CCBC-Net Archives
[CCBC-Net] NYTimes.com: Children's Book Stirs Battle With Single Word
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Kathy Johnson <kmquimby>
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 15:37:40 -0500
Double sigh. Or the point that this is the scientific terminology for the genitalia of all male mammals. Please note, it was a dog that was bitten. So yes, it really is all about literacy and knowledge, and not necessarily about human sexuality, although why we are always so much more accepting of violence than sexuality remains beyond me. Kathy Q.
At 03:26 PM 2/17/2007, you wrote:
>Ruth,
>
>Sigh.
> >
> > Ms. Nilsson, reached at Sunnyside Elementary School in Durango, Colo.,
> > said she had heard from dozens of librarians who agreed with her
> > stance. "I don't want to start an issue about censorship," she said.
> > "But you won't find men's genitalia in quality literature."
> >
> > "At least not for children," she added.
> >
>Um, is Ms. Nilsson missing the point that it is boy's genitalia too?
>That most boys explore their body parts from a very young age? That
>girls with little brothers or little boy friends or girl friends with
>little brothers, or girls who babysit, have already "seen it all"? That
>everyone likes knowing what to call things?
>
>Isn't knowing the words what literacy and articulation are all about?
>
> > "I think it's a good case of an author not realizing her audience,"
> > said Frederick Muller, a librarian at Halsted Middle School in Newton,
> > N.J. "If I were a third- or fourth-grade teacher, I wouldn't want to
> > have to explain that."
>
>Audience? I think it is a good case of an author, and a bunch of writers
>and librarians and teachers and publishing folk, not accepting
>Victorian-1950 body hating attitudes as the singular, dominant, or
>healthiest way of living. It's a wise bunch of people who refused to
>recognize adult hang-ups as an adequate reason to create the same
>hang-ups in our next generation. Who is the audience here? Kids? They
>will be glad of the language. But adults... well, yes, they might very
>well be uncomfortable to have to learn to use the language they should
>have been fairly taught as children.
>
>I would bet, too, that many American adults couldn't define the word
>scrotum. So, we can thank the Newbery committee for enlightening and
>enlivening us all. :)
>
>Maia
>
>_______________________________________________
>CCBC-Net mailing list
>CCBC-Net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu
>Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe...
>http://ccbc.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
Received on Sat 17 Feb 2007 02:37:40 PM CST
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 15:37:40 -0500
Double sigh. Or the point that this is the scientific terminology for the genitalia of all male mammals. Please note, it was a dog that was bitten. So yes, it really is all about literacy and knowledge, and not necessarily about human sexuality, although why we are always so much more accepting of violence than sexuality remains beyond me. Kathy Q.
At 03:26 PM 2/17/2007, you wrote:
>Ruth,
>
>Sigh.
> >
> > Ms. Nilsson, reached at Sunnyside Elementary School in Durango, Colo.,
> > said she had heard from dozens of librarians who agreed with her
> > stance. "I don't want to start an issue about censorship," she said.
> > "But you won't find men's genitalia in quality literature."
> >
> > "At least not for children," she added.
> >
>Um, is Ms. Nilsson missing the point that it is boy's genitalia too?
>That most boys explore their body parts from a very young age? That
>girls with little brothers or little boy friends or girl friends with
>little brothers, or girls who babysit, have already "seen it all"? That
>everyone likes knowing what to call things?
>
>Isn't knowing the words what literacy and articulation are all about?
>
> > "I think it's a good case of an author not realizing her audience,"
> > said Frederick Muller, a librarian at Halsted Middle School in Newton,
> > N.J. "If I were a third- or fourth-grade teacher, I wouldn't want to
> > have to explain that."
>
>Audience? I think it is a good case of an author, and a bunch of writers
>and librarians and teachers and publishing folk, not accepting
>Victorian-1950 body hating attitudes as the singular, dominant, or
>healthiest way of living. It's a wise bunch of people who refused to
>recognize adult hang-ups as an adequate reason to create the same
>hang-ups in our next generation. Who is the audience here? Kids? They
>will be glad of the language. But adults... well, yes, they might very
>well be uncomfortable to have to learn to use the language they should
>have been fairly taught as children.
>
>I would bet, too, that many American adults couldn't define the word
>scrotum. So, we can thank the Newbery committee for enlightening and
>enlivening us all. :)
>
>Maia
>
>_______________________________________________
>CCBC-Net mailing list
>CCBC-Net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu
>Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe...
>http://ccbc.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
Received on Sat 17 Feb 2007 02:37:40 PM CST
