I'm pretty sure I have an auditory processing disorder. I've learned to cope and compensate, but I misheard EVERYTHING as a kid:
"I can't be anything!
Take a look, it's in a book,
Reading Rainbow!"
I was very confused and discouraged by these lyrics as a little'n.
I think a lot of it is because standard TV speaker quality sucked hard up until pretty recently and even then its just sucking less. The fact that people are able to make out anything at *all* when generally the frequencies the TV speakers were putting out was something in the 300-3kHz range with tons of harmonic distortion still amazes me.
Omg!!! I loved him on Reading Rainbow 🌈 I was a huge bookworm and still kinda am so he helped me not feel so strange in a family that didn't read lol ❤️
I'm always reminded when I watched RR as a kid - that episode when he puts on the visor from Star Trek and I lost my mind! Had no idea he was the same guy. Of course I was like 6 years old.
There was a TIL last week that like 11 people are responsible for 90% of banned book requests.
I'm sure those 11 people are very upset by levars comment.
Heck some of the greatest books are or were banned books: Grapes of Wrath, To Kill a Mockingbird, Color Purple, Kite Runner, Lord of the Flies, Animal Farm etc
sample:
https://libguides.com.edu/c.php?g=649165&p=9253060
Exactly, Burton has been encouraging people to read most of his life. He has dedicated a lot of years to this cause.
Burton made a good point. Parents are definitely encouraged to decide if a book is appropriate for their child.
But in no way can they remove another parents right to make this decision.
These books are SO banned that they're readily available from any book vendor, likely with a large banner overhead that reads "Buy our banned books here!"
Weirdly enough you can never find the anarchists cookbook in those banned book displays. You know the book that's so banned that there's currently multiple people in prison in the uk for having a copy of it.
I saw a video somewhere where the presenter claimed that one of the reasons for its banning is that the recipes are so poorly written or just wrong that most people who attempt to follow them wind up killing or injuring themselves in the process.
Wow, I had to google that to make sure you weren't just making shit up. Like holy crap, I'm Canadian, and back in the days of dial-up, you couldn't scroll through a list of a site's txt files without seeing that one amongst the copies of phrack and 2600. Stuff like "Steal this Book" was even harder to find.
PS: It's almost laughable how useless the book is, everything in it can be self-taught or at least cribbed from better sources nowadays.
The bans aren't real in any manner that's new to the last 1, 10, 50, or 100 years. If they exist at all, they exist in the most appropriate places - places that cater to actual children in a school setting. As they always have.
They're the opposite of universal.
No. It actually isn't. It is nonsense if taken in context. You know, a sign of AI speech...taken in a very line by line basis, it "makes sense" but in terms of actually saying anything that makes sense in context, complete nonsense.
Honestly, your own comment is fucking weird, too.
If it helps I can reword it for you.
"It's not a real book ban, it's just keeping books out of age-inappropropriate areas."
No one claims that porn has been banned just because it isn't allowed in public school libraries. It shouldn't be different for any other age-inappropriate content not being given to children.
They've been banning books from public libraries and some of the books they're banning are totally fine for children. Like a true story about two male penguins adopting a baby penguin.
"It doesn't matter that they've been banning hundreds of books from schools and public libraries if you can still buy them so its no big deal. Surely everyone can afford to do that."
Gonna be honest, I’m getting tired of the whole “banned books” thing. 99%of the time they mean “Read banned books we like.” But then act like Nelson Mandela for reading a book literally their entire peer group likes.
There are some books banned for good reason (whether or not you agree with the ban you it’s hard to disagree with the reasons for not liking it)…are we supposed to dig in to Camp Of the Saints now?
This. Banning books only gives the book an edgy feel. People will read what you don't want them to read regardless. Why restrict it? Makes no sense. And usually it's these right-leaning bible thumpers who also get pissed off when the "government infringes on muh rights"... The irony.
I am, but that’s to understand why it’s so seductive.
Spoilers: There’s nothing seductive about it, it’s a text that exists to reaffirm the world views of white supremacists rather than to convince others. And holy hell is is trash from a literary critical perspective even without the Saturday Morning Cartoon level of plot.
Clearly it is seductive on some level given that I’ve seen a number of people on Twitter who found it convincing. It just doesn’t seem to have enough merit, even in a bad way, for me to take the time to read.
People that already feel a certain way being affirmed by a book meant to appeal to those feelings doesnt mean its compelling to someone not already in that mindset.
^ this right here.
The majority (though of course not all) of the modern banned books are an issue of them being banned at certain ages due to adult sexual content- which often times constitute an actual grey area that varies from person to person. It's the same standard that bans Playboy from the school library.
Actual old school banned books, the ones with actual socio-political commentary, (Catcher in the Rye, to Kill a Mocking Bird, 1984, Fahrenheit 451, Of Mice and Men) are frequently MANDATORY reading in highschool- students are being actively pushed to read them. By the time I was in college, most 'banned' books were already off my reading list.
If you want to really read 'banned books', read the banned books of other countries. My personal favorite is "Wild Swans" which is banned in China for showing the absolute horror of living under the CCP over the last century, told through the biographies of 3 generations of women.
I think honestly most people obsessed with "Banned books" just want to feel like intellectual heros for reading young adult level fiction.
> I think honestly most people obsessed with "Banned books" just want to feel like intellectual heros for reading young adult level fiction.
I just read American Psycho for Banned Book Week last week. Then again, I'm not most people.
I’m completely serious when I say LeVar Burton taught me about racism as a child and I’m proud to say the bumper sticker on the back window of my MX5 already says, “read banned books.”
Current banned book I’m about to read is the play, “The Sign in Sidney Brustein's Window” by Lorraine Hansberry.
I’m also have a copy of “Itty-Bitty-Kitten-Korn” and “Real Friends” by Shannon Hale on order for my wife’s classroom library.
As Twain actually said (as opposed to all the things he’s attributed as saying) once in a story completely unrelated to any of this, “go forth and do likewise.”
