NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA606408.html

Okay, so basically in 2005 in my area there was a big uproar over "gay-theme" children's books. They passed a resolution that the books have to be put up high. The county commissioner basically ignored it and so did my local librarian (although librarians at libraries we didn't frequent as much followed the rule).

In the recent election our county commissioner has been replaced and the new guy came into my library this morning and threw a bitch fit in front of my kids about how the book was "where it goes alphabetically" and not where it goes "morally" or some shit.

The librarian has stated that he would not move the book and that it's censorship to do so.

I hate to post and run, but I have to go.....eep! Library drama. I thought I would post this and see what you guys think......might be a good discussion.

Is putting the children's book up too high for children or keeping it off the shelf altogether* censorship? Should the librarian be forced to follow the resolution?


*the library we used to go to before we moved didn't put it or books like it on the shelf at all, they had them stowed in a back room, but you could have them if you asked.....:rolleyes:

II don't think it's censorship, I think it's stupid.

Hi Smunk, I love you!

http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA606408.html

Okay, so basically in 2005 in my area there was a big uproar over "gay-theme" children's books. They passed a resolution that the books have to be put up high. The county commissioner basically ignored it and so did my local librarian (although librarians at libraries we didn't frequent as much followed the rule).

In the recent election our county commissioner has been replaced and the new guy came into my library this morning and threw a bitch fit in front of my kids about how the book was "where it goes alphabetically" and not where it goes "morally" or some shit.

The librarian has stated that he would not move the book and that it's censorship to do so.

I hate to post and run, but I have to go.....eep! Library drama. I thought I would post this and see what you guys think......might be a good discussion.

Is putting the children's book up too high for children or keeping it off the shelf altogether* censorship? Should the librarian be forced to follow the resolution?


*the library we used to go to before we moved didn't put it or books like it on the shelf at all, they had them stowed in a back room, but you could have them if you asked.....:rolleyes:

Of course these are forms of censorship. Yeah for your local librarian for saying so and nuts to your old library for hiding the books.

the new guy came into my library this morning and threw a bitch fit in front of my kids about how the book was "where it goes alphabetically" and not where it goes "morally" or some shit.
He wants to have them organised by alphabet, or at best - not by morality. Sounds fine with me.

The librarian has stated that he would not move the book and that it's censorship to do so.
*sigh*
I hate when people use words the don't fully understand the meaning of. Changing the physical location of books is censorship now?


Is putting the children's book up too high for children or keeping it off the shelf altogether* censorship? Should the librarian be forced to follow the resolution?


*the library we used to go to before we moved didn't put it or books like it on the shelf at all, they had them stowed in a back room, but you could have them if you asked.....:rolleyes:
My opinion: The library should stack the books in whatever manner is deemed the most effective for the public's use.

He wants to have them organised by alphabet, or at best - not by morality. Sounds fine with me.

From my understanding, the individual complained that they were arranged alphabetically and believed that they should be arranged "morally". You see:

"the new guy came into my library this morning and threw a bitch fit in front of my kids about how the book was "where it goes alphabetically" and not where it goes "morally" or some shit."

Bolded for emphasis.

Anything that restricts the access of the public to information, art or literature that is legal to disseminate is a form of censorship. Forcing librarians to rearrange the shelves to follow some moral code is just stupid. I'm with your new librarian on this one. Good on him.

Censorship. Moving a book where it is less likely to be seen is censorship.

From my understanding, the individual complained that they were arranged alphabetically and believed that they should be arranged "morally".

Oh. I thought is was the other way around. Erm.... huh.

Arranged by morals. Stupid?

Edit: I read it like, it was arranged morally, and he wanted it changed to alphabetically. My bad.

He wants to have them organised by alphabet, or at best - not by morality. Sounds fine with me.


*sigh*
I hate when people use words the don't fully understand the meaning of. Changing the physical location of books is censorship now?



My opinion: The library should stack the books in whatever manner is deemed the most effective for the public's use.


Actually I think he threw a fit about them being in alphabetical order. At least, that is how I read it.

I can see how they would want to call it censorship, but as long as they list the book as available and don't refuse to loan it out to those who request it, I don't think it is actual censorship.

It's an attempt to limit the target audience's access to the book. Perhaps not the most blatant kind of censorship: no books have been burned or banned, after all. But censorship nevertheless. The librarian was right to ignore the ruling.

From my understanding, the individual complained that they were arranged alphabetically and believed that they should be arranged "morally". You see:

"the new guy came into my library this morning and threw a bitch fit in front of my kids about how the book was "where it goes alphabetically" and not where it goes "morally" or some shit."

Bolded for emphasis.



How 'bout "people who comment on something without reading it first". How you feel about them?
Maybe I'm reading too much into it because I wasn't there to hear the man's tone of voice, but I took it to mean, "This is how it is and this is how it will stay." In other words, "The books are arranged alphabetically, not morally -- deal with it."

Just get a ladder.

I wonder where they put the Yaoi manga?

Maybe I'm reading too much into it because I wasn't there to hear the man's tone of voice, but I took it to mean, "This is how it is and this is how it will stay." In other words, "The books are arranged alphabetically, not morally -- deal with it."

Nah, I got it the other way round.

Per se. Either way, it's idiotic.

Maybe I'm reading too much into it because I wasn't there to hear the man's tone of voice, but I took it to mean, "This is how it is and this is how it will stay."

from my understanding of Smunk's story, it went something like this:

- town sets out edict to arrange books out of alphabetical order

- neither old commissioner nor librarian follows edict

- new commissioner comes in, sees books arranged in alphabetical order, complains that books are arranged in alphabetical order and not "moral order"

I wonder why some people act as if "the ghey" were something you "caught" from reading a book...

Actually I think he threw a fit about them being in alphabetical order. At least, that is how I read it.
Yeh, I get that now. *ahem*

I can see how they would want to call it censorship, but as long as they list the book as available and don't refuse to loan it out to those who request it, I don't think it is actual censorship.

Exactly.

from my understanding of Smunk's story, it went something like this:

- town sets out edict to arrange books out of alphabetical order

- neither old commissioner nor librarian follows edict

- new commissioner comes in, sees books arranged in alphabetical order, complains that books are arranged in alphabetical order and not "moral order"
Oh, I see where I went wrong.

