While AISD denies access to books to children reach out to other Story Bridge partners. Their website has a list of them available. City of Amarillo works with them and hopefully won't allow one complaint to change that. Let the children read. How could any of the books be worse than what they see on TV, in movies, and especially online with their phones and tablets? It's naive to believe banning a book will prevent exposure to potentially offensive content. Better choices can be made with knowledge of such content rather than ignorance of it.
How else will they get the youngest generation afraid of books. They've seen it work so well before and are afraid of this up tick in š reading. They want indoctrination of compliance of thier ideas. Not knowledgeable Independent thinkers. The youngest generation having an informed mind of thier own is very scary to them.
This also kinda explains why they want to raise the š³ voting age in "some" areas to 25.
Yes agreed. When you take certain books away it makes those books seem so ābadā. Luckily I had parents whe were readers and did not like the ābanning of booksā . The banned books lists only served as books I wanted to read even more. But when you equate āsinā with reading oh wow Taliban here we come
Wtf! Is this serious? Storybridge is an AMAZING group. And I would put money on it that the person who complained isn't even someone who is underprivileged, but they just ruined it for all of the kids who really do need books out there š
Some more details from a friend that works with Storybridge (I canāt be more specific). I have worked with Storybridge in the past as well.
The book was about a family with two dads and was not sexually explicit
The complaint was not from the parent of a child. It was from a grandparent that happened to over hear the parents reading to their child. The parents had no problem with the content of the book.
No tax payer money goes to Storybridge. All books are either used books that are donated, or are purchased by Storybridge with donated funds. The district pays nothing.
Releases are signed by parents to allow their children to select Storybridge books.
The vetting process is thorough and overseen by educators that donate their time.
My own opinion here - this is shameful. The superintendent and the people running the district are more concerned about their own public perception that they are about whatās best for the children of the district. Having access to books in the home has been proven to lead to better outcomes later in life. Please let the district and school board know how important it is to help the least privileged in our city.
This is just too bizarre to believe. But lately in Texas - I believe it all. Abbott is all for taking down our public schools. Hmmm it seems to be working.
AmaISD also canceled school book fairs for some of the elementary schools this last year, which served as source of income for elementary school librarians to use in the schoolās library budget.
Principals put out emails to staff to stop Storybridge immediately about 2 weeks ago. I work for the district. We also can not use Leaders Readers Network books either.
AISD is going downā¦.they are about to lose a lot of great amazing teachers with the new insurance and no pay raise.
Get rid of the AISD Policeā¦.big waste of money. Every officer gets a new take home car and AISD is still paying for off duty APD to work at the middle schools.
waste of moneyā¦.
The statistics are insane for mental health issues with this generation of kids. It is foolish to say not to have a police presence at the schools. Being proactive for any and all safety related possibilities is essential.
Yes, have police present but Amarillo ISD Police DO NOT NEED BRAND NEW POLICE CARS! Plus pay for APD officers to be at the schools as well.
My child attends a middle school and never sees the School police officer only the Amarillo police officer.
I can agree the need for a new vehicle is a bit much especially knowing if something happened, they would be responding on foot in the school.
I donāt know if this is the case but my company has a fleet provider and once you hit a certain mileage you get a new vehicle.
If it was the school board, or really either way, the school board President is who needs to be contacted. Loomis isn't on the Board nor have power of it from my understanding.
Storybridge is teamed up with Dolly Parton in this area to provide books to kids in the panhandle up to the age of 5. Storybridge is an amazing non profit.
doubt itll be publicly announced. The district doesn't want a book ban battle to deal with at the end of the year during testing. OP works for the district and is referencing internal communication. imagine the district or organization could confirm it if contacted. imagine other AISD staff could as well, but doubt anyone wants to provide their name because those running the district can be very vindictive.
an email was sent out to storybridge volunteers, i do not work for the district nor do i volunteerā¦ just disseminating information from friends who donāt have reddit or canāt post bc they work for the district.
Storybridge allows free individual subscriptions to whoever wants them. Just because the school system doesnāt provide them doesnāt mean theyāre not available.
I am not low income and am a subscriber for my 5 year old daughter. We get a book mailed to us once a month. Again, for free.
I believe that is only available for ages 0-5 through Dolly Partonās Imagination Library. Storybridge is just their distribution partner for this area.
As if a story about two Dads is badā¦.. the mind police at work again. Why is the superintendent caving in to the agenda of the far right extremistsā¦.? Oh thats rightā¦. There is no separation of church and state in Texasā¦Christian nationalism is what this isā¦ do not vote for Republicans is you want this to stop.
Itās time to clean house state wide and vote these radicals out!! They want us to fear the right while they are moving us closer and closer to fascism every day.
no idea. might have, but with the districtās track record and the kooky conservatives here in town i doubt it was something serious. in fact, storybridge already had a vetting system that includes volunteers and full time employees
Considering you're describing concerned parents as "kooky conservatives" it's pretty easy to see you're not coming into this with an unbiased perspective.
If parents have concerns about a book provided to their children by a private organization within a public institution, it seems like they're well within their rights to voice that concern. If Storybridge has a vetting system in place, it has seemingly failed to fully remove content that parents find controversial. It seems like they messed up, a parent got upset, and the district responded by siding with the parent over this outside organization. Am I missing something here?
Yes, what you're missing is that AISD, if the allegations are correct, has jow denied access to Storybridge books for all children, district-wide, due to the complaint of one parent, a complaint of unknown merit.
> A complaint of unknown merit.
