posted
One thing to keep in mind is that if a book has gay characters in it, there is some mention of sex or sexuality. For instance, "Dick saw Jane run" might have a gay character (Dick, or if you want general homosexuality, Jane), but it's kind of tough to tell, eh? I'm not sure I'm at all comfortable keeping books out of an elementary library just because there's homosexuals in it, but I would be wary of any book that did have homosexuals in it because the only way to know is if it was brought up, and since homosexuality is entirley defined by sexual attraction and/ sex, I don't think it's totally absurd to want to keep that out of an elementar school.
And even if the entire homosexual part is: "John was gay" then whatever kid reads that all of a sudden has a whole lot of questions a lot of parents might not want their children asking at that age.
posted
Hobbes, so books that have kids talking about "girlfriends" and "boyfriends" should be taken out because the implication would be that they have to have sex to be boyfriend and girlfriend? If homosexuality is only defined to you as "having sex with someone of the same gender" does that go the same with heterosexuality? If not, why not?
Posts: 896 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Hobbes, so books that have kids talking about "girlfriends" and "boyfriends" should be taken out because the implication would be that they have to have sex to be boyfriend and girlfriend?
No.
quote: If homosexuality is only defined to you as "having sex with someone of the same gender"...
posted
I'm not for banning any books, any where; appropriatness should be considered for where they're being bought and that's it. I was just pointing out that a book with homosexual characters is far more likely to not meet that level of appropriatness than one that doesn't, because to discuss homosexuality is a discussion of sexual desires.
posted
Does the discussion of homosexual relationships involve sexuality any more than the discussion of heterosexual relationships?
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Technically it doesn't have to, but I've never seen a case where it didn't, whereas hetreosexual relationships are so engrained as being a normal part of growing up (instead of about the desires they neccessitate) they are often, if not usually, treated without any sexual overtones.
posted
Have you looked at any children's books that deal with the subject? I have a friend who was researching it and there are quite a few of them. Granted many of the books on the subject deal with middle school or high school age children discovering that they are homosexual, but that's not that much different from a book talking about a hetrosexual first crush, and it can be and is done in just as appropriate a manner.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well it depends on how you define "being sexual" but in elementary school I would fully support banning those books from the library (i.e. not buying them).
posted
Originally I was going to agree that elementary school is too young for books that deal with sexual issues. But then I thought about it for a few minutes. Elementary school goes up to either fifth or sixth grade (depending on the school). And kids in fifth and sixth grade are already dealing with issues of sexuality. And fiction reading helps a lot of people to make sense of their world and the issues they go through. I think we should be encouraging upper elementary kids to read books by Judy Blume, Madeleine L’Engle, and other writers who deal maturely and compassionately with difficult subjects. Certainly not making the books harder to find by removing them from school libraries.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not necessarily. My elementary library was divided into three sections. K-1 were only allowed in the first section, 2-3 were allowed in two of the sections, and 4-6 could check out books from anywhere. The sections were ostensibly based on reading-level, but controlled for age-appropriate content as well.
Edit: Reading-level and interest will also help control for age-appropriateness. How may first graders want to read a chapter book (with no pictures!) about teenage relationships?
posted
It's available, but does it interest them? I don't know any kids of first grade age that would be interested in Judy Bloom books.
Posts: 903 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
My wife developed was a C cup and menstruating at age 10. Waiting three more years to start hearing about sexual relationships and their consequences wouldn't have been a good idea for her. On the other hand, my youngest son is 12 and seems to be exhibiting no interest in relationship matters that don't concern the number of video game players.
I think I'd rather see books of different age levels available and let parents know they should pay attention to what their kids check out.
[ December 03, 2004, 04:08 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Really? I'd never heard of that. o_O Was there actually policing going on, I mean if I as a first grader walked into the 5th gradere section would I be shunned away?
posted
You could walk into the section, but you couldn't check anything out. And Mr. Washburn would have (nicely) suggested that you get your butt back into the section where the rest of your class was.