The "new guy" who threw the bitch fit was the NEW COMMISSIONER.

I thought it was a new librarian.

So, it's the new commissioner throwing bitch fits and the established librarian saying "Tough, I'm not moving the books."

I get it now.

Well, the measure is clearly designed to keep the children from getting a hold of the books in question themselves, presumably their only other option being to have an adult procure it for them, after said adult has deemed it "Not-Too-Gay".

Applied to an adult reality, where I would only be able to access certain reading materials via a "higher" individual (Perhaps a Commissar of Books?) who could refuse access to me if they felt the material is "too subversive", then yes I'd imagine most people would agree it's censorship.

from my understanding of Smunk's story, it went something like this:

- town sets out edict to arrange books out of alphabetical order

- neither old commissioner nor librarian follows edict

- new commissioner comes in, sees books arranged in alphabetical order, complains that books are arranged in alphabetical order and not "moral order"

You sir, are right. Sorry about the incoherence of the OP, my story time was messed up by new county commissioner so I had to postpone and I now have to return and pretend I'm in a good mood and tell stories to confused kids and irate parents. Bleh.

I'm with the rest, it is censorship, good on the librarian.

I guess we could fight over dictionary definitions of "censorship." This is not a complete denial of information, but (1) the intent is to try to deny some information to the public and (2) the effect is to make obtaining some information more difficult on the basis of its content. That, to me, makes it a form of censorship.

Regardless, it is absurd and morally offensive.

Screw censorship! Long live ANARCHY!!!

I think Smunk just wanted to confuse us all

If books are shelved so that they are inaccessible to the audience they are aimed at, it is censorship.

If books are shelved so that they are inaccessible to the audience they are aimed at, it is censorship.

Yeah, the more I think about it, the more I am inclined to agree.

You live in Bhutan?

I have friends visiting from there right now.

http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA606408.html

Okay, so basically in 2005 in my area there was a big uproar over "gay-theme" children's books. They passed a resolution that the books have to be put up high. The county commissioner basically ignored it and so did my local librarian (although librarians at libraries we didn't frequent as much followed the rule).

In the recent election our county commissioner has been replaced and the new guy came into my library this morning and threw a bitch fit in front of my kids about how the book was "where it goes alphabetically" and not where it goes "morally" or some shit.

The librarian has stated that he would not move the book and that it's censorship to do so.

I hate to post and run, but I have to go.....eep! Library drama. I thought I would post this and see what you guys think......might be a good discussion.

Is putting the children's book up too high for children or keeping it off the shelf altogether* censorship? Should the librarian be forced to follow the resolution?


*the library we used to go to before we moved didn't put it or books like it on the shelf at all, they had them stowed in a back room, but you could have them if you asked.....:rolleyes:

There should have been no resolution in the first place. It's up to the parents, not the library, bookstore or government to monitor what kids read.

Seriously, if kids want to read something, they will and no amount of legal nitpicking will stop them.

seems like a good compromise for children to me.

that way parents who dont have a problem with their kids reading "gay themed" books dont have to go out of their way to make sure that they are available to their kids (as keeping them in a special room or behind the libarians' desk would) but those things that might be inappropriate to young children are effectively kept out of their view.

not that i think that "gay themed" children's books should be censored but there are some books that should be .... moderated...by age.

http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA606408.html

Okay, so basically in 2005 in my area there was a big uproar over "gay-theme" children's books. They passed a resolution that the books have to be put up high. The county commissioner basically ignored it and so did my local librarian (although librarians at libraries we didn't frequent as much followed the rule).

In the recent election our county commissioner has been replaced and the new guy came into my library this morning and threw a bitch fit in front of my kids about how the book was "where it goes alphabetically" and not where it goes "morally" or some shit.

The librarian has stated that he would not move the book and that it's censorship to do so.

I hate to post and run, but I have to go.....eep! Library drama. I thought I would post this and see what you guys think......might be a good discussion.

Is putting the children's book up too high for children or keeping it off the shelf altogether* censorship? Should the librarian be forced to follow the resolution?


*the library we used to go to before we moved didn't put it or books like it on the shelf at all, they had them stowed in a back room, but you could have them if you asked.....:rolleyes:

Well I don't see it as censorship as it it just changing the location of the books from one shelf to the other. And yes the librarian should follow the resolution if it is required by her job to do this then she should do it otherwise she should resign on principle.

Anyway I thought books in library's were arranged according to the Dewy Decimal System? What's this alphabetical stuff?

Well I don't see it as censorship as it it just changing the location of the books from one shelf to the other. And yes the librarian should follow the resolution if it is required by her job to do this then she should do it otherwise she should resign on principle.

Anyway I thought books in library's were arranged according to the Dewy Decimal System? What's this alphabetical stuff?

Dewey puts all the things in one subject together under a shelf-mark ie 317.2 within that you will generally sort by the authors name alphabetically so you would have an extension like Poe for works by Edgar Allen Poe. You could also sort them by title alphabetically within the subject.

Well I don't see it as censorship as it it just changing the location of the books from one shelf to the other. And yes the librarian should follow the resolution if it is required by her job to do this then she should do it otherwise she should resign on principle.

Anyway I thought books in library's were arranged according to the Dewy Decimal System? What's this alphabetical stuff?

Fictional books are in alphabetical order by author's last name.

Just curious, but what kind of children's books are viewed as "gay" by the resolution anyway?

Miffy meets Tom of Finland

Just curious, but what kind of children's books are viewed as "gay" by the resolution anyway?
Glad you asked, I've just received an email from Representative Sally "gays are more dangerous than terrorists" Kern entailing what books she is so very worried about my children "stumbling upon".

I'll save you the part where she talks down to me and just list the books.


These books are in the Easy Readers children’s section. I have searched the Metro OKC library system’s on-line catalogue . . . the OKC libraries DO carry these books in the Easy Reader section (these are just a few):



1) The Family Book, by Parr …Review from School Library Journal: PreSchool-Grade 2- Parr introduces children to an array of families. Some families include stepmoms, stepdads... two moms or two dads, while some children have only one parent….This concept book celebrating the diversity of family groups is distinguished by its sense of fun..” ‘…Parr includes adopted families, step-families, one-parent families, and families with two parents of the same sex, as well as the traditional nuclear family.



