Cancel Culture

[Brother Nature]

Factually untrue

I just looked this up and in actual fact there are constantly books being challenged in the USA. The data I'll quote is from the top ten most challenged books in the US from 2018-2019 (nothing newer), but the link itself shows a lot more information on what is being asked to be banned and why. These books are also not necessarily banned for sale, but have either been petitioned to or been banned from certain school districts and libraries. Many don't seem to be challenged for the same reasons those Dr. Suess books have been. It paints the picture the way I've always seen it, right wing Christain conservatives that invented cancel culture still seem to be leading the charge.


http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/f...gedbooks/top10

Top 10 Most Challenged Books of 2019


Find more shareable statistics on the Free Downloads webpage.

The ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom tracked 377 challenges to library, school, and university materials and services in 2019. Of the 566 books that were targeted, here are the most challenged, along with the reasons cited for censoring the books:

1. George by Alex Gino
   Reasons: challenged, banned, restricted, and hidden to avoid controversy; for LGBTQIA+ content and a transgender character; because schools and libraries should not “put books in a child’s hand that require discussion”; for sexual references; and for conflicting with a religious viewpoint and “traditional family structure”
2. Beyond Magenta: Transgender Teens Speak Out by Susan Kuklin
   Reasons: challenged for LGBTQIA+ content, for “its effect on any young people who would read it,” and for concerns that it was sexually explicit and biased
3. A Day in the Life of Marlon Bundo by Jill Twiss, illustrated by EG Keller
   Reasons: Challenged and vandalized for LGBTQIA+ content and political viewpoints, for concerns that it is “designed to pollute the morals of its readers,” and for not including a content warning
4. Sex is a Funny Word by Cory Silverberg, illustrated by Fiona Smyth
   Reasons: Challenged, banned, and relocated for LGBTQIA+ content; for discussing gender identity and sex education; and for concerns that the title and illustrations were “inappropriate”
5. Prince & Knight by Daniel Haack, illustrated by Stevie Lewis
   Reasons: Challenged and restricted for featuring a gay marriage and LGBTQIA+ content; for being “a deliberate attempt to indoctrinate young children” with the potential to cause confusion, curiosity, and gender dysphoria; and for conflicting with a religious viewpoint
6. I Am Jazz by Jessica Herthel and Jazz Jennings, illustrated by Shelagh McNicholas
   Reasons: Challenged and relocated for LGBTQIA+ content, for a transgender character, and for confronting a topic that is “sensitive, controversial, and politically charged”
7. The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood
   Reasons: Banned and challenged for profanity and for “vulgarity and sexual overtones”
8. Drama written and illustrated by Raina Telgemeier
   Reasons: Challenged for LGBTQIA+ content and for concerns that it goes against “family values/morals”
9. Harry Potter series by J. K. Rowling
   Reasons: Banned and forbidden from discussion for referring to magic and witchcraft, for containing actual curses and spells, and for characters that use “nefarious means” to attain goals
10. And Tango Makes Three by Peter Parnell and Justin Richardson illustrated by Henry Cole
    Reason: Challenged and relocated for LGBTQIA+ content

Top 11 Most Challenged Books of 2018


View the Censorship by the Numbers infographic for 2018

The ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom tracked 347 challenges to library, school and university materials and services in 2018. Of the 483 books challenged or banned in 2018, the Top 11 Most Challenged Books are:

1. George by Alex Gino
   Reasons: banned, challenged, and relocated because it was believed to encourage children to clear browser history and change their bodies using hormones, and for mentioning “dirty magazines,” describing male anatomy, “creating confusion,” and including a transgender character
2. A Day in the Life of Marlon Bundo by Jill Twiss, illustrated by EG Keller
   Reasons: banned and challenged for including LGBTQIA+ content, and for political and religious viewpoints
3. Captain Underpants series written and illustrated by Dav Pilkey
   Reasons: series was challenged because it was perceived as encouraging disruptive behavior, while Captain Underpants and the Sensational Saga of Sir Stinks-A-Lot was challenged for including a same-sex couple
4. The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas
   Reasons: banned and challenged because it was deemed “anti-cop,” and for profanity, drug use, and sexual references
5. Drama written and illustrated by Raina Telgemeier
   Reasons: banned and challenged for including LGBTQIA+ characters and themes
6. Thirteen Reasons Why by Jay Asher
   Reasons: banned, challenged, and restricted for addressing teen suicide
7. This One Summer by Mariko Tamaki, illustrated by Jillian Tamaki
   Reasons: banned and challenged for profanity, sexual references, and certain illustrations
8. Skippyjon Jones series written and illustrated by Judy Schachner
   Reason: challenged for depicting stereotypes of Mexican culture
9. The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian by Sherman Alexie
   Reasons: banned and challenged for sexual references, profanity, violence, gambling, and underage drinking, and for its religious viewpoint
10. This Day in June by Gayle E. Pitman, illustrated by Kristyna Litten
    Reason: challenged and burned for including LGBTQIA+ content
11. Two Boys Kissing by David Levithan
    Reason: challenged and burned for including LGBTQIA+ content

