S11.E10: Public Libraries

[Lantern7]

After getting a week off, John comes back . . . first to talk about student protests and the often-disproportionate response to them, and then he covered libraries.

Good topic, because you have people looking to ban/outlaw books and subsequently blame libraries for having said books. Sure, children could be exposed to stuff that might be inappropriate, but shouldn’t there be parents/guardians to prevent that? I mean actually being there, as opposed to railing against books that they probably don’t read. It’s insane that librarians can face jail time in a few states for checking out banned books. Only thing missing from John’s report was book burnings. You just know that’s happening.

I live in NYC (well, one of the boroughs), so I never had had a chance to take out leaf blowers, seeds or stuffed and mounted animals. I don’t think John got that bird from a recognized library.

[Annber03]

Well, I got to be embarrased on behalf of two states I've lived in tonight, so...that's fun. First that story about that parent from Iowa, and then the news about the Campbell County Public Library in Wyoming -and I worked at that library when my family lived there nearly twenty yeras ago. It was a nice library. So to see that story in the news is just all the more horrifyingly depressing. 

Good on that guy who called out the board and called their BS exactly what it was, a shitshow. Too bad his words didn't seem to sink in for those morons. 

5 minutes ago, Lantern7 said:

Sure, children could be exposed to stuff that might be inappropriate, but shouldn’t there be parents/guardians to prevent that? I mean actually being there, as opposed to railing against books that they probably don’t read.

For real, this is a prime example of parents slacking on the job and expecting everyone else to coddle and protect their kids for them because god forbid they actually do their jobs and raise their own children. I'm not your kids' mom, you idiots, it's not my job to limit things because you can't possibly handle talking to your kids about serious topics like the grown adult you're suppsoed to be or monitor your own children's reading habits. 

To say nothing of the fact that, okay, so let's say a kid does stumble upon a book that might be a little too adult for them, or might discuss topics that they might be a bit young yet to understand. So. The fuck. What? That is when their parent either tells them that that's something they can discuss when they're older or, if they think their kid's questions should be answered, they can either answer them or direct them to another trusted adult who can better andwer them. 

Like, I hate to break it to all the hand-wringing parents out there, but kids and teenagers will be curious about sex. They are going to have questions about it. They are going to stumble uopn things discussing it at some point. And, as this episode itself noted, if they don't read it in a book, they're sure as hell gonna find out about it on the internet, or through any friends of theirs whose parents don't have a coronary at the mere mention of anything relating to the topic of sex. Avoding and banning this stuff DOES NOT HELP YOUR CHILD AT ALL. All it does is lead them to learn about sex in ways you probably don't want them learning about it, and  and the very problems you think you're somehow magically solving by hiding anything relating to the topic of sex from them will still wind up happening anyway, and will be even worse in your kids' cases, because they will have no actual education or understanding of how to deal with the problems that come with a lack of proper, responsible, factual sex education. So...good job? 

I just...do not understand how people STILL, in this day and age, do not get that. For as often as people like to cite the Bible* as their reasoning and justification for banning this stuff, you'd think they'd remember the rather infamous story of the forbidden fruit and what happened because of that. 

*I absolutely LOVED John's bit about taking moments from the Bible out of context. That was perfect. For real, talk about books that would be banned if we were to follow these idiots' "logic". 

And yeah, I worked in both a library and a bookstore and I cannot for the life of me recall a single moment when books that weren't age apropriated were willingly stocked in children's sections. Not once. Occasionally, when I worked at the bookstore, I would find an adult magazine tossed in the children's section, but that sure as hell wasn't the doing of anyone who worked there, that was some customer who thought they were being cute and funny. And when we did find those magazines, we immediately put them back where they were supposed to go and kept them out of sight of the children's area. It's like the people who seem to think that schools are teaching all this super explicit sexual content in sex ed - I would love to know what schools they think this is happening at, 'cause it's pretty well known that the sex ed in the vast majority of U.S. schools is...minimal at best. 

And of course LGBTQ+ content would be their first target. Don't want children learning that gender and sexuality are fluid and varied and there's nothing wrong with any of that! The horror! I just can't imagine how pathetic one's life has to be that this is the sort of thing that freaks them out. 

We're not even gonna get into the overdramatic antics of that woman who just couldn't bear to read the rest of the snippets of that book at that one meeting (the book that she seemed to have no problem making a big public stink about on local television, mind) or that dumbass commercial with the little girl coming home and asking her mom about explicit sexual stuff. Just...shut up. 

As for the campus protests, I love the cops complaining about the chains and how they're not appropriate for schools...while they're coming in guns a-blazing with tear gas and rubber bullets and things of that sort. And then they have the nerve to act shocked, shocked, I tell you, that the students might want to use their own means to protect themselves from all of that. 

To say nothing of how thera are surely far better and less over the top ways to fight anti-Semitism on camups grounds than bringing in the freaking National Guard. 

But yeah, so, just to recap, children and teenagers reading books about sex and LGBTQ+ content? That's bad, 'cause it might upset and confuse them. Students having to deal with police storming their campuses, carrying an assortment of weapons besides, to violently crack down on peaceful protests? Nah, that's fine. That's not gonna traumatize or upset any of the students at all, nope. 