2) Molly's Family, Nancy Garden (LOTS of homosexually-themed children’s books by this author) Description: “PreS-Gr. 2. When Molly draws a picture of her family for her kindergarten class, Tommy jeers at her that no one has two mommies. At first she is angry and hurt, but with the support of her teacher and her loving parents--Mommy (her birth mother) and Mama Lu (her adoptive mother)--she comes to accept her family.



3) Best, Best Colors, by Eric Hoffman. Nate has trouble deciding what his favorite color is, but his two mammas help him realize that he does not have to have a best, best color.

4) King & King by Linda de Haan. From School Library Journal
Grades 3-5--In this postmodern fractured fairy tale, a worn-out and badly beleaguered Queen is ready for retirement. After many hours of nagging, the crown prince, who "never cared much for princesses," finally caves in and agrees to wed in order to ascend the throne. Their search for a suitable bride extends far and wide, but none of the eligible princesses strikes the Prince's fancy, until Princess Madeleine shows up. The Prince is immediately smitten- with her brother, Prince Lee. The wedding is "very special," the Queen settles down on a chaise lounge in the sun, and everyone lives happily ever after. Originally published in the Netherlands, this is a commendable fledgling effort with good intentions toward its subject matter. Unfortunately, though, the book is hobbled by thin characterization and ugly artwork; the homosexual prince comes across as fragile and languid, while the dour, matronly queen is a dead ringer for England's Victoria at her aesthetic worst. Some of the details in the artwork are interesting, including the "crown kitty" performing antics in the periphery. However, that isn't enough to compensate for page after page of cluttered, disjointed, ill-conceived art. The book does present same-sex marriage as a viable, acceptable way of life within an immediately recognizable narrative form, the fairy tale. However, those looking for picture books about alternative lifestyles may want to keep looking for a barrier-breaking classic on the subject.

There are certainly many more than that. And there are many other books that I found which are in our OKC libraries juvenile section, as well, such as:

1) Annie on My Mind, by Nancy Garden. Editorial review: “From Publishers Weekly: Garden's exceptionally well-rendered tale concerns two teenage girls who fall in love with each other. Ages 14-up.” This book has been banned from many school libraries and even publicly burned in Kansas City.

2) Holly’s Secret, by Nancy Garden – Gay/lesbian fiction for Grades 4 to 7, in the Juvenile Fiction section of our OKC libraries.

3) Dare Truth or Promise by Paul Boock – editorial review: “…portrayal of two young women caught up in sexual passion for each other…” “…developing lesbian romance between two high school seniors…” and a comment from a customer, “…the story is gripping and powerful. Recommended for anyone who is a teenage lesbian or thinking of becoming one…” This book is shelved in the Juvenile Fiction section of our OKC libraries.

4) Good Moon Rising, Nancy Garden - “From School Library Journal: Grade 8 Up. Jan is a high school senior… Eventually, the two [senior girls] realize that they are sexually attracted to one another. … this is a straightforward story of teen romance with a…twist.” From a customer: “Nancy Garden certainly knows a lot about the world of lesbian teenagers and homophobia.” Shelved with juvenile fiction at OKC libraries.

5) The Year They Burned the Books, Nancy Garden – Editorial review: “High school condom distribution and a hotly contested sex education curriculum set a small New England town's blood boiling and books burning in The Year They Burned the Books, an issue-driven novel by Nancy Garden. Jamie Crawford is the senior editor of the "Telegraph," her high school's newspaper, but the publication of her editorial in favor of the school's new policy to distribute condoms happens to coincide with the election of a new, highly conservative school board member [as though “conservative” is a bad word!]. As a result, Jamie suddenly finds her editorial voice gagged. Soon the school's health books have been removed from the classrooms for "review," a conservative parents' group stages a library book burning, and Jamie's beloved teacher is forced to resign as the newspaper's faculty advisor. Jamie's personal life also becomes more complicated as she tries to deal with her physical attraction to Tessa, a new girl at school.” Yes, in our juvenile fiction department. In this book, conservative values are being presented as backward, prejudice, intolerant, and fear-based.

6) Kissing Kate, by Lauren Myracle. Gr. 7-10. "It was one thing for someone else to be gay. It was something else entirely if it was me." Lissa, 16, has been best friends with beautiful Kate for four years, but everything changes when Kate gets drunk at a party, and she and Lissa passionately kiss.” Juvenile fiction department, OKC libraries.

7) Deliver Us From Evie, M. E. Kerr. “Evie's story is affectingly told by her younger brother, Parr, who understands as their parents cannot that Evie [a female] is falling in love, not with Cord Whittle, but with the daughter of the man who holds the mortgage on their farm.” Juv fiction, OKC libraries.

8) Keeping You a Secret, Julie Peters. “From School Library Journal: Grade 9 Up-Holland Jaeger goes steady with a good-looking boy and contemplates attending an Ivy League college in the fall. Then she meets "out-and-proud" lesbian Cece Goddard, and her life changes. Within a matter of weeks, the two begin an affair that eventually leads to a committed relationship. Holland loses old friends, encounters vicious discrimination, and is thrown out of the house by her hysterical mother. She finds help at the local Gay Resource Center, however, and begins to look forward to attending a local college after high school, with Cece by her side.” Juv fiction, OKC libraries.

9) The Case of the Stolen Scarab (Candlestone Inn Mystery #1), by Nancy Garden. “Grade 4-6–No sooner have…Nikki, Travis, and their two moms arrived at their newly renovated…Inn than the sheriff pays them an unexpected visit.” You see, it’s not ABOUT gay parents; it just sneaks it in to the story. The OKC libraries have this book on order.

She goes on in the email to explain to me that when my kids are older I won't have time to "pre-read" all their books and that this is in fact for my own good and for the good of all mankind or some other bull shit.

She goes on in the email to explain to me that when my kids are older I won't have time to "pre-read" all their books and that this is in fact for my own good and for the good of all mankind or some other bull shit.