I did successfully petition to let second graders in the advanced reading group check out one non-fiction book a week from the last section, though. I wanted a book of instructions on yarn-crafting and it was in the "big kid" stacks.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Our elementary school only goes up to 3rd grade, 4-8 is middle, and 9-12 high school.
If a school k-6 or 7th grade, then I think separate library sections are a good way to go. In our school library, all the kids have a reading level assigned to them (it's updated three times during the year, based on reading aptitude tests) so those scores give the librarian a guideline as to what books the child can handle on their own.
It was a problem when Natalie tested at a 10th grade reading level in the 3rd grade - but the librarian and the teacher and I discussed it and they pretty much let her check out anything she wanted, but then again, this library was only for K-5 (at the time, they've since made it a k-3 school)
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I had a similar problem with my children being sent to the "little kids section" when they were in 3rd and 4th grades while they were reading Ender's Game and Red Prophet at home. After meeting with the librarian (and she even gave my daughter a short oral quiz on a book she had just finished), all of my children were exempt from the "rule" from then on.
Most librarians will recognize an exceptional child when they see one, and in my experience, were excited to give them suggestions of books to read.
Posts: 2069 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Madeleine L'Engle and Judy Blume write wonderful books...I read them when I was that age. They explore common feelings of pre-adolescence, and I can't say that's a bad thing at all. Far to the contrary. If there were a Judy Blume book that explored pre-adolescent feelings of same-sex attraction, I don't know how I'd feel about it, but I'd surely want to read it first before letting my child read it. It depends on how it was handled, I guess. If it was, "Hey, you're still very young, but what you feel is part of growing up." then I'd probably be okay with it and want to know from my son what he liked about the book and what he found intresting about it, if he checked it out.
In my son's school (a private Christian PK-8 school), the books are all pre-screened, and when a potentially objectionable subject is included (whether non-fiction or fiction) the book is stamped with a warning along with what might be objectionable about it. A slip is sent with the book so the parent can review whether or not it's suitable. For example, it wouldn't bother me in the slightest to have my son read a book that included references to evolution. Not all parents feel that way, so books with references to evolution are stamped.
I don't see why the public schools could not do something similar with potentially objectionable books so that parents are aware. See, what Idemosthenes pointed out on page 1 is *precisely* why so many parents pull their kids out of public school. Yet we are required by law to make sure our children are educated...not everyone can send their kids to private school, and not everyone can (or should) homeschool. So we're left with a system of education that is swayed by private lobbies who see children as the perfect targets to effect their pet social changes. It's wrong and I don't blame anyone who objects to it.
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
That would have been such a torment to me. I hated being told what to read and what not to read when I was young. I hated having people confiscate books I bought for myself, for example...
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I went through a brief John Saul phase in junior high after I read Second Child. It was freaky, but quite good. There was also this young adult scary trilogy as well that was pretty good. Then my father and former stepmother decided to take those books from me and half the ones the library threw away. I was very annoyed. I bought most of those books with my own money. I so dislike having my reading material censored. I read everything from fascinating young adult novels to mediocre adult novels.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
See, the issue here is...who is responsible for a child's upbringing? Parents, or the government? We've always said, "The parents." Abuses occurred, and we changed it to, "The parents, unless they abuse the rights that come with the responsibilities." And now we're faced with the line between abuse and not abuse.
No parent is perfect. I like to believe that we all try to do our best at the job, but I know that some parents are terrible at it, and their children suffer.
Someone has to be responsible for a child's upbringing, because the child himself cannot. So it is in the best interests of the child to have someone who has that child's best interest in mind be responsible. I believe that generally, that is going to be the parents. I do not believe, nor has it ever been shown, that the government is a better entity to be responsible for a child's upbringing. With that in mind, we must allow parents final say, except where abuse exists, over what is best for a child to view or read. If the parent is the one responsible, they must have the right to restrict access where they perceive it is necessary.