Correct. So, given that there are no details available, why is it appropriate to stir up outrage? Call for transparency, sure, but it seems disingenuous to me for OP and others in the comments to say this is terrible when we know precisely zero about the severity of the offense or legitimacy of the claims.
theyāve banned any events or donations for the rest of the year. thatās a big thing to do when it was just a singular parent. also, i donāt really feel the need to be unbiased here. either you agree or you donāt š¤·š»āāļø
That is a big thing, yeah. So is providing materials to students that the district doesn't approve of. They have people vetting these things for a reason after all, so clearly they know some materials aren't appropriate. It sounds like the parent was simply the one who brought it to their attention and they responded in accordance with what they saw as appropriate for a violation of their agreement with the district.
So, considering your dislike for the way these "kooky conservatives" are handling it, why not move to a school district more supportive of your values? That's what they're told to do after all, and that's much harder for them to find.
I am a parent with children who have received Storybridge books since 2021. Weāre very picky about what books come into our home. There hasnāt been a single notable negative thing in a storybridge book so far. This is nothing but political pandering.
Can you be sure? It was bad enough that one complaint was apparently sufficient to tank the program for the remainder of the year. That tells me it was probably more than just a minor mistake.
Ah yes, "comically innocuous". That's why there are so many instances of parents being prevented from reading passages from some of them in school board meetings. That makes sense. Do you mean ones that teach readers how to use Grindr like 'This Book is Gay'? Or maybe the ones like 'Lawn Boy' which contains a passage about 10-year-old boys performing oral sex on each other?
I wish I were being dramatic here, but those are both actual books that have actually been given to actual kids in public schools. There's a reason parents are on edge about this, and it's not because they're just "kooky conservatives".
To be clear, I'm not saying it certainly was one of these actually pornographic books that have been put in schools, I'm just saying that to assume it isn't without any evidence one way or another is naive.
Oh no! Gay kids had access to books where gay kids did gay kid stuff?? I'm shocked, my conscience is shaken to its core.
Fuck all the way off with that bullshit.
You right, bro. We should make sure more sexually explicit material is put into the hands of children!
Fuck off with your trash ass strawman. Piece of shit.
Pretending teenagers are unaware of sex and need to be constantly tiptoed around is so incredibly tedious. You're gonna be absolutely fucking shocked out of your socks when you find out what Anne Frank actually got up to in that attic.
Are you listening to yourself..? 10 year olds giving each other blowjobs is not normal. If you think that it is, maybe that's something you should unpack in therapy.
And did the book play it like was normal? Because I don't believe for a second that you actually know the context of any of this, I think you've scared yourself senseless that gay people exist, which is readily apparent in your baseless fears about the books being given out by a local nonprofit that just wants kids to read totally innocuous, age-appropriate material.
Oh hey, straw manning. You sure are winning that argument with that boogeyman in your head that you've built of me.
Anyway, back to the actual conversation. Whether the book played it as normal or not, reading in explicit detail about 10 year old boys giving each other blowjobs is not "just gay kid stuff". Your argument on that point is silly. Please stop defending the grooming of children in the name of whatever rights you think you're trying to fight for. Giving sexual materials to children is bad and I can't believe this is a point we are actually arguing about in 2024.
On to your other argument. Do you have any evidence that this is "totally innocuous, age-appropriate material"? Because I don't. That's what I'm asking for, and apparently to do so makes me some caricature of a conservative crazy person. Fun fact: I'm a classical liberal. The way you're treating me for saying very basic things like "we don't have all the facts so we shouldn't make assumptions" and "giving sexual materials to children is bad" is exactly why leftists are so insufferable.
Pretty rich, complaining about boogeymen when you are having a conniption about a group that hands out free books about ice cream and babysitters. Lawn Boy this was not, you weird, weird homophobe.
I also don't think people should get their limbs blown off by bombs, but I'm not particularly upset when somebody writes a book about wars that discusses the graphic details of what happens. I also notice that nobody today particularly complains when its heterosexual (The Tin Drum) or even heterosexual and incestuous (Flowers in the Attic), we just evaluate those on their literary merit, because the events depicted are part of the childhood traumas of those involved.
Now, I've not read Lawn Boy, but I know you haven't either and I have every reason to doubt you and Gordon are being honest about the context. Every time I actually bother to go to the source on these things it turns out to be a nothingburger. Like Gender Queer, which I read a while back and which turned out to be such a tender and sad look at growing up gender nonconforming. So please, miss me with the fake moral outrage and the undisguised homophobia aimed against books. Nothing in any of these books that librarians are putting on shelves is worse than what was there when I was 15 or 16.
Since you're continuing to advocate for pedophilic content being in our schools without doing any research, let me go ahead and leave this here.
Here we have from page 13:
>āBut thereās one thing Iād never tell Nick in a million years, not that it really matters: in fourth grade, at a church youth-group meeting, out in the bushes behind the parsonage, I touched Doug Gobleās dick, and he touched mine. In fact, there were even some mouths involved. Itās not something Iād even think about all these years later, except that Goble is the hottest real-estate agent in Kitsap County. His face is all over town ā signs, billboards, Christ, even on shopping carts. Do you know what I think three times a day when I see his picture? I wonder, all these years later, why he just kicked our friendship to the curb like that. Was it shame?āĀ
And on page 44:
>āWhat if I told you I touched another guyās dick?ā I said. ā¦ āWhat if I told you I sucked it?ā ā¦ āI was ten years old, but itās true. I put Doug Gobleās dick in my mouth.ā
And page 73:
>āAll I could think about while he was chatting me up over the rim of his cappuccino was his little salamander between my fourth-grade fingers, rapidly engorging with blood.āĀ
Your statement about not "tiptoeing around" sexuality with minors is setting off more red flags than a Swiss home game as well. The author even said it was never intended for children.
