Ban, officially or legally prohibit.
If the above is the definition of ban, then "The book remains available in the media center.", would seem to indicate that the book was not banned.
It seems like educators making a decision that certain books are not appropriate for one age group, while having them available to appropriate age groups is literally not banning the book.
28 comments:
You're missing the point. Banning Ms Gorman from school age children is wrong. What has she said that is inappropriate for grade school children?! Can you cite ANYTHING?
What of the children, parents and families whose lives are uplifted and empowered by Ms Gorman's words and example? Who are these bigots to decide for everyone else What Is and isn't appropriate?
Are white conservatives thinking they'll get ahead by appealing to their more racist, less tolerant minority of the citizenry?
Dan
I have heard this story several times over the past few years. The only conclusion I can come to is that we must provide pornographic material to six-year-olds or we're "banning books." If "age appropriate" is not a thing, I don't understand.
I don't know what Dan's on about now. You mentioned no specific books or anything else, and in googling "Ms Gorman", I came up with her poem with which a Florida school student's parent had issues. I read the poem, and aside from a false reference to Jan 6...that is what it was about and why the people were assembled at the Capitol...I found it to be as pretentious as so many poems are. Not necessarily all that objectionable as most books and materials honorable people rightly regard as inappropriate for students for whom they are provided. It seems Dan's looking to stir the pot by again citing something not widely regarded as the worst offender, and I doubt too many school kids would give the poem any notice at all.
But the whine from the left about "book banning" is an especially pernicious lie intended to smear the character of better people seeking to consider the best interests of students. Dan, like all lefties, seek only to push their vile and immoral agenda under the guise of "free speech" and other such principles the left will similarly corrupt.
Dan,
I wrote a while back about a parent who was removed from a school board meeting for reading a book that was deemed appropriate for grade school children, you stayed silent on that story.
However, I don't need to provide anything. I am simply acknowledging that the experts, when it comes to what is age appropriate for one school, are the people who are most closely involved with that school.
Further, my point is that you significantly overstated the actual situation and exaggerated what was actually happening.
Are you really claiming that you know better what is age appropriate for one school in a state you don't live in, than the teachers and administrators at that school?
Who are you to decide what is and isn't appropriate?
It's amusing that when liberal education administrators and teachers insist that they alone know what is best for children and that parents need not interfere, you say nothing. Yet, when those experts make a decision you don't like, you go off.
Stan,
The fact that there are folx who think that age appropriate means "banned" seems to be the problem.
"Are you really claiming that you know better what is age appropriate for one school in a state you don't live in, than the teachers and administrators at that school?"
IF they keep up a pattern of banning specifically black and LGBTQ people, then yes. Of course. We white people and religious people have a REAL history and legacy of oppressing people in those minority groups and it was wrong.
IF they can make a rational defense, then let them make it. But, "it hurts our little white, conservative feelings... and so, we'll force our opinion on these minority, historically oppressed groups..." is NOT a rational reason. It's bigoted. Again, they don't HAVE to read the books. THEY can't decide for everyone else.
And I notice you don't even try to justify the ban on Gorman's poem. Because it's an irrational bullshit ban.
"Who are you to decide what is and isn't appropriate?"
A citizen fighting against oppression. As all rational, good citizens have a right and duty to do.
Can you at least admit the ban on Gorman is bigoted and uncalled for... that there's NOTHING "bannable" about that poem?
Dan
And if you listen to black people, they will tell you that it's vital that their daughters and sons have Amanda Gormans to represent them and serve as role models and heroes.
Those conservative Florida schools are telling little black children that their heroes are "inappropriate, " and that diabolical, oppressive lie will just be part of the shame of white people in our history.
Dan
Dan,
I know this'll probably slip right by you, so I'll try to explain it. I am not taking a position on whether of not this book should be age restricted. It's likely so much less offensive and pornographic than much of what the left wants young children to have access to, that I honestly have no opinion. What I am saying is that I think that if y'all on the left are going to be consistent in thinking that we must listen to teachers over parents, then you'd need to listen to teachers even when they do something you don't like. What I am saying is that I'm willing to defer to the people most qualified to make decisions for their individual school, and not to you. Finally I'm saying that it's strange that you don't have a problem with left leaning teachers insist in exposing children to books that many don't feel are age appropriate, yet you get all worked up when one school limits access to one book.
Therefore your questions are absurd, as they assume that I'm making a point, which you actually created out of thin air.
"And if you listen to black people, they will tell you that it's vital that their daughters and sons have Amanda Gormans to represent them and serve as role models and heroes."
Yet absolutely NOTHING is stopping these theoretical black parents from telling their children anything they want about Gorman. Nothing is stopping these parents from going to the public library and checking out the book. Perhaps you were unaware of this little service called Amazon, they'll deliver the book to the front door of any black parents who want it. Unless this is the only possible book that can accomplish this purpose.
"Those conservative Florida schools are telling little black children that their heroes are "inappropriate, " and that diabolical, oppressive lie will just be part of the shame of white people in our history. "
No, they are not. They are telling some children that this particular work is more appropriate for them when they are a little bit older, and that they might have to find it elsewhere if they are so desperate to find it when they are too young.
"IF they keep up a pattern of banning specifically black and LGBTQ people, then yes. Of course."
The level of pride and hubris necessary to write the above sentence is simply beyond my ability to understand. This attitude of "The experts must be listened to no matter what.", unless the local experts do something that Dan doesn't like, then the local experts must be ignored.
"it hurts our little white, conservative feelings."
Can you provide a source for this quote, or a source which shows anyone saying anything remotely like this quote?
You're right, I haven't justified anything.
1. Because I see no reason to justify something that is fictional.
2. Because I am NOT arguing in favor of the book being slightly restricted based on age.
3. Because I am not obligated to justify something just because you make some shit up and demand that I justify your made up bullshit.
"Can you at least admit the ban on Gorman is bigoted and uncalled for... that there's NOTHING "bannable" about that poem?"
Since there is no "ban", no I cannot admit that something made up exists.
So, here's one of the articles...
"In the complaint, the parent mistakenly listed Oprah Winfrey as the author of The Hill We Climb, and said she objected to the poem because it was “not educational and have [sic] indirectly hate messages”.
Gorman hit back in a lengthy social media post.
“So they ban my book from young readers, confuse me with Oprah, fail to specify what parts of my poetry they object to, refuse to read any reviews, and offer no alternatives … Unnecessary book bans like these are on the rise, and we must fight back,” she said."
Let's say Ms Gorman asks you to join in the fight over this personal attack on her, this attack which "gutted her..." What do you tell her? She's been vaguely accused of having "hate messages," - clearly a stupidly false lie - will you agree with the parent or join the side of decency?
Dan
"It's likely so much less offensive and pornographic than much of what the left wants young children to have access to, that I honestly have no opinion."
Like the "good Germans" in Nazi Germany, you'll just remain quiet. Even while more black and LGBTQ people are being slandered and demonized, you'll take the side of doing nothing.
Got it.
And before you say these parents aren't nazis, no, They're not... But neither were Germans in the 1920s/before the rise of Nazism. Also, that their fascist behavior doesn't yet sink to the lows of nazism doesn't mean it's not bad. This slander of a good, heroic woman is evil and malicious and you'll refuse to take a stand with her.
Shame.
Also, quit with the No ban nonsense. This school board IS banning this poem from grade school students, in spite of their not being ANY reason to do so.
Children will soon rise up and say, WTH, pops?
Dan
The types of books that the Nazis wanted removed and burned were largely political, with ideologies opposed to Nazism, including books on race and sexuality.
https://ed.stanford.edu/news/stanford-lecturer-explores-rise-book-bans-nazi-book-burnings-school-board-races
There were actually two types of ‘flags’ used by the SS: the first type was for books that ‘threatened the Nazi culture’ and the second type was for books that were ‘unsuitable to fall into the hands of youth (children under the age of 18).’ These books also could not be shown in storefront windows or placed in bookstores ‘where the general public could find them.’..
Again, these examples show the extent to which the Nazis waged a culture war on media in order to control and limit the free expression of ideas that went against the party’s social, historical, and religious narrative.
This is exactly why Trump’s war on the media sets such a dangerous precedent: by controlling how the populace understands its reality, those in power gain the ability to emotionally manipulate and agitate them in predictable ways.
https://towardsdatascience.com/data-analysis-books-banned-by-the-nazis-c9d3cf0cfab3
Dan
" What do you tell her? She's been vaguely accused of having "hate messages," - clearly a stupidly false lie - will you agree with the parent or join the side of decency?"