She obviously loves Freedom so much that she has to keep your children's freedom to read whatever they like all to herself.

Seriously, how very Stalinist.

She obviously loves Freedom so much that she has to keep your children's freedom to read whatever they like all to herself.

Seriously, how very Stalinist.

She also explained to me that this is not censorship in that if my kids along with me goes to the library counter and requests these books specifically we will be allowed to check them out........but then admits it is about censorship and "protecting" the children. :rolleyes:

seems like a good compromise for children to me.

that way parents who dont have a problem with their kids reading "gay themed" books dont have to go out of their way to make sure that they are available to their kids (as keeping them in a special room or behind the libarians' desk would) but those things that might be inappropriate to young children are effectively kept out of their view.

not that i think that "gay themed" children's books should be censored but there are some books that should be .... moderated...by age.

That is why I agreed with what the new commissioner had to say. Such material should be placed on a high shelf, so that it requires an adult to get the material down. This adult (hopefully a parent) can then decide if they feel their children are ready for such material and guide them through the process.

I see it as censorship, but it is just like having a threshold on your TV. Again, it is to help parents control what their children see. This isn't like going out and burning or banning books.

Fictional books are in alphabetical order by author's last name.

Just goes to show how little I go into the fictional part of the library nowadays :$

That is why I agreed with what the new commissioner had to say. Such material should be placed on a high shelf, so that it requires an adult to get the material down. This adult (hopefully a parent) can then decide if they feel their children are ready for such material and guide them through the process.

I see it as censorship, but it is just like having a threshold on your TV. Again, it is to help parents control what their children see. This isn't like going out and burning or banning books.

The parental controls on my television are turned on and monitored by me. This is control that is being exerted by the government.

One of these things is not like the other.

Anyway I thought books in library's were arranged according to the Dewy Decimal System? What's this alphabetical stuff?

fiction books are alphabetical(author's last name) in dewy decimal system.

Though to be honest you should find a library large enough to use Library of Congress Classification system. a much better system by far.

She also explained to me that this is not censorship in that if my kids along with me goes to the library counter and requests these books specifically we will be allowed to check them out........but then admits it is about censorship and "protecting" the children. :rolleyes:

This is utter nonsense, really. I noted that books for teenagers where included too. Which is absolutely ludicrous, since the brief blurb's I've noticed seem to be contemporary stories that I imagine high school girls could really relate to, homosexual or not.

Though to be honest you should find a library large enough to use Library of Congress Classification system. a much better system by far.

I have been to huge library's and they have never used that system. But then again I have never been to one in America.

In this book, conservative values are being presented as backward, prejudice, intolerant, and fear-based..

So it's non-fiction? :D

Okay......so like I emailed her and the county commissioner, and he just emailed me back, he wants to meet with me to discuss my opinions on this after the holidays.....which holidays I do not know.....like after Thanksgiving and Christmas or like after Columbus day 2009? I mean I can assume.......but what if I'm wrong? :p

Let em have it Smunkee! Ask them if they believe the state should run our lives for us or if it should be left up to the parents.

Let em have it Smunkee! Ask them if they believe the state should run our lives for us or if it should be left up to the parents.

This is exactly my angle. If in fact the republican party is the party of "personal responsibility" then why shouldn't I be responsible for my own children's reading lists?

:fluffle:This is exactly my angle. If in fact the republican party is the party of "personal responsibility" then why shouldn't I be responsible for my own children's reading lists?

I can see how they would want to call it censorship, but as long as they list the book as available and don't refuse to loan it out to those who request it, I don't think it is actual censorship.
I agree with you there. If the item is in the library, it is listed, and available for loan, then it is not censorship.

It is a book intended for children, it should stay in the children's section and arranged in the way the library sees fit.

If there are people that don't agree with the contents of the book, well too bad. Maybe you should start paying more attention to what your kid wants you to read as a bedtime story. Fact is there are open-minded people that want to explain to their kids that homossexuality is an issue nowadays that is real and the book provides them aid.

Even the relocation of the book is censorship.

This is exactly my angle. If in fact the republican party is the party of "personal responsibility" then why shouldn't I be responsible for my own children's reading lists?
you are.

you dont even have to identify yourself as a bad mother by having to make a special request to get these horrible books for your children. (thinking about the "meth registry" for getting cough syrup)

you live in oklahoma. the alternatives are far worse than this. if they leave the books in their proper library order there will be parents who dont let their kids go to the library lest they fall into the hands of satan. if it were left to them to decide, the books would be removed and burned.

is it stupid to move these harmless age appropriate books? of course it is. but perhaps it is the best compromise for the community you live in.

This is exactly my angle. If in fact the republican party is the party of "personal responsibility" then why shouldn't I be responsible for my own children's reading lists?
I look forward to hearing the results.

The parental controls on my television are turned on and monitored by me. This is control that is being exerted by the government.

One of these things is not like the other.

GAH! Now I have the song stuck in my head!

On topic: Screw the bigoted parents. Their kids need to read the books MORE than the kids who's parents will get the book down for them.

The parental controls on my television are turned on and monitored by me. This is control that is being exerted by the government.

One of these things is not like the other.

Smunkeeville, having such books on a higher shelf is like a parental control turned on and monitored by you. It means that the child needs your assistance to get the book down, and if you wish your child to read that book, then you would. If you do not wish your child to read that book, then obviously you would not.

Anyways, I was thinking more of a threshold like no adults only television prior to 8:30pm (it is a rule we have in New Zealand). It aids parents in their quest to guide their children.

Personally, I think keeping the books on the top shelf is a great idea. They are going to be exposed to it plenty enough later in life.

Or are the number of converts to homosexuality falling and they have to lower the age limit for recruiting purposes?

The very fact that there are gay-themed children's books, and that this battle exists, smacks of either anti-straight propaganda or recruitment purposes.

Glad you asked, I've just received an email from Representative Sally "gays are more dangerous than terrorists" Kern entailing what books she is so very worried about my children "stumbling upon".

I'll save you the part where she talks down to me and just list the books.



She goes on in the email to explain to me that when my kids are older I won't have time to "pre-read" all their books and that this is in fact for my own good and for the good of all mankind or some other bull shit.