Having said all that, personally, I can't see sheltering a high schooler from the realities of the Holocaust unless he was mentally ill. A friend of mine has a 14 year old who is very clingy and is afraid to stay home by herself. I wouldn't blame her at all for restricting access to books that would make her more scared to leave the house. See what I mean? The government can only make sweeping rules...generally, parents know their kids and are in the best position to know what will them harm. Are they always right? No way. But I bet that generally, they get it right more often than the government would.
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The stamp idea seems like a perfectly appropriate compromise.
Jeniwren, you and government raise your children. The government has an interest in the morality of your children. If they break the law, the government doesn't send them home, the government hauls them away, then calls you. That's why honesty and tolerance are taught in the classroom. Schools need to partner with parents, and that happens better in some places than in others, but it's a team effort to make sure your kid doesn't try to mug me now, or ten years from now.
quote:Are they always right? No way. But I bet that generally, they get it right more often than the government would.
I don't know. School librarians and teachers spend a lot of time thinking about these exact issues. I know they are the "government," but I almost think that they would probably know as much as the people who succeeded in getting pregnant.
I do think that controversial books should be discussed before introducing them in the curriculum proper, but yanking them wholesale out of the library?
I do think that, with discretion and thought, books containing intimacy should be in elementary school libraries. I mean, if kids are going to be given to kiss and touch in junior high school, I remember spending large amounts of my day thinking about kissing and touching, the books could prepare them to help them cope.
If it's thought about in life, it should be in the book. That the only way I can imagine to try to keep books relevant and kids reading. As a fifth grader, these are tangential issues, but it doesn't mean that they should be completely ignored. ________________
I didn't know that middle schools go from fourth to eighth. That's a tough road for the fifth and sixth graders.
posted
I like the stamp idea, but I'm sort of worried. Is the slip of paper sent home with the student, or does the school email or send it to the parents without the student as a middleman? I ask because when I was in elementary school I got all kinds of papers to take home that my parents never saw, not because I was trying to hide stuff, I just forgot about them.
Completely different subject, while I agree that it is necessary that we pay strict attention to what goes in elementary school libraries, I don't think that's the case in high school libraries. A high schooler is at the point in his or her life when they are not only being taught information, but also to be independent. I don't think the school should be censoring what high school students are exposed to. Most school libraries don't have very big collections anyway, so books are screened on how educationally useful during the buying process, I don't think they need to go through another screening process.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Someone has to be responsible for a child's upbringing, because the child himself cannot. So it is in the best interests of the child to have someone who has that child's best interest in mind be responsible. I believe that generally, that is going to be the parents. I do not believe, nor has it ever been shown, that the government is a better entity to be responsible for a child's upbringing. With that in mind, we must allow parents final say, except where abuse exists, over what is best for a child to view or read. If the parent is the one responsible, they must have the right to restrict access where they perceive it is necessary.
Having said all that, personally, I can't see sheltering a high schooler from the realities of the Holocaust unless he was mentally ill. A friend of mine has a 14 year old who is very clingy and is afraid to stay home by herself. I wouldn't blame her at all for restricting access to books that would make her more scared to leave the house. See what I mean? The government can only make sweeping rules...generally, parents know their kids and are in the best position to know what will them harm. Are they always right? No way. But I bet that generally, they get it right more often than the government would.
And, thus, it seems to me the optimal configuration would be for the library to stock everything and put the burden of policing their child on the parent.
There are really only two options here. Either the school restricts some books, or allows a child access to all books. If you restrict some books, you run into the problems already illustrated in this thread where some children who are ready for 'certain' books are going to be disenfranchised. You can't assume that schools or librarians will always make exceptions for your child. There are many instances of 'zero tolerance' policies in schools run amok. Why do you think libraries would be immune from unthinking censorship or buaracratic laziness? (I can't spell, I know. I'll fix it later.)
In the final analysis, if a school restricts books from certain ages of children/people, you are handing over your parental rights to the state and, once given, they are out of your control. The state that can keep knowledge out of a child's hands can force it on a child, too.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hobbes, if your relationship with your child is such that they can't share the books they read with you, or don't want to show you, all the censorship in the world ain't gonna save your child.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
