Slog
News & ArtsThursday, October 22, 2009
Books Do You Know Who You Are?
Posted by Paul Constant on Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 1:08 PM
This Idaho woman got upset that her four-year-old took out a 183-page young adult book with a cartoon naked lady on the front cover and the word "smart-ass" on the back. She's trying to—yawn—get the book banned from the library.
In lieu of the removal of "How to Get Suspended," Gering said she would like to see warning labels on potentially offensive children's books."We do that with movies, why don't we do that with books?" she said. "I think (the book is) completely inappropriate, and I wouldn't let a 13-year-old read it. I know they have other things like that in the library, but I think they should be removed. Unrefined — that means crude. Anything like that is disgusting. I think the people of Nampa need to decide what they want in their library."
Here's what I wonder about these sorts of people. When they discover these books in the library or school, the books that are for some reason so offensive that they're willing to complain to the press and the mayor and everyone they meet: Do they have a moment before this media maelstrom starts where they go into the bathroom, look at their own eyes in the mirror, and think to themselves "Yes. I am about to become that person," or does it just happen? Do they know they're the same person as every other person who has tried to ban a book? Or do they think they are special? I've read dozens of these stories in the last two years, and I've never determined a difference between any of these people. They're always the exact same fucking asshole, every goddamned time.
4
Heh. If she thinks that's bad, just wait til she sees the kind of shit her kid gets exposed to at school.
5
I doubt she paused an reflected on her decision to blow this way out of proportion because that's probably exactly how she lives the rest of her life.
Also, someone tell this idiot there IS a book audience recommendation system, why do you think the book your four year old picked out was classified as Young Adult?
Also, someone tell this idiot there IS a book audience recommendation system, why do you think the book your four year old picked out was classified as Young Adult?
7
@3: It *is* confusing to use "take out" in the context of a library, but in the article, it just meant that the four-year-old pulled it from the shelf.
8
Paul, is this your first visit to the wonderful state of Idaho?
As an Idaho native, let me assure you that "realising that she is THAT PERSON" would cause neither her nor the majority of her neighbors any discomfort whatsoever.
As an Idaho native, let me assure you that "realising that she is THAT PERSON" would cause neither her nor the majority of her neighbors any discomfort whatsoever.
10
It's way too late for her to reflect on becoming "that person". She's been "that person" for a long time now. This event is more like a coming out than a conversion.
11
"cartoon naked lady" hardly describes the cover. A stylized & 'censored" illustration appears in the top right corner - how anyone could find that offensive is beyond me.
13
Can't help putting in my two cents - as a mother of young boys who liked sci-fi novels, it was extremely difficult to tell which books were "too adult" (i.e. full of kinky space sex) I wished for warning lables too.
15
Nothing makes people more self-righteous than having children. Breeders think that just because they push out a few kids, the world needs to revolve around them and their families. Stop using your kids as political cover for stupidity, ignorance, bigotry et. al. and actually, you know, parent.
Making babies is the easy part, but parenting takes a hell of a lot more effort. Sadly, too many parents want some easy world where they don't have to put forth any effort, at the expense of the rest of us.
Making babies is the easy part, but parenting takes a hell of a lot more effort. Sadly, too many parents want some easy world where they don't have to put forth any effort, at the expense of the rest of us.
16
Paul, was there a mention of the phrase "Won;t someone think of the children!" anywhere in the article?
A 4 y/o pulled the book off the shelf, checked it out and brought it home without mommy dearest noticing? There's some great parenting for you.
A 4 y/o pulled the book off the shelf, checked it out and brought it home without mommy dearest noticing? There's some great parenting for you.
17
so your question is why didn't a woman unaware of the possibility of self-reflection stop and self-reflect?
18
Paul, you're not being fair. At least that's how it seems.
Over a decade ago, I was living in that miserable berg known as Salem, Oregon. A local woman complained to the Salem-Keizer school board about Robert McCammon's Demon Walk, claiming that the book—by having a character in it named "Demon"—by being in the school district's libraries, violated her First Amendment right to religious freedom.
