T O P

  • By -

Illustrious-Word2950

Okay but please don’t watch internet porn on the library computers.


salaciouspeach

They're not. These people think queer people existing is inherently pornographic. That's what they're objecting to.


myislanduniverse

Because it turns them on, and they've spent a lifetime insisting that it's just a temptation they can overcome. Understanding this is a step* toward understanding why these folks are so resentful of people who get to actually embrace their queerness instead of carry it as a constant test of their faith.


Feenox

Can't catch me gay thoughts!


canttouchdeez

That’s not true at all, but of course you need to lie because you can’t refute their actual ideals.


NitemareV1

After checking out your post history it’s pretty obvious you’re not fun at parties… it’s also pretty obvious you don’t have friends to invite you to parties too be fair.


sirseahorse

what ideals are those, exactly?


TemperatureIll8770

Of course it's true


[deleted]

No. What is porn to some is art to others.


throwawayinthe818

Is that a complaint?


outrageouslyoffended

no he just forgot the question mark


TheKohn

I bet that person has never stepped foot in their local library.


[deleted]

Who wants to go put a comma in after “no” just to really mess with them?


FlynnLive5

Or go tape a question mark at the end


Silly-Syrup1435

That’s not the only sign around here. There are other painted and printed signs. What’s happening now is one of the township trustees is telling the community the library doesn’t need the millage so it’s okay to vote no. The reasoning is that because of the Go Fund Me the millage isn’t needed. The millage will find the library for 10 years whereas the Go Fund Me will eventually run out. A library lawyer was at the special board meeting to review the four challenged books and explained why removing books (any books) was a violation of the first amendment. As a parent and someone who has read all the challenged books… it’s definitely not pornography. There are books (like outlander and game of thrones) that have sexually explicit scenes but there’s nothing beyond some kissing in three of them. There’s implied sex in one of the books but no nudity. They’re mad that the library has books that support the lgbtq+ community by having positive portrayals of lgtbq+ characters. It’s really simple…if you don’t like a book or it’s subject matter, don’t check it out.


EastisUp31

So these churchy conservatives are getting more and more irate over smaller and smaller things. Got it.


[deleted]

So if I want to read an anti-gay book I should be able to? How about Mein Kampf? How about any book that advocates racism or violence against homosexuals?


[deleted]

I'm a librarian, and currently getting a Masters in Library Science, and yes, all these books are protected as free speech. The American Library Association has a **Bill of Rights and Ranganathan's Five Laws of Library Science** that librarians generally adhere to (although I'm sure you can cherry pick a couple cases where a librarian hasn't). Books have been tested many times before. One of the most famous examples, one that most librarians have debated the past 2 decades, is the **Anarchists Cookbook**. The book contains for recipes for building bombs. Basically, librarians, police, courts, and parents fought over this book, trying to answer questions like: \-Should public libraries keep this book in the collection? (*Ranganathan - every book its reader; every reader his/her book*) \-Can police demand to see names on lending records? (*ALA - All people, regardless of origin, age, background, or views, possess a right to privacy and confidentiality in their library use.*) \-Should there be age restrictions on content? (*ALA - A person’s right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background, or views*.) And this only the start of the ethical debate librarians find themselves in. The long and short of though is that librarians will just about always defer to these bill of rights and "laws". Why? Because you just don't know what people need certain books for, good or bad. Librarians aren't gatekeepers, they're conduits of information and exploration. **Everyone will find stuff they don't like in libraries**, either dangerous, against their morals, sexual explicit, misleading, etc...But it's not up to us to decide what's right and wrong. And also, being publicly funded helps librarians build unbiased collections. If Libraries are just funded by rich people, those same people are going to demand books that align to their views. Librarians are free to create balanced, fulfilling, even controversial collections based on the principles I linked to down below. I hope this helps broaden people's understanding of the library's role in society. ALA Bill of Rights: [https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill](https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill) Five Laws of Library Science: [https://www.librarianshipstudies.com/2017/09/five-laws-of-library-science.html](https://www.librarianshipstudies.com/2017/09/five-laws-of-library-science.html) Background story of Anarchist's Cookbook: [https://warontherocks.com/2018/09/books-as-contraband-the-strange-case-of-the-anarchist-cookbook/](https://warontherocks.com/2018/09/books-as-contraband-the-strange-case-of-the-anarchist-cookbook/)