Our country is just so fucked up. 

On a significantly lighter note, I absolutely cracked the hell up at Kilmeade talking about how he didn't have a pet rock 'cause he couldn't afford one. Dude...

[smittykins]

5 hours ago, Annber03 said:

On a significantly lighter note, I absolutely cracked the hell up at Kilmeade talking about how he didn't have a pet rock 'cause he couldn't afford one. Dude...

I got mine out of our garden.  Cleaned it up, drew a face on one side and wrote “PET ROCK” on the other(and this was long after the fad had ended).

I wish I still had it.

[rwlevin]

I hate to tell John but those Seders and Shabbat dinners at the protests were all but performative. One girl posted a picture of eating challah at a Shabbat dinner during Passover. Anyone who knows anything about Passover knows that all bread and products made with flour aside from matzoh, is verboten throughout the entire week. Then there was the “Seder plate” at UCLA that had all the Hebrew written backwards while the English was correct.

Also, regarding the protests, I know someone- and will gladly give you the name if asked- that was at the protest against the apartheid in the 80s. He said the blockading of Hamilton hall was figurative. They blocked the outside of the front door, did not block any of the other doors, didn’t vandalize or destroy any college property and allowed people to come and go as they pleased.

And then there was the protest at City College where 60% of the people arrested weren’t even affiliated with CCNY. But yes, let’s ignore the parts of the story that do not align with your narrative.

 

Mind you, I’m a Jewish person who went to both Columbia (during the second intifada) and City College so this whole incident is very personal to me.

Edited May 6 by rwlevin

[peeayebee]

9 hours ago, Annber03 said:

I would love to know what schools they think this is happening at...

The ones with the litter boxes for students to use.

But yeah, children are curious. Hiding information from them usually backfires. Give them information, engage, treat their questions objectively, without horror and histrionics. If it's too hard for you, there are things called "books" that just might help.

Quote

We're not even gonna get into the overdramatic antics of that woman who just couldn't bear to read the rest of the snippets of that book at that one meeting 

It was like she was going to have the vapors.

"Oh I'm sorry. Am I misunderstanding the Bible by taking things out of context? Forgive me, I haven't read it." Awesome, perfect, loved it.

Many years ago I used to volunteer at the library of my son's schools. I remember the librarian saying she was going to weed books. I thought she had a speech impediment and was saying she was going to read books.

How did Eric Adams get elected?

[lasu]

5 hours ago, smittykins said:

I got mine out of our garden.  Cleaned it up, drew a face on one side and wrote “PET ROCK” on the other(and this was long after the fad had ended).

I wish I still had it.

Whyyyyyyy did this make me so sad for you???  I feel like you should think about adopting another rock and giving it a good home.

[Shrek]

My question is for the people checking out seeds, why & what for? Do you plant them for fun & then return them 3 weeks later? And if you don't return them do they rack up late fees until you do?

[DoctorAtomic]

I know ymmv and I understand this is an important topic, but I think the coverage of the campus protests are massively oversaturated. I'll give John a little credit about covering the nonsense why the tents look the same and whether students have bike locks, but otherwise, there's just not a new angle for me here. I'm not sure why there's so much pearl clutching over campus protests given it's really an American tradition. I was at Berkeley. There were protests all the time. Maybe I'm more used to it. They took over a building one time too when I was there. 

Was the picture of the guy watching Fox news the guy that John tracked down from Getty images?

I don't know if it passed, but my state had a bill that minors would get a different library card if you're under 18. I don't think that is *that bad*, but I would agree that there's a disconnect with parents' personal responsibility for their kids are the same people complaining about the 'nanny state'. Pick a lane. 

There's the flip side as well in that very rural community libraries are basically a shed with one volunteer. I've seen them. It's a lot of work to expect them to police the entire town's reading habits. 

10 hours ago, Annber03 said:

And of course LGBTQ+ content would be their first target.

Let's not act like there's not a hidden agenda here. Again, in my state, one of the library bills that failed would have made the bible on the list of books that could be requested to be removed from the library. So, that didn't pass, of course. 

Last week I read that the Brooklyn public library will issue a card to any high school student nationwide. 

 

[SoMuchTV]

9 minutes ago, Shrek said:

My question is for the people checking out seeds, why & what for? Do you plant them for fun & then return them 3 weeks later? And if you don't return them do they rack up late fees until you do?

You may have been joking, it's hard to tell on the internet, but if that was a serious question...  I can't speak for all libraries everywhere, but our local Master Gardeners sponsor a "Seed Library" at several branches.  You don't have to return anything, but there are some rules...
 

Quote

 

Each month the Master Gardeners will stock the Seed Library with new herb, vegetable and flower seeds. The seeds have been donated by several sponsors in our community (see Sponsors tab). 

Each packet provides a short description of the plant and how to care for it. Please take no more than three packets per visit. Any remaining packets from prior months can be found in the "More Seeds" drawer.

