Too trashy for Crook - Book banning

[Ivan Seeking]

The Crook County School District has temporarily removed a book from classrooms after one parent complained to the school board that the National Book Award winner was "trashy" and "inappropriate."

...Moss, reached today by The Oregonian, said the book includes "a reference about masturbation, and that it's ok and no big deal." He added that he felt it was "inappropriate."

Moss said he also was upset that the school didn't notify him that the book was being assigned, adding that it alerts parents when teachers are covering certain topics in health class, for instance...

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2008/12/crook_county_removes_book_from.html

 

[Cyrus]

Leading scientists agree, you'll go blind.

 

[tribdog]

Leading scientists agree, you'll go blind.

You only go blind once but can enjoy masturbation thousands of times. In fact I'm enjoying whoa, who turned out the lights?

 

[tribdog]

Actually when I first saw this book I thought it was inappropriate. "Dora explores her sexuality" by Dora the Explorer. Chapter One: What happened to Flashlight's batteries? Chapter Two: Look what's inside Backpack Chapter Three: Find the little man in the Canoe.

 

[NeoDevin]

Just for clarity, there is a difference between banning the book, and removing it from the curriculum. The thread title is a little misleading.

 

[Proton Soup]

Leading scientists agree, you'll go blind.

viagra's side effects make me wonder if maybe there's something to that

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viagra#Side_effects

 

[russ_watters]

Just for clarity, there is a difference between banning the book, and removing it from the curriculum. The thread title is a little misleading.

Agreed. And I'll go further that put in historical context: there is nothing any school district can ever do to "ban" a book. Use of that word is inappropriate.

 

[binzing]

Just a redneck. Plenty in Prineville too.

 

[Gokul43201]

Agreed. And I'll go further that put in historical context: there is nothing any school district can ever do to "ban" a book. Use of that word is inappropriate.

But the term "book banning" is widely prevalent, even in the context of schools and school districts.

Many ways exist to ban books. Our county has a group which reads the questionable book and determines whether its educational value exceeds the weight of the objections against it. However, schools can ban books without this lengthy procedure. They just choose not to order the books in the first place.

http://712educators.about.com/cs/bannedbooks/a/bookbanning.htm

It seems this person is contradicting your assertion. Do we have a conflict of having definitions here?

How is the word 'ban" being used in these places, for instance?

This listing of the books most frequently banned in the United States is from Banned in the U.S.A by Herbert N. Foerstel (Greenwood Press, 1994).

1. Impressions Edited by Jack Booth et al.
2. Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck
3. The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger
4. The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens)
...

http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/nation/082297nation-list.html

School shelves orders for new Harry Potter books
- Carrollwood Elementary will not stock the two latest volumes of the wildly popular series because of witchcraft themes.
...
Those who follow the issue say the books have yet to be banned outright in any school system, but some districts have removed the books from libraries or suffered challenges from parents. A school district in Michigan pulled the books from the library, and a mother in New York threatened a lawsuit if the books weren't banned from her son's school district.

http://www.sptimes.com/News/012800/Hillsborough/School_shelves_orders.shtml

Useful reading can be had in the USSC's decision in the Pico case. The decision was 5-4 against banning books in school libraries.

Here are the majority and minority opinions: http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/resources/handout1a.aspx?id=13965

... In brief, we hold that local school boards may not remove books from school library shelves simply because they dislike the ideas contained in those books and seek by their removal to 'prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion.

… In this case, the students' rights of free speech and expression were not infringed, and no ideas were suppressed. … If the school can set curriculum, select teachers, and determine what books to purchase for the school library, it surely can decide which books to discontinue or remove from the school library so long as it does not also interfere with the right of students to read the material and to discuss it.

Both groups, however, seem to agree that the school shouldn't remove books from the library for ideological reasons, if there isn't say, a public library in the neighborhood that carries said book.

So anyway, following the Pico case, school districts may not ban books from school libraries, but it appears to happen all the time, nevertheless (perhaps until challenged in court?).

 

[NeoDevin]

But the term "book banning" is widely prevalent, even in the context of schools and school districts.

In this case, there is no mention in the article linked to about removing the book from the library, only from classrooms and the curriculum. The word "banning" in the title is still misleading (Unless Ivan has further evidence)

 

[FredGarvin]

Symantics aside, the fact that a single parent can cause such a wholesale change in a high school's curriculum is disturbing.

