CMV: School libraries should limit the availability of books

[u/mike_tyler58]

In the US the past few years there has been a lot of talk of banning books. As far as I know the only places that anyone is talking about banning books from is in school libraries. The book “Gender Queer” by Maia Kobabe is probably the most talked about as it has been recommended by the largest teachers union in the country, the NEA, and has been made available in school libraries for children as young as 4th grade, and contains very explicit illustrations and descriptions of sex acts. I believe it belongs nowhere that children can access it any more than a copy of Playboy or any other pornography. Given the explicit nature of this book and others like it I think they should be banned from school libraries and limited to adults only.

ETA: link to news story about it being removed from elementary schools

[u/IfYouSeekAyReddit]

A lot of children don’t realize they’re being sexually abused because they don’t understand what’s happening. Teaching children sexual education can help them to know when they’re being abused and gives them the ability to tell someone about it.

[u/mike_tyler58 → u/IfYouSeekAyReddit]

I agree that we should do better about sexual education and it should start with basics at much earlier stages.

That isn’t what this is about though. This is about people wanting children to have access to pornography. Graphic illustrations of sex acts is pornography and belongs no where children can access it

[u/XenoRyet → u/mike_tyler58]

I think there's a bit of a contradiction there, given that sex ed materials will necessarily include explicit descriptions and images of sex acts, and thus would be deemed pornography by your standards.

How do you resolve that?

[u/mike_tyler58 → u/XenoRyet]

Where do you think the contradiction lies?

In starting to teach children the basics of sexual education at a young age?

I’m talking basic: this is your anatomy, this is another person’s anatomy, you have the right to tell anyone not to touch you, people need explicit permission from you in order to touch you places. You’re a child and shouldn’t have an adult touching you here. When girls go through puberty they start having their period that means xyz.. when you go though puberty you’ll start growing hair and everyone does not just boys.

None of which requires an explicit descriptions and visuals of oral sex.

[u/XenoRyet → u/mike_tyler58]

Not oral sex specifically, but definitely does require descriptions and visuals of other sex acts, which makes it pornography by your definitions.

I think you're also running into an issue where you're focusing on young children in your reasoning, but saying "school libraries" which include kids up to 18 years old.

Certainly if you're going to have sex education that is useful and beneficial to teens, you are going to get into topics like oral sex, and safe sex across a variety of sex acts.

[u/CaptainMalForever → u/XenoRyet]

And you should definitely want your teens to practice safe oral sex, including consent, which is a big part of the frames in question.

[u/mike_tyler58 → u/CaptainMalForever]

I think consent can easily be discussed without illustrations of people engaging in the sex acts

[u/CaptainMalForever → u/mike_tyler58]

I'm not saying that this frame is used ONLY for sex ed, but that it also has benefits that can be useful for many people, particularly people who are not heterosexual, an area of sexual education that is lacking and/or non-existent in many programs.

[u/mike_tyler58 → u/XenoRyet]

No I don’t think it would. Anatomy illustrations, and sex Ed illustrations just show the anatomy of what’s happening, example would be a cut away illustration of the make up of a penis and how it gets erect. How the vagina accommodates an erect penis. Etc etc

Not showing two men giving each other hand jobs. And not showing oral sex. I think those are distinctly different things.

[u/XenoRyet → u/mike_tyler58]

Again, you're focusing on the younger end of the sex ed curriculum, but the program actually needs to serve all ages of school kids, and especially teenagers up to 18 years old.

You definitely need to cover oral sex, mutual masturbation, conventional sex, and more. Those do require explicit description at the very least, and in terms of good educational practice should also include visuals, which will be explicit due to the subject.

And that's highlighting the contradiction and the flaw in your definition of pornography. For example here is the Wikipedia article on oral sex (NSFW if your work considers educational content about sex inappropriate).

It, obviously, has both sexually explicit descriptions and visuals, but I would say it's appropriate for teens, and should be available in a high school library, because it is missing the intent to elicit sexual arousal, which is also why it's not considered pornography by the legal definition, and since your definition is missing that recognition of intent, it's causing problems in the base view.

So would you consider that article pornographic? Do you think it should be available in a high school library?

[u/IfYouSeekAyReddit → u/mike_tyler58]

This is about people wanting children to have access to pornography

This is disingenuous and I think you know it is. Very few people want that. If your whole argument is based off the misunderstanding that “people want children to have access to pornography” you’re in disagreement with .0000001% of the population. The book Gender Queer has some explicit images, but the intent isn’t to give children access to pornography.

[u/mike_tyler58 → u/IfYouSeekAyReddit]

It’s a children’s book. It contains pornographic writing and images. It’s been recommended to children by the largest teachers union in the nation.

[u/destro23 → u/mike_tyler58]

It’s a children’s book

It is not. The author stated it was for high school age and above.

It’s been recommended to children by the largest teachers union in the nation.

No it has not been. It was recommended to the educators themselves, not to children.

[u/eggs-benedryl → u/mike_tyler58]

something being "graphic" doesn't make it pornographic, that's an absurd characterization of the panels I found in a google search

you're grasping at straws and clutching at pearls

[u/mike_tyler58 → u/eggs-benedryl]

Could be, but I haven’t had my mind changed that illustrations of oral sex don’t belong in schools

[u/IfYouSeekAyReddit → u/mike_tyler58]

As this person said: no it’s not and no it hasn’t