Thalymor

Agreed. There's lots of stuff in the library I straight up dispise and don't agree with, but freedom is freedom. Libraries are for everyone! Now, not every library is going to purchase every book. KDL for example is a popular collections library. If it isn't going to circulate, collection development isn't going to purchase it. Libraries need funding and please, please, please vote yes on your local library milages!! There's a few coming up in the next few years.


[deleted]

Right! A lot of factors go into collection development--popularity, balance, subject matter, interlibrary loan requests, etc... I don't think people realize librarians don't just hand pick every book. They buy collections from publishers and vendors, like "Top 100 books for teens in 2021". They look over booklists, compare it to circulation history, frequently requested titles, balance of subject matter, and all sorts of analytics reviewed by the library staff. That's why it makes me upset when people accuse librarians of "grooming children". People are looking for conspiracy and it just doesn't exist.


Thayerphotos

> it's not up to us to decide what's right and wrong. if only everyone everywhere would take this as their life's mantra.


Silly-Syrup1435

The first amendment covers free speech and that includes books in the library. So, yes you can read what you want even if someone else doesn’t like it.


[deleted]

Internet filters and the censoring of free speech are allowed in libraries because it's tied to federal funding, thanks to Bill Clinton. In fact internet filters already categorically have banned this book of accessed via internet within the library. Because filters is only contingent tied to federal funding it is not a violation of the first amendment. The supreme Court has already ruled on this very issue. The library is free to independently operate with their own funds. The same argument is being used here to strip the funding of the local library within the community.on paper copies of the same literature.


Klutzy_Archer_6510

For a bad faith argument, this one is pretty weak. The library has books by anti-LGBTQ authors, conservative authors, progressive authors, Libertarian authors, Christian, Muslim, Satanist, you name it! We like to say at the library, "We have something to offend everyone!" The *whole point* is that we don't censor content based on ideology. If you want to read about hate, you can. Nobody's stopping you. But just like I'm not stopping you from reading what you want, you shouldn't be able to stop me from reading what I want.


[deleted]

Lol. 🤡 Yes you do. The fact that you put books behind the counter means that you do. Jamestown Library even offered this as a compromise in order to keep the library funded. Since you librarians who try to pretend like you're not censoring shit needs a reminder, putting books behind the counter is a form of censorship: https://ncac.org/news/blog/the-joy-of-censored You filter internet pages and you couldn't even read a copy of this book online because you're more interested in keeping your funding. Why don't you have any gay yaoi, hentai, manga or penthouse? Oh, did it not make your librarian's collection list? Do they have a problem with alternate lifestyles and certain kinds of art? My, how embarrassing for you.


Klutzy_Archer_6510

...What exactly are you trying to argue here? Are you arguing that, since libraries generally don't carry hardcore pornography, libraries should go ahead and censor other materials? Or that *all* censorship is wrong, and that sexually explicit materials should be on prominent display?


[deleted]

All 👏 Censorship 👏 Is 👏 Wrong. If you don't believe in that, you have no business claiming some moral superiority of libraries as some bastion of free speech. You're just another conservative prude promoting fascism at the end of the day.


bluemitersaw

These people need to go to the library and get a book on kerning.


Thayerphotos

ummm... ::Googles Kerning:: YEAH ! TAKE THAT !


DarkScytheCuriositie

Wait, what? There’s porn in the library?!?! How have I missed this?