I like the inclusion of The Year They Burned Books. No sense of irony there.

Personally, I think keeping the books on the top shelf is a great idea. They are going to be exposed to it plenty enough later in life.

Or are the number of converts to homosexuality falling and they have to lower the age limit for recruiting purposes?

The very fact that there are gay-themed children's books, and that this battle exists, smacks of either anti-straight propaganda or recruitment purposes.

<licks Wuldani>

Yep, tastes like troll.

That is why I agreed with what the new commissioner had to say. Such material should be placed on a high shelf, so that it requires an adult to get the material down. This adult (hopefully a parent) can then decide if they feel their children are ready for such material and guide them through the process.

I see it as censorship, but it is just like having a threshold on your TV. Again, it is to help parents control what their children see. This isn't like going out and burning or banning books.

What about books that portray families with a mother and father? Shouldn't those be placed on a higher shelf, too? Young kids reading them might become confused about their sexuality and "go straight".

<licks Wuldani>

Yep, tastes like troll.

Eww. Go brush your teeth, you've got troll-breath now!

Personally, I think keeping the books on the top shelf is a great idea. They are going to be exposed to it plenty enough later in life.

Or are the number of converts to homosexuality falling and they have to lower the age limit for recruiting purposes?

The very fact that there are gay-themed children's books, and that this battle exists, smacks of either anti-straight propaganda or recruitment purposes.

lmao.

Plenty of books out there that are controversal not just ones of homosexual content. Before I changed majors from Education to English, I was famarlized with many banned books. The fact is book reading like television watching needs to be montored with kids. If parents are too lazy to take an intrest in what their kids are reading then are they really truely being responsible parents? Seriously it's not the state's job or a city's job to play babysitter. A librarian shouldn't have to play babysitter either.

Plenty of books out there that are controversial not just ones of homosexual content.

And all of them should be available to read without restriction.

And all of them should be available to read without restriction.

Agreed. On the basis,that parents should be the ones that hold that key of whether or not to restrict or not. It shouldn't have to be the library or the city that says no. When I was in a classroom situation, I had a teacher tell me that a parent did not want their child to read To Kill a Mockingbird, the teacher agreed with the parents wishes and so the student had to read other books. Although I can't see anything offensive with To Kill a Mockingbird , (at least in my personal stand) but if that's a parent's wish then that's the parent's wish. Disagree with it you may, but that's a proactive and responsible parent for you.

Agreed. On the basis,that parents should be the ones that hold that key of whether or not to restrict or not.

No. Without restriction.

No. Without restriction.With restriction. No need for Hustler to be placed next to Harry Potter.

No. Without restriction.

So you think that parents shouldn't have some say in what television or movies that a child watches?

Placing books up high is perfectly reasonable, according to the age of the intended audience. That is, their grade level as decided by your national librarians association.

Picking individual books because they include gay characters (as parents or protagonists) and shelving them above their reading age IS censorship. By the time the kids are old enough to reach those books, they won't be interested in fairy tales (I liked the sound of that one, the gay prince who makes a marriage of convenience.)

The recommended reading age isn't a firm guide to what book a kid will want to read, of course. But the commissioner needs a better reason to over-ride it than "morality." Who is he to judge what is moral or not? Bah.

So you think that parents shouldn't have some say in what television or movies that a child watches?

Books are different. Watching audio-visual takes zero effort, whereas kids read only when they're interested.

Kids hell. Anyone.

Personally, I think keeping the books on the top shelf is a great idea. They are going to be exposed to it plenty enough later in life.

Or are the number of converts to homosexuality falling and they have to lower the age limit for recruiting purposes?

You should run away. Some of us are gay! Don't read another word, you'll get infected!

With restriction. No need for Hustler to be placed next to Harry Potter.

I can't think of any library classification scheme where that could possibly happen. No need for restrictions because it won't happen anyway.

I'm done with Waldani.

Alex Ptol, however, I am somewhat familiar with. That young NZ fella who was tearing his hair a year or two ago about how girls only wanted money ...

That is why I agreed with what the new commissioner had to say. Such material should be placed on a high shelf, so that it requires an adult to get the material down. This adult (hopefully a parent) can then decide if they feel their children are ready for such material and guide them through the process.

"Such material" ...?

Did you read the descriptions of the books (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14250115)? They don't have graphic descriptions of sex, they don't have violence. They're just children's books which treat "two mommies" or other unconventional families as normal.

So explain how such descriptions are "morally dangerous" to children.

Offensive little Commissioner you have to deal with there!.. Don't agree with 'moving'--cough, cough censorshipz--the childrens' books, making access to them more difficult by the target audience. As for the parents deciding what their children should or should not read, well I can't say I agree with that either - parents should teach their children core critical thinking skills first and foremost so that children have the ability to question something or criticise something for themselves within their own context... If you.. know what I mean..?
:p

Offensive little Commissioner you have to deal with there!.. Don't agree with 'moving'--cough, cough censorshipz--the childrens' books, making access to them more difficult by the target audience. As for the parents deciding what their children should or should not read, well I can't say I agree with that either - parents should teach their children core critical thinking skills first and foremost so that children have the ability to question something or criticise something for themselves within their own context... If you.. know what I mean..?
:p

Naaa man, you have to censor what your kids have access to.

Naaa man, you have to censor what your kids have access to.

I've pretty much held the idea that it's much better to be open to the world around you - little point in denying something exists if it actually does; which apparently is what I feel censorship aims to do and to be able to explain or debate why something may be wrong etc etc.

Censorship, in so many ways, wins. In this case not so much though.

I've pretty much held the idea that it's much better to be open to the world around you - little point in denying something exists if it actually does; which apparently is what I feel censorship aims to do and to be able to explain or debate why something may be wrong etc etc.

That may be true for the adult, not for teh child though. There comes a time when you have to protect your children from some knowldedge.

Would you let your 5 year old boy have a copy of a porn mag?

The recommended reading age isn't a firm guide to what book a kid will want to read, of course. But the commissioner needs a better reason to over-ride it than "morality." Who is he to judge what is moral or not? Bah.

