ADVERTISEMENT

Iowa's best journalist...

torbee

HR King
Gold Member
Is not from the Register or Gazette. It is Art Cullen of the Storm Lake Times AINEC.

This is fabulous (and insightful) writing:


Opinion: Bridges are failing in Iowa, but the legislature wants to ban books


Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds (R) wants to put parents in charge of children's education. (Charlie Neibergall/AP)

By Art Cullen








imrs.php


The Iowa Senate’s first order of business this year was to boot those pesky Capitol reporters off the press bench on the chamber floor and upstairs to the gallery with the zealots and schoolchildren on tour.
It was just the fight state Senate Majority Leader Jack Whitver (R) hoped to pick. On cue, the press howled about being evicted from the bench that was built along the wall of the glorious Iowa Capitol where the Senate 122 years ago expressly reserved a spot for the ink-stained wretches to ply their trade. Punishing the “lamestream” media in a fit of pique over seating privileges is a great way to start a legislative session heading into midterm elections.
It was so good that Kansas picked up on the idea a week later and also told the press to take a hike upstairs.

Next on the agenda in Des Moines: draft a list of books to ban from schools involving race or sex. Here, Kansas already had the jump on Iowa. Not to be outdone, Iowa Senate President Jake Chapman, a Republican from the nearby suburbs, said that the media and teachers were complicit in a “sinister agenda” to push “deviant” materials onto children. He wants to impose criminal penalties on Marian the Librarian if she puts on the shelves something like “Lady Chatterley’s Lover” — or whatever a farmer-legislator finds prurient without having read it. Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds in her Condition of the State address suggested that every school district should publish its entire curriculum online with a listing of assigned reading material. Some of this stuff could be X-rated, she claimed. She wants parents in charge.

If parents wanted to be in charge, they might just check their kid’s backpack. The principal will show them the lesson plans if parents are curious or concerned. Our elementary principal in Storm Lake, Iowa, is a nice woman. If you think a book is objectionable, she wants to know. That kind of problem solving — if that is what is needed — doesn’t fit the current script for political theater.

Who writes this script? Someone faraway in Virginia, where they recently used it to win a governor’s race. We don’t worry too much about dirty books here in Iowa, because we’ve got our hands full keeping the kids away from meth, stupid video games and one another. Critical race theory is not on the blackboards of Storm Lake schools. It used to be that a degree from the University of Northern Iowa and a principal’s certificate meant you knew something more than the average newspaper editor or Joe the Plumber about how to get a kid to read. It won’t be the parents drawing up the lists of objectionable materials — it will be a bunch of state senators whose caucus was found to be a boar’s nest of sexual harassment. Defining what is objectionable is why some people run for office now — not to fix the failing Linn Grove bridge over the Little Sioux River.

It could all be harmless fun, banning reporters, censoring books and demonizing teachers. Eventually it all washes into the past, like the Scopes Monkey Trial of 1925. But sometimes it doesn’t and then you end up like some European countries in the run-up to World War II.


Call me a worry wart, but there was this incident a year ago on Jan. 6 at the U.S. Capitol. If you call someone “enemy of the people” enough, some people can start to believe it. When you declare that books about teens struggling with their sexual identity are obscene or deviant, you smear a group of people. If you ban that book about how White people stole Iowa by killing off the native people and dispossessing them of their land, you deny our history. Then anything is possible.

Iowa used to pride itself on being the education state. Not so much anymore. Is it worth shaming teachers who were heroes in the classroom right on through the pandemic and shunning the public through the press? Does that whole charade wear well through an election? The governor boasts a $1.2 billion surplus to give away in tax cuts — with hopes of eliminating the income tax altogether. That should be enough to get you through November without analyzing “The Catcher in the Rye.”

These days you go with what you know works, and it worked in Virginia. The Linn Grove bridge replacement has been delayed by a year for lack of funds.

 
I was almost positive you were going to go with Lyz Lenz.

In fact, not choosing her is extremely misogynistic of you.
Huge difference between Lyz and Art.

Art actually has his finger on the pulse of what most Iowans think and feel. Lyz is definitely in a woke bubble.