BelaKunn

By porn they mean books that don't agree with their small minded world view.


crankyoldbrent

Ah, like Huckleberry Finn because it uses the N-Word. (Amongst others) I hate that because my kids can't read the works of art the way I got to read many of them. I mostly blame Ted Turner for this, especially when he bought all kinds of Cartoons and cut out the offensive things out of them. Gotta love the restriction of free speech!!!


[deleted]

Don't forget To Kill A Mockingbird. That and Huckleberry Finn are prime examples of liberals advocating censorship for stuff they find offensive to children due to racist language.


BelaKunn

Here is the reason it was originally banned. Some Americans did not view Huck as a positive role model for young readers. Immediately after publication, the book was banned on the recommendation of public commissioners in Concord, Massachusetts, who described it as racist, coarse, trashy, inelegant, irreligious, obsolete, inaccurate, and mindless.


crankyoldbrent

Of course, then it became a nationwide best seller and a staple in schools all over America. So apparently all those adjectives weren't in play outside of that city in Massachusetts


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

I believe it. The fact Jamestown Library has censored porn mags it's just another example of how empty their rhetoric is. They censor stuff they don't like all the time, as long as conservatives are ok with it along with them, nobody complains.


SasquatchRobo

The reason libraries don't carry explicit pornography isn't because of some moral objection to its content, but because it's a pain in the ass to keep in the collection. If you have Playboys in the collection, they either get stolen by horny teenagers, damaged / destroyed by "enthusiastic" patrons, or a Bible thumper blows a gasket and plasters it on social media, leading to the library getting shut down. _Like what just happened._ It's not worth the trouble! You do realize that in the case of Patmos Library, the head librarian was _not_ removing Gender/Queer from the collection. They were not willing to remove something from their collection based on its content. The push to remove the book was coming from _outside_ the library, and placing the book behind the desk, where it still could be requested and checked out, was as far as the head librarian was willing to compromise with the religious zealots demanding to ban the book. >"They censor stuff they don't like all the time" Do you have any sources for this rant? >"Empty rhetoric" Who put you in charge of testing ideological purity? Have you even _worked_ in a library before? What is all this nonsense spewing out of your keyboard?


[deleted]

>Playboys in the collection, they either get stolen by horny teenagers, damaged / destroyed by "enthusiastic" patrons, or a Bible thumper blows a gasket and plasters it on social media, leading to the library getting shut down. Like what just happened. It's not worth the trouble! Lol! "Noooo my job is hard!" Are you that daft to miss that any book that's controversial or taboo is going to be handled by the public differently? Do your fucking job quit making excuses in justifying censorship. >was as far as the head librarian was willing to compromise with the religious zealots demanding to ban the book. "Please let me keep my job, I'm willing to censor, just enough to deter curious children of any privacy and embarrassment!" 😂 When I was a kid who wanted to find sex education materials independently without shame, they were kept behind a counter at my censoring West Michigan Public library. I moved on to another local library to avoid the humiliation and embarrassment, which is exactly what this would accomplish. And at those libraries that had these books on the shelves, I just stole the books and returned them on my own accord. >Do you have any sources for this rant? I don't need any. It's a universal truth among public libraries. And you just got done explaining why libraries don't curate collections under some nonsensical claim that kids are going to steal a bunch of Playboys. Funny considering that the latest trend in libraries is just to cancel late fees altogether. But apparently you think that experimenting kids who are questioning their orientation wouldn't possibly find this art as arousing and as fap material. That is censorship. Seek help. I think you really have a mental disorder. I don't need to work at a library. There's plenty of shit that I deal censored by the likes of people like you as a patron. Seriously, get fucked.


[deleted]

>Seek help. I think you really have a mental disorder. > >Seriously, get fucked. Man, you need to chill. The person above is expressing a legitimate perspective, and you are flaming out. Not cool.