 

[SticksandStones]

Symantics aside, the fact that a single parent can cause such a wholesale change in a high school's curriculum is disturbing.

Even more disturbing is that the school didn't tell him to go **** himself.

This is what's wrong with education these days: parents have too much of a say and too many of them are mentally deficient in some way. My sister, a teacher, once had a parent come up to her and asked her to stop assigning reading and writing assignments. In an English class.

 

[Gokul43201]

In this case, there is no mention in the article linked to about removing the book from the library, only from classrooms and the curriculum.

I did not disagree with this. The thing I was disagreeing with was Russ' statement that a school/school district can not even ban books. And even there, the conflict is only between the use of 'can' as opposed to 'may'.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

A book may be banned from the curriculum. The error made by careless readers is to apply the word in a broader context.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Symantics aside

But that would mean actually discussing the point of the thread.

the fact that a single parent can cause such a wholesale change in a high school's curriculum is disturbing.

...the point of the thread. I'm glad that you, Gokul, S&S, and Binzing, could keep up.

 

[chemisttree]

Symantics aside, the fact that a single parent can cause such a wholesale change in a high school's curriculum is disturbing.

It was a committee!

Both Jefferson and Crook county school officials said when a book is challenged, a committee reviews the book and decides what action will be taken.

What do you have against single parents?

 

[LowlyPion]

Leading scientists agree, you'll go blind.

This would be why so many people wear glasses?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

It was a committee!

And the committee agreed to allow it, but it was a non-binding decision.

 

[chemisttree]

Useful reading can be had in the USSC's decision in the Pico case. The decision was 5-4 against banning books in school libraries.

Here are the majority and minority opinions: http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/resources/handout1a.aspx?id=13965

... In brief, we hold that local school boards may not remove books from school library shelves simply because they dislike the ideas contained in those books and seek by their removal to 'prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion.

Both groups, however, seem to agree that the school shouldn't remove books from the library for ideological reasons, if there isn't say, a public library in the neighborhood that carries said book.

So anyway, following the Pico case, school districts may not ban books from school libraries, but it appears to happen all the time, nevertheless (perhaps until challenged in court?).

Are you sure you are interpreting the Pico case correctly? In the second part of the majority opinion, it is stated:

...(b) While petitioners might rightfully claim absolute discretion in matters of curriculum by reliance upon their duty to inculcate community values in schools, petitioners' reliance upon that duty is misplaced where they attempt to extend their claim of absolute discretion beyond the compulsory environment of the classroom into the school library and the regime of voluntary inquiry that there holds sway.

Thus the case is only applicable if the Board were to remove the book from the library not the curriculum.

 

[chemisttree]

And the committee agreed to allow it, but it was a non-binding decision.

The committee agreed to allow 'it'? By 'it' do you mean removal or it's continued use in the classroom?

 

[russ_watters]

But the term "book banning" is widely prevalent, even in the context of schools and school districts.

It seems this person is contradicting your assertion. Do we have a conflict of having definitions here?

Yes, I think we do have a conflict of definitions. Here's one of those quotes you posted, the most basic form (and exactly what I was thinking of when I objected to the usage):

However, schools can ban books without this lengthy procedure. They just choose not to order the books in the first place.

I, on occasion, throw out books I don't like. Am I "banning" them? No, I'm just choosing not to own them.

1. to prohibit, forbid, or bar; interdict: to ban nuclear weapons; The dictator banned all newspapers and books that criticized his regime.
2. Archaic. a. to pronounce an ecclesiastical curse upon.
b. to curse; execrate.

–noun 3. the act of prohibiting by law; interdiction.
4. informal denunciation or prohibition, as by public opinion: society's ban on racial discrimination.
5. Law. a. a proclamation.
b. a public condemnation.

6. Ecclesiastical. a formal condemnation; excommunication.
7. a malediction; curse.

The closest possibility would be the first definition. But simply choosing not to stock something something in the library isn't the same as "forbiding" it and it would certainly be overusing the word to say all books not in the library inventory are "banned".

The article in the OP doesn't use the word, just the title of the thread. Reworded into an affirmative statement, it would read 'Crook County School Distric bans book.' So what is forbidden? Is a student forbidden from having the book on school property or reading it? No.

Use of the word in this context is inflammatory rhetoric - nothing more.

Also, I don't consider a faceless about.com author to be an authoritative source on the matter either: She is misusing the word too. Or rather, she is also using it so broadly as to make it meaningless.

