School district stops what’s offered
   I may have read Vonnegut’s book when I was a kid because it was on a school reading list. I don’t remember it though. Regarding censorship, the school district obviously isn’t censoring what high school students can read.
   School districts should only spend their precious resources to make available books that directly serve an educational purpose, and they along with parents should decide whether a particular title should be purchased for that purpose.
   Students who want to read a novel for entertainment can go to the public library or download it to their Kindles. There is no censorship involved in this decision.

That particular quote came from LakeNewsOnline.com but it is not the only comment which expressed the sentiment that “there is no censorship involved in this decision.” It amazes me that people think that simply because there are other means to obtain the material no censorship has been involved. What about the kids who do not have the means to go to the public library, or who don’t have a Kindle? Is it censorship for them? I think we may have forgotten the definition of censorship which is the act of censoring. And according to Merriam-Webster it is: to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable; also: to suppress or delete as objectionable.

Hmmm, seems a little familiar. And in the above quote, the decision was not being made about whether to purchase the books or not. That decision had already been made. In fact, Slaughterhouse-Five was a part of the curriculum. But the books were then removed from the classrooms and the library and made unavailable to the students in the schools. Or to put it another way, the books were suppressed. First as a result of the challenge, and now as a permanent removal.

By the suppression and removal of the books from the school, the school district is obviously censoring what high school students can read. If the books were never available, then the argument would be a completely different one. They were available, and they were deleted from the curriculum and library as objectionable — which is the very definition of censorship.

Thomas Andrews wrote a thoughtful opinion piece on the banning and requested that Republic, MO repeal the ban. The comments in some cases bordered on farcical. The very first comment derided Andrews right to his own opinion stating, “The school board made the right decision after considering community input yet you somehow think your opinion should override that of the community of Republic.” Another stated that since Andrews was an undergrad, that he only wrote the piece at the behest and the opinion of a professor and that nothing in the piece could be considered his own opinion. I was glad to see a few comments supporting his post.

My hope is that ultimately, while the books are banned for now, the people of Republic will come to their senses or that the case will continue to be pursued until a court overrules it. The banning of books has been overturned in the past, including Slaughterhouse-Five in New York in 1982. Let’s not take a step backwards in time. Let’s stop the insanity — Now!

The post Stop the Insanity – Part II appeared first on Be the Cat.

It is particularly appalling because of the board members who voted to ban, only ONE had read all three books according to UPI. How can you possibly cast a knowledgeable vote if you haven’t read the material? Did they decide that one person reading the books was sufficient? The vote is said to be about policy and not a criticism of the books in question. “Were not making a judgment call on if the book is good or bad, we just want to make sure it’s age-appropriate,” Duvall said. I find the whole age-appropriate rationale a bit baffling. My understanding is that these books were available in high school, not middle school or elementary.

Slaughterhouse-Five is considered not age-appropriate because it deals with the shocking realities of war — apparently our tender teens just aren’t ready for that. But from seventeen-years-old on, they are eligible to enlist in the military and the military would laugh if you told them it wasn’t age-appropriate to send the tender teens into battle zones. So a year or two prior to being able to experience the front line themselves, it is not appropriate for them to read? Reading about the realities is a form of preparation. By removing the books, you are removing the chance to explore the situations and bloodshed in the safety of written format.

As far as the sex in Twenty Boy Summer, I feel like heads are being buried in the sand. Teens have sex. Not all of them, but some — and they always have. And to deny that it is happening doesn’t change reality. So let’s look at age-appropriateness again. In high school where some teens are having sex, they shouldn’t be able to read about it? Oh and just to be clear, we are talking about a scene and NOT the overall message of the book — which is about grief and how two girls deal with death of a loved one.

Does this mean that we should allow teens to read any and every thing they want? I think it depends on the teen and the family. When I was a teen, the answer to that question for my family would have been yes. That was my family’s decision — they had the right to make it. Wesley Scroggins chooses no — which is well within his rights for his own family. I still have a very hard time with the fact that Scroggins led this charge to remove these books from the school system where his children aren’t in attendance. If his own children were in the public school system in Republic, then I might have a little understanding for a father trying to protect his children. He wasn’t trying to protect his own. He was assuming that all parents in Republic were unable to protect their own children according to his standards… and were I a parent in Republic, MO I’d be angry with his assumption and his actions.

