[HN Gopher] As calls to ban books intensify, digital librarians ...
___________________________________________________________________
As calls to ban books intensify, digital librarians offer
perspective
Author : sohkamyung
Score : 105 points
Date : 2021-11-24 13:42 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (blog.archive.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (blog.archive.org)
| derbOac wrote:
| Anyone know where there's data on challenges over time?
|
| I could only find these two things:
|
| https://www.ala.org/advocacy/sites/ala.org.advocacy/files/co...
|
| https://bookriot.com/statistics-of-censorship/
|
| I have a feeling something more comprehensive and precise is out
| there but I don't know where to look. The ALA has a "field
| report" but they charge for it and I'm not even sure if it would
| have the content I'm looking for.
|
| Most of the data I can find is on the most frequently challenged
| books, and the reasons for doing so.
| BashiBazouk wrote:
| As a kid in the 70's growing up on the beach in Santa Cruz I once
| watched a real book burning. It was weird. Some local christian
| group came down a dug a huge pit. Started a bonfire and a large
| group of people were tossing in books and records. When I was
| much older I realized with all the melted records that must have
| really polluted that section of the beach...
| finite_jest wrote:
| Real book burning still do happen today:
| https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/book-burning-at-ontario...
| stareblinkstare wrote:
| Trying to find an angle to discredit Archive.org is a pretty low-
| brow move. As long as they continue to host works by George
| Lincoln Rockwell and his ilk, they will stand their ground for
| you and me.
| quadrifoliate wrote:
| A lot of the other comments on here are saying that this is
| banning books from _curricula_ [1]. But I would...like to see the
| sources for this assertion?
|
| All of the stories I have seen [1][2] say that the books are
| banned from the school _library system_. As far as I am aware,
| school libraries usually contain a wide range of books, not just
| whatever is required for the curriculum.
|
| So banning a book from a school library does seem to be a fairly
| strong suppression of ideas. Libraries have usually been the
| place where you go to find ideas outside the safe circle of
| whatever is permitted by your (usually insipid) curriculum.
|
| For example, I am not a fan of Ayn Rand's philosophy, but I am
| still glad I got to read her books from my school library, so I
| could make that decision for myself. School libraries curated by
| legislators with an agenda seem like a Really Bad Idea.
|
| ----------------------------------------
|
| [1] This would be within limits, I guess, but still weird.
| Wouldn't you just use a different curriculum?
|
| [2] https://www.npr.org/2021/10/28/1050013664/texas-lawmaker-
| mat...
|
| [3] https://www.kmuw.org/education/2021-11-09/goddard-school-
| dis...
| Spooky23 wrote:
| Local school districts frequently do this sort of thing.
|
| It sucks for the kids, but it is a good signal for you when
| you're looking for a place to live, as the school board is
| controlled by provincial idiots.
| [deleted]
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| Sometimes it's entire states.
| lr4444lr wrote:
| The books being on the school library or on classroom shelves
| connotes that the educational custodians of our children, who
| have literal and legal responsibility for their safety and well
| being on multiple levels, have approved them. Not so much to
| promote every idea they contain, but at least that they express
| things in a way that is psychologically appropriate for kids at
| their level of development.
|
| What kinds of ideas cross this line of appropriateness you or I
| may disagree on, but the point is that it exists in a school
| setting, which the article seems to pretty much miss
| altogether.
| boplicity wrote:
| Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be where people are
| drawing the line lately, especially in "conservative" areas.
|
| It's hard to argue there's anything but racism (or
| xenophobia) going on when they ban a book such as _A Big
| Mooncake for Little Star._ [0]
|
| [0] https://twitter.com/pacylin/status/1440318317806317569
| dillondoyle wrote:
| Homophobia and transphobia too.
|
| https://ncac.org/resource/lgbtq-book-bans-and-challenges
|
| https://wgntv.com/news/downers-grove-parents-students-
| clash-...
| kvathupo wrote:
| From the Texas legislator's proposed list of banned books, I
| fail to see why books such as "Bioethics Beyond the
| Headlines" or "V for Vendetta" should be banned. Indeed, it
| does concern me that much of the novels are fictional works
| portraying the LGBT experience. I can't imagine how
| alienating it must be to students of that group.
|
| As an aside, I find it amusing that Shakespeare is never
| banned on the grounds of sexual content. Perhaps people don't
| pay attention in English class?
| UnpossibleJim wrote:
| |Perhaps people don't pay attention in English class?|
|
| Funny enough, I always assumed this same thing of the
| people who were trying to get Mark Twain books banned for
| the misuse of language =)
|
| People who don't read books are always the ones who are the
| most afraid of the ideas contained within them, I suppose.
| anigbrowl wrote:
| Some parts of Shakespeare are so wordy that the sexual
| aspect isn't obvious enough to notice without advanced
| literary education, but there certainly used to be
| sanitized versions for school students that omitted more
| explicit passages on booze, lechery and so on.
| [deleted]
| TechnoTimeStop wrote:
| Yeah cause Harry Potter should be banned because the Trans-
| bully-train.... LMFAO
| wolverine876 wrote:
| We want the kids to use their freedom and free will, and to
| think for themselves - even or especially when it challenges
| the adults - and to learn how to do that. It's an essential
| skill to a democracy (and a free market), and to teach them
| freedom for all by giving them freedom, instead of teaching
| them that people should be sheparded. There are limits to
| what we want middle schoolers exposed to, but I think my
| approach is different than what you describe.
| Cpoll wrote:
| > I am not a fan of Ayn Rand's philosophy
|
| I've been thinking about this lately, and I'm not sure where I
| stand. I'm against book burning, but I feel like there are also
| problems with unchecked dissemination of ideas.
|
| I think this is flawed logic in a few ways, but I'll put it
| down anyway:
|
| 1. Is there a difference between an undiscerning student (i.e.
| young, impressionable, hasn't been taught critical thinking,
| doesn't have sufficient experience to evaluate the validity of
| what they're learning) reading Ayn Rand on their own and being
| taught Ayn Rand by a teacher?
|
| 2. Would you consider it acceptable to teach Rand's novels non-
| critically as part of the curriculum (heck, why not, there are
| more than a few Senators that cite her books as inspiration).
|
| The problem I run up against is how do you "objectively" decide
| which books to restrict. As you said, "school libraries curated
| by legislators with an agenda seem like a Really Bad Idea," but
| _everyone_ has some sort of agenda. Everyone thinks it 's
| obvious what should and shouldn't be taught in school, but of
| course it's not the same "obvious" for everyone.
| dsr_ wrote:
| I have never run up against problems caused by people reading
| too widely.
|
| I have frequently seen problems caused by people who didn't
| read enough.
| pram wrote:
| Having personally read some of Rand's fiction as a teen (from
| my high school library no less!) I think you'd be hard
| pressed to find a reason to "ban" them.
|
| The narrative in Anthem, for example, is so hilariously over
| the top I'm not sure what the argument would be. It's a Pol
| Pot "Year Zero" style civilization, and the randian superman
| subverts the established collectivist order by single
| handedly reinventing the lightbulb in a sewer.