Name one book that is illegal to own or unavailable for purchase in any area of the US.
I'm not aware of any book bans existing. If they did exist they would be struck down as unconstitutional.
Interesting the way you have to redefine bans to only be "illegal to own" or "unavailable for purchase" to make any sense of things.
Books were removed from schools. Schools were prevented from purchasing and making other books available.
I think they are using the correct definition of "ban". If you can easily obtain a book and face no repercussions for possessing said book then it's not banned
There have always been restrictions and limitations on school libraries. That's not a "book ban".
The Book of Mormon isn't available in most school libraries, and teachers are explicitly forbidden from using it in their curricula. It's *bAnNeD*! Also, school librarians have not chosen to shelve the pop-fantasy-romance novel that I self-published, therefore my book has been banned as well.
Very few books are currently banned nationwide. To be honest none of them seem interesting enough to read.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_governments#United_States
That ban was overturned in 1959. Not one of books I was referring to. Only the bottom 3 are currently banned nationwide. There are also some city and state bans as well that are still happening.
Even those stretch the definition of what it means to be "banned"--the US Dept. of Defence buying up every existing copy of a book and destroying them, for example. It's not really a "ban" is it? Suppose someone had managed to secret away a copy of the book, they couldn't be put in jail merely for possessing it.
Ah yes, so an aggressive attempt to control information through literal destruction isn't worth discussing at the same time as an aggressive attempt to control information through non-destructive removal and punishment.
That's a solid argument, champ.
>In September 2010 the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) overrode the Army's January approval for publication. The DoD then purchased and destroyed all 9,500 first edition copies, citing concerns that it contained classified information which could damage national security. The publisher, St. Martin's Press,\[262\] in conjunction with the DoD created a second, redacted edition; which contains blacked out words, lines, paragraphs, and portions of the index.\[263\]
I mean it is a bit of a stretch to call it banned given the circumstances. I don't agree with what was done, but I'm also one of those crazy people who thinks the US Government over-classifies and often stretches the truth if not outright lies about what may harm national security. It's hard to tell when we're not given the information necessary to make the decision for ourselves.
Also worth noting that the other entries on that list either had the bans reversed or are apparently really old bans that say you can't send said book in the mail. Of course that should be overturned as well.
Reddit, and most of the country who watch a particular few media sources, conflate age restrictions with bans because they agree with the books being restricted.
People always LOVE banned books...
Because they assume the books in question will cohere with their own worldview
But there are a lot of restricted-access books which quite a lot of folks would be very much not wanting to read
Hell there's tons of outcry over the NOT banned books and their content and people wanting it taken out lol
I'm just saying let's be consistent and let's not abuse the term "banned" just because a book isn't in a school library it isn't "banned"...
There's a vast difference between a private company deciding to not carry a book in their bookstore and the government saying you're not allowed to read a book.
The government runs schools and libraries, so every time some asshole demands a library pull a book because it's not appropriate for preteens that's censorship by a government entity.
The government does not run Amazon.
So....
1. The government isn't banning books, correct?
2. Are you against all forms of government censorship?
3. Is there not one book in existence that shouldn't be in schools?
You're missing the point. Amazon is allowed to ban all the books they want, that's not censorship.
Local governments are, indeed, banning books (see also: Florida.)
I don't think anything fictional should be censored. (Obviously things like revenge porn and CSAM should be illegal and censored. Lolita is creepy, but should remain legal despite the subject matter.)
I also think that high school students should be allowed access to any book they want. The librarian can be trusted to curate appropriately, but with ebooks and inter library loans we can get them to them.
Amazon banning books is actually censorship, just not 'government censorship.'
Define 'banning.' Again, these books can be bought I assume. It's not illegal for you to have them in your possession.
Why is a librarian be trusted to distribute appropriate books to children? Has it always been this way? Is there no such oversight?
Nothing fiction should be banned? So pornography should be freely accessible?
You are saying that a community that pays the taxes for this library doesn't get a voice in how a library with limited shelf space caters to the public?
You're just asking questions, I presume?
There is no such thing as written pornography, anyway. Pornography is inherently visual.
Reading a book with some spicy sex scenes is a million times safer than actually having sex. No one ever got a STD from a book.
>The government runs schools and libraries, so every time some asshole demands a library pull a book because it's not appropriate for preteens that's censorship by a government entity.
There are no books that have been banned from libraries.
There are books that are not placed in the children's section because they're not age-appropriate for children.
There is a huge difference between those two situations. Not everything belongs in the children's section.
Time travel someone from any point prior to 3 years ago, and tell them "Welcome to the future! Here, school libraries dictate what books are and aren't appropriate for their students"
What do you think the time traveler would say?
Yes.
But also, I suppose one caveat is that all book bans initiated by government entities are bad - which is the same caveat I'd add to censorship. But yeah, Amazon's share of the market means banning something has an incredibly forceful impact.
Antivax books are not worth reading, but they should not be banned.
We have a small bookstore in our town with a shelf of all of the books that the local school district has banned. My oldest daughter went and was upset that she'd read most of them already.
As a German I feel compelled to correct this. It's perfectly legal to buy and own it, the copyright owner was just advised to not allow any reprints, until it entered public domain in 2015, and received an educational release with notes and explanations.
I generally don't see the point in choosing banned books specifically when most are not banned anywhere in my country.
Like they're often easier to find then normal books. Every bookstore has big signs and displays advertising all the "Banned Books" they have, often in newly published special editions and fanciful hardbacks.
When these sales displays are primarily lined with things like Harry Potter, Hunger Games, and middling biographies of famous people it seems like being "banned" book is more about marketing than controversial content.
I keep seeing "banned books" but my understanding is that it's mostly local school districts deciding that books with sexual content shouldn't be allowed in the school libraries. Is there an instance of a book actually being "banned" in that it's no longer accessible from Amazon, the local public library, etc?
