10 Most Frequently Challenged Books

[PokerGuy]

Inasmuch as there should be no government imposed limits on what gets broadcast, yes, that is my view.

You're entitled to that view, but that's just plain silly. Any logical person sees the value in having standards as a community. Communities have standards. Libraries are funded by the community so that community should have a say in what is available at the library. Don't like it? No problem, you are free to buy whatever you want, the community doesn't have to buy it for you and make it available at the library.

Now if we start talking about censorship, that's a different ballgame. I don't believe in censorship at all, let adults make their own decisions. Setting standards for what is age appropriate makes perfect sense and does not censor anything.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Huh? So there shouldn't be any limits on what gets broadcast or displayed in view of anyone anywhere including minors at all? If not government, what other entity could create a workable framework? There's a reason the FCC creates limits as to what is appropriate for public broadcast at certain hours, and it's perfectly fine for a community to create standards as to what it deems age appropriate. If you as a parent feel your child can handle something, then feel free to give it to them yourself.

Big Government is Evil, unless it's supporting your preferences...

 

[PokerGuy]

Big Government is Evil, unless it's supporting your preferences...

My preferences? Where did I say anything about my preferences? I said THE COMMUNITY would set standards, not me. I have no idea what your community looks like or what the standards are, just that it should have the right to set standards.

WRT "big government", there are specific things that only a government can do, and setting community standards of conduct is one of them. If government limited itself to performing the functions only the government could effectively perform, this would be a much better country.

 

[Fern]

don't read it or let your child(ren) read it[/b]. I guess that's too difficult.

Where does the money come from to buy those books?

It comes from the local taxpayers. WTH shouldn't they be allowed to complain about how their money is spent?

You might have a point if they're compaining about other people spending their own money to buy the books. But they're not and you don't.

With local government (which is what we're talking about here) budget problems and threats of increased prop taxes to make up budget gaps, people have a particularly strong right to complain about spending, even on books.

Fern

 

[child of wonder]

"Religious viewpoint?"

WTF?

So no library should have the Bible, the Koran, Talmud, etc.

 

[zsdersw]

You're entitled to that view, but that's just plain silly. Any logical person sees the value in having standards as a community. Communities have standards. Libraries are funded by the community so that community should have a say in what is available at the library. Don't like it? No problem, you are free to buy whatever you want, the community doesn't have to buy it for you and make it available at the library.

It's not at all silly. If a majority of people in a community want to do A, B, and C.. and don't want there to be X, Y, and Z.. then they can do a perfect job of that on their own... they don't need their government to tell them to do it. It is, ultimately, the people that make a community what it is, not a government mandate.

These are complaints about what the libraries have bought, not about what hasn't been bought. It's also not about money, either. Even if you go to the top 50 books people file these complaints about (if there is 50 books that people complain about), that's still a drop in the bucket in terms of cost. There are hundreds of other books for them and their children to read.

No, these are people complaining because their morals/beliefs are offended... when the real problem is that they think it is the government's (or the library's) job to protect/prevent them from being offended.

Now if we start talking about censorship, that's a different ballgame. I don't believe in censorship at all, let adults make their own decisions. Setting standards for what is age appropriate makes perfect sense and does not censor anything.

Setting standards is what parents should be doing for their own children... not government.

 

[zsdersw]

Where does the money come from to buy those books?

It comes from the local taxpayers. WTH shouldn't they be allowed to complain about how their money is spent?

If it was about money they'd be complaining about library funding in general, not specific books.

You might have a point if they're compaining about other people spending their own money to buy the books. But they're not and you don't.

Actually, if you do the math, the situation is very similar to that. The number of complainers < the rest of the community. The rest of the community's tax money > the complainers' tax money.

With local government (which is what we're talking about here) budget problems and threats of increased prop taxes to make up budget gaps, people have a particularly strong right to complain about spending, even on books.

Fern

Again, this isn't about spending. Unless these complainers are specifically requesting cuts to libraries (which they're not), this is about their morals/beliefs being offended or, at least, not specifically catered to... and that's just stupid. It is not either the library's or the government's responsibility (at any level) to ensure that no one person is offended or that every one person's morals/beliefs are catered to.

 

[PokerGuy]

zsdersw, who gets to decide what books should be bought and be made available in the library? If MY tax dollars are being used to fund that activity, why should I not have the right to complain if I disagree with the choice of books purchased? What the heck narrow minded viewpoint is that? Libraries serve their communities and like any business or organization they can get feedback from their customers, who are ultimately footing the bill.