|
| Frankly anyone would be giving it more credibility than it
| deserves by saying it contains dangerous ideas.
| Cpoll wrote:
| I really had Atlas Shrugged in mind, which is convincing
| enough to regularly show up on Republican booklists (and
| AFAIR at least one Supreme Court judge) and has all sorts
| of (my opinion) problematic views on ethical egoism and the
| like.
|
| > hilariously over the top
|
| These days I'm not sure anything can be so over-the-top
| that no-one will take it seriously.
| SamoyedFurFluff wrote:
| Frankly? The best is when a child can read Ayn Rand and then
| be in a safe enough environment where they can discuss the
| ideas with adults who can greatly contextualize the
| discussion around that piece of literature.
| Cpoll wrote:
| I'm completely in agreement. I think I danced around this
| in my post. The main things that bother me, in general:
|
| 1. Undiscerning student (i.e. young, impressionable, hasn't
| been taught critical thinking, doesn't have sufficient
| experience to evaluate the validity of what they're
| learning).
|
| 2. Things taught non-critically. I think this even applies
| to the "obvious" stuff like algebra and heliocentrism. My
| experience with public schooling was that there was too
| much rote memorization and appeal to authority and not
| enough "learning."
|
| If either of those are fixed (and I think they go hand-in-
| hand) I don't care if the curriculum/school library has
| Rand, an unannotated Mein Kampf, or
| $insert_book_promoting_an_agenda.
| throwaway2077 wrote:
| book burning is just one manifestation of restricting the
| freedom of thought and expression, and it sounds you aren't
| against that.
| Cpoll wrote:
| Fair point, and I don't have a good counter-argument.
|
| I think my problem, if anything, isn't that there's an
| excess of freedom of thought and expression so much as
| there's not enough counter-thought and counter-expression.
|
| So my shaky position is stuck somewhere between what I've
| identified as the two evils: Book burning, and the
| uncritical dissemination and condoning of problematic
| ideas. (I'm aware there's a further problem here because
| I'm the one deeming things "problematic").
|
| I also think I picked the wrong place to have this
| conversation. After all, TFA isn't talking about Ayn Rand,
| it's talking about "opposition to LGBTQIA material, the
| history of racism, and material that may cause discomfort
| to readers." These aren't things I would typically label as
| "problematic."
| shkkmo wrote:
| How do you teach students critical thinking if the very works
| that require critical thinking are not available to these
| kids in the places where they have access to teachers?
|
| To me if there are "dangerous ideas" that need
| contextualization, those are the very books that need to be
| in the school curriculum.
| jl2718 wrote:
| The "Banned Books" movement is clearly only about any books that
| have faced even minor protest from "the other side" of the
| political spectrum. They frame the censorship debate in terms of
| provocative, but otherwise meaningless fiction. Real censorship
| of factual and relevant information exists today, and they
| support it.
| shkkmo wrote:
| Who is "they" in your comment? Open Library is part of the
| Internet Archive which has generally been pretty effective at
| limiting censorship rather than promoting it..
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| I would agree, but I don't think you'd find Ayn Rand in the
| average modern school library. Or a book that supports Trump, or
| a book that talks about socialism in an unflattering light.
| Remember that even the benign Dr. Seuss had books removed from
| school libraries.
|
| There's plenty of books that are already unofficially banned.
| ZetaZero wrote:
| That's a silly argument "Our books are banned, so we want to
| ban your books". Fight to have your books unbanned, don't ban
| more books.
|
| My old HS has Atlas Shrugged. shrug
| dang wrote:
| We detached this subthread from
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29330726.
| azeirah wrote:
| As far as I know most libraries (school libraries too
| probably?) are open to book requests.
|
| Unless you're asking for something like mein kampf, I don't
| think the librarians will look at you weirdly when asking for
| _any_ book whatsoever.
| belorn wrote:
| I would assume that if someone asked a librarian for Mein
| Kampf, the assumption is that the student is interested in
| history. Similar, a student reading the Communist Manifesto
| is most likely not a revolutionary that want to draw
| inspiration for an violent insurrection, but rather a
| philosophy/history student that is interested to read the
| original text.
|
| Naturally context matter. If the student is wearing a beret
| and holding a AK4, maybe denying the Communist Manifesto
| would be the right decision at that point in time.
| jjj123 wrote:
| In your last example I think only the gun is the problem.
| Even if the kid started a club for socialists and wanted to
| read the communist manifesto as part of their book club
| that should be allowed.
| klyrs wrote:
| I went to a public inner-city high school that some here
| would deride as an extreme-left institution in an extreme-
| left city, and we had Mein Kampf in the library. You had to
| request it, because previous copies had been defaced, but it
| was visible on a shelf behind the checkout counter.
| the_only_law wrote:
| Hell, when I was in HS there was a copy of Mein Kampf sitting
| on a display stand. This was not that long ago either.
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| >I don't think you'd find Ayn Rand in the average modern school
| library. Or a book that supports Trump, or a book that talks
| about socialism in an unflattering light.
|
| My daughter's ultra left wing school in Denmark has Atlas
| Shrugged, Trump: The Art of the Deal, and Gulag Archipelago.
|
| Are you suggesting that American schools are more left wing
| than a left wing school in Denmark?
|
| Also, I got Atlas Shrugged from my school library in the U.S
| but that was in the 80s so probably you would think that
| wouldn't be possible today?
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| There are schools across America where, yes, I actually
| believe you would not find those books.
|
| Remember that _Dr. Seuss_ , benign of benign, having multiple
| books removed from school libraries is well-documented.
|
| EDIT: I was wrong about this - it was the estate and a few
| vocal libraries - but most libraries did not remove.
| [deleted]
| wbsss4412 wrote:
| > Remember that Dr. Seuss, benign of benign, having
| multiple books removed from school libraries is well-
| documented.
|
| Citation needed
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| Apparently a few library did remove it, but most did not
| remove it and it was just the estate as others stated.
| I'll admit it's not the best example.
| [deleted]
| Wistar wrote:
| I thought that it was Dr. Seuss Enterprises themselves
| choosing to cease publication of some of his books rather
| than school libraries removing them from their shelves.
|
| Politico seems to agree.
| https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/mar/10/viral-
| imag...
| kasey_junk wrote:
| https://pac.library.cps.edu/mobile?config=11#section=resourc...
|
| First search I did at Chicago Public Schools returns Ayn Rand.
| butMyside wrote:
| Why have books by non-contributing grifters?
|
| Isn't it clear some people are utter hypocrites?
|
| Ayn Rand ranted against social safety nets and relied on it
| herself.
|
| Trump has, by all accounts, contributed no net new discovery to
| humans.
|
| Perhaps we should remove STEM altogether and just have kids
| watch John Wayne movies all day?
|
| Why have kids ogle our past? We're not the center of the
| universe.
|
| Culture warriors on both sides of the Anglo-gibberish political
| debate need to go away. So much of it is superfluous rambling
| by meat bags with electricity in them.
|
| Technical invention is what's moved our awareness along.
| Conjuring one nonsense story after another is what human
| languages are for. Why believe Rands words mean anything to HER
| since we have evidence to the contrary she violated them.
|
| Grow up and identify yourself by your own efforts, stop
| carrying water for people who are doing just fine.
| Der_Einzige wrote:
| You are so wrong. I literally had anthem as _required reading_
| in high school. I assure you that ayn rand can be found in many
| if not most high school libraries in the USA.
| wbsss4412 wrote:
| The Dr Seuss controversy this year was because _his estate_
| decided to stop publishing certain titles.
|
| Can you point to any record of his books being banned en mass
| from any actual school libraries?