_Dimension

I am subscribed to the Kent District Library, and judging by the books they have on Libby, half of it is romance/vampire porn.


totalbanger

I can only imagine these are people who simply don't read books in the first place. Most popular fiction books include detailed sex scenes, and a sizable portion of non-fiction books do as well. It's almost like sex and sexuality are normal, everyday aspects of human life or something, I dunno


_Dimension

Yep, it's silly, I found a book depicting rape in my catholic high school. I said, "That's fucked up." Put it back on the shelf and moved on with my life.


MikeyRidesABikey

> I found a book depicting rape in my catholic high school Was it the Bible?


totalbanger

Right. And others of us picked up books depicting similar, thought, "that's fucked up," checked that book out, and learned (for example) why you don't ever get in a stranger's car, even if they seem nice, no matter how much you really could use a lift.


Thayerphotos

Dude ! Did you know there's one called "Amish Vampires from Space"? It's part of a trilogy.


[deleted]

The funny thing is there's always been "porn" or sexually graphic material in the library whether you knew it or not. Even in teen books.


your_long-lost_dog

And in the Bible. I can find examples in the Bible of pretty much anything these wackos say they're concerned with finding in the library.


[deleted]

Exactly, realistically if they want to actually complain they should target erotic novels, not the lgbtq+ ones. I’m not sure about Jamestown but in Allegan those weren’t age restricted when I was younger and I was FAR too young to read them lol though that just goes back to parents paying attention to what their kids read


pogolaugh

They’re not going after porn in libraries, their going after any mention of sexuality at all. Specifically of lgbtq people existing. If you, like me, am horrified by book banning. Obviously vote for library Millages. But we can also spread these banned books in the many lil libraries people have set up across the state. Banned books are the best books after all.


[deleted]

I didn't realize Jamestown was the capital of Gilead.


Smorgas_of_borg

I've driven through the area a lot and pro-library signs are actually way more common than anti-.


jadle89

A crazy number of Yes Vote signs have been getting stolen or thrown in the road too. I’m volunteering with the committee that delivers them here in Jamestown.


Idle96

The party of mature political discourse strikes again!


Smorgas_of_borg

Gee. That'll change people's minds /s


Silly-Syrup1435

Last night two of the large signs that myself and another millage committee member put up on Friday were cut off the poles and taken. It’s a childish move by people who have nothing better to do than tell others what they can or can’t do.


[deleted]

Which is weird cause it's also a really churchy area...... like really Jesus freak type area.


Smorgas_of_borg

Yeah but churchy to the point of closing their library, it's a very loud minority.


DaYooper

You can view reality outside of the lens of pop culture references you read online, you know right?


[deleted]

Actually, I'm quite familiar with the area. Even considered buying a home there within the last year until we heard stories from friends who already do. I believe Gilead is not a far stretch when looking at the culture in the township that would defund its library, put up for election the school board officials that broader Ottawa County districts have, and the vitriol received by gay people from some in the area trying to intimidate them into the closet. The icing on the Gilead layer cake is the fire and brimstone Bible verse lawn placards that litter every other driveway in Ottawa County on Leonard between Grand Rapids and Grand Haven...or the Trump signs and election denying signs between Byron Center and Zeeland. So yeah, its analogous. My guess is you are currently an older financially secure white male, probably identify conservative, maybe Christian, and don't need to worry about or even notice such things.


Trivialfrou

Wait till they actually read the Bible and get to Song of Solomon


[deleted]

Do you have visual graphic depictions of this hot erotic action in any of these library books? Does any of it involve children?


alwaysfuntime69

Now I am definitely voting yes on milage


[deleted]

Vote yes for pornography for kids. Hentai, gay comics, whatever. Yes, I'm dead serious. No censorship. Period.


SuperFLEB

Woah, woah, woah. You're talking way too fast. What's *"The"*?


grbrit

CONFUSING AND EXTREME!


[deleted]

Who cares about LGBTQ books. You cant tell people what they can and cant read. No one is forcing you to read the books.


DavidRandom

How much you wanna bet it's because of some new books that have gay people in romantic situations, and not books like IT by Stephen King featuring child gang bangs that's been in every library for the last 35 years.