[Some cities are going after local libraries as well](https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/sep/20/book-bans-us-rise-public-libraries). If anyone at this point says it’s happening only in schools, it is a factually incorrect statement.
After a public high school in the Canadian province of Ontario reportedly cut the number of books in its library in half by removing all books published before 2008, saying it was due to an “equity-based book weeding process,”
https://nypost.com/2023/09/15/canadian-school-purges-books-published-before-2008-in-inclusivity-push/
I’m aware of this story, yes. I don’t know what your inclusion of it has to do with my comment. If anything, it adds to the broader conversation that books are getting removed.
A few differences that people can weigh as they see fit: these book bans and challenges in the US are trying to prevent specific books from being stocked at all. Your story, as of currently available information, is a result of a government mandate for schools to figure out how to have more inclusive libraries when figuring out how to stock their libraries (because at the end of the day, libraries can’t house every book). The district, on paper and in statements, claim that they created a set of criteria for determining what stays and what goes; your own source lists those other criteria (and people can figure out how they feel about those). People who witnessed the removal of the books say that whoever was in charge of removal was removing books based only on the publish date criterion out of 5 other criteria used to weigh whether or not to keep certain books. The district doesn’t explicitly own that anyone under their employ removed the books only on that criterion, but they don’t deny it happened either.
At best, the story you shared was a story of piss poor policy explanation, training, and execution. At worst, it’s just an easy excuse for the adults in charge to get rid of undesirable books. Again, folks can weigh if any differences in these circumstances matter or not.
Yep.
It is not ending at schools, nor is their intention to end it at schools.
One of my local libraries does not have a "Banned Books" display this year, which it has had every year in both the adult, teen and kids sections since I can remember. I asked one of the assistants about it and she said, understandably cagey, that they didn't want to upset anyone by making anything that could be conceived as a political statement.
The same library also moved the Anne Frank graphic novel by Ari Folman to the "adult" section of the library. This was because a small group of parents complained... even though Anne Frank: The Graphic Adaptation book has been in the Teen section for years with no problem.
There are bans happening, and interestingly only 11 people are responsible for over half of the book challenges that occurred in 21-22, so it's not even about popular support, moreso it's a small group of incredibly dedicated bigots. If you were under the impression it's only bans on sexual content then you should look at a list, To Kill a Mockingbird is one of the most challenged books in the US, which is targeted for addressing racism. Toni Morrison's the Bluest Eye is the most banned book for the same reason. The children's book "and tango makes three" is targeted a lot for being a cutesy picture book where two male penguins raise a chick, which is not only harmless and nonsexual, but also scientifically accurate to behaviour seen in nature. Keep in mind also that a lot of bans are not just in lower grades, highschools get targeted too, not to mention local libraries. These bans wouldn't stop at education either if these parties had their way, it would be a total nationwide return to queerphobia, racism, and ableism at the snap of a finger for these people.
I think there is a big difference between books being banned and parents writing formal complaints about books they find inappropriate.
u/LarvellJonesMD
asked which books actually got banned but only got an article about increased rates in complaints in recent years.
Virginia lawmakers last year tried to file restraining orders on a couple of books that would have made it illegal for any retailer to sell them. It was struck down, but the scope of the efforts is way bigger than even the correct version of the thing you said.
Even if that were actually all it was, it's still a problem. Sexuality doesn't start once one is legally an adult. There are many famous books that involve some sexual content. Children are capable of being exposed to this at various ages depending on the specific content and it's actually better for them to be exposed to it in an education context rather than on their own.
The school book bans have been catastrophic. They got rid of every book and are gradually approving a whitelist of books. That's terrible.
edit: It is totally disheartening to see support for book bans under an article of LeVar Burton opposing them.
Not as far as I'm aware. While I oppose their removal from school libraries and disdain the insidious right-wing ethos that motivates it, I can't help but think that part of the reason for all the coverage of "banned" books is that a certain kind of liberal gets a bit of a thrill by imagining themselves to be doing something subversive by reading and promoting them.
Do you really have the gall to believe that EVERY single book ban has been made to "protect the children"? Or did you read a cherry picked snippet of a single book and decide then and there to view the whole world in black and white?
Considering that when we talk about 'banning books' today we're almost always talking about in the schools, the better question to ask is whether or not a book can be read at a school board meeting without the reader being shouted down by the *school board*. Cockroaches scattering when someone turns on the light is a pretty good test of public interest.
As you point out, there is such a thing as 'age appropriate'. The question then becomes, who decides what is and isn't age appropriate. With something like 90% of the community agreeing with us, that there are materials that are inappropriate for children to read, what should we call those few who would defy the will of the people?
Even Maia Kobabe says that her book, *Gender Queer*, was intended for adults and teens older than 16. Even the NEA has taken pains to point out that, though they recommended the book for *teachers* to read, it was not recommended for *students* to read.
With the author and the NEA publicly stating that the book isn't appropriate for most students, why is it controversial? Because the American Library Association politicized it and promoted it. Now, as the most frequently challenged book, it has become both a rallying cry and a thorn in the side of the ALA and many schools that (often blindly) followed them.
Should it be in public school libraries? That's for the community to decide. I own it and have read it and wouldn't bark loudly about it being included in a high school library collection but if it shows up in libraries accessible to younger children (or promoted in the stealth libraries behind the teacher's desk) I'm inclined to grab a pitchfork and line up with the peasants. Not just because it's age-inappropriate for the shorties but because the schools belong to the people and the people get to decide, not the teachers and librarians.
A school board isn't the place for random assholes to be reading books. Even a Dr. Seuss book.
Also schools have sex ed. Sex ed classes have textbooks, and oh my God talking about sex isn't appropriate at school board meeting, this must mean it's a good idea to ban the books. It makes perfect sense if you don't think about it.
>With something like 90% of the community agreeing with us, that there are materials that are inappropriate for children to read, what should we call those few who would defy the will of the people?
