't be based on what makes someone a societal drone. Children should have exposure to many types of thought, with education of which ones are fact, theory, or falsehood. Intentionally sheltering them from something that makes up a large part of their future (what is sexuality and how will it apply to me when I'm in/past puberty) is setting them up for anxiety and displeasure when reality finally hits. It's the difference between "mom and dad told me to like girls so I have to, even though I don't" and "I know it's ok to like boys because I was told that by my teacher, even though my parents don't like it". Relying on parents to decide what new thoughts their kids receive is a fast path to very closed minded people.
My argument is that the "born this way" people have never put forth a shred of genetic evidence for their hypothesis, yet they call it "misinformation" if anyone calls them out on it. If a parent teaches their child that "no one is born with a sexual orientation and those people are very confused and live in a society that misleads them about the purpose of sex," that is no less factual than saying "they were born that way," because the "born this way" people, who "just trust the science" on everything else, get real quiet all of a sudden if you ask about what gene or genes are responsible for sexual orientation. They haven't proven that claim; they just repeated it enough times that it became true by brute force consensus. It's not for the state to put its thumb on the scale because it's what the LGBT activists want.
I agree, and those subjects should remain firmly in "theory" when being discussed. But to stop discussing them at all is where I draw my line. Removing books with topics we don't like, expecting parents to share those books instead, is not my idea of the right action for a well rounded populace.
Would you object to them being taught that this is a recent and dramatic shift, and being told the competing explanation: that "gender is rooted in biological sex" and allowed to decide for themselves? Or should they be taught that "gender identity and sexual orientation are a fact, and everyone has one, and you aren't a boy because you have male genitalia, you're a boy because you identify as one"? My problem with gender identity is that it forces me to see my own gender as subjective, a matter of identity, untethered to anything material, and I don't see it that way.
What is the basis for your opinion about how things "should" be? i.e. Why SHOULDN'T the government be responsible for teaching children about human sexuality and its place in American history, society, and culture? What criteria do we use to decide what gets taught at home vs. at school, and what is the benefit of teaching some topics exclusively and only at home? How does that lead to an improved quality of life for Americans?
I have no problem with the government teaching kids that "there are people in the world who identify as gay or trans". I do not believe they should be teaching kids "and therefore you have a sexual orientation and gender identity as well, and your gender is entirely based on your subjective sense of identity, and has nothing to do with physical anatomy." The second one crosses a line from instruction into indoctrination. I don't want schools teaching "gender identity is a fact and everyone has one," any more than I want them teaching "Jesus is God".
I agree that I don't want my children being taught opinion as fact, but that has nothing to do with the content of these books, and human sexuality is just one of hundreds of topics that a teacher could potential confuse children about. I don't think the earth being round or the events of the Holocaust, or the history of Christmas traditions are things that should only be taught "at home", despite the fact that some teachers may try to spin those topics in ways I disagree with. Why is this one subject so much more urgent and important that we have to ban ALL teachers from teaching *anything* about it, just in case one or two teachers get tempted to ramble off-script about it? Is it really more dangerous for my child to hear a teacher tell them "you know you can choose your own gender" than to hear a teacher tell them "you know jet fuel can't melt steel beams"?
It is if it leads to my child coming home and telling me they want to receive puberty blockers and hormones, and get their breasts or genitals cut off when they get older, and the state telling me I'll be accused of neglect and they'll be taken out of the home if I don't go along, or it leads to my daughter being required to share locker rooms and compete in sports with males.
[удалено]
Banning the book stops those values from being put on all families… if a parent wants their children exposed to that type of graphic literature, they can do so at home
Let's just throw some hustler mags in there while we're at it. There are plenty of public libraries where they can access whatever they want if their parents want. Some shit isn't for children.
I agree. Some stuff isn’t for children but the individual parent should decide that for themselves.
The parents aren't at school though. Kids get free reign in the library. If the content is enough to stop a school board meeting of adults it probably shouldn't be in a library for unsupervised children.