From a writing standpoint, she is talented. But she has almost as huge of a persecution complex as the average Republican lawmaker -- i.e. MASSIVE.
 
  • Like
Reactions: joelbc1 and HawCory
Huge difference between Lyz and Art.

Art actually has his finger on the pulse of what most Iowans think and feel. Lyz is definitely in a woke bubble.

From a writing standpoint, she is talented. But she has almost as huge of a persecution complex as the average Republican lawmaker -- i.e. MASSIVE.
She is an interesting "chicken or the egg" study. Spends all day, every day shouting to anybody who will listen about how horrible men are and then freaks out when men are horrible to her.
 
  • Like
Reactions: torbee
Why tackle the real problems when you can tackle the problems in the minds of the feckless.
Not legislating on anything material and instead fighting the culture wars is what keeps the cash coming in:

 
  • Like
Reactions: Tom Paris
Damn, I could have sworn that I posted this the other day, but apparently I didn't. Another great article from Art, and right on the money, as usual!
 
  • Wow
Reactions: ping72
I wrote a pretty mean essay my 8th grade year on the price of cabbage…….or maybe it was how instant mashed potatoes were destroying the American dream
 
Is this ok with all of you then?

Excerpt from one of the books in question used in our public schools.


"You told me to take my pajamas, my pajama pants, which I said to take off my pajama pants, which I told you when, which I did. You then took off your shorts, followed by your boxers," she read from the passage. "There you stood in front of me, fully erected and said, 'Taste it.' At first, I laughed and refused. But then you said, 'come on, Matt, taste it. This is what boys like us do when we like each other.' I finally listened to you. The whole time I knew it was wrong, not because I was having sexual intercourse with a guy, but that you were my family. I only did that for about 45 seconds before you had me stop. Then you got down on your hands and knees and told me to close my eyes, and that's when you began oral sex on me as well."
 
Is this ok with all of you then?

Excerpt from one of the books in question used in our public schools.


"You told me to take my pajamas, my pajama pants, which I said to take off my pajama pants, which I told you when, which I did. You then took off your shorts, followed by your boxers," she read from the passage. "There you stood in front of me, fully erected and said, 'Taste it.' At first, I laughed and refused. But then you said, 'come on, Matt, taste it. This is what boys like us do when we like each other.' I finally listened to you. The whole time I knew it was wrong, not because I was having sexual intercourse with a guy, but that you were my family. I only did that for about 45 seconds before you had me stop. Then you got down on your hands and knees and told me to close my eyes, and that's when you began oral sex on me as well."

This kind of content is clearly vital to a well-rounded public education.
 
Is this ok with all of you then?

Excerpt from one of the books in question used in our public schools.


"You told me to take my pajamas, my pajama pants, which I said to take off my pajama pants, which I told you when, which I did. You then took off your shorts, followed by your boxers," she read from the passage. "There you stood in front of me, fully erected and said, 'Taste it.' At first, I laughed and refused. But then you said, 'come on, Matt, taste it. This is what boys like us do when we like each other.' I finally listened to you. The whole time I knew it was wrong, not because I was having sexual intercourse with a guy, but that you were my family. I only did that for about 45 seconds before you had me stop. Then you got down on your hands and knees and told me to close my eyes, and that's when you began oral sex on me as well."
I have barely been following the 'Ban the Books' conversation the last few months, but this seems a little out of line to find in a school. I have no problem with people choosing to purchase / read this on their own time & dime, but 'Penthouse Forum' probably shouldn't be purchased with tax dollars.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thewop
Is not from the Register or Gazette. It is Art Cullen of the Storm Lake Times AINEC.

This is fabulous (and insightful) writing:


Opinion: Bridges are failing in Iowa, but the legislature wants to ban books


Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds (R) wants to put parents in charge of children's education. (Charlie Neibergall/AP)

By Art Cullen








imrs.php


The Iowa Senate’s first order of business this year was to boot those pesky Capitol reporters off the press bench on the chamber floor and upstairs to the gallery with the zealots and schoolchildren on tour.
It was just the fight state Senate Majority Leader Jack Whitver (R) hoped to pick. On cue, the press howled about being evicted from the bench that was built along the wall of the glorious Iowa Capitol where the Senate 122 years ago expressly reserved a spot for the ink-stained wretches to ply their trade. Punishing the “lamestream” media in a fit of pique over seating privileges is a great way to start a legislative session heading into midterm elections.
It was so good that Kansas picked up on the idea a week later and also told the press to take a hike upstairs.