 

 

[JustHereForFood]

I agree about the book bans, of course. For one thing, even if we agreed that parents have a right to decide what their own children read, they have no right to control what other children read. Also, children are not stupid. If the book is too mature for them, they will soon lose interest. And there are children living in controlling and abusive homes, who probably can only access what they want to read via libraries. They can't buy those books, because their finances are probably controlled or they can't afford it and they can't look it up on the internet because that can be monitored by their parents too. These are the kids that schools and the state need to protect.

As for the protests, yeez. I am so over this one-sided coverage. John says there are some examples of antisemitism? Scattered incidents? Not what I've read from several Jewish student posting about their experiences, or you know, all of the reports about the rise of antisemitism in the last few months (dramatically higher than the rise in islamophobia, if anyone wants to chime in with that whataboutism). I am used to John being a lot more left and a lot less liberal than I would like, but this seems like a new low. Nothing about the shouts of "Go back to Poland" on the campus protests, or the talks about how they want Israel gone. I wonder why would people call them extremists. This is the same as those environmental protesters who destroy valuable art in galleries or those who send death threats to people who don' agree with them on social media. In the general picture, they do more harm them help. Don't take it from me, here's someone from Gaza saying the same: Message From a Gazan to Campus Protesters: You're Hurting the Palestinian Cause | Opinion

But these students don't really care about the voices of people who are hurt by this horrible war on both sides. They are proving again that they just want to shout about something that is currently trending and when they are done, things will probably be even worse that they are now, in part thanks to them.

Edited May 6 by JustHereForFood
typos

[Shrek]

15 minutes ago, SoMuchTV said:

You may have been joking, it's hard to tell on the internet, but if that was a serious question...  I can't speak for all libraries everywhere, but our local Master Gardeners sponsor a "Seed Library" at several branches.  You don't have to return anything, but there are some rules...
 

 

Yes I was joking but the answer is interesting nonetheless & close to what I presumed the answer to be. 

[lasu]

1 hour ago, Shrek said:

My question is for the people checking out seeds, why & what for? Do you plant them for fun & then return them 3 weeks later? And if you don't return them do they rack up late fees until you do?

The fines for the seeds just grow and grow...

 

Sorry, I know this has already been answered, but I couldn't resist!

[iMonrey]

2 hours ago, JustHereForFood said:

But these students don't really care about the voices of people who are hurt by this horrible war on both sides. They are proving again that they just want to shout about something that is currently trending and when they are done, things will probably be even worse that they are now, in part thanks to them.

I think the vast majority of them care very much about the war in Gaza and to write them all off as agitators just looking for attention is dismissive of the root cause of the protests. John's basic point is correct, there is entirely too much attention on the protests rather than what they are protesting about. And if nothing else, if the protests draw attention to the war in Gaza, that's at least something the media isn't doing a very good job at, and something that doesn't seem to be on the radar of most Americans.

[Annber03]

6 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I know ymmv and I understand this is an important topic, but I think the coverage of the campus protests are massively oversaturated. I'll give John a little credit about covering the nonsense why the tents look the same and whether students have bike locks, but otherwise, there's just not a new angle for me here. I'm not sure why there's so much pearl clutching over campus protests given it's really an American tradition. I was at Berkeley. There were protests all the time. Maybe I'm more used to it. They took over a building one time too when I was there. 

Yeah, I don't get the anger/shock/horror at the colelge protests, either. Like you said, this is nothing new. Are there people at these protests who are there just to look like they're part of something, and don't really care about the issues being proested? Sure. As John noted, you'll get idiots like that at any protest. 

But I do also agree that i think a lot of the protesters are genuine - I can agree that some of them may not fully understand all the complexities involved, but I do think they genuinely care. And I think there's got to be ways for campuses to balance allowing students to peacefully protest while also making sure that Jewish people are being protected from anti-Semitic attacks and harassment. And I think all of that can easily be done without the need for this over the top police presence, 'cause that's sure as hell not going to help a damn thing on either side. It really shouldn't be that difficult and complicated, but apparently it is. 
 

Quote

 

but I would agree that there's a disconnect with parents' personal responsibility for their kids are the same people complaining about the 'nanny state'. Pick a lane. 

 

Yeah, people like this tend to be very selective when they talk about how they want "limited government interference". The government needs to stay out of people's lives...except when it comes to what people get to do with their reproductive choices, who they can marry/sleep with, and what books they can read, apparently. Then I guess it's fair game, in their eyes. 

Edited May 6 by Annber03

[heatherchandler]

18 hours ago, Annber03 said:

To say nothing of the fact that, okay, so let's say a kid does stumble upon a book that might be a little too adult for them, or might discuss topics that they might be a bit young yet to understand. So. The fuck. What?

I agree with most of what you wrote except.. I assume you don’t have young kids.  Kids talk, they text and as an example, I really don’t want my 11 year old to know what a strap-on is.  One day when he’s a little older, ok.  Only because he tells his friends everything and I don’t need the talk of the school to be that he is talking about that.  CPS has been called on parents who expose their kids to sexual stuff when they are too young, because it spreads and other parents grow “concerned.”

I don’t think the book should be banned or that ANY book should be banned but it’s not “so fucking what” handwaved away when a kid is exposed to something too adult.

