When they accuse us of “book bans” they’re referring to pornography

originally posted by: olaru12
Ironic that the rightwing wants to ban books while their kids can access the most vile content available on their cell phones, tablets and laptops.


If a kid is curious about sexuality, they won't go looking for that info in the school library, when they have a peer group that can lead straight to that info via the WWW.

Here's a thought...."Deny Ignorance"

Here’s another thought…parents provide kids with their ph’s, tabs and computers, school computers have systems that don’t allow children access to porn sites. So… control of those devices is up to the parents, not something the school is providing, big difference

……and FYI It’s not just right wing that doesn’t want their children reading about BJ’s and anal sex at school or providing children with dildos and butt plugs and giving instruction on how to use or drag Queen shows that parents are not often informed about (yes there’s been a few). I know a lot of democrats with kids that are not down with this # at all. So… your whole right wing narrative goes right out the door.

Like you said….deny ignorance.

originally posted by: timequake
The principle of the school was terminated because she refused to follow the policy of first obtaining parental consent. This was a trip the school has made multiple times in the past. The Media's version of the story is, no surprise, misleading.

Oh, you should definitely get 'parental consent' when reviewing the works of Michelangelo. Probably DaVinci too. Never know how Renaissance Masters may screw your kids up.

a reply to: infolurker Toni Morrison’s debut 1970 novel “The Bluest Eye” was the most challenged book in the state.

There has been reports that her follow up book "The Brownest Eye" is also receiving heavy criticism.

Parents are not impressed.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: timequake
The principle of the school was terminated because she refused to follow the policy of first obtaining parental consent. This was a trip the school has made multiple times in the past. The Media's version of the story is, no surprise, misleading.

Oh, you should definitely get 'parental consent' when reviewing the works of Michelangelo. Probably DaVinci too. Never know how Renaissance Masters may screw your kids up.

Yeah, it is bit more than that. DaVinci isn't instructing Sex Acts!

Go ahead, take a look and tell me this is cool for 11 year olds. Oh, the drag show is all ages.

chaosandcontrol.substack.com...

sanzi.substack.com...

chaosandcontrol.substack.com...

themillstone.substack.com...

chaosandcontrol.substack.com...

video.twimg.com...

originally posted by: infolurker
Yeah, it is bit more than that.

No, it's exactly that. Puritanical parents afraid of David.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Legally a child is someone who can’t give consent. So the parents do it for them. That’s based in English common law older than the United States.

But you think the government should remove that power, or the local library board, or their third grade teacher, or the state. Or advertisers

The goal here is that children cannot give consent, but a stranger can. Nicely played


I’m sure it’s easy to make decisions like that when you consider yourself part of the human elite. Making decisions for the little people – that’s what being in the elite is all about

originally posted by: tovenar
But you think the government should remove that power, or the local library board, or their third grade teacher, or the state. Or advertisers

I think the parents should plan their kid's entire curriculum so they grow up to be abject morons just like them.

"OH, NOES! David is nekkid!"

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I was merely correcting your misstatement of facts. It wasn't a comment about what should or should not have required parental consent.

originally posted by: timequake
I was merely correcting your misstatement of facts.

There was nothing to correct, puritanical parents(s) think David is pornographic.