 

[Guest]

For me, this is a CRAP THREAD posted by the PARANOID. You can't do ANYTHING about what's going on by writing about YOUR CONSERVATIVE VERSION of the topic to a bunch of stoned people who are as POWERLESS as you are.

 

[Brother Nature]

For me, this is a CRAP THREAD posted by the PARANOID. You can't do ANYTHING about what's going on by writing about YOUR CONSERVATIVE VERSION of the topic to a bunch of stoned people who are as POWERLESS as you are.

Sounds like you want to cancel this thread...

 

[NEW ENGLAND]

Hahahaha.....that was good!

 

[mowood3479]

....

 

[mowood3479]

That poster must be old. Everybody know that Republicans are all about the union-busting.

Yes, it has the date right on it, genius
Labor Day 1956

 

[mowood3479]

I just looked this up and in actual fact there are constantly books being challenged in the USA. The data I'll quote is from the top ten most challenged books in the US from 2018-2019 (nothing newer), but the link itself shows a lot more information on what is being asked to be banned and why. These books are also not necessarily banned for sale, but have either been petitioned to or been banned from certain school districts and libraries. Many don't seem to be challenged for the same reasons those Dr. Suess books have been. It paints the picture the way I've always seen it, right wing Christain conservatives that invented cancel culture still seem to be leading the charge.


http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/f...gedbooks/top10

Yea, all censorship is pretty fucking lame. Either side of the aisle.
id much prefer it if both the racist morons and fake Christians stayed the fuck away from me and my freedoms

 

[NEW ENGLAND]

Yea, all censorship is pretty fucking lame. Either side of the aisle.
id much prefer it if both the racist morons and fake Christians stayed the fuck away from me and my freedoms

I've decided to jump in with both feet , my stimulus will be scooping up the box set of 'All in the Family' before the 'Ding bats' revolt.
To those who who are offended....'Stifle Yourself'!!!

 

[audiohi]

I've decided to jump in with both feet , my stimulus will be scooping up the box set of 'All in the Family' before the 'Ding bats' revolt.
To those who who are offended....'Stifle Yourself'!!!

They play it for marathon runs on the Logo (LGBTQ) channel along with some others like Married with Children and such.

Can you 'Stifle Yourself' and not get offended by the gayness during the commercials in order to watch your old timey racism??

 

[audiohi]

Protesting has been canceled in the UK by Boris. 10 years in prison if you protest police officers killing women. The bill is pretty vague, so it'll probably apply in all kinds of situations.

At least it isn't Seuss.

Boris Johnson to make protests that cause 'annoyance' illegal, with prison sentences of up to 10 years
https://www.businessinsider.com/bori...noyance-2021-3

 

[gaiusmarius]

again, i don't agree with banning any books, i don't care who's doing it.

as for the right to assembly and protest or ask for justice, thats a fundamental human right and no government can take it away without becoming a tyrannical police state. our forfathers fought and bleed for this right, we have no right to give up this right under any circumstances.

we should be taking names of all government officials who are involved in atrocities like happened at the vigil, they are shitting on our human rights, behaving like nazi thugs with peacfull protesters.

 

[NEW ENGLAND]

They play it for marathon runs on the Logo (LGBTQ) channel along with some others like Married with Children and such.

Can you 'Stifle Yourself' and not get offended by the gayness during the commercials in order to watch your old timey racism??

Gonna have to swing by your place,I dont get that channel.Although,I hear they're even broadcasting Womens Hockey....well ,sorta maybe.Is that the network airing 'Chicks with Sticks'?

We can switch off ,and I'll let you watch the Jeffersons.

Remember the days when a tranny problem went to the shop,and not to a podium.

Those were the days!

 

[audiohi]

.

