And Tango Makes Three----BANNED

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I'm fine with the ALA keeping track of the challenges. Remember, this isn't a case someone simply "not liking" a book. These are cases where someone took the official "first step" in trying to keep other people from liking a book by having it removed from a library system. Just because they weren't successful doesn't mean it's not noteworthy.

If I were packing up and relocating a young family, I would certainly want to know if I was moving to a community that had an abundance of jerk-wads who were making numerous efforts to bring their library more "into compliance" with their religious or political ideals. Waiting until someone successfully gets a book banned is a little late to bring it to everyone's attention, is it not?

If a challenge is successful, then you can make certain assumptions about the kind of community it is that removed a book on whatever specific grounds, and factor that into the decision about where you want to live. Who cares about a few lone crackpots challenging books if the challenges go nowhere? What's significant is the decision the community as a whole makes.

[Nyssa]

Originally Posted by Hamlet53

Now that thought almost, but not quite, makes me think the occasional book banning might be a good thing.

Poor Twilight. My closest friend and I were so curious as to the hubbub over this that we just had to read them. Be both had the same reaction: The series as a whole is not horrible.....the first 2 books are admittedly painfully sophomoric, but books 3 & 4 were actually pretty entertaining. I don't think I'd let pre-teens read the last two, but I certainly wouldn't ban them.

As for the movies...I've had absolutely no desire to watch any of them.

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by Hamlet53

Yes banned is not the correct word. Fortunately, as I stated in an earlier post here, it is very difficult to ban a book in the US in the meaning of preventing publication or distribution. Anything classified as pornography being the exception. However, in say a small rural community like the one I live in if some local activist group (a church group maybe) is successful in getting a book removed from school use and the public library it is effectively “banned” in that access to the book depends on even knowing that it exists and being able to obtain it.

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I'm fine with the ALA keeping track of the challenges. Remember, this isn't a case someone simply "not liking" a book. These are cases where someone took the official "first step" in trying to keep other people from liking a book by having it removed from a library system. Just because they weren't successful doesn't mean it's not noteworthy.

If I were packing up and relocating a young family, I would certainly want to know if I was moving to a community that had an abundance of jerk-wads who were making numerous efforts to bring their library more "into compliance" with their religious or political ideals. Waiting until someone successfully gets a book banned is a little late to bring it to everyone's attention, is it not?

That's just my point really. I can't seem to find anything about the book successfully being removed from any library.

So some crackpots have complained about it but the general community/libraries have basically replied "tough shit the book stays".

I'm at a loss as to why so many seem to think that if we give people the right to complain about a book they don't like this automatically means the government is going to start down the road of censoring everything we get to read.

[DiapDealer]

That's just my point really. I can't seem to find anything about the book successfully being removed from any library.

And I'll repeat my point. Waiting until a book has been removed from a library before calling attention to it means it's too late to do anything about it. What would be the point?

So some crackpots have complained about it but the general community/libraries have basically replied "tough shit the book stays".

Why are you assuming lone crackpots? It could just as likely be a concerted effort to have a book removed that was thwarted by the ALA calling attention to the "challenge," couldn't it? Most complaints don't even make it to the formal challenge stage.

I'm at a loss as to why so many seem to think that if we give people the right to complain about a book they don't like this automatically means the government is going to start down the road of censoring everything we get to read.

I'm not worried at all about the government. I'm worried about local groups of douchebag citizens feeling threatened by a children's picture book.

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

And I'll repeat my point. Waiting until a book has been removed from a library before calling attention to it means it's too late to do anything about it. What would be the point?

Sorry for not being clear. I've got no problem with the ALA calling attention to a book that has been challenged. Though I do think the way they talk of banned books is a little dishonest and misleading.

What I'm wondering is why so many in this thread seem to be suggesting that because the book has been challenged this indicates the thought police are now going to crack down on everything we read.

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Why are you assuming lone crackpots? It could just as likely be a concerted effort to have a book removed that was thwarted by the ALA calling attention to the "challenge," couldn't it? Most complaints don't even make it to the formal challenge stage.

I never assumed lone crackpots. My wording was "some crackpots" but that is beside the point really.

Firstly, I'm pretty sure if the majority of the community challenged the book the book would be banned. Ergo, I would think it a safe assumption that it is not a majority. Secondly, if any of the challenges were found to be reasonable and the book deemed to contravene established censorship rules I'm sure the book would be banned. Ergo, I think it a safe assumption the challenges were deemed not to be reasonable and the use of "some crackpots" would be at least arguably justifiable.

Originally Posted by Diapdealer

I'm not worried at all about the government. I'm worried about local groups of douchebag citizens feeling threatened by a children's picture book.

All I'd say is it's probably not worth your time to worry about every little thing that people feel threatened by. There will always be things people feel threatened by. Seems the system is working in this case in that the book has not been banned so I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

[anesthezea]

Originally Posted by ebusinesstutor

While growing up, we had a mother cat quite ill after the birth of her kittens and she used to go out and hunt and leave them for long periods. A tomcat we had was very interested in the box in the closet.

We were watching him very carefully as tomcats have been known to kill kittens. Instead, he would crawl in with the kittens and let them suck on his fur. While the kittens weren't getting nourishment from this, the warm, furry presence comforted them. Never saw any other tomcat do that before.

Sometimes animals will act differently than normal caring in ways we do not expect. Just like the orangutang and the hound.

We had a very large tomcat once who would pull our other cat's kittens out of their box while she was out of the house. Like you, we were afraid at first, but all he ever did was lie on his back, pull them up onto his belly and go to sleep.