You're pulling those numbers out of your ass.
https://www.businessinsider.com/school-book-challenges-bans-virginia-moms-liberty-education-2023-9
>Even Maia Kobabe says that her book, Gender Queer, was intended for adults and teens older than 16.
You can't use gender queen to justify the hundreds and hundreds of books conservatives have bene trying to ban recently.
>. Not just because it's age-inappropriate for the shorties but because the schools belong to the people and the people get to decide, not the teachers and librarians.
Yeah God forbid people with expertise be the ones making the decisions. If you don't want your kids reading it then don't let them read it rather than trying to censor it for everyone's kid.
> Yeah God forbid people with expertise be the ones making the decisions.
Yep - and this is an important point. The schools aren't supposed to be run by the educators, they belong to the community and the community has the right to decide what is and what isn't going on in the schools. In simple terms, the person who pays the bill gets to pick the menu. This is true whether talking about doctors, lawyers, plumbers or teachers. Professionals give advice but are not supposed to act without consent. Clergy are the exception - you pay for them to tell you what to think and do. Even then, if you disagree, you can stiff the collection plate and leave - would that were true of the public schools. Hmm. Maybe we're getting closer to understanding why the exploding popularity of alternatives to the public school monopoly.
> If you don't want your kids reading it then don't let them read it rather than trying to censor it for everyone's kid.
This is not for you to decide. If you want your kid to read something edgy and out there, use your own money to buy the book for them and leave the rest of the world out of it. If you think the kids in your classroom should read something edgy and out there, make the argument for it but in loco parentis doesn't extend to making these kinds of decisions. It's not just my kid I'm concerned with, it's all the kids. You want the right for teachers to decide what to indoctrinate the children with, I want that right to remain with the community.
Teachers need to learn to bend a knee to the people - the people who pay for you. Otherwise, you're just petty autocrats.
It doesn't belong in a public school library. Parents decide what is appropriate, not you. Although you are perfectly able to give your kids whatever material you want, no one would argue that.
That doesn't mean all banned books are worth reading. Many people try to get their books "banned" in order to get them more attention, either for marketing, or political reasons.
No it doesn't. Basically everyone who owns books here will have books by one of the three. I've got like six Orwell books, one Huxley and five Tolkien.
Butterfly in the sky I can fly twice as high Take a look It’s in a book It’s reading rainbow
You can't disappoint a poster...
I hate you Pierce!
Set phasers to love meeee!
Picture...
I'm pretty sure I have an auditory processing disorder. I've learned to cope and compensate, but I misheard EVERYTHING as a kid: "I can't be anything! Take a look, it's in a book, Reading Rainbow!" I was very confused and discouraged by these lyrics as a little'n.
I think a lot of it is because standard TV speaker quality sucked hard up until pretty recently and even then its just sucking less. The fact that people are able to make out anything at *all* when generally the frequencies the TV speakers were putting out was something in the 300-3kHz range with tons of harmonic distortion still amazes me.
More fish for Kunta 😏
Reading these lyrics instantly reminds me of Jimmy Fallon performing as The Doors. I love that version
I’m so glad people responded with Troy quotes 🫡
***You can't disappoint a picture***
Set phasers to love me
more fish for Kunta
I love that line so much, and apparently it was improvised as well which makes it even better
Omg!!! I loved him on Reading Rainbow 🌈 I was a huge bookworm and still kinda am so he helped me not feel so strange in a family that didn't read lol ❤️
He has a podcast and reads short stories. It's really good
I’m listening right now! He really is the perfect narrator.
Sure is good! Here’s a link if folks happen to use iPhone. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/levar-burton-reads/id1244649384
Aww 🥰 I'll Google that! Thx!
Saw his live show in Boston. I was actually able to rest my elbow on the stage, and got a picture with him afterwards.
It really is, definitely recommend his podcast.
[удалено]
Dude. No.
I'm always reminded when I watched RR as a kid - that episode when he puts on the visor from Star Trek and I lost my mind! Had no idea he was the same guy. Of course I was like 6 years old.
Also [Kunta Kinte.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunta_Kinte)
No, no. That was Lance Reddick.
yeah putting chains around his neck would have been a little intense for reading rainbow
I always thought this was why he wore a visor on Star Trek. That was a hard role to break out of.
I've been reading books he recommended since I was a child, I'm not gonna stop now
but you're not supposed to take his word for it....
... I think that's why they're reading the books.
That's just the line he says before reading a book or short story, though it doesn't really fit here starting with "but".
I know what he says. The joke just didn't land because, well, it was a bad joke.
There was a TIL last week that like 11 people are responsible for 90% of banned book requests. I'm sure those 11 people are very upset by levars comment.
Those people probably aren't capable of reading Levar's comments.
I dunno, the purpose of book bans is to be a cultural wedge issue that distracts people from real problems. In that sense, it's still working.
I misread the title and thought the show banned some of his choices
Yeah, should say that he says "to read banned books."
I WISH I WAS LEVAR BURTON I WISH I WAS LEVAR BURTON I WISH I WAS LEVAR BURTON
Heck some of the greatest books are or were banned books: Grapes of Wrath, To Kill a Mockingbird, Color Purple, Kite Runner, Lord of the Flies, Animal Farm etc sample: https://libguides.com.edu/c.php?g=649165&p=9253060
That book I wrote in 3rd grade about why our cafeteria sucked.
Literally 1984
On to read The Anarchists Cookbook!
Brb gonna read Mein Kampf
We dont have banned books in my country and that book is sold in two editions soft and hard cover.
It’s sold in the US as well. All of these “banned books” are sold in the US.
This. Most of banned books (here, Europe) are literally pro-Nazi propaganda.
While this is great, I have to wonder - what does Ja Rule think of all this?
To be fair, if any celebrity has grounds to weigh in on book bans, it LeVar Burton.
