Missouri lawmakers move to strip library funding, retaliate for book ban lawsuit • Hacker News Board

Re: Missouri lawmakers move to strip library funding, retaliate for book ban lawsuit

#121

Post by claudiawerner » Fri, Mar 24, 2023, 11:52 PM UTC

tablespoon wrote: post #116

barbazoo wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not in this case. Those images are 100% graphic porn (of the cartoon/hentai variety). I saw the pictures upthread. Porn that presents itself as "educational" is still porn (IIRC, that's also a actual real-people-having-sex porn genre). As I said, the first picture is taken out of context and the second one isn't even in the book. This book is porn the same way other educational material about anatomy and sexuality…

> As I said, the first picture is taken out of context... There isn't a context that could make that first POV/frontal view picture of someone getting a blowjob not-porn. If that's appropriate for school, so is hentai.

Such images are shown in books about human sexuality, or sex guides. The purpose of those books is not to tittilate in an erotic sense, but to provide information or education.

To go further, almost everyone agrees that a cartoon of a man and woman having sex in the missionary position for the purpose of procreation is not necessarily pornographic; this is a standard sort of picture in age appropriate sex education materials.

Granted, these images concern sexual reproduction. However this only makes me question why people deem that image appropriate, but images of other positions or acts not worthy of learning about in other contexts.

The fact is that we do learn about sex at school for other reasons. "Safe sex", consent, and in many cases contraception are all taught.

So hypothetically, if we're fine with images to educate about reproduction, and images to educate about consent or safe sex for nonreproductive purposes, what makes the images in the book so different as to deserve to be forbidden knowledge?

Re: Missouri lawmakers move to strip library funding, retaliate for book ban lawsuit

#122

Post by remarkEon » Sat, Mar 25, 2023, 2:42 AM UTC

Avshalom wrote: post #81

remarkEon wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's been really jarring about this issue is that everyone is calling it a "book ban", when it demonstrably is not. It's removing certain (in some cases pornographic) material from school curricula and libraries. Maybe you can steelman an argument that goes something like "if they remove this from school curricula and libraries, they'll try to remove it from the [everywhere else] too". This is of course silly. Plus…

>(in some cases pornographic) so what was going on in all those other cases? >they'll try to remove it from the [everywhere else] too" https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2022/05/gop-lawmaker-petitions-c... hey look they've already started escalating. Now, that one got dismissed but yeah, your "steelman" is not in fact "silly"

The other cases are borderline. Not truly “porn”, but definitely something a parent might object to. I don’t get the backlash here at all. Parents can inform what goes into curricula and that’s what’s happened here.

Also, a nakedly unconstitutional attempt to control the inventory of a private company is not exactly the greatest example of an escalating.

Re: Missouri lawmakers move to strip library funding, retaliate for book ban lawsuit

#123

Post by tablespoon » Sat, Mar 25, 2023, 4:47 AM UTC

claudiawerner wrote: post #121

tablespoon wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As I said, the first picture is taken out of context... There isn't a context that could make that first POV/frontal view picture of someone getting a blowjob not-porn. If that's appropriate for school, so is hentai.

Such images are shown in books about human sexuality, or sex guides. The purpose of those books is not to tittilate in an erotic sense, but to provide information or education. To go further, almost everyone agrees that a cartoon of a man and woman having sex in the missionary position for the purpose of procreation is not necessarily pornographic; this is a standard sort of picture in age appropriate sex education m…

> Such images are shown in books about human sexuality, or sex guides. The purpose of those books is not to tittilate in an erotic sense, but to provide information or education.

How-to sex guides and the like are not appropriate for a high school library.

> To go further, almost everyone agrees that a cartoon of a man and woman having sex in the missionary position for the purpose of procreation is not necessarily pornographic; this is a standard sort of picture in age appropriate sex education materials.

Is it? I don't recall having been shown anything like that.