It should be noted, for literary consideration, that characters named "Demon" are fairly common in McCammon stories, my favorite being the little red-haired girl in Boy's Life.
At any rate, however, the crux of her argument was that simply by being available for students to choose to read, the book violated her religious freedom to teach her children whatever she wanted without anyone ever suggesting anything else. In other words, her First Amendment rights were violated unless other people's were forfeit.
And over the years I've told that story probably more than is healthy, and the responses are always the same. Those sympathetic to, well, freedom and art and expression, laugh at how silly the argument sounds. Those sympathetic to the book-banning crowd simply don't understand the contradiction.
Then again, I was raised in the '80s when more conservative segments of society could be heard to say of heavy metal lyrics, "Your freedom of speech ends when it infringes on mine." In other words, if you are allowed to buy an album your daddy doesn't like—say, King Diamond's Abigail, which I was once refused the right to purchase at a Disc Jockey store when I was seventeen—you're persecuting him.
My point being that the would-be censors in such cases can't even figure out so basic a contradiction. Before these aspiring tyrants can even look in the mirror to ask, "Am I about to become that person?" they must first recognize that other people (e.g., that [other] person) are actually real. And history speaks against that.
As such, I would suggest it is unfair to call them assholes. It would be more appropriate to call them retarded. Or, to be politically correct ... um ... what are we up to? Developmentally delayed? Learning impaired? "Acceptional"? (And no, that's not a misspelling; it's a sad, old PC joke.)
Point being, it's not nice to call retards assholes.
More...
Over a decade ago, I was living in that miserable berg known as Salem, Oregon. A local woman complained to the Salem-Keizer school board about Robert McCammon's Demon Walk, claiming that the book—by having a character in it named "Demon"—by being in the school district's libraries, violated her First Amendment right to religious freedom.
It should be noted, for literary consideration, that characters named "Demon" are fairly common in McCammon stories, my favorite being the little red-haired girl in Boy's Life.
At any rate, however, the crux of her argument was that simply by being available for students to choose to read, the book violated her religious freedom to teach her children whatever she wanted without anyone ever suggesting anything else. In other words, her First Amendment rights were violated unless other people's were forfeit.
And over the years I've told that story probably more than is healthy, and the responses are always the same. Those sympathetic to, well, freedom and art and expression, laugh at how silly the argument sounds. Those sympathetic to the book-banning crowd simply don't understand the contradiction.
Then again, I was raised in the '80s when more conservative segments of society could be heard to say of heavy metal lyrics, "Your freedom of speech ends when it infringes on mine." In other words, if you are allowed to buy an album your daddy doesn't like—say, King Diamond's Abigail, which I was once refused the right to purchase at a Disc Jockey store when I was seventeen—you're persecuting him.
My point being that the would-be censors in such cases can't even figure out so basic a contradiction. Before these aspiring tyrants can even look in the mirror to ask, "Am I about to become that person?" they must first recognize that other people (e.g., that [other] person) are actually real. And history speaks against that.
As such, I would suggest it is unfair to call them assholes. It would be more appropriate to call them retarded. Or, to be politically correct ... um ... what are we up to? Developmentally delayed? Learning impaired? "Acceptional"? (And no, that's not a misspelling; it's a sad, old PC joke.)
Point being, it's not nice to call retards assholes.
21
That's the problem: Everyone thinks they're special. Everyone thinks they're a victim. The world should be exactly as THEY call it and there's no room for flexibility. Exactly why I hated "it takes a village" - no it doesn't. The village didn't forget its birth-control, you did and so it's your job to raise your kid. Unfortunately, this is only going to get worse as the T-Ball Generation ("Everyone's a winner!") matures. And then votes. Great.
