Report on banned books in schools for 2022

[SomeRandom]

As I alluded to in my previous post, I think a solid case could be made that both the Qur'an and the Bible could qualify for such monitoring. Somehow I think a lot of the people pushing for book bans now for being "graphic" or "bad for children" wouldn't approve of monitoring either or both.

That’s a valid point.
Personally I think anything graphic, regardless of medium, including any and all holy books, should be monitored for age appropriateness. And even then I think there should be caveats (like history lessons) because sometimes the entire point is the graphic nature.

But in saying that I’m generally against such book bans, regardless of politics. Maybe I’d argue for certain “questionable” books to be monitored so a teacher can explain them to a student properly. That’s about as far as I’d go.

Though you are right that there is a certain amount of hypocrisy to be found in folk who decry “graphic material.”

 

[Shadow Wolf]

maybe one could make the case for the graphic adaption of Anne Frank’s Diary to be age restricted, I suppose

Better the kids see the **** storm for what it is before some skinhead puke fills them with lies.

I don't have the insider view I once did with the current situation, but I am struck by how sensationalistic and superficial the coverage on banned books is. It doesn't seem to address the nuances of the process, the very real and well-intentioned legitimacy of some challenges, and the importance of curation just in general. Looking at mainstream news, that makes it difficult to assess what's really going on. So I like to go to the experts to get a good view, which means something like the American Library Association. It is worth reading their statement about current events here: The American Library Association opposes widespread efforts to censor books in U.S. schools and libraries

There's no nuance going on with them. They see the books as evil and want them banned. It offends their social and religious beliefs, and it really is that simple as they see it their duty to prevent the spread of what they see as moral decay.

 

[SomeRandom]

Better the kids see the **** storm for what it is before some skinhead puke fills them with lies.
.

Agreed.
Though I might be persuaded to draw a line at maybe very young children at least.
Though I certainly agree that we should be using a “prevention method” approach for young people before they fall into dangerous ideologies.
I mean just look at the recent and rather alarming rise of far right ideology targeting disaffected youth happening right now.
*shudders*

 

[JustGeorge]

As I alluded to in my previous post, I think a solid case could be made that both the Qur'an and the Bible could qualify for such monitoring. Somehow I think a lot of the people pushing for book bans now for being "graphic" or "bad for children" wouldn't approve of monitoring either or both.

In general, I'm against book banning. Books are records of the human experience, and to banish them takes from what it was to be in certain times, places, mindsets, cultures, etc.

I think alternatively, requiring permission slips to read certain books might be a good middle ground.

There seems to be an assumption that what's good for one student is good for all; that's not always true. I remember some dystopian novel being required for reading by my oldest(can't remember the name)... I had no idea he was being exposed to it, until he started having episodes of depression and anxiety(which he has diagnosis for, along with taking medication). He told me about the book, and what was setting him off. I was disgusted the school was so casual about it, as was his therapist. He really had no business, with his mindset, reading that. It didn't teach him anything, rather he shut down mentally to protect himself from the material.

At that age and with that frame of mind, I wouldn't have approved the Bible or Qur'an, either.

That doesn't mean that no youth should read it. My niece(who is actually a bit younger) handles that kind of material much better. It would be okay for her, and she'd probably get something from it.

While I think there's the potential a few parents would wrongly shelter their children past what is necessary, it would also prevent kids from getting materials they aren't actually ready for.

 

[Debater Slayer]

In general, I'm against book banning. Books are records of the human experience, and to banish them takes from what it was to be in certain times, places, mindsets, cultures, etc.

I think alternatively, requiring permission slips to read certain books might be a good middle ground.

There seems to be an assumption that what's good for one student is good for all; that's not always true. I remember some dystopian novel being required for reading by my oldest(can't remember the name)... I had no idea he was being exposed to it, until he started having episodes of depression and anxiety(which he has diagnosis for, along with taking medication). He told me about the book, and what was setting him off. I was disgusted the school was so casual about it, as was his therapist. He really had no business, with his mindset, reading that. It didn't teach him anything, rather he shut down mentally to protect himself from the material.

At that age and with that frame of mind, I wouldn't have approved the Bible or Qur'an, either.

That doesn't mean that no youth should read it. My niece(who is actually a bit younger) handles that kind of material much better. It would be okay for her, and she'd probably get something from it.

While I think there's the potential a few parents would wrongly shelter their children past what is necessary, it would also prevent kids from getting materials they aren't actually ready for.

I completely agree. I favor a nuanced and case-by-case approach to such things. I definitely think a lot of books are generally inappropriate for children, but I don't want the arbiter of that to be some ideologue or politician with a clearly biased agenda. I'd rather experts in psychology and education decided such things after talking to the children first-hand.

