# N.H. dad arrested over daughter's porno homework assignment!



## copperkid3 (Mar 18, 2005)

William Baer and a few other parents voiced their opinions at the Gilford High School's
school board meeting, saying they should've been informed that their kids were reading
the book. And when Baer went over his allotted two minutes to speak, police arrested
him and charged him with disorderly conduct. If convicted, he could be fined up to $ 1200.00.

Now, the-Gilford School District-will be taking action. According to a statement
from the school board, it plans to include a notification that requires parents to 
accept controversial material rather than opt out. 


http://www.aol.com/article/2014/05/...grid7|vzw-tablet-b|dl16|sec1_lnk3&pLid=473906


I simply have no words . . . (well that's not entirely true . . .
I have plenty of words, but if I voiced them, they would get me banned)!

Which might be worse than Mr. Baer's arrest . . . at least he gets his day in court.


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

Another example of liberalism in education. Absolutely disgusting. Im glad he'll have his day in court and I hope he has a good lawyer. I hate to say it, but I hope he sues that school district down to their knees. It's the only thing they understand. If that author let her daughters read her filth she should be charged with child abuse and sexual exploitation. A defense and charge that Mr. Baer could probably use.


----------



## Dixie Bee Acres (Jul 22, 2013)

Disgusting


----------



## Marthas_minis (Jan 28, 2014)

"She tells the New Hampshire Union-Leader all three of her kids read the book in high school. Picoult said the goal is to teach people about tolerance, bullying and gun violence."

I feel that her goals could have been reached without the graphic sex. 

Parents should have at least been made aware of the content and asked to give or deny permission for their child to read this book. Freshmen seems a little young... They are still just very immature and hormonal at that age. 

While I probably would not have had a problem with my daughter reading this at that age because of her level of maturity; I feel that it was an irresponsible decision on the school's part. 

I agree, I hope this dad wins his case.


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

The heck with parental permission. The fact that the school board would even allow this book on the reading list speaks volumes of problems. when you consider that Huckleberry Finn is banned in many school systems it makes you wonder. The author stated her reason about gun violence, and bullying and acceptance and blah, blah, blah. She wrote the book to make money. She now got her name and the title of her book in the news, hoping to make more money. If she could make money by writing a book about Bar-B-Que kittens she would do it. The school board needs to be recalled.


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

Hm. As a parent I'd just let my kid take the F. I wouldn't have let either of my kids read something like that at that age. Ludicrous. 

ETA: Oops - my bad. I thought she was in 5th grade. Carry on.


----------



## susieneddy (Sep 2, 2011)

folks may be surprised what a 9th grader already knows about sex or maybe already had sex


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

susieneddy said:


> folks may be surprised what a 9th grader already knows about sex or maybe already had sex


Not really.. I was a 9th grader once.. and to think what we would have been into had we of had the internet back then.. hhhmm...


----------



## susieneddy (Sep 2, 2011)

simi-steading said:


> Not really.. I was a 9th grader once.. and to think what we would have been into had we of had the internet back then.. hhhmm...


you would have been able to find a lot more about sex with pictures than what was in the book.


----------



## CurtisWilliams (Mar 14, 2005)

By the time that I was a freshman, I had already had a MUCH more graphic introduction into sexuality than the brief exerpt from the book. 

Kids are no longer (and never were) the the sexual innocents that we want then to be.


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

It is not about innocence. It is about approve reading from a school board. Where do we draw the line? Having a knowledge of sex and having sexual violence portrayed as required reading are two different things. What if they approved having students read the New Testiment? Since most students have attended church at least at sometime, would the liberals find that acceptable? Its the most popular book ever printed. Where do the schools find the power to take over the responsibilities of parents?


----------



## CurtisWilliams (Mar 14, 2005)

JJ Grandits said:


> Where do we draw the line?


I cannot answer that. But I will agree that ultimately it is up to the parents to decide what is best for their kids. It is also up to parents to educate their kids about literature, society and the world in general. It sounds like the father failed to take advantage of an opportunity to do so.

I grew up reading Durango Street, Tom Sawyer, Huck Finn, and other books that by todays protectionary standards would be considered racist, sexist, or morally corrupt. I was none the worse for it. And these were school books. 

I also grew up on Follet, Clarke, Heinlein, London, Hubbard and many other authors whose target audience was well beyond my tender years. 

I was allowed to read freely. I read what ever I wanted, and was allowed to formulate my own viewpoints about the material at hand. I was allowed to be a free thinker.

Should erotica be mandated reading? NO! Does the very brief excerpt constitute erotica? Again NO! 

The reason that schools require everyone to read the same books is so that they can have a discussion with everyone in the class involved. If we are going to limit the books available to what might not offend anyone, well then, that is why Johnny can't read.


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

Johnny can't read because he has lousy parents and useless teachers.


----------



## susieneddy (Sep 2, 2011)

JJ Grandits said:


> Johnny can't read because he has lousy parents and useless teachers.


well you got one thing right and that was the lousy parents. It always make me laugh when people want to blame the teachers when it starts at home with the parents.

If the parents can't make the kid do his homework or read assignments then you can always blame the teachers for the kids failure...right


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

CurtisWilliams said:


> I cannot answer that. But I will agree that ultimately it is up to the parents to decide what is best for their kids. It is also up to parents to educate their kids about literature, society and the world in general. It sounds like the father failed to take advantage of an opportunity to do so.
> 
> I grew up reading Durango Street, Tom Sawyer, Huck Finn, and other books that by todays protectionary standards would be considered racist, sexist, or morally corrupt. I was none the worse for it.
> 
> ...


A statement that graphically demonstrates the failure of its own argument. You decide you are the standard for a good life and point out that you were allowed to read whatever you wanted and form your own views. And that last lead to the first.

All I can say is that I remember the views I had as a ninth grader but not without blushing. Critical reasoning was not big as I did not have much perspective. I tended to be unaware of the faults of thought in an author or to not see the whole of the self-involved world view. I tended to believe that fiction was the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth when in reality almost all was opinion and little observation. It was predigested food for the not-adult trying to figure out the world. And could lead to some pretty poor choices because it created an illusion of knowledge.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

susieneddy said:


> well you got one thing right and that was the lousy parents. It always make me laugh when people want to blame the teachers when it starts at home with the parents.
> 
> If the parents can't make the kid do his homework or read assignments then you can always blame the teachers for the kids failure...right


But it is the professional who is the one to do what can be done for those students who don't have parents to do the donkey work. Personally I think more students would be so much farther along with less homework and more teacher face time, however inconvenient for teachers that would be.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

I haven't read the book but the whole thing puts me in mind of Judy Blume's book "Forever" back in the bad old 70's/80's. So much kerfuffle about it I couldn't wait to get my hands on it. It wasn't nearly as titillating as I'd hoped either.


----------



## susieneddy (Sep 2, 2011)

where I want to said:


> But it is the professional who is the one to do what can be done for those students who don't have parents to do the donkey work. Personally I think more students would be so much farther along with less homework and more teacher face time, however inconvenient for teachers that would be.


So the parents should do nothing and leave it all up to the teachers? Talk about taking no responsibility for your kids.

The teachers do have face time with the kids everyday which is more than the kids are probably getting at home. If you think they just give them test or make them read and never engage with the students daily then you are sadly mistaken.

Seems to me the parents are the one getting the better end of the deal. Lets do nothing and blame the teachers because the parents didn't care about their kids.

My ex was a teacher and a ---- good one. I saw all the crap she had to go through with those lousy parents who blamed her for their kids failures.


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

LOL. When I worked at my local library as a teenager, that was the #1 missing book (before they had those alarm system thingies in each book). That and Erica Jong.


----------



## CurtisWilliams (Mar 14, 2005)

where I want to said:


> A statement that graphically demonstrates the failure of its own argument. You decide you are the standard for a good life and point out that you were allowed to read whatever you wanted and form your own views. And that last lead to the first.


You misinterpreted my meaning completely. I never decided that my my freedom to learn and think freely was the standard for a good life. It was the standard for MY good life. I have never imposed my will on anyone nor will I. 

If the freedom to learn and think freely leads to a good life and a good life leads to the freedom to learn and think freely.... 

You do the math.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

susieneddy said:


> So the parents should do nothing and leave it all up to the teachers? Talk about taking no responsibility for your kids.
> 
> The teachers do have face time with the kids everyday which is more than the kids are probably getting at home. If you think they just give them test or make them read and never engage with the students daily then you are sadly mistaken.
> 
> ...


No- there have and will always be parents either unwilling or unable to provide homework supervision. Should their children be allowed to fail because of it? Or would it be better to have a system that acknowledges that reality and deals with it as a matter of routine? 

Too much home work does not seem to have improved education, especially with elementary children. It does not keep kids who are likely exposed to an environment offering opportunity for trouble out of it. 

What it does is give an ever increasing opportunity for those kids to fail constantly. To be put in a position of easily avoiding a requirement and constantly falling further behind until they see no way to ever catch up. They quit.

Blaming a parent may be convenient but does nothing to help the kid who did not choose their parent. 

No, there needs to be some, increasing with age to teach self discipline, but giving too much only teaches how to avoid self discipline.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

CurtisWilliams said:


> You misinterpreted my meaning completely. I never decided that my my freedom to learn and think freely was the standard for a good life. It was the standard for MY good life. I have never imposed my will on anyone nor will I.
> 
> If the freedom to learn and think freely leads to a good life and a good life leads to the freedom to learn and think freely....
> 
> You do the math.


What math?


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

.......has the school district committed ...delinquency to a minor....in exposing the girl to the materialise she a Victim of sexual harassment..... just thoughts I have as a mother. The cops may be need to investigate the material.


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

This subject got buried quick. It would seem parents lose more rights with each passing day when it comes to their children. 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3qtpdSQox0[/ame]


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

When you send your child to public school, you ARE making him/her also the responsibility of the community. Obviously the parents have the first responsibility but the school has a responsibility for them too. No?


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

*********************


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Forcing porn on kids should be viewed as sexual assault on a child, and everybody responsible should do prison time and be branded a sex offender for life.
No wonder people don't trust the schools anymore, it's being infiltrated and run by the least trustworthy people in the world, the American left


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> Obviously the parents have the first responsibility but the school has a responsibility for them too. No?


To spoon feed them porn? Can't agree with that. These same schools would and have expelled young kids because they innocently hugged each other.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

dixiegal62 said:


> This subject got buried quick. It would seem parents lose more rights with each passing day when it comes to their children.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3qtpdSQox0


That is disturbing


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

dixiegal62 said:


> To spoon feed them porn? Can't agree with that. These same schools would and have expelled young kids because they innocently hugged each other.


My kids have been in public schools and have hugged and been hugged and there were no expulsions. Please give a source for this.


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> My kids have been in public schools and have hugged and been hugged and there were no expulsions. Please give a source for this.


 
There have been stories in the last few years about kids being expelled for all kinds of silly reasons I'm sure a Google search would bring some of them up for you.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

dixiegal62 said:


> There have been stories in the last few years about kids being expelled for all kinds of silly reasons I'm sure a Google search would bring some of them up for you.


I'm not the one who used them as an example. I have my own example of kids hugging in school with no dire consequences.


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> I'm not the one who used them as an example. I have my own example of kids hugging in school with no dire consequences.


 
I guess your children where fortunate to go to a school where hugging wasn't banned


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> I'm not the one who used them as an example. I have my own example of kids hugging in school with no dire consequences.


 
I don't doubt your word at all or feel the need to ask you to back your claim  you have your examples, I have mine. I have no doubt that not all schools ban hugging...yet.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

If he doesn't want his daughter reading this, then she should be exempted. I haven't read the book in question, but I can guarantee that she has probably read more explicit things on her own, and maybe even done them herself. 

Oh, heck, when I was a tween, I read "Go Ask Alice" and that was almost 40 years ago.


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

thesedays said:


> If he doesn't want his daughter reading this, then she should be exempted. I haven't read the book in question, but I can guarantee that she has probably read more explicit things on her own, and maybe even done them herself.
> 
> Oh, heck, when I was a tween, I read "Go Ask Alice" and that was almost 40 years ago.


