Utah Bans 13 books from state schools

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by Aleron Ives

On the Kobo store, 'A Court Of Thorns And Roses' is classified as Romance, Science Fiction & Fantasy, Epic Fantasy, Fiction & Literature. It is not in the Erotica section. Amazon classifies it as Fantasy Romance, Epic Fantasy, Romantic Fantasy.

How the book is "classified" means nothing. It's its content that matters. I haven't read A Court of Thorns and Roses, but I have scanned another of Maas' books. If this one is the same or similar than it's smut. Not suitable for a 14 year-old child and definitely not something that should be in a school library.

Originally Posted by Aleron Ives

You may think the books are in bad taste, but that doesn't make them pornographic. If Utah's school libraries actually did contain erotica, then parents would have a stronger case to make in favour of removing the books, but the solution in that case would be to discipline the librarians who put such books on the shelves, rather than to impose book bans.

I'm not going to quibble over pornographic vs "bad taste" or "erotica." When sexual acts are described in the detail that they were described in the book I scanned, whether it's smut, porno, erotica, "in bad taste" or however you want to describe it, it definitely is not something that should be available to a 14 year-old child in their school library.

And, since school librarians seem to think this kind of smut is perfectly acceptable for children, what works better? Trusting them to do the right thing or banning books that shouldn't have been there in the first place? I'm guessing parents already went to their school librarians and were stone walled on this subject. Which is probably why the law was passed.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by DNSB

You think Sarah J. Maas' books are explicit? ROTFLMAO.

And you don't? Okay, whatever. Fortunately, in Utah at least, you're not the final judge on this on what is inappropriate for 14 year-old school children.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Does not in Idaho mean that these books are banned in ALL public libraries in Idaho?

it means parent's have to sign off on what books kids can check out in the public libraries now.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

The phrase "basically pornographic" is just another way of saying "not actually porn pornographic".

Quibbling over "degrees of porn" in books that have been placed in school libraries is not a good sign.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

When I was a kid, I was reading above my age. At age 13 I know I was reading some books rated for 18+.

I see no need at all to ban any of those books and if someone finds books incorrectly filed and they really are, don't ban them and correctly file them.

Your opinion noted but I don't agree. I think parents do have the right to keep their school libraries free of this kind of material.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

You do realize that these kids can go online and buy these banned books if they want? The problem is that a ban like this gives these book much more attention then they would ever get otherwise and it might make kids want to read them when they otherwise would have nothing to do with them.

If I had a high-school age teen, I would not mind any of those books being read.

What kids can do outside of the school is beside the point. You're right that this law, in its own way, promotes these books. I definitely wouldn't have heard of them without the law (and the post here). But apparently it was the only way to get them out of school libraries, even in a state like Utah. And it's not like Maas is an unknown writer, apparently she's sold some 12 million books. The real question is why didn't school librarians take these books out of their libraries without this law? And why were they there in the first place?

I've had high school teens, six of them, and I would definitely not have wanted them reading this crap.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by hildea

Several posters here have written that parents have a right to decide what their children can read. In my opinion, children have a right to information, and their right should weigh heavier than the parents' right to restrict information.

You can't have it both ways. Either children are minors whom parents are responsible for, or they're adults. By law, in the United States, children are minors until they are 18 (and parent's are responsible for their actions). Since that is the law, parents have the right to restrict what kind of material they're kids read.

Many public school teachers think they're rights should trump the parent's rights, and apparently this goes for public school librarians as well. Unfortunately too many of them think that those "rights" (rights they don't have) include helping the kids to "grow up" in ways they think are appropriate in opposition to the wishes of the parents.

This is partly why my kids did not go to public school.

Originally Posted by hildea

We should trust schools and librarians to determine which books are suitable for which ages. The damage if some kids read books that's too advanced for them is minimal compared to the damage kids suffer from being kept in ignorance about how bodies work, what sex is, and other topics that typically get targeted by bans.

So you claim. Do you really think kids are that ignorant about this subject because they're "deprived" of reading smut? I've got a feeling you've never had kids, so you're probably unaware about what parents go through when raising them. Kind of like too many school teachers who want to be kids' friends instead of responsible adults. It's not the school teachers' or school librarians' job to decide when and how kids should be introduced to the adult world. That's the parents' job.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

A Court of Thorns and Roses has 2,885,884 ratings & 228,243 reviews on Goodreads. And that's a pittance compared to how many have read it.

And your point is...?

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by rcentros

Quibbling over "degrees of porn" in books that have been placed in school libraries is not a good sign.

I agree wholeheartedly. Only problem is: we WEREN'T quibbling over 'degrees of porn'. I was disputing whether porn was being placed in Utah's school libraries at all. Your opinion based on the skimming of another novel gives me a high degree of certainty that nothing even approaching the average person's definition of 'porn' has been placed in any school library. What I'm hearing is an objection to books that acknowledge sexual encounters of any kind happening between characters in books being available to students of any age in state schools.

Keeping your own kids out of public schools seems like a much more reasonable approach to parenting than supporting bans on what other parents' children are allowed to read in public schools is.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by rcentros

it means parent's have to sign off on what books kids can check out in the public libraries now.

Idaho's gonna do what Idaho's gonna do. Thankfully, there are 4 out-of-state libraries that allow Idaho teens to get free library cards online and without parental consent.

[cfrizz]

Originally Posted by rcentros

...So you claim. Do you really think kids are that ignorant about this subject because they're "deprived" of reading smut? I've got a feeling you've never had kids, so you're probably unaware about what parents go through when raising them. Kind of like too many school teachers who want to be kids' friends instead of responsible adults. It's not the school teachers' or school librarians' job to decide when and how kids should be introduced to the adult world. That's the parents' job.

That is the whole point, kids are NOT ignorant today and trying to keep them ignorant will NOT work!

I've known plenty of parents who try being their kids friends rather than their parents. Plenty of parents outright ignore their duty as parents. If you are going to claim/expect it's your job to decide these issues then you had BETTER do the job but do it responsibly and realistically.

Because telling your daughter that you expect her to remain a virgin until she marries or she will be a slut if she doesn't won't work. Telling your son if he's going to fool around make sure he wears protection otherwise have fun isn't the recipe to success either.

There needs to be realistic honesty to the discussion that the parents SHOULD be having with their kids. Sadly, most don't want to have those discussions with their teenage children they would prefer to stick their heads in the sand and not do their DUTY! So, they take the easy way out and blame the schools for them not doing the parents jobs.

[Karellen]

Originally Posted by rcentros

I scanned one.

You would give your argument a lot more credence if you actually read the book, instead of blindly arguing against it. Statements/sentences/words taken out of context can always be twisted into something horrifying to support your argument.

What is your hang up with the natural human state? You have children, so you have obviously engaged in the "smut" behaviour... so why do you trash it? Are you one of those people that thinks it is ok when you do it, but disgusting when anybody else does it?

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by rcentros

Your opinion noted but I don't agree. I think parents do have the right to keep their school libraries free of this kind of material.

Parents have the right to keep their children away from material they find objectionable. They do NOT have the right to keep other people's children away from that material. That's interfering in the parental rights of other people.

[Karellen]

Originally Posted by cfrizz

There needs to be realistic honesty to the discussion that the parents SHOULD be having with their kids. Sadly, most don't want to have those discussions with their teenage children they would prefer to stick their heads in the sand and not do their DUTY!

Yes, and I believe this contributes heavily with the "sex" problems we read about so often. Confused children that grow up into confused adults, not really knowing what is right, what is enough.

We would never give children the keys to the car at 15 and tell them to go learn to drive.
We would never give children a screwdriver and pliers and tell them to upgrade the electrical cables in the house.
We would never throw a child off a boat into deep water and tell them to learn to swim.

Most of lifes activities require education and training. Yet, when it comes to sex, parents are mute. Most children are thrown out there in the wild, clueless, confused, and expected to figure it out for themselves, only able to talk to other children as ignorant on the subject as themselves.

[pdurrant]

I think the discussion is going in circles now. If you think you have something insightful to say on this topic, say it now, because I'll be closing this thread in about 10 hours time.