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| A few did - but not many upon further research.
|
| I'll admit Dr. Seuss is not the best example.
| wbsss4412 wrote:
| The Dr. Seuss controversy was typical of the social media
| age. A lot of outrage and chatter, not a lot of substance.
|
| The narrative chugs along...
| throwaway832167 wrote:
| You are an extremely dishonest person. Stop engaging in bad
| faith and posting outright lies, it's clear you're trying
| to obfuscate the truth to push an agenda.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| I am trying to engage honestly, and is it dishonest to be
| engaging in conversation but with some mistaken beliefs
| that you are admitting your mistakes on?
|
| For example, I legitimately thought from the news story
| that Dr. Seuss had been removed from many school
| libraries, and thus it would be reasonable to believe
| other books had been also removed. Some people called me
| out on this, I did further research, found I was
| incorrect in that it was the estate and not the
| libraries, and posted comments amending my statements and
| admitting it was not a good example.
|
| Similarly, I believed initially that the proposal would
| only mess with the curriculum and not school libraries.
| People again called me out, I disagreed with the moral
| impact but posted an Edit anyway saying my view of the
| matter, but admitted my error and will admit my error to
| anyone who asks.
|
| That's honest participation and good-faith discussion,
| even if I am in error, but I try to admit my error when
| people show my errors. Everyone makes mistakes and has
| incorrect information in their heads somewhere. If I was
| engaged in bad faith, I wouldn't admit my mistakes
| anywhere but would double-down.
|
| EDIT: Also, it's actually a little ironic that you would
| call me dishonest by replying to my correction to my
| earlier mistaken belief.
| abeppu wrote:
| With respect to the distinction between books that are part of
| the curriculum and books in the school library, I think it's
| worth raising that kids are just reading less overall over time
| (perhaps 2020 being an exception). The proportion of kids who are
| going to the library and finding something unrelated to their
| classwork is shrinking. I suspect that the impulse to ban books
| is caused by the same cultural incuriousness that ironically
| makes book banning less impactful than proponents would hope.
| This is _especially_ true for most of the books on those banned
| lists. Those one of the linked lists includes such barn-burner
| titles as "The Gale Encyclopedia of Medicine", "Medical Ethics:
| Moral and Legal Conflicts in Health Care", "Race and the Media in
| Modern America". Kids aren't casually stumbling across these in
| the school library and deciding they're worth perusing. If some
| kid _is_ reading about medical ethics in high school, I'm
| guessing they're gonna find information about their topics of
| interest regardless. There are a bunch of books about teen
| pregnancy and abortion -- but I'm gonna guess that most of the
| time the teen pregnancies don't happen because someone first read
| a book literally titled "Teen Pregnancy" and decided they liked
| it. Similarly "A Baby Doesn't Make the Man: Alternative Sources
| of Power and Manhood for Young Men" probably isn't actually
| changing teen behavior. What ever intern in some state
| legislator's office drummed up suggestions for books to ban must
| have been pretty lazy.
|
| I'm not saying we shouldn't care about these efforts. But arguing
| over which books should be ignored in the library reference
| section is probably less important than figuring out how to get
| the kids to actually enjoy reading despite being raised in an
| environment with tiktok etc. And when you get it figured out for
| kids, tell me, b/c these days I mostly only get through a novel
| while traveling.
|
| https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/29/children-r...
|
| https://openlibrary.org/collections/texas-challenged
| alfor wrote:
| The problem we have is the destruction of the americans values by
| CRT and post modernist ideas. Those ideas are tough to student
| through the school system mostly unchalenged.
|
| The vast majority of student out of university end up with
| communist/socialist ideas, they know very well the disease of the
| right(Hitler) but almost nothing of the problems of the left
| (Mao, Stalin, etc)
|
| You end up with a young work force with a new kind of Marxist
| thinking. Some of those will get position in HR in companies and
| push for equality of outcome.
|
| While it is good to progress in ours socials value and improve,
| we must not do so at the price of what make our system
| functional.
| 29329867 wrote:
| Critical Race Theory is not being taught in any high school,
| nor is Marxist thinking. When put to task on this, all these
| pearl clutching busy bodies on the PTAs can't even define what
| CRT is, much less how their school curricula aligns with it.
|
| This all reeks of the same old moral panic that engulfs schools
| every once in a while when parents realize the world has
| changed and they're too fucking stupid to understand it.
| dang wrote:
| Please do not create accounts to break HN's rules with.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
| dang wrote:
| Please do not take HN threads further into generic ideological
| flamewar. It's not what this site is for, and it destroys what
| it is for.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
| mcphage wrote:
| > The problem we have is the destruction of the americans
| values by CRT and post modernist ideas.
|
| The supporters of CRT are not the people doing the banning
| discussed in this article--it is the critics of CRT that are
| doing the banning.
| klyrs wrote:
| > The problem we have is the destruction of the americans
| values...
|
| I agree, inasmuch as the American value being destroyed here
| are freedom of speech and freedom of religion. The latter of
| which should, IMO, encompass freedom _from_ religion. But in
| this case, states are censoring books that go against the
| values of a particular religion; much like the abortion bans.
| If they were Muslim, there would be a deafening uproar about
| Sharia Law. But since they 're Christian, it's just "American
| values." I call bullshit.
| Der_Einzige wrote:
| You should ask yourself why it is that American academics seem
| to almost _universally_ hold left wing freduo-marxist-post-
| modernist views. I love to bash on fashionable nonsense as much
| as the next HN reader, but it may actually have to do with
| there being something essential to the process of education
| that finds those who pursue large amounts of it to favor
| egalitarian social and economic politics.
|
| I look at the academy being leftist as a sign that they are
| genuine about education being a force for equality. Sure,
| sometimes the left goes "too far", but the principles behind it
| are the _only ones_ compatible with modern academia.
|
| Conservatives rejection of academic philosophy is one of the
| reasons why the "parallel" institutions of conservative
| universities are a laughing stock in the USA and around the
| world. I trigger conservatives sometimes by reminding them that
| they can't code because they hate liberal education and refuse
| to go to anywhere with a prestigious CS program. If a Marxist
| professor at Berkeley is what keeps trump from having effective
| web developers on his team, than it looks like I just became a
| Marxist...