Because, uh, duh he is the Commissioner.

Really NH, you are quite dense sometimes :p

That may be true for the adult, not for teh child though. There comes a time when you have to protect your children from some knowldedge.

Would you let your 5 year old boy have a copy of a porn mag?

No, I wouldn't actively go buy a porn mag for my 5 year old boy - and whilst holding myself in contempt for saying that lol... I must also point out that porn mags are dirty because I have been socially engineered to snigger at 'naughty stuff' if you catch my drift?

So perhaps I would say to the kid that it's people playing with one another - I'd try to put it in some sort of context to fit in my boys' world because after all it happens and is very um... noticable!

:9

Because, uh, duh he is the Commissioner.

Really NH, you are quite dense sometimes :p

I don't understand how the US system works. The whole "parents council" thing creeps me out, it's exactly why a retarded majority in one particular area can impose crazy moralistic crap on other public school students.

Perhaps you can explain what the Commissioner does?

I don't understand how the US system works. The whole "parents council" thing creeps me out, it's exactly why a retarded majority in one particular area can impose crazy moralistic crap on other public school students.

Perhaps you can explain what the Commissioner does?

Don't ask me mate, I hail from NSW as well. I was just having a joke with my post.

I am sure someone in America can tell us.

No, I wouldn't actively go buy a porn mag for my 5 year old boy - and whilst holding myself in contempt for saying that lol... I must also point out that porn mags are dirty because I have been socially engineered to snigger at 'naughty stuff' if you catch my drift?

So perhaps I would say to the kid that it's people playing with one another - I'd try to put it in some sort of context to fit in my boys' world because after all it happens and is very um... noticable!

:9

*shock* What not even if he asked you to buy it for him? Now isn't that censorship?:D

*shock* What not even if he asked you to buy it for him? Now isn't that censorship?:D

Ah, ah, ah you cheeky bugger
:p
If my 5 year old boy asked me about it or specifically a pron mag (wtf lol) then I'd be more inclined to explain to him what it's about rather than deny it at all although I would probably go buy said mag if asked specifically for it.

...Damn dirty hypothetical situations!
:S

Ah, ah, ah you cheeky bugger
:p
If my 5 year old boy asked me about it or specifically a pron mag (wtf lol) then I'd be more inclined to explain to him what it's about rather than deny it at all although I would probably go buy said mag if asked specifically for it.

...Damn dirty hypothetical situations!
:S

Wow I can't quite work out if that makes you noble or irrisponsible!

My 15 year old, sure, I guess he is of an age, but my 5 year old. Nooo man not a chance.

Buy the kid a copy of the Oxford Journal of Archaeology. Wrap it up in a brown paper bag, and explain how porno is a very private thing and he should go look at it in room.

Don't ask me mate, I hail from NSW as well. I was just having a joke with my post.

I am sure someone in America can tell us.

Isn't he chief of police, ala Commisoner Gordon!

Buy the kid a copy of the Oxford Journal of Archaeology. Wrap it up in a brown paper bag, and explain how porno is a very private thing and he should go look at it in room.

Now that's just an evilly fun idea heh
^^;
Well - at least until he starts studying ancient history and recognises it as porn
:p

Wow I can't quite work out if that makes you noble or irrisponsible!

My 15 year old, sure, I guess he is of an age, but my 5 year old. Nooo man not a chance.

Although to be perfectly honest with you I really don't think I could actually bring myself to go and buy a pron mag for my darling cute 'ikkle hypothetical 5 year old boy... I mean - aren't they quite expensive?..
:9

Honestly though, I don't think I'd be able to do it; which is my problem lol - I also feel that teaching kiddies from a very young age about different families, cultures and acceptance as well as critical thinking should be part of a worldwide reform of schooling - but alas... 'tis my gay agenda thingy lol...

Although to be perfectly honest with you I really don't think I could actually bring myself to go and buy a pron mag for my darling cute 'ikkle hypothetical 5 year old boy... I mean - aren't they quite expensive?..
:9

Honestly though, I don't think I'd be able to do it; which is my problem lol - I also feel that teaching kiddies from a very young age about different families, cultures and acceptance as well as critical thinking should be part of a worldwide reform of schooling - but alas... 'tis my gay agenda thingy lol...


I'm not sure that it should be anything to do with the schools myself. Surly that's the families job?

Meh, just put the book on the top shelf, and make sure every kid knows it's there, that certain people don't want them to read it, and that the librarian will gladly get it down for them. That should increase the number of kids reading it tenfold or so. Because everything that's not allowed is better.

Would you let your 5 year old boy have a copy of a porn mag?Does it have anything more explicit than naked ladies? If not, than I don't really see much of a problem. Not least of all because there's nothing in it that would keep the boy's interest anyway. He'd undoubtedly rather have a Donald Duck.

Does it have anything more explicit than naked ladies? If not, than I don't really see much of a problem. Not least of all because there's nothing in it that would keep the boy's interest anyway. He'd undoubtedly rather have a Donald Duck.

Heh yeah 5 year olds can be like that. But lets say for the sake of argument it is a hard core Dutch mag?

Heh yeah 5 year olds can be like that. But lets say for the sake of argument it is a hard core Dutch mag?

Hot tulip on tulip action?

Hot tulip on tulip action?

Bwahaha which reminds me of the following:

What is better than daffadils on your piano?





Twolips on your organ!:D

I don't understand how the US system works. The whole "parents council" thing creeps me out, it's exactly why a retarded majority in one particular area can impose crazy moralistic crap on other public school students.

Perhaps you can explain what the Commissioner does?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/County_commission

Heh yeah 5 year olds can be like that. But lets say for the sake of argument it is a hard core Dutch mag?Well, on the one hand, it almost certainly won't mean anything to the kid; it's just comical postures that don't make much sense. (Although there's always that one in a million chance he'll flip through it and try it on a classmate in kindergarten.) On the other hand, I wouldn't be comfortable with it despite the non-existence of any real risks it'd have.
If he actually wanted me to get him such a magazine, and not rather a comic book or something like that, I'd be rather worried about what goes on with him at places I leave my hypothetical child in the care of others. It's not a good indication.