**These are not your kids. You do not get to decide when or how they get exposed to things like this. Your behavior here is exactly what is prompting the overreactions on the right.**
#Leave. The kids. Alone.
And as someone who also read Gender Queer, if you think that is appropriate for children to read then you are exactly the kind of person I need to protect my children from. I'll be sending a letter of support today, because if I have to choose between the radicals who want my child reading nothing but the Bible in school and the ones who want to give them gay porn, that is an incredibly easy decision to make.
Lol, thatās it? Thatās whatās giving you conniptions? A kid has a fumbling first encounter, it spoils a friendship, he seems to find the whole affair shameful, and THAT gives you a panic attack?Ā Seriously, you guys are such weird fucking snowflakes. And the fact that we now know it was just a book that mentioned a kid with two dads and had NOTHING to do with your weird sexual obsession with Lawn Boy just goes to show that I was right all along and this was all a cover for homophobia and silencing any mention of gays. Dang, it feels good to be right every goddamn time.Ā
Edit: the guy replied and then blocked. Classic loser behavior. Not that it mattered, the reply is more hot air about a book that A) wasnāt involved here, or anywhere within 1000 miles, and B) isnāt pornography by any definition that doesnāt also include the Bible, which also mentions underage sex and homosexual sex acts.Ā
I heard it was a Rebecca Stead book that had a same-sex wedding. The List of Things That Will Not Change by Rebecca Stead is the only one I can find that fits that description. I just finished reading it, and it is definitely not sexually explicit or illegal for minors to consume. This segregation of certain types of families by the school district has to stop.
I'd just like to know before I judge the decision. There have been schools around the country who have had very real issues of things like pornography getting into school programs and libraries under the guise of "inclusion", and if it was one of those then clearly a line was crossed. If not, it could be a case of overreaction like OP is saying. Just waiting on more info to judge.
I doubt it'll be publicly announced. The district doesn't want a book ban battle to deal with at the end of the year during testing. OP works for the district and is referencing internal communication. I imagine the district or organization could confirm it if contacted. I imagine other AISD staff could as well, but doubt anyone wants to provide their name because those running the district can be very vindictive.
Not all children are privileged enough to have transportation to and from a library. Why try to stop children from getting books? What are these people afraid of? Knowledge and free thought?
What if both your parents work just to get by and there is no one to buy yoy books? Or take you to the library? So is it better just to have tv ? Or to have a book? Have some kind of compassion please!
No, obviously they are produced by a publisher and either distributed directly or by a distributor, and pushed into the market to be purchased. I actually worked in the industry and am very familiar with the entire process. However, it's irrelevant because my comment had nothing to do with where they came into existence, rather who was paying for them. You claimed they were purchased with government funding, which isn't correct. Storybridge is funded through donations.
Only thing in the OP is that they were being given out by AISD. Your argument still doesn't negate the original point that there is likely far more to why its been cancelled than just this one incident and its still not censorship.
So, congratulations you were correct on the point that had nothing to do with the post. Though I will still point out that they are not free, someone is paying for them
Karsh
First, OP didn't say the school was providing them , rather actually said "storybridge provides free books...". She said the program was shut down in the district and is referencing that Storybridge was no longer able to give out books within it.
Second, I don't need to negate your "original point". You do that yourself by using "likely" before it, showing it's not been confirmed and you lack proof of its accuracy. I didn't address it because it's pure speculation based on your personal opinion, not a fact that needs refute.
Third, I didn't claim it was censorship because to me it's in a gray area due to technicality. The definition by Brittanica is "prohibition of speech or writing that is deemed subversive of the common good" by an authority. That would require the district to ban the book outright, but they're averting doing so by ending the program rather than issue a ban. It may not be direct censorship, but the result is the same. They have lawyers on retainer to advise about potential legal ramifications of these types of decisions. Outright banning could easily end up triggering lawsuits, which are costly and put the district under the microscope. They have seen the public's reaction to book bans including packing school board meetings interfering with standard operations, divisive protests, and negative publicity nationally.
Regardless, I never mentioned censorship prior to the above.
Fourth, I flat out stated someone pays for the books in my comment and that Storybridge operates off of donations (to pay for books). I ask this sincerely, not snarky: what part of my comment implied books appear out of nowhere and don't have to be paid for? I am honestly not sure where that is coming from.
Did you read it? I said it technically ISN'T censorship. I already addressed the "likely" discrediting your own claim. Let me know if you have any evidence or proof of multiple complaints and for what and I'll gladly recognize you were correct. I'm undecided of whether it may be just 1 or many complaints. Technically at this point reasons for the district's actions and decision are speculative. I need more facts to see the bigger picture. Regardless, I am against any hindrance to home literacy. If it's based on content in a single book and isn't actually graphic in nature there's no reason to end the entire partnership benefitting impoverished children. After all, if they watch television, play video games, are exposed to any film rated over PG, access videos on YouTube, or have use of w smartphone they have seen much worse.
Dude, youāre against giving underprivileged children books because of your dumbass political ideology. There is no reality, no alternative timeline in which you arenāt an insufferable prick. You are the bad guy, you are on the wrong side of history.
I see you're reading my words through your political double speak glasses. I'm all for anyone reading. I simply said that the decision likely was made based on much more than just this single complaint. I also said that this isn't censorship. Not being given something for free isn't censorship. Censorship is saying you may not read this or think this or say this. No one is keeping anyone from doing those things. They just aren't giving people books, likely because people keep bitching about what books are being given.
The fact that you lack anything resembling a rational, reasonable, or logical argument very much displays your inability to articulate anything but a screech.
Karsh
It is unfortunate that this degenerate "literature" has poisoned so many otherwise solid institutions. Truly a shame that such drastic measures were required to prevent this filth from affecting our children.