As usual, when wound up about a topic, I become long-winded. I have more to say, but will save it for another post for tomorrow. Please check back and find out more about the insanity of banning books.

The post Stop the Insanity – Part I appeared first on Be the Cat.

I don’t like to use the word victim when referring to my experience. Victim in today’s society has some connotations I’d rather stay away from, and there is the current trend to blame the victim – I am not to blame. I am a survivor. It may seem strange to say, but there are several things I am thankful for with my experience. I was an adult at the time it happened. It was a single occurrence, and not a ritual molestation by someone who was supposed to love and protect me. The person who violated me wasn’t someone posing as a friend. My memory of the act itself is hazy.

My experience happened in the home of a friend of a friend. A group of us got together and went out to have a little fun and when we came back to the house, everyone crashed…or at least that was the idea. I was on medication at the time which caused me to sleep heavily. Apparently, someone fully clothed, sleeping on a sofa bed in the same room was enough of an invitation. By the time I awoke, it was too late.

Even as an adult, my first instinct was to keep quiet. I wasn’t physically hurt, so no one had to know. Then, after a few days, I got mad. He didn’t have the right to take advantage of me, he didn’t have the right to get away with it, and if I didn’t speak up, he would do it to someone else – and I couldn’t live with that. So, knowing too much time had passed, knowing the physical evidence was gone, I went to the police. My reason? I wanted them to know so there would be a file against this guy to help corroborate the claim of the next girl he assaulted. And I went back to the place it happened, knowing he would be there and confronted him directly. (I took a friend with me for back up.)

At first he denied, told me I was crazy, and then uttered the words which proved the sickness of his mind. “But you wanted it.” By the way, confronting your attacker is not always wise, and I don’t recommend it, except for in protected circumstances – hopefully when the attacker is in custody. Confronting him was what enabled my healing to begin. The embarrassment went away, I was able to tell people what had happened and not feel like I had to defend myself for being asleep. I sought out counseling to further help me deal with the situation. And by confronting him, and letting him know I had been to the police, maybe it would make him pause before doing it again to someone else.

One of the things which angered me, and still does today, is how I became a statistic. And the statistic is too high. I grew up knowing my aunt was part of that statistic, and always told myself it wouldn’t happen to me. But it did. My mother also suffered from the ritual abuse by a close relative, and I have gone through the experiences with her because she suppressed them as a child, believing she always talked her way out of it. It wasn’t until she was an adult and the memories could stay suppressed no longer that she realized she didn’t talk her way out of it.

I will always be thankful that my mom believed in allowing me to read widely and didn’t censor any of my reading material. Because I read of girls who had been raped (although Speak was not out prior to my experience) and knew they were not to blame, because I read about their reactions to the experience and those of their peers, and because I have always been able to discuss anything with my mother without fear of being judged, I was able to deal with my experience from a position of better knowledge. Does it mean that I came through unscathed? Absolutely not. No one who has been violated remains unscathed. But I was able to understand the feelings and issues as they came up; the embarrassment, the “if I’d only…” cycle of regrets, the anger, and most of all the feeling of guilt. And beyond understanding, I was able to deal with them. Without books, like Laurie Halse Anderson’s Speak, I would not have been able to deal with the situation as well. And no girl or boy should be deprived of the opportunity to read and learn because of someone else’s limited personal opinion.

I’m going to guess that Wesley Scroggins doesn’t have personal experience himself, or a loved one, with rape. Because if he did, then he would understand how important it is to keep the issue in the schools. To show the kids that bad things can happen and they need to speak up and speak out. Or maybe he does, and this whole vendetta against letting parents make the choice for their own children is because he is afraid to speak.

Read Laurie Halse Anderson’s post on this issue and below is her poem of the responses to Speak

For a list of blog posts related to this issue, visit the Reclusive Bibliophile.

The post Speak Loudly: My Story appeared first on Be the Cat.