10 Most Frequently Challenged Books

[zsdersw]

http://www.mediabistro.com/galleyca...-challenged-books-of-2010-free-samples_b27503

1. And Tango Makes Three by Peter Parnell and Justin Richardson
Reasons: Homosexuality, Religious Viewpoint, Unsuited to Age Group

2. The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian by Sherman Alexie
Reasons: Offensive language, Racism, Sex Education, Sexually Explicit, Unsuited to Age Group, Violence

3. Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
Reasons: Insensitivity, Offensive Language, Racism, Sexually Explicit

4. Crank by Ellen Hopkins
Reasons: Drugs, Offensive Language, Sexually Explicit

5. The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins
Reasons: Sexually Explicit, Unsuited to Age Group, Violence

6. Lush by Natasha Friend
Reasons: Drugs, Offensive Language, Sexually Explicit, Unsuited to Age Group

7. What My Mother Doesn’t Know by Sonya Sones
Reasons: Sexism, Sexually Explicit, Unsuited to Age Group

8. Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By In America by Barbara Ehrenreich
Reasons: Drugs, Inaccurate, Offensive Language, Political Viewpoint, Religious Viewpoint

9. Revolutionary Voices edited by Amy Sonnie
Reasons: Homosexuality, Sexually Explicit

10. Twilight by Stephenie Meyer
Reasons: Religious Viewpoint, Violence

I find it laughably ridiculous that people bother to make formal complaints to libraries because some of the books contain, in their view, inappropriate material. If you don't like the book's content, or don't think your child(ren) should see it, practice a little common sense and don't read it or let your child(ren) read it. I guess that's too difficult.

 

[PeshakJang]

Still not as bad as editing classics to remove offensive language. See: Tom Sawyer

 

[PottedMeat]

3. Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
Reasons: Insensitivity, Offensive Language, Racism, Sexually Explicit

10. Twilight by Stephenie Meyer
Reasons: Religious Viewpoint, Violence

I've read #3 and heard of #10, haven't heard of the rest.

What's wrong with hatin' on twilight? Seems like most of the complaints are legit :awe:

 

[Atreus21]

Twilight had a religious viewpoint?

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Twilight had a religious viewpoint?

Mormonism

 

[PokerGuy]

I have no problem with any books being in the library, so long as they are segregated for appropriate ages. I want to encourage my 7 year old to read and wander and find subjects of interest without having to worry about them reading things that are completely inappropriate.

I disagree with banning or censorship of any kind, but age appropriate access makes sense.

 

[Vette73]

Mormonism

Someone say magic underwear? :sneaky:

 

[Theb]

8. Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By In America by Barbara Ehrenreich
Reasons: Drugs, Inaccurate, Offensive Language, Political Viewpoint, Religious Viewpoint

This should be required reading for high school students, plan a career or you could end up wearing a pink uniform everyday.

 

[zsdersw]

I have no problem with any books being in the library, so long as they are segregated for appropriate ages. I want to encourage my 7 year old to read and wander and find subjects of interest without having to worry about them reading things that are completely inappropriate.

I disagree with banning or censorship of any kind, but age appropriate access makes sense.

Who determines what's appropriate for what age?

 

[dguy6789]

Who determines what's appropriate for what age?

I do

 

[ProfJohn]

Many of the challenged books are challenged due to sexual view points such as homosexuality and such.

Show this list to some Europeans and they would look at it and ask what the fuck is wrong with us.

 

[PingSpike]

So what happens to the challenges? They get put into the spreadsheet that was used to generate this article and then tossed in the round file?

 

[Schadenfroh]

No love for A Clockwork Orange? IIRC, in the first couple of chapters the protagonists mugged a professor, home invaded another guy, raped his wife in front of him and worse...

 

[Kadarin]

No love for A Clockwork Orange? IIRC, in the first couple of chapters the protagonists mugged a professor, home invaded another guy, raped his wife in front of him and worse...

This is the US, where we don't give a crap how violent something is. We care much more about making sure our precious little angelic children aren't exposed to nipples and other dirty, filthy sexual things.

 

[Schadenfroh]

This is the US, where we don't give a crap how violent something is. We care much more about making sure our precious little angelic children aren't exposed to nipples and other dirty, filthy sexual things.

Jack Thompson would disagree, also gang rape (mentioned in my post above) involves nipples and filthy sexual things...

