The only thing I remembered being taken away from me by my mother was the first Sweet Valley High book. I think I was around 10 or 11 when I was reading it, and there's a scene where Jessica sneaks out with an older guy and he takes her to a bar. While they are there, he puts his hand on her knee and says to her something about not showing the goods in the window if she doesn't intend to sell them or something like that (I don't know why I remember this so well - probably because it was 7 years before I was able to finish the damned book).

My grandmother always read to me and was a lit major when she went to U of M so she mostly just got mad at the "trash" I was reading when there were so many good and wonderful books out there. She's STILL trying to get me to read Rebecca.

She's STILL trying to get me to read Rebecca.

"Last night I dreamt I went to Manderley again." Listen to your grandmother. I think there are people who'd put Rebecca in the "trash" category, though.

I can't remember my mother ever taking a book away from me. She worried about tv and music, but books seemed to be all ok with her.

The only thing my mom objected to was when I came home from the local Goodwill with a small stack of Harlequin romances. I read them anyway, and hid them. I'm sure she'd have had a fit if she'd known what was in those VC Andrews books.

ew. I don't remember mom ever objecting toi sharing reading material with me...nope, I lie, there was that one Isadora Wing book where she eats guacamole off some guy...I was 13 and was not allowed to finish that one.Otherwise we read the same stuff a lot...I should write a memoir called "I was a teenage procedural junkie"

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.

Deb, my point is that as a parent you have the right to try and control what your kid is exposed to, especially at a young age like 6 years old. Obviously you can't lock them in a box and they are going to hear stuff from other kids and see stuff in their daily lives. But you can expect other adults - especially teachers and schools - to try and respect those parental rights.

When I was around 5 or 6 my mom got me a book written for kids to educate us on our bodies that included information about digestion, fighting illnesses, and sexual reproduction. Since it said the words penis and vagina in it I took it to school and showed my classmates. Then I went and lent it to my best friend who brought it home. Inevitably, my mom got a phone call from his mom who was a little disturbed (and amused) by the porn books I was passing around. However, if my friend had gotten the book out of the school library, or from a teacher, my friend's mom would have been much more upset. Hell, if I had gotten the same book from school before my mom gave it to me, she would have been spitting fire.

Schools and teachers need to try and respect those sensibilities. WRT, the children's book described in the article, I don't necessarily think the school was wrong for having such a book. But parents should be aware that books that deal with homosexual relationships are on the shelves of the school library and preempt the subject by having "that conversation" with their children, or accept the consequences. Or they can pull their child out of that school.

"Last night I dreamt I went to Manderley again." Listen to your grandmother. I think there are people who'd put Rebecca in the "trash" category, though.

Gods, yes. The gloriously sulky Max de Winter. And Mrs. Danvers. And Cornwall.

Deb, my point is that as a parent you have the right to try and control what your kid is exposed to, especially at a young age like 6 years old.

Oh, I agree - I'd go farther and say it's actually part of what I consider my parental duty. I just opted to discuss stuff with her, as and when it came up because of her encounters with the real world, because I knew from my own experience as a heavily travelled kid that she was likely to find stuff out long before she bothered mentioning stuff to me. (edit: an incredibly clumsy sentence - sorry. I just meant that I opted to be proactive, to save trouble and shock value down the line.)

But parents should be aware that books that deal with homosexual relationships are on the shelves of the school library and preempt the subject by having "that conversation" with their children, or accept the consequences. Or they can pull their child out of that school.

Again, total agreement. But the guy in the article is keeping the book until they promise to pull it. And I do not, not, not allow some other kid's parents to dictate to me what my child is allowed to read, or when. It's tricky, and a damned fine line.

I just came back from doing a very nice reading, with mystery writer and Sherlock Holmes fan Lora Roberts. Java Cat came along, and brought me champagne!

I just opted to discuss stuff with her, as and when it came up because of her encounters with the real world, because I knew from my own experience as a heavily travelled kid that she was likely to find stuff out long before she bothered mentioning stuff to me.

My oldest is 4, but I suspect that I'll be doing plenty of these types of discussions too. For example, I never plan on explaining to her the existence of dog porn even though I learned that little tidbit from Friday's Natter. That's something I really hope she's not likely to encounter as a child.

But the guy in the article is keeping the book until they promise to pull it. And I do not, not, not allow some other kid's parents to dictate to me what my child is allowed to read, or when. It's tricky, and a damned fine line.

I totally, totally agree. Of course the school can just buy another book and send him a bill. That's what I'd do.

DOG porn?

Ew ew ew ew ewwwwww. But not as bad, I suspect, as the heap of magazines I found when I finally managed to jimmy open my desk drawer at Dolby in London after taking that job; I found a shitload of German snuff porn stuff. I could have gone a lifetime without seeing those.

So, we're on the same page. Although the very concept of a kindergarten or 6-12 age group library that stocