JeniParsonsSaw this elsewhere and I love it! #bookstodon
commander555@JeniParsons Its simple, we don't want smut in schools. I am not against lgbtq stories persay, I just oppose the pornographic ones being available in school libraries for the same reason I wouldn't want nudie mags in the school libraries. It isn't about the message, it is about the smut. When the public and school libraries use taxpayer money to put smut on the shelves, that makes smut socially acceptable for the same reason the government putting lottery terminals everywhere makes buying lottery tickets socially acceptable or the death penalty makes killing people to solve problems socially acceptable. If you want to read smut, buy it with your own money, but everything the government does should be held to a higher moral standard than what you or I choose to do with our own money.
David Brent 📚@commander555 @JeniParsons Uh huh. And what smut, exactly, are you talking about? Be specific. Show your work. Let's see some titles. Are you prepared to defend your position? Have you read the books you want restricted?
Who decides what is smut and what is not smut? You? Your friends? Chaya Raichik?
Who determines who does and does not get access to smut? Politicians? Church leaders?
Are you able to answer any of these questions?
Would you object to Playboy or Hustler getting a spot on a school library? What about 50 shades of gray? Again, this is not about the content, because I believe that smut depicting consenting adults should be legal for consenting adults to view, I just don't think the government should be making smut socially acceptable by putting it in school or public libraries. Again, I only have so many characters, so I cannot go over every example, but lets go over two that I object to and why. My first example is "The Fourth Wing" which I consider to be literary porn because it contains multiple sex scenes between the protagonist and antagonist. These sex scenes depict specific types of sex acts and are clearly meant to arouse rather than to tell the story. Again, adults should be able to read this even if it is not my thing, I don't object to the content, I object to where the content is made available and to who. My second example is Gender Queer, which I object to not because it depicts non binary people, but because it contains a specific plate depicting the author masturbating and tasting her own sex fluids. Again, adults should be able to buy this, but the government shouldn't be making it socially acceptable by putting it in libraries.
@commander555 @JeniParsons You can't judge of what is deemed appropriate for others. There are those who suggest two men kissing is smut. Why would they get to decide if my kid can check a book with that content out of the library? What qualifies you to decide if sex in The Fourth Wing or masturbation in Gender Queer advances the story? You sound like Moms For Liberty talking points and it's not appreciated. #Bookstodon @bookstodon
@dbsalk @JeniParsons @bookstodon I don't think you get it. If you want to buy those books for yourself to read them, that if fine, but I wouldn't want those books being deliberately placed in school or public libraries or being taught in school. After all, what makes Fyodor Dostoevsky a better author than the editor and chief of a nudie mag with a 3 page pullout of a naked women? What makes "Animal Farm" or "1984" a better exploration of politics and the English language than a smutty fanfiction of the same? What makes "Topological Foundations of Electromagnetism, 2nd edition" more scientifically valuable than a shock site that plays beheading videos and cartel shootouts? My point is that I know enough about right and wrong to know that the rhetorical questions I asked have obvious answers.