 

[tytlyf]

Kept the public dumb and stupid they easier to control. That's why they ban books and talk of colleges pushing a political agenda. Saying colleges are leftists and lying to the people. Keep the masses dumb they can control the people.

Republicans have always been against Public Education funding. For this reason alone.
Republicans want "school choice" so public funds can be dispersed to private (religious) schools.
More corporate welfare sponsored by Republicans.

Corporate welfare = GOOD
People welfare = BAD

Someone is going to get the tax dollars for subsidies, Republicans work overtime to make sure the recipients of welfare are corporations and not the people.

 

[Sand Dancer]

In general, I'm against book banning. Books are records of the human experience, and to banish them takes from what it was to be in certain times, places, mindsets, cultures, etc.

I think alternatively, requiring permission slips to read certain books might be a good middle ground.

There seems to be an assumption that what's good for one student is good for all; that's not always true. I remember some dystopian novel being required for reading by my oldest(can't remember the name)... I had no idea he was being exposed to it, until he started having episodes of depression and anxiety(which he has diagnosis for, along with taking medication). He told me about the book, and what was setting him off. I was disgusted the school was so casual about it, as was his therapist. He really had no business, with his mindset, reading that. It didn't teach him anything, rather he shut down mentally to protect himself from the material.

At that age and with that frame of mind, I wouldn't have approved the Bible or Qur'an, either.

That doesn't mean that no youth should read it. My niece(who is actually a bit younger) handles that kind of material much better. It would be okay for her, and she'd probably get something from it.

While I think there's the potential a few parents would wrongly shelter their children past what is necessary, it would also prevent kids from getting materials they aren't actually ready for.

They ban certain books, then want kids to read the Bible, which has adult content in it.

 

[JustGeorge]

They ban certain books, then want kids to read the Bible, which has adult content in it.

I don't understand that.

Adult material is adult material.

 

[sun rise]

Actually reading this books, especially from the perspective of an educator of schoolchildren, may help clarify why these books were banned, and no, it's not necessarily racism or antisemitism or whatever. I am personally, at the moment, only familiar with the two Holocaust books, Maus and the graphic adaptation of Anne Frank's Diary. Both have scenes that I think many would regard as inappropriate, particular for kids, and I'm not talking about Nazi-related things.

I suspect at least some of the other books were banned for similar reasons. Other books may have been banned because they present ideologies that are too contradictory to the ideals of the communities where the books were banned. As I have stated a number of times on this site, even democracy needs boundaries, because without such boundaries, opposing ideologies would quickly win over. Then there'd be no form of freedom.

All I need to do is look at the states where they were banned to know that it's political NOT an educations/age appropriate situation.

As far as "contrary to the ideals of local communities" - where those books are being banned is due to the extreme right wing/racist/antisemitic nature of those so-called ideals. That is exactly the problem where those so-called ideals are in fact anti-American.

 

[sun rise]

When I was growing up, the library had a children's section and an adult section. That's fine with me. If a parent wanted a child to read something from the adult section, he or she could check it out and give it to the child.

There are also ways of introducing kids to various topics such as LGBTQ. This song from the Meher Schools does just that without going into any details:

Life is a rainbow
and every color
is precious in love's light.
Every color is a ray
of loves's pure light.

https://www.meherschools.org/videos-songs

 

[amorphous_constellation]

But in saying that I’m generally against such book bans, regardless of politics. Maybe I’d argue for certain “questionable” books to be monitored so a teacher can explain them to a student properly. That’s about as far as I’d go.

Out of a the total curriculum when I was in school, which included math, science, gym, shop class, and other stuff, english class was only a small part of it, and that's where we read books. And that's where we read the books about war and dystopia, and analyzed them with the teacher. Doing the analysis of these books that are deep in the moral and ethical material we face is hard, and it I think it should be done carefully with a teacher.

But there are only so many books that can fill the space in that small part of the total curriculum, with proper guidance from the educated authority.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

I served as a youth rep on a committee that reviewed book challenges to a local school district many years ago. I learned a lot about the process; what sorts of challenges were common, why they were brought forth, and what the role of a library is in a public school. At that time, we only got legitimate book challenges. What's a legitimate book challenge?