| alfor wrote:
| Creative, open people are heavily geared toward left
| thinking, it's a question of personality.
|
| People in new tech, in journalism, in art are thus far more
| left leaning. That is good, this is thoses that push the
| boundaries of what is possible, that explore and inquire. It
| also explain why all the news tech corporation are heavily
| left leaning.
|
| But at some point I think it became too much and become self
| destructive.
|
| On the other side conservative are more interested in
| traditions, in what did work for a long time. Our world is
| changing faster than ever, this put the conservative in
| disadvantage in the market.
| WkndTriathlete wrote:
| I'll admit that the one that puzzled me was the school district
| that banned "Catch-22".
| ModernMech wrote:
| This is likely why:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22#Anti-capitalism
|
| I mean, really there's a lot in there that the people banning
| these books would probably find offensive. Questioning the MIC,
| questioning God, questioning capitalism...
| FundementalBrit wrote:
| The British government has a vague law on books which incite
| terroism... Of course they couldn't actually write an actual list
| because the book at the top of the list would be problematic.
| erichocean wrote:
| Are "graphic novels" really expected to be given the same
| treatment as actual books? It's not like school libraries
| typically have movies for kids to check out and watch at home.
|
| If they did have movies, it's likely that anything "R" rated
| would be "banned" by educators--and I doubt anyone here would
| care.
|
| The graphic novels being "banned" can't be posted to Instagram or
| Facebook or network TV because: pornographic...but we're supposed
| to pretend it's a "book" that's being banned?
|
| Seems disingenuous to call this "banning books."
| jfax wrote:
| Graphic novels are books.
| golemiprague wrote:
| The people who banned Dr. Seuss and many TV shows and movies for
| all of us are now complaining that some schools don't want to
| promote their extreme agendas in their curriculum and libraries?
| Sounds a bit hypocrite to me.
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| Choice of books and ideas easily available is preference (ie all
| of politics is preference), especially in a library where space
| is zero sum relative to the 500 million books to choose from.
|
| Get involved if you disagree, but don't be surprised people
| disagree in such a diverse country.
| gidam wrote:
| It's a classic autoritarian and conservative plot. Knowledge is
| power, and they are fcking scared of it.
| hiram112 wrote:
| Love how the left is now framing this as some sort of
| authoritarian Fascist plot of the right, when they themselves
| have created the cancel culture we're now drowning in.
|
| Seems to me that the right is simply trying to curate books
| that are pushed on impressionable children and young adults,
| who are FORCED to attend public schools, paid for by taxpayers
| who are FORCED to fund them. I have not seen a single instance
| of conservative groups attempting to censor books from the
| public itself (i.e. via the publisher, author, book sellers
| like Amazon, online sources like Google, etc).
|
| This is in contrast to the leftist mob going after these
| entities in an attempt to ensure nobody can obtain material
| with which they disagree, even private citizens obtaining it on
| their own dime.
| gidam wrote:
| Yes sure, everyone knows that librarians hide books with
| which they disagree, because, since Socrates, their only goal
| is to corrupt the young, the innocent and the virgins. LOL
| You don't look very familiar with libraries and books.
| dang wrote:
| Please do not use HN for ideological battle, regardless of
| what you're battling for or against. It's not what this site
| is for, and it destroys what it is for.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
| ModernMech wrote:
| Amazing world we live in, where a private company (Ebay)
| decided not to sell a book, and that's considered by the
| right as equivalent to book burning and an impending sign of
| fascism from the left. Meanwhile the right is talking about
| using the authority of local governments to _literally_ burn
| and ban books from public institutions like schools, and that
| 's framed as "curation", definitely not fascist or fascist
| adjacent at all, but also twisted to be the fault of the left
| as well.
| dang wrote:
| Please don't take HN threads into generic ideological flamewar.
| We're trying to avoid the circles of internet hell here, and a
| comment like this points straight in.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
| [deleted]
| gidam wrote:
| Mine is not a generic idelogical flamewar. It's an objective
| observation based on the History and the politics of
| authoritarian governments. It's sad how in 2021, in a
| respected website like this, facts are considered to have the
| same value as opinions. And if someone dont like the facts
| call them "ideological flames".
| dang wrote:
| I'm sorry, but it was entirely generic in the sense that we
| use that term here. I say that because: (1) it included
| nothing directly related to the specific details of the
| specific topic, and (2) it made a grand and sweeping claim.
| Those are shallow, because while they come with a lot of
| activation energy (e.g. high indignation levels), they
| include very little information. Shallow statements on
| divisive topics are automatically flamebait.
|
| The reason we call these ideological flames is because of
| the effect they have on threads. The probability is high
| that they will turn discussion away from any specific topic
| and into the generic theme. Like flames, those have the
| habit of consuming everything they touch and destroying
| what was there before. It's therefore a good metaphor.
|
| Here's another metaphor. The grand generic topics are like
| the black holes of internet threads. If you fly too close
| to them, the thread gets completely sucked in (https://hn.a
| lgolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...).
|
| This is a shame, because those discussions are so
| repetitive, and curiosity withers under repetition (https:/
| /hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...).
| What we want instead are discussions that are _different_
| from what 's been discussed before. Curiosity thrives on
| diffs (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=
| false&so...).
|
| Note that all of this would be just the same if you were
| battling from the opposite ideological position. Actually
| the two poles of these battles resemble each other far more
| than they resemble the audience between them, which
| consists of readers who are here for curious, thoughtful
| discussion--not to defeat enemies.
|
| If you wouldn't mind reviewing
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking
| the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be
| grateful.
| gidam wrote:
| Thank you for the answer, but again I've said that
| censoring books is a plot of authoritarian gov. You are
| considering this an ideological position while it is a
| fact. I am not here to troll, but be flagged as flamer
| for saying a fact is very disappointing for a respectful
| website. But I understand that people in united states
| have different sensitivity about truth and facts.
|
| "Those who don't remember history are doomed to repeat
| it."
|
| Cheers
| hermannj314 wrote:
| I like to think I am open minded to freedom of knowledge, but
| there is definitely information that shouldn't be available in
| K-12 libraries.
|
| "TidePods are Safe and Nutritious to eat (seriously kids, don't
| believe the lies)" should not be a book in a public school
| library visited by children. I think most people agree with
| that and they aren't authoritarian conservatives. Some
| knowledge is very dangerous for people not old enough to
| understand better.
| CountDrewku wrote:
| k-12 students are not adults. We ban and censor all sorts of
| things for the the underage crowd, look up CIPA. There are
| borderline pedophilia books available at school libraries. I've
| also seen several examples of incredibly racist CRT books in
| classrooms.
|
| I don't think young kids should have unfettered access to this
| stuff. They're not able to process it correctly.
|
| If communities are saying they do not want this is classrooms
| then I think that's the way it should be. Schools don't get to be
| an authoritarian decision maker on how everyone's kids should be
| raised.
|
| Aside from the censorship issue I'd rather my tax dollars go to
| more useful stuff than smut books.