 
Sure kids can do all sorts of things on their own before parents are ready for them to. We still try as a whole to discourage them with r rated movies, laws about underage sex, sexting, age limits for smoking, drinking. If a teacher gave a teen a bottle of whisky and a pack of smokes I doubt many would say the kid probably already drank and smoked anyway


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

How do you feel about kids reading Othello or other Shakespearean plays with explicit sexual references?


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

> Where do the schools find the power to take over the responsibilities of parents?


They get that power directly from the parents who voluntarily shirk their responsibilities send their kids to the schools.


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> How do you feel about kids reading Othello or other Shakespearean plays with explicit sexual references?


 
I think it's up to the parents to decide if they want their kids to read it or not. Same with Huck Fin and To Kill a Mockingbird.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

jtbrandt said:


> They get that power directly from the parents who voluntarily shirk their responsibilities send their kids to the schools.


It could be said that a parent is shirking their responsibilities by by not talking about sex in a frank manner with their kids. The biology of it all is not enough. 
I haven't read this book but now I'm curious and downloading it onto my Kindle. If it's truly gratuitous and pornographic, I would not particularly want my child reading it. If it's in a context and teaches something, I wouldn't have a problem.


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

Forget the porn/erotica or what ever the subject was..

I want to know why you now can get arrested if you go over the 2 minute time frame?

Since when is that a crime?
The man wasn't disorderly and conducted himself with restraint.

So don't feed me a disorderly conduct line....

This shows that this particular school board is nothing more than a thiefdom, runs by lowlife scum who get off on their "power"..


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

I've read the book after my niece read it, she is 16. Her comment was it was disjointed, written in a manner that seemed to be for a younger group and the sex scene seemed to be just stuck in there for a bit of drama. For me it was not very realistic especially the parts dealing with characters that were in the legal professions, I think a judge and a lawyer. 

My niece is an avid reader and enjoys multiple genre's.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

A thiefdom?


----------



## Tabitha (Apr 10, 2006)

spot on beowulf

I thought it was Congress that passed laws. since when can a schoolboard do that? and the police will ARREST you, for going over THEIR 2 minute rule. Worse than the king and the Pope rolled into one. 
What has this country come to? And you talk about what kids know about, or not, sex. 

And he will have his day in court!!!! What????

and if he loses he can be fined 1200 dollars!!!!.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Tabitha said:


> spot on beowulf
> 
> I thought it was Congress that passed laws. since when can a schoolboard do that? and the police will ARREST you, for going over THEIR 2 minute rule. Worse than the king and the Pope rolled into one.
> What has this country come to? And you talk about what kids know about, or not, sex.
> ...



If you are concerned about this dad, you must have been very upset by this:

http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/11/19...olice-pepper-spray-demonstrators-at-uc-davis/


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

JJ Grandits said:


> The heck with parental permission. The fact that the school board would even allow this book on the reading list speaks volumes of problems. when you consider that Huckleberry Finn is banned in many school systems it makes you wonder. The author stated her reason about gun violence, and bullying and acceptance and blah, blah, blah. She wrote the book to make money. She now got her name and the title of her book in the news, hoping to make more money. If she could make money by writing a book about Bar-B-Que kittens she would do it. The school board needs to be recalled.


You obviously know absolutely nothing about Jodie Picoult. All of her books are about important issues and her goal is always to make people aware of things that need to be changed or discussed, etc. I have read several of her books and I can't imagine a High Schooler these days who is so sheltered and naive that what she rights would be anything they did not already know about. 

I do not understand how you can feel comfortable tearing down the character of someone you nothing at all about.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> If you are concerned about this dad, you must have been very upset by this:
> 
> http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/11/19...olice-pepper-spray-demonstrators-at-uc-davis/


I certainly was outraged by that. I don't know what it has to do with this. Are you assuming something about people who think it was wrong for this man to be arrested at the school board meeting? I see the police as in the wrong in both cases (assuming there isn't much more to the story about this case).


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

jtbrandt said:


> I certainly was outraged by that. I don't know what it has to do with this. Are you assuming something about people who think it was wrong for this man to be arrested at the school board meeting? I see both as wrong.


I could be wrong but my guess is that many of the people who are outraged by the treatment of the father who would not comply with being called to order and went over the time limit and was arrested and removed are not outraged by the treatment of the protesting students who were hosed down with pepper spray for simply sitting in protest and refusing to move.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> I could be wrong but my guess is that many of the people who are outraged by the treatment of the father who would not comply with being called to order and went over the time limit and was arrested and removed are not outraged by the treatment of the protesting students who were hosed down with pepper spray for simply sitting in protest and refusing to move.


I'm sure there are some but it's a big conclusion to jump to that any particular individual would fit into that preconceived notion. Of course you worded it in such a way that you could have easily backpedaled if you were wrong. I respect that you didn't do that, at least. Now I am interested in the response of the person you directed your comment toward.


----------



## grandma12703 (Jan 13, 2011)

Once when my daughter was in 7th grade and trying out for middle school cheerleader they had a dance they had to do. The dance was not that bad but the song was terrible. Sex this sex that...blah blah blah. I went to the cheer coach and she said she would think about it so I also went to the principal which immediately made them change the song and some of the dance. My dd was still selected even though I told her not to get upset if my interferance caused her not to. She told me it was ok because it was the right thing to do. Pretty mature 7th grader.

I owned an all-star competitive gymnastics/cheer center for lots of years (15). I have seen some pretty raunchy stuff they have these kids do but I always told the girls the best way to defeat that was to look good doing the right kind of dances with the right kind of music. We always had fun and always did well. My kids had complete outfits and not the bakini swinsuit type uniforms. I always thought our kids were the cutest thing out there. They wore a little lipgloss and glitter pen on their face as well as glitter in their hair but I did not all the lipsticks, eyeshadows, and rouge. The girls were 4 yrs-12 yrs old. I sold the gym when I started getting pushed by some of the new mothers to update our look and routines. It wasn't my thing and I wasn't going to do that to the kids. The new owner was open 1 year and called to let me know I was lucky I got out when I did. Things a changin.....


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

Police brutality should never be tolerated. Sadly in an ever growing nanny state where people are taught from a young age never to question authority like schools it will be more common place in coming years.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

grandma12703 said:


> Once when my daughter was in 7th grade and trying out for middle school cheerleader they had a dance they had to do. The dance was not that bad but the song was terrible. Sex this sex that...blah blah blah. I went to the cheer coach and she said she would think about it so I also went to the principal which immediately made them change the song and some of the dance. My dd was still selected even though I told her not to get upset if my interferance caused her not to. She told me it was ok because it was the right thing to do. Pretty mature 7th grader.
> 
> I owned an all-star competitive gymnastics/cheer center for lots of years (15). I have seen some pretty raunchy stuff they have these kids do but I always told the girls the best way to defeat that was to look good doing the right kind of dances with the right kind of music. We always had fun and always did well. My kids had complete outfits and not the bakini swinsuit type uniforms. I always thought our kids were the cutest thing out there. They wore a little lipgloss and glitter pen on their face as well as glitter in their hair but I did not all the lipsticks, eyeshadows, and rouge. The girls were 4 yrs-12 yrs old. I sold the gym when I started getting pushed by some of the new mothers to update our look and routines. It wasn't my thing and I wasn't going to do that to the kids. The new owner was open 1 year and called to let me know I was lucky I got out when I did. Things a changin.....



I totally agree with you on this. However, there is a huge difference in participating in raunchy, sexualized behavior and reading about sex in a way that promotes a lesson about life.


----------



## grandma12703 (Jan 13, 2011)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> I totally agree with you on this. However, there is a huge difference in participating in raunchy, sexualized behavior and reading about sex in a way that promotes a lesson about life.


 
But don't you believe it should still be the parents decision? That is where I have a problem. IMO as unpopular as it is I think that there are still kids out there that are 15-16-17 that are still shielded from a lot of these kinds of things. Done correctly I think these kids still grow up to be very knowledgable and positive citizens. They aren't exposed to certain things 
until they are at a maturity level that their brain can really understand the pro's and con's of their actions. We need to teach responsibility to yourself before we teach prevention, consequences and techniques. Without understanding how to be responsible for yourself how do you understand the other?

College age is ready for this high school especially freshmen not so much.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Apparently, this guy's family does not own a television, or at least one without heavy parental filtering. Turn on (no pun intended) _Law and order, SVU, _or many other shows and hear similar dialog, practically every week. 

He had his right to protest - for two minutes. Apparently his rights trumps , every one else s, who was waiting to do business with the school board.

He brought up an issue he thought they needed to address. So they need to address it. The school has been using the book for six years, so apparently no one else has been concerned.

What did he want them to do with his ongoing ranting?

I'd be surprised if most 9th graders would be the slightest bit shocked reading that.

But he does have his right to complain - for two minutes.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

grandma12703 said:


> But don't you believe it should still be the parents decision? That is where I have a problem. IMO as unpopular as it is I think that there are still kids out there that are 15-16-17 that are still shielded from a lot of these kinds of things. Done correctly I think these kids still grow up to be very knowledgable and positive citizens. They aren't exposed to certain things
> until they are at a maturity level that their brain can really understand the pro's and con's of their actions. We need to teach responsibility to yourself before we teach prevention, consequences and techniques. Without understanding how to be responsible for yourself how do you understand the other?
> 
> College age is ready for this high school especially freshmen not so much.


If kids that age are still shielded from these "kinds of things" by their parents, then it's ridiculous for them to be in public school and naive to think they haven't heard far more in middle school from their peers.


----------



## grandma12703 (Jan 13, 2011)

Why can't we just let them be kids? Sure when you are in middle school which most 9th grades are you will find tidbits of things written in books and you and your friends go hide in a corner and giggle and laugh about it. Why as adults can we not just let them spend a year or two giggling and making fun of things like this. 

IMO you teach kids things so they know how to do something correctly. ??? Then we wonder why there are so many high school kids ages 14-16 that have already had sexual relations and drink beer among other things. Why can't we just let them grow up naturally and teach them the dangers as they go along? People can say what they want but it doensn't make it right. 

My kids went to public school and were actually very popular kids. They were athletes, aggie kids, and musically inclined. They were also all valedictorians of their classes. They went to school dances which we were usually asked to be sponsors at and they went to all school functions but they didn't date till 16. By that time we had talked about a lot of "stuff". They came home with lots of "stuff" up to that point because they had no feeling of shame or regret for anything they had done. They opened a door for us to walk through and we did. We sent many kids home for inappropriate talk at our house only to have them return the next day to apologize and then hang out like usual. 

We have had 21 foreign exchange students live with us over the years and many of them came from a much different lifestyle. They are still our extended kids. Many conversations at dinner time were extensive about sex, money, and life in general. We also worked as mission houseparents for 6 months in a troubled teen home with 11 boys that were 17 years old. Lots of laughter, tears, and straight talk about sex, drugs, and life took place in that home as well. I just feel like this should be up to parents not schools.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Wonder if the Father actually read the book, or just quoted a few lines and determined it was porn. Like it or not, it is a children's book. &quot;In Sterling, New Hampshire, 17-year-old high school student Peter Houghton has endured years of verbal and physical abuse at the hands of classmates. His best friend, Josie Cormier, succumbed to peer pressure and now hangs out with the popular crowd that often instigates the harassment. One final incident of bullying sends Peter over the edge and leads him to commit an act of violence that forever changes the lives of Sterlingâs residents.&quot; http://www.jodipicoult.com/nineteen-minutes.html


----------



## grandma12703 (Jan 13, 2011)

and that breaks my heart.


----------



## kendall j (Mar 30, 2007)

Trying to shut down a point that someone is making when they cite a well-known example is just weak. 

It basically says "I've been hiding under a rock for the past few years." or "I'm going to question the credibility of your well-known example while leading others to assume I am too lazy to use a search engine."

It doesn't say "My argument is valid and yours is not because you have no proof." Maybe if the example cited were obscure or the topic being debated were not well-known, but the contents of this thread have shown to be neither.