Absolutely nothing wrong with people complaining about certain books being at the library or anything else for that matter, just like there's nothing wrong with the library saying "tough" if it doesn't feel the complaint is warranted. Of course, you have to be willing to deal with the consequences (no funding and / or get fired) of the choices.

If you want to read a certain book, feel free to buy it, the taxpayer doesn't have to pay for your choices.

 

[Zebo]

You're entitled to that view, but that's just plain silly. Any logical person sees the value in having standards as a community. Communities have standards. Libraries are funded by the community so that community should have a say in what is available at the library. Don't like it? No problem, you are free to buy whatever you want, the community doesn't have to buy it for you and make it available at the library.

Now if we start talking about censorship, that's a different ballgame. I don't believe in censorship at all, let adults make their own decisions. Setting standards for what is age appropriate makes perfect sense and does not censor anything.

Just getting kids reading these days would up community standards. I see no reason to ban what requires active participation in like a book. Passive activity such as Broadcast TV/Radio I'd agree.

 

[PokerGuy]

Just getting kids reading these days would up community standards.

True dat!

I see no reason to ban what requires active participation in like a book.

I haven't seen anyone advocating any ban. I'm against any kind of ban. People should be able to allow their kids to go to the library without worrying about age inappropriate stuff being available to them.

 

[zsdersw]

zsdersw, who gets to decide what books should be bought and be made available in the library? If MY tax dollars are being used to fund that activity, why should I not have the right to complain if I disagree with the choice of books purchased? What the heck narrow minded viewpoint is that? Libraries serve their communities and like any business or organization they can get feedback from their customers, who are ultimately footing the bill.

This isn't about the right to complain, it's about the stupidity of doing so.

Absolutely nothing wrong with people complaining about certain books being at the library or anything else for that matter, just like there's nothing wrong with the library saying "tough" if it doesn't feel the complaint is warranted. Of course, you have to be willing to deal with the consequences (no funding and / or get fired) of the choices.

Sure there is something wrong with it... the people who are complaining should be doing their job as parents, not abdicating their responsibility to the library/local government, and then complain when it doesn't go their way.

If you want to read a certain book, feel free to buy it, the taxpayer doesn't have to pay for your choices.

The majority of taxpayers.. who are not complaining about specific books.. also do not have to care if the minority is offended by the books that are on the shelves.

 

[zsdersw]

People should be able to allow their kids to go to the library without worrying about age inappropriate stuff being available to them.

Ridiculous. It is the parents' job to determine what's inappropriate for their child(ren) and what their child(ren) can/cannot access, not government's or the library's.

What if the child goes to the adult section and reads the book anyway and the parent(s) complain to the library? What good are government or library-imposed standards then? If you think kids don't go to the adult section and some of their parents complain to the library even though the book was classified as adult, you're a fool.

 

[PokerGuy]

This isn't about the right to complain, it's about the stupidity of doing so.

So you think there's absolutely nothing in this world that's inappropriate for a library. That's fine. Most think otherwise, and they have a right to complain and there's nothing stupid about that.

Sure there is something wrong with it... the people who are complaining should be doing their job as parents, not abdicating their responsibility to the library/local government,

There's absolutely no evidence to support your assumptions, you're just making stuff up and assigning your made up motivations to others. How do you know why someone complained about something? I certainly haven't abdicated my responsibility to anyone, yet I certainly can complain about inappropriate materials being purchased with my tax dollars.

This is not rocket surgery. Different communities have different ideas about what is appropriate material to make available in a library for people of various ages. They can set standards. Most people also think a library should be a place where young people can explore and learn, without being exposed to age-inappropriate material. People can differ over what they consider inappropriate.

The majority of taxpayers.. who are not complaining about specific books.. also do not have to care if the minority is offended by the books that are on the shelves.

You are assuming that just because someone doesn't complain about something it means they agree with it being there. Logic fail.

 

[PokerGuy]

What if the child goes to the adult section and reads the book anyway and the parent(s) complain to the library?

If the library has an "adult reading" section, then they have an obligation to keep children out of that section.

I guess it depends on how you view the library. If you view it as an "anything goes" kind of place where all kids should be accompanied by a parent all all times lest they be exposed to inappropriate materials, then fine. Most people don't view it that way, and they expect their library to have some standards for appropriate material. If they want to have a "Bobby has those 'special feelings' for his goat" section, I have the right to complain, and I have an expectation that based on community standards kids are not exposed to that material in the library.

 

[zsdersw]

So you think there's absolutely nothing in this world that's inappropriate for a library. That's fine. Most think otherwise, and they have a right to complain and there's nothing stupid about that.

There's nothing stupid about the right to complain, but complaining about these things is very stupid. No one's forcing their children to read anything inappropriate from a public library, so the parents have every opportunity to keep inappropriate material from their kids. Any government action or imposed standards are just state-sponsored nannying.. which is never a good substitute for parental involvement/decision-making.

There's absolutely no evidence to support your assumptions, you're just making stuff up and assigning your made up motivations to others. How do you know why someone complained about something? I certainly haven't abdicated my responsibility to anyone, yet I certainly can complain about inappropriate materials being purchased with my tax dollars.

Why did they complain? Did they complain about their tax dollars being used to buy the book or did they complain about the content of the book being inappropriate? In the cases of these and other books mentioned in the OP, which is what we're talking about, they're complaining about the content being inappropriate.

You and anyone else has a right to complain, but that doesn't mean you and they aren't stupid for doing so.

This is not rocket surgery. Different communities have different ideas about what is appropriate material to make available in a library for people of various ages. They can set standards. Most people also think a library should be a place where young people can explore and learn, without being exposed to age-inappropriate material. People can differ over what they consider inappropriate.

Why are the standards necessary? If parents were doing their jobs their kids wouldn't be exposed to anything they found inappropriate.

You are assuming that just because someone doesn't complain about something it means they agree with it being there. Logic fail.

Logic win. The people who don't complain are either indifferent, unaware, or agree with it being there. Indifferent to and agreeing with it being there are going to be the larger groups of people.

 

[zsdersw]

If the library has an "adult reading" section, then they have an obligation to keep children out of that section.

I'm talking about books like what's in the OP... not pornography.. but aside from that, no, the library has no such obligation. The only obligation it could conceivably have is to make it known what books are for kids and what ones are for adults.

I guess it depends on how you view the library. If you view it as an "anything goes" kind of place where all kids should be accompanied by a parent all all times lest they be exposed to inappropriate materials, then fine. Most people don't view it that way, and they expect their library to have some standards for appropriate material. If they want to have a "Bobby has those 'special feelings' for his goat" section, I have the right to complain, and I have an expectation that based on community standards kids are not exposed to that material in the library.

What's popular isn't always right.. and what's right isn't always popular.

 

[PokerGuy]

I'm talking about books like what's in the OP... not pornography.. but aside from that, no, the library has no such obligation. The only obligation it could conceivably have is to make it known what books are for kids and what ones are for adults.

I guess that's the crux of our disagreement then. You think there should be no standards, that the parents should be with their kids 100% of the time in the library and make sure that their eyes don't stray and see some crap you don't want them to see. You obviously don't have kids and have no realistic understanding of what parenting is.

I contend that the community has always had the right to set standards and will continue to do so, and that parents have a reasonable expectation that children are not exposed to materials the community deems inappropriate at the library.

Taking a look around in the real world, it's pretty clear which view is more prevalent and makes more sense. After all, if MY tax money is being used, I have a right to complain about how it gets used, and people exercise that right.

 

[zsdersw]

I guess that's the crux of our disagreement then. You think there should be no standards, that the parents should be with their kids 100&#37; of the time in the library and make sure that their eyes don't stray and see some crap you don't want them to see. You obviously don't have kids and have no realistic understanding of what parenting is.

I don't have kids, but I work with them every day. The parents don't need to be physically with their kids 100% of the time to be effective at keeping inappropriate material from them. If you think they do or that I was seriously suggesting that, you have no realistic understanding of anything... much less parenting. I don't care if you have kids or not; having kids doesn't make you good at it.

I contend that the community has always had the right to set standards and will continue to do so, and that parents have a reasonable expectation that children are not exposed to materials the community deems inappropriate at the library.

I contend that a community of individuals who take proper responsibility for themselves and their children do not need to use government to get a desired result. Absent this responsibility, government-imposed standards are a poor substitute.

Taking a look around in the real world, it's pretty clear which view is more prevalent and makes more sense. After all, if MY tax money is being used, I have a right to complain about how it gets used, and people exercise that right.

Prevalence has no bearing on whether something is right or not, or if it makes sense. Your right to complain doesn't mean you aren't stupid for doing so.

 

[PokerGuy]

I don't have kids, but I work with them every day.

