Funny events in anti-woke world

[Dwarvenhobble]

Well yes, otherwise it would defeat the point.

Would it? because merely directed them to the library and letting them find stuff on their own would be far more defensible than putting out a list of the books to look at.

Still not erotica. Your idea of what constitutes erotica is hilariously 1950s.

I'm sorry but illustrated drawings of blowjobs in a fictional story. Yeh I'm going with erotica.
When you can only get away with that stuff on screen in an R rated art-house film or outright porn, I'm pretty confident in labelling it as erotica.

 

[Cheetodust]

When you can only get away with that stuff on screen in an R rated art-house film or outright porn, I'm pretty confident in labelling it as erotica.

That's fine, you've been confident and wrong plenty.

 

[PsychedelicDiamond]

Anyway, some comedy.

This is amazing. When you're such a petty asshole you someho

Anyway, some comedy.

I believe that's what they call "accidentally based". I'd chip in.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

That's fine, you've been confident and wrong plenty.

yeh, it happens when you actually take a clear position rather than a nebulous one.
Also means I've been right far more times too.

 

[Silvanus]

Would it? because merely directed them to the library and letting them find stuff on their own would be far more defensible than putting out a list of the books to look at.

Both are perfectly fine.

She wanted them to be able to access books that the school had taken off the shelves. That was the point. So doing something which doesn't fulfil that... obviously misses the point.

I'm sorry but illustrated drawings of blowjobs in a fictional story. Yeh I'm going with erotica.
When you can only get away with that stuff on screen in an R rated art-house film or outright porn [...]

There are pictures on Wikipedia articles about sex that are more graphic. Average sex-ed material has graphs or simple illustrations.

This is puritan religious bullshit.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Both are perfectly fine.

She wanted them to be able to access books that the school had taken off the shelves. That was the point. So doing something which doesn't fulfil that... obviously misses the point.

So she did direct the students to them against the school boards wishes.

Yeh sorry but teachers tend to have to play by the rules of the school board and trust me on this (as I know some-one in the field who ended up at a school whose boards were very disagreeable) you still have to play without the rules or if you're going to break them be ready to face the blowback.

In this case sounds like a school board looked at the titles and determined they were not suitable for the kids. Unless you're going to spin me a conspiratorial tale of secretly infiltrated school boards to claim it's somehow not right then I'm going to have to go with "School board made a choice it should be respected".

There are pictures on Wikipedia articles about sex that are more graphic. Average sex-ed material has graphs or simple illustrations.

That really does say more about your sex end than anything lol. My best mate ran out the room and was violently sick in one of our sex-ed sessions.

This is puritan religious bullshit.

How so?
For suggesting maybe we don't need to be directing kids to erotica?

At what point did that become puritanical?

"Oh no Dwarvenhobble only wants the gloriously depraved content available for adults when kids should totally be watching The Boys or Carnival Row or Game of Thrones?"

Come on really?

 

[Silvanus]

So she did direct the students to them against the school boards wishes.

Yeh sorry but teachers tend to have to play by the rules of the school board and trust me on this (as I know some-one in the field who ended up at a school whose boards were very disagreeable) you still have to play without the rules or if you're going to break them be ready to face the blowback.

In this case sounds like a school board looked at the titles and determined they were not suitable for the kids. Unless you're going to spin me a conspiratorial tale of secretly infiltrated school boards to claim it's somehow not right then I'm going to have to go with "School board made a choice it should be respected".

Except what the teacher did wasn't in contravention of any school board decision or legal ordinance. She didn't break their rule regarding these books-- she complied with it.

That really does say more about your sex end than anything lol. My best mate ran out the room and was violently sick in one of our sex-ed sessions.

Not mine personally; mine was extremely perfunctory and borderline useless. But actual functional sex-ed, uhrm, sort of has to discuss... sex.

How so?
For suggesting maybe we don't need to be directing kids to erotica?

At what point did that become puritanical?

Never did. But this still isn't erotica.

What's puritanical is insisting that any discussion or depiction of anything remotely related to sex, even in an educational context, is pornography. That's some pearl-clutching repressed 1950s nonsense. As if the Wikipedia page for sex is pornography (lol).