For your enjoyment.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=expelled+for+hugging


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

kendall j said:


> Trying to shut down a point that someone is making when they cite a well-known example is just weak.
> 
> It basically says "I've been hiding under a rock for the past few years." or "I'm going to question the credibility of your well-known example while leading others to assume I am too lazy to use a search engine."
> 
> ...


How kind. However, there still aren't any examples there of young children being suspended for hugging each other. Your search was a little weak. For future reference, it's best to quote the person you're being snarky to in order to get the best effect.


----------



## kendall j (Mar 30, 2007)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> How kind. However, there still aren't any examples there of young children being suspended for hugging each other. Your search was a little weak. For future reference, it's best to quote the person you're being snarky to in order to get the best effect.


No snark intended which is why I didn't quote you. You are by far not the only person to do this on this board or one of the many others I have used. I was just making an observation regarding something I see frequently in message boards. I always wonder why the "citations please" argument comes up so often on well-known issues when Google is literally a mouse click away.

Since my point is so weak because the students in the search hugged teachers (though the point of the argument was that students are disciplined over ridiculous things like hugging), here you go (since the target of the hug matters so much): http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlin...ended-for-breaking-schools-no-hugging-policy/

This one hugged his best friend. Since she was a she and he was a he, I guess that was a big no-no. Zero tolerance just makes so much sense you know. Gotta love it when policy can't even make common sense distinctions and disciplinary action is the route taken when students do something as simple as exchanging an innocent hug. I mean, if he had grabbed her rear end or been making out with her, I could see the point, but this example is just ridiculous.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

kendall j said:


> Trying to shut down a point that someone is making when they cite a well-known example is just weak.
> 
> It basically says "I've been hiding under a rock for the past few years." or "I'm going to question the credibility of your well-known example while leading others to assume I am too lazy to use a search engine."
> 
> ...


That is pretty rude. All of the links it pulled up were stories about a high schooler expelled for repeatedly hugging a teacher who asked him not to do so. No little kiddies punished for hugging other little kiddies.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Patchouli said:


> That is pretty rude. All of the links it pulled up were stories about a high schooler expelled for repeatedly hugging a teacher who asked him not to do so. No little kiddies punished for hugging other little kiddies.


And then the one she provided was of a 14 year old.


----------



## firestick (Oct 19, 2008)

When my daughter was in grade one we got a notice from the school that she was going to be suspended for hugging a classmate contrary to school policy. No physical contact allowed. No hugging,no handholding etc. Needless to say, that was her last day in that school.
Bill


----------



## kendall j (Mar 30, 2007)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> And then the one she provided was of a 14 year old.


I am male thank you very much.

As for the age of the student, I fail to see where it matters. The overarching point here is that schools suspend and expel due to zero tolerance on ridiculous issues, yet seem to find it perfectly acceptable to not inform parents about reading material may be viewed as objectionable on similar grounds to their "oh so enlightened" zero tolerance policies.

I admit the search I presented had a bunch of stories about the kid from GA. It was a popular story on a lot of sites. He did not really have a leg to stand on once more facts came out.

However, the one I linked was in that same search and discounting it because the student was not "young enough" is just arbitrary. 

This one was in the same search a couple pages in http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/06/judge_rules_against_school_tha.html But I guess it is not good enough because the student wasn't hugging but touched the teacher while trying to comfort her. Expelling a kid over that is just soooo reasonable. Or maybe you can discredit that one because it was an evil charter school and not a wonderful public school with an asinine zero tolerance policy.

Or you can search for the 4 year old in TX that was suspended for hugging a teacher's aide for "inappropriate touching" because he made the mistake of nestling his face into her chest. Never mind the fact that many kids that age tend to do that when they hug a caregiver because they are looking for comfort. So yeah, let's suspend him. 

The point is that schools have policies that overreact and try to justify them for "reason x" when they are called on it, yet they have no problem acting offended when parents get upset over something that happens due to "reason x" and the try their best to act like the parents should have no say.

Originally I really was not trying to be snarky, I just was pointing out something I see a lot in an attempt to figure out some reasoning behind why the argument of "citations please" seems to happen so much when a person posts something you disagree with yet the idea behind what they posted is pretty well-known. However, I think I see why it offended you so. Your original comment asking another poster to cite a source when she dared to disagree with what appears to be your view of "the school is always right and the parents are always wrong" was meant to be snarky. I guess I have my answer on why people trot out the "citations please" argument oh so often.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

This book chosen to be a lesson of bullying and violence, while containing some suggestiveness is probably very mild in comparison to what students have access to today via the internet on their cell phones.

When I saw this I couldn't help but chuckle at how much it reminded me of 1975 only back then the homeroom teachers in our school system read bible verses and lead prayer , the science teachers stumbled through sex education as part of the health and reproduction portions of science and biology class and we students were quietly discussing the three or four dog eared copies of Dr. Rueben' copy of his 1969 paperback edition of "Everything You Want to Know about Sex* *but were afraid to ask".

The girl I was dating at the time and I spent a weekend at her house reading the copy of the book that was passed on to her by the kids of her preacher who had gotten hold of their copy from the junior high school crowd and she had to give it back to them to channel back to the 8th grade crowd.

While I am sure this parents shock regarding the reading material was genuine, he expectations of what his kids are voluntarily exposed to may be way off base.

40 years ago our health class was firing more fact filled statements back at the embarrassed and blushing science teacher than she was offering us because we had all read or were on the circulation list of an underground circulated sex education paper back geared to a high school reading level and our school was in a state considered a buckle of the Bible Belt. 

While I still remember much of the safe sex and health information that was covered in that dog eared paperback that was circulated among the student body covertly, all I remember of that teacher and her presentation was that putting a cover over an umbrella somehow was a safe sex practice. 

As far as the father being arrested for exceeding his time at the microphone, that would be decided by municipal ordinance and if he exceeded he would be asked by the police officer acting as sergeant at arms of the board meeting to relinquish the microphone to the next in line. When he refused he would be forcibly ejected and charged with disorderly conduct, resisting an officer and possibly assault depending on the degree of resistance.

A better strategy would have been 20 or 30 registered speakers each passing the "topic baton" of their rehearsed presentation as their 2 minutes came to an end.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

As a former school board member I've read this thread with interest. For those of you questioning the enforcement of a two minute speaking limit it is often the only way to run an orderly meeting in which every person who wants to speak gets that chance. Imagine that 100 people show up for the meeting and all want their say. At two minutes each you're already looking at close to 2 1/2 hours of speakers. Make it unlimited speaking time and you should be able to see how unweildy it becomes. In my experience most people are happy to be heard and can say what they need to in the time alloted. Some go over and are quick to wrap their comments up when asked. Others push the limits because the can and need to be asked to step away from the microphone more forcibly. We never had any arrested but we did have people who had the microphone turned off and taken away and escorted from a meeting.

As for those saying the parents should have a say, you're right. I think its great these people showed up to the meeting but that shouldn't be the start or end if their involvement. I would ask how many of them have attended other school board meetings. How many have voted in school board elections and could name their representative on the board. Responsibility for your child's education shouldn't start when the school does something you disagree with. It should be a daily, ongoing process.


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> A thiefdom?



Just a word I made up.. Meaning these local boards (planning, school, zoning or any others you can think of ) that have power to spend tax dollars with little to no over site.. Some even have the power to tax, which is dangerous..

They can demand that you flush your toilet at a certain time only and if you flush if any other time it's a fine/tax.. I've found that most long term members on these boards are wanna-be-lords. They truly don't care about the community, they only care about the "power" they think they have.. The ones that serve a term or 2 are fine, and the reason they leave is they get tired of the wanna-be-lords.. Most of those who serve long term are nothing but career politicians on a smaller scale..


----------



## MichaelZ (May 21, 2013)

The bible verse Ephesians 6:12 comes to mind: _For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. _


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> I could be wrong but my guess is that many of the people who are outraged by the treatment of the father who would not comply with being called to order and went over the time limit and was arrested and removed are not outraged by the treatment of the protesting students who were hosed down with pepper spray for simply sitting in protest and refusing to move.



So you are showing your prejudices towards others...You assume because some of us SUPPORT the Constitution and are willing to fight tooth and nail for it, that we only do so if it fits what you perceive as our agenda..

Thanks for showing us the truth..

Freedom is a double edge sword that swings both ways.. I may not always agree with what it cuts, but I know it cuts in the name of Freedom and Liberty.. This is something we are losing every moment all in the name of "it's for the children", "it's for your safety" and the list goes on..


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

mmoetc said:


> As a former school board member I've read this thread with interest. For those of you questioning the enforcement of a two minute speaking limit it is often the only way to run an orderly meeting in which every person who wants to speak gets that chance. Imagine that 100 people show up for the meeting and all want their say. At two minutes each you're already looking at close to 2 1/2 hours of speakers. Make it unlimited speaking time and you should be able to see how unweildy it becomes. In my experience most people are happy to be heard and can say what they need to in the time alloted. Some go over and are quick to wrap their comments up when asked. Others push the limits because the can and need to be asked to step away from the microphone more forcibly. We never had any arrested but we did have people who had the microphone turned off and taken away and escorted from a meeting.
> 
> As for those saying the parents should have a say, you're right. I think its great these people showed up to the meeting but that shouldn't be the start or end if their involvement. I would ask how many of them have attended other school board meetings. How many have voted in school board elections and could name their representative on the board. Responsibility for your child's education shouldn't start when the school does something you disagree with. It should be a daily, ongoing process.


Well I'm one of those people that have shown up and spoken at school boards and do vote in school board elections.. Even considered running, but I would have only replaced another fiscal conservative on the board if I had won, which wouldn't have changed anything..

When a school board is telling us that they are 3 million in the hole and have to raise taxes to cover it.. Then in the same meeting they decide to spend 1.9 million to redo one football field and create/rehab 4 other areas into athletic fields, there is something wrong.. When asked why they have money in 1 account, but are short in another.. Their only response was "it's different accounts". yet both accounts are supported by tax dollars...

There is a problem with these thiefdoms...


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

kendall j said:


> I am male thank you very much.


Sorry, I always assumed you were a woman.



kendall j said:


> As for the age of the student, I fail to see where it matters. The overarching point here is that schools suspend and expel due to zero tolerance on ridiculous issues, yet seem to find it perfectly acceptable to not inform parents about reading material may be viewed as objectionable on similar grounds to their "oh so enlightened" zero tolerance policies.


Actually I do think it matters because as Dixiegal said, originally, "young kids" which of course contributes to the ridiculousness of a suspension for hugging because there shouldn't be a sexual component in it.



kendall j said:


> However, I think I see why it offended you so. Your original comment asking another poster to cite a source when she dared to disagree with what appears to be your view of "the school is always right and the parents are always wrong" was meant to be snarky. I guess I have my answer on why people trot out the "citations please" argument oh so often.


You didn't offend me, I thought it was a weak attempt at snark. 
If you'd read more of my posts in the past you'd know that I've had problems with public schools and I actually pulled my daughter out to homeschool her for 4 years to get a better education than what the public schools could offer. 

What I don't buy is the idiotic line that the schools and teachers are always wrong. And that is the message that Dixiegal was promoting by implying that young kids everywhere are being suspended willy-nilly for hugging each other. 
When you make a wild generalization like that, back it up. 
Or be prepared to be asked for sources. Obviously it wasn't happening frequently or it would have been all over google and your initial search would have sufficed.


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> What I don't buy is the idiotic line that the schools and teachers are always wrong. And that is the message that Dixiegal was promoting by implying that young kids everywhere are being suspended willy-nilly for hugging each other .


Yeah I'm funny that way when it comes to liberal schools telling parents what they can or can't do with their kids I tend to side with parental rights  

'Young kids' was over the top I admit, we all sometimes tend to do that when passionate about a subject... even you with your artistic license with what I said, *''implying that young kids everywhere are being suspended willy-nilly for hugging each other''*
I'm sure with your keen attention to details you can admit you made way more out of what I said than I did. 

Still hugging is being banned in schools and young kids showing affection to each other will be a thing of the past. But no worries these kids can learn that rough sex is a great substitute through the schools reading programs. 


I wasn't aware there where forums rules about backing statements up.:shrug:


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

dixiegal62 said:


> Yeah I'm funny that way when it comes to liberal schools telling parents what they can or can't do with their kids I tend to side with parental rights
> 
> 'Young kids' was over the top I admit, we all sometimes tend to do that when passionate about a subject... even you with your artistic license with what I said, *''implying that young kids everywhere are being suspended willy-nilly for hugging each other''*
> I'm sure with your keen attention to details you can admit you made way more out of what I said than I did.
> ...


I didn't say there was a rule. You didn't back it up. Did anyone accuse you of breaking a rule?
Maybe you should read the book before deciding that it's promoting "rough sex".


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> I didn't say there was a rule. You didn't back it up. Did anyone accuse you of breaking a rule?
> Maybe you should read the book before deciding that it's promoting "rough sex".


 
I read the passage no thanks on the book. I've only read one of hers I enjoyed, I'm just not a fan of her work. I find them to be glorified Harlequin Romances.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

dixiegal62 said:


> Yeah I'm funny that way when it comes to liberal schools telling parents what they can or can't do with their kids I tend to side with parental rights
> 
> 'Young kids' was over the top I admit, we all sometimes tend to do that when passionate about a subject... even you with your artistic license with what I said, *''implying that young kids everywhere are being suspended willy-nilly for hugging each other''*
> I'm sure with your keen attention to details you can admit you made way more out of what I said than I did.
> ...


It's more a discussion rule than a forum one. If you propose a situation or argument than it is on you to back it up with proof.  Same for me or any of us. I can say whatever I like but it is just me saying it until I back it up.

When I was in High School 30 some years ago we had rules against PDA. Expelling high schoolers for breaking a rule about hugging each other would be really different to me than expelling a kid in grade school. In HS they just ban everything and it makes sense school should be about learning not PDA. Little kids are huggers and that it fine. 

The whole point of Ms. Picoult's book was that the behavior in it should not be normal and she wants to make parents especially aware of what is going on out there with their kids. The kids already know this stuff. We live in a time when 50 Shades of Grey is the hottest book out there and they are making a movie out of it. D you really think this socially conscious book is going to be a shocker for the average high schooler?


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

dixiegal62 said:


> I read the passage no thanks on the book. I've only read one of hers I enjoyed, I'm just not a fan of her work. I find them to be glorified Harlequin Romances.


No, Jodi Picoult is not a romance writer. She's a "ripped from the headlines/social commentary" writer. Not remotely a romance writer in any sense at all. Which books did you read that gave you that impression?


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

Patchouli said:


> The kids already know this stuff. We live in a time when 50 Shades of Grey is the hottest book out there and they are making a movie out of it. D you really think this socially conscious book is going to be a shocker for the average high schooler?


I sure the average kid wasn't shocked by the book but I still stand behind a parents right to say if they want their kids to read it. 50 shades of Grey may be the hottest book out there but does something being popular mean it should be considered a good thing? Meth is pretty popular. Most kids that age know about drinking and smoking too, does that mean we shouldn't protect them from it?


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> No, Jodi Picoult is not a romance writer. She's a "ripped from the headlines/social commentary" writer. Not remotely a romance writer in any sense at all. Which books did you read that gave you that impression?


Once again I have read her books, at least a few of them. I don't care for them except for the one I enjoyed I don't recall the name it was in an Amish setting. I find her writing style similar to the style of HR writers.


----------



## grandma12703 (Jan 13, 2011)

Also I think it is very sad to lump all kids into a group of "they know all about this stuff so why even try to protect and shield." That makes no sense to me. It just seems like today we are just getting more and more about anything goes. I think we would be a lot better off if as mothers we taught our boys that girls are something to be cherished and loved and our girls should know that the boys that respect them are the ones that should be respected and cared about back. It seems like we skip that lesson now days and go right to .... this is what you need to do if you have sex. Why not ask questions about love and that if he loves her then he will respect her and in respecting her and her body he is respecting himself? 

Sometimes I wonder if when we laugh or poke fun at what I just said.... why? 

Power to parents that try to protect! We just need to do it in a way that is productive not disruptive. I wonder if this couldn't have been solved through a meeting of the principal, superintendent, teacher and parent. Perhaps he tried that and this is the only way he saw to do it. Parents need to keep trying but make your 2 minute speech mean something without anger and loud voices. 
Talk in an educated way with things to back it up with statistics, etc.

I work with kids in the court system on an ongoing basis. I hear the argument that they all do it often. I hear it from parents as well. I just don't buy it. I think it is a cop out to not have to really deal with the things leading up to the event whatever that may be. Someone said earlier about being on a school board that parents need to be involved regularly not just one day on one thing. I agree and that is my point exactly. Teach in levels and at appropriate times. Don't just have the "sex" talk or the "drug" talk or the "drinking" talk when they are already at that point. That should have been years of talks going from a very young age.


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

I didn't like 50 shades of grey, but my dog sure did.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

My youngest is 19 and in college so she reads what she wants, but she pretty much did in high school as well. 

However, if her school assigned that book and I'd taken time to check it out (as I did last night) I would *very much approve* of her reading it. It certainly isn't glorifying teen sex at all, it was more about what girls will put up with to be socially accepted and have the "right" boyfriend. 

Which is an incredibly important thing to talk about with daughters rather than just wanting "kids to be kids" and denying for our own comfort that 14 year olds are thinking and talking about sex quite a bit with their peers if not doing it themselves.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

I find it interesting that schools and teachers complain that parents don't take responsibility in raising their kids and are expected to do the job for the parents, yet when a parent wants to do the right thing and be a part of raising their child, the schools want to limit what a parent can say...


----------



## grandma12703 (Jan 13, 2011)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> My youngest is 19 and in college so she reads what she wants, but she pretty much did in high school as well.
> 
> However, if her school assigned that book and I'd taken time to check it out (as I did last night) I would *very much approve* of her reading it. It certainly isn't glorifying teen sex at all, it was more about what girls will put up with to be socially accepted and have the "right" boyfriend.
> 
> Which is an incredibly important thing to talk about with daughters rather than just wanting "kids to be kids" and denying for our own comfort that 14 year olds are thinking and talking about sex quite a bit with their peers if not doing it themselves.


 
In all fairness Lisa I have not read the book. I did read the piece on here and it made me very uncomfortable. It was too explicit. The point can be made with a lot less explicit wording I believe.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

What happened to trying to be inclusive, embracing others differences? Where is the understanding and empathy?


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

simi-steading said:


> I find it interesting that schools and teachers complain that parents don't take responsibility in raising their kids and are expected to do the job for the parents, yet when a parent wants to do the right thing and be a part of raising their child, the schools want to limit what a parent can say...



I thought it was about the time limit and keeping order than what he had to say. Did I miss something? My husband and I were heavily involved with city politics in our AZ town and they were pretty strict about time limits and keeping order. On both sides of issues. You can see why: if one person gets to go over, then everyone else would and they'd be there forever. Usually these things are pretty strictly enforced.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

grandma12703 said:


> In all fairness Lisa I have not read the book. I did read the piece on here and it made me very uncomfortable. It was too explicit. The point can be made with a lot less explicit wording I believe.


I think the wording emphasized the degradation that the girl felt. It made me uncomfortable too, but I love my daughters a whole lot more than I love my own comfort level. We talked over their growing up years about a whole lot of things that my mom didn't talk to me about. I was uncomfortable as heck talking about some of them, but parents swallow their discomfort for the good of their kids.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> I thought it was about the time limit and keeping order than what he had to say. Did I miss something? My husband and I were heavily involved with city politics in our AZ town and they were pretty strict about time limits and keeping order. On both sides of issues. You can see why: if one person gets to go over, then everyone else would and they'd be there forever. Usually these things are pretty strictly enforced.


To me, limiting a person's time is limiting what they have to say...

Maybe the board should have said something like, "Sorry, but your two minutes are up. We are interested in what you have to say, so let's discuss this further after the meeting."

Instead, it sounds more like they didn't like his opinion so they got forceful.... Arresting a person for disruption is a chicken scat way to deal with it.. 

Funny the whole discussion was over a book about bullying, and yet the board bullied the guy with the police...


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> I think the wording emphasized the degradation that the girl felt. It made me uncomfortable too, but I love my daughters a whole lot more than I love my own comfort level. We talked over their growing up years about a whole lot of things that my mom didn't talk to me about. I was uncomfortable as heck talking about some of them, but parents swallow their discomfort for the good of their kids.


 
Are you assuming parents who prefer their kids don't get their sex education from school or books don't talk to them about sex? The subject comes up at a pretty early age on a farm.


----------



## grandma12703 (Jan 13, 2011)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> I think the wording emphasized the degradation that the girl felt. It made me uncomfortable too, but I love my daughters a whole lot more than I love my own comfort level. We talked over their growing up years about a whole lot of things that my mom didn't talk to me about. I was uncomfortable as heck talking about some of them, but parents swallow their discomfort for the good of their kids.


 
This is my point and I want you to know I appreciate the fact that you do have that relationship with your children. YOU talked to your girls. YOU being key here.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

dixiegal62 said:


> Are you assuming parents who prefer their kids don't get their sex education from school or books don't talk to them about sex? The subject comes up at a pretty early age on a farm.


Not at all. Sex is only a small part of it. Did you read my post about What girls will do to be accepted by boys and to be popular? That isn't covered by farm husbandry and the biological act of sex. But if you're comparing human sex to animal sex than I really wouldn't see why you'd have a problem with this depiction.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

simi-steading said:


> To me, limiting a person's time is limiting what they have to say...
> 
> Maybe the board should have said something like, "Sorry, but your two minutes are up. We are interested in what you have to say, so let's discuss this further after the meeting."
> 
> ...


In the absence of an example of someone supporting the book going over the time limit, you don't have much evidence to go on there. You may not like that time is limited but that's pretty much the way the world works. We do have to work within the system. This guy didn't and it didn't work out so well for him.


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> Not at all. Sex is only a small part of it. Did you read my post about What girls will do to be accepted by boys and to be popular? That isn't covered by farm husbandry and the biological act of sex.


Parents are the better judge at what and when their kids are ready for more serious talks about sex,love and respect. A teacher who may have 30+ kids in her class and not know each kid individually isn't. I prefer Ms Smith who may or may not share mine and my husband's values keep her opinions to herself.


----------



## grandma12703 (Jan 13, 2011)

My daughter and my son are both HS coaches. My daughter also being a teacher. I asked her and this is what she replied and she knows the book.

She/he had to know it would be a controversial assignment anyway, so why not send a permission slip and allow the parents to read it first or sign and release the liability from herself?

My perspective on what my DD says: Seems to me also it would have made things much simpler. They have to send permission slips home for field trips, etc.


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

^ I agree. Our kids' schools sent home a notice before the sex-ed talk. Besides the option to opt out, we were allowed to preview the movie. I previewed and opted in. I believe parents should have the final say with matters like this.

Some parents opted out, and those kids were taken to the library while the others saw the movie. While I'm sure the opted-out kids got the story later, I still appreciate the parents were given fair warning and the choice.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

mmoetc said:


> As a former school board member I've read this thread with interest. For those of you questioning the enforcement of a two minute speaking limit it is often the only way to run an orderly meeting in which every person who wants to speak gets that chance. Imagine that 100 people show up for the meeting and all want their say. At two minutes each you're already looking at close to 2 1/2 hours of speakers. Make it unlimited speaking time and you should be able to see how unweildy it becomes. In my experience most people are happy to be heard and can say what they need to in the time alloted. Some go over and are quick to wrap their comments up when asked. Others push the limits because the can and need to be asked to step away from the microphone more forcibly. We never had any arrested but we did have people who had the microphone turned off and taken away and escorted from a meeting.


I have no problem with the 2 minute limit. I served a short time on a local government council (appointed to finish a term, not elected to a full one) and those meetings were brutally long for no good reason. It's not the time limit that bothers me about this, it's the arrest. The man was in his seat, not still standing at the lectern. While he may have still been speaking up from his seat, once he was escorted out of the room that problem was solved. Unless something much worse happened that we are unaware of, there was no need to arrest him. Disorderly conduct is probably the charge most abused by police to arrest people who really don't need to be arrested.


----------



## my3boys (Jan 18, 2011)

dixiegal62 said:


> I sure the average kid wasn't shocked by the book but I still stand behind a parents right to say if they want their kids to read it. 50 shades of Grey may be the hottest book out there but does something being popular mean it should be considered a good thing? Meth is pretty popular. Most kids that age know about drinking and smoking too, does that mean we shouldn't protect them from it?


Exactly and thank you.

Each of my 3 spent time in public school. The youngest was there 1st-3rd grade and there was absolutely a "no physical contact" rule. No hugging or handholding. My son almost got into trouble in 2nd grade for helping a 1st grader with a stuck zipper on his jacket.

In third grade he came home asking me about stories and words he heard in class. Things I never heard until my later years in high school and sparingly then. Just because society is becoming more permissive doesn't mean it's healthy or make it right.


----------



## my3boys (Jan 18, 2011)

dixiegal62 said:


> Parents are the better judge at what and when their kids are ready for more serious talks about sex,love and respect. A teacher who may have 30+ kids in her class and not know each kid individually isn't. I prefer Ms Smith who may or may not share mine and my husband's values keep her opinions to herself.


Exactly. I didn't want the government schools telling my kids their version of sexual morality. Since we are evangelicals, we wanted them to understand the Biblical context of that relationship, not the humanist one. I trust God's reasons over human reasoning any day of the week.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> How kind. However, there still aren't any examples there of young children being suspended for hugging each other. Your search was a little weak. For future reference, it's best to quote the person you're being snarky to in order to get the best effect.



A quick google search turned up much more than just the following:

One was suspended for hugging his teacher, but i didnt have the time to sort through the search to find students suspended for hugging each other. Its banned at many schools, so somewhere in that search, they will be found.

Maryland School Bans Hugging: St. Mary's County Public Elementary Schools Ban Hugs, Birthday Party Invitations And Homemade Food 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/18/maryland-school-bans-hugging_n_2900992.html

Student suspended for sexual harassment after hugging teacher

http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/17/living/parents-student-suspended-sexual-harassment-hugging-teacher/

Matawan school district that decided that middle school children shouldn&#8217;t hug each other. &#8220;It&#8217;s not normal or natural,&#8221; said school superintendent John Jacobus. &#8220;If kids hug, then the next thing you know there having babies and we can&#8217;t have that happen in our school.&#8221;

http://weeklyworldnews.com/headlines/45769/hugging-banned-in-new-jersey/

North Carolina middle school bans hugging, students are up in arms

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...students-arms-article-1.1172953#ixzz31jOvzFUK


----------



## light rain (Jan 14, 2013)

If the advancement and proliferation of sexual education and explicit information being proffered in the public school system is suppose to be improving our kids lives, why do we have more bullying, more teenage pregnancy, more abortions, more drug use, and more depression resulting in more anti-depressants. And some of the drugs can actually increase the instance of suicide. 

I would like to see the schools concentrate on math, science, English, geography, and personal finance. Also music and art. It is not the school's responsibility or right to formulate our children's moral outlook. While the test scores continue to plummet, and we worry about the lack of discipline and safety in our schools for students and teachers, maybe we should at least investigate what directions other countries take to teach their kids. 

When our children or grandchildren need support, direction, or an honest but sometimes unwelcome answer it will come from family not the school system.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

A. I never said anywhere nor implied it that hugging was not banned in some schools.:smack
B. I've already seen the hugging teacher sources. We were talking about the supposed proliferation of young kids hugging each other suspensions. Have you missed the ensuing posts?


----------



## RiverPines (Dec 12, 2006)

And thus I homeschool!!!


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> A. I never said anywhere nor implied it that hugging was not banned in some schools.:smack
> B. I've already seen the hugging teacher sources. We were talking about the supposed proliferation of young kids hugging each other suspensions. Have you missed the ensuing posts?


I missed the word "proliferation" in those posts! Please point it out for me?


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Parents who feel the need to micromanage every aspect of their kids education (and lives), should indeed home school and stop wasting time, of those that want to teach or learn.

What, parents of 30, 300, or 3000 kids, should be polled for approval, on anything and everything, that might be considered "controversial"?

Exactly whose call would this be?

If you want total control over your child, public school was never the place for it.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

plowjockey said:


> Parents who feel the need to micromanage every aspect of their kids education (and lives), should indeed home school and stop wasting time, of those that want to teach or learn.
> 
> What, parents of 30, 300, or 3000 kids, should be polled for approval, on anything and everything, that might be considered "controversial"?
> 
> ...


How about teaching things that are NOT controversial? Parents should have control over what the public education teaches their kids, to think they shouldn't is just foolish. That's why we have pta's!


----------



## RiverPines (Dec 12, 2006)

plowjockey said:


> Parents who feel the need to micromanage every aspect of their kids education (and lives), should indeed home school and stop wasting time, of those that want to teach or learn.
> 
> What, parents of 30, 300, or 3000 kids, should be polled for approval, on anything and everything, that might be considered "controversial"?
> 
> ...


I'd rather have control over my kids than some bureaucrats in the school system. They are my responsibility. 
3 are also all grown and have done very well. The last 2 are in highschool. Oh and none of them are sheep. They were raised to have their own opinions and ideas, something the system has been killing in kids.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

JeffreyD said:


> How about teaching things that are NOT controversial? Parents should have control over what the public education teaches their kids, to think they shouldn't is just foolish. That's why we have pta's!


Darn near everything is "controversial" to somebody....


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

JeffreyD said:


> How about teaching things that are NOT controversial? Parents should have control over what the public education teaches their kids, to think they shouldn't is just foolish. That's why we have pta's!


Good point.

Teaching creationism in our schools, is a controversial subject.

So keep it out, right? 

The parents, of different religions, ethnic, or political backgrounds, ect, of 2000 kids, fighting over what they think the school should be teaching _their _kids, sounds pretty foolish and a waste of already shrinking school resources, IMO.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

plowjockey said:


> Good point.
> 
> Teaching creationism in our schools, is a controversial subject.
> 
> ...


No teaching evolution then either...i'm good with that, since it's only a theory anyway! Shrinking school resources? American taxpayers are paying more for schools than ever and the can't get enough money. Why is it that the more we spend on schools, the worse the drop out rate is? The worse our levels of knowledge have become? Were not even near the top 50 in the world, yet we spend 10,000 times more than other countries that constantly score higher then the US. Shrinking school resources......:smack


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

RiverPines said:


> I'd rather have control over my kids than some bureaucrats in the school system. They are my responsibility.
> 3 are also all grown and have done very well. The last 2 are in highschool. Oh and none of them are sheep. They were raised to have their own opinions and ideas, *something the system has been killing in kids.*


Nonsense, IMO.

Schools teach our kids. What kind of control, do you think they actually have over them? Ask my kids and "not much" would be the answer.

kids will read _nineteen minutes_ (if its not banned), and either be really shocked, somewhat shocked, not shocked at all, some maybe even amused,. possibly indifferent It's doubtful, that they will want to run out and have wild sex with, or kill somebody, unless it's something they were already planning to do.

My kids are are of high intelligence also and I try not to insult their's, by assuming they are not capable of reading something "controversial", without losing control, of what's right and wrong.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Someone posted earlier about thinking that permission should be needed to read Huck Finn and To Kill A Mockingbird. 
Why would you need parental permission for two of the greatest American classics ever written? No one ever answered about Shakespeare and he was one raunchy dude.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> Someone posted earlier about thinking that permission should be needed to read Huck Finn and To Kill A Mockingbird.
> Why would you need parental permission for two of the greatest American classics ever written? No one ever answered about Shakespeare and he was one raunchy dude.


Probably no one complained at a school board meeting.

My parents taught me to be_ independent_.

Some parents today, want their kids to be more _dependent_ than ever. Heck we'll do their laundry when they are in college.

How can our high school kids even discern the difference between right and wrong, let alone read something "racy", without turning into a pillar of salt? 

It's not about children learning - it's about parental control, IMO.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

plowjockey said:


> Probably no one complained at a school board meeting.
> 
> My parents taught me to be_ independent_.
> 
> ...



The book in question unglorifies teen sex in it's context. You'd think that would be a good thing.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> The book in question unglorifies teen sex in it's context. You'd think that would be a good thing.



Frankly, I doubt if anyone who was outraged, even read the book.

It was all about the outrage.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

> No one ever answered about Shakespeare and he was one raunchy dude.


Most of the people upset about this book probably don't know a lot of Shakespeare. That's how Jodi Picoult could get away with it...writing like Shakespeare! If the parents can't understand it, they can't get outraged, right? Well, I guess they still could...just depends on how bored they are at any given moment.


----------



## candyknitter (Apr 23, 2009)

When I was at school we were set the book "Catcher in the Rye". Our elderly form teacher raised her heckles saying it was disgusting and shouldn't be allowed. Our young English teacher who had chosen it said it was a modern classic and we were old enough to read it. 
I was 13 and thought it was the most boring book on earth and didn't even finish it. The point is sometimes the grown ups care a whole lot more that the kids, it was a book none of us enjoyed and we forgot it as soon as we put it down (sorry to any Salinger fans)


----------



## Tabitha (Apr 10, 2006)

plowjockey said:


> Parents who feel the need to micromanage every aspect of their kids education (and lives), should indeed home school and stop wasting time, of those that want to teach or learn.
> 
> What, parents of 30, 300, or 3000 kids, should be polled for approval, on anything and everything, that might be considered "controversial"?
> 
> ...


It was simple when I was a kid. Our schools emphasized real subjects. I can figure out things in my head that the guy who sells the tile needs a calculator. There was absolutely nothing controversial in the plan, and from what I see, I have not missed a thing. Poor kids nowadays.


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

I think some are missing the point. It's not so much what's in the books as it is parents having the right to decide if they feel it's appropriate for their kids. 

Many schools have Huck Fin and To Kill a Mockingbird on their ban list but parents can still allow their kids to read them at home, there's still a choice thank goodness. I do think if some parents found those books objectionable their kids should be given an alternate choice instead of banning them.

I don't think the book in question should be banned, if parents are ok with their kid reading it, all well and good, if they are against it there should be an alternate choice. Though it this had come up with a book I didn't approve with no other options I would have my kid take the F


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

dixiegal62 said:


> I think some are missing the point. It's not so much what's in the books as it is parents having the right to decide if they feel it's appropriate for their kids.
> 
> Many schools have Huck Fin and To Kill a Mockingbird on their ban list but parents can still allow their kids to read them at home, there's still a choice thank goodness. I do think if some parents found those books objectionable their kids should be given an alternate choice instead of banning them.
> 
> I don't think the book in question should be banned, if parents are ok with their kid reading it, all well and good, if they are against it there should be an alternate choice. Though it this had come up with a book I didn't approve with no other options I would have my kid take the F


So you think teachers should send home a permission slip about every book and short story they assign?


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> So you think teachers should send home a permission slip about every book and short story they assign?


Since there is a curriculum set up by the school district, and since they know what will be taught, it wouldn't be very hard to send every parent a copy of that curriculum to approve!


----------



## light rain (Jan 14, 2013)

Teachers practice discernment on all the material they assign to their students. I think a teacher would be very reluctant to assign material that portrays Islam in a negative light. 

If a subject is controversial regarding sex, religion, politics or violence I believe it would be wise for the parents to have a heads up notice and a choice in the matter. They are, after all, paying the bills and the TAXES.

Once the kids get out of HS and into a higher learning institution or into the military or the workforce, THEN the parents have no say, but not before.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

I know for sure that teachers class curriculum have been available to parents since 1997 when I asked my stepsons teacher to review hers and my mother said her and my father did the same during some parent /teacher meetings during my public school education to ensure that I was properly academically challenged to avoid boredom in class.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

JeffreyD said:


> Since there is a curriculum set up by the school district, and since they know what will be taught, it wouldn't be very hard to send every parent a copy of that curriculum to approve!


Then it should be up to the parent and student to keep up with which offensive material they don't want Junior to be horrified by that week and keep them home. The rest of the class shouldn't lose teaching time because particular students need protection from the curriculum.


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> So you think teachers should send home a permission slip about every book and short story they assign?


No I expect teachers to have enough common sense to realize when a subject could be considered controversial by some parents to err on the side of caution.


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> Then it should be up to the parent and student to keep up with which offensive material they don't want Junior to be horrified by that week and keep them home. The rest of the class shouldn't lose teaching time because particular students need protection from the curriculum.


 
How is a choice of 2 books causing the loss of teaching time?


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

dixiegal62 said:


> How is a choice of 2 books causing the loss of teaching time?


That's just two books for you. Other parents may be horrified by other books.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

dixiegal62 said:


> No I expect teachers to have enough common sense to realize when a subject could be considered controversial by some parents to err on the side of caution.


ANYTHING can be controversial to some parents.


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

JJ Grandits said:


> It is not about innocence. It is about approve reading from a school board. Where do we draw the line? Having a knowledge of sex and having sexual violence portrayed as required reading are two different things. What if they approved having students read the New Testiment? Since most students have attended church at least at sometime, would the liberals find that acceptable? Its the most popular book ever printed. Where do the schools find the power to take over the responsibilities of parents?


 Got to agree!

big rockpile


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> ANYTHING can be controversial to some parents.


 
And? It's their kid, their right as parents as far as I'm concerned. Or can parents only disagree when it's something you disagree with?


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

JJ Grandits said:


> It is not about innocence. It is about approve reading from a school board. Where do we draw the line? Having a knowledge of sex and having sexual violence portrayed as required reading are two different things. What if they approved having students read the New Testiment? Since most students have attended church at least at sometime, would the liberals find that acceptable? Its the most popular book ever printed. Where do the schools find the power to take over the responsibilities of parents?


Where is that 'post of the day' sign when you want it


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

dixiegal62 said:


> And? It's their kid, their right as parents as far as I'm concerned. Or can parents only disagree when it's something you disagree with?


That was spiteful. :Bawling:


----------



## 36376 (Jan 24, 2009)

There is an easy solution for this situation. Homeschool. Most homeschool kids can think for themselves, not just spout off what they were indoctrinated with. My son has been complimented several times that he has be better grasp on American politics than most adults they know. (coming from a public school educator, no less) And for those who think we indoctrinated him with our conservative beliefs, think again. He doesn't exactly agree with everything we believe and we have healthy, sometimes heated discussions.


----------



## susieneddy (Sep 2, 2011)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> ANYTHING can be controversial to some parents.


adding to your post:

ANYTHING can be controversial to some parents but not to their kids. 

Times have changed from when we were in school compared to when our kids are in school. Kids have learned how to grow while parents still live in the past at lot of the time


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

dixiegal62 said:


> And? It's their kid, their right as parents as far as I'm concerned. Or can parents only disagree when it's something you disagree with?


It is the parent's right to disagree. In this case that disagreement was expressed to the school board as it should have been. That doesn't guarantee the school board has to agree with them or acquiesce to their demands. If the board decides the book is suitable for the class and age and fits the curriculum the parents can live with the decision or remove their child from the situation. One of the great things about local representative democracy is you almost always have a voice and a forum to express it. One of the frustrating parts is that so do many others and their views might just prevail over yours.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

If a parent finds classroom material objectionable, it is my understanding that they can have their child excused from the classroom at that time but the kid will get 0 on that particular unit. 

It's been a while since my kids were in school but reading the book is only part of the equation. Classroom time is spent discussing the book and analyzing literary styles, etc so I think offering a second choice would make classroom discussion complicated and disjointed.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

light rain said:


> If a subject is controversial regarding sex, religion, politics or violence I believe it would be wise for the parents to have a heads up notice and a choice in the matter. They are, after all, paying the bills and the TAXES.


This is the problem.

It's not about learning, even learning something, that could possibility be "controversial". Are our kids that stupid, or weak minded, that they can't handle it?

It's about the parent's personal agenda and them getting_ bang for the buck.
_


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

When I went to school the English teacher had a second book for reading if the first book was considered objectionable to students or parents. It was a difference in base language with lots of base cussing, to no base language or any cussing.

The majority of the students in the class did the original book but two or three did the 2nd book. Students all were in the class during the main book discussion which did not include the language but the general ideas and personalities. At the end of the section, all students took a test on the book they read.

There was no penalizing the student for not reading the original book. They got the grade the received on the test for the book they read.

It is not a big hassle and it can be done, even way back in 1968 or 1969.


----------



## Wanda (Dec 19, 2002)

How many lesson plans should the teacher have for one class?


----------



## light rain (Jan 14, 2013)

plowjockey, I wish you would explain your last sentence. I have to go cut wood in a few minutes but by this evening, I should have some comments on your post.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

There are a bazillion time tested choices for required reading that offer plenty of discussion and scope. It is totally unneccessary to go to a book that was certain to have controversial aspects in language and graphic detail.

There is only one reason for this to have happened and that is because the teachers preferred to push their own agenda rather than to respect the children or their parents. It was more important to the teachers to "expand understanding of the modern world", which is their interpretation of honesty, than to teach respect for varying values by actually respecting them.

There is definitely too much confusion between talking about values and living them. And too much confusion between political correctness and respect.

And yes, such confusion can seriously damage a child before they have enough experience to know that the person at the head of the class room may be a blithering idiot who just happens to know more than a 9th grader but not more than most adults.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

light rain said:


> plowjockey, I wish you would explain your last sentence. I have to go cut wood in a few minutes but by this evening, I should have some comments on your post.


Sure.

By attending a public school, we expect someone else to educate our children, presumably as best as they can see fit, yet we want to personally control every aspect of that eduction, like they are teaching our child only and no one elses.

It takes time and effort (meaning money) to put each and every teaching material under a microscope, then present it to 1,000 of parents for a thumbs up/down, based on their own personal agenda, what ever that may be.

It's exchanging teaching for political correctness, IMO.

Our children need to be taught, to think and feel, not be totally controlled.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

plowjockey said:


> Sure.
> 
> By attending a public school, we expect someone else to educate our children, presumably as best as they can see fit, yet we want to personally control every aspect of that eduction, like they are teaching our child only and no one elses.
> 
> ...


Children feel things just fine. And they either think naturally or they don't- it can't be taught.

What you really mean is that they should be taught to feel and think in the way you choose as inherently right. And that parents who think wrongly should not be allowed to interfere. In other words, you mean to control what they feel and think by exposing them to your agenda while denigrating opposing views.

I would prefer to leave content alone as much as possible and concentrate on giving them the tools to use to make judgements for themselves at a later date. The teacher who gave me the best and most useful idea of my childhood was the one who gave a story about the difference between coincidence and consequence. That saved me from a lot of errors in making decisions.

I want to modify the above- I think that simple indoctrination of some basic principles like lying, stealing and murder is pretty generally wrong is a good idea. This will get them by until they are at a point in their understanding that they can see it's not so black and white.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

AngieM2 said:


> When I went to school the English teacher had a second book for reading if the first book was considered objectionable to students or parents. It was a difference in base language with lots of base cussing, to no base language or any cussing.
> 
> The majority of the students in the class did the original book but two or three did the 2nd book. Students all were in the class during the main book discussion which did not include the language but the general ideas and personalities. At the end of the section, all students took a test on the book they read.
> 
> ...


Back in 1978 some parents of our school system objected because our social studies teacher used a interview article with a leading researcher of third world cultures because "gasp" the article was originally published in an issue of Playboy.

Parents were giving the school board smacks for allowing "smut" to be used in the classroom and none of them even investigated to find out that while the teacher was indeed using a Playboy owned article that she applied for permission from the school board to order high school appropriate sanitized language copies of the article in pamphlet form from the publisher.

All the parents knew was if the material came from Playboy it was smut. Never mind that the magazine often includes in depth professional interviews and has means of offering those articles to schools sans the rest of the magazine.

My parents understood that the only thing "Playboy" on the article I saw was the bunny logo on the copyright information. I did get in trouble with my father a bit though as my teacher was also the wife of one of his penny poker card club friends.

After she told us that she had been approved to order the article pamphlets, I was one of the students who asked if we could get extra credit if we could get our hands on a copy of the magazine and start studying early. While she laughed at our high school junior humor, she told her husband, who told my father , who told me to stop acting like a Sweat Hog in class.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

I just started reading this book to see what all the outrage is about. I'm about 20% in and so far no sex at all...kind of disappointing, to be honest. There is a little bad language and some talk about abortion (but the mother decided to keep the baby). It's not particularly well written, but not bad either. I wouldn't mind if my kids read it, but I can see why some parents wouldn't want their kids to.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

where I want to said:


> Children feel things just fine. And they either think naturally or they don't- it can't be taught.
> 
> What you really mean is that they should be taught to feel and think in the way you choose as inherently right. And that parents who think wrongly should not be allowed to interfere. In other words, you mean to control what they feel and think by exposing them to your agenda while denigrating opposing views.
> 
> ...


It's not my agenda - it's the schools agenda - it's their job, to create a curriculum (agenda) to challenge kid's mind.

No, what I really mean is children that learn right from wrong, learn about _whatever_ god (or none), and learn what is real and what is not, about sex - in the home, will not be swayed or corrupted, by reading some novel at school.

At least my kids are capable, of distinguishing.

if others are not, it's the parents fault, not the school.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Frankly reading the number of people posting "party line" opinions without any apparent independent thought expressed makes me sure that many adults are incapable of telling the difference. I'm fairly sure that these people were not particularly wiser as children. The only chance that they ever had was engaging in the critical debate, which I am positive is not the goal of politically correct schooling.
And I tend to differ about it being the parent's fault. I have a sneaking feeling, not well thought out yet, that having no one telling you what is the proper opinion to hold, neither parents or teachers, forces a person to use the tools that an education provides to come to their own understanding. Any spoon fed opinions have to be overcome to get on to the place of independent thought. It would be faster not to put these roadblocks in the way considering how many people can't get over them at all.


----------



## light rain (Jan 14, 2013)

plowjockey, you say we send our kids to school to be taught "presumably as they see fit". Who is they? Is it the individual teacher in the classroom? Or the philosophical tenants of the district? Or just possibly, could it be, what the parents want their children to learn? When our kids were in school, I wanted them to learn 1) math 2) science 3)English 4)history 5)geography, and 6) social studies. And that was about the order of importance IMO. 

America's kids are falling far behind other countries. There are many reasons but one is the pursuit of the schools to do social engineering of the children instead of educating them. Let them teach the math, and all the other subjects that will help educate the children to compete in a global job market. I almost think that the schools divert time and resources to the social engineering activities because the success cannot be evaluated. No one can be held accountable.

You say our kids "need to be taught, to think and feel". NO. They already come to school with the abilities to think and feel. They need to be taught the information that will help them build one block on top of another and to make their own conclusions. I don't think children are weak-minded or adults either, but I also don't think anyone is immune from peer pressure or being handed a bill of goods. You say the opponents are practicing political correctness while I view the situation reversed. To me, the school board has their own standards of what is pc and in this instance it is vulgarity and violence. I will try to get a copy of this book and read it for myself and I'll honestly let you know what I think after reading it.


----------



## Wanda (Dec 19, 2002)

If parents rated schools by there math and English teachers, we would have students with better math and English skills! The ''average'' parent can name the coach of the sports team and the team ranking in the area. They would be hard pressed to name the science teacher or tell you how much science it takes to graduate. They (parents) will get up in arms at the drop of a hat, but it usually is the wrong hat.:ashamed:


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

Wanda said:


> If parents rated schools by there math and English teachers, we would have students with better math and English skills! The ''average'' parent can name the coach of the sports team and the team ranking in the area. They would be hard pressed to name the science teacher or tell you how much science it takes to graduate. They (parents) will get up in arms at the drop of a hat, but it usually is the wrong hat.:ashamed:


We had one of the best mathematics courses teachers in high school until she actually gave some of the star first string football players the grades they deserved before regional play offs and the coach and some parents pressured the school board to fire her or convince her to resign mid term so they could save their precious foolsball team with the assistance of her replacement.

Six years later I was happy to see her teaching university level when I was taking a physics class at night in pursuit of a degree required for advancement in my work field.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

light rain said:


> When our kids were in school, I wanted them to learn 1) math 2) science 3)English 4)history 5)geography, and 6) social studies. And that was about the order of importance IMO.


Fair enough. My high school kids know all that, at an average, white, middle class high school. But Is this all that matters? No literature, philosophy, Psychology,health class, shop class, art class, needed? These are classes to challenge kids mind, to learn about life, for something outside numbers, facts or locations.




light rain said:


> America's kids are falling far behind other countries. There are many reasons but one is the pursuit of the schools to do social engineering of the children instead of educating them. Let them teach the math, and all the other subjects that will help educate the children to compete in a global job market. I almost think that the schools divert time and resources to the social engineering activities because the success cannot be evaluated. No one can be held accountable.


I never bought into comparing our education system, to other countries, because the "playing field", is *never *level.

Our education scores are behind Lichtenstein? No kidding? Wonder what their inner city minority poverty/gang violence culture is?  Their unemployment rate is 2.5% mainly because 50% of their work force commutes from other surrounding countries.

The Right constantly bashes _head start_ and _no child left behind_, but other countries - with good math scores, embrace getting every kid into early learning.



> Nearly all 4-year-olds in the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Japan are enrolled in preschool, for example, compared to only 69 percent of American 4-year-olds, according to the report.


http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/06/17/report-us-drops-in-high-school-college-grad-rates





light rain said:


> You say our kids "need to be taught, to think and feel". NO. They already come to school with the abilities to think and feel. They need to be taught the information that will help them build one block on top of another and to make their own conclusions. I don't think children are weak-minded or adults either, but I also don't think anyone is immune from peer pressure or being handed a bill of goods. You say the opponents are practicing political correctness while I view the situation reversed. To me, the school board has their own standards of what is pc and in this instance it is vulgarity and violence. I will try to get a copy of this book and read it for myself and I'll honestly let you know what I think after reading it.


Sorry, but I don't agree.

Vulgarity and violence - like it or not, are part of our child's world. Pretending it does not exist, does nothing to help our children prepare to deal this reality.

FWIW
_
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn_ has been a "controversial" lightening rod, since it was first printed - in 1885.



> In general, the debate over Twain's _The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn_ has centered around the language of the book, which has been objected to on social grounds. Yielding to publisit her nowc pressure, some textbook publishers have substituted "slave" or "servant" for the term that Mark Twain uses in the book, which has been considered derogatory to African Americans.


As I sit here now, I still have the feeling of inspiration, I received as a young Indiana 6th grade,farm boy, reading this awesome classic, 45 years ago. the words (vulgar, politically incorrect, slang - whatever) meant nothing, to me. 

It was the story.

I'm truly glad my parents didn't feel a need to "opted out", based on their own agenda.

http://classiclit.about.com/od/huckleberryfinnfaqs/f/faq_huck_ban.htm


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Shrek said:


> ..... so they could save their precious foolsball team with the assistance of her replacement.
> 
> .


 "Foolsball is the DEVIL, Bobby Boucher!!!"


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

plowjockey said:


> The Right constantly bashes _head start_ and _no child left behind_,
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So you assume but in reality there was a whole lot of successful editing. Successful because you did not read anyone of the huge number of books that were pretty raw for class. Some parent somewhere made the schools more cautious and thoughtful about their choices and did not leave it to indivdual teachers judgement of varying quality. But you also assume that this unlimited exposure that you never had is responsible for your outstanding intellectual achievements. 

In truth, the process has always been on of tension between parents and teachers not to go too far. If the father in this case was representing a view the school board did not like, that does not mean that they have the right to dismiss his concerns with a two minutes bureaucratic tolerance level. They should have offer to met after the meeting to allow his input. The details of his arrest are unknown but the responsiblity is probably on both sides.


----------



## light rain (Jan 14, 2013)

Where I want to, I apologize if my "like" makes you wince. I know that sometimes, this is a very politically charged arena, and I don't want to, intentionally, cause anyone unhappiness. 

It is sad and true, that a lot of parents place a higher value on organized sports than math, science, English, literature... It suggests, IMO, that everyone is susceptible to peer pressure. Whether it results in positive or negative actions depends on the group doing the pressuring and the individual.

Shrek, the teacher that lost her job was most assuredly the victim of misguided values and bullying. For that to take place in a school district, a lot of people that disagreed with that course, chose to remain silent. I don't know how many years ago that this happened, but it would be interesting to hear the commentary by those football players and the teacher on how their lives progressed from then on. Sort of a Paul Harvey scenario. 

Lisa In Idaho, I am curious. Does your saying at the bottom of every post mean that if someone says something you don't agree with/like that they will need an ambulance? Just asking... :huh:


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

to


where I want to said:


> So you assume but in reality there was a whole lot of successful editing. Successful because you did not read anyone of the huge number of books that were pretty raw for class. Some parent somewhere made the schools more cautious and thoughtful about their choices and did not leave it to indivdual teachers judgement of varying quality. But you also assume that this unlimited exposure that you never had is responsible for your outstanding intellectual achievements.
> 
> In truth, the process has always been on of tension between parents and teachers not to go too far. If the father in this case was representing a view the school board did not like, that does not mean that they have the right to dismiss his concerns with a two minutes bureaucratic tolerance level. They should have offer to met after the meeting to allow his input. The details of his arrest are unknown but the responsiblity is probably on both sides.


Not sure why you are insulting me, I didn't claim to have superior intellect (I'm far from it), only making a point.

I disagree that there has "always" been tension between parents and educators, on what it taught. Never occurred once during any school i ever attended.

We also read Shakespeares _Macbeth_ is another one people just don't seem to get.



> _Macbeth_, when the Lady Macbethâs famous cry âOut, damned spot!â was changed to âOut, crimson spot!â


Really, now. Let's completely lose the meaning over one "dirty word". 

I'm glad I was raised at a Catholic School. They are considered "opened minded", by today's PC standards.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

light rain said:


> Lisa In Idaho, I am curious. Does your saying at the bottom of every post mean that if someone says something you don't agree with/like that they will need an ambulance? Just asking... :huh:


 I don't even know what to say to a question like that. Are you trying to accuse me of threatening people because I posted a silly ginger joke as my signature? Is this a sly attempt at a personal attack or do you really not get it? Just asking.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

plowjockey said:


> to
> 
> Not sure why you are insulting me, I didn't claim to have superior intellect (I'm far from it), only making a point.
> 
> ...


But that was not an insult- it's your premise that the freedom you experienced resulted in a superior education. If not, why bother commenting at all on the issue as it would be irrelevant. 

You say it never happened. But I suspect that, even if your Catholic school never had meetings raising parent's questions, they were guided by other school and government standards always. And I would not be surprised at the number of meetings privately held. You as a student would never be informed. Every Catholic school I ever heard of had a list of banned books given to it by the religion itself. So I suspect it happened but you did not know it happen, unlike the open process of public schools.

And, in some area '----' was considered as a display of poor manners, while I imagine the word had more common use in a religious school. They had their own shibboleths, which as a private school, were not open to question and certainly not to public debate. As a student, you would have thought it was like the air, always there and unnoticed.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

light rain said:


> Where I want to, I apologize if my "like" makes you wince. I know that sometimes, this is a very politically charged arena, and I don't want to, intentionally, cause anyone unhappiness.
> 
> :


Almost never- I believe in personal expression. it's the only way to see different ideas.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

where I want to said:


> But that was not an insult- it's your premise that the freedom you experienced resulted in a superior education. If not, why bother commenting at all on the issue as it would be irrelevant.
> 
> You say it never happened. But I suspect that, even if your Catholic school never had meetings raising parent's questions, they were guided by other school and government standards always. And I would not be surprised at the number of meetings privately held. You as a student would never be informed. Every Catholic school I ever heard of had a list of banned books given to it by the religion itself. So I suspect it happened but you did not know it happen, unlike the open process of public schools.
> 
> And, in some area '----' was considered as a display of poor manners, while I imagine the word had more common use in a religious school. They had their own shibboleths, which as a private school, were not open to question and certainly not to public debate. As a student, you would have thought it was like the air, always there and unnoticed.


Do doubt there has been scrutiny, it just does never had to come to micromanagement, which is so en vogue today.

Perhaps I'm a free thinker today, because my awesome parents, worked so hard to expand my mind, not control it. I have tried to do the same for my my kids. 

Everybody raises their kids as they see fit.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

plowjockey said:


> Do doubt there has been scrutiny, it just does never had to come to micromanagement, which is so en vogue today.
> 
> Perhaps I'm a free thinker today, because my awesome parents, worked so hard to expand my mind, not control it. I have tried to do the same for my my kids.
> 
> Everybody raises their kids as they see fit.


 When my daughter was 12 and homeschooled she had a friend from public school who had very strong view on things like political figures, gay marriage, etc. My daughter did too. They would argue about it and my daughter would ask where her friend got her information and how she formed her viewpoints. "From my parents" she would say. Even then my daughter was surprised that her friend just believed everything her parents told her. We encouraged our daughters to seek out information and form opinions on their own. They knew what ours were but they didn't always agree. Incidentally that same daughter swiped this book Nineteen Minutes from her 18 year old sister's room and read it when she was 12. You may be relieved to know that it didn't affect her morals at all except to help reinforce our teaching to be kind to other people, stand up to bullies and that being popular isn't worth sacrificing your identity for.


----------



## light rain (Jan 14, 2013)

You may be right, Lisa, I'm just too dumb to get the humor. In fact, until I discussed this saying with my husband a couple of months ago, I only knew ginger was a spice... :hrm:


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

light rain said:


> You may be right, Lisa, I'm just too dumb to get the humor. In fact, until I discussed this saying with my husband a couple of months ago, I only knew ginger was a spice... :hrm:



Many words have alternate meanings. Ginger can be a spice or a redhead, gay can mean happy or gay and murse could mean male nurse or manbag - just as a few examples. 

The internet has given us a whole bunch of new terminology and slang.


----------



## kendall j (Mar 30, 2007)

Wanda said:


> How many lesson plans should the teacher have for one class?


So, differentiating is only OK when it is for certain feel good liberal reasons? Because I can think of tons of crap I've had to alter my plans for over the years that were in the name of "tolerance" or some other bull excrement. 

Having an alternative reading assignment is not inconveniencing the teacher in a case like this any more than it is for any of the other junk reasons for differentiation of assignments, grading, etc. that come down from "on high" administrators who wouldn't know education if it beat them over the head.


----------



## Wanda (Dec 19, 2002)

kendall j said:


> So, differentiating is only OK when it is for certain feel good liberal reasons? Because I can think of tons of crap I've had to alter my plans for over the years that were in the name of "tolerance" or some other bull excrement.
> 
> Having an alternative reading assignment is not inconveniencing the teacher in a case like this any more than it is for any of the other junk reasons for differentiation of assignments, grading, etc. that come down from "on high" administrators who wouldn't know education if it beat them over the head.




I asked a simple question as to how many teaching plans should be used for one class. When other parents do not care for your plan B, what then?


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

plowjockey said:


> Do doubt there has been scrutiny, it just does never had to come to micromanagement, which is so en vogue today.
> 
> Perhaps I'm a free thinker today, because my awesome parents, worked so hard to expand my mind, not control it. I have tried to do the same for my my kids.
> 
> Everybody raises their kids as they see fit.


Free thinking is not just opposing another more generally held view point but it is deriving a position from independent understanding. Can you give me an example of the free thinking you mean? Because I've noticed more of simply being in a less popular camp rather than original rationale in your posts.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

I'm not sure it's feasible to come up with lesson plans for every possible scenario and ultimately it might be better if parent object to standard curriculum just homeschooled instead. 

Does that not teach children that if they don't like the rules or what is required of them, they can complain loudly and the world will change for them? I think I've had the dubious honour of working with a few of those.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

dixiegal62 said:


> Parents are the better judge at what and when their kids are ready for more serious talks about sex,love and respect. A teacher who may have 30+ kids in her class and not know each kid individually isn't. I prefer Ms Smith who may or may not share mine and my husband's values keep her opinions to herself.


Why would you send your kids to public school if you are that worried about what the teacher might share that conflicts with your values?


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

where I want to said:


> Free thinking is not just opposing another more generally held view point but it is deriving a position from independent understanding. Can you give me an example of the free thinking you mean? Because I've noticed more of simply being in a less popular camp rather than original rationale in your posts.


Sure, go back and read most any one of my 10,000+ posts on the HT discussion forums.

I rarely offer an opposing view, without the informed rational, for doing so.

I'm in the less popular camp for obvious reason, I don't really have the bible, Fox news,or even MSNBC to influence my decision process.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

kendall Having an alternative reading assignment is not inconveniencing the teacher in a case like this any more than it is for any of the other junk reasons for differentiation of assignments said:


> Last I heard, it isn't a matter of just reading a book and handing in a report. Classroom time is spent analyzing the material read. How does a teacher divide a classroom in such a way that certain students will not be impacted by the discussions of the majority of the students unless they are completely removed from the classroom?


----------



## kendall j (Mar 30, 2007)

Wanda said:


> I asked a simple question as to how many teaching plans should be used for one class. When other parents do not care for your plan B, what then?


I'm just saying it already happens for a whole bunch of other reasons. How are the objections of these taxpaying parents any less legitimate?


----------



## kendall j (Mar 30, 2007)

wr said:


> Last I heard, it isn't a matter of just reading a book and handing in a report. Classroom time is spent analyzing the material read. How does a teacher divide a classroom in such a way that certain students will not be impacted by the discussions of the majority of the students unless they are completely removed from the classroom?


We already have to for a whole lot of other reasons. You can utilize reading groups or many other options. What these parents are requesting is just another form of differentiation which is already happening anyway.


----------



## kendall j (Mar 30, 2007)

Patchouli said:


> Why would you send your kids to public school if you are that worried about what the teacher might share that conflicts with your values?


Because some people may not have that option. Everyone is not financially able to homeschool. Besides, they should be expected to. Last I heard, they were the ones funding the public schools regardless of whether they want to or not. Couple that with the fact that school attendance is compulsory and you have your answer as to why people send their kids to school yet feel the need to object to what is being taught at times.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

kendall j said:


> We already have to for a whole lot of other reasons. You can utilize reading groups or many other options. What these parents are requesting is just another form of differentiation which is already happening anyway.



Yes and we have raised a whole generation to believe they are so special that have hit the job market that believe if they don't want to do the job they were hired for, they have to whine, moan or complain and somebody will exempt them.


----------



## light rain (Jan 14, 2013)

What a crock! Our daughter has put in 10 days straight or more (numerous times) and our son leaves for work before the sun comes up and is often coming home after the sun has set. Just because we, as parents, decided to monitor what they were being taught, doesn't mean we did not encourage good/above average work ethics. Our goal, in the last 30 some years, was to raise people who had the education and the desire to be successful and contributing members of society. I would have been just as happy if they had taken a job outside white collar sector if they could make a decent living and could grow old without the fear of poverty. 

Now, do out kids agree with our views on education and what should be allowed or promoted. No. But, they have a right to their opinions. I just hope I live long enough to see a change of their outlook or I hope that I can, a some point, be able to laugh, about the differences. :whistlin:


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

wr said:


> Last I heard, it isn't a matter of just reading a book and handing in a report. Classroom time is spent analyzing the material read. How does a teacher divide a classroom in such a way that certain students will not be impacted by the discussions of the majority of the students unless they are completely removed from the classroom?



Talking about a book overall in class does not have the same nastiness factor as reading the explicit words in the book.

It worked very well in 1968 or 1969 and could work now just as well.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

light rain said:


> What a crock! Our daughter has put in 10 days straight or more (numerous times) and our son leaves for work before the sun comes up and is often coming home after the sun has set. Just because we, as parents, decided to monitor what they were being taught, doesn't mean we did not encourage good/above average work ethics. Our goal, in the last 30 some years, was to raise people who had the education and the desire to be successful and contributing members of society. I would have been just as happy if they had taken a job outside white collar sector if they could make a decent living and could grow old without the fear of poverty.
> 
> 
> 
> Now, do out kids agree with our views on education and what should be allowed or promoted. No. But, they have a right to their opinions. I just hope I live long enough to see a change of their outlook or I hope that I can, a some point, be able to laugh, about the differences. :whistlin:



Mine work hard too and all three make very good livings but my industry if full of little gems who are allergic to OT, can't quite grasp the idea that YouTube is for breaks and lunch and quite often respond to requests with, 'no.' I wonder where the learn that?


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

AngieM2 said:


> Talking about a book overall in class does not have the same nastiness factor as reading the explicit words in the book.
> 
> It worked very well in 1968 or 1969 and could work now just as well.


 I thought wr was talking more about a situation in which most of the class read Book A and a few kids read Book B. How to discuss the reading assignments in a group situation if the class read different books? But I could be wrong. I've read the book. The sex scene in question in no way glorifies sex, in fact it does the opposite. If you don't WANT your kids having sex, you shouldn't have a problem with this book. Or do people just not want their kids to know about sex?


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

AngieM2 said:


> Talking about a book overall in class does not have the same nastiness factor as reading the explicit words in the book.
> 
> It worked very well in 1968 or 1969 and could work now just as well.



I have yet to hear of any classroom time dedicated to strong language in a book assignment but I know parents that are also strongly against Harry Potter books being used for assigned reading and yet not teacher I know gas emphasized witchcraft. It is used to initially to discuss a young fellow who doesn't fit in. 

My point was only that a teacher gears a lesson plan for specific subject matter and it's pretty tough to work around kids who can't or won't work in the same material.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

The only concession the teacher made was to have a separate test for the other book in the case I cited. And the couple of students not reading the main subject did listen in class. Hearing the talk is different than having to read the detailed words.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

kendall j said:


> Because some people may not have that option. Everyone is not financially able to homeschool. Besides, they should be expected to. Last I heard, they were the ones funding the public schools regardless of whether they want to or not. Couple that with the fact that school attendance is compulsory and you have your answer as to why people send their kids to school yet feel the need to object to what is being taught at times.


We homeschooled ours from kindergarten to graduation. It cost us some in lifestyle choices since only one worked but we made it. I have known single mothers with jobs who homeschooled and people whose only income was disability. If you want to do it you can. What most parents want is to send their kids to public school and then nitpick and fuss about everything the public school teaches. The teacher can not teach to make every single parent happy. Ultimately you are responsible for your child's education.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

AngieM2 said:


> The only concession the teacher made was to have a separate test for the other book in the case I cited. And the couple of students not reading the main subject did listen in class. Hearing the talk is different than having to read the detailed words.


I don't think parents understand what a difficult position they put their children in. My parents were deeply religious and fanatical and they would read every book before me and my mother would heavily edit anything she disagreed with in my reading assignments. She also wouldn't allow me to see some things and I had to be sent to the library while the other kids watched things she disagreed with. It was humiliating and frustrating and I really hated them for doing it to me. If it matters so much to a parent that their child be kept separate from the other kids in what they are learning they should send them to a private school or homeschool them.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

The other side of that is good to have parents that back a student not wishing to read the filth that sometimes passes as "literature". 

In the case that I know of the student was the one that brought it to the parent's attention and they backed the student. I'm not sure of the other two or three's conditions.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

AngieM2 said:


> The other side of that is good to have parents that back a student not wishing to read the filth that sometimes passes as &quot;literature&quot;.
> 
> In the case that I know of the student was the one that brought it to the parent's attention and they backed the student. I'm not sure of the other two or three's conditions.


 Like Shakespeare? Steinbeck? Nathaniel Hawthorne?


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

AngieM2 said:


> The only concession the teacher made was to have a separate test for the other book in the case I cited. And the couple of students not reading the main subject did listen in class. Hearing the talk is different than having to read the detailed words.



Maybe it's different in the US but our kids are marked on discussion, various assignments relating to various matters regarding the book and final exams included questions relating to everything learned within the year. I can't think of any time a teacher went into depth on profanity or violence but we did talk about simile, hyperbole and such. 

It would be like sitting in a classroom discussing Othello when 5 students read Romeo and Juliet. 

There were various reading assignment that students were allowed a certain amount of latitude and only book reports were required but certain material was studied way more in depth.


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

wr said:


> Maybe it's different in the US but our kids are marked on discussion, various assignments relating to various matters regarding the book and final exams included questions relating to everything learned within the year. I can't think of any time a teacher went into depth on profanity or violence but we did talk about simile, hyperbole and such.
> 
> It would be like sitting in a classroom discussing Othello when 5 students read Romeo and Juliet.
> 
> There were various reading assignment that students were allowed a certain amount of latitude and only book reports were required but certain material was studied way more in depth.


 Pretty much the way it's done here too. But since both Othello and Romeo and Juliet contain lewd sexual references, probably better include a third option.


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> Pretty much the way it's done here too. But since both Othello and Romeo and Juliet contain lewd sexual references, probably better include a third option.



Ah yes, Romeo & Juliet, 2 teens who commit suicide.. Great thing to teach your kids who don't know how to deal with their emotions and hormones..

Just like the Wizard of Oz.. A story about 2 women fighting over a pair of shoes and how the men in their lives suffer the consequences.. 

:nana::nana::nana::nana::nana::nana:


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

LisaInN.Idaho said:


> Like Shakespeare? Steinbeck? Nathaniel Hawthorne?


Maybe not all Shakespeare, Steinbeck or Hawthorne, although I know of no Hawthorne that is that graphic. I suppose your mean people objecting to the Scarlet Letter.

But trotting out every instance of rather extreme controversy does not mean that parents have no right to object to various poor choices. There trends to be an arrogance in public education that comes from the inbred nature of schooling. Educators pretty much deal with people who by design know less than they do- children. They then become accustomed to being unopposed and too authoritarian to those outside of school. And way too impatient at disagreement from outside. And very resistent to accomodation, calling it ignorant interfering. 

Schooling has customers too, however much that is not the way teachers wish to think of it, and those customers include parents. Who may not always understand but should always have a hearing.


----------



## kendall j (Mar 30, 2007)

wr said:


> Yes and we have raised a whole generation to believe they are so special that have hit the job market that believe if they don't want to do the job they were hired for, they have to whine, moan or complain and somebody will exempt them.


No. Schools that reward them with an A average just for showing up and have no concept of discipline are what has caused that. 

Work ethic and monitoring content are 2 entirely separate concepts. Kids are lazy because our schools and many parents allow them to be. You can mike the kids work for their grades while still adhering to the wishes of the parents as far as content is concerned the majority of the time.

Come look at a school in NC where the inmates are running the asylum in terms of classroom discipline because administrators have no testicular fortitude and you will see what I mean.


----------



## kendall j (Mar 30, 2007)

Patchouli said:


> We homeschooled ours from kindergarten to graduation. It cost us some in lifestyle choices since only one worked but we made it. I have known single mothers with jobs who homeschooled and people whose only income was disability. If you want to do it you can. What most parents want is to send their kids to public school and then nitpick and fuss about everything the public school teaches. The teacher can not teach to make every single parent happy. Ultimately you are responsible for your child's education.


We homeschool as well, but I am open enough to realize not everyone is as fortunate as I am. Some people just can't do it. They should not have the right to parent their children curtailed "for the good of society".


----------



## snowlady (Aug 1, 2011)

I agree that this generation has little work ethic. The school I work at scheduled the last of the finals and graduation on the same day. Does that tell you they will graduate everyone regardless of the final grade? Parents need to expect more of their children. Our daughter HATED her honors English teacher Sophomore year. We told her she was not dropping the class a few weeks in but we would re-evaluate at the semester. As a senior, guess who her favorite teacher is...and guess who is majoring in English next year...
If there is a problem with the content of the books the teacher assigns then talk to the teacher, calmly. I would think the tests, assignments and classroom discussion are about the English/literature aspects of the book not the sex. The teacher is probably trying to pick a book most of the kids will actually read. I am the library director at a very small school and kids just won't read.


----------

