The Orlando Sentinel published a two-page print spread Thursday listing 673 books that have been removed from classrooms in Orange County in 2023 due to fears they violate the state’s new laws banning “sexual conduct” from public schools.
Teachers with any of the 673 books on their classroom shelves have been instructed by the school district to remove them, the newspaper said, also noting that the Orange County Public Schools (OCPS) staff will review the list of rejected books once again, so it’s possible the books will eventually be returned to the classroom. The district began compiling the list over the summer.
The list stems from two Florida laws signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis ®, who is also running for president. They require media specialists to review books in libraries and classrooms, and to exclude books that include sexually lewd material or pornography. The legislation also aims to give parents greater ability to raise objections to their children’s education.
As long as it’s just expelled from school libraries, I’m okay with that.
Regular libraries is way different though. If my kid wants to read a book and it’s not offered at the school library, I’m more than willing to take them to the regular library and get it.
From what I’ve read, these books aren’t banned in regular libraries, just in school libraries, right?
School libraries are libraries. Children without parents like yourself will never see those. What kind of “I got mine” world are you people living in.
Yes, they’re both libraries. Thats the overall category. Then, they’re split into other categories, two of which being school libraries and public libraries.
Do you think that just anyone off the street should be able to walk into a school library like they can a public library? Because that’s the same argument. They’re both libraries after all. ಠ_ಠ
That’s a privileged statement - many don’t have the choice of regularly accessing multiple libraries (due to lack of supply or transportation). For some, the school library is THE library.
Also why would you EVER want to hinder a child that’s actually intellectually curious and ready to learn (in that magical and increasingly rare moment) to say, “No, you have to find a way to go to another place and maybe they’ll have it”. They may also walk away feeling judged and othered and avoid seeking that literature, as some children are very sensitive to perception by others.
You just don’t have a defensible position as considered by any rational adult. Both of these are public institutions, school libraries should have the same books that a city library would stock for the age ranges of a given school - there is no functional difference. Your “only banned in schools though right?” statement suggests that you REALLY need to go read the poem, “first they came for…”
You’re unquestionably wrong, there’s no ambiguity there, just hopeful that you can realize that in time and evolve forward - your kids are watching and learning from how you approach these things.
We need to educate kids about sex. Otherwise bad actors will take advantage of them and/or they grow up unhealthily.
We do it with hetero themes all the time. E.g. in Shrek they get married and donkey/dragon have babies. In Cinderella they get married. They give baby dolls to young girls. A common question for 5 year olds to ask is where babies come from.
WE don’t need to do anything, it’s up to individual parents on how they choose to teach their kids about sex.
Pornography and sex are different, and the removal from schools is a reaction to pornograhy being found in some books offered in school libraries, which I think were appropriate for removal.
The problem came when people doubled down and insisted that pornographic images weren’t being found. That left an opening for right-wing outlets to point out that not only was it there, but that people were outright denying it.
What we have now is an overreach. There are certainly age-appropriate books that have characters who aren’t straight being pulled, which u agree is bad, but those books are still plenty available in libraries, where… gasp children can still learn about sex, however their parents find appropriate.
I think representation is good in school libraries, but not PORNOGRAPHIC representation. This isn’t a hard concept to grasp, and the left dug themselves a big hole for conservatives to fill by literally trying to gaslight what was found.
Everything you listed is fine, and it would be fine if donky and dragon were both men and they adopted babies. It wouldn’t be fine if donky put on a strap on and dragon blew him. One version is kid friendly, the other one isnt.
Children aren’t property, parents don’t get to dictate their interests. If you don’t like a book, you don’t have to read it. If a parent doesn’t like a book in a library, they don’t have to read it. They do not however have the right to restrict what content is available for everyone else.
Pornography - ie images designed to arouse sexual desire - is not the same as the discussion or even depiction of sex in every regard.
You can read something like “It takes some couples up to two years of trying to conceive to get pregnant” without becoming aroused.
Same as you can look at a picture of how the testes connects to the urethra without getting a boner.
However, you can look at a fully clothed person in a sexy outfit (eg pin up girl) and know it is pornography - even if extremely softcore and mild.
It is for the most part a deliberate red herring to discus pornography being displayed in schools because, even if the material is describing accurately the process of sex, even within a narrative, it is likely, if aimed at young adults, more designed to answer common questions and show representation than it is to stoke their lust.
Any attempt to classify pornography is instantly met with Diogenes’ plucked chicken: Behold — a porno!