| zorpner wrote:
| > I've also seen several examples of incredibly racist CRT
| books in classrooms.
|
| You mean to tell me that high-level academic critical theory is
| being taught to children? Please, name the books.
| netizen-936824 wrote:
| What is the 'correct' way to process it? Who determines what is
| 'correct'? When do they learn this correct way? How do they
| learn? Considering you seem confident in this knowledge, I
| eagerly await the list of citations.
| tenebrisalietum wrote:
| > Who determines what is 'correct'? The kids' parents.
|
| > When do they learn this correct way? The kids' parents.
|
| > How do they learn? From their parents.
|
| After all the child belongs to the parents so they get to
| make these decisions.
| wpurvis1 wrote:
| "I've also seen several examples of incredibly racist CRT books
| in classrooms."
|
| Can you list some examples?
| chmod775 wrote:
| That is how you raise yet another generation who mistakenly
| believes everything written to be sacrosanct, holds no tested and
| cohesive views, is easy prey to manipulators who have no qualms
| making people _uncomfortable_ , and will forever defer to
| authority figures who tell them what is acceptable.
| jl2718 wrote:
| Do you mean banning books containing well-researched facts,
| which is commonly practiced in silence, or promoting
| fantastical fiction books about your political agenda by
| convincing kids that the evil censorship boogeyman is after
| them?
| jowsie wrote:
| Could you give some examples of these well-researched fact
| containing books that are supposedly banned?
| sequel_database wrote:
| There's a wide gap between banning a book and using it as
| curriculum. Find a happy medium.
| analyte123 wrote:
| Not going to hold my breath for Archive.org or the ALA's "curated
| collection" of books banned from Amazon.
| kspacewalk2 wrote:
| "Books whose authors are no longer able to give a talk on
| college campuses without multiple threats of physical violence
| against them". Curated, of course.
| shlurpy wrote:
| So any LGBT authors and any femenists?
| phone8675309 wrote:
| Sure, but to be fair, it's a pretty broad category these
| days, and not limited to just those categories.
| kspacewalk2 wrote:
| No, I don't think so.
|
| If you meant to use those as examples, please tell me who
| are these LGBT and feminist authors who cannot freely give
| talks at American campuses these days?
|
| Other than, you know, team TERF.
| zorpner wrote:
| In case anyone else was confused about the multiple comments on
| this post talking about "books banned from Amazon", it's about
| Amazon choosing not to sell books that characterize gender
| identities and sexual orientation as mental illness.
| mherdeg wrote:
| Were any of the recently withdrawn-by-publisher Seuss books, like
| "And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street", widely removed
| from school libraries? Or is this a purely "Beloved" phenomenon?
|
| The closest I could find about coverage on this was an article
| saying that some libraries reclassified the Seuss books as
| "reference" to prohibit checkouts because they were being stolen
| (e.g. https://oxfordobserver.org/5172/community/dr-seuss-
| enterpris...).
| balozi wrote:
| We're not the censor, you're the censor. This book banning thing
| is the new manufacturing of an old moral panic.
| hiram112 wrote:
| > So banning a book from a school library does seem to be a
| fairly strong suppression of ideas. Libraries have usually been
| the place where you go to find ideas outside the safe circle of
| whatever is permitted by your (usually insipid) curriculum.
|
| Baloney. Yes, I'm sure we can find some 1 in a 1,000,000
| exceptional case of some bright student from a marginalized
| community who just couldn't obtain some obscure reference book in
| their high school library because conservatives had "banned it"
| (i.e. chosen not to include it in their limited selection due to
| content concerns). However, I find it hard to believe that
| 99.9999% of students, who probably haven't even used their public
| school's library more than a few times in their whole life, would
| be absolutely unable to obtain anything they could possibly want,
| for the price they already spend in a week on video games or
| music.
|
| Reminds me of that straw man example used to demand ID-less
| voting for EVERYONE - cherry picking that obscure case of the 87
| year old guy who was born in a rural bayou of some southern swamp
| state, and who had no birth certificate and had never registered
| to vote or learned to drive or paid any utilities or taxes in the
| last 8 decades, and who now had trouble getting an official ID at
| the local DMV in another state he'd moved to recently.
|
| Come on, man. Examples like this apply to like 0.001% of the
| population, and instead of spending tens of millions of dollars
| and years fighting for insanely insecure voting rules, the left
| could, you know, just spend that time and money helping the tiny
| minority of folks who might have this actual problem.
|
| Likewise, I have never ever heard of any adult using a public
| school library (e.g. high school or elementary school) to obtain
| books or other media for themselves. To be honest, in the US in
| 2021, as a "child free" middle aged male, I'd be hesitant to even
| go into a public high school as it seems my demographic is not
| exactly welcome around children, even those whose education,
| meals, etc. I'm forced to increasingly subsidize each year. But
| God forbid I have any say in what materials these children are
| forced to be indoctrinated with in public schools, which they are
| forced to attend, by the state.
|
| OTOH, I've seen 0 instances of conservatives demanding that books
| be censored from EVERYONE at the source (i.e. publishers,
| sellers, retail outlets, etc.) whereas there are dozens of
| instances of the left mob going after these entities in an
| attempt to keep the books out of the market itself.
| quadrifoliate wrote:
| > Baloney. Yes, I'm sure we can find some 1 in a 1,000,000
| exceptional case of some bright student from a marginalized
| community who just couldn't obtain some obscure reference book
| in their high school library because conservatives had "banned
| it" (i.e. chosen not to include it in their limited selection
| due to content concerns). However, I find it hard to believe
| that 99.9999% of students, who probably haven't even used their
| public school's library more than a few times in their whole
| life, would be absolutely unable to obtain anything they could
| possibly want, for the price they already spend in a week on
| video games or music.
|
| That is not the point. The point is that you don't want
| legislators, left _or_ right-wing, picking the books that
| students can access in the library system of their school.
| School librarians are the ones who do that. It 's a
| decentralized system that works extraordinarily well without
| political interference, and has done so for hundreds of years.
|
| > Examples like this apply to like 0.001% of the population,
| and instead of spending tens of millions of dollars and years
| fighting for insanely insecure voting rules...
|
| This is wholly irrelevant to the topic being discussed, which
| is legislatively banning books from public library systems.
|
| > Likewise, I have never ever heard of any adult using a public
| school library (e.g. high school or elementary school) to
| obtain books or other media for themselves.
|
| No, _students_ use those libraries. Students that go to public
| schools. Adults usually go to their area 's library systems. I
| suggest you check out your local library. You might find it
| stocked full of books that are interesting. And you can check
| them out, for free!
|
| The only takeaway for me from a lot of this discussion has been
| that a lot of people don't seem to have much of an idea about
| libraries in general, school or public; or the role they play
| in society.
| hiram112 wrote:
| > That is not the point. The point is that you don't want
| legislators, left or right-wing, picking the books that
| students can access in the library system of their school.
| School librarians are the ones who do that, and it's a
| decentralized system that works extraordinarily well.