I don't tell her anything. It's not my place to do so. Given the fact that your presentation of the situation is clearly one sided and hysterical, I'd have to do much more research from primary sources and taking into considerations both sides. The problem is that since there is no "ban", I see no point in doing so.
"So, here's one of the articles..."
No, it's not "one of the articles", it's an anonymous snippet allegedly from an article with no sourcing or context. But other than that reality, you pretend as much as you want.
Blah, blah, blah, NAZI's, blah, blah, blah, more NAZI's, blah, blah, blah.
"Also, quit with the No ban nonsense. This school board IS banning this poem from grade school students, in spite of their not being ANY reason to do so."
No, they are not. They are restricting access to this work in the school library for children of a certain age. This work is readily available in multiple other places. Are you really suggesting that every school library is required to have every book you deem essential available on demand to any one who wants it with absolutely zero restrictions?
"Children will soon rise up and say, WTH, pops?"
Ok, if you say so. I'll tell them that there was no ban, and that folx like you were less than honest with them. I'll tell them to seek the Truth, always.
NAZI's blah, blah, blah, NAZI's blah, blah, blah.
It's definitely better to play the NAZI card, instead of answering questions.
The only question you asked a question, that I can see, is...
"Can you provide a source for this quote, or a source which shows anyone saying anything remotely like this quote?"
"Make America Great Again!"
"Take back our nation!"
And on on the militant March goes for Trump's America, longing for a day back before black folk, LGBTQ folk and others they don't approve had the power that threatens their white, conservative way of life.
Have you paid NO attention?
Now, how about you answering the questions about what's deviant or unacceptable about Gorman's poem that it's been banned from grade school? What makes it SO "inappropriate " for gradeschoolers?
Stop defending those threatened by a black worldview.
Dan
"In the complaint, the parent reportedly flagged multiple books addressing Black history, and claimed that Gorman’s poem “indirectly” featured “hate messages.” The poem is still available to the school’s middle schoolers, but not younger readers."
Vox, reporting on the story.
This parent who, given their grammar errors, may not be especially well-educated themselves, is flagging SPECIFICALLY black literature.
Why is that?
Also, IF it contains "hate messages," then WHY is it appropriate for middle school students?
Clearly racially charged by.
Dan
"Have you paid NO attention?"
Yes, I have. Unfortunately, I haven't seen you provide a source for your quote. Which leads me to conclude that you just made that up and put it in quotation marks to pretend like it was real.
"Now, how about you answering the questions about what's deviant or unacceptable about Gorman's poem that it's been banned from grade school?"
I've never claimed that it was "deviant" or "unacceptable". I have no opinion on the choice to age restrict this. I don't particularly care. I am willing to defer to the local experts and allow them to set local policy as they see fit. My only points here are that you have no standing to impose your hunches on others, and your hysterical exaggeration of what's actually happening makes you look like an idiot.
"What makes it SO "inappropriate " for gradeschoolers?"
I don't know and don't care.
"Why is that?"
You do realize that I am not them, and I don't know them. Nor do I know why they chose to do what they did. Not a clue. You do realize that just because you believe that I share some level of political commonality with someone, doesn't mean that I automatically know everything that they are thinking or what their motivation for their specific actions is.
"Also, IF it contains "hate messages," then WHY is it appropriate for middle school students?"
Again, I have no idea. I might speculate that since middle/high school students are older and theoretically more mature that they are better able to process and deal with themes than younger children. Again, I don't know these people. I've never met or communicated with them. I have no secret insight regarding their thoughts, motivations, or rationale. You can keep asking these stupid questions, but I'm not going to magically be able to answer them.
I love it (by love it, I mean that I'm amused/disgusted by it) when you make shit up and pretend like it is the only possible conclusion that can be drawn and therefore your made up bullshit becomes "reality" in your mind.
Just like Behar's idiocy is clearly racially charged, and an example of her whitesplaining.