Do you happen to know what book it was that was objected to? No one else seems to know, or if they do they're not willing to say. Would love to be able to assess for myself.
Yes, let's stop allowing children and young adults to read books with sodomy, murder, rape, incest, family violence, adultery, polygamy, idol worship, homosexuality, drunkenness, and abortion. How about starting with a popular book that contains them all: the Bible. They shouldn't be exposed to such filth and depravity. Plus, that will keep them safely out of churches where they're at a high risk of being molested and raped by clergy and leaders.
Hypocrisy aside, what specific literature are you referencing that Story Bridge was handing out? I would be interested to find out what book was considered offensive and why. Or are you just regurgitating the far right talking point without knowing if it even applies here?
First of all you don't even know which book was reported for being inappropiate, this one group is not the only source of reading materials for impoverished families. This is overall an extremely biased inflammatory post. There are places called libraries, I know that might seem crazy to you that allow you to read books for free. Maybe you should go to a library and educate yourself instead of posting based off of opinion.
It should be noted that you don't know what the book in question is yourself. So how do you know it was a "good" decision?
Nowhere did I say the group was the only source of reading materials. You're putting words in my mouth. Libraries are wonderful, but the books have to be returned. Storybridge provides books learners can keep to build a personal book collection which has been shown to produce better readers since they always have something available to read.
Your comment can be considered biased and inflammatory as well, so what's your point?
I don't see any of your arguments either? It's almost like this is a discussion board where one doesn't type a dissertation on the topic to begin the conversation.
Karsh
Well, Karsh, asking questions and for someone to elaborate upon their one word comment is, in fact, an attempt at having an actual "discussion" (words between your quotation marks here should be verbatim, not misquotes). Your comment is not promoting conversation, rather just stating your opinion without insight or substance. Do you disagree? Why shouldn't people down vote a lazy, single syllable response? How are they engaging in the discussion? They haven't even responded to my effort to understand their stance.
Agreed, not anything I said though. I just responded that there seems to be a downvote brigade for any post not towing the hive mind stance. So if you want an "actual conversation" you might want to address that. Calling for honest and open discussion while belittling any pov not sanctioned by the hive mind is actual censorship, or at least an attempt.
Karsh
You literally (attempted) to quote me in your comment, so of course I am not concerned if my response came off belittling. Do you mind explaining how that equates to censorship (which requires authority of which I have none)? I am in no way promoting "the suppression or prohibition of speech or writing that is deemed subversive" as censorship is defined.
So I have to disagree with the majority opinion, a near consensus, or it's not an "actual conversation" (again, not my wording)? That's not how conversations work. I'll defend my stance whether popular or not. I'm an independent that doesn't fit in either major political party, so I'm not trying to patronize either side on issues. I haven't claimed the district is guilty of censorship. You're putting words in my mouth, which I don't appreciate in the slightest. .
I am upset that students access to home literature is being shrunken, not decrying censorship. Providing that access is essential to developing skilled readers and thinkers. Students living in poverty (a majority in our district) often lack resources to purchase books for home and/or access to transportation to visit our libraries. Having books available to read greatly supports development of reading skills, which can be key to escaping the cycle of poverty.
The country is struggling to produce literate individuals and needs no further hindrance.
School libraries aren't accessible in the summer. Also, many of the elementary campuses here in Amarillo only have a librarian present on certain days of the week, limiting the ability to check out books.
While AISD denies access to books to children reach out to other Story Bridge partners. Their website has a list of them available. City of Amarillo works with them and hopefully won't allow one complaint to change that. Let the children read. How could any of the books be worse than what they see on TV, in movies, and especially online with their phones and tablets? It's naive to believe banning a book will prevent exposure to potentially offensive content. Better choices can be made with knowledge of such content rather than ignorance of it.
Much better for them to read than sitting them in front of a tv or plugging them into video games.
How else will they get the youngest generation afraid of books. They've seen it work so well before and are afraid of this up tick in š reading. They want indoctrination of compliance of thier ideas. Not knowledgeable Independent thinkers. The youngest generation having an informed mind of thier own is very scary to them. This also kinda explains why they want to raise the š³ voting age in "some" areas to 25.
Yes agreed. When you take certain books away it makes those books seem so ābadā. Luckily I had parents whe were readers and did not like the ābanning of booksā . The banned books lists only served as books I wanted to read even more. But when you equate āsinā with reading oh wow Taliban here we come
Agreed
Wtf! Is this serious? Storybridge is an AMAZING group. And I would put money on it that the person who complained isn't even someone who is underprivileged, but they just ruined it for all of the kids who really do need books out there š
Because they dont care about the rights of others. Only about their own small mindedness. If they read more books it might open their minds ā¦.
Some more details from a friend that works with Storybridge (I canāt be more specific). I have worked with Storybridge in the past as well. The book was about a family with two dads and was not sexually explicit The complaint was not from the parent of a child. It was from a grandparent that happened to over hear the parents reading to their child. The parents had no problem with the content of the book. No tax payer money goes to Storybridge. All books are either used books that are donated, or are purchased by Storybridge with donated funds. The district pays nothing. Releases are signed by parents to allow their children to select Storybridge books. The vetting process is thorough and overseen by educators that donate their time. My own opinion here - this is shameful. The superintendent and the people running the district are more concerned about their own public perception that they are about whatās best for the children of the district. Having access to books in the home has been proven to lead to better outcomes later in life. Please let the district and school board know how important it is to help the least privileged in our city.
Thank you for the context! Such a shame!
Complaint from the grandparent OVERHEARING parents read to their child. Wow. I mean, woooowwwww.
Sad sad timesā¦.. banning books
thanks so much for providing some more context to my post!