You can go back historically and compare this to things like Tolsoy's banned books in Russia. The word means something completely different in the context in the article you posted and in the OP. I don't like it when people co-opt words for their emotional appeal. Googling, I see people use the word this way a lot. It doesn't affect my opinion. It's overused.

 

[russ_watters]

Symantics aside, the fact that a single parent can cause such a wholesale change in a high school's curriculum is disturbing.

Agreed. Regarless of the usage of that word, people are too PC and the squeaky wheel should not always get the grease.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The committee agreed to allow 'it'? By 'it' do you mean removal or it's continued use in the classroom?

Sorry, they agreed to allow the suspension to continue. From a later report.
http://lisnews.org/alexie_book_still_spended_crook_cty_classrooms_available_library

My cousin is an English teacher involved in all of this. I got a an earful about this on the phone last night.

 

[Gokul43201]

Are you sure you are interpreting the Pico case correctly? In the second part of the majority opinion, it is stated:
...
Thus the case is only applicable if the Board were to remove the book from the library not the curriculum.

That's how I understood it too (in fact, you've quoted me saying the same thing).

I wasn't saying that Pico was relevant to the OP; only that it was relevant to my interpretation of Russ' statement about schools banning books (i.e., banning from their libraries).

 

[chemisttree]

My cousin is an English teacher involved in all of this. I got a an earful about this on the phone last night.

Thanks for sharing!

It's really a sad state of affairs we have here... on one hand we have a reactionary school board (and committee too!) that bans books based on said book's brief mention of masturbation and on the other hand we have a journalist, obviously the product of a much more progressive school system, that writes a story about the 'touchy feely' book entitled "http://www.bendbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081211/NEWS0107/812110432/-1/rss&emailed_article=1" ...".

Oh, the horror... the HORROR!

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

I still remember in elementary school reading about the good doctor Watson finding my hero Sherlock in his basement flat coming down off a coke bender. that was the good old school library for ya.

I'm fairly against censorship but when it comes to sexual topics in the classroom with ones children... things just seem a bit different.

 

[NeoDevin]

But that would mean actually discussing the point of the thread.

Sorry, what was the point of the thread? You post a sensationalized and misleading title, followed by a quote from an article and a link, with no comment of your own. You claimed in the title that they banned the book (and you didn't qualify it, so the only reasonable assumption is that you meant a complete ban), and then have the nerve to claim that people who point out that no book was banned in this scenario are not discussing the point of the thread?

To the others: That one parent can have an influence on the school system is a good thing, as long as there is a proper procedure for such things (like, say, a committee). If they were reading from the Bible, Qur'an, or other holy book, in a predominately religious community, I would be fully supportive of a single secularist parent being able to affect a change (note, I don't want to digress into a debate about separation of church and state, it was just the first example that came to mind). If there was a teacher who was using pornography (note, I'm not saying the book in question is pornography, I have never read it), I would hope there were an avenue of appeal to have it removed from the curriculum.

Further, we don't know what the reasons/goals were for choosing that particular book in the first place, it's possible they got the complaint, figured that they may get more in the future, and that they could accomplish the same teaching objectives with a less controversial book. The students haven't been prevented from reading the book, and we have no indication that removing it from the curriculum has negatively impacted their education, so I see no reason why anyone is complaining. If it were chosen for a very particular purpose, and there were no other appropriate examples, then I would agree that removing it for a complaint would be inappropriate, but I don't see any evidence that this is the case here.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

It seems that others had no problem seeing the point. The addendum of "book banning" was only intended to give a little context and was entirely appropriate. The proper interpretation was obvious upon reading the link. Not my fault if some people get aggressive due to their personal definitions, biases, or expectations.

 

[NeoDevin]

It seems that others had no problem seeing the point. The addendum of "book banning" was only intended to give a little context and was entirely appropriate. The proper interpretation was obvious upon reading the link. Not my fault if some people get aggressive due to their personal definitions, biases, or expectations.

In no possible interpretation of the phrase "Book banning" can it be read to mean "removed from curriculum". Save what's left of your integrity and admit that the title was disingenuous.

 

[SticksandStones]

I still remember in elementary school reading about the good doctor Watson finding my hero Sherlock in his basement flat coming down off a coke bender. that was the good old school library for ya.

I'm fairly against censorship but when it comes to sexual topics in the classroom with ones children... things just seem a bit different.

How so? Sex is a perfectly normal biological function, why treat it any different than we would drinking or eating?