22
I would have thought the "cartoon naked lady" and the word "smart-ass" on the covers of the book would have been enough warning label. At times it's indeed a challenge to filter reading material from young inquiring minds but that's the parental or guardian responsibility. Every reader young and old is an individual and reading material shouldn't be classified with warning labels. The parent should ask the local librarian for help selecting books or go to the beginning of the Dewey Decimal system to find books like '101 books your preschooler will sit through" and should especially review the titles before they get scanned/checked out.
23
A better question: do these people ever actually READ the books they seek to ban? It doesn't seem like it.
24
If she won't let her 13-year-old read books for young adults, she's gonna be mighty surprised when her 15-year old gets pregnant.
25
The book's name is "How to Get Suspended"! That's probably not a book a 4 year old should be reading.
Everyone has already made my point about parents needing to parent, but come on. It's not hard to check the books your kid is checking out before you leave the library.
Everyone has already made my point about parents needing to parent, but come on. It's not hard to check the books your kid is checking out before you leave the library.
26
You've got it all wrong Paul - people like this don't look at themselves in the mirror and think about becoming that person they look outside their front doors and think about those people.
@24:
Unfortunately she probably won't, since it's entirely likely that's about the same age SHE got preggers...
@24:
Unfortunately she probably won't, since it's entirely likely that's about the same age SHE got preggers...
27
Can her four-year-old read well enough to sound out "smartass?" At least she's doing something right.
The thing about books is that's it's pretty tough to read through a book if it's not at your maturity level. Adult books are boring and difficult to understand if you're seven, even though you can read all the words, even if it's a titillating story. Except for comic books. I suppose those can still terrorize the semi-literate.
The thing about books is that's it's pretty tough to read through a book if it's not at your maturity level. Adult books are boring and difficult to understand if you're seven, even though you can read all the words, even if it's a titillating story. Except for comic books. I suppose those can still terrorize the semi-literate.
28
The irony of trying to ban a book about censorship is just too much for me.
I'm admittedly biased since I know the author, but it's a great little book. I'm loving seeing it get so much publicity over this.
I'm admittedly biased since I know the author, but it's a great little book. I'm loving seeing it get so much publicity over this.
29
@18 - You are missing the point in your own story. The 1st Amendment has more than one part - the "Demon" argument is that there is an Establishment issue, not a Free Speech issue.
Not that it is a *persuasive* argument, it isn't, but that is the argument being made, same as if there was a shelf full of Bibles in a public school library.
Google the news today in Lodi, CA if you want to see the Establishment argument at work and being ignored by a whole town full of "those" people.
I live in a town full of "those" people where our town government skirts on the very edge of the Establishment Clause at every opportunity, somewhat south of Lodi. In fact, I just raised the issue, again, on my blog this morning.
I haven't seen it in the local library, or in the local schools, this book banning, but I know it is only a matter of time. I have long been fully intending to ask our local librarian about her position regarding such matters the next time I bump into her. Maybe I will make an effort to ask before it happens...
Not that it is a *persuasive* argument, it isn't, but that is the argument being made, same as if there was a shelf full of Bibles in a public school library.
Google the news today in Lodi, CA if you want to see the Establishment argument at work and being ignored by a whole town full of "those" people.
I live in a town full of "those" people where our town government skirts on the very edge of the Establishment Clause at every opportunity, somewhat south of Lodi. In fact, I just raised the issue, again, on my blog this morning.
I haven't seen it in the local library, or in the local schools, this book banning, but I know it is only a matter of time. I have long been fully intending to ask our local librarian about her position regarding such matters the next time I bump into her. Maybe I will make an effort to ask before it happens...
30
God I hate book banners. I WANT to read the New Joy of Sex! I'm a fucking adult and pay taxes on this library system! Stop controlling my fucking life!
31
Everything that has been said to this point in comments is pretty much true. One thing I will add though, is that this lady, irritatingly stupid as she is, is justified, I believe, in getting upset that the book was shelved in the "juvenile" section, which from the article sounds like this particular library's designation for children's books. They have a separate "young adult" section, and a book with profanity on the back, with (if the article description is to be believed) sexually-oriented subject matter, should have been shelved there.