|
| Are we arguing about what's accessible in "public libraries"
| to adults in a community, or what is being pushed on young
| children who are forced to attend public schools?
|
| These books aren't just being made available in some public
| school's archives for 10th grade "researchers" to access like
| you find in large university systems. They're being used by
| the activist teachers themselves in homework assignments i.e.
| coerced indoctrination on impressionable kids who have no
| right to refuse the assignments.
|
| > The only takeaway for me from a lot of this discussion has
| been that a lot of people don't seem to have much of an idea
| about libraries in general, school or public; or the role
| they play in society.
|
| I don't disagree that I might not understand how public
| libraries are utilized these days. My experiences in the last
| decade were varied. In the very left leaning cities I've
| lived, it seemed the libraries had been taken over by
| homeless and drug addicts. In the lily-white suburbs, it was
| mostly retirees drinking coffee and browsing Oprah book club
| material (that they could have easily purchased on their own
| for $10 on Amazon) and bored housewives checking out stacks
| of garbage DVDs for their toddlers.
|
| My own guess is that the library "profession" has been taken
| over by leftist activists groups, similar to the public
| school unions and accreditation schools, and are now being
| used for very partisan organization and indoctrination that a
| majority of the taxpayers who are forced to fund them would
| either not appreciate or actively oppose.
|
| I do not believe that public libraries are a main source of
| actual research or non-political education these days, and
| online sources and public university libraries have far more
| relevant material than any public library could even hope to
| obtain.
|
| And we also need to admit that there is a BIG difference
| between the censorship that the right is now pushing (i.e.
| tax payer funded entities) and that which the left has been
| engaged in for years now (censoring at the source e.g.
| publishers, content distributers, big tech, and sellers)
| which means NOBODY can access it, even on their own dime.
| quadrifoliate wrote:
| You are making a lot of extraordinary claims, with no
| sources to back them up.
|
| _My_ guess is that you work in software (like many on this
| site) and are making the Dunning-Kruger mistake of thinking
| that you know more than you actually do about teaching and
| libraries. Instead, I 'd encourage you to imagine how you
| would feel if legislators started talking about banning
| "dangerous, anti-capitalist operating systems like Linux".
|
| In any case, "I guess that...<wild conspiracy theory>" is
| not a reasonable basis for legislation, which is why these
| legislators are correctly being criticized.
| nec4b wrote:
| >>You are making a lot of extraordinary claims, with no
| sources to back them up.
|
| You didn't use any sources yourself in your comment, but
| expect from GP to style his comments like a scientific
| article ready to be published in a scientific journal.
|
| >>anti-capitalist operating systems like Linux
|
| It probably has more corporate sponsors [1] than any
| other software in the world.
|
| [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_Foundation
| dang wrote:
| This comment was a noticeable step further into ideological
| flamewar, and broke other site guidelines as well. Would you
| please review them and not post like this to HN? We're trying
| to avoid this kind of thing here, because it destroys the
| intellectual curiosity that the site is supposed to be for.
|
| Edit: we've also had to ask you about this multiple times in
| the past. If you'd please review the site guidelines and fix
| this going forward, we'd appreciate it.
|
| We detached this subthread from
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29330726.
| temp8964 wrote:
| Stop confusing K-12 public school libraries with public
| libraries. K-12 public school libraries always have a small
| selection of books. Vast majority of books are not in K-12 public
| school libraries. There is no parallel between select books for
| K-12 public school libraries and banning books from libraries.
|
| If this is about you want to indoctrinate certain ideology into
| kids using the public school system, at least be honest about it.
| Stop pretending this is about banning books.
|
| Stop using the K-12 public school libraries or the public school
| system as the battle ground for spreading radical political
| ideologies. Our public school system is already bad enough.
| xphilter wrote:
| Which radical political ideologies?
| Wistar wrote:
| Those that espouse unrestricted access to knowledge.
| temp8964 wrote:
| This might be a valid idea for academic research, not for
| K-12 learning. It's not even worth arguing.
| xphilter wrote:
| So which ideas are you okay with banning? Are you the
| person who gets to decide? If not, then who does?
| klyrs wrote:
| In this case, the state wants to decide what sexualities
| that children are allowed to be exposed to. Is that a can
| of worms that you _really_ want opened? If the left
| demanded a ban on books that contain positive depictions
| of heterosexual romance (for example, A Wrinkle in Time
| would be banned because of the pornographic, dare I say
| pedophilic, kiss shared between boy and girl) would you
| be making the same argument?
| dang wrote:
| Your comment was a significant step further into flamewar.
| Would you please not do that on HN? It's exactly what we're
| trying to avoid here, and we've already had to ask you about
| this multiple times.
|
| We detached this subthread from
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29330726.
| temp8964 wrote:
| No. Select books for K-12 curriculum or school libraries is far
| far away from banning books. Please stop the fear-mongering.
| gambiting wrote:
| I don't know where you grew up, but our school library had lots
| and lots and lots of books that had nothing to do with the
| curriculum, and students were encouraged to read outside of the
| required material. The idea that certain books(or indeed,
| entire categories of books) should be banned from a school
| library is definitely censorship. It's like suggesting that
| school computers should be banned from viewing certain pages on
| wikipedia, on actually, in fact, providing students with copies
| of paper encyclopedias with pages torn out - it's the removal
| of knowledge that is the hallmark of censorship.
| temp8964 wrote:
| How about school computers should be banned from viewing
| certain websites?
| ivanche wrote:
| I would've really expected that any semi-decent school bans
| at least pr0n, gambling, sports betting and similar types
| of sites.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| They already are, and it is legally required that they do
| so, as are libraries.
|
| https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/childrens-internet-
| prot...
| gambiting wrote:
| Websites are not books though and cannot be treated the
| same way. I see a library more like a giant encyclopedia of
| knowledge, you should be free to access it if you need to,
| without books being banned for political reasons or
| otherwise.
|
| Now, I do support having a kind of a "restricted section"
| where you can access a book normally out of sight. Say a
| copy of Kamasutra - it's not on a shelf, but if you need it
| for a project and got a permission from a teacher - go
| ahead.
| 29329867 wrote:
| As a high schooler I loved the banned books list. My English
| teacher had a cabinet full of old copies of books they weren't
| allowed to teach any more for one reason or another. She lent me
| The Chocolate War, Catcher in the Rye...
|
| Before that, in elementary school, some of our books had sections
| blacked out for being too racy. First thing I did was head
| straight to the local library and read those passages
| specifically.
|
| censorship made me an avid reader.
| jl2718 wrote:
| > banned books ... local library.
|
| Hmmm... those evil censors must have been working overtime to
| stop you.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| Ha - It's a great signal!
| erichocean wrote:
| In that case, people should look deeply into the books banned
| on Amazon.com--great signal!
| dehrmann wrote:
| Banning as a marketing ploy.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| Nobody's calling for banning books. They are calling for not
| using certain books in curriculum, which is very different and
| not allowing certain books is necessary for any school system. I
| wouldn't want my kid to write "A kid's version of Algebra" and
| then have it used in schools. I wouldn't want a flat-earther to
| have his Science book in schools. Who wants Trump's guide to
| Civics? That's super different than "banning books" like it's
| 1940s Germany or something.
