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from a Tory MP (Eliot Colburn), after an invitation to a writer to come and promote his books and talk to the kids was withdrawn because his books were judged by the diocese to be ‘outside what is permissible in a Catholic school’.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?

@Regularsizedrudy

Yawn.

Yeah. Safeguarding is so tiresome isn't it.

There's nothing wrong with the extract you've quoted - it's pretty standard homophobic bullying in a secondary school. It's bloody awful that gay kids are treated like that, but banning this book won't make such bullying less likely to happen.

You're being OTT. Gay kids are often bullied, and the attitudes of the Catholic Church on homosexuality are pretty awful (and I'm a Catholic!).

‘The job of libraries is to enable all people to access all kinds if material and to have a choice or what they want to read. To not do this would be censorship.’

Yes. Educators are allowed (and it is necessary for them) to make judgments about material they give to children.

You are denying this why?

Again 14+ kids will have learnt or be learning this language already so it’s better to hear it in a safe context. You think they’re never going to hear this stuff. The book is about an autistic boy. Wouldn’t you rather a safe guarding individual taught your cousin this in a safe environment in a healthy context than her hear it from her friends/peers and become a distressed. They’re going to learn it at some point and will have probably already. Much better with this book than porn. I came on this thread to offer my opinion as someone who was more recently a peer as opposed to a teacher and all you’ve done is belittle my opinion despite most people on the thread disagreeing with you. Safeguarding doesn’t mean never mentioning sexually explicit things it’s explaining them in a safe context. I have to go but I promise you you’re being naive

‘There's nothing wrong with the extract you've quoted - it's pretty standard homophobic bullying in a secondary school. It's bloody awful that gay kids are treated like that, but banning this book won't make such bullying less likely to happen.’

Again, we see this faulty argument that the only thing that matters here is stopping or not stopping bullying.

What about the safeguarding element of what a school should or should not put into the hands of children in terms of sexualised material?

Why are people unable to separate these issues out?

No, Lillith. Teenagers are not inevitably going to come across this language at school. It’s our job to teach them about the issues. It’s not our job to present them with sexualised material and let them hop off and read it. You are misunderstanding safeguarding. Sorry if my disagreement feels belittling (it’s not the intention).

OP Of Mice and Men is no longer on the syllabus. You should check out Pigeon English, which is.

I'm not sure censureship of any kind is helpful in education providing it's guided carefully I don't see a problem

‘So which schools have this in their libraries? Can you provide a list as that is your issue.....
Can you name even 1 school?’

That’s hardly the issue. The book is marketed to schools. If none have bought it, that’s great. I am questioning why anyone would.

There was a filthy version of I Will Survive going around my my primary school back in the early 90s when we didn't even have the internet. It was extremely graphic and absolutely disgusting. I actually remember most of it and it included the word "cum" in that sense. My point being you are extremely niave to think that kids are unfamiliar with these words.

Also Hickory Dickory Dock (I'll let you guess the rhyme word there).

Think they’re going to reach 18 and not have heard “sucking cock” or “cumming” 😂😳

‘I'm not sure censureship of any kind is helpful in education providing it's guided carefully I don't see a problem’

It’s not just helpful, it’s the law. As a teacher I would not be allowed to give American Psycho to a 12 year old to read in this country. That us arguably ‘censorship’. It is also safeguarding and absolutely necessary.

Lillith111

Except you know I said KS3 and KS4, not 16+. This distracts from the issues. Teachers accept that some children hear sexualised language. That doesn’t make it their job to hand it to them.

@tabbycatstripy

‘I'm not sure censureship of any kind is helpful in education providing it's guided carefully I don't see a problem’

It’s not just helpful, it’s the law. As a teacher I would not be allowed to give American Psycho to a 12 year old to read in this country. That us arguably ‘censorship’. It is also safeguarding and absolutely necessary.

What law would you be breaking?

‘My point being you are extremely niave to think that kids are unfamiliar with these words.’

I’m not naive. Some children know those words. This is a discussion about whether that language should be given to them by adults.

I say no.

@tabbycatstripy

‘My point being you are extremely niave to think that kids are unfamiliar with these words.’

I’m not naive. Some children know those words. This is a discussion about whether that language should be given to them by adults.

I say no.

Most children if not all know those words.

Should children learn about the Holocaust?

Disclaimer : haven't read the book.
FWIW, I agree for the most part with the OP. This content is more suitable for 13+. I work in a school, and most of the y7s will not be using the language you refer to here. The topics and themes are important and should be taught but with guidance, as we do with racist language. That said, I'd be OK with y9s+ reading it.

@tabbycatstripy

‘The job of libraries is to enable all people to access all kinds if material and to have a choice or what they want to read. To not do this would be censorship.’

Yes. Educators are allowed (and it is necessary for them) to make judgments about material they give to children.

You are denying this why?

What am I denying? Educators and Librarians do make a choice and make judgements. There are many books that aren't put on the shelves for many reasons. However, we are balanced in our judgements and understand that there needs to be a variety.

The judgements we make are based on years of experience of working with young people and the materials that they read. We read a LOT of children's and young people's books and if something is maybe pushing a boundary we ensure that we read it thoroughly. We read THE WHOLE BOOK and think about ALL THE POTENTIAL READERS.

There are professionals at the heart of this who look at the whole picture: not just at one page of one book thinking about one child.

Just curious OP, do you think the people who want the author cancelled on the grounds that he's promoting a "lifestyle choice" are in the right?

BettyBag

You would be in breach of safeguarding legislation (Education Act, for example), which places broad and stringent responsibilities on teachers to protect children, including from sexualised and extremely violent material.

MedusasBadHairDay

What do you mean exactly? Do you mean would I think he shouldn’t be allowed to do a writer visit to a school to talk to kids if I didn’t think his books contained inappropriate material?

@tabbycatstripy

BettyBag

You would be in breach of safeguarding legislation (Education Act, for example), which places broad and stringent responsibilities on teachers to protect children, including from sexualised and extremely violent material.

Which part of the Education Act? I would be genuinely interested in reading it. Safeguarding Legislation is a nonsense term (source-I work in statutory Safeguarding).

@tabbycatstripy

‘I'm not sure censureship of any kind is helpful in education providing it's guided carefully I don't see a problem’

It’s not just helpful, it’s the law. As a teacher I would not be allowed to give American Psycho to a 12 year old to read in this country. That us arguably ‘censorship’. It is also safeguarding and absolutely necessary.

Can you please tell me which law you would be breaking?

There is also a difference between giving a book to someone and saying 'you must read this' and having it on the shelf in the library as a choice.

I would also be interested to know your views on homosexuality.

RhubarbCrumbled

You seemed to be denying the importance of censoring what children should be allowed to read.

And the call to authority isn’t going to work here. As a parent and an educator myself I have a right to a view on what schools present to children.

@tabbycatstripy

RhubarbCrumbled

You seemed to be denying the importance of censoring what children should be allowed to read.

And the call to authority isn’t going to work here. As a parent and an educator myself I have a right to a view on what schools present to children.

Lol, it was you who called to authority when you said it was unlawful. Christ.