Of course, then she has to make a fucking ass out of herself by going right past that, and saying they should remove it from the entire library. Pathetic.
Of course, then she has to make a fucking ass out of herself by going right past that, and saying they should remove it from the entire library. Pathetic.
32
Hold on a second. I just looked at the picture of the book. That's what she's all up in arms about? It looks like a Picasso painting with the square boobs blacked out. WTF is wrong with these people?
37
Dear dumb fucking lady:
If my mom could check what 13-year-old me and my 7-year-old brother were trying to check out BEFORE we got it to the counter (no lurid romances for me and no Guns and Ammo for my brother), I'm sure you can put the fucking Chicken Soup for the Stupid Soul book down long enough to watch where your kid is. 4-year-olds aren't reading chapter books, which, in EVERY FUCKING LIBRARY EVER, are shelved separately from the picture books. If you don't want your kid reading it, ACT LIKE A GODDAMN PARENT.
A million dollars says she protests sex ed being taught in schools on the basis of "parents know best", yet can't do something as basic as watch where her kid goes in a library.
If my mom could check what 13-year-old me and my 7-year-old brother were trying to check out BEFORE we got it to the counter (no lurid romances for me and no Guns and Ammo for my brother), I'm sure you can put the fucking Chicken Soup for the Stupid Soul book down long enough to watch where your kid is. 4-year-olds aren't reading chapter books, which, in EVERY FUCKING LIBRARY EVER, are shelved separately from the picture books. If you don't want your kid reading it, ACT LIKE A GODDAMN PARENT.
A million dollars says she protests sex ed being taught in schools on the basis of "parents know best", yet can't do something as basic as watch where her kid goes in a library.
38
@13, so, how are your kids after reading kinky space sex?
One of my high school English professors found out I was also a vampire fan and lent me an anthology of vampire fiction from right off the classroom bookshelf. It had kinky lesbian sex in it, graphic enough that it wouldn't have been allowed for a high school audience. I thought it was awesome, informative, and made him a cooler guy, and I didn't say anything to anyone. And hey, I've turned out okay--although a slightly kinky bisexual.
A friend of mine has been bringing up her daughter, now 10, with exposure to every sexualized bit of media that adults enjoy. The kid watched Queer As Folk when she was six, and now is on to True Blood. Mom just explains as much as the kid wants to know, and demystifies what the kid is watching. She's the most mature for her age, smartest, coolest kid I know.
So while I wish every parent was as progressive as my friend is with her daughter, myself and that kid are proof that exposure at a young age to sexual material (for me, it definitely didn't start with the vampire anthology) doesn't hurt anything, and has probably only made us better people.
One of my high school English professors found out I was also a vampire fan and lent me an anthology of vampire fiction from right off the classroom bookshelf. It had kinky lesbian sex in it, graphic enough that it wouldn't have been allowed for a high school audience. I thought it was awesome, informative, and made him a cooler guy, and I didn't say anything to anyone. And hey, I've turned out okay--although a slightly kinky bisexual.
A friend of mine has been bringing up her daughter, now 10, with exposure to every sexualized bit of media that adults enjoy. The kid watched Queer As Folk when she was six, and now is on to True Blood. Mom just explains as much as the kid wants to know, and demystifies what the kid is watching. She's the most mature for her age, smartest, coolest kid I know.
So while I wish every parent was as progressive as my friend is with her daughter, myself and that kid are proof that exposure at a young age to sexual material (for me, it definitely didn't start with the vampire anthology) doesn't hurt anything, and has probably only made us better people.
39
How did I fucking know it was in Nampa? I swear to God everytime something like this involves an "Idaho Woman", it's in Nampa.
What a Place to Live!
What a Place to Live!
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (39) RSS