[revbfc]

I do realize that there’s always going to be crazy signs at protests, but I have noticed that the “Crazy” signage is usually the same & condoned.  I do want a ceasefire, and I want the Palestinians to have their own state, but I will not stand next to someone who throws around the term “Zionist” with the ease and ferocity of George Lincoln Rockwell.

[Shrek]

14 hours ago, heatherchandler said:

I agree with most of what you wrote except.. I assume you don’t have young kids.  Kids talk, they text and as an example, I really don’t want my 11 year old to know what a strap-on is.  One day when he’s a little older, ok.  Only because he tells his friends everything and I don’t need the talk of the school to be that he is talking about that.  CPS has been called on parents who expose their kids to sexual stuff when they are too young, because it spreads and other parents grow “concerned.”

I don’t think the book should be banned or that ANY book should be banned but it’s not “so fucking what” handwaved away when a kid is exposed to something too adult.

I originally wrote a long reply but then thought better of it as today isn't my day for getting banned again but I will say boys will be boys no matter the age & no amount of book banning will stop that from happening no matter what age they are. I know because I was one a long time ago, way before the internet age.

[JustHereForFood]

15 hours ago, heatherchandler said:

I agree with most of what you wrote except.. I assume you don’t have young kids.  Kids talk, they text and as an example, I really don’t want my 11 year old to know what a strap-on is.  One day when he’s a little older, ok.  Only because he tells his friends everything and I don’t need the talk of the school to be that he is talking about that.  CPS has been called on parents who expose their kids to sexual stuff when they are too young, because it spreads and other parents grow “concerned.”

I don’t think the book should be banned or that ANY book should be banned but it’s not “so fucking what” handwaved away when a kid is exposed to something too adult.

Sure, but isn't that the job of a librarian, to divide the books into appropriate age selections? 

Anyway, some kids always read what is considered too mature for them. I remember even on this site, when V.C.Andrews books were discussed, so many posters said they've read Flowers in the Attic, the book that romanticizes rape and incest between siblings, when they were about 12. I'm not saying it's ok or that none of them get screwed up perspectives about love and sex, but the reactions are usually overblown. Developing critical thinking is an important skill and it's so often lacking these days. Protecting kids from a lot of the crap on the internet is IMO much more important than from what is in most books.

[iMonrey]

16 hours ago, heatherchandler said:

I don’t think the book should be banned or that ANY book should be banned but it’s not “so fucking what” handwaved away when a kid is exposed to something too adult.

I can appreciate the sentiment, but the reality is that kids can be exposed to inappropriate material in any number of ways, especially today in the internet age. Even back in my day, way back in the dark ages, you picked stuff up from other kids and their older siblings, etc. Banning books from libraries isn't going to fix that. You can do the best you can to steer your kids away from inappropriate material but at the same time you've got to be prepared to answer difficult questions.

Also? The true agenda here isn't to shield kids from age-inappropriate material. As John points out, the primary target seems to be books that are LGBTQ+ oriented. The religious right seems to think they can prevent children from turning gay or trans if they can prevent them from hearing about it.

[lasu]

39 minutes ago, JustHereForFood said:

Anyway, some kids always read what is considered too mature for them. I remember even on this site, when V.C.Andrews books were discussed, so many posters said they've read Flowers in the Attic, the book that romanticizes rape and incest between siblings, when they were about 12. I'm not saying it's ok or that none of them get screwed up perspectives about love and sex, but the reactions are usually overblown. Developing critical thinking is an important skill and it's so often lacking these days. Protecting kids from a lot of the crap on the internet is IMO much more important than from what is in most books.

This is neither here nor there, but read that series again as an adult, and you'll realize her brother was her best love interest. Sorry/not sorry.

I did read VC Andrews books at too young of an age, but I also read Are You There God, It's Me Margaret at too young of an age (I read the entire book before I knew what periods were, lol).  I read Stephen King at too young of an age.  I read Danielle Steele at too young of an age. You name it, I started reading it too young.

None of these things made into a sexual pervert as an adult.  You know what they made me as an adult?? 

A READER.

[DoctorAtomic]

I do think it's the job of the librarian to classify the books accordingly, but another part of the problem is that parents want the librarians on the hook if the kid wanders into a section that they shouldn't. Like I said, some of the rural libraries just don't have the personnel. It's hard to lay it on their feet. How old are kids that they're going to the library on their own anyway? Wouldn't the parents be with them?

My state (ugh) had a bill that was fortunately vetoed, where any given library would be fined $2500 a pop if a kid found an 'inappropriate' book. It was really broadly worded. But, of course, you all know what books were on the list. It wasn't Stephen King. 

I actually would like to see the librarians just tell everyone off like the guy in the hearing. 

[Shrek]

39 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I do think it's the job of the librarian to classify the books accordingly, but another part of the problem is that parents want the librarians on the hook if the kid wanders into a section that they shouldn't. Like I said, some of the rural libraries just don't have the personnel. It's hard to lay it on their feet. How old are kids that they're going to the library on their own anyway? Wouldn't the parents be with them?

My state (ugh) had a bill that was fortunately vetoed, where any given library would be fined $2500 a pop if a kid found an 'inappropriate' book. It was really broadly worded. But, of course, you all know what books were on the list. It wasn't Stephen King. 