 

[Thump553]

Nickel and Dimed I'd reccommend to anyone regardless of age. Maybe I didn't read it with a critical enough eye, but for the life of me I don't know what there is in that book that would offend anyone's moral code. I don't recall any substantial political preaching in the book-the basic premise is that it's going to be very hard to live in the US on a minimum wage job, and many of those jobs you really have to bust your butt to make that minimum wage. The section where she worked as a housecleaner is a classic read.

My town's library has a couple of shelves of Glen Beck etc. books. I can't imagine anyone being so petty as to challenge a library circulating a book because of it's political viewpoint or supposed accuracy. That's for the reader to decide.

 

[zsdersw]

I do

For you and your children, sure, but not for anyone else.

 

[ShawnD1]

http://www.mediabistro.com/galleyca...-challenged-books-of-2010-free-samples_b27503



I find it laughably ridiculous that people bother to make formal complaints to libraries because some of the books contain, in their view, inappropriate material. If you don't like the book's content, or don't think your child(ren) should see it, practice a little common sense and don't read it or let your child(ren) read it. I guess that's too difficult.

This is AMERIKA, land of the free. It's my right to limit your rights. That's how it works


For some things like a guide on how to make explosives from household chemicals, it makes a lot of sense why someone would complain about that. For shit like Twilight or Harry Potter or that book Darwin wrote, it's just mentally ill people who complain.

 

[Elfear]

Mormonism

Which viewpoints from the Twilight series do you consider strictly Mormon?

No premarital sex is a view shared by almost all Christians, Muslims, and a few other groups.

The idea of our actions in this life affecting our happiness in the afterlife is also shared by almost all Christians, Muslims, and others.

Any others?


To be fair, some of those books are in the Young Adult section of the library so I can see why parents might be worried. I've read a few off that list and I don't think I'd want my 11-13yr old reading them.

 

[zsdersw]

To be fair, some of those books are in the Young Adult section of the library so I can see why parents might be worried. I've read a few off that list and I don't think I'd want my 11-13yr old reading them.

Then those parents can do their job and keep their kids from reading them... not waste anyone else's time by filing formal protests about the books.

 

[PokerGuy]

Who determines what's appropriate for what age?

Each community does, that's already a well established principle in common law: community standards as to what is considered "reasonable". Things they are OK with in San Fran might not fly in Tuscaloosa and vice versa. People have a right to complain if they think something is not appropriate and it's up to the library to make that determination as to what is appropriate for the community served by the library. They should always err on the side of caution. After all, if you want to see a book that's not appropriate for a small child, you can do so, but a child can not "unsee" a book depicting graphic violence.

 

[PokerGuy]

This is AMERIKA, land of the free. It's my right to limit your rights. That's how it works

Nobody should be limiting what someone else gets to view or read, but we can put limits on what is age appropriate in public places like the library that are funded by taxpayer dollars. If you want to read a book that's not at the library, you're free to buy it.

 

[zsdersw]

Each community does, that's already a well established principle in common law: community standards as to what is considered "reasonable". Things they are OK with in San Fran might not fly in Tuscaloosa and vice versa. People have a right to complain if they think something is not appropriate and it's up to the library to make that determination as to what is appropriate for the community served by the library. They should always err on the side of caution. After all, if you want to see a book that's not appropriate for a small child, you can do so, but a child can not "unsee" a book depicting graphic violence.

Thank you, Captain Obvious.. but it wasn't a question of what is done, but of what should be done. I'm of the opinion that no level of government is endowed with either the wisdom or authority to determine what's appropriate and what's not.

 

[PokerGuy]

Thank you, Captain Obvious.. but it wasn't a question of what is done, but of what should be done. I'm of the opinion that no level of government is endowed with either the wisdom or authority to determine what's appropriate and what's not.

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.

 

[zsdersw]

Huh? So there shouldn't be any limits on what gets broadcast or displayed in view of anyone anywhere including minors at all?

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

If not government, what other entity could create a workable framework?

No government framework is required. The market has already provided all the tools parents need to keep things from their children that they feel are inappropriate.

There's a reason the FCC creates limits as to what is appropriate for public broadcast at certain hours,

What reason is that, exactly?

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.

That belief stems from the mindset that freedom can only be had by making a specific choice (parents must take special action to exercise their freedom to watch/show what they want), not present by default... and that is entirely the wrong mindset, IMO.