School libraries are supposed to be curated to age appropriate content and materials. In some respects, it is similar to the notion of rating films and movies to certain age groups. Where it is okay to have a book with some violent imagery in a high school library, it is not acceptable in an elementary school. And graphically violent or graphically sexual (pornographic) content was never permissible. Every so often, a parent would rightly flag something to the librarians that was a bit borderline on age appropriateness. It might get moved up in the age spectrum of the collections, if the committee agreed that was necessary after hearing the arguments of the person who put forth the challenge. Outright banning of a book was extremely rare, in part because librarians already curate collections to filter out anything that could reasonably be banned.

I don't have the insider view I once did with the current situation, but I am struck by how sensationalistic and superficial the coverage on banned books is. It doesn't seem to address the nuances of the process, the very real and well-intentioned legitimacy of some challenges, and the importance of curation just in general. Looking at mainstream news, that makes it difficult to assess what's really going on. So I like to go to the experts to get a good view, which means something like the American Library Association. It is worth reading their statement about current events here: The American Library Association opposes widespread efforts to censor books in U.S. schools and libraries

See also the rest of their resources on the matter here: Resources for Book Challenges

I find no problem with your educated view here, but I am concerned about how nuanced views like this would sail in the current political climate. Both parties seem to increasingly believe that all nuance is actually a dogwhistle, which is a view I find disgusting

 

[JustGeorge]

Out of a the total curriculum when I was in school, which included math, science, gym, shop class, and other stuff, english class was only a small part of it, and that's where we read books. And that's where we read the books about war and dystopia, and analyzed them with the teacher. Doing the analysis of these books that are deep in the moral and ethical material we face is hard, and it I think it should be done carefully with a teacher.

But there are only so many books that can fill the space in that small part of the total curriculum, with proper guidance from the educated authority.

I remember being in high school, and asking a favored teacher why we had to bother with all this crap, we'd never retain it all. He told me "we're trying to teach you how to think, not what to think. How to learn, and how to come to your own conclusions." That stuck with me.

Having my oldest go through the public school system(he's in the later years of high school now), I don't feel there's a large quantity of teachers living up to this code. I do feel more teachers that he's had pressed that there was a right and a wrong(other things that require such an answer), and have tried to impress a worldview upon him.

I suspect fear that their child is going to learn a worldview they oppose within the schools is the reason why some parents feel they need to ban certain books, but I would say working with the school system rather than against it would go better(provided the district is open to that).

 

[amorphous_constellation]

I remember being in high school, and asking a favored teacher why we had to bother with all this crap, we'd never retain it all. He told me "we're trying to teach you how to think, not what to think. How to learn, and how to come to your own conclusions." That stuck with me.

There's another view right there, that I'm sure that someone in the modern polarized political media would declaim as a dog whistle.

 

[JustGeorge]

There's another view right there, that I'm sure that someone in the modern polarized political media would declaim as a dog whistle.

Do you think there's any way to win in these situations with all the polarization going on?

 

[Shaul]

Or not. I am skeptical that pen.org is a credible source. Everybody and their brother could find fault with how a school library is stocked. That doesn't equate to "banning". If you really want your children to read a particular book and it isn't in your school library then just get your own copy for them. The truth is most students rarely, if ever, check out books from their school library.

Meanwhile six year old students are shooting teachers in the classroom.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Do you think there's any way to win in these situations with all the polarization going on?

Well if I was running for election, I would start something called the 'tempered party.' This would be a party of nuanced centrism, but I would immediately be attacked by both sides, since I'm not sure they believe centrism exists. Centrism has largely retreated from politics.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Sounds like they don't want to have actual discussions.

Religious people never do -- they want to tell everybody what and how to think -- and then later collect the rewards from the offering salver.

 

[JustGeorge]

Well if I was running for election, I would start something called the 'tempered party.' This would be a party of nuanced centrism, but I would immediately be attacked by both sides, since I'm not sure they believe centrism exists. Centrism has largely retreated from politics.

I agree with this.

I feel right now many are 'picking teams', and if you're not with them, you're against them(in their mind)!

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Actually reading this books, especially from the perspective of an educator of schoolchildren, may help clarify why these books were banned, and no, it's not necessarily racism or antisemitism or whatever. I am personally, at the moment, only familiar with the two Holocaust books, Maus and the graphic adaptation of Anne Frank's Diary. Both have scenes that I think many would regard as inappropriate, particular for kids, and I'm not talking about Nazi-related things.

I suspect at least some of the other books were banned for similar reasons. Other books may have been banned because they present ideologies that are too contradictory to the ideals of the communities where the books were banned. As I have stated a number of times on this site, even democracy needs boundaries, because without such boundaries, opposing ideologies would quickly win over. Then there'd be no form of freedom.

So, what books would you personally think it appropriate to ban? What do you think it is inappropriate for a free people to read?