Next on the agenda in Des Moines: draft a list of books to ban from schools involving race or sex. Here, Kansas already had the jump on Iowa. Not to be outdone, Iowa Senate President Jake Chapman, a Republican from the nearby suburbs, said that the media and teachers were complicit in a “sinister agenda” to push “deviant” materials onto children. He wants to impose criminal penalties on Marian the Librarian if she puts on the shelves something like “Lady Chatterley’s Lover” — or whatever a farmer-legislator finds prurient without having read it. Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds in her Condition of the State address suggested that every school district should publish its entire curriculum online with a listing of assigned reading material. Some of this stuff could be X-rated, she claimed. She wants parents in charge.

If parents wanted to be in charge, they might just check their kid’s backpack. The principal will show them the lesson plans if parents are curious or concerned. Our elementary principal in Storm Lake, Iowa, is a nice woman. If you think a book is objectionable, she wants to know. That kind of problem solving — if that is what is needed — doesn’t fit the current script for political theater.

Who writes this script? Someone faraway in Virginia, where they recently used it to win a governor’s race. We don’t worry too much about dirty books here in Iowa, because we’ve got our hands full keeping the kids away from meth, stupid video games and one another. Critical race theory is not on the blackboards of Storm Lake schools. It used to be that a degree from the University of Northern Iowa and a principal’s certificate meant you knew something more than the average newspaper editor or Joe the Plumber about how to get a kid to read. It won’t be the parents drawing up the lists of objectionable materials — it will be a bunch of state senators whose caucus was found to be a boar’s nest of sexual harassment. Defining what is objectionable is why some people run for office now — not to fix the failing Linn Grove bridge over the Little Sioux River.

It could all be harmless fun, banning reporters, censoring books and demonizing teachers. Eventually it all washes into the past, like the Scopes Monkey Trial of 1925. But sometimes it doesn’t and then you end up like some European countries in the run-up to World War II.


Call me a worry wart, but there was this incident a year ago on Jan. 6 at the U.S. Capitol. If you call someone “enemy of the people” enough, some people can start to believe it. When you declare that books about teens struggling with their sexual identity are obscene or deviant, you smear a group of people. If you ban that book about how White people stole Iowa by killing off the native people and dispossessing them of their land, you deny our history. Then anything is possible.

Iowa used to pride itself on being the education state. Not so much anymore. Is it worth shaming teachers who were heroes in the classroom right on through the pandemic and shunning the public through the press? Does that whole charade wear well through an election? The governor boasts a $1.2 billion surplus to give away in tax cuts — with hopes of eliminating the income tax altogether. That should be enough to get you through November without analyzing “The Catcher in the Rye.”

These days you go with what you know works, and it worked in Virginia. The Linn Grove bridge replacement has been delayed by a year for lack of funds.

He needs more exposure excellent Writer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: torbee
Is this ok with all of you then?

Excerpt from one of the books in question used in our public schools.


"You told me to take my pajamas, my pajama pants, which I said to take off my pajama pants, which I told you when, which I did. You then took off your shorts, followed by your boxers," she read from the passage. "There you stood in front of me, fully erected and said, 'Taste it.' At first, I laughed and refused. But then you said, 'come on, Matt, taste it. This is what boys like us do when we like each other.' I finally listened to you. The whole time I knew it was wrong, not because I was having sexual intercourse with a guy, but that you were my family. I only did that for about 45 seconds before you had me stop. Then you got down on your hands and knees and told me to close my eyes, and that's when you began oral sex on me as well."
What grade? What class? Assigned reading or merely available in the library?

Without that context, your question is meaningless.

Is anything in that section more egregious than much of what's online, on tv, in movies, in videogames? Certainly not appropriate for kindergarten -- but by middle school, certainly could be.
 