I actually would like to see the librarians just tell everyone off like the guy in the hearing. 

I bet it wasn't the bible either.

[heatherchandler]

1 hour ago, iMonrey said:

I can appreciate the sentiment, but the reality is that kids can be exposed to inappropriate material in any number of ways, especially today in the internet age. Even back in my day, way back in the dark ages, you picked stuff up from other kids and their older siblings, etc. Banning books from libraries isn't going to fix that. You can do the best you can to steer your kids away from inappropriate material but at the same time you've got to be prepared to answer difficult questions.

Also? The true agenda here isn't to shield kids from age-inappropriate material. As John points out, the primary target seems to be books that are LGBTQ+ oriented. The religious right seems to think they can prevent children from turning gay or trans if they can prevent them from hearing about it.

Oh I know this very well!  I’m not for banning books in any way shape or form.  My issue was arguing against “so they see this book so fucking what?”  

Honestly it’s a fucking hassle to deal with when your kid is the kid talking about strap-ons.  I haven’t experienced that but I’ve had my 11 year old GET inappropriate info from another kid, a bunch of kids did and the parents were investigated by CPS.  He knew too much detail and they were concerned, and truth be told it was actually concerning.  You don’t know why a kid is talking about something hyper-sexual and maybe something is not right in the home.

They can get this info anywhere but talking about sex a lot as an 11 year old shouldn't always be handwaved away.

[DoctorAtomic]

12 minutes ago, Shrek said:

I bet it wasn't the bible either.

No, but I did mention above that under a version of the bill, the bible could have been on the list of reportable books. The bill that passed narrowed the definition of 'offensive materials' but didn't provide any funding for libraries for support. 

I tend to think today's youth are a little too sheltered. Did no one else play, 'Red Light, Green Light, Strap On' at recess? 

[angelamh66]

These book banners are just the height of irony. If they actually read a history book once in a while they might understand that book banners are rarely, if ever, on the right side of history and banning books usually does not lead anywhere good. But they would actually have to read to know that. 

[JustHereForFood]

So many of those concentrate on sex (and sometimes language) and not for example on violence. Same with people who assign age levels to movies. Why are people so worried about teenagers knowing that two (or more, why not?) consenting adults are pleasing each other in physical way? Or that they will use swear words around their friend groups? As long as they are not swearing at their teachers or grandparents, and those are completely different matters, what is the deal? 

You know what scared me as a child? Nonsense talks about Hell. Guess where that came from. Or some of the horror movies or body-horror scenes in sci-fi, like Matrix. But this is not what people are trying to shield kids from. Or some of the over-the-top violence in the movies. No, it almost always is sexuality and the fear that their children will grow more interested in whatever they don't consider "normal". As if banning things never made people more interested in them anyway.

2 hours ago, lasu said:

This is neither here nor there, but read that series again as an adult, and you'll realize her brother was her best love interest. Sorry/not sorry.

Ha! Ok, I don't want to go off-topic, but well, that is not really saying much, is it? Her other love interests were two men who also raped her and one who adopted her siblings and had sex with her when he was in his 40's and she was 17 and still traumatized. (And I was already adult when I've read it.)

[DoctorAtomic]

I don't think it's even primarily explicit sex because none of that content is in the kids' section in a library, than it is stories about LGBTQIA+ characters that are kids, which don't really talk about sex. 

There was a comment above that they think if kids don't read stories about gay and queer kids than they won't 'turn' gay. (which I know isn't real, but that is me reflecting on their motivation for banning the books.) 

 

[JustHereForFood]

It's the usual double-standard where they claim that everything about LGBTQ+ topics is "mature" by default. Even if it's just two men holding hands or chastely kissing. The horror! Meanwhile, kids are exposed to heterosexuality since early childhood, most of the fairy tales have some sort of heterosexual romance, yet the people who are used to how heteronormative and cisnormative the society is don't see it as an equivalent. People will ask questions like "How will I explain to my kid that their classmate has two mothers?", as if they never had to explain million other questions kids ask, or many other family situations when there is only one parent, or foster parents, or whatever. Every time I read about someone coming out to family members including kids about being gay or trans, they always say that the kids just accept it immediately, it's the adults who are often weird about it. Kids will be fine.

[Annber03]

8 hours ago, heatherchandler said:

Oh I know this very well!  I’m not for banning books in any way shape or form.  My issue was arguing against “so they see this book so fucking what?”  

Honestly it’s a fucking hassle to deal with when your kid is the kid talking about strap-ons.  I haven’t experienced that but I’ve had my 11 year old GET inappropriate info from another kid, a bunch of kids did and the parents were investigated by CPS.  He knew too much detail and they were concerned, and truth be told it was actually concerning.  You don’t know why a kid is talking about something hyper-sexual and maybe something is not right in the home.

They can get this info anywhere but talking about sex a lot as an 11 year old shouldn't always be handwaved away.

I just meant "so what" in the sense that moments like that should be handled with a little more context and clarity and maturity. I agree that there are times when a kid being very openly frank about sexual stuff is absolutely a sign of something more troubling and concerning worth investigating. 

