I mean are you guys thinking we want pornographic material in schools?

Clearly its messed up, its not something to put in schools.

So get rid of the Bible.

When conservatives call something pornographic, it’s very doubtful whether it really is.

https://www.alberta.ca/system/files/ec-examples-of-sexual-content-in-school-libraries.pdf

Well heres the reference they cited in the law.

NGL this sounda like a nothing burger. The news are “Adults Only” books are no longer awolled in schools? What non smutty book even fulfills that criteria?

Religious texts, such as the Bible, will be allowed on the shelves.

… as most of the books Nicolaides said he was looking to take off shelves deal with 2SLGBTQ+ subject matter.

Have the Satanic Temple republish those books so they remain accessible.

https://www.alberta.ca/system/files/ec-examples-of-sexual-content-in-school-libraries.pdf

Well heres the reference they cited in the law.

Everybody has their own unique internal world, so obviously you do you. All I can tell you that from my point of view it looks very confusing when you talk about “pornographic material at schools” in one comment and then provide references that, by anyone looking for pornographic material could at best be described as “incredibly disappointing”.

I mean, seriously: If you were a bookshop owner and someone asked you for some good porn, would you hush them, look around fertively and then genuinely recommend any of this?

Looking for Alaska, a book about loss and grief, frequently taught in Canada (and Alberta), one of the most banned books in the USA, and almost certainly about to be banned in Alberta now.

I’d give the book shop owner mad props for recommending this to me if i asked for some good porn!

Warning: May offend easily offended people. (edit: just changing to an image of the whole page)

::: spoiler spoiler :::

How did it go again… “I know pornography when I see it.”, wasn’t it?

Which, honestly, is actually rather impressive as far as non-answers to things in general go in that it not only made the speaker simultaneously sound both like a condescending prick AND some sort-of super creepy dude who is waaaay too into porn, all while assuring us that these qualities gave them the necessary authority to… Identify porn, I guess? Ya know, like that wood book fellow

I’m actually surprised they haven’t done something like that.

We’re republishing Looking For Alaska, as it’s now a holy text that teaches our disciples about loss and grief.

Lolita, The French Lieutenant’s Woman, IT. All books I read as a teen with explicit sexual content…

Ezekiel 23:20-21

She lusted after lovers with genitals as large as a donkey’s and emissions like those of a horse. And so, Oholibah, you relived your former days as a young girl in Egypt, when you first allowed your breasts to be fondled.

Good thing they have clear standards!

All David Gemmells books.

Pretty much any book that is going to have useful information for sex ed, which is taught at around ages 10 to 12, is either going to be useless or sufficiently graphic for hormonal pubescent kids. Back when I was a kid, the go-to source for accessible nudity was National Geographic. Also, there were kids who would read the National Geographics to learn about the world (which included places with different taboos than us). Should the education of some be hampered for the sake of the ignorance of others? Alberta says yes.

And you borrowed these books from your school’s library?

To clarify: You borrowed fucking Lolita from your school’s library? And you want other kids to be able to do the same?

Yeah. A couple of years after I first read it, I wrote a coursework essay about the unreliable narrator, using Lolita and Pale Fire as my primary texts (the latter also by Nabokov). What’s the problem with that? I’m assuming you’ve not read either if you’re getting this outraged, lol

I can see where the censors are coming from, and how they might see these as pornographic, but I think they’ve responded to the surface appearance rather than what’s actually going on in the book.

These excerpts are fairly explicit and describe sex acts and being turned on. In that, they resemble porn. But they also tend to be describing teenage sexual discovery in a realistic way, showing how the development of sexual feelings can be tender and complex. If you remove teenagers’ access to these books, what are they left with to help them understand what they’re experiencing? Internet porn and the manosphere? It can be helpful for kids to have access to more nuanced and sensitive materials, even if they are somewhat explicit.

So I can see how the censors see this, but I still wouldn’t ban these books just because they contain sexually explicit scenes, and I still think it’s a mistake to classify these as porn.

Ah. We clearly had different experiences of high school. Lmao.

So is it or is not explicit btw? Does it contain ‘detailed and clear depictions of sexual acts, including’? Because you seem to lean into whatever is the opposite of what I say lol. But we’re taking about OP.

Ah. We clearly had different experiences of high school. Lmao.

So is it or is not explicit btw? Does it contain detailed and clear descriptions of sexual acts? Because you seem to lean into whatever is the opposite of what I say lol.

I mean it’s pretty graphic when he compares her ring to a football pump before going into licking it, but it’s also hilarious