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Except what the teacher did wasn't in contravention of any school board decision or legal ordinance. She didn't break their rule regarding these books-- she complied with it.

Nah, even if you want to argue she didn't break the letter of the ruling (which, here's how you can get these books without parental oversight that the school governors have determined you shouldn't have access to without parental oversight likely is breaking that ruling) then she definitely broke to spirit of the ruling and intention of it.

Not mine personally; mine was extremely perfunctory and borderline useless. But actual functional sex-ed, uhrm, sort of has to discuss... sex.

yeh, and?

Sorry but apparently unlike your sex ed we didn't have to rely on fictional works to actually help inform us.

Never did. But this still isn't erotica.

OK so care to elaborate and quite what your statement about it being "puritan religious bullshit." Was meant to relate to?

What's puritanical is insisting that any discussion or depiction of anything remotely related to sex, even in an educational context, is pornography. That's some pearl-clutching repressed 1950s nonsense. As if the Wikipedia page for sex is pornography (lol).

Which isn't what I did and I refer you back to my initial post where I did lay out a nuanced position you have chosen to ignore because apparently you think illustrations of blowjobs along with accompanying descriptions of the sexual act from the perspective of a character talking about how it felt isn't pornographic at all.

Like how far does it need to go to be erotica in your eyes? Does it need to be showing it ejaculating too?

 

[Cheetodust]

yeh, it happens when you actually take a clear position rather than a nebulous one.
Also means I've been right far more times too.

That's the spirit, look at that confidence.

 

[Silvanus]

Nah, even if you want to argue she didn't break the letter of the ruling (which, here's how you can get these books without parental oversight that the school governors have determined you shouldn't have access to without parental oversight likely is breaking that ruling) then she definitely broke to spirit of the ruling and intention of it.

OK, this quite obviously indicates that you don't actually know what the state ordinance actually said. Because state governors didn't determine kids shouldn't have access to them.

yeh, and?

Sorry but apparently unlike your sex ed we didn't have to rely on fictional works to actually help inform us.

The book with the much-maligned illustration we're talking about wasn't fiction.

OK so care to elaborate and quite what your statement about it being "puritan religious bullshit." Was meant to relate to?

It's puritanical to insist that 14-18 year olds must not be presented with any frank discussion of sex in an educational context, and it's puritanical to refer to any instances of such as "pornography". And those repressed attitudes largely derive from religious approaches.

Which isn't what I did and I refer you back to my initial post where I did lay out a nuanced position [...]

Nuanced position! You've shown quite clearly you don't even know what the state ordinance actually was, or even the nature of the book!

 

[BrawlMan]

Preserving the freedom to read: After 40 years of Banned Book Week, librarians craft new plan to fight back (msn.com)

 

[Silvanus]

Like how far does it need to go to be erotica in your eyes? Does it need to be showing it ejaculating too?

I wasn't aware a strap-on could ejaculate honestly. You were aware there weren't any genitals in the illustration, right?

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

I wasn't aware a strap-on could ejaculate honestly. You were aware there weren't any genitals in the illustration, right?

On the first part, well you did say your sex end wasn't great. It's not common but I'm sure there's some that have the function.

Ok how do you depict a blowjob in an illustration without any genitalia, was it an illustration of deep throating or something now?

 

[Silvanus]

On the first part, well you did say your sex end wasn't great. It's not common but I'm sure there's some that have the function.

Ok how do you depict a blowjob in an illustration without any genitalia, was it an illustration of deep throating or something now?

... you haven't even seen the material, have you?

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

... you haven't even seen the material, have you?

No I haven't read all 20 of the banned books in question in 2 days of seeing it in this thread. Have you?

I was clear before when I said about hearing about illustrations. Thought that might have clued you in a bit.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Considering comprehensive and frank levels of sex ed from kindergarten is statistically proven to be the best way to lower child pregnancy rates, child sex abuse, and grooming, the fact that the conservative position is to Never Do That leads me to some very unfortunate implications. Like, shouldn't it be a good thing that kids know what their parts are, how they work, and what a healthy relationship looks like? So that they know that Daddy's Secret Playtime is actually abuse and they can get help?

