Agreed. And I think the way they're making a hash of what is and what isn't "inappropriate" content is going to actually make it harder to address any books that might actually be problematic. There are decent arguments for age-restricting some of these books (none of them need to be removed from every school library in the state, IMO), but the lack of consistency is not going to help.
And creates such a mess that is a pointless waste of time for teachers and staff and politicians. It's so frustrating to watch them create problems in need of no solutions.
Grateful you attend instead of me because I would definitely lose my cool. Rita Allison, who spent years lobbying for CHE, now going against a basic premise of good, public education by banning a book. And I expect a lot more pretending, a lot more pendantic justifications, and Lord know what other BS to advance Ellen's agenda.
I will say I was impressed they hesitated on CRANK. That one truly doesn't seem to meet the criteria, even as explained by Cathcart. But I think they were inconsistent in a lot of other areas.
As someone who works a few days a week in a bookstore, the only silver lining to book bans is that people discover new books. I just wish students had that option.
It is wild that they suspended judgment on Crank after digging in their heels throughout the meeting, asserting that their hands were tied (by their own poorly formed, legally dubious regulation) if there was any sexual content. I am glad they exercised some restraint, for sure, but their decision (or deferral) on Crank underscores just how unevenly they are applying their own standard of review. It is as if the Miller Test made a cameo and then, once they got past that shock, they dutifully returned to the usual business of making bonfires with books. 🤦🙄🚩🤡
Very telling that Cathcart had to acknowledge there is no Miller test in the regulation. I think that’s helpful in terms of allowing the public to understand how much further they’re going than what they said they were doing.
I watched the meeting and appreciate your comments. They were spot on! Thank you for covering this farcical meeting. We are in sad and scary times as Ellen advances her agenda and the SCBE remains spineless. Thank you, Steve!
Thank you for covering this... it's so depressing to watch them remove the books that might get teenagers away from screens and excited about reading.
Agreed. And I think the way they're making a hash of what is and what isn't "inappropriate" content is going to actually make it harder to address any books that might actually be problematic. There are decent arguments for age-restricting some of these books (none of them need to be removed from every school library in the state, IMO), but the lack of consistency is not going to help.
And creates such a mess that is a pointless waste of time for teachers and staff and politicians. It's so frustrating to watch them create problems in need of no solutions.
Grateful you attend instead of me because I would definitely lose my cool. Rita Allison, who spent years lobbying for CHE, now going against a basic premise of good, public education by banning a book. And I expect a lot more pretending, a lot more pendantic justifications, and Lord know what other BS to advance Ellen's agenda.
I will say I was impressed they hesitated on CRANK. That one truly doesn't seem to meet the criteria, even as explained by Cathcart. But I think they were inconsistent in a lot of other areas.
I haven't read that one, but adding it to my long reading list.
As someone who works a few days a week in a bookstore, the only silver lining to book bans is that people discover new books. I just wish students had that option.
It is wild that they suspended judgment on Crank after digging in their heels throughout the meeting, asserting that their hands were tied (by their own poorly formed, legally dubious regulation) if there was any sexual content. I am glad they exercised some restraint, for sure, but their decision (or deferral) on Crank underscores just how unevenly they are applying their own standard of review. It is as if the Miller Test made a cameo and then, once they got past that shock, they dutifully returned to the usual business of making bonfires with books. 🤦🙄🚩🤡
Very telling that Cathcart had to acknowledge there is no Miller test in the regulation. I think that’s helpful in terms of allowing the public to understand how much further they’re going than what they said they were doing.
I watched the meeting and appreciate your comments. They were spot on! Thank you for covering this farcical meeting. We are in sad and scary times as Ellen advances her agenda and the SCBE remains spineless. Thank you, Steve!