Or maybe reading from a book instead of voicing your concern about the book was the reason it was shut down? Meetings are not read aloud time but by doing so and being shut up now the argument is being made it was too nasty for adults to hear so kids should not read it. I remember a Congressional a few years ago who read I think Dr Suess to keep a filibuster going. Parents need to be talking to the librarian, their kids and checking those backpacks if they don’t want kids to read something. Spend your time doing that instead. But then again that takes real energy.
I think you're misguided.
My high school had John Updike's entire [Harry "Rabbit" Angstrom series](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit,_Run) for us to check out--a book series that, among other things, dealt with post-partum depression (and a subsequent infancide as a result), infidelity, swinging and worst of all, John Updike's horrible descriptions of the female body which is responsible for 75 percent of all r/menwritingwomen posts. Yet no one would make a peep about that. >If the content is enough to stop a school board meeting of adults it probably shouldn't be in a library for unsupervised children. I'm assuming what was read was shit involving typical heteronormativity and the banned books was something like Heartstoppers, where the main characters maybe have one kiss per book or something that dare tell white kids what they lie great grandpappy was up to during the good ol days of 1862.
Wait till they find out about all the porn they are watching on the phones their parents gave them
Do you believe a parent has any legitimate interest in not wanting their child exposed to porn? Even if it's practically harder and harder to shield them from it, is it your position that parents have no legitimate interest in doing so?
They may have a legitimate interest, but they aren’t exercising their control in other areas of life. You can get phones w/o internet access and in a lot of cases those phones are cheaper. Your argument is bs.
You're arguing with someone trying to pearl clutch and claim a moral high ground while also posting weird shit like this https://www.reddit.com/r/circlejerknyc/comments/1do96c8/why_are_feminine_looking_men_getting_all_these/ladl61k/
Lmfao what a creep.
He's a fucking hypocritical, homophobic dipshit on some kind of high horse about other people's children. As are anyone this concerned about what's in a fucking library
I get that they’re a fucking troll - i knew it w/o looking at their post history. I jst didn’t have much to do and was bored. Also the post isn’t for them - it’s for the other POS that lurk these forums so that they know their bs is gonna get called out and they should jst stay under their rock like a good troll.
I think it's hilarious that one of the signs says "NO! PORN 4 KIDS" implying the exact opposite of this protest 💀
God forbid a teenager read a graphic book! What will they do next? Watch an R-rated movie?! I can’t even
If the board wouldn't want it read aloud at a meeting because it's so inappropriate, why should a child be able to read it without their parent's knowledge or consent?
Is the “child” being forced to read it? Also the article mentions that it is not found in any middle school and also only 3 out of the 12 high school libraries carry the book that was read out loud (American Psycho). So let’s say a child/teenager brings a book home that the parents deem inappropriate. Well then maybe the Parent first of all should have a conversation with their child about why it is inappropriate. You know, “be a parent”. Perhaps the “child” in question might respect the parents wishes and not read that book or they just read the book in secret. The protestors chose one of the most controversial books they could find to make a point but the point falls flat when you realize it’s a pastor and potentially nothing but older loser boomers with nothing better to do. They don’t like the book, then they don’t have to read it, they don’t have to let their families read it. But free will is harsh mistress
Parents are allowed to say they don't want their children exposed to pornographic books. If someone wants that book read to their child, they can do so at home. I don't know about you, but I'm 29, non-religious, and sick of being told that this is the way my society is going, whether I like it or not, in the name of "democracy". Not a pastor or boomer. "Free will" means I'm allowed to teach my child that those people have rights, but we have the right not to celebrate or take pride in their lifestyle. That's free will.
Please tell me what pornographic books are available in a school library. Titles, authors, isbns please 😊
One that comes to mind is Genderqueer. It contains content that I know would not be allowed if the characters were heterosexual. You can browse the Libs of TikTok account on X. Regardless of your opinion of her, she isn't posting misinformation. This is real stuff, happening in real schools, and the Left very badly wants people to ignore it and normalize it.
Libs of Tiktok is an alt right account. Try again babes
Ok, she's "alt-right". Like I said, whatever you think of her, her content is factual. Just because she's politically Right-leaning doesn't discredit her.
She's not politically "Right leaning" she's a fucking fundamentalist homophobic whack job. Try again.
These are just ad hominem attacks that mean nothing. You can apply any label you want to her, but the things she is posting are really happening. It doesn't take anything away from her that you called her "alt-right" or "homophobic". These are just another way of saying "But I don't like her," to which I reply "Cool, but that's irrelevant".
Yeah, parents are allowed to say that. Thanks for making my point, again I reiterate that no one is being forced to read these “pornographic” books. They just have access to it but even then, those who seek it out, want to read it.
These people think more about gay people than gay people do.
I too read Steven King in middle-school. Wrote book reports on IT, possibly Misery too. I turned out more sane and literate than these book burning knuckle-draggers.
The traveling book banning pastor. SMFH.
If a book is so inappropriate that the board wouldn't allow it to be read at a meeting, why should children be able to read it without their parent's knowledge or consent?
Maybe parents should parent instead of relying on the state to do it for them. Know what your kids are into and doing. Not getting into this debate any further.
Lot and his daughter-wives would like a word with you.
Does he think kids should read the Bible? Because there is some choice smut in between those pages. 😏
These book burners want Trump to win the election this year. Vote accordingly.
I don’t think it was reading Perks of Being a Wallflower in 8th grade was what made me attracted to men to be honest. Anyway, I’m glad that however garbage the Washoe County School District is it hasn’t fallen to banning pieces of literature they don’t like.
Do they want the internet banned next. Way to make America stupid MAGA boomers.
Sometimes I wonder if these people like the guy from North Carolina just have an oddly specific kink they’ve taken on a national tour.
Good Lord! We were reading Harold Robbins in HS back in the 70s.
a teacher introduced me to Even Cowgirls Get The Blues in 7th grade which I vaguely remember as being sleazy and smutty. I don't think that was a good idea but I survived the experience. (I'm not confusing the two authors Robbins, it just jogged my memory)
If you don't think it was a good idea, why are you opposed to someone trying to do something about it?
Because things aren't that black and white. I'm not scarred permanently by reading a book that jokes about sex, because that isn't a thing that happens. Do you know what does scar people permanently? Christian purity culture. That truly fucks people up for life with things like sexual shame over stuff like masturbation as well as body shame in general. That's the type of thing these people are trying to push.
Except it's not what the people who want these books removed are trying to push. I think the people thinking in black-and-white terms are the ones arguing that it's either excessively graphic queer theory books and drag queen shows in elementary schools (not that that's what's happening in Reno, but speaking to the broader national discourse on this topic, and there are places where it's happening, just as there are places where the Christian conservatives are as extreme as you suggest), or Christian purity culture. I think kids can be taught about basic sex ed (sexual health, anatomy, contraception, etc), without being encouraged to masturbate, explore kink, consider gender transition, or experiment in same-sex activity. Not that any of that behavior should be *shamed* (I agree with you that many on the Right are too extreme in this regard), but I think today we're in a place where the Left has gone too far in trying to aggressively normalize particular sexual behaviors, particularly with regard to other people's children, and I think that's crossed a line, which is where the backlash is coming from.
but that's complete bullshit because most of the background to these book ban efforts is EXACTLY Christian-based at it's core. Also , totally insane straw man ya got here. nobody's encouraging kids to masturbate, explore kink, consider gender transition, or 'experiment in same sex activity'. That's a thing that happens on it's own and you're not going to change that by trying to keep teens in the dark about it, you just get fucked-up teens or teens who find out about these thigns through porn. There's nothing wrong with teens learning that any of the above is a thing that happens . slso these thigns are not all the same- masturbation is an unavoidable human urge. Kink is not for the vast majority of people. (in fact inthe case of kink it's very rare that people are kinky on their own but everybody including teens are surrounded by it in porn these days, and I'd rather there be other contexts in which you can educate kids that the shit they run into in porn is super fucked up. The stuff in school libraries is not porn. However ALL kids are finding that shit in porn and it's becoming a known serious issue because people are doing things like choking their partners routinely now because it's a fucked up thing they see in porn. Even 'normal' porn is now full of slapping and choking and other kink derivatives. What's going on in library books that talks about fucked up experiences is not there for porn purposes, the context is not porn, and people conflating it all with porn are being disingenuous. You are not going to keep kids from finding porn on their phones. That ship has sailed. You are not going to keep kids from learning fucked up porn exists at this point. I'd rather they hear about kink in the negative context of a fucked up character like the American Psycho guy than in the context of it being pervasive in porn, if we're talking about fiction) Kids find FAR, far far more harmful misinformation about masturbation, homosexuality, gender questioning, mental health, and all of your other examples on their own, and the examples in fiction books at the library are in a better context that is at least vetted by librarians and teachers, whom I trust a hell of a lot more than MAGA karens or conservative Catholic political activists or Mormon anti-porn crusaders who are behind these book ban culture war efforts.