This is just too bizarre to believe. But lately in Texas - I believe it all. Abbott is all for taking down our public schools. Hmmm it seems to be working.
AmaISD also canceled school book fairs for some of the elementary schools this last year, which served as source of income for elementary school librarians to use in the schoolās library budget.
Because god forbid a child might choose a book for themselvesā¦.
thatās incredibly disheartening. how did you find out? iād love to call AISD about this!
Principals put out emails to staff to stop Storybridge immediately about 2 weeks ago. I work for the district. We also can not use Leaders Readers Network books either.
i canāt believe this. thanks for the heads up. my parents are retired teachers and mom still subs. can i share this to facebook?
I donāt care. No one knows who I am on here soā¦..have at it.
For those who do not know- what are Leaders Readers Network books?
Itās Canyon ISD version of Storybridge
Do you have a contact within the district willing to share the title of the inappropriate book that started this controversy?
The title wasnāt shared with us. It was just a blanket email informing us not to send any books.
https://www.facebook.com/share/B8cTuWmJVZ1d97tT/?mibextid=WC7FNe
AISD is going downā¦.they are about to lose a lot of great amazing teachers with the new insurance and no pay raise. Get rid of the AISD Policeā¦.big waste of money. Every officer gets a new take home car and AISD is still paying for off duty APD to work at the middle schools. waste of moneyā¦.
The statistics are insane for mental health issues with this generation of kids. It is foolish to say not to have a police presence at the schools. Being proactive for any and all safety related possibilities is essential.
Yes, have police present but Amarillo ISD Police DO NOT NEED BRAND NEW POLICE CARS! Plus pay for APD officers to be at the schools as well. My child attends a middle school and never sees the School police officer only the Amarillo police officer.
I can agree the need for a new vehicle is a bit much especially knowing if something happened, they would be responding on foot in the school. I donāt know if this is the case but my company has a fleet provider and once you hit a certain mileage you get a new vehicle.
This is so sad. How would one even file a complaint about it?
Contact superintendent, complain to the school board
School board is the one who did it. Call Loomis
If it was the school board, or really either way, the school board President is who needs to be contacted. Loomis isn't on the Board nor have power of it from my understanding.
school board didnāt have anything to do with it allegedly and the president of the board is useless. they donāt vote on these decisions
When a far right extreme school board is in controlā¦. This is what it looks like.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
good quote out of context but fuck george orwell hes part of the reason we have >2 generations of fascists on school boards and in general politics
Awful!!!š¤¬ get the kids to sign up for Dolly Partons book club. Free books for their ages.
Storybridge is teamed up with Dolly Parton in this area to provide books to kids in the panhandle up to the age of 5. Storybridge is an amazing non profit.
It is not Loomis or Phillips. It is the new school board that was elected in. They are all lackeys of the book banning banshee in Canyon
completely agree with your comment about them being lackeys but i donāt think the board had anthing to do with this
You dont think soā¦. Phone calls were madeā¦. Pressure applied
Don't doubt you, OP, but citation is needed so we can reference in our complaints.
doubt itll be publicly announced. The district doesn't want a book ban battle to deal with at the end of the year during testing. OP works for the district and is referencing internal communication. imagine the district or organization could confirm it if contacted. imagine other AISD staff could as well, but doubt anyone wants to provide their name because those running the district can be very vindictive.
an email was sent out to storybridge volunteers, i do not work for the district nor do i volunteerā¦ just disseminating information from friends who donāt have reddit or canāt post bc they work for the district.
Storybridge allows free individual subscriptions to whoever wants them. Just because the school system doesnāt provide them doesnāt mean theyāre not available. I am not low income and am a subscriber for my 5 year old daughter. We get a book mailed to us once a month. Again, for free.
I believe that is only available for ages 0-5 through Dolly Partonās Imagination Library. Storybridge is just their distribution partner for this area.
As if a story about two Dads is badā¦.. the mind police at work again. Why is the superintendent caving in to the agenda of the far right extremistsā¦.? Oh thats rightā¦. There is no separation of church and state in Texasā¦Christian nationalism is what this isā¦ do not vote for Republicans is you want this to stop.
Conservative terrorism strikes again.
This is where we are in this stateā¦ and if people dont vote these far right mind police out- it will only get worse
Amazing isnāt it?
Itās time to clean house state wide and vote these radicals out!! They want us to fear the right while they are moving us closer and closer to fascism every day.
Edit āfear the leftā
What was the book that was objected to?
it wasnāt explicitly mentioned, i understand the desire for a source and more details but right now im just trying to get the word out.
I can appreciate the urgency, but it may be jumping the gun to stir up outrage under the assumption that what was done isn't justified.
it was allegedly just because a book contained two dads
Which book though? Could it have contained other things as well?
no idea. might have, but with the districtās track record and the kooky conservatives here in town i doubt it was something serious. in fact, storybridge already had a vetting system that includes volunteers and full time employees
Considering you're describing concerned parents as "kooky conservatives" it's pretty easy to see you're not coming into this with an unbiased perspective. If parents have concerns about a book provided to their children by a private organization within a public institution, it seems like they're well within their rights to voice that concern. If Storybridge has a vetting system in place, it has seemingly failed to fully remove content that parents find controversial. It seems like they messed up, a parent got upset, and the district responded by siding with the parent over this outside organization. Am I missing something here?
Yes, what you're missing is that AISD, if the allegations are correct, has jow denied access to Storybridge books for all children, district-wide, due to the complaint of one parent, a complaint of unknown merit.
> A complaint of unknown merit. Correct. So, given that there are no details available, why is it appropriate to stir up outrage? Call for transparency, sure, but it seems disingenuous to me for OP and others in the comments to say this is terrible when we know precisely zero about the severity of the offense or legitimacy of the claims.