|
| EDIT: Some are saying that this would also apply to the school
| library. This, in my view, doesn't negate the schools need to
| discriminate between content in the least. I would not want a
| flat earther science book in the curriculum or in the library.
| bwb wrote:
| I guess it depends a little on who is making the choices. If it
| is politician driven, might be fair to call it banning. If it
| is the school system and teachers making a choice about what to
| use to teach effectively that seems like good policy.
| LocalH wrote:
| If they're public schools, the funding is governmental
| (state-based in the US), and thus there could be an argument
| made that it is still "banning". In private schools, not so
| much (but then again, pretty sure private schools can already
| control their curriculum and the books available to students
| from the library).
| bequanna wrote:
| I think you have that backwards. Parents and the community
| should have the final say when deciding what is included in a
| curriculum, not (potentially activist) teachers and school
| boards.
| quadrifoliate wrote:
| > Parents and the community should have the final say
| ...not (potentially activist) teachers and school boards.
|
| Aren't school boards usually elected by the community?
|
| Also, generally, a lot of public school teaching is about
| encouraging a newer generation to think for themselves, and
| potentially be exposed to ideas that are not constrained by
| the parents and the community.
|
| Parents who want to micromanage what ideas their kid is
| exposed to should consider homeschooling.
| bequanna wrote:
| Let's get real for a second and be honest about the very
| real problem we are discussing:
|
| Political activist teachers are pushing their agendas
| onto students. This has been quietly happening for some
| time, but has become harder for the teachers to hide as
| children started completing more instruction and
| schoolwork in the home.
|
| These are not isolated incidents and the examples of this
| happening are everywhere in the US. In fact, many
| teachers have been caught openly bragging about trying to
| create "radicalized" students. This is precisely why
| we've seen a grassroots push by parents against teachers
| and admin.
| LocalH wrote:
| That only works to a point. If a community decided "math is
| stupid, our schools shouldn't be teaching it", they should
| quite rightly be overridden. Instead of treating it like a
| power grab, perhaps the process for determining curriculum
| should be more open and transparent?
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| If a community decided that math is stupid and our
| schools shouldn't be teaching it, they may actually have
| a point. Who defines "math"? Is it all the way to
| Calculus 2 because the math teachers got excited and
| thought everyone needs to get that far? Is it politics
| disguised as math?
|
| I'd trust the community in that case. And if it
| backfires, they get to live with the consequences. Not
| everything needs to be idiot-proof. Our country might do
| much better if we just let bad ideas fail hard.
| LocalH wrote:
| It wouldn't be so bad if "bad ideas fail[ing] hard"
| didn't have the potential to quite literally ruin the
| lives of the youths who come up in these environments.
| trasz wrote:
| The article says it's about books being available to kids in
| libraries, not curriculum per se.
| js2 wrote:
| No, they are literally calling for banning books from school
| libraries. Books that are not used as part of the curriculum.
|
| https://www.alternet.org/2021/11/henry-mcmaster/
|
| They are also literally calling for burning books:
|
| > Two board members, Courtland representative Rabih Abuismail
| and Livingston representative Kirk Twigg, said they would like
| to see the removed books burned.
|
| > "I think we should throw those books in a fire," Abuismail
| said, and Twigg said he wants to "see the books before we burn
| them so we can identify within our community that we are
| eradicating this bad stuff."
|
| https://fredericksburg.com/news/local/education/spotsylvania...
| erichocean wrote:
| Burning "porn"? Literally (heh), that's what the Nazis did.
|
| Yikes.
| 015a wrote:
| But, they _are_ , in some instances, calling for the removal of
| some of these books from school libraries. I would qualify that
| as "book burning" (dramatically, metaphorically); its similar
| to the argument that school lunches have to be healthy, because
| in unfortunately-to-many cases it may be the only meal that
| student gets today.
|
| Additionally, as you point out of the gulf between this and
| 1940s Germany, I will point out the gulf between "flat earther
| science" and "books on critical race theory, LGBTQ studies, and
| _The Hunger Games_ ". That's a strawman. Curriculum time is a
| limited resource, absolutely, so some concessions have to be
| made; we should be skeptical when those concessions are
| politically, religiously, or ideologically motivated, rather
| than academically, scientifically, artistically, or societally.
| Even with a title like the Hunger Games (or Harry Potter, which
| lest anyone forget was also _very_ contentious with the
| Religious Right upon its release, due to concerns about kids
| studying witchcraft); sure, its not exactly _Godel, Escher,
| Bach_ ; but its still reading! Do you know how rare reading is,
| especially among our children who have spent their entire lives
| connected to the internet, having instant access to the latest
| dopamine-inducing content on Tik Tok? Any book which can
| capture their interest, and maybe open a door to a more
| critical and insightful fifth, sixth, and seventh book, should
| be in consideration.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| You are aware that >40% of this country views flat-earth,
| LGBTQ studies, and CRT at the same level of regard? If they
| didn't, why the school board battles going on all over the
| place? As far as they are concerned, there is no gulf between
| them.
| shagie wrote:
| ... and that is why the The Gale Encyclopedia of Medicine (
| https://www.amazon.com/Gale-Encyclopedia-Medicine-
| Set/dp/141... ) is on the list of books being removed ( htt
| ps://static.texastribune.org/media/files/94fee7ff93eff960..
| . )
| iammisc wrote:
| You can be pro-curation of content and against this
| particular list. I agree. This list is ridiculous.
| Schools should be able to hold these books in their
| collections (although I do see arguments for not
| purchasing some)
| [deleted]
| shagie wrote:
| > Nobody's calling for banning books. They are calling for not
| using certain books in curriculum, which is very different and
| not allowing certain books is necessary for any school system.
|
| From the other day on NPR:
| https://www.npr.org/2021/11/11/1054798508/when-schools-ban-b...
|
| > Texas Gov. Greg Abbott joined Krause's efforts this week,
| sending his own letter to the Texas Education Agency asking it
| and other agencies "to immediately develop statewide standards
| to prevent the presence of pornography and other obscene
| content in Texas public schools, including in school
| libraries."
|
| > While the censorship of some books in schools is nothing new,
| a growing number of challenges are against books about race. In
| her reporting on the topic, KERA reporter Miranda Suarez spoke
| to Deborah Caldwell-Stone who leads the American Library
| Association's Office for Intellectual Freedom. Caldwell-Stones
| said, "We went from a situation where the majority of books
| being challenged and removed in schools and libraries dealt
| with LGBTQ themes, to a situation where there's a real mix."
|
| The referenced letter is
| https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/governor-abbott-directs-tea-...
|
| ---
|
| So yes, this is a book ban and its not just material in the
| curriculum but also content in the libraries.