And I would say a cartoon of two characters having sex and showing penetration would necessarily be pornographic. A medical illustration wouldn't (think stiff, cutaway diagram, narrowly focused on the necessary parts), but that's not a "cartoon."

> Granted, these images concern sexual reproduction. However this only makes me question why people deem that image appropriate, but images of other positions or acts not worthy of learning about in other contexts.

I think you need to figure out the difference between sex education and a sex guide on your own. You're playing fast and loose with categories, and getting yourself tied in knots as a result.

Re: Missouri lawmakers move to strip library funding, retaliate for book ban lawsuit

#124

Post by remarkEon » Sat, Mar 25, 2023, 7:26 AM UTC

yamtaddle wrote: post #103

remarkEon wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may not like it, but this is how democracy works.

Is there a point somewhere in this comment?

My point is that it's perfectly normal in a democracy for a higher level authority to decide to intervene in lower level activities. People seem to get mad when they read a report about a town or city or state far away from where they live that has chosen to do things they disagree with.

Re: Missouri lawmakers move to strip library funding, retaliate for book ban lawsuit

#125

Post by claudiawerner » Sat, Mar 25, 2023, 1:42 PM UTC

tablespoon wrote: post #123

claudiawerner wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such images are shown in books about human sexuality, or sex guides. The purpose of those books is not to tittilate in an erotic sense, but to provide information or education. To go further, almost everyone agrees that a cartoon of a man and woman having sex in the missionary position for the purpose of procreation is not necessarily pornographic; this is a standard sort of picture in age appropriate sex education m…

> Such images are shown in books about human sexuality, or sex guides. The purpose of those books is not to tittilate in an erotic sense, but to provide information or education. How-to sex guides and the like are not appropriate for a high school library. > To go further, almost everyone agrees that a cartoon of a man and woman having sex in the missionary position for the purpose of procreation is not necessarily p…

>How-to sex guides and the like are not appropriate for a high school library.

I wasn't saying they necessarily are; I was saying that such a representation isn't necessarily pornographic.

>Is it? I don't recall having been shown anything like that.

I do, even if it was many years ago.

>I think you need to figure out the difference between sex education and a sex guide on your own.

I have figured it out; the fact is that there is a continuum of representations of sex between a cut-out diagram of the interior anatomy of a penis penetrating the interior anatomy of a vagina, a diagram showing how a condom is applied, a picture of one adult on top of another in a book in a "How are Babies Made" sort of book for children, and showing how sex with a strap-on works. I don't see any reason to consider any of these necessarily pornographic - as all lack the primary intention to titillate.

Re: Missouri lawmakers move to strip library funding, retaliate for book ban lawsuit

#126

Post by jessaustin » Sun, Mar 26, 2023, 9:27 AM UTC

temp_praneshp wrote: post #35

thwayunion wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's Missouri, so I highly doubt the money is equally distributed among libraries. You can see where aid goes here: https://www.sos.mo.gov/library/development/stateaid/default And then you can look up or estimate the total spend for each of those community's libraries. Likely this means approximately nothing for most suburban, urban, and exurban/college town/resort town/etc. library systems. Those communities can eas…

Are the politicians pushing for this from rural areas? Seems like either they are serving their constituents, or they'll be voted out next time?

Both of the Republicans quoted in TFA "represent" suburban districts on the Kansas border. Not rural, and only technically Missourian.

Re: Missouri lawmakers move to strip library funding, retaliate for book ban lawsuit

#127

Post by jessaustin » Sun, Mar 26, 2023, 9:57 AM UTC

Overtonwindow wrote: post #109

jessaustin wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The line should be drawn wherever parents, teachers, and librarians choose to draw it. Politicians should not be involved. Top-down meddling has destroyed public education in USA, and this is just more of that. At some point we should stop making public schools worse.

