It really doesn't concern me for 2 reasons. 1: (lets Yhatzee talk down to their level) bannee book make people wantee read banneed book moore. And 2: most these similar stories ending the same way the one here in Kansas did... suspiciously recently and about suspiciously mostly the same books, as if a list is circulating around r/rimjobsforTrump or whereverer... but its probably just coincidence. The school board had librarians pull the books for review, somebody actually READ them, and now they are back on the shelves and the story is going away save for some reflexively pissed off parents who will continue to harp on in the public address portion of school board meetings until they get bored of being completely ignored and finally just go away. That's the way it happened last time there was a list circulating of "objectionable" books making school boards go through the dance again, and the time before, and the time before that.
We are now at the book burning stage...
- Thread starter Buyetyen
- Start date
Recommended Videos
In Texas, schools were banning some of the Vampire Academy books before they were written. Not because of Vampires (or, Rose wandering aimlessly round the former USSR for a whole book), but because there might be sex in them.
Do you truly lack the ability to understand the difference between JKR being criticized on social media for her social media posts and official government representatives censoring books with LGBT+ content including calling for them to be publicly burned? Or is this just you pretending because you have no actual argument but you felt the need to defend the school board's actions regardless because "yay team sports politics"?
Conveniently vague.
He knows the difference, he just wants to derail the thread like always. Just put him on ignore and let him smarm at a brick wall.
My recollection of the book burnings of Harry Potter as we traditionally understand them were carried out by the religious right. And while I won't deny there were books burned due to recent revelations about Rowling, I can only imagine that most of the books burned weren't new ones, but old and dog eared copies that now no longer held in the regard they once were. The only statement being made there was 'I can't have this in my life any more'. Allowing of course for the small subset of utter cranks who likely set their own pubic hair on fire to get some attention.
Official government employees were part of the fire cleansing before........They signed off on it.
Don't pull the "Only the government can censor things" crap. Or in this case "It only counts when the government does it".
I'm pointing out how funny it is suddenly only now to people care. I think this book burning is dumb, I think the other book burnings are dumb, I thought the Koran burnings in like 2009 were stupid, I thought the video game burnings in I think it was 2007 was stupid.
How hard is it to acknowledge the idea that this is unfortunately not new even in somewhat recent years but funny how people only declare the book burning to have started again now.
That was the first round, we've had a second round since then too by the other side.
The subject is elements contained in the plot of an unspecified sexually explicit game. Without more info about it you ought be vague, since it's such a broad statement. No one type of thing would fit all games. If your game is an orthodox harem game for example it'd make no sense, meanwhile if it's an otome game it'd prolly be expected to have a gay dude or twelve lol.
I mean yeah. If Trans people complain about Rowling then she can just gloat ''Lol you were never more than a percentage of my audience anyway''
But if a corrupt governor says ''I say a gay relation is essentially just pornography and I shall use all resources at my disposal to ensure that work of Satan gets banned in my state!'' then it kinda gets a different ring to it.
Yes, because in the first instance people are calling for the bans.
In the second instance the governor is implementing them normally because some small group called for them and for some reason the governor is listening to that group.
I find both bad.
I mean in context it was what 6 months ago or less there was a swell of people petitioning Joe Biden to ban 6 Days in Fallujah from being released on the grounds they were offended by it.
Taboo? I just think some concepts, like CRT, is for older children/ young adults. I'm not going to teach algebra to a 5 year old, nor am I going to teach them the cons and benefits of the Minimum Wage
The only thing that concerns me about this is what criteria will they use to ban books with “sexually explicit” material and who are the arbiters of making such a decision. Do we now ban books where women are showing a little skin or have somewhat big breasts? I’m all for kids not being exposed to adult material, but do we really need an authority figure making those calls based one what they perceive to be sexually explicit?
Last edited:
That's kind of where I'm stuck as well. With visual media, it's a lot easier to say "that's too much boob on screen, cut it out". With literature...is describing a character with huge...tracts of land as such considered explicit?
The criteria will be "Whatever the Spotsylvania County School Board votes for".
1. The criteria at least so far expressed seems to be "anything even passingly mentioning LGBT+ people existing".
2. The arbiters are the county school board
Nah, thighs and posteriors matter too.
CRT is a graduate studies theory for lawyers, so your kids must be especially bright XD.
But no by taboo I mean that if the kid sees this thing but you tell em the thing is taboo and they can't access it they will see it as a forbidden pleasure of some sort and want to access it more, they will place it on a pedestal. Meanwhile if you just explain it to them and treat it as a no big deal they will not put as much emphasis on it because you're not overreacting and they'll go back to watching the teletubies or whatever 5 year olds to.
A good example with this is alcohol. In the US they treat it as a taboo substance which is why you have kids drinking like crazy to the point of getting alcohol poisoning at parties and so on after they escape their parental supervision. Growing up for me alcohol was just a part of meals, we even had a red wine barrel in our balcony that we made ourselves. From a very young age it was culturally fine to have a couple of sips of it with meals if you were together with family. As a consequence, I've literally never been too drunk to function as an adult, never thrown up or anything, since I know my limits and don't treat drinking as this magical thing but just as a component of a nice meal or a relaxing evening. Even as a kid where I was left unsupervised with a literal large barrel worth of wine for hours on end every day I never snuck in and drank more than I should, since I figured if I wanted a couple sips I could have em anytime so it wasn't special or anything.
Last edited:
Yeah, nah. Thing is The Nazis ARE the enemy.
They were the enemy back in the 40s when they ravaged through my country and half of the Europe.
They were the enemy after WWII when they're hiding in plain sight, unbothered in South America, in the US Army research centers or in the administration ranks of newly formed Federal Republic of Germany.
When it comes to war criminals i preffer Simon Wiesenthal approach, rather that idiotic "forgive and forget".
Just want to point out that I think we are saying the exact same thing.
You keep saying forbidden like that's what I'm advocating. Then in your alcohol example, you put a bunch of barriers to limit alcohol use to certain times. I.e. you made it forbidden until meal times and then restricted access to a certain amount. Like, that's the approach I've been advocating for.