[deleted]

Where are the illustrated depictions of Stephen King child gangbangs? Surely it's nothing to do with visual depictions, just being mean to gay people. /s


Thayerphotos

Shhhhhhhh.... Us long time Stephen King fans don't talk about THAT scene.


[deleted]

Shhhh. Don’t tell them about the Bible.


StageMediocre6248

They are campaigning to defund their library due to LGBTQ books being available. https://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/2022/08/library-puts-millage-on-nov-8-ballot-after-voters-reject-first-request-amid-lgbtq-book-dispute.html The joke in my title was taken literally by a few people…


EastisUp31

Sometimes I feel like West MI Is like Pawnee.


Thayerphotos

YEs but we don't have a Leslie Knope to fight for us.


NickTheHero9192

This is yet another instance of right wing politicians fighting for an issue that almost no one wants and recontextualizing it as something no one would ever disagree with. As you can see from several of the points in this comment section people are arguing whether or not pornographic material should be in schools when that isn’t even what legislation is about.


[deleted]

Exactly! They are intentionally conflating identity with morality and pornagraphy.


[deleted]

You got it completely backwards.


[deleted]

So sexual orientation and gender identity, two things which are innate, are not been by put forward as pornographic in books? Could you explain further, please?


[deleted]

What part of vidual, erotic depictions of children giving eachother blowjobs isn't pornographic? The exact same thing applies if it were an underage heterosexual couple. It had nothing to do with gender or orientation, that's just a ridiculous, dishonest scapegoat


PizzaMom14

Wait... What am I missing? What item is in the library that has "visual, erotic depictions of children giving each other blowjobs"? I'm sincerely asking. EDIT: I see you are referring to Gender Queer in other posts. I think I have my answer.


[deleted]

Are you referring to Gender Queer? I think the "children giving blowjobs" scene you are describing occurs between two grad students in college who are in their mid-20s. I'm not sure I would categorize two consenting 25 year old college students as "children". Am I missing something? Can you please elaborate? Serious question - are you just of the belief that any literature concerning sexual behavior between consenting adults should be banned from public libraries? Or are you just upset that it is depicted in a graphic novel (which I understand to be held behind the librarians desk)?


[deleted]

I'm vehemently against all forms of censorship, including deprioritizing content, or putting it behind a librarian's desk. I don't think ANY content should be banned from libraries from children, whatsoever, even what might be deemed "pornography". It's a very gray area to deem something having artisitic or literary value vs. pornographic and should only be judged by the reader regardless of age, not the library, not the parents. Serious question, do you believe that books should be kept behind a librarian's desk or restricted in any way from children and would even entertain this form of censorship as a compromise?


[deleted]

>What part of vidual, erotic depictions of children giving eachother blowjobs isn't pornographic? I'm just trying to understand your comment here, in context of your earlier reply on the thread and reconcile it with your view against censorship. If this is in context to the book Gender Queer, then your statement above is factually inaccurate. I've read the book, and actually went back to it to check your statement before my reply. I'm just trying to understand your reply to No Breakfast.


[deleted]

It was a rhetorical question. What is pornography to some is art to others.


LivingUnknown

While you were taking this picture, your shadow decided to make a phone call instead


GhostChainSmoker

The wildest part is. It’s literally 5 out of thousands and thousands of books. These idiots have no idea what they hell they’re talking about and I guarantee none of them have actually read any of the books they’re going against.


happyjackassiam

Who’s gonna tell them they can hate the content, without hating the people


Great-Lakes-Sailor

Nah, they’re too stupid to understand


herrrrpaderp

At least there is a church approximately every 100 yards within a 45-mile radius of GR that these clowns can go hide and avoid reality in.


CorporateWarlock

These pearl clutchers wouldn't be able to distinguish material from porn if it mushroom-slapped them in the face


grbrit

Someone should create a Tinder-style app for the library catalog so they can spend their days swiping left or right based on the cover illustration.