 

[Cannavore]

language isn't right wing or left wing, language just is what it is....

when language is skillfully used to craft people's opinions, of course it is. the GOP issues weekly talking points memos to their politicians and media pundits so they all repeat the same false nonsense to their base of drones - "hurrr boycotts and canceling are not the same durrrr"

boycott: making use of your right to decide where to spend your money etc

cancel culture: deciding where other people can spend their money, basically getting a few screaming idiots together to shout and scream or drag down and beat a speaker, so they can't be heard by the majority who are there to listen

sounds like the same exact thing to me. i would love for you to show me proof of people "dragging down and beating speakers". hell, care to show me proof of anything you just said lmao?

what this really says is - when you think the cause is right, it's a boycott - and when you don't - it's cancel culture.

you're quite literally engaging in the "distinction without difference" logical fallacy

as for Gina, your take shows that you are spouting someone else's views on what she said.

except that i google'd what she said, read it, and copied it over lol. another wannabe victim.

as for her being a transphobe thats libellous and you won't find any proof in any of her public statements. she has made her possition clear on this subject and has no issue with anyone going the trans route.

she mocked them. which is usually a sign that she views such group as a joke. it's boomer racism.

i know very well how a climate of hatred was promoted to the population of Germany, how the papers were demonizing the Jews as the cause of all the nations problems, how they betrayed the german people........funny how the msm is now busy saying the same kind of things about Trump supporters. how many years of hate will it take before the re education camps are introduced i wonder?

lmao and so you double down on the victim complex. reaffirming the statement Gina Carano said after you just said "you are spouting someone elses views on what she said".

as for companies making decisions, how naive can you really be? you think they did that all by them selves? out of the blue? or maybe there was some cancel culture warrior on twitter telling them to or else?

yes. that's exactly what i think. there was no public push to do this. they did it on their own = not cancel culture. what it is on the other hand is a capitalist company creating outrage to deflect from the fact that every republican politician in the country is voting against stimulus and support for Americans, including their own voters.

i don't give damn about a kids book, but i do care about Books. cancelling Huck Fin will be next and thats akin to book burning and sacrilege. once you ban books you are on very thin ice imo and i don't really care who it is that promoting it, its wrong.

i doubt it

 

[Cannavore]

I was trying to find middle ground but u insist on being a toolbox..... so true communism is so good... that no one has come even semi close to achieving it... it degenerates into a tyrannical state almost instantly.
that makes me feel loads better

the middle ground of what? you're putting words in my mouth. i never said communism is good or that i am a communist.

 

[gaiusmarius]

**********

s e e d f i n d e r

cancel cultured by IC mag.

im sorry, but do you think this helps your argument? lmao...

you are comparing a speaker who is talking to a willing audience, or a book being bought by willing buyers, being stopped from speaking or selling a book, by a small mob, with a business not advertising the direct competition. if those seem the same in your view i really wonder if you missed out on some important part of your schooling. i know that logic is no longer emphasized as it once was, but really such ignorance is an embarrassment. your the 3rd person in this thread who cant understand the difference between boycotts, cancel culture and self serving business practices. how you think IC sells advertising if we allow it for free?

we are not going around the world saying no one is allowed to type seed f i n d e r, or buy there. we are not trying to have laws passed against them. it's not the same bloody thing at all if you use your god given brain to actually logically THINK.

 

[Cannavore]

what speaker has been stopped from speaking to an audience?

 

[audiohi]

I understand it perfectly, buddy.

IC mag can make business decisions to help their bottom line and that isn't cancel culture.

A book publisher makes a business decision to help their bottom line and it is cancel culture.



It's hilarious that an IC mag mod started this cancel culture thread, and is defending canceling the free exchange of information within it. It really helps your argument. Lol.


Please refer to this previous post as it very much applies

what this really says is - when you think the cause is right, it's a boycott - and when you don't - it's cancel culture.

you're quite literally engaging in the "distinction without difference" logical fallacy

 

[growlegal]

Gonna have to swing by your place,I dont get that channel.Although,I hear they're even broadcasting Womens Hockey....well ,sorta maybe.Is that the network airing 'Chicks with Sticks'?

We can switch off ,and I'll let you watch the Jeffersons.

Remember the days when a tranny problem went to the shop,and not to a podium.

Those were the days!

And here I thought you were extinct ☹

 

[NEW ENGLAND]

And here I thought you were extinct ☹

Yep still here,we travel throughout the state of Connecticut attending girls athletic events,cheering on Richard (otherwise known as 'little Dicky'

You should come out man,good times for all.You would be shocked at all the parents support of 'little dicky',truly heartwarming.