View Full Version : Children's Newbery Award book banned over scrotum
Polly
02-18-2007, 08:22 AM
Oh my.
http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/childrens-book-stirs-battle-with-single/20070217193109990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001
:soapbox Hey, I thought parents were supposed to teach their kids the correct name for body parts. Since the target audience is 9-12 years old, I see no problem with this book. According to education standards for literature, it is appropriate. Yes, if Elizabeth wants to use this book for a book report or to share with the class in the future I would back her %100. I refuse to let anyone tell my daughter that the correct term for that particular body part is dirty or inappropriate. Would they rather her call them "balls" or "nuts?" Or maybe it's the old standby (I always imagine this voice in the Charlie Brown teacher voice) "it's inappropriate for a child that age to talk about the scrotum." Oh, OK. You can't know or talk about the scrotum. Because pure, innocent, children think or pretend people look like Ken dolls. Nothing there.
Ok, I'm off my soapbox.
Polly
Erika
02-18-2007, 08:39 AM
What I find sad about it are the school librarians who are banning the book right off the bat because they don't want to have awkward questions to answer or the possibility that parents might get angry over ONE word. School should be a place the children can ask these questions and get an answer, not necessarily an explicit answer but know they won't be fobbed off.
Scrotum is a good term for testicles and honestly, most 9 yr olds will probably read over that word and not really even think about it (it isn't penis or dick or vagina or one of the more known giggle-worth words). However, now there is going to be great interest in the "banned" book from kids.
Personally I would have no problem with Sasha reading that book or with that book being available in school for her. To know that she is reading and enjoying it will be enough for me.
Lastly - the last paragraph made me pretty annoyed:
Ms. Nilsson, reached at Sunnyside Elementary School in Durango, Colo., said she had heard from dozens of librarians who agreed with her stance. “I don’t want to start an issue about censorship,” she said. “But you won’t find men’s genitalia in quality literature.”
“At least not for children,” she added.
Quality literature can contain sex and references to male genitalia. That smacks of prudishness and her own bias against the book. Whether she likes it or not, it IS censorship and it sounds like it is their own set of morals that are deciding what is good enough for the children to read. What if it turned out that the majority of parents were happy with the book being in the library? WOuld she then stock it? My hunch is..no.
Wow. That's just insane. Since when is "scrotum" a bad word?
Quality literature can contain sex and references to male genitalia.
:yup I find the idea that "you won’t find men’s genitalia in quality literature" really odd. It's not like there's a huge centerfold of a giant penis in the middle of the book. Yeah, you probably WON'T find that in quality literature. But, you'll certainly find the word "penis" or "scrotum" in quality literature, just like you'd find "arm" or "hand."
Men have scrotums. There's nothing dirty or sexual about it; it's just anatomy. Why that would be a basis for censorship is beyond me. Thomas is aware that he has a penis and a scrotum, and he's aware that girls have vulvas. If I have a daughter, she'll know about her body parts and boy's body parts. That we think basic facts about anatomy are inappropriate for 9-12 year olds is ridiculous.
YourMom
02-18-2007, 10:01 AM
Well, balls.
Erika
02-18-2007, 10:18 AM
:hehe :rofl :lmao
A real case of "bollocks to that!"
How old are kids for sex ed these days? Like 9 or 10, right? That's well within the age range of the target audience. I wouldn't have a problem with it.
gr8mommy
02-18-2007, 11:23 AM
What I find most amusing is:
“I don’t want to start an issue about censorship,” she said. “But you won’t find men’s genitalia in quality literature.”
Isn't the word used in connection with a DOG? The dog is bitten on the scrotum, not a person. It sounds as if the librarian herself hasn't even read the story.
Stupid. My son has known the appropriate terms for his body parts since he was two. My daughters also know the appropriate terms.
Sarah
02-18-2007, 03:14 PM
Well, balls.
:giggle
I think banning the book is silly. A lot of kids probably see and hear worse things on TV and the internet.