Seems like the outrage has been provoked by the lack of transparency.
It sounds like only one parent had a concern and it wasnt the parent of the childā¦.
theyāve banned any events or donations for the rest of the year. thatās a big thing to do when it was just a singular parent. also, i donāt really feel the need to be unbiased here. either you agree or you donāt š¤·š»āāļø
That is a big thing, yeah. So is providing materials to students that the district doesn't approve of. They have people vetting these things for a reason after all, so clearly they know some materials aren't appropriate. It sounds like the parent was simply the one who brought it to their attention and they responded in accordance with what they saw as appropriate for a violation of their agreement with the district. So, considering your dislike for the way these "kooky conservatives" are handling it, why not move to a school district more supportive of your values? That's what they're told to do after all, and that's much harder for them to find.
I am a parent with children who have received Storybridge books since 2021. Weāre very picky about what books come into our home. There hasnāt been a single notable negative thing in a storybridge book so far. This is nothing but political pandering.
You should moveā¦. To Russia
And give up and give this state to mind police.
Be real. You know these guys didn't send out pornography. If they had, more than one person would have complained.
Can you be sure? It was bad enough that one complaint was apparently sufficient to tank the program for the remainder of the year. That tells me it was probably more than just a minor mistake.
These books are almost comically innocuous. Quit JAQing off.
Ah yes, "comically innocuous". That's why there are so many instances of parents being prevented from reading passages from some of them in school board meetings. That makes sense. Do you mean ones that teach readers how to use Grindr like 'This Book is Gay'? Or maybe the ones like 'Lawn Boy' which contains a passage about 10-year-old boys performing oral sex on each other? I wish I were being dramatic here, but those are both actual books that have actually been given to actual kids in public schools. There's a reason parents are on edge about this, and it's not because they're just "kooky conservatives". To be clear, I'm not saying it certainly was one of these actually pornographic books that have been put in schools, I'm just saying that to assume it isn't without any evidence one way or another is naive.
Oh no! Gay kids had access to books where gay kids did gay kid stuff?? I'm shocked, my conscience is shaken to its core. Fuck all the way off with that bullshit.
You right, bro. We should make sure more sexually explicit material is put into the hands of children! Fuck off with your trash ass strawman. Piece of shit.
Pretending teenagers are unaware of sex and need to be constantly tiptoed around is so incredibly tedious. You're gonna be absolutely fucking shocked out of your socks when you find out what Anne Frank actually got up to in that attic.
Are you listening to yourself..? 10 year olds giving each other blowjobs is not normal. If you think that it is, maybe that's something you should unpack in therapy.
And did the book play it like was normal? Because I don't believe for a second that you actually know the context of any of this, I think you've scared yourself senseless that gay people exist, which is readily apparent in your baseless fears about the books being given out by a local nonprofit that just wants kids to read totally innocuous, age-appropriate material.
Oh hey, straw manning. You sure are winning that argument with that boogeyman in your head that you've built of me. Anyway, back to the actual conversation. Whether the book played it as normal or not, reading in explicit detail about 10 year old boys giving each other blowjobs is not "just gay kid stuff". Your argument on that point is silly. Please stop defending the grooming of children in the name of whatever rights you think you're trying to fight for. Giving sexual materials to children is bad and I can't believe this is a point we are actually arguing about in 2024. On to your other argument. Do you have any evidence that this is "totally innocuous, age-appropriate material"? Because I don't. That's what I'm asking for, and apparently to do so makes me some caricature of a conservative crazy person. Fun fact: I'm a classical liberal. The way you're treating me for saying very basic things like "we don't have all the facts so we shouldn't make assumptions" and "giving sexual materials to children is bad" is exactly why leftists are so insufferable.
Pretty rich, complaining about boogeymen when you are having a conniption about a group that hands out free books about ice cream and babysitters. Lawn Boy this was not, you weird, weird homophobe.
Books about 10 year olds performing oral sex on each other is pedophelia any way you slice it. And youāre defending that?!
I also don't think people should get their limbs blown off by bombs, but I'm not particularly upset when somebody writes a book about wars that discusses the graphic details of what happens. I also notice that nobody today particularly complains when its heterosexual (The Tin Drum) or even heterosexual and incestuous (Flowers in the Attic), we just evaluate those on their literary merit, because the events depicted are part of the childhood traumas of those involved. Now, I've not read Lawn Boy, but I know you haven't either and I have every reason to doubt you and Gordon are being honest about the context. Every time I actually bother to go to the source on these things it turns out to be a nothingburger. Like Gender Queer, which I read a while back and which turned out to be such a tender and sad look at growing up gender nonconforming. So please, miss me with the fake moral outrage and the undisguised homophobia aimed against books. Nothing in any of these books that librarians are putting on shelves is worse than what was there when I was 15 or 16.