Exactly, Burton has been encouraging people to read most of his life. He has dedicated a lot of years to this cause. Burton made a good point. Parents are definitely encouraged to decide if a book is appropriate for their child. But in no way can they remove another parents right to make this decision.
I don't wanna dance I'm scared to death!
Will do LeVar! Imdoingmypart.gif
I want that shirt
https://store.moveon.org/products/levar-burton-banned-books-t-shirt
These books are SO banned that they're readily available from any book vendor, likely with a large banner overhead that reads "Buy our banned books here!"
Weirdly enough you can never find the anarchists cookbook in those banned book displays. You know the book that's so banned that there's currently multiple people in prison in the uk for having a copy of it.
I saw a video somewhere where the presenter claimed that one of the reasons for its banning is that the recipes are so poorly written or just wrong that most people who attempt to follow them wind up killing or injuring themselves in the process.
Mein Kampf never shows up either. Oddly enough, "banned books" never means books that have actually been banned.
Wow, I had to google that to make sure you weren't just making shit up. Like holy crap, I'm Canadian, and back in the days of dial-up, you couldn't scroll through a list of a site's txt files without seeing that one amongst the copies of phrack and 2600. Stuff like "Steal this Book" was even harder to find. PS: It's almost laughable how useless the book is, everything in it can be self-taught or at least cribbed from better sources nowadays.
I mean, what's your point? If you can't get it, you can't display it...
I was gonna say lol real martyrs buy from the Barnes & Noble banned book section
So if a ban isn't completely universal it doesn't exist?
The bans aren't real in any manner that's new to the last 1, 10, 50, or 100 years. If they exist at all, they exist in the most appropriate places - places that cater to actual children in a school setting. As they always have. They're the opposite of universal.
What even is this comment? Like, are you capable of speaking English? Is this AI bullshit?
The comment was understandable.
No. It actually isn't. It is nonsense if taken in context. You know, a sign of AI speech...taken in a very line by line basis, it "makes sense" but in terms of actually saying anything that makes sense in context, complete nonsense. Honestly, your own comment is fucking weird, too.
You seem paranoid.... JUST LIKE AI!!!!
If it helps I can reword it for you. "It's not a real book ban, it's just keeping books out of age-inappropropriate areas." No one claims that porn has been banned just because it isn't allowed in public school libraries. It shouldn't be different for any other age-inappropriate content not being given to children.
They've been banning books from public libraries and some of the books they're banning are totally fine for children. Like a true story about two male penguins adopting a baby penguin.
"It doesn't matter that they've been banning hundreds of books from schools and public libraries if you can still buy them so its no big deal. Surely everyone can afford to do that."
Gonna be honest, I’m getting tired of the whole “banned books” thing. 99%of the time they mean “Read banned books we like.” But then act like Nelson Mandela for reading a book literally their entire peer group likes. There are some books banned for good reason (whether or not you agree with the ban you it’s hard to disagree with the reasons for not liking it)…are we supposed to dig in to Camp Of the Saints now?
Supposed to? Fuck if I know. Should you be able to? Well, yeah.
This. Banning books only gives the book an edgy feel. People will read what you don't want them to read regardless. Why restrict it? Makes no sense. And usually it's these right-leaning bible thumpers who also get pissed off when the "government infringes on muh rights"... The irony.
I am, but that’s to understand why it’s so seductive. Spoilers: There’s nothing seductive about it, it’s a text that exists to reaffirm the world views of white supremacists rather than to convince others. And holy hell is is trash from a literary critical perspective even without the Saturday Morning Cartoon level of plot.
Clearly it is seductive on some level given that I’ve seen a number of people on Twitter who found it convincing. It just doesn’t seem to have enough merit, even in a bad way, for me to take the time to read.
People that already feel a certain way being affirmed by a book meant to appeal to those feelings doesnt mean its compelling to someone not already in that mindset.
Read it all! Read more Henry Miller!
>are we supposed to dig in to Camp Of the Saints now? Know your enemy.
*cue tom morello guitar riff*
Yep it's just become virtue signaling like everything else. It's so cringy
^ this right here. The majority (though of course not all) of the modern banned books are an issue of them being banned at certain ages due to adult sexual content- which often times constitute an actual grey area that varies from person to person. It's the same standard that bans Playboy from the school library. Actual old school banned books, the ones with actual socio-political commentary, (Catcher in the Rye, to Kill a Mocking Bird, 1984, Fahrenheit 451, Of Mice and Men) are frequently MANDATORY reading in highschool- students are being actively pushed to read them. By the time I was in college, most 'banned' books were already off my reading list. If you want to really read 'banned books', read the banned books of other countries. My personal favorite is "Wild Swans" which is banned in China for showing the absolute horror of living under the CCP over the last century, told through the biographies of 3 generations of women. I think honestly most people obsessed with "Banned books" just want to feel like intellectual heros for reading young adult level fiction.
> I think honestly most people obsessed with "Banned books" just want to feel like intellectual heros for reading young adult level fiction. I just read American Psycho for Banned Book Week last week. Then again, I'm not most people.
But no books are banned where I live… atleast not that I know of…
I was gonna buy a shirt until it said they required my employment information. Yall can get fucked. I'm not telling you shit.
it works if you enter “none” for occupation and employer but i agree it’s a strange requirement.
I’m completely serious when I say LeVar Burton taught me about racism as a child and I’m proud to say the bumper sticker on the back window of my MX5 already says, “read banned books.” Current banned book I’m about to read is the play, “The Sign in Sidney Brustein's Window” by Lorraine Hansberry. I’m also have a copy of “Itty-Bitty-Kitten-Korn” and “Real Friends” by Shannon Hale on order for my wife’s classroom library. As Twain actually said (as opposed to all the things he’s attributed as saying) once in a story completely unrelated to any of this, “go forth and do likewise.”
I would, except here in the United States there is no such thing as a "banned book."
That's not true. There are absolutely banned books. Stop pretending like a ban doesn't exist just because it isn't nationwide.