Well.. to that I would say that parents HAVE drawn a line and teachers and people without children, perhaps such as yourself, are pushing back. Parents, IMO, should be the ones to draw the line. Not the teachers, not the state, and not third-parties that are fighting a political war. As for top-down meddling, I agree with that. The Department of Education has been the worst thing for America's education system, not t…

Parents have some measure of authority in their homes, although sometimes the law acts in the interests of e.g. abused children. Public employees on public property don't take direction from parents, nor should they. Public school employees are managed by an elected body called the school board. Since school boards meet in the actual communities they govern, they are often somewhat democratic in nature. If parents don't like this situation, they can keep the children home where bookshelves, if they existed, would contain nothing but bibles and the "Left Behind" series. (Too bad about algebra and English...)

State legislatures are mostly not democratic. Rather than implementing the will of their constituents, state legislators spend their time campaigning and representing for those who fund their campaigning. TFA is just another example.

"...to draw the line as you say..."

To be clear, you introduced this banal cliche, and I used it once in response.

Re: Missouri lawmakers move to strip library funding, retaliate for book ban lawsuit

#128

Post by yamtaddle » Sun, Mar 26, 2023, 7:14 PM UTC

tablespoon wrote: post #117

yamtaddle wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parents who don't like what their school libraries stock should lobby their school board, vote for school board members who share their views, and maybe even run for school board. There's a whole nice, approachable, local body to deal with all this, basically everywhere in the US. It's arguably one of the closest-to-the-people and easiest-for-constituents-to-influence governing bodies that exists in this country. [ED…

> Parents who don't like what their school libraries stock should lobby their school board, vote for school board members who share their views, and maybe even run for school board. Maybe they should do that too (and I believe that's actually not uncommon), but it doesn't preclude or de-legitimize other political action to address the problem. In any case, tactical criticism such as yours is almost always noise. It u…

> Come on. All sides are grandstanding all the time nowadays, even on this particular issue. Complaints about it are almost always soaked with myside bias.

Agreed, but exactly one side made this fake issue A Thing.

Re: Missouri lawmakers move to strip library funding, retaliate for book ban lawsuit

#129

Post by barbazoo » Mon, Mar 27, 2023, 1:42 AM UTC

tablespoon wrote: post #116

barbazoo wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not in this case. Those images are 100% graphic porn (of the cartoon/hentai variety). I saw the pictures upthread. Porn that presents itself as "educational" is still porn (IIRC, that's also a actual real-people-having-sex porn genre). As I said, the first picture is taken out of context and the second one isn't even in the book. This book is porn the same way other educational material about anatomy and sexuality…

> As I said, the first picture is taken out of context... There isn't a context that could make that first POV/frontal view picture of someone getting a blowjob not-porn. If that's appropriate for school, so is hentai.

It's so lazy to just see that picture out of context and decide that young people shouldn't read the book. Context matters and it's part of that author's story. Had you read the book you'd know that this wasn't an enjoyable act for the protagonist or a how-to for the reader but part of their difficult youth trying to figure out their sexuality and identity. Many people might feel like this and I'm convinced having this book available to them will make the lives of LGBTQ youth easier to cope with.

And again, this wasn't even a penis in that picture. This is definitely not a book to be considered porn. And if you haven't read it, I don't think you can convince anyone otherwise.

Re: Missouri lawmakers move to strip library funding, retaliate for book ban lawsuit

#130

Post by Philorandroid » Mon, Mar 27, 2023, 1:08 PM UTC

cguess wrote: post #59

Philorandroid wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps the answer lies in teaching kids (young adults?) in an objective, strictly-educational manner as the time dawns for it to become relevant in their lives. Of course that solution would be objected to by both sides. The social leftists think it's literally a death sentence to trans children to not teach 6-year-olds about anal sex, and populist conservatives think sex ed in any capacity is degenerate pedophilia.

> The social leftists think it's literally a death sentence to trans children to not teach 6-year-olds about anal sex Where... where has any leftist said that?

Every public forum, ever. No Twitter discourse would be complete without it. Florida's "Don't Say Gay" bill had social leftists crying foul of targeting trans children by banning sexually explicit material in Kindergarten through third grade.