Why are any schools allowing this in their libraries?

[tabbycatstripy]

There was a mini scandal over a Catholic school in Southwark last month, with complaints to the Archbishop from a Tory MP (Eliot Colburn), after an invitation to a writer to come and promote his books and talk to the kids was withdrawn because his books were judged by the diocese to be ‘outside what is permissible in a Catholic school’. Complaints were made to Ofsted, the governors were dismissed by the diocese, and apparently the HT, who wanted the visit to go ahead, was at odds with the church.

So far so normal.

Twitter then went crazy in support of this writer, saying the books were lovely, fun, inclusive, with hardly any sexual content, and it was all so homophobic.

Anyway, I just saw an extract from the book:

twitter.com/dolphinmaria/status/1503490597931339785?s=21&t=0ZURhjXM1Ln6esoraw6Ilw

Why does a Tory MP (or any adult) think this content is suitable for adolescents?

Why is any librarian placing books in KS3 collections that talk this explicitly about (and trivialise) anal sex, oral sex, and porn?

I agree with you OP. It is not right to fail to invite or disinvite and author because the author is gay or because the characters in the books are gay - absolutely not. What you point out though is not age appropriate for the school library. Yes the kids may say worse in really life even at 11, some other 11 year olds may also know what the bullies mean, that does not mean all 11 year olds have to be exposed to it in all its explicit glory. You don't have to rush to the lowest common denominator of experience and then say that's ok for all kids because some kids move in those waters, it does not matter whether the sexual content is hetrosexual or homosexual.

11-14 year olds are way under the age of consent and I think that should also include consent to sexual content in books.

Some kids are sexually abused. Some children's books deal with this but they don't usually go into the details of the actual abuse. There are ways of presenting a subject without being explicit. Similarly with homophobic bullying - you can infer rather than detail.

Jan Needles' book My Mate Shofiq was removed because the racist bullying was too explicit. Because it used words that Asian kids in mill towns heard regularly in the 70s when they were bullied. That was being authentic. But just because it is really said to some kids does not mean all kids, especially younger kids, have to hear it. It normalising the saying of the racist terms. Why do that? In the same way why normalise homophobic bullying? Why provide a vocabulary or model bullying behaviour? Just to show the adults are not homophobic? I don't think anyone should rainbow wash bullying or virtue signal at the expense of the kids in their care.

There is perhaps an argument of for having a library system that allows KS4 to take out books that are not available to KS3, otherwise sexually explicit reading matter should not be school libraries.

Great post, Christina, couldn’t agree more.

I'm shocked at reading that. To ridicule the Lord's Prayer which is sacred to Catholics - also to other Christians but we're talking here about a Catholic school - in such a way is grossly offensive. That person shouldn't be anywhere near a Catholic school or a secular one, given the gross content of the book(s). The diocese should insist.

As for Ofcom, has it got blinkers on? And teachers should have the wit to exercise judgement and responsibility on behalf of children in their care? They should know not to parrot the ugly language and themes of pornography and misogynistic abuse in such books.

Christina's comment:

"11-14 year olds are way under the age of consent and I think that should also include consent to sexual content in books."

reminded me that I also had meant to say that inflicting such explicit content and gross and hateful language and themes on children takes away their freedom as they don't have any choice about it.

If I were a parent of a young child I'd be worried and want to do something about it if I knew the content but I might not know. The child then has no protection and no freedom from it.

Again I agree.

Here’s a bit more:

’Noah wasn’t sure what to do about the banana. If he pulled it out from underneath him it was bound to elicit further jibes from the knobs in the row behind. Yet to leave it there, when he had so obviously sat on it, seemed odd. There was also the fact the banana had been very ripe and had burst open on impact, the mush and juice now seeping into his trousers... Screw them. Noah shifted slightly and reached underneath himself to extract the banana. “He’s going to pull it out his arse!” “Dirty bastard!”... As it turned out, the adhesive qualities of bananas were quite considerable. He needed more leverage... He was so deeply involved with the manoeuvre that he hadn’t noticed Mr Baxter was no longer talking, but was instead looking directly at him, horrified, as he apparently fiddler with his bottom.’

I don’t want that being given to my 12 year old by their school as appropriate literature. It’s not appropriate.

Or what about:

’Surely a condom was a condom? Types? Shit! He racked his brain for any memories of changing room banter between hideous lads, boasting and talking crap. He had a vague recollection of a brand name... “Yeah, yeah, I like to use the Dulux range...” “Dulux?” “Uh-huh. Yeah, they’ve got one called the... Mega-Hung Donkey Stud.”’

12 year olds? Seriously?

Or we could look at:

’He was completely au fait with how the modern world worked. Why, just the other night he watched a TV documentary about an outbreak of kinky sex parties in the Cotswolds, that had led to a marked rise in STIs among the over-fifties. He was nothing of not informed.’

“Yeah, yeah, I like to use the Dulux range...”

Is that an actual quote that is meant to spoken by a 12yo/young teen? That is APPALLING dialogue! Apart from anything else. No one talks like that. "I like to use the Dulux range"? It sounds like bad advertising-speak.

The thing is if anything has "queer" stuck to it it's sacred and the author and the book cannot be criticised, however inappropriate (or offensive to anyone else) it might be. Because that would make you a prude/bigot/establishment/old pointless idiot who doesn't understand the Youth of Today.

The protagonist is 15. I don’t think 15 year olds talk like they are presented in this book. My main issue is that the book and visit were being marketed to Y8 and up, which means 12 year olds.

Or for that matter like this:

’”Big boy now. So I’ve heard.” Damn! Of course she didn’t care about the law! She planted a drunken, slobbering kiss on his lips, which he immediately wiped away with the back of his hand before doing the buttons on his shirt back up as fast as she was unbuttoning them. “We can’t do it with our clothes on, silly!” she giggled. “No, well, that’s fine...” “I’m hot for you, Noah,” she purred, like a bad porn actress. “Oh, God!” he screamed, panicked by how fast things were happening and trying to fling her off him. It was no use. She was like a deranged, sex-mad limpet. “Look, if you’re hot, maybe you should cool down?” he said. “I could run you a cold bath? Or maybe hose you down in the garden? Have you got a hose?” “You’ve got a hose!” she grinned, making a grab for his trousers.’

Oh I see tabby - thanks. Agree with you on that!

OP with all due respect you are focussing on a small extract of the book. It looks like all you have seen is a photo of the extract on Twitter and have kicked off

Read the book and then come back to be outraged, and then I will tell you that you have every right to stop your children reading this book, but you have absolutely no right to make that choice for other people’s children.

I’m actually not. Have you read my last three or four posts?

But the first post was enough. One clearly inappropriate section in a book would make that book an inappropriate book for a school to give to a KS3 child.

And you are right: parents have every right to know what their children are being exposed to at school.

I've just been reading the thread on Standing for Women, Manchester which has a live stream of the speeches posted by ScreamingMeMe. One woman described how adult male sexuality is being projected on to young children in schools. She read out several examples of the vile language and sentiments used in this material. It's horrific.

It started around 28 minutes and I listened for about 5 minutes but there's more.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4549905-standing-for-women-manchester-event-sun-15-may

I agree, this is adult sexuality. Kids don’t (without influence) talk about kink, how ‘well hung’ someone is, incest and orgies.

Were they talking about this particular book?

Just listened to a bit of that and it’s absolutely revolting.

you have absolutely no right to make that choice for other people’s children.

Well... as a society we do do that, and so do schools, and so do things like film ratings, etc etc. There are things that aren't OK for children, by general agreement, for good reasons (eg because they enable grooming) and if those standards are being eroded or ignored then it's everyone's business.

It doesn't matter if the rest of the book is actually well written & engaging.

That excerpt is intentionally highly offensive & displays both contempt & great disrespect to those of the Catholic & other Christian faiths who pray the Lords Prayer.
It is sacrilege.

It shouldn't be in any published book in any school.
If it was based on a prayer from the Muslim faith no 'so called expert' would have accepted it & recommended it to be distributed in schools.

tabby, I don't think she mentioned that book. She referred to different people, in some cases reluctant to name them and using aliases instead, and others I may not have caught as the audio isn't great on my pc.
I did catch a mention of the Family Sex Show having been stopped.

I have had an issue with the combination of the ages 11-13 with the 14 -15 year olds in reading material. I tried to have a conversation about it with a local Borough librarian and was told that it was entirely appropriate that 11 year olds would be reading sexualised content and content about suicides etc written for 14/15 year olds.

There is a huge difference between 11-13 and 14/15 year olds, as there is between 14/15 year olds and 18+. I have no idea why 11-13 are grouped together except for convenience. It is convenient to shelve them together.

‘was told that it was entirely appropriate that 11 year olds would be reading sexualised content and content about suicides etc written for 14/15 year olds.’

First I would report this librarian to their boss and the council, with examples of what they say is appropriate that clearly isn’t. Second I would supervise my child’s visits and flick through all the books myself.

It was the head librarian for that library.

And I did then a quick check on the books they read (as we did with their internet usage) when they were 11, but they are a very fast reader and read many books. So I had to resort to looking them up and reading many reviews as it was quicker.

By the time they reached 13, they had sorted out which series etc they wanted to read and was fine. They chose for themselves mostly.

Now at 15 they read widely but also told me they just skip over the bits they don’t want to read that seem to be gratituous or weird. Weird being things like why do YA novels have so many ancient shape shifting characters wanting to be teenagers and having sex with teenagers.

There is a remarkable difference between the age groups. I am surprised by those saying at 11/12 they were reading sexualised books and reading porn as if it was a common thing to do regularly.

‘I am surprised by those saying at 11/12 they were reading sexualised books and reading porn as if it was a common thing to do regularly.’

It’s not. Some kids gravitate towards the taboo, but adults are responsible for making sure they have a gentle introduction to topics that might be harmful or upsetting, or encourage certain types of behaviour.

‘Weird being things like why do YA novels have so many ancient shape shifting characters wanting to be teenagers and having sex with teenagers.’

That’s just because it’s common for teenagers to hanker after being someone’s special person. Normal. But we don’t need the explicit stuff.