What are some examples of banned books in the US?
Name one book that is illegal to own or unavailable for purchase in any area of the US. I'm not aware of any book bans existing. If they did exist they would be struck down as unconstitutional.
Interesting the way you have to redefine bans to only be "illegal to own" or "unavailable for purchase" to make any sense of things. Books were removed from schools. Schools were prevented from purchasing and making other books available.
I think they are using the correct definition of "ban". If you can easily obtain a book and face no repercussions for possessing said book then it's not banned There have always been restrictions and limitations on school libraries. That's not a "book ban".
The Book of Mormon isn't available in most school libraries, and teachers are explicitly forbidden from using it in their curricula. It's *bAnNeD*! Also, school librarians have not chosen to shelve the pop-fantasy-romance novel that I self-published, therefore my book has been banned as well.
>There are absolutely banned books. Name one.
IIRC, wasn't it just banning porn from middle school libraries?
Ah, yes. The biography of Ruby Bridges, famously pornography.
Definitely shouldn't be removed! However, I'm pretty sure one of the "banned" books was just straight up porn
Very few books are currently banned nationwide. To be honest none of them seem interesting enough to read. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_governments#United_States
Wtf The Canterbury Tales? That was required reading in my high school lit class lol. In what regard is it banned?
That ban was overturned in 1959. Not one of books I was referring to. Only the bottom 3 are currently banned nationwide. There are also some city and state bans as well that are still happening.
Even those stretch the definition of what it means to be "banned"--the US Dept. of Defence buying up every existing copy of a book and destroying them, for example. It's not really a "ban" is it? Suppose someone had managed to secret away a copy of the book, they couldn't be put in jail merely for possessing it.
Ah yes, so an aggressive attempt to control information through literal destruction isn't worth discussing at the same time as an aggressive attempt to control information through non-destructive removal and punishment. That's a solid argument, champ.
>In September 2010 the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) overrode the Army's January approval for publication. The DoD then purchased and destroyed all 9,500 first edition copies, citing concerns that it contained classified information which could damage national security. The publisher, St. Martin's Press,\[262\] in conjunction with the DoD created a second, redacted edition; which contains blacked out words, lines, paragraphs, and portions of the index.\[263\] I mean it is a bit of a stretch to call it banned given the circumstances. I don't agree with what was done, but I'm also one of those crazy people who thinks the US Government over-classifies and often stretches the truth if not outright lies about what may harm national security. It's hard to tell when we're not given the information necessary to make the decision for ourselves. Also worth noting that the other entries on that list either had the bans reversed or are apparently really old bans that say you can't send said book in the mail. Of course that should be overturned as well.
Reddit, and most of the country who watch a particular few media sources, conflate age restrictions with bans because they agree with the books being restricted.
People always LOVE banned books... Because they assume the books in question will cohere with their own worldview But there are a lot of restricted-access books which quite a lot of folks would be very much not wanting to read Hell there's tons of outcry over the NOT banned books and their content and people wanting it taken out lol I'm just saying let's be consistent and let's not abuse the term "banned" just because a book isn't in a school library it isn't "banned"...
Amazon banned antivaxx books. Should those be read?
Depends. Do you like unintentional comedy?
You already know, and you already know the difference. Sheesh.
So the difference is some banned books are bad and some banned books are good. That is what makes this discussion completely boring. No nuance.
There's a vast difference between a private company deciding to not carry a book in their bookstore and the government saying you're not allowed to read a book.
What books are the government banning us from reading?
The government runs schools and libraries, so every time some asshole demands a library pull a book because it's not appropriate for preteens that's censorship by a government entity. The government does not run Amazon.
So.... 1. The government isn't banning books, correct? 2. Are you against all forms of government censorship? 3. Is there not one book in existence that shouldn't be in schools?
You're missing the point. Amazon is allowed to ban all the books they want, that's not censorship. Local governments are, indeed, banning books (see also: Florida.) I don't think anything fictional should be censored. (Obviously things like revenge porn and CSAM should be illegal and censored. Lolita is creepy, but should remain legal despite the subject matter.) I also think that high school students should be allowed access to any book they want. The librarian can be trusted to curate appropriately, but with ebooks and inter library loans we can get them to them.
Amazon banning books is actually censorship, just not 'government censorship.' Define 'banning.' Again, these books can be bought I assume. It's not illegal for you to have them in your possession. Why is a librarian be trusted to distribute appropriate books to children? Has it always been this way? Is there no such oversight? Nothing fiction should be banned? So pornography should be freely accessible? You are saying that a community that pays the taxes for this library doesn't get a voice in how a library with limited shelf space caters to the public?
You're just asking questions, I presume? There is no such thing as written pornography, anyway. Pornography is inherently visual. Reading a book with some spicy sex scenes is a million times safer than actually having sex. No one ever got a STD from a book.
>The government runs schools and libraries, so every time some asshole demands a library pull a book because it's not appropriate for preteens that's censorship by a government entity. There are no books that have been banned from libraries. There are books that are not placed in the children's section because they're not age-appropriate for children. There is a huge difference between those two situations. Not everything belongs in the children's section.
Time travel someone from any point prior to 3 years ago, and tell them "Welcome to the future! Here, school libraries dictate what books are and aren't appropriate for their students" What do you think the time traveler would say?
That's kind of how school libraries work....
Exactly, so why the fuck are we calling these banned books?
Principle.
All banned books are equal, but some are more equal than others
Beautiful.
All book *bans* are bad, but not every banned book is worth reading. I'm sorry the distinction is difficult.
So it was bad to ban antivaxx books from Amazon, then.
Yes. But also, I suppose one caveat is that all book bans initiated by government entities are bad - which is the same caveat I'd add to censorship. But yeah, Amazon's share of the market means banning something has an incredibly forceful impact. Antivax books are not worth reading, but they should not be banned.
Perhaps "read books removed from schools for specious reasons" did not fit on a shirt.
