Quote:
Originally Posted by haertig
That is an inflammatory statement thinly disguised as a question. Addressing "age inappropriate" issues is not synonymous with "book banning".
The problem is that book banners will often site age appropriateness as the reason for the bans they want. And conversely, those wanting children to have a too-early introduction to atypical lifestyle choices that kids wouldn't even understand use book banning as the reason they call for "any book for any child".
There is such a thing as "age appropriateness". And there is such a thing as "restricting speech".
It is the extremists on either side that cause the problems. Not the normal people who desire a workable solution somewhere in the middle. The childish rhetoric of accusing someone of being a "book banner" or a "child groomer" does not help, and just makes the issue more difficult to solve.
|
Is there such a thing as age appropriateness? Some 12 year olds might be fine with some content, others not so much. Even when you look at things like film and game ratings, it's incredibly subjective and cultural. Titles that have some light nudity might be rated 17+ in North America and 12+ in Europe or Japan, meanwhile a violent title might be 13+ rated in NA and 18+ in Japan. What's actually age appropriate?
There is no solid line. And politicians
definitely shouldn't be the ones demarcating it.