What grade? What class? Assigned reading or merely available in the library?

Without that context, your question is meaningless.

Is anything in that section more egregious than much of what's online, on tv, in movies, in videogames? Certainly not appropriate for kindergarten -- but by middle school, certainly could be.
No context needed. The fact that you support that at any level of public education tells me what I need to know.

Public library - fine
Part of Public school curriculum- no
 
  • Haha
Reactions: bojihawk44
No context needed. The fact that you support that at any level of public education tells me what I need to know.

Public library - fine
Part of Public school curriculum- no
Serious question - why does it matter in one but not the other? You are aware that any age kid can check out any book from a public library, correct?

You are also aware that kids in middle school are intimately familiar with erections, oral sex, intercourse, boxer briefs, etc., as well, right? Wouldn't it be better to have adults help contextualize the perils and responsibilities of sexuality with kids rather than letting them figure it out for themselves? What, exactly, are you trying to protect them from here?
 
I have barely been following the 'Ban the Books' conversation the last few months, but this seems a little out of line to find in a school. I have no problem with people choosing to purchase / read this on their own time & dime, but 'Penthouse Forum' probably shouldn't be purchased with tax dollars.
This. 100%.

Some books just don't need to be there, the above is a good example.
 
No context needed. The fact that you support that at any level of public education tells me what I need to know.

Public library - fine
Part of Public school curriculum- no
Public library or school library?

I'm an anything goes in the public library person, not in the school library.

Side rant. For any 80s kids on here, did you search out the national geographic with the hologram cover as a kid? If you know, you know. Our librarian eventually caught on and removed it.
 
Public library or school library?

I'm an anything goes in the public library person, not in the school library.

Side rant. For any 80s kids on here, did you search out the national geographic with the hologram cover as a kid? If you know, you know. Our librarian eventually caught on and removed it.
I guess I'm of the opinion that if kids are going to be looking at adultish-themed material, I'd rather have that done in conjunction with classroom objectives and in the presence of a professional educator.

No books that end up in school libraries or on curriculum lists are put there without review, vetting and discussion by professional educators.
 
Serious question - why does it matter in one but not the other? You are aware that any age kid can check out any book from a public library, correct?

You are also aware that kids in middle school are intimately familiar with erections, oral sex, intercourse, boxer briefs, etc., as well, right? Wouldn't it be better to have adults help contextualize the perils and responsibilities of sexuality with kids rather than letting them figure it out for themselves? What, exactly, are you trying to protect them from here?
You sound like the type of person that has been grooming kids. Normalizing this to children isn't ok
 
  • Haha
Reactions: torbee
What grade? What class? Assigned reading or merely available in the library?

Without that context, your question is meaningless.

Is anything in that section more egregious than much of what's online, on tv, in movies, in videogames? Certainly not appropriate for kindergarten -- but by middle school, certainly could be.

Can I just say, w-t-f?!?

Yeah, suffice it to say a book depicting the snippet that hexum referenced has no place in a public school library. None. No context needed...holy hell, torbee. If I'm reading it right, it's a depiction of an incestual, pedophilial rape encounter.
 
Can I just say, w-t-f?!?

Yeah, suffice it to say a book depicting the snippet that hexum referenced has no place in a public school library. None. No context needed...holy hell, torbee. If I'm reading it right, it's a depiction of an incestual, pedophilial rape encounter.
Transgenders, students with sex identity questions have no reference material at their disposal? Crafty… u live in a big world. Lots of “new” stuff out there. As long as there are “restrictions” to the material, I have no problem with it in a jr hi/ hi school library. Again crafty… the world is changing whether you like it or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: torbee
Public library or school library?

I'm an anything goes in the public library person, not in the school library.

Side rant. For any 80s kids on here, did you search out the national geographic with the hologram cover as a kid? If you know, you know. Our librarian eventually caught on and removed it.
Public
 
Serious question - why does it matter in one but not the other? You are aware that any age kid can check out any book from a public library, correct?

You are also aware that kids in middle school are intimately familiar with erections, oral sex, intercourse, boxer briefs, etc., as well, right? Wouldn't it be better to have adults help contextualize the perils and responsibilities of sexuality with kids rather than letting them figure it out for themselves? What, exactly, are you trying to protect them from here?