But that is a very different scenario from what I was referring to. I was talking more about people flipping out and acting like a kid's come across hardcore porn or something of that sort when they stumble upon, say, a romance novel with a sex scene in it, or a book about how the human body works, or things of that sort. Is it an uncomfortable moment for a parent? Sure, yeah. Is the content in certain types of books inappropriate to some degree or another for certain age groups? Yeah, probably. 

But in those cases, I still say, "So what?" If the adults don't make a big to do about it in the first place, the kids won't, either. If a kid comes across something like that, then maybe the adults in their lives need to act like, y'know, adults, and talk to them about this stuff, and have conversations with them about what's apprpriate and inappropriate to read/talk about in public/etc., and things of that sort. And maybe if they pay more attention to what their kids are looking at and reading, they'll be less likely to encouter a situation where their kid stumbles upon something they're too young to stumble upon or understand, whether it's in a book or on the internet or, hell, ust in their everyday interactions in public. 'Cause I remember my friends' parents being super restrictive with the stuff they would let their kids watch or read or listen to, and then they'd turn around and say and do things that I guarantee were a far more negative influence on their kids than the TV, books, or music they didn't let them read/watch/listen to would've been. 

[iMonrey]

22 hours ago, JustHereForFood said:

You know what scared me as a child? Nonsense talks about Hell. Guess where that came from. Or some of the horror movies or body-horror scenes in sci-fi, like Matrix. But this is not what people are trying to shield kids from.

I grew up in the Vietnam era, and as a child I was terrified I would be drafted and have to go to war. Yet there are no groups trying to shield kids from books about war or violence either. We're still mostly a Puritanical society at heart. You see all kinds of violence on broadcast TV but God forbid you see a naked body.

[andromeda331]

The different Berenstein books cracked me up. I wanted John to go on.

The whole book ban is stupid. They complain about appropriate books for kids. But public libraries already have everything separated into catagories including children's sections. If your kid is in the adult section that's your problem not the librarian's.

They claim they are "protecting" the kids but if that was true why isn't it enough that it's in the adult section? Why do they need to take them off the shelves completely? They want to ban books from adults too. Nora Roberts' has two books ban for apparently porn. Anyone who actually read her books know the sex scenes aren't porn not even close. Also her book about Satanists isn't ban. 

Pre-tweens and teens should have access to books to information about their bodies and sex if they want it. So many parents' won't talk to their kids about those subjects and not all schools have sex ed. Just because those books are banned doesn't mean they aren't think about it or learning about it somewhere else. I learned more about sex in the hallways of high school then in sex ed. I liked having the information because I had parents' who wouldn't talk to you about any of that. I'd rather teen and preteens have accurate information. 

Just because you ban the books doesn't mean kids can't get a hold of those books. I read VC Andrews in my early teens. My parents' never would have allowed had they known. I made sure they didn't. This was pre-internet days and I had no problem get them. Yeah, it had incest and stuff but I like the for reading how much Cathy and her siblings went through. The shock at reading that the real villain turned out to be their mother.  Each book afterwards showed how the trauma continued to effect their lives into adults and raising their own children. Which a lot of sequels of similar stuff doesn't show. I like reading about what people go through whether it's fiction or real like the Diary of Anne Frank which has been banned in some places. I've read many more holocaust books since then. At sixteen I was reading romance books full of romance and sex.  I still like romance books and movies.

As pointed out the same kids have access to the internet which is the easiest way to find the same stuff that's in the the books they want to ban. 

I love John pointing out certain stories from the Bible. I never tired of people pointing out the same stuff they supposely want banned is in the Bible. There's incest. Brother murdering brother. Wars and more. But it's not going to be banned. Nor do I think it should. I don't believe in banning books. 

 The guy addressing the board and the librarian were right. 

[peeayebee]

5 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

Nora Roberts' has two books ban for apparently porn. Anyone who actually read her books know the sex scenes aren't porn not even close.

I haven't read any of her books, but I assumed they were lusty romances. Why did anyone say these books were porn?

[Hanahope]

I do not agree with book bans. 

i  note a similarity between the bruhaha over "explicit" material in books and the bruhaha over "explicit" material in songs/music back in the 80s.  the result was merely requiring music publishers to print an "E" on the albums.  So why not do the same thing for books?  

Putting the "E" on albums really didn't do a whole lot to keep it out of kids hands, but i guess at least the parent could easily see it and, you know "parent the kids."  So do the same for books, if that is your concern, that kids are getting books that parents don't always know contains "explicit" material.

 

[DoctorAtomic]

Wouldn't young adult books being in the young adult section already be the same as putting the E on the albums from the 80s. 

Funny enough, back then, I think Frank Zappa made the suggestion that an album's lyrics could be accessible for the parents to read first before letting the kids buy it. I don't suppose that parents today could give the books a once over similarly. 

[Hanahope]

2 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

Wouldn't young adult books being in the young adult section already be the same as putting the E on the albums from the 80s. 

one would think, but if a parent does not know what section the book came from, how would they know if its explicit or not?  

[peeayebee]

3 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

Funny enough, back then, I think Frank Zappa made the suggestion that an album's lyrics could be accessible for the parents to read first before letting the kids buy it. I don't suppose that parents today could give the books a once over similarly. 