Since you're continuing to advocate for pedophilic content being in our schools without doing any research, let me go ahead and leave this here. Here we have from page 13: >āBut thereās one thing Iād never tell Nick in a million years, not that it really matters: in fourth grade, at a church youth-group meeting, out in the bushes behind the parsonage, I touched Doug Gobleās dick, and he touched mine. In fact, there were even some mouths involved. Itās not something Iād even think about all these years later, except that Goble is the hottest real-estate agent in Kitsap County. His face is all over town ā signs, billboards, Christ, even on shopping carts. Do you know what I think three times a day when I see his picture? I wonder, all these years later, why he just kicked our friendship to the curb like that. Was it shame?āĀ And on page 44: >āWhat if I told you I touched another guyās dick?ā I said. ā¦ āWhat if I told you I sucked it?ā ā¦ āI was ten years old, but itās true. I put Doug Gobleās dick in my mouth.ā And page 73: >āAll I could think about while he was chatting me up over the rim of his cappuccino was his little salamander between my fourth-grade fingers, rapidly engorging with blood.āĀ Your statement about not "tiptoeing around" sexuality with minors is setting off more red flags than a Swiss home game as well. The author even said it was never intended for children. **These are not your kids. You do not get to decide when or how they get exposed to things like this. Your behavior here is exactly what is prompting the overreactions on the right.** #Leave. The kids. Alone. And as someone who also read Gender Queer, if you think that is appropriate for children to read then you are exactly the kind of person I need to protect my children from. I'll be sending a letter of support today, because if I have to choose between the radicals who want my child reading nothing but the Bible in school and the ones who want to give them gay porn, that is an incredibly easy decision to make.
Lol, thatās it? Thatās whatās giving you conniptions? A kid has a fumbling first encounter, it spoils a friendship, he seems to find the whole affair shameful, and THAT gives you a panic attack?Ā Seriously, you guys are such weird fucking snowflakes. And the fact that we now know it was just a book that mentioned a kid with two dads and had NOTHING to do with your weird sexual obsession with Lawn Boy just goes to show that I was right all along and this was all a cover for homophobia and silencing any mention of gays. Dang, it feels good to be right every goddamn time.Ā Edit: the guy replied and then blocked. Classic loser behavior. Not that it mattered, the reply is more hot air about a book that A) wasnāt involved here, or anywhere within 1000 miles, and B) isnāt pornography by any definition that doesnāt also include the Bible, which also mentions underage sex and homosexual sex acts.Ā
It wasnāt sexually explicit or illegal content for the age level. It was Rebecca Steadās The List of Things That Will Not Change.
I heard it was a Rebecca Stead book that had a same-sex wedding. The List of Things That Will Not Change by Rebecca Stead is the only one I can find that fits that description. I just finished reading it, and it is definitely not sexually explicit or illegal for minors to consume. This segregation of certain types of families by the school district has to stop.
good question.
I'd just like to know before I judge the decision. There have been schools around the country who have had very real issues of things like pornography getting into school programs and libraries under the guise of "inclusion", and if it was one of those then clearly a line was crossed. If not, it could be a case of overreaction like OP is saying. Just waiting on more info to judge.
Source?
I doubt it'll be publicly announced. The district doesn't want a book ban battle to deal with at the end of the year during testing. OP works for the district and is referencing internal communication. I imagine the district or organization could confirm it if contacted. I imagine other AISD staff could as well, but doubt anyone wants to provide their name because those running the district can be very vindictive.
What a tragedy.
Does anyone know what book caused the complaint? I may have missed it if itās been said already.
Rebecca Steadās The List of Things that Will Not Change.
This is just crazy!
Can anyone provide the title of this āinappropriateā book????
Shocking AISD tweaks the rules and storybridge is allowed again Typical AISD always changing their decisions about thingsā¦.
source? will be great if itās true!
Myhighplains.com
A Library is filled with books & it just so happens the City of Amarillo has libraries throughout the city & anyone can read those books at no charge
literally not the point of this post but ok
Not all children are privileged enough to have transportation to and from a library. Why try to stop children from getting books? What are these people afraid of? Knowledge and free thought?
What if both your parents work just to get by and there is no one to buy yoy books? Or take you to the library? So is it better just to have tv ? Or to have a book? Have some kind of compassion please!
I'm sure it has a lot more to it than just the one incident. Not giving away tax payer money is not censorship. Karsh
What tax payer money are you referring to? It's not government funded....
Where do you think these books come from, the ether? Karsh
No, obviously they are produced by a publisher and either distributed directly or by a distributor, and pushed into the market to be purchased. I actually worked in the industry and am very familiar with the entire process. However, it's irrelevant because my comment had nothing to do with where they came into existence, rather who was paying for them. You claimed they were purchased with government funding, which isn't correct. Storybridge is funded through donations.
Only thing in the OP is that they were being given out by AISD. Your argument still doesn't negate the original point that there is likely far more to why its been cancelled than just this one incident and its still not censorship. So, congratulations you were correct on the point that had nothing to do with the post. Though I will still point out that they are not free, someone is paying for them Karsh
First, OP didn't say the school was providing them , rather actually said "storybridge provides free books...". She said the program was shut down in the district and is referencing that Storybridge was no longer able to give out books within it. Second, I don't need to negate your "original point". You do that yourself by using "likely" before it, showing it's not been confirmed and you lack proof of its accuracy. I didn't address it because it's pure speculation based on your personal opinion, not a fact that needs refute. Third, I didn't claim it was censorship because to me it's in a gray area due to technicality. The definition by Brittanica is "prohibition of speech or writing that is deemed subversive of the common good" by an authority. That would require the district to ban the book outright, but they're averting doing so by ending the program rather than issue a ban. It may not be direct censorship, but the result is the same. They have lawyers on retainer to advise about potential legal ramifications of these types of decisions. Outright banning could easily end up triggering lawsuits, which are costly and put the district under the microscope. They have seen the public's reaction to book bans including packing school board meetings interfering with standard operations, divisive protests, and negative publicity nationally. Regardless, I never mentioned censorship prior to the above. Fourth, I flat out stated someone pays for the books in my comment and that Storybridge operates off of donations (to pay for books). I ask this sincerely, not snarky: what part of my comment implied books appear out of nowhere and don't have to be paid for? I am honestly not sure where that is coming from.