LOL @ guy who doesn't have kids telling people who DO have kids how to parent. bwahahahaha. "but I did work at a holliday in express last night!". Funny how the people without any first hand experience are the ones with the silliest notions about how to "properly" do something.

Absent this responsibility, government-imposed standards are a poor substitute.

They are not a substitute or mutually exclusive. They work in conjunction, parents doing their job, communities setting standards.

Your right to complain doesn't mean you aren't stupid for doing so.

... or that people calling others stupid for exercising their rights are even more stupid for doing so.

 

[zsdersw]

LOL @ guy who doesn't have kids telling people who DO have kids how to parent. bwahahahaha. "but I did work at a holliday in express last night!". Funny how the people without any first hand experience are the ones with the silliest notions about how to "properly" do something.

LOL @ idiot who thinks that having kids makes you a good parent or that not having kids makes someone unable to know what the "proper" way is.

They are not a substitute or mutually exclusive. They work in conjunction, parents doing their job, communities setting standards.

Too many view and treat them as a substitute. You still haven't explained why standards are necessary.

... or that people calling others stupid for exercising their rights are even more stupid for doing so.

No, your stupidity takes the cake... every time.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Community Standards FTW!!!

Who needs trash like Ulysses or Tropic of Cancer in the public library, anyway?

 

[PokerGuy]

LOL @ idiot who thinks that having kids makes you a good parent or that not having kids makes someone unable to know what the "proper" way is.

You just keep telling yourself that. The fact is, until you have kids you have NO CLUE what you're talking about when you talk about parenting. None. You might want to get the brain surgeon that says "I read all about it in a book, I'm an expert!", I'll go with the one that's done it before, thanks.

Too many view and treat them as a substitute.

Agreed!

You still haven't explained why standards are necessary.

Because realistically without such standards there's absolutely no way a parent would have any chance to raise their kids based on their parental standards and everyone would be down to the standard of the lowest standard bearer. Hence, communities set minimum standards. See how that works, that logic stuff?

 

[zsdersw]

You just keep telling yourself that. The fact is, until you have kids you have NO CLUE what you're talking about when you talk about parenting. None.

You just keep telling yourself that. I see it all the time at work. The kids with problems are almost invariably the kids with crappy parents that take little or no responsibility for their child; the parents who aren't disciplinarians from the start.

Because realistically without such standards there's absolutely no way a parent would have any chance to raise their kids based on their parental standards and everyone would be down to the standard of the lowest standard bearer. Hence, communities set minimum standards. See how that works, that logic stuff?

Not at all true. Communities will form themselves around people who think and act similarly. People build communities and make them what they are, not because a standard exists telling them to do so.

 

[PokerGuy]

You just keep telling yourself that. I see it all the time at work.

"I saw it in a book!". No clue. Anyone who's ever had kids can tell you, anything they ever thought they knew about parenting etc went right out the window when they actually had kids and had to figure out how it actually works in the real world. Having kids doesn't make you a good parent, there are plenty of lousy ones... but if you don't have any, don't pretend to know how to raise them because you have no idea.

Not at all true. Communities will form themselves around people who think and act similarly. People build communities and make them what they are, not because a standard exists telling them to do so.

And with no standards all it would take is for a small group to do stupid things and the whole community would be ruined. Hence, through thousands of years evolving as towns/villages/societies, humans figured out that you have to set standards and enforce them.

 

[zsdersw]

"I saw it in a book!". No clue. Anyone who's ever had kids can tell you, anything they ever thought they knew about parenting etc went right out the window when they actually had kids and had to figure out how it actually works in the real world. Having kids doesn't make you a good parent, there are plenty of lousy ones... but if you don't have any, don't pretend to know how to raise them because you have no idea.

Yes yes, "actually works in the real world"... what a load of crap. There are preconceptions that are shown to be incorrect once you have kids, and there are preconceptions that you learn from other people's experiences that turn out exactly correct once you have kids. Lousy parents do a good job of showing what not to do.. is my point.

And with no standards all it would take is for a small group to do stupid things and the whole community would be ruined.

No it wouldn't. Everyone else practicing what they believe is right would insulate themselves from any small group doing stupid things. Books available in a library that, according to the majority, are not appropriate will not be checked out by their children. Broadcasts that, according to the majority, are not appropriate will not be watched by them.

Hence, through thousands of years evolving as towns/villages/societies, humans figured out that you have to set standards and enforce them.

Ah yes.. the old "that's the way we've always done it" excuse. Here's a clue: the way we've always done it is not necessarily the best way or the necessary way.