There are sites where they list various things that parents could object to. Parental guides. But of course there's a lack of context.

[SoMuchTV]

5 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

Wouldn't young adult books being in the young adult section already be the same as putting the E on the albums from the 80s. 

“Young Adult” (I assume - librarians here feel free to correct me) would be based more on reading level and subject matter. So there would be a wide variety in YA, from cozy to “explicit”. So maybe before we start removing books, it would be more appropriate to come up with a movie-style G-PG-PG13 etc. system. I’m still not convinced there’s a problem here that needs to be solved, but at least that would put the rating system on the publishers and not every single local librarian. 

[andromeda331]

17 hours ago, peeayebee said:

I haven't read any of her books, but I assumed they were lusty romances. Why did anyone say these books were porn?

That's what they are. I don't know why anyone thought they were porn.  They were banned in Florida high schools. The Bridal Quartet and the Dream trilogy.   

[Ceindreadh]

Growing up, we only had a small library in my town.  Kids books on one side, adults on the other.  But once we were 12 or 13, the librarian used to let us take one book from the adult side each time we went in.  Of course, I'm pretty sure that if we'd picked anything *too* adult, she would have refused to check it out for us.  The perils of living in a small town where the librarian knew everybody! 

[bilgistic]

Speaking from personal experience, the minute someone bans a book, the more intriguing it becomes to readers.

When I was a pre-teen, some older girls that were friends of our family gave us a box of books. Mom went through them, reading the back covers. After reading the synopsis of "Then Again, Maybe I Won't" by Judy Blume, she said, "Nope!" and threw it back in the box. Promptly the next day, I went to the school library to check it out. That's the only way I learned about cismale puberty.

[Annber03]

54 minutes ago, bilgistic said:

Speaking from personal experience, the minute someone bans a book, the more intriguing it becomes to readers.

When I was a pre-teen, some older girls that were friends of our family gave us a box of books. Mom went through them, reading the back covers. After reading the synopsis of "Then Again, Maybe I Won't" by Judy Blume, she said, "Nope!" and threw it back in the box. Promptly the next day, I went to the school library to check it out. That's the only way I learned about cismale puberty.

This. Hell, the same can be said for adults - when I worked at a bookstore I remember there was a time when our manager gave us a heads up about this woman who'd been trying to call and register complaints with all the bookstores in the area/state. Apparently she blamed the bookstores for her husband's porn addiction, because he would see the sections with the adult magazines and I guess that, according to her, their being there and available just further added to his addiction. So she was trying to complain to the bookstores and demand they remove those sections with the adult magazines (which, I will remind people, was a section that was properly labeled and all that sort of thing, and also out of easy reach or view of children besides), and if they didn't, she threatened legal action. 

She never wound up calling our store that I'm aware of, but yeah, apparently it was other people's responsibility to handle her husband's sex issues (presuming he even had an addiction in the first place, that is, 'cause I can see it where some people think even just casually looking at adult content somehow equates to an "addiction"). Not her husband's, nor hers. Nope. In her eyes, it was the responsibility of total strangers who worked in these stores and had never met her or her husband to do that. 

And mind, I can sympathize with the fact that there are a lot of people out there who do have hangups or complicated issues around the topic of sex, for a whole host of reasons...but again, that's where professionals and other people who can properly help them work through those issues come into play. Getting rid of anything with even the slightest hint of sexual content isn't going to magically solve that problem. Keeping a kid from reading a book about teenagers hooking up won't make them less curious about, or less likely to want to have, sex. Keeping a kid from reading a book about LGBTQ+ people isn't going to make them not turn out to be  LGBTQ+ (to say nothing of how that's literally not how that works when it comes to people figuring out their sexual orientation, nor is it something that people need to try and stop from happening to begin with). Getting rid of adult magazines won't fix a husband's porn addiction. And so on. Banning this stuff has never, ever solved the probems (or "problems") these people seem to think ibanning them will. All it does is leave people ignorant (and sex in particular is a topic where ignorance is NOT a good thing - quite the contrary, it can be a very dangerous thing), or it makes people find more creative ways to get their hands on this thing that's been banned, or so on. 

Just. You'd think after all the endless attempts people have made to ban this and that media content, we'd have learned that by now. Clearly not. 

Edited May 11 by Annber03

[Anela]

When I finally got HBO, half price, late 2021, this show was one that I was looking forward to watching regularly. But I keep forgetting to look for it.  
 

anyway. I just have to say that John Oliver is amazing. The opening about the protests, was good.  

On 5/6/2024 at 12:21 AM, Lantern7 said:

After getting a week off, John comes back . . . first to talk about student protests and the often-disproportionate response to them, and then he covered libraries.

Good topic, because you have people looking to ban/outlaw books and subsequently blame libraries for having said books. Sure, children could be exposed to stuff that might be inappropriate, but shouldn’t there be parents/guardians to prevent that? I mean actually being there, as opposed to railing against books that they probably don’t read. It’s insane that librarians can face jail time in a few states for checking out banned books. Only thing missing from John’s report was book burnings. You just know that’s happening.