[bhartman36]

Originally Posted by Hamlet53

Fortunately, as I stated in an earlier post here, it is very difficult to ban a book in the US in the meaning of preventing publication or distribution. Anything classified as pornography being the exception. However, in say a small rural community like the one I live in if some local activist group (a church group maybe) is successful in getting a book removed from school use and the public library it is effectively “banned” in that access to the book depends on even knowing that it exists and being able to obtain it.

Well, two points here:

1) Pornography isn't an exception. It's legal to publish and distribute pornography (or Playboy and Hustler, et al, wouldn't be in business). Obscenity is illegal. That would include (IIRC), things like child pornography, snuff (although the very existence of snuff films is an urban legend, as far as I can tell), people doing scatological things (urinating and defecating on each other, for example), etc. Visual or written depictions of sex are seldom declared obscene these days on their own (since, if I remember right, the 1960's).

2) Knowing that a book exists doesn't necessarily hinge upon it being available at a library, does it? There are plenty of places for people to be exposed to books, from the bestseller lists in papers like the NY Times, to online lists, and even (when she was on) Oprah. I would venture to guess, based on library attendance, that the library is the least likely place for a person to get his/her book information in modern times.

[5thWiggle]

My girls both read and loved this book. After seeing this thread, I asked them what they thought about male penguins hatching an egg. We have already had several talks about the different types of families that are possible, and was expecting something along the lines of "...it takes more than one to make a family, doesn't matter if they are boys or girls...". What I got was: "Oh Daddy, EVERYBODY knows that peguin fathers hatch the eggs. They even have more fat on their bum to keep the eggs warmer!".

So it seems that all of the KGPOOOS (Keep Gay Penguins Out Of Our Schools) squad desperately need a zoology lesson from two seven year old girls.

[AndyfromVA]

One of the authors of "Tango Makes Three" is Peter Parnell, a playwright and screenwriter (wrote an episode of "The West Wing"). He was also my neighbor when we were growing up. A very talented man.

[ekster]

One thing I love about the banned book list is that it's always a great recommendation list of books to read. I'm never disappointed when I pick up a banned book! And without this list, I wouldn't have been exposed to half the books. So thank you to whoever is fighting so hard to give these books extra publicity.

[Nyssa]

Originally Posted by 5thWiggle

My girls both read and loved this book. After seeing this thread, I asked them what they thought about male penguins hatching an egg. We have already had several talks about the different types of families that are possible, and was expecting something along the lines of "...it takes more than one to make a family, doesn't matter if they are boys or girls...". What I got was: "Oh Daddy, EVERYBODY knows that peguin fathers hatch the eggs. They even have more fat on their bum to keep the eggs warmer!".

So it seems that all of the KGPOOOS (Keep Gay Penguins Out Of Our Schools) squad desperately need a zoology lesson from two seven year old girls.

Thank you for adding a smile to my morning. Great post!

[RHWright]

Originally Posted by bhartman36

In principle, I do think these things should be left to local standards. If I pay taxes for my public library, I have a stake in how it's run.

To a certain extent, I agree. As a citizen, your input should be considered in broad terms. You want to make sure those tax dollars are well spent.

But when it comes to raising challenges to specific books or types of books, that's where I have a problem. A library serves a community and all its varied viewpoints and needs.

It's not an area that should be politicized or bow to a small segment of viewpoints.

Did I wish my local library spent less on books by right-wing talk show hosts, religious fiction, and sub-literate vampire stories? Sure. But I'm sure there are plenty of patrons who wonder why they buy the stuff I like to read.

In the end, a well-stocked library has something to offer all its patrons.

(School libraries are a slightly different discussion, as they have more specific educational goals.)

Originally Posted by bhartman36

Well, two points here:

1) Pornography isn't an exception. It's legal to publish and distribute pornography (or Playboy and Hustler, et al, wouldn't be in business). Obscenity is illegal. That would include (IIRC), things like child pornography, snuff (although the very existence of snuff films is an urban legend, as far as I can tell), people doing scatological things (urinating and defecating on each other, for example), etc. Visual or written depictions of sex are seldom declared obscene these days on their own (since, if I remember right, the 1960's).

You are correct, obscenity is the correct term. From what I have seen of legal pornography of the XXX variety, I cannot get that excited about bans on obscenity except in the absolute purist no limitations on freedom of expression argument sort of way.

[Sydney's Mom]

Sorry, I didn't make it though the whole thread, but

Who in the WORLD would ban Nickle and Dimmed? and why?

Originally Posted by RHWright

To a certain extent, I agree. As a citizen, your input should be considered in broad terms. You want to make sure those tax dollars are well spent.

But when it comes to raising challenges to specific books or types of books, that's where I have a problem. A library serves a community and all its varied viewpoints and needs.

It's not an area that should be politicized or bow to a small segment of viewpoints.

Did I wish my local library spent less on books by right-wing talk show hosts, religious fiction, and sub-literate vampire stories? Sure. But I'm sure there are plenty of patrons who wonder why they buy the stuff I like to read.

In the end, a well-stocked library has something to offer all its patrons.

(School libraries are a slightly different discussion, as they have more specific educational goals.)

Excellent response. Or as I would put it a public library should err on the side of including works of interest to even small minorities in the community, and be extremely dubious about allowing even a large majority to restrict inclusion.

Originally Posted by Sydney's Mom

Sorry, I didn't make it though the whole thread, but

Who in the WORLD would ban Nickle and Dimmed? and why?

Well a proper response would require that this thread be in the P&R forum, which should give you a very good hint.