Because there is still a difference between the job of a parent and the job of the school. If I want to expose my kids to that material, i can go to the public library and do it. My choice. Kids that are in that class don't have a choice on the material they have to use to pass the class not to mention the material goes way beyond a normal sex ed class review.

Like you mentioned earlier, most of these materials are vetted but that doesn't mean that there need to be adjustments when the public learns of the materials as it should be their right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crafty Beaver
If I'm reading it right, it's a depiction of an incestual, pedophilial rape encounter.
So quite similar in narrative structure to the Bible then?

JUSTIFIABLE RAPE? THE STORY OF LOT’S DAUGHTERS (GENESIS 19:30-38)​

200px-gentileschi_artemisia_-_lot_and_his_daughters_-_1635-1638

Lot and his Daughters (Artemisia Gentileschi)
Is it ever possible to justify rape? The issue arises in a bizarre story found in Genesis 19.
Immediately after the city of Sodom is sulfur-ified for wickedness and Lot’s wife is salt-ified for rubber-necking, Lot and his remaining family, his two unnamed daughters settle in the hills outside of Zoar (Gen. 19:30).
In order to give offspring to their aging father, the two daughters come up with a creative plan. Get dad drunk and then sleep with him on consecutive nights (Gen. 19:31-32). Their plan works and each daughter conceives and eventually gives birth to sons, Moab and Ben-Ammi, the ancestors of the Moabites and the Ammonites (Gen. 19:33-38).
When someone is deprived of their ability to give consent to sex, we would call it rape. In this case alcohol was depriving Lot of his ability to give consent, so one could argue Lot was raped by his daughters. Also, sex between a father and a daughter is a particularly heinous form of incest.
But one can make an argument that this incestuous rape was perhaps justified.
The heading of my NRSV Bible titles this section, “The Shameful Origin of Moab and Ammon” so we know what the NRSV editors think about the morality of this story.
But what do you think? Should we condemn or defend the actions of Lot’s daughters?
One should only ever broach the sensitive subject of rape with the utmost caution, and personally, I’d rather avoid it because I don’t feel qualified, but I teach the Old Testament and the Bible doesn’t avoid it (Gen. 34; Lev. 19; 2 Sam. 13), so I think we need to discuss it.
I discuss this story in Prostitutes and Polygamists (pages 150-152), but I’ve had a few more thoughts since I wrote it. I’ll share more thoughts in my next post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bulldogs1974
Here's some quotes from the author of this book regarding the banning. As with most cases a small snippet of a quote out of entire book does not tell the whole story. I have not read it, but I'm not calling for it to be banned either. If your calling for a book to be banned at least have the respect to read the book first to be aware of what you're demanding. Unfortunately that's too much to ask for a lot of people these days.

For those who believe the topics covered by Johnson are too intense, Johnson says, “If a topic that you deem as heavy can happen to a child, then it is not too heavy to discuss with that child.”

How do you respond to claims that your book is “sexually explicit,” and should be banned for that reason?

It’s disingenuous for multiple reasons. There’s this misconception that this book is going to children—they’re using language like, ‘Do you think an eight-year-old should read this?’ And my response is, no, that’s why it’s geared for 14 to 18-year-olds.

We also have to stop pretending like my book is what’s introducing [a] child to sex. It isn’t. [A] 14-year-old child, by the time they’ve read my book, may have already had sex. So them reading about a sex scene is possibly more about their own experience, in their own life.


The part that’s also being left out is that I am talking about sexual education. I am talking about consent. I am talking about agency. And I am using my story to teach kids about the mistakes that I made the first time that I was having sex, so they don’t make those same mistakes. I am teaching kids about not feeling guilty when sexual abuse happens, and how to recognize sexual abuse—most teens don’t even recognize they’ve been abused. And how to fight back against those traumas that you can hold on to for so very long. So they’re leaving very, very important context out, intentionally of course, to try and say my book is pornographic.

Books with heavy topics are not going to harm children. Children still have to exist in a world full of these heavy topics, and are going to be affected by them whether they read the book or not. Having [this] book though, gives them the tools, the language, the resources and the education so that when they are having to deal with a heavy topic, they have a roadmap for how to handle it.
 
Here's some quotes from the author of this book regarding the banning. As with most cases a small snippet of a quote out of entire book does not tell the whole story. I have not read it, but I'm not calling for it to be banned either. If your calling for a book to be banned at least have the respect to read the book first to be aware of what you're demanding. Unfortunately that's too much to ask for a lot of people these days.

For those who believe the topics covered by Johnson are too intense, Johnson says, “If a topic that you deem as heavy can happen to a child, then it is not too heavy to discuss with that child.”

How do you respond to claims that your book is “sexually explicit,” and should be banned for that reason?

It’s disingenuous for multiple reasons. There’s this misconception that this book is going to children—they’re using language like, ‘Do you think an eight-year-old should read this?’ And my response is, no, that’s why it’s geared for 14 to 18-year-olds.

We also have to stop pretending like my book is what’s introducing [a] child to sex. It isn’t. [A] 14-year-old child, by the time they’ve read my book, may have already had sex. So them reading about a sex scene is possibly more about their own experience, in their own life.


The part that’s also being left out is that I am talking about sexual education. I am talking about consent. I am talking about agency. And I am using my story to teach kids about the mistakes that I made the first time that I was having sex, so they don’t make those same mistakes. I am teaching kids about not feeling guilty when sexual abuse happens, and how to recognize sexual abuse—most teens don’t even recognize they’ve been abused. And how to fight back against those traumas that you can hold on to for so very long. So they’re leaving very, very important context out, intentionally of course, to try and say my book is pornographic.

Books with heavy topics are not going to harm children. Children still have to exist in a world full of these heavy topics, and are going to be affected by them whether they read the book or not. Having [this] book though, gives them the tools, the language, the resources and the education so that when they are having to deal with a heavy topic, they have a roadmap for how to handle it.
That author is much smarter than many HROT posters. And 100 percent dead-on with his assessment here.

People vastly underestimate the sophistication of children. By 14-18 -- the target audience of this book -- nothing in the passage quoted above is new, shocking, titillating or something that can't be talked about maturely in an academic setting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ping72 and srams21
Is this ok with all of you then?

Excerpt from one of the books in question used in our public schools.


"You told me to take my pajamas, my pajama pants, which I said to take off my pajama pants, which I told you when, which I did. You then took off your shorts, followed by your boxers," she read from the passage. "There you stood in front of me, fully erected and said, 'Taste it.' At first, I laughed and refused. But then you said, 'come on, Matt, taste it. This is what boys like us do when we like each other.' I finally listened to you. The whole time I knew it was wrong, not because I was having sexual intercourse with a guy, but that you were my family. I only did that for about 45 seconds before you had me stop. Then you got down on your hands and knees and told me to close my eyes, and that's when you began oral sex on me as well."

You really don't want to play this game. You will lose.

Lot's daughters daughters drugging poor dad and raping him:
So they made their father drink wine that night; and the firstborn went in, and lay with her father; he did not know when she lay down or when she rose.

On the next day, the firstborn said to the younger, “Look, I lay last night with my father; let us make him drink wine tonight also; then you go in and lie with him, so that we may preserve offspring through our father.”

So they made their father drink wine that night also; and the younger rose, and lay with him; and he did not know when she lay down or when she rose. Thus both the daughters of Lot became pregnant by their father.

Don't forget that time Lot offered up his daughters to be ganged raped by angels"

Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him 7 and said, “No, my friends. Don’t do this wicked thing. 8 Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don’t do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof.

 
Because there is still a difference between the job of a parent and the job of the school. If I want to expose my kids to that material, i can go to the public library and do it. My choice. Kids that are in that class don't have a choice on the material they have to use to pass the class not to mention the material goes way beyond a normal sex ed class review.

Like you mentioned earlier, most of these materials are vetted but that doesn't mean that there need to be adjustments when the public learns of the materials as it should be their right.
Seriously though parents have had their kids taken away for exposing then to that kind of material. Funny that a school can do so and telling them it isn't ok is wrong
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT