politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I'm not for banning books by any measure. I also don't have kids, so I don't really have a dog in this fight.
However, I've read all the Court of Thorns and Roses series and it does contain some pretty explicit sexual scenes and themes. I probably wouldn't want a child reading them until they were old enough to understand the use of sex in stories like this, and how you can tell the difference between healthy and unhealthy relationships. The books in my opinion are very fun reads, but I feel that they were written primarily for an adult audience.
No idea when a kid should start reading ACOTAR, as again I don't have kids. I'm not the right person to ask, but I'd argue that readers should be at least high school age for that series.
I haven't read any of the other books on that list, so I can't speak to those. It's very evident that whoever assembled that list isn't well read, because there's oodles more books with much worse content than ACOTAR that aren't banned. Off the top from books I read back in high school: American Psycho, Clockwork Orange, Blood Meridian, the list goes on...
not really how it works.
you may never be going to school again, but it is still in your best interest to have good schools funded. they generate engineers that will invent new things you use and doctors who will one day take care of your heart attack.
and it is in your best interest not to be surrounded by idiots, to which reading books is part of the process.
Aren't that the republicans who spout nonsense like "i ain't co-parenting with the government"?
So maybe leave what books to read and when up to specific schools/parents/kids.
I mean. That's what I was saying? I'm not in favor of book bans, I'm in favor of parents being aware of the content their kids are consuming. If you as a parent want your kids to read ACOTAR, then that's your call. I'm not in favor of book bans or the government telling you what you can or can't read. Not sure where all this hostility is coming from.
first, you presented the fact you don't have kids, as if it somehow made you impartial in the discussion - i explained that is really not the case.
then you said "i am not for banning books, however..." and then you spent 3 paragraphs explaining why you consider these books really problematic for kids.
and as the aphorism says, anything before "but" does not really count 🤷♂️
Kids really start with relationships in middle school and by high school they are sexually active. There's nothing in ACOTAR that would surprise an American high school kid.
I did say that high school is where I could see this book being read. It may even be beneficial to read them in order to learn about abusive relationships.
"I don't mind living in a dystopian shithole" vibes
Bit of a leap there, but hey, if you've got kids and you want them to read those books then I don't think anyone should be able to stop you. Your kid, your choice.
My only point is that I'd want to make sure my kid, if I had one, was able to understand the themes in the book before reading.
I was also making a point about other books with more violent or pornographic content not being on this reactionary banned book list, but everyone seems to have overlooked that. Oh well.
My children are grown, graduated and productive members of society. Still doesn't stop me for advocating for literacy and access for the next generations. If you want to live in a dystopian hellhole, only care about you and yours and see how far it gets you.
I'm glad you'd care about your kid, you should care about society's kids, because it's society that will keep the hospitals open etc.
see this is the part that falls flat for me. You've been to a library before right?
maybe?
See, they have these things, called LIBRARIANS. And Librarians know what's in their collections.
Do you really think the librarians are pushing printed smut on the kiddos?
Or could it just, maybe just possibly, be yet another culture war canard of BULLSHIT the right is pushing because they don't LIKE FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION, LGBTQ folk etc - and are trying to suppress anything not chirstofascist?
USE YOUR FUCKING MELON.
"oh well"
yeah fuck that, it's easy to moan and go "what about the children" - WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN GETTING A FUCKING EDUCATION AND PEOPLE STOP FUCKING WITH LIBRARIANS?
oh well. fucking hell
The latest instructions given to librarians from George Soros are to focus on turning kids trans by applying a special powder to the pages. Smut-pushing was voted down at the conference, but just barely, so it might come back next year. Stay tuned!
(/s, if that's not apparent)
Edit: misread your initial point. Sorry! I think the main thing is talking to kids, giving them context and content warnings, knowing their maturity level and and letting them in most cases lead the way about what they’re okay with reading within reason, while answering their questions about sex, violence, relationships, etc. Kids tend to put back books they’re not ready for.
So, it's not like these are part of any curriculum. No one is making, suggesting, recommending, or encouraging kids to read these books. So the ban is just simply censorship. (Except the list of banned books is sort of a recommendation in its own way.)
No matter what they say, this isn't about kids in any way. It's not about protecting them from things they aren't mature enough for. It's not restricting them to a certain grade level. It's outright censorship and it's fucking bullshit.