I'm not sure that it should be anything to do with the schools myself. Surly that's the families job?

Well, to be absolutely honest with you - most schools/teachers I trust whereas most families/parents I don't trust so although it may very well be the families job in the context of a household family to teach such amazing things to their children... I wouldn't actually expect them nor trust them to teach more than I expect and trust schools/teachers to teach these values.

But then again I also strongly feel that parents have NO rights over their children but rather have many responsibilities and duties to their children; hence why I feel that I can't trust families/parents to do a better job than most schools/teachers.

...kinda thing
:p

Books are different. Watching audio-visual takes zero effort, whereas kids read only when they're interested.

Kids hell. Anyone.

I'm not sure how books taking more effort answers my question. The reason why I asked Redwulf that question is because most people believe that it is right for a parent to restrict a child's access to violent tv shows or movies. I was wondering if Redwulf believe the same thing.
If he does,why is it fine to restrict access to certain media but wrong for there to be any restrictions on the books children read.

I'm not sure how books taking more effort answers my question. The reason why I asked Redwulf that question is because most people believe that it is right for a parent to restrict a child's access to violent tv shows or movies. I was wondering if Redwulf believe the same thing.
If he does,why is it fine to restrict access to certain media but wrong for there to be any restrictions on the books children read.

Because silly, it's the medium that matters not the content! *sigh*:rolleyes:

Well, to be absolutely honest with you - most schools/teachers I trust whereas most families/parents I don't trust so although it may very well be the families job in the context of a household family to teach such amazing things to their children... I wouldn't actually expect them nor trust them to teach more than I expect and trust schools/teachers to teach these values.

But then again I also strongly feel that parents have NO rights over their children but rather have many responsibilities and duties to their children; hence why I feel that I can't trust families/parents to do a better job than most schools/teachers.

...kinda thing
:p
Why would you trust random adults with kids and not their own parents? :confused:

Why would you trust random adults with kids and not their own parents? :confused:

They're held more accountable and are in a more open environment so more open to peer review/critique, parents are not and although I'm not claiming that all parents aren't to be trusted or all teachers are trusted I do feel that an environment more open to scrutiny is better than a closed environment in terms of learning and teaching.

Hence why I "trust random adults with kids [in schools/with teachers] and not their own parents".
(:

They're held more accountable and are in a more open environment so more open to peer review/critique, parents are not and although I'm not claiming that all parents aren't to be trusted or all teachers are trusted I do feel that an environment more open to scrutiny is better than a closed environment in terms of learning and teaching.

Hence why I "trust random adults with kids [in schools/with teachers] and not their own parents".
(:

Peer review? of what? How many voices I do during bedtime stories? How many cookies they eat on Christmas?:confused:

Peer review? of what? How many voices I do during bedtime stories? How many cookies they eat on Christmas?:confused:

Okki dokki! You've confused me too heh ^^; I'm saying that an open environment for learning is better than a closed unit in my opinion - therefore, schools where many people learn together are more open and a more accountable environment than the family home.

Okki dokki! You've confused me too heh ^^; I'm saying that an open environment for learning is better than a closed unit in my opinion - therefore, schools where many people learn together are more open and a more accountable environment than the family home.

Heh I think you are on to a looser here man. It is the schools job to educate, not teach moral standards.

Okki dokki! You've confused me too heh ^^; I'm saying that an open environment for learning is better than a closed unit in my opinion - therefore, schools where many people learn together are more open and a more accountable environment than the family home.

My kids are homeschooled (you aren't confused) they are rarely at home being schooled and rarely schooled by me. They have a much more open and diverse learning environment than most school kids their age, since most kids their age have 1 teacher and they have 8-10. More people, more diversity of opinion.

Heh I think you are on to a looser here man. It is the schools job to educate, not teach moral standards.

I don't think I said anything about moral standards and if I did then I'm sowwy - didn't mean to imply it, am just saying that I feel it would be a wise idea to have an open teaching n learning environment where things aren't denied or whatever to children because their parents are afraid of a topic/issue.

=[

I don't think I said anything about moral standards and if I did then I'm sowwy - didn't mean to imply it, am just saying that I feel it would be a wise idea to have an open teaching n learning environment where things aren't denied or whatever to children because their parents are afraid of a topic/issue.

=[

Ahh no, but you did say this:

Honestly though, I don't think I'd be able to do it; which is my problem lol - I also feel that teaching kiddies from a very young age about different families, cultures and acceptance as well as critical thinking should be part of a worldwide reform of schooling - but alas... 'tis my gay agenda thingy lol...=

Acceptance of the diffrances we have is a moral issue not an education one. Sure by learning about such differances, we are more likely to accept them, or maybe not!

My kids are homeschooled (you aren't confused) they are rarely at home being schooled and rarely schooled by me. They have a much more open and diverse learning environment than most school kids their age, since most kids their age have 1 teacher and they have 8-10. More people, more diversity of opinion.

Then I'm not quite sure at all why you went hostile to me? Your approach is what I am advocating - more open learning around more people in an open environment. I feel that a closed family home environment of learning would not give as much experience or diversity as an open environment would.
(:

Then I'm not quite sure at all why you went hostile to me? Your approach is what I am advocating - more open learning around more people in an open environment. I feel that a closed family home environment of learning would not give as much experience or diversity as an open environment would.
(:

I didn't mean to come off as hostile. I'm sorry. I was just trying to procrastinate so I might get out of going to my in-laws for Thanksgiving dinner in 30 minutes. :) Truce?

Acceptance of the diffrances we have is a moral issue not an education one. Sure by learning about such differances, we are more likely to accept them, or maybe not!

Ahh, fair do's ya cheeky bugger lol
:9
Bad wording on my part - meant to say the education and awareness that there are different cultures/ways of living etc.

I didn't mean to come off as hostile. I'm sorry. I was just trying to procrastinate so I might get out of going to my in-laws for Thanksgiving dinner in 30 minutes. :) Truce?

Totally understandeable! Truce.
:)

Ahh, fair do's ya cheeky bugger lol
:9
Bad wording on my part - meant to say the education and awareness that there are different cultures/ways of living etc.

Sweet and to borrow a phrase from your neck of the woods, 'jobs a goodun'.:D

I'm not sure how books taking more effort answers my question. The reason why I asked Redwulf that question is because most people believe that it is right for a parent to restrict a child's access to violent tv shows or movies. I was wondering if Redwulf believe the same thing.
If he does,why is it fine to restrict access to certain media but wrong for there to be any restrictions on the books children read.

Answers later when non-drunk.

Anyone else notice the over-intrusiveness of the legislative processes lately? Its not really just the government itself either. Its almost like the people want their "almighty government" to tell them exactly how everyone should live their lives. Our right to the "pursuit happiness" seems like it is being highly constricted and directionally "promoted". I liked being able to go the direction I wanted without my government tugging me around because they feel they are "protecting my best interests". Ugh, wish we were more laisse-faire minded about everything. If I spelled that wrong, my bad. Full with turkey :)

Anyway, the book thing was dumb, it was censorship, and if parents would just take it upon themselves to keep up with their child through multiple steps of involvement the law would be unnecessary anyway. If anything a parent could simply ask the librarian, "Hey, are books like this available, and could you help make sure my child 'blank' not expose him/herself to this material?" Or even better, let the parent suck it up and learn to address the issue with their child when they do obtain the material. After all, our parents shape us in our early years, why should it be so horrible to confront important issues with them? And assuming there is a "children's section" that these things are divided into anyway, it's not like there is going to be explicit content right there in the open to shock the crud out of them. That's the majority of my take on it.

Censorship Causes blindness

:):D I'm at the library, the books are in the "back room" like they are supposed to be.....but there is a sign up in the children's section and also on the wall by the computer catalogs.

"We have the books that are being censored, if you would like to read them please inquire at the desk, they are available for check-out"

:):D I'm at the library, the books are in the "back room" like they are supposed to be.....but there is a sign up in the children's section and also on the wall by the computer catalogs.

"We have the books that are being censored, if you would like to read them please inquire at the desk, they are available for check-out"
The sign is good. It sucks like hell that it is necessary. :(

http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA606408.html

Okay, so basically in 2005 in my area there was a big uproar over "gay-theme" children's books. They passed a resolution that the books have to be put up high. The county commissioner basically ignored it and so did my local librarian (although librarians at libraries we didn't frequent as much followed the rule).

In the recent election our county commissioner has been replaced and the new guy came into my library this morning and threw a bitch fit in front of my kids about how the book was "where it goes alphabetically" and not where it goes "morally" or some shit.

The librarian has stated that he would not move the book and that it's censorship to do so.

I hate to post and run, but I have to go.....eep! Library drama. I thought I would post this and see what you guys think......might be a good discussion.

Is putting the children's book up too high for children or keeping it off the shelf altogether* censorship? Should the librarian be forced to follow the resolution?


*the library we used to go to before we moved didn't put it or books like it on the shelf at all, they had them stowed in a back room, but you could have them if you asked.....:rolleyes:

It's censorship per se. But children books should be censored, as children should not have access to certain violent and/or sexual content.

I'm not sure if there is any need for gay children books. Sexuality starts at puberty so...

Then again, something like the king and the king getting married and living happily ever after sounds harmless.

The issue should be decided by developmental psychologists, what children can read or not, after lots of empirical research.

He wants to have them organised by alphabet, or at best - not by morality. Sounds fine with me.


*sigh*
I hate when people use words the don't fully understand the meaning of. Changing the physical location of books is censorship now?



My opinion: The library should stack the books in whatever manner is deemed the most effective for the public's use.
The point is putting it where the public can't access it. Much like keeping it in the basement, with out stairs, a burnt out light, and a starving jaguar would keep 99.9% of people from checking it out.

I'd put it high. Then I would put a BIG poster saying, "Want "Heather has two Mommies"? Ask the librarian to take it off the top shelf for you!

Really, it's a brilliant idea. If kids have to work for it, they'll want to read it even more.

:):D I'm at the library, the books are in the "back room" like they are supposed to be.....but there is a sign up in the children's section and also on the wall by the computer catalogs.

"We have the books that are being censored, if you would like to read them please inquire at the desk, they are available for check-out"
oh now i think THAT Is wrong. it puts parents and children in the spot of declaring themselves "deviants" for wanting to read harmless books.

oh now i think THAT Is wrong. it puts parents and children in the spot of declaring themselves "deviants" for wanting to read harmless books.

It is however better than nothing...

It is however better than nothing...
yes but its more than should be done with harmless books.

especially in a place like oklahoma where getting a reputation for letting your child read pro-gay-agenda books (or satanic books like harry potter, or pornographic books like "my body myself") can get you ostracized.

yes but its more than should be done with harmless books.

especially in a place like oklahoma where getting a reputation for letting your child read pro-gay-agenda books (or satanic books like harry potter, or pornographic books like "my body myself") can get you ostracized.

True, I personally would have fought harder than they appear to to keep the books where they belong (i.e. on the shelves placed appropriately by the Dewey Decimal system).

Smunkeeville, having such books on a higher shelf is like a parental control turned on and monitored by you. It means that the child needs your assistance to get the book down, and if you wish your child to read that book, then you would. If you do not wish your child to read that book, then obviously you would not.

Anyways, I was thinking more of a threshold like no adults only television prior to 8:30pm (it is a rule we have in New Zealand). It aids parents in their quest to guide their children.
By that reasoning, should all books be kept out of the hands of children? What if parents don't want their children to get the idea that good will triumph over evil, or that love conquers all, or that Dick and Jane have a dog called Spot?
:):D I'm at the library, the books are in the "back room" like they are supposed to be.....but there is a sign up in the children's section and also on the wall by the computer catalogs.

"We have the books that are being censored, if you would like to read them please inquire at the desk, they are available for check-out"

Your library totally deserves some manner of shiny device for their awesomeness.

yes but its more than should be done with harmless books.

especially in a place like oklahoma where getting a reputation for letting your child read pro-gay-agenda books (or satanic books like harry potter, or pornographic books like "my body myself") can get you ostracized.
This is very true. I amend my earlier statement: The defiant tone of the sign is good. The fact that it has to exist is a fucking outrage.