CCBC-Net Archives

[CCBC-Net] Words, words, words

From: Leslie Sharbel <Lsharbel>
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 18:55:33 -0600

"in this day and age of exposure of (to?) anything and everything in books, film, newspapers, magazines, and the Internet..."

Have you stopped to think how we got to this point in the first place? That the reason we are exposed to so much in books, magazines, etc, is because we didn't make any objection to these things? We just let whomever express themselves, no matter how grusome, how violent, how sexual, all in the name of free expression? No matter what the consequences? Just because we have the right to free speech does not mean we have to be rude.

The reason we don't use those words (and I won't use it here) in polite conversation, or children's books, is not because we are ashamed of our body parts, or are afraid to let our children use correct anatomical terms, or any other psycho-babble reason. It is because we do not want to make the other person uncomfortable. Isn't that what manners are all about? Being considerate of others' feelings, and not using words or actions that we think might make them uncomfortable? Or is a polite society no longer important? There is a reason we call them "private parts". It is because they are private.

"put the book on the shelf and let the children decide"????? Are we not to guide our children in any way? Provide things in a time that is age-appropriate? If this word, and words like it, keep appearing in children's books, how are they ever going to learn what is "polite conversation"? Or do we care? Is that Rome I smell burning?

Lsharbel


----- Original Message ----- From: <Scgbooks at aol.com> To: <ccbc-net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu> Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 8:20 AM Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] Words, words, words


> It's interesting to wonder what would have happened if the word scrotum
> hadn't been on the first page. Surely, such an obscure word (to the minds
> of a
> young audience, I would think) would have flown by with little notice
> except in
> the minds of a few preternaturally mature children. Boys, most likely. I
> read to a small group of 4th graders every week and can't read the word
> "love"
> without moans and groans and total embarrassment on the part of the three
> boys
> in the group.
>
> During some of this discussion, one teacher said that before reading it to
> her class, she was going to announce the word is there, read a dictionary
> definition, discuss it, and proceed to read. Having just looked up the
> definition, I'm not at all sure it will go that smoothly. The definition
> is so
> specific, raising the specter of yet another inflammatory word -
> "testes" - I can
> only imagine that, together, they're going to bring down the house.
>
> Such a little word. How can it possibly withstand the intense scrutiny the
> adult community is giving it? Why doesn't everyone just get on with the
> reading
> of this book to children, and the putting of it on library shelves, and
> see
> what the children decide? It makes me incredulous to think that in this
> day
> and age of exposure of anything and everything in books, film,
> newspapers,
> magazines, and the Internet, that such a small word is going to make any
> difference.
>
> Stephanie Greene, author
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 Sun 18 Feb 2007 06:55:33 PM CST