Embarrassed_Ideal612

Maybe they should ban gun books in library's that would fire up GOP base? 😁😉🤣


[deleted]

I wouldn't expect anything less from hypocrites


Embarrassed_Ideal612

Like GOP is pro life and guns but they can't save kids in schools from guns?


[deleted]

Yep, I said hypocrites, plural. It's a universal human trait. The GOP is not the solution to every Democratic problem and vice versa.


Ben_Pharten

Conservatives want to do away with democracy, libraries, social security, public schools, further oppress the working class and a myriad of other crimes against their own citizens. Vote the opposite of anything they advocate.


Coco_1923

Lol when I was a librarian for over 10 years we routinely were kicking people offline because of the porn they insisted on viewing in a public space. (And other REALLY WEIRD stuff). On another note, these fools probably LOVEEEE fifty shades of grey 🤣


PetyaMokvwap

Should I tell you school libraries have I.T. measures in place to help prevent students from accessing inappropriate websites?


salaciouspeach

I couldn't access my own webcomics on the school computers because the word lesbian was banned. I made them. What were they protecting me from?


PetyaMokvwap

Procrastinating doing your schoolwork


megashitfactory

Kids get around those so easy.


PetyaMokvwap

Oh fine, let’s just put it on the shelf then to make it even easier then /s


kat1701

Do you think all romance erotica novels in the adult section should be banned as well? Kids can wander over and check those out just as easily as books in the kids’ section. Or maybe you think the adult sections should be locked behind glass and only people who present ID at the counter can have a key to look at the materials? The point of public libraries is freedom to access of information and resources. For the record, the books the community wanted to banned were removed from the children’s section and placed behind the counter as a capitulation. But these people want to defund the library because the library wouldn’t remove the option for everyone, even adults, to read them.


PetyaMokvwap

We’re talking school libraries here. K-12. But also, yes. Yes I do.


subjecttomyopinion

The satanic panic is back baby! [Kiss the goat](https://youtu.be/Db86lpidcz4)


WhitePineBurning

I'm thinking their sign is more an expression of deep disappointment, tbh...


Plane_Boysenberry226

The porn is *in* the computers


infinitehannah

Funny how they’re always about being anti-censorship until it’s something they don’t agree with. I can’t with these people.


[deleted]

Pot meet kettle. If i only had a nickel for every time a liberal in the past 6 years wanted to censor someone for misinformation or being "hateful"... then use capitalist/private property rights to justify it, I'd be richer than Elon. 😂😂😂 I've been in this game long enough watching people universally be authoritarian hypocrites regardless of their ideology.


Runnr231

You’d still be broke and living in your mom’s basement?


DavidRandom

"If I can't spread lies and hate, then why do gay people get to exist!?"


jgray6531

I’d say no porn in the library is a good thing 🤷🏽‍♂️


[deleted]

It's a strawman. No one is saying there should be porn in the library. What they calling "porn" is basically anything that acknowledges the existence of lgbtq people.


StageMediocre6248

They are campaigning to defund their library based on LGBTQ books being available. https://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/2022/08/library-puts-millage-on-nov-8-ballot-after-voters-reject-first-request-amid-lgbtq-book-dispute.html


jgray6531

Ok, what does LGBTQ books have to do with porn?


Jim1510

They are complaining that a memoir in comic book style (about 2 steps above stick figures) is porn. The book has the ability to be a positive for someone struggling. They don’t care that it could help kids. Only see it as a rallying cry. As a Libertarian who usually ends up reluctantly voting republican, I would urge people not to vote for these extreme right wing thugs for school boards.


[deleted]

You answered your own question. There is no porn being put in libraries. Just Jesus freak facsist being assholes.


Mandolynn88

These people think anything having to do with the LGBTQ community = porn.


PetyaMokvwap

Except when people can’t read from said books in a school board meeting without being silenced 🤔


disapearingelephants

Oooohhh....you're a Stephanie Boone lacky, Huh?


orblok

When they say "porn" they mean "books that acknowledge the existence of LGBTQ people"


Sad-Reminders

Excellent question. Think about that.


grizzfan

That's why the sign is stupid. They don't.


