Get LISNews via email! Enter Your Email Address:
"Now we know why you wish to remain anonymous."
Who is we? You like this "us versus them" mentality. You thrive on it. "It's me versus the ALA! I'm just one guy taking on an entire organization!" It is rather amusing since the ALA is a big enough organization to not give a damn. One reference in one presentation and you are over the moon thinking you are on an enemies list. The ALA is big enough to not care about their membership, so why would they care about you? Answer: they don't. You're not even a blip on the radar.
'Pervasively vulgar' is a terms used by book censors (like yourself) for when they want to make a book challenge without actual substance. You can't say it's pornographic because it's not. You can't call it smut because it's not. You say it's 'pervasively vulgar'. It's an attempt to summon up the exemptions of Pico for a book removal to move forward without a review. You just want the book to be removed without the book challenge process because your reasoning wouldn't hold up to actual scrutiny. Just admit it because it's really holding up the conversation here. You can say you're not a censor because the book is available from other places, but you want to control the reading content for other children on the basis of your own morality. You want to stunt debate because then you would have to actually defend your position. It is just easier to say it is "pervasively vulgar" and hope that other people don't notice what you are trying to do.
With the Judith Krug quote, you don't use the whole thing. You take it out of the context it is given and remove the part that says that books that have been chosen by the guidelines of the school should be fought for. You are being completely intellectually dishonest by leaving it out there. That is being completely deceptive.
"On rare occasion, we have situations where a piece of material is not what it appears to be on the surface and the material is totally inappropriate for a school library. In that case, yes, it is appropriate to remove materials. If it doesn't fit your material selection policy, get it out of there. But materials that adhere to the material selection statement that every school has, and that have been duly selected, we would fight alongside every librarian and every teacher to keep the books available."
Why so much deceit? You can't argue the merits of your position? Are you afraid of open and honest debate?
I am noticing that my questions still aren't being answered. This is a typical SafeLibraries tactic, right? When challenged on something, ignore the question and raise others. You make accusations and yet won't explain them. (But you sure like to type "squirting sperm". Why is that?)
I'd think that you were using your time while you were reading my reply to come up with actual answers to my questions, but I doubt it. You were probably just thinking "which SafeLibraries propaganda can I link to now?" So I await your inevitable non-answer full of personal accusations, persecution psychosis laden speech, and more twisting of words and statements to your own end. This is why your 'movement' hasn't taken off. People online are drawn to authenticity and integrity. In taking shortcuts with facts and figures, you undermine your own efforts. But I'm guessing you're so wrapped up in being right that there isn't any other path, is there?
More information about formatting options
Hosted By ibiblio XML Twitter!