On a related note, Yen Press localized the manga series Sex Education 120%. It was written because the authors thought Japanese sex ed was hot garbage, and being somebody from a country which also has a rep for sex ed being garbage I kinda wanted to see how they stack up. Would've been a godsend if I were a kid. Lot of frank talk about relationships, consent, the common myths kids and adults will believe, invent, or lie about to have sex, what different relationships looks like, how pornography lies and sets up dramatically unrealistic expectations, the actual physical mechanics of sex, which if you haven't had it yet can be surprisingly useful, hygiene, and how not to hurt yourself and others. Only downside is that Yen Press rated it Mature despite being way less horny and somehow less explicit than most shonen manga, which puts it outside the age range it's really helpful for. It also has some gay kids and a kid who's probably asexual on top of the useful and practical sex ed, so it's basically conservative mind poison.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

... you haven't even seen the material, have you?

Hell, he hasn't read your posts considering you've plainly stated what happens

 

[Cheetodust]

No I haven't read all 20 of the banned books in question in 2 days of seeing it in this thread. Have you?

I was clear before when I said about hearing about illustrations. Thought that might have clued you in a bit.

Look how confidently wrong you're being! This is fantastic. Love it. Maybe you should actually look into a situation before taking a "clear position" because it's starting to look like maybe you take that "clear position" long before you look into small details like "what's actually fucking happening".

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Considering comprehensive and frank levels of sex ed from kindergarten is statistically proven to be the best way to lower child pregnancy rates, child sex abuse, and grooming, the fact that the conservative position is to Never Do That leads me to some very unfortunate implications. Like, shouldn't it be a good thing that kids know what their parts are, how they work, and what a healthy relationship looks like? So that they know that Daddy's Secret Playtime is actually abuse and they can get help?

On a related note, Yen Press localized the manga series Sex Education 120%. It was written because they authors thought Japanese sex ed was hot garbage, and being somebody from a country which also has a rep for sex ed being garbage I kinda wanted to see how they stack up. Would've been a godsend if I were a kid. Lot of frank talk about relationships, consent, the common myths kids and adults will believe, invent, or lie about to have sex, what different relationships looks like, how pornography lies and sets up dramatically unrealistic expectations, the actual s physical mechanics of sex, which if you haven't had it yet can be surprisingly useful, hygiene, and how not to hurt yourself and others. Only downside is that Yen Press rated it Mature despite being way less horny and somehow less explicit than most shonen manga, which puts it outside the age range it's really helpful for. It also has some gay kids and a kid who's probably asexual on top of the useful and practical sex ed, so it's basically conservative mind poison.

And I wouldn't want that knowledge to have to be learned from the literary equivalent of (at best) the series Skins (maybe saying Euphoria is a better frame of reference now, I don't know?).

To be clear I'm not calling the Manga series that, I'm saying by he sounds of everything the banned books are that.

Hell, he hasn't read your posts considering you've plainly stated what happens

I read both sets of posts on this.

One set that presents it as broaching these topics and being good for sex ed but not being very clear specifically on the content in it or how its good.
The other set that presents it as the pieces of media being far more explicit and closer to erotica which wouldn't be the kind of material you'd really want to be used as sex education material as it would push unrealistic expectations and lies.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Look how confidently wrong you're being! This is fantastic. Love it. Maybe you should actually look into a situation before taking a "clear position" because it's starting to look like maybe you take that "clear position" long before you look into small details like "what's actually fucking happening".

Ok, prove me wrong.

Find somewhere reliable that actually describes the content of the books, I don't need to see the content personally but based on the rather nebulous position on it some people are taking on the content and the suddenly turn about of "Well have you read the content?" by people who also haven't in all likelyhood read any of it either and are entirely reliant on sources or others they've heard from on it. Yeh lets just say after the stunts pulled with the two different books sharing the same name and people accidentally or deliberately bringing up the wrong one. I'm going to be far more suspicious of the side of this known for being far ore dishonest or lying in this regard than the side that are better known for being a bit hyperbolic.

Oh and my position was not just clear but nuanced to handle the unknown elements here. But of course that is being ignored.

So yeh kindly prove me wrong or drop the sophistry.
You want me to believe one side over the other? show evidence and support for it
As is so far my position is based on precedent and biases established by prior actions.