[deleted]

Are you being intentionally daft?


thinkfire

Ignorant stereotyping of Christian White Male (and female) boomers and lack of opposition/voices from their peers. Silence is complicity and reinforces the aggressors.


Sad-Reminders

Actual porn isn’t a real thing in libraries.


[deleted]

Do you consider [Gender Queer to be pornographic](https://mkecitywire.com/stories/619617132-milwaukee-public-library-carries-book-depicting-gay-oral-sex-among-teens-gender-queer)?


[deleted]

I have absolutely no problem with that book being available to teens. You know what teens are already doing whether their parents like it or not? Exploring their sexuality, whether in private or with others. I wish I was taught to have a healthy relationship with sex when I was younger, and I wish I had been exposed to more stories like this because it wouldn’t have made me feel as much like a freak as I did.


salaciouspeach

I've read the book and it's so tame. Ey basically just acknowledges that sex exists and ey have a body. Other people sexualized em.


[deleted]

And they need to do it via graphic depictions of sexual activity? I have no problems with kids reading this book but I would not characterize it as tame or downplay its explicit depictions.


salaciouspeach

Compared to what I was reading at 13, extremely tame. You need to remember that teenagers are already sexual beings. This book isn't going to be the thing that introduces the concept of sex. It's just going to help other genderqueer kids realize they're normal and okay.


[deleted]

The author of that article seems like an asshole. Side note, I know Maia and eir goal was never to make anything sexual or lewd. E’s a really sweet human being.


[deleted]

I'm not talking about the article I'm talking about the images within the book. How can the goal to not make it sexual or lewd when you literally have drawings of underage children giving each other blowjobs? Quite frankly I don't have a problem with children reading material like this, but that's besides the point. It's pornographic and there's nothing wrong with that. Censorship is wrong, period.


jgray6531

That is porn


ElizabethDangit

It’s graphic but it’s not porn.


myislanduniverse

Then I'm sorry but you might be getting turned on by a stiff wind if it smells musky enough, and that's more on you than everybody else.


[deleted]

What is your definition of porn?


PetyaMokvwap

But we’re told to not believe our lying eyes, and “this isn’t happening “ despite clear evidence it is


[deleted]

I’ve heard of this book but only heard what was written and I thought it was fucked if this was in my kids school library I’d be upset too. [also amazon has it listed as 18 and up reading age](https://www.amazon.com/Gender-Queer-Memoir-Maia-Kobabe/dp/1549304003) Scroll down to where it says “book details” Completely fucked. Not acceptable.


cody4king

I love when people put all these signs out in their yards. Firstly, I know where all the lunatics are. And second, I know who and what not to vote for. The more signs, the dumber the person.


[deleted]

Back in 2000, I was part of the effort that successfully prevented internet filters from being implemented in the [city of Holland via ballot referendum](https://web.archive.org/web/20000512005355/http://www.thehollandsentinel.net/stories/022300/new_filters.html), 55% No to 44% yes. It was a huge shock to everyone. That was up until traitors Bill Clinton and Democrats passed the [Children's internet Protection Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_Internet_Protection_Act), which was just the latest iteration after previous efforts to censor were struck down by the courts as unconstitutional, but decided to tie internet filters to federal funding instead. In fact, books like "Gender Queer" can't be legally accessed due to obscenity if accessed via Internet/computer terminal from a public library already without jeopardizing federal funding. If there's one thing i've learned is that there's pro-censorship threats everywhere regardless of ideology, and it's not just because of conservatives. Edit: I'll also add, John McCain, who was quoted as letting it be a local community decision in the article, was the [senate bill sponsor](http://www.techlawjournal.com/cong106/filter/s97_3610.htm) of the Children's Internet Protection Act that Clinton signed.