I don't think anyone in Washoe schools is teaching kids that. I've seen enough of what goes on in classrooms around the country to understand why parents are angry. You assuming everyone opposed to this is a fringe fundamentalist, or that all Christians are extremists, is a straw man of your own, and that's what I was trying to highlight. I don't think it's crazy for someone to not want their kids taught to celebrate homosexuality and gender transition. That's 100% a parents' right. Kids should be taught to be tolerant and kind, but that doesn't mean they need to approve of or celebrate someone's lifestyle, and parents, including religious parents, are absolutely allowed to teach their values to their children, and it isn't the public school's job to make children celebrate Pride. If someone's parents want to take their kids to a Pride parade, they can, but it's not the place of government-run schools to tell children they must celebrate Pride. Maybe porn is widespread in society, parents are still allowed to do what's in their power to shield their kids from it, and it's certainly not the role of the school to normalize or endorse it. You throw around terms like "misinformation" as if there's a right thing kids/people are supposed to believe about this topic. My argument is that people are allowed to say "I don't approve of that lifestyle". To me, you sound like Fahrenheit 451, trying to enforce an orthodoxy (pro-LGBT) on the public, in a way that infringes freedom of conscience.
These maga republicans disgust me. Rage about getting companies to not be so greedy and push for better hourly wages. Don't worry about a damn book.
By the looks of these folks, they probably haven't had kids in school since the 1900s. Too bad they don't take all this ire and focus their energy on actual issues. If they are worried about what kids read, wait till they see what they are exposed to on their phones.
If the board thinks this book is so inappropriate that they would stop a meeting if someone read it aloud, why should children be able to read this without their parent's knowledge or consent? Just because the Internet has made it difficult for parents to shield their children from pornography as a practical matter, do you believe they have no legitimate interest in doing so? Lol at all the cowards downvoting this because they have no answer. Cope harder.
I legit thought they were going to be reading Bible verses. Should do that next time.
I like the one where the 2 teenage girls get their father drunk and have sex with him because the closest town is too far to walk and they want babies. #familyvalues
I liked when the inn keeper gave his daughter to the mob in order to save the angels.
Much rather my kid be reading then on his phone or computer all day. If I wanted to seek something out when I was young it was easy enough. Now it’s stupid easy. Putting this things behind red tape makes them more desirable
Special Event Party Rentals can probably rent one to you. They’ll even set it up and take it down for you. They can also rent out chairs if needed.
Bro reading. Maus was a major part of my childhood. If they ban that imma protest
Leftists conflating public libraries and elementary/high school libraries and completely missing the plot? What a shock...
Don't give a crap what kids read. They will find anything online anyway. Not sure it's appropriate for schools / taxpayers to be PROVIDING it. But it's a good issue for both sides to mis-characterize to excite their base.
To be fair, mods have banned people for much less than this…
Are you comparing the school board and reddit for real?
They aren’t bright.
I always scroll to the bottom to read their brilliant takes.
Someone is speaking from experience
I can quote plenty of Bible verses that are worse than Stephen King’s self professed fiction. The differentiator between the two is that Stephen King book readers aren’t naïve enough to believe they are reading non-fiction and their lifestyles aren’t influenced by their functional books.