I live in NYC (well, one of the boroughs), so I never had had a chance to take out leaf blowers, seeds or stuffed and mounted animals. I don’t think John got that bird from a recognized library.

Our library used to have a sewing machine that you could borrow, and they now have love animal traps available.  

[Anela]

On 5/6/2024 at 3:40 PM, iMonrey said:

I think the vast majority of them care very much about the war in Gaza and to write them all off as agitators just looking for attention is dismissive of the root cause of the protests. John's basic point is correct, there is entirely too much attention on the protests rather than what they are protesting about. And if nothing else, if the protests draw attention to the war in Gaza, that's at least something the media isn't doing a very good job at, and something that doesn't seem to be on the radar of most Americans.

I agree with you.  
I’m not throwing around anything about Zionism, I just want innocent people to not be starved and bombed. I’ve seen video accidentally, of refugee camps getting bombed, and dead children. Then doomscrolling through twitter, and seeing the images from the met gala, combined with these dead little ones.  I just can’t.  

On 5/7/2024 at 3:19 PM, JustHereForFood said:

It's the usual double-standard where they claim that everything about LGBTQ+ topics is "mature" by default. Even if it's just two men holding hands or chastely kissing. The horror! Meanwhile, kids are exposed to heterosexuality since early childhood, most of the fairy tales have some sort of heterosexual romance, yet the people who are used to how heteronormative and cisnormative the society is don't see it as an equivalent. People will ask questions like "How will I explain to my kid that their classmate has two mothers?", as if they never had to explain million other questions kids ask, or many other family situations when there is only one parent, or foster parents, or whatever. Every time I read about someone coming out to family members including kids about being gay or trans, they always say that the kids just accept it immediately, it's the adults who are often weird about it. Kids will be fine.

I had a friend who died last year.  When we were teenagers, he pretended to have a crush on me, so that people would leave him alone, but when he finally came out (their mother was dying), his brother was great about it.  
 

I remember when we were living with my aunt, and three cousins.  We were all jammed into a two-bedroom apartment, after moving back here, when my parents got back together.  Mum was driving around with my aunt, who sold things to gas stations (like ephedrine for truck drivers, until teenagers got into it, and it was banned). one afternoon, she came home, temper gauge set at nuclear. She advanced on me, across the bedroom - I was pressed against the dresser, and the mirror on top of it.  I had no idea what was going on, even when she pulled an open condom out of the pocket on the coat she had borrowed.  My coat.  

My aunt was very free with her kids.  Her youngest daughter was nineteen, and they had condoms in the bathroom, ready to take with them on a date.  They smoked marijuana, and she only got angry if they stole her money to get cigarettes.  My little sister got curious about the condoms, opened one, and then didn’t know what to do, so she hid it in my coat pocket.  😑 my sister had no hang-ups about sex, but I had a few, and that was one thing that fueled it.  My mother’s response to finding that.  I found that she was much harder on me, as the eldest, than she ever was on my sister.  

Edited May 12 by Anela

[Anela]

Anyway, I read books with sex in them, long before the condom incident.  They were my mum’s books. When we were younger, my cousin also showed us a really explicit book, with sketches, like a graphic novel, of sexual positions.  It belonged to his parents.  
 

 

Edited May 12 by Anela

[shapeshifter]

As a retired librarian, my main takeaway on the episode was the librarian who had to quit her job because her life was threatened by so-called Christians.

 

[Anela]

3 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

As a retired librarian, my main takeaway on the episode was the librarian who had to quit her job because her life was threatened by so-called Christians.

 

The students were on my mind, because of Kent State. I’m one county over from it, less than an hour, and  it’s remembered every year.  

[DoctorAtomic]

On 5/11/2024 at 7:49 AM, bilgistic said:

That's the only way I learned about cismale puberty.

Must have been a short book.

[andromeda331]

When we first got the internet on computers, the school tried to restrict it by banning anything that had a sexual or body part word in it thinking that would solve the problem. Until a student was doing a report on breast cancer but couldn't do it because the word "breast". 

My last year of high school these two boys' in my class got expelled because during one class instead of doing their report they spent it looking up porn on the internet. it was at school and even though they knew it was montiored and they had to enter their id and password to access the internet so the school would know who it was. They still did it. 

[heatherchandler]

On 5/12/2024 at 12:30 AM, Anela said:

When I finally got HBO, half price, late 2021, this show was one that I was looking forward to watching regularly. But I keep forgetting to look for it.  
 

 

Our library used to have a sewing machine that you could borrow, and they now have love animal traps available.  

HBO (or Max now) does not promote the show very well.  I watch it every week but their algorithm never puts it up on the homepage to remind me.  I have to search.

 

Now I’m curious.. what kind of animal traps?

[shapeshifter]

12 hours ago, heatherchandler said:

Now I’m curious.. what kind of animal traps?

My first guess is skunk.
Animal Control Services are required by law to euthanize the skunk, even if it's cute and just stinking up the joint because it is not anatomically capable of climbing up the outside stairs to the basement.😢🦨
But maybe raccoon? 

 

I did watch the entire episode, but I can't recall:
Did we get to see anyone ask the book banners about banning the Bible from the library because of passages like these?

Edited May 14 by shapeshifter