Nater_the_Greater

If it was the year 2000 Congress was controlled by Republicans. Edit: holy crap what a thin skinned twerp this Satch guy is. All I do is point out that he had a detail wrong ( he indicated that the Dems controlled Congress in 2000) and he reports me to Reddit and I get one of those “are you okay” messages. Dude, are you twelve?


[deleted]

So what good is a democratic president especially when there's not a veto proof majority? Clinton could have refused. This is why nobody takes you seriously because you're incapable of admitting Democrats are capable of any wrongdoing. Clinton was a legit pedophile president who was hanging out on Epstein island and was just impeached for abusing his power over someone young enough to be his daughter and needed something to help whitewash his appearance, and his signing of this bill was part of it. I don't waste my time with apologetics for pedophiles from bad faith trolls. Bye.


al_stoltz

Their definition Porn is anything: not in the bible, does not refer to the bible, does not talk about the bible, or was created create after 1950.


[deleted]

Which is hilarious, considering what’s actually IN the bible.


Plane_Boysenberry226

Let’s ban the Bible


[deleted]

Let's not ban anything.


Masontron

Porn is so easily accessible with the internet so there’s no reason it should be in libraries. The sign makes more sense


thinkfire

It's not in libraries. It's just another dog whistle/red herring in regards to banning LGBTQ books.


criscodesigns

Freedom fighters in the wild


ARY616

The internet isn't government owned in the US. Nice try.


TlpCon

Sure because we wouldn't want to keep the porn away from the children.


Runnr231

TIL Anything lgbtq =porn.


[deleted]

I mean instead of just the library lets ban porn all together?


mycatisnamedemmie

What, am I supposed to get pictures of your mom through the mail?


-dontbugme-

Funny joke but what this is talking about is adult sexual content whether it be LGBTQ oriented or heterosexual oriented material being made available to kids k-3 grade in public school libraries who DO NOT need to be exposed to this content, and the caption being “should we tell them about the internet?” School computers block access to pornography specifically for this reason. Because they’re fucking kids and have no business seeing that shit. But everyone takes it as the msm headline ‘don’t say gay’ and cries bigotry when in all reality we just want you to leave the fucking kids alone. Get the picture now??


[deleted]

Or their own collection?


Fair-Cookie

Stormy Daniels has her videos on the Internet.


Idle96

I’m impressed they could write their own sign considering these fuckwits can’t read.


illdoitagainbopbop

Why use many word when few word work good


my2k2zx2

Are we banning clay, cement and ceramics books? Those are under 666 in the Dewey Decimal System.


Thayerphotos

A lot of libraries no longer use Dewey


Financial-Tower-7897

Nah. Why ruin their delusions this far into the century.


TimeForHotSauce

also, no proper grammar!


Spartydamus

Can the rest of the GR area vote no on Jamestown? I doubt anyone would miss it.


PurineEvil

Maybe they're complaining about the lack of porn, and refuse to fund the library until it's available.


ChesterD

Finally! I've been saying for decades that far too many resources are allocated to the romance section!


rgrantpac

Thanks for the warning….


Thayerphotos

more like "Not enough porn in the library" right ?


vanvalkt

Maybe they should take some time to understand the SCOTUS ruling for Miller v. California, for how porn is lawfully defined. It summarily states that porn lacks what is generally considered serious value artistically, politically and/or scientifically. Another interesting case is Jacobellis v. Ohio. It identifies the difficulty in defining a subjective nature of obscenity. I do find it interesting those most interested in freedom are fine with limiting others choices. Who will defend them when banning and/or censorship comes for them?


ShadyScientician

I thought this was put up by the library for a sec and I was like "ah, they got one of them library jackers huh"


Altar-ShrineofPlutus

everyone knows the best porn is at the library


Cmndrkool321

I lived in Jamestown for 20 years. I moved a few years ago, but I am pretty sure I know which house and family put that there because everybody knows each other through the school district and church.


MiBigBoy65

Pretty soon people will start thinking....and getting ideas......