| iammisc wrote:
| Not all 'pornography' is equivalent. While I can see an
| argument for expression of certain viewpoints, a lot of
| pornography is just meant to appeal to baser instincts, and
| has a known negative effect on people. Not all books are
| equal. I don't understand the extremism in this regard around
| children's literature. In an adult library sure, but yes...
| children's books ought to be curated. This cannot be remotely
| controversial.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| Well then, again, would you want a flat-earther science
| manual in the school library?
|
| Schools exercising discretion is not 1940s Germany book bans
| and the two are not comparable.
| ncallaway wrote:
| I would be surprised if the librarian had the flat-earther
| science manual already in the library.
|
| But if it was already in the library, I would not want to
| _ban_ it from the library as a remedy. That 's insanity.
|
| So, no, I don't _want_ the book in the school library, but
| I sure as shit don 't want to ban it from the school
| library either.
| Animats wrote:
| A book from the Flat Earth Society's reading list would be
| worth having around.[1] Kids should have an opportunity to
| see the stupid ideas of the past. It yields perspective.
|
| The problem is not reading enough books. Kids who only read
| a few take them too seriously. After you've read everything
| from Abbie Hoffman's Steal This Book to Johnathan Edward's
| "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God", you get some
| perspective.
|
| But with so much online content available, it's hard to get
| anyone to read in bulk today.
|
| [1] https://theflatearthsociety.org/home/index.php/flat-
| earth-li...
| BashiBazouk wrote:
| Why not? Sure flat earth science would be horrible for
| science curriculum but the book in the library is fine.
| What if a student wanted to do a report on flat earthers?
| Should they have no access to reference material?
| JTbane wrote:
| >Well then, again, would you want a flat-earther science
| manual in the school library?
|
| I'd be fine with that so long as it's in the fiction
| section.
| ericd wrote:
| I kind of do, that sounds like a fascinating read. Also a
| good way to learn that something being printed in a book
| doesn't make it authoritative.
| MisterBastahrd wrote:
| Sorry, no, that's utterly wrong. "Used in curriculum" means
| that they would be used in the teaching of subjects in class.
| There are school districts and entire state school systems that
| are starting to ban books on the topics of sexual orientation
| and critical race theory from being in the school library at
| all.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| For everyone arguing about how the library system is being
| censored with this, I would like to remind people that since
| 2000, all libraries (including non-school libraries) have the
| internet censored with (almost always) Google SafeSearch locked
| on and many websites (particularly porn but there are others)
| blocked. And it's federal law.
|
| https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/childrens-internet-prot...
|
| Is this censorship? And if so, what is the difference between
| internet censorship and library censorship, other than that
| someone printed their work instead of typing it? And why is
| outrage permitted for this and blocking printed books, but not
| for digital work?
| wolverine876 wrote:
| It's a common philosophical question applied to this topic: The
| logically easy philosophical definition is always the extreme -
| in this case, absolutely no restriction - and there are always
| objections using false equivalencies and slippery slopes ('if
| you violate the extreme in this way, you can violate it in any
| way').
|
| Real life is not about logical extremes. Nothing in the US Bill
| of Rights is unlimited, for example. You have freedom of
| speech, to bear arms, and of religion, but you can't slander
| someone, own an anti-aircraft weapon, or sacrifice humans to
| the gods.
|
| At the school library, we may not want people watching
| pornography. That's different than political censorship.
| throwawayboise wrote:
| I don't want them watching porn at the public library either.
| It ruins the experience to have to witness a homeless person
| jacking off at a computer station, and not something I want
| my taxes paying for.
| colpabar wrote:
| The difference is that you can't accidentally click a popup
| that takes you to a porn website in a book. If you want to talk
| about specific things that are blocked by that safe filter that
| you think shouldn't be, that could be a discussion worth
| having. But anyone who has ever used the internet should know
| that you absolutely need some kind of filter on a school's
| internet connection.
|
| When I was in school, the only things online that I wanted to
| access that were blocked were flash games.
| quadrifoliate wrote:
| The difference is that librarians _already_ provide a
| "SafeSearch" by curating material at libraries. This is more
| similar to if Texas tried to mandate that Google SafeSearch at
| libraries should now include a ban on any LGBTQ images.
|
| Contrary to what you might imagine, checking out and shelving
| books is not the only things librarians do - they also curate
| and trim material, a bit like cultivating a garden. Libraries
| are a fine-tuned system that maximizes freedom of expression
| and ideas in a reasonably curated manner. It existed long
| before the Internet, and legislators tampering with that is
| always alarming.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| Would the legislators intervening be permissible in your view
| if the legislators believe that the librarians are doing a
| poor job at curation?
|
| An example of this is the right's claim that many of these
| banned books are almost pornographic in nature and
| inappropriate for almost any age. From the right's
| perspective, the legislators are intervening because the
| librarians are failing at their curation and safety job.
| quadrifoliate wrote:
| Yes, that would be a perfectly reasonable legislation. The
| burden would be on the legislators to clearly articulate
| their viewpoint, and provide reasonable justification for
| why those materials are inappropriate for any age.
|
| Currently, some of the 850 "suspicious titles" they are
| "looking into" include books like _We Are All Born Free:
| The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Pictures_ [1].
| This does not lead me to conclude that their chief concern
| is safety and curation.
|
| ----------------------------------------
|
| [1] https://www.npr.org/2021/10/28/1050013664/texas-
| lawmaker-mat...
| netizen-936824 wrote:
| Safety? Absolutely! But safety of what? Their own ideas
| and ideals at the cost of everyone else's.
| at-fates-hands wrote:
| >> An example of this is the right's claim that many of
| these banned books are almost pornographic in nature.
|
| I'm pretty sure illustrations of people having sex and an
| illustration of a younger child giving an older child oral
| sex falls into that category:
|
| https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FBdP1kYXoAA_c0T?format=jpg&name
| =...
|
| People lost their minds when a woman read several pages
| from the book "Gender Queer" by Maia Kobabe.
| SamoyedFurFluff wrote:
| What's the context of those images? It seems perfectly
| appropriate for highschool.
| akira2501 wrote:
| > Libraries are a fine-tuned system that maximizes freedom of
| expression and ideas in a reasonably curated manner.
|
| Is there a difference between the freedom of expression of
| children and of adults? If so, wouldn't parents have a right
| to limit the freedoms of their own children according to
| their families moral and religious beliefs?
|
| I wonder if maybe the issue is that in a school setting, the
| librarians are operating as if the children are their only
| charges?
|
| I'm entirely ignorant on these points and don't have
| children, so this is just a question from that perspective:
| Are librarians doing enough to announce their editorial
| decisions and to explain them to parents? Should they be
| required to?
|
| Should libraries share with parents the list of books their
| children have checked out? Should libraries allow parents to
| curate a list of books they do not want their children to
| checkout? Is there a better middle ground here?
| germinalphrase wrote:
| Parents should teach their children to use "good judgement"
| according to their family values with regard to what books
| they choose to check out from the library. Creating some
| kind of list system (with all the additional overhead
| involved) seems silly to me.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-11-24 23:01 UTC)