Brooke
02-18-2007, 04:19 PM
hehe, and to add to Steph and what Xander called them, I just want to say:
Oh beans. :p
This is just ridiculous.
YourMom
02-18-2007, 05:04 PM
You can always count on me to take the high road! :thumbsup
Jejune
02-18-2007, 06:03 PM
At least it wasn't banned literally over a scrotum. I imagine that would be uncomfortable for the scrotum's owner.
Christi
02-18-2007, 07:51 PM
That is freakin' rediculous! I think I'm gonna try my best to find the book and read it to my students just to be difficult!! :nannybooboo
Kristi
02-18-2007, 08:04 PM
That is a silly reason to ban it. I mean 12 yr olds? That is who it is aimed at. And that is what middle school age when they start sex education classes (atleast they did when I was in middle school) so they are going to hear it soon anyways. Kids younger than that say things alot worse in school now days. I am horrified by some of the stories my mom tells me about the first and second graders she substitutes for.
I noticed a couple of posts talk about when the schools teach sex education. Why should that matter? I don't think the schools should be the primary source of this information and shouldn't be the basis for deciding what reading material is appropriate. The issue is what the parents have taught and if their children are ready to read it. Personally, I don't have an issue with anyone saying or reading scrotum in the context described in the article at the ages the book is intended. But I for one, don't look to the schools for guidance on when certain things should be taught. I look at my children to see if they are ready.
BTW-Mira wants to go back into my tummy sometimes because she could cuddle better!LOL That is where we are with the whole sex ed thing....
I just made the connection between when schools teach sex ed and this book because it's not likely to be a new word or something. The context of the book is not anything sexual, it's the girl's response to hearing a word she doesn't know. So to me, it's not like the context offers anything offensive- it would merely be the word itself. Which, judging by typical sex ed ages and participation is NOT a new thing.
As far as parents being the primary source of imformation, to me, that's a whole 'nother topic.
Oh my goodness, Give me a freaking break! :sigh
That is freakin' rediculous! I think I'm gonna try my best to find the book and read it to my students just to be difficult!! :nannybooboo
You go girl! :clap
As far as parents being the primary source of information, to me, that's a whole 'nother topic.
Sounds like a fun topic to discuss!:giggle
If you don't spin it off tonight, then I will tomorrow Val!:D
BTW-Mira wants to go back into my tummy sometimes because she could cuddle better! That is where we are with the whole sex ed thing....
It must be the age, because Thomas wants to do the same thing. His new thing is that he likes to crawl under my shirt, and then pop out and say "I got born!" He finds the idea that he was inside of me fascinating, but it hasn't occured to him to ask how he got there yet.
Kristi
02-18-2007, 09:55 PM
I mentioned it for the same reason as Val. That the topic should not be something new even IF the parents don't teach their children about it. Though I do agree that the parents should be the main source of information for that type of thing.
I think the question I would have is main source of what? Should parents be the main source of instructing their children on sexual values? Of course. But, part of school is learning life skills, not just academic facts, and I'd consider learning the basics about human anatomy and reproduction to fall into the realm of academic facts, and learning about how to prevent pregnancy and disease to fall into the realm of life skills. I think there are some values that are so universal--that sex should be consensual, for example, and practiced responsibly--that a school isn't overstepping their bounds in teaching that, but when it comes to things like when it's morally okay to have sex, what kinds of sexual relationships are acceptable, and the like, then I think that unless there is a community consensus about those values and agreement that they should be taught in school, it's best to leave it up to the parents, and for the school to simply present age-appropriate facts and remain neutral on any moral interpretations of them.
I actually think the parents should not necessarily will, but should be the main source of all information pertaining to sex education. I am glad the schools do teach these topics since many do not get accurate information at home about the basics. I have a feeling that when my girls are going to be ahead of the curve when those topics are introduced in class. I consider the technical issues to be basic facts on how the human body works and don't see a reason to hide it from them. It is all the confusing social rules and nuances surrounding the information that I think will be harder to explain.