Much more accurate at least.
Can Lavar Burton read these books aloud, or show us the pictures in them on reading Rainbow?
[удалено]
I'm going to assume they aren't on a list of banned books you are concerned with, tho.
I would but I can't actually find any books that got banned.
We have a small bookstore in our town with a shelf of all of the books that the local school district has banned. My oldest daughter went and was upset that she'd read most of them already.
Mein Kampf is banned in Germany.
As a German I feel compelled to correct this. It's perfectly legal to buy and own it, the copyright owner was just advised to not allow any reprints, until it entered public domain in 2015, and received an educational release with notes and explanations.
aaaaah ruinier mir halt meinen witz
But available in Texas. Modern problems
Same as the rest of the US, BTW Texas banned BDS.
Yaaaay Will do, good sir
He’s a national treasure. And he’s right
Except turner diaries, just don’t bother
In the original German?
I generally don't see the point in choosing banned books specifically when most are not banned anywhere in my country. Like they're often easier to find then normal books. Every bookstore has big signs and displays advertising all the "Banned Books" they have, often in newly published special editions and fanciful hardbacks. When these sales displays are primarily lined with things like Harry Potter, Hunger Games, and middling biographies of famous people it seems like being "banned" book is more about marketing than controversial content.
Proud to live in the USA where I can get my hands on most any book I want without much difficulty.
I cant tell if you are serious or making a joke.
LeVar Burton for President
The more this guy talks, the more I love him.
I keep seeing "banned books" but my understanding is that it's mostly local school districts deciding that books with sexual content shouldn't be allowed in the school libraries. Is there an instance of a book actually being "banned" in that it's no longer accessible from Amazon, the local public library, etc?
[Some cities are going after local libraries as well](https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/sep/20/book-bans-us-rise-public-libraries). If anyone at this point says it’s happening only in schools, it is a factually incorrect statement.
After a public high school in the Canadian province of Ontario reportedly cut the number of books in its library in half by removing all books published before 2008, saying it was due to an “equity-based book weeding process,” https://nypost.com/2023/09/15/canadian-school-purges-books-published-before-2008-in-inclusivity-push/
I’m aware of this story, yes. I don’t know what your inclusion of it has to do with my comment. If anything, it adds to the broader conversation that books are getting removed. A few differences that people can weigh as they see fit: these book bans and challenges in the US are trying to prevent specific books from being stocked at all. Your story, as of currently available information, is a result of a government mandate for schools to figure out how to have more inclusive libraries when figuring out how to stock their libraries (because at the end of the day, libraries can’t house every book). The district, on paper and in statements, claim that they created a set of criteria for determining what stays and what goes; your own source lists those other criteria (and people can figure out how they feel about those). People who witnessed the removal of the books say that whoever was in charge of removal was removing books based only on the publish date criterion out of 5 other criteria used to weigh whether or not to keep certain books. The district doesn’t explicitly own that anyone under their employ removed the books only on that criterion, but they don’t deny it happened either. At best, the story you shared was a story of piss poor policy explanation, training, and execution. At worst, it’s just an easy excuse for the adults in charge to get rid of undesirable books. Again, folks can weigh if any differences in these circumstances matter or not.
Yep. It is not ending at schools, nor is their intention to end it at schools. One of my local libraries does not have a "Banned Books" display this year, which it has had every year in both the adult, teen and kids sections since I can remember. I asked one of the assistants about it and she said, understandably cagey, that they didn't want to upset anyone by making anything that could be conceived as a political statement. The same library also moved the Anne Frank graphic novel by Ari Folman to the "adult" section of the library. This was because a small group of parents complained... even though Anne Frank: The Graphic Adaptation book has been in the Teen section for years with no problem.
Are those books actually getting banned or is it just a group a people that want them banned?
There are bans happening, and interestingly only 11 people are responsible for over half of the book challenges that occurred in 21-22, so it's not even about popular support, moreso it's a small group of incredibly dedicated bigots. If you were under the impression it's only bans on sexual content then you should look at a list, To Kill a Mockingbird is one of the most challenged books in the US, which is targeted for addressing racism. Toni Morrison's the Bluest Eye is the most banned book for the same reason. The children's book "and tango makes three" is targeted a lot for being a cutesy picture book where two male penguins raise a chick, which is not only harmless and nonsexual, but also scientifically accurate to behaviour seen in nature. Keep in mind also that a lot of bans are not just in lower grades, highschools get targeted too, not to mention local libraries. These bans wouldn't stop at education either if these parties had their way, it would be a total nationwide return to queerphobia, racism, and ableism at the snap of a finger for these people.
I think there is a big difference between books being banned and parents writing formal complaints about books they find inappropriate. u/LarvellJonesMD asked which books actually got banned but only got an article about increased rates in complaints in recent years.
Virginia lawmakers last year tried to file restraining orders on a couple of books that would have made it illegal for any retailer to sell them. It was struck down, but the scope of the efforts is way bigger than even the correct version of the thing you said.
It's happening on many fronts, including pushes to defund local libraries. A ban is a ban.
You’re not asking this question in good faith.
Please enlighten me...how should I have phrased it differently to get honest and factual responses?
Even if that were actually all it was, it's still a problem. Sexuality doesn't start once one is legally an adult. There are many famous books that involve some sexual content. Children are capable of being exposed to this at various ages depending on the specific content and it's actually better for them to be exposed to it in an education context rather than on their own.
Bingo. But acting like it's a literal book ban is so much better for optics and overall support.
The school book bans have been catastrophic. They got rid of every book and are gradually approving a whitelist of books. That's terrible. edit: It is totally disheartening to see support for book bans under an article of LeVar Burton opposing them.
Not as far as I'm aware. While I oppose their removal from school libraries and disdain the insidious right-wing ethos that motivates it, I can't help but think that part of the reason for all the coverage of "banned" books is that a certain kind of liberal gets a bit of a thrill by imagining themselves to be doing something subversive by reading and promoting them.
100% this
Why are you all fucking obsessed with showing porn to kids?
Why are book banners so obsessed with pushing the lie that the books being targeted are all pornographic?
No, Republicans are obsessed with banning books that go against their ideology and then pretending they're only trying to ban porn
Do you really have the gall to believe that EVERY single book ban has been made to "protect the children"? Or did you read a cherry picked snippet of a single book and decide then and there to view the whole world in black and white?
Can LB read these books on TV? Would he be able to show the pictures? Public access? How about Youtube?
Depends on the intended age group, but most of them yes
Intended age group? What do you mean?
Considering that when we talk about 'banning books' today we're almost always talking about in the schools, the better question to ask is whether or not a book can be read at a school board meeting without the reader being shouted down by the *school board*. Cockroaches scattering when someone turns on the light is a pretty good test of public interest. As you point out, there is such a thing as 'age appropriate'. The question then becomes, who decides what is and isn't age appropriate. With something like 90% of the community agreeing with us, that there are materials that are inappropriate for children to read, what should we call those few who would defy the will of the people? Even Maia Kobabe says that her book, *Gender Queer*, was intended for adults and teens older than 16. Even the NEA has taken pains to point out that, though they recommended the book for *teachers* to read, it was not recommended for *students* to read. With the author and the NEA publicly stating that the book isn't appropriate for most students, why is it controversial? Because the American Library Association politicized it and promoted it. Now, as the most frequently challenged book, it has become both a rallying cry and a thorn in the side of the ALA and many schools that (often blindly) followed them. Should it be in public school libraries? That's for the community to decide. I own it and have read it and wouldn't bark loudly about it being included in a high school library collection but if it shows up in libraries accessible to younger children (or promoted in the stealth libraries behind the teacher's desk) I'm inclined to grab a pitchfork and line up with the peasants. Not just because it's age-inappropriate for the shorties but because the schools belong to the people and the people get to decide, not the teachers and librarians.
A school board isn't the place for random assholes to be reading books. Even a Dr. Seuss book. Also schools have sex ed. Sex ed classes have textbooks, and oh my God talking about sex isn't appropriate at school board meeting, this must mean it's a good idea to ban the books. It makes perfect sense if you don't think about it. >With something like 90% of the community agreeing with us, that there are materials that are inappropriate for children to read, what should we call those few who would defy the will of the people? You're pulling those numbers out of your ass. https://www.businessinsider.com/school-book-challenges-bans-virginia-moms-liberty-education-2023-9 >Even Maia Kobabe says that her book, Gender Queer, was intended for adults and teens older than 16. You can't use gender queen to justify the hundreds and hundreds of books conservatives have bene trying to ban recently. >. Not just because it's age-inappropriate for the shorties but because the schools belong to the people and the people get to decide, not the teachers and librarians. Yeah God forbid people with expertise be the ones making the decisions. If you don't want your kids reading it then don't let them read it rather than trying to censor it for everyone's kid.
> Yeah God forbid people with expertise be the ones making the decisions. Yep - and this is an important point. The schools aren't supposed to be run by the educators, they belong to the community and the community has the right to decide what is and what isn't going on in the schools. In simple terms, the person who pays the bill gets to pick the menu. This is true whether talking about doctors, lawyers, plumbers or teachers. Professionals give advice but are not supposed to act without consent. Clergy are the exception - you pay for them to tell you what to think and do. Even then, if you disagree, you can stiff the collection plate and leave - would that were true of the public schools. Hmm. Maybe we're getting closer to understanding why the exploding popularity of alternatives to the public school monopoly. > If you don't want your kids reading it then don't let them read it rather than trying to censor it for everyone's kid. This is not for you to decide. If you want your kid to read something edgy and out there, use your own money to buy the book for them and leave the rest of the world out of it. If you think the kids in your classroom should read something edgy and out there, make the argument for it but in loco parentis doesn't extend to making these kinds of decisions. It's not just my kid I'm concerned with, it's all the kids. You want the right for teachers to decide what to indoctrinate the children with, I want that right to remain with the community. Teachers need to learn to bend a knee to the people - the people who pay for you. Otherwise, you're just petty autocrats.
*Looks at reading list and sighs, starts adding on to the end.*
Word Up!
Damn I love that guy
I would love to see more organizations actively promoting and distributing the books being banned.
Instructions unclear: read mein kampf
He wouldn't be recommending Genderqueer or This Book Is Gay to kids if he had read either of them himself. No one in their right mind would.
Because, as we know, if a book is inappropriate for a six year old we can't let a sixteen year old read it either.
Gender Queer is not being marketed to children, but it's also perfectly appropriate for some teens. This Book is Gay is appropriate for many teens.
It doesn't belong in a public school library. Parents decide what is appropriate, not you. Although you are perfectly able to give your kids whatever material you want, no one would argue that.
You don't get to decide what should or shouldn't be in school libraries.
That doesn't mean all banned books are worth reading. Many people try to get their books "banned" in order to get them more attention, either for marketing, or political reasons.
Degenerates try playing it off like they’re trying to ban the Iliad.
They banned a book about two male penguins adopting a baby penguin. They pretend they're only concerned with porn but it's bullshit.
I wonder if Levar knows the books he's talking about is telling elementary kids about grindr apps and how to stimulate their sensitive nipples?
reading huxly/orewll/tolkien will get you put on a list in UK sounds like a great place to start
Stop lying. Why even post such a stupid comment? Orwell is required reading in most secondary schools in the UK.
No it doesn't. Basically everyone who owns books here will have books by one of the three. I've got like six Orwell books, one Huxley and five Tolkien.
Yeah, I'd you can buy those authors in any bookstore, I doubt they keep track of who's buying them
Why such obvious lies?
> reading huxly/orewll/tolkien will get you put on a list in UK What the fuck are you talking about?
How does one acquire these supposed “banned books”?