My parents never had any idea what I was reading. They didn't really read, so unless it was the James Bond books, which I hid, they had no idea whether the books were appropriate or not. My parents were not particularly religious or conservative and tended to believe I was a sensible child. We went to church, but I would characterize their belief as "There is a God, and he hates us." Eventually we had a minister who came to my mother to say the he was concerned about the state of my soul because I was reading .... Mark Twain. Mother was outraged, but not at me.

But those same parents are going to be equally aggrieved by front-page stories on gay marriage (indeed, many of them are) and by men holding hands in public.

There's a difference between a child seeing a gay couple or gay marriage and a fairy tale about two princes who marry each other. A fairy tale is usually more than just an entertaining story; it teaches lessons, morals, appropriate behavior, etc. If you consider homosexuality immoral, you probably won't want your child reading a fairy tale that considers it moral.

This is separate from teaching your child respect and tolerance for other people's beliefs.

And then there's all the parents who need to shield their kids from the powers of darkness as found in Harry Potter.

I met some of those parents. They were especially displeased that the hellbound big-city relative of their child's playmate had also brought a copy of Kiki's Delivery Service, because Kiki is a witch. I told them it was different in Japan, but that went over about as well as one might have expected.

I think you do have the right to determine at what age you teach your kids about homosexuality. For some parents a children's book written for 6 year olds is not the age when they wanted to have that talk.

Heh. Been carrying Emmett around on San Francisco public transport since he was four days old. The subject came up fairly early. Actually, it's just always been one kind of normal thing that grown ups do. It's around him every day. We never had to discuss it as if it were different, because clearly lots of people did it.

I think you do have the right to determine at what age you teach your kids about homosexuality.

What on earth do rights have to do with it? I'm talking about reality. I'd have loved to shield my daughter from the existence of Ronald Reagan, but the minute she saw a newspaper, there he was. If I tell her he's not real, I'm a liar, she'll figure that out pretty soon on her own, and then there we are, with a kid who knows you're full of crap and not being truthful with them.

Teaching them what I believe? Yes and yes and yes. Putting my hands over their eyes and gasping in shock because what I'd like them to believe isn't going to stand the barrage of information from the outside world?

I repeat my choice of word: futile.

My mother had to do that a lot when I was in school, Betsy. I was really young when we started having the "Even People in Charge Can Be Stupid Sometimes," conversation.

Most libraries ( public and school) use community standards as part of the process. Most libraries can get books out of other libraries fairly easily - so if there is a segment out side the usual there is an option.

I am guessing king and king shouldn't be in a large number of school libraries. Mostly because of the age it seems to be for. But I am also guessing there are school libraries where it should be.

I believe in community standards as part of the criteria for school and public libraries. I think libraries should have the broadest possible standards for the community but library dollars are based on use.

Double post due to cat stepping on keyboard.

I think Wolfram is right - a storybook is different than a newspaper article. Which has more impact ~ well that depends. I can't ever really thinking that stories were the same as real life. So for me the news ( which was very serious in my parents house - actually still is) would have made more of an impact, because it was real. If this book really is a fairy tale ( I just put it on hold- will report after I read) I t probbably wouldn't have pinged the lesson of boy/boy is ok. I would have gotten the greater lesson of - not everyone is the same and not everything turns out as expected, but that can be ok.

I think Wolfram is right - a storybook is different than a newspaper article.

I was responding specifically to the "I have the right to determine the age at which I discuss this with my children" comment. My point is that standing on your rights is very often futile, because whether you hunt for the information (as in, checking out a library book) or whether it's there in the real world (a kid goes to school, he/she is going to converse with other children at the very least and there will be information or misinformation spread between them), your rights, as you may perceive them, go down the tubes in the face of reality intruding on the parent-child relationship.

A few years ago, I got reamed by a school counselor because my then eight-year-old son and another child got caught talking about the "kids with guns" while at school. This was after Columbine. When questioned, Jake said it upset him and scared him to think about such a thing happening. She wanted to know why we would "let him watch the news" or stories about what happened, and I told her we hadn't. We'd discussed it in very general terms when he asked us about it, but he rode the bus with eleven- and twelve-year-olds who very graphically described what (they thought/imagined/heard) had happened.

Once yor child is in any kind of school, your chances of bringing up every possibly delicate subject exactly when and how you want to pretty fly out the window.

I was surprised that Judy Blume has been replaced by Phyllys Reynolds Naylor on the challenged books list. Poor Judy must be considered passe now. :-)