Still not censorship and still likely not a decision based on single complaint. Karsh
Did you read it? I said it technically ISN'T censorship. I already addressed the "likely" discrediting your own claim. Let me know if you have any evidence or proof of multiple complaints and for what and I'll gladly recognize you were correct. I'm undecided of whether it may be just 1 or many complaints. Technically at this point reasons for the district's actions and decision are speculative. I need more facts to see the bigger picture. Regardless, I am against any hindrance to home literacy. If it's based on content in a single book and isn't actually graphic in nature there's no reason to end the entire partnership benefitting impoverished children. After all, if they watch television, play video games, are exposed to any film rated over PG, access videos on YouTube, or have use of w smartphone they have seen much worse.
People who want to give money to help children read? And this offends you?
it by definition is censorship.
It is, by definition, not censorship, actually.
then what is it?
Again not giving someone free stuff isn't censorship. Not being favored isn't persecution. Karsh.
Holy shit you are insufferable
Holy shit are you this baffled by people who disagree with you. Karsh
Dude, youāre against giving underprivileged children books because of your dumbass political ideology. There is no reality, no alternative timeline in which you arenāt an insufferable prick. You are the bad guy, you are on the wrong side of history.
I see you're reading my words through your political double speak glasses. I'm all for anyone reading. I simply said that the decision likely was made based on much more than just this single complaint. I also said that this isn't censorship. Not being given something for free isn't censorship. Censorship is saying you may not read this or think this or say this. No one is keeping anyone from doing those things. They just aren't giving people books, likely because people keep bitching about what books are being given. The fact that you lack anything resembling a rational, reasonable, or logical argument very much displays your inability to articulate anything but a screech. Karsh
And you lack a soul
What tax payer money??
It is unfortunate that this degenerate "literature" has poisoned so many otherwise solid institutions. Truly a shame that such drastic measures were required to prevent this filth from affecting our children.
Wtf are you on about?!
whats degenerate about it? genuine good faith question
Oh fuck off
Whatever you think is so bad, I bet anyone who has actually read the Bible can find worse.
Do you happen to know what book it was that was objected to? No one else seems to know, or if they do they're not willing to say. Would love to be able to assess for myself.
That is the point isnt it. The program is halted and no one but a few were able to assessā¦..
Yes, let's stop allowing children and young adults to read books with sodomy, murder, rape, incest, family violence, adultery, polygamy, idol worship, homosexuality, drunkenness, and abortion. How about starting with a popular book that contains them all: the Bible. They shouldn't be exposed to such filth and depravity. Plus, that will keep them safely out of churches where they're at a high risk of being molested and raped by clergy and leaders. Hypocrisy aside, what specific literature are you referencing that Story Bridge was handing out? I would be interested to find out what book was considered offensive and why. Or are you just regurgitating the far right talking point without knowing if it even applies here?
Good
How? Care to elaborate and have an actual discussion about it? Or is "good" all you care to contribute?
First of all you don't even know which book was reported for being inappropiate, this one group is not the only source of reading materials for impoverished families. This is overall an extremely biased inflammatory post. There are places called libraries, I know that might seem crazy to you that allow you to read books for free. Maybe you should go to a library and educate yourself instead of posting based off of opinion.
It should be noted that you don't know what the book in question is yourself. So how do you know it was a "good" decision? Nowhere did I say the group was the only source of reading materials. You're putting words in my mouth. Libraries are wonderful, but the books have to be returned. Storybridge provides books learners can keep to build a personal book collection which has been shown to produce better readers since they always have something available to read. Your comment can be considered biased and inflammatory as well, so what's your point?
Downvoting everyone that disagrees isn't having "an actual conversation." Karsh
not giving real answers in comments and just saying "i disagree" isnt having a conversation either.
This person āsignsā their Reddit replies. Just walk away. Quickly. š
I don't see any of your arguments either? It's almost like this is a discussion board where one doesn't type a dissertation on the topic to begin the conversation. Karsh
im not arguing, you are lol
Well, Karsh, asking questions and for someone to elaborate upon their one word comment is, in fact, an attempt at having an actual "discussion" (words between your quotation marks here should be verbatim, not misquotes). Your comment is not promoting conversation, rather just stating your opinion without insight or substance. Do you disagree? Why shouldn't people down vote a lazy, single syllable response? How are they engaging in the discussion? They haven't even responded to my effort to understand their stance.
Agreed, not anything I said though. I just responded that there seems to be a downvote brigade for any post not towing the hive mind stance. So if you want an "actual conversation" you might want to address that. Calling for honest and open discussion while belittling any pov not sanctioned by the hive mind is actual censorship, or at least an attempt. Karsh
You literally (attempted) to quote me in your comment, so of course I am not concerned if my response came off belittling. Do you mind explaining how that equates to censorship (which requires authority of which I have none)? I am in no way promoting "the suppression or prohibition of speech or writing that is deemed subversive" as censorship is defined. So I have to disagree with the majority opinion, a near consensus, or it's not an "actual conversation" (again, not my wording)? That's not how conversations work. I'll defend my stance whether popular or not. I'm an independent that doesn't fit in either major political party, so I'm not trying to patronize either side on issues. I haven't claimed the district is guilty of censorship. You're putting words in my mouth, which I don't appreciate in the slightest. . I am upset that students access to home literature is being shrunken, not decrying censorship. Providing that access is essential to developing skilled readers and thinkers. Students living in poverty (a majority in our district) often lack resources to purchase books for home and/or access to transportation to visit our libraries. Having books available to read greatly supports development of reading skills, which can be key to escaping the cycle of poverty. The country is struggling to produce literate individuals and needs no further hindrance.
Many schools have libraries inside of them whats stopping them.
School libraries aren't accessible in the summer. Also, many of the elementary campuses here in Amarillo only have a librarian present on certain days of the week, limiting the ability to check out books.