Dan,
I wanted to apologize, for taking so long to figure out where the disconnect is. I finally realized that you think that the fact that I disagree with your overwrought, hysterical, exaggerated, hyperbolic response means that I automatically agree with what happened at the one school in FL. I don't automatically agree, of course I don't automatically disagree either. I do think that school boards are the level of government most closely in touch with their constituents and therefore are most representative of their constituents. Unless it's something like I mentioned recently (a book for elementary kids that was too explicit to be read at a school board meeting, or the equivalent of R rated material being presented to kids younger than 10), my inclination is to leave them alone and allow those who disagree the opportunity to run in the next election.
Again, I apologize for making you ask all of these questions because I failed to make it sufficiently clear that I was ONLY addressing your response, not the event.
I'm still at a loss for understanding how Dan took, what I feel was an obvious point about parents outraged at the materials to which their school children are exposed...most always without any consent or input from them...to make it about some leftist kid and her poem a mother found objectionable. Clearly, Dan ignores the very real problem of kids in schools indoctrinated in all the leftist crap Dan stupidly regards as beneficial despite the obvious problems inherent in all of it. Are there some materials which aren't as bad as some parents believe them to be? Well, that's a subjective issue and I've not seen them all. I do know that when books like Adventures of Huckelberry Finn or To Kill A Mockingbird are mentioned, leftists and other race-hustlers wet themselves over language of the time. Indeed, there's a push to "re-write" famous books due to their accurate representation for the speech of the times depicted within...often written during those times as well.
Yet Dan and others of his bent ilk pretend there's something Nazi-like, something very Fahrenheit 451 (ironically another book to which parents objected due to things within it which grace-embracing progressives find personally pleasing: profanity, using God's Name in vain, sex, drugs, suicide, murder and abortion [same thing]) about parents concerned about what their kids are forced to read.
So Dan whines on like the liar he is with his false depiction of the intentions of those who confront leftist school boards for their child abusive intention. That's because he favors the vile crap kids are forced to read. Craig spoke of instances...and there were more than one...where a parent or student was reading such pornographic materials put in the school before members of a school board and shut down because of just how pornographic the materials are. That is, they couldn't bear to hear what they were putting in front of kids not their own.
continuing....
But Dan chooses this poem which is nowhere as good or "inspiring" as his kind pretend to believe. Indeed, as I stated earlier, it's quite pretentious. Most contemporary poetry I've seen is. And none so much as that written by leftists. This poem of Gorman's is typical of someone her age corrupted to buy into the usual race-hustling, America-hating crap so common among our youth. I don't much blame her and a look at her bio indicates a young girl with a desire to make good noise in the world, despite her perspective so horribly skewed as it is. She's a leftist's dream child and that makes her potentially dangerous as she grows older if she hasn't a mind open enough to see both sides of the ideological divide. She could easily make Obama look like more of a piker than he is. In reading about her I was impressed as well as nauseated, because she is dedicated to her belief in myth.
The problem with her poem was her willful alteration to reflect the leftist view of Jan 6. As such, the poem delivers the leftist falsehoods about what that was about...why the people assembled there before it devolved into chaos. This and other aspects are used as a basis for her call to aspire to the usual things to which lefties so often pay lip service while in reality, they are what divides us.
I would not necessarily deny her poem in schools, except for how our nation is presented to kids these days. This simply adds to the distortion which in large part led to this composition in the first place. Hers is really just another CRT/1619 Project-style attack on America. Whatever she hoped to inspire...assuming kids actually pay it any attention at all (very doubtful if a kid isn't brainwashed in her direction anyway)...isn't as beneficial as lefties would presume it to be. But then, they have a jaded view of their own fictional understanding of American history and how to improve it. Based on that alone, arguments for finding better for students than her poetry are legit. It's true value is to teach kids how some wish to trash America and what it can look like.
Among Dan's lies above, we can find one actual truth. Dan says, "We white people and religious people have a REAL history and legacy of oppressing people in those minority groups..."
It's true. White people and "religious" people like Dan do indeed have a real history like that. Fortunately, there have always been white, religious people like me to stand in their way. But they carry on with their hatefulness as they have turned their evil toward parents who care about what's being forced down the throats of their children, a truly captive audience for whatever leftist crap the Dan's of education choose for the purpose.
He again speaks of Trump's disparagement of that part of the press Dan wants to believe is all of it. There's no downside except that morons pretend Trump's attacks weren't focused on those who most honest people who pay attention dislike because they've been paying attention. Those same members of the press are still doing the same thing. They haven't changed a whit.
But Dan's a vile, dishonest and dishonorable character all around. He won't see anything objectionable because he doesn't want to see it. He prefers seeing it where little objectionable crap exists...among the center-right population who adhere to time-honored, time-tested concepts of virtue, morality and character. Such people care about the quality of materials to which their kids are exposed, and even if there's any question about the quality, they'll err on the side of protecting their kids.
The biggest hypocrisy in all this "book banning" crap the left pukes out is how it is they who are the cancelling, deleting, stifling of opposing points of view asshats in the world...not the conservatives. Dan's a prime example.
" I have no opinion on the choice to age restrict this. I don't particularly care. "
And
" I do think that school boards are the level of government most closely in touch with their constituents and therefore are most representative of their constituents."
Well, the white privilege of not caring if a minority group is being further oppressed and marginalized is exactly part of the problem. You, as a white cisgender male can just, la di da, say I don't know and I don't care. Black and LGBTQ people who've been historically oppressed don't have that privilege.
Which is precisely why, says I, Jesus' call for us to ally with the least of these makes so much sense.
"Unless it's something like I mentioned recently (a book for elementary kids that was too explicit to be read at a school board meeting, or the equivalent of R rated material being presented to kids younger than 10), my inclination is to leave them alone..."
Ah! You WILL intervene or have an opinion if it offends your sense of "it's too sexual for my tastes!" But not when it's too oppressive of black people or LGBTQ folks.
Thus showing where your values and lack of values (ie, what you're literally saying is not worth intervening over.)
Recognize it for what it is.
Dan
More from the mom who got the book banned from the gradeschool library...
“I’m not an expert,” she said. “I’m not a reader. I’m not a book person. I’m a mom involved in my children’s education.”..
The advocacy group Miami Against Fascism posted photos of Salinas at rallies with member of Proud Boys and Moms for Liberty, a conservative group that has protested school curriculums that mention LGBTQ rights, critical race theory and other issues. Salinas told JTA that she was not a member of either group, saying she had merely attended rallies where their members were present...
Salinas expressed regrets for sharing a Facebook post in March about “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” a notoriously antisemitic hoax purporting to describe a Jewish plan for global domination.."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/05/28/daily-salinas-amanda-gorman-poem/70265234007/
THESE are the people you defend.
Get on the right side of decency.
Dan
"THESE are the people you defend."
Well, you are exactly right. I do defend people's right to hold an opinion that is contrary to Dan's and to be able to express that opinion in public. I also support the right of people to petition the government. What I haven't done, is support the specific actions of the school in this post.
"Well, the white privilege of not caring if a minority group is being further oppressed and marginalized is exactly part of the problem. You, as a white cisgender male can just, la di da, say I don't know and I don't care. Black and LGBTQ people who've been historically oppressed don't have that privilege."
1. I appreciate how you've decided to falsely characterize what I actually said, into something you wish I would have said.
2. The restriction by age of one book, does NOT "marginalize" and entire group of people.
"Which is precisely why, says I, Jesus' call for us to ally with the least of these makes so much sense."
Oh, look. We're back to "Because I say so.".
"Ah! You WILL intervene or have an opinion if it offends your sense of "it's too sexual for my tastes!" But not when it's too oppressive of black people or LGBTQ folks."
Yet, that's not actually what I said. But feel free to keep making this shit up. FYI, I can't help but notice the hypocrisy displayed by a school board that banned the reading of a book in front of a group of adults, that is readily available to children. Your willful ignorance of this story, and willingness to ignore the reality of who was "offended" in favor of some bullshit you made up.
"Thus showing where your values and lack of values (ie, what you're literally saying is not worth intervening over.)"
Except that it's not that at all, it's just some bullshit you made up, while ignoring the blatant racism and white supremacy displayed by Behar.
Recognize it for what it is.
Just for the record, I don't care about the people Dan defends. They have the means to improve themselves and become better people, but Dan wants us to accommodate their shortcomings. I don't know that there are any teachings of Christ which compel us to do so. What Dan defends is anathema to the faith to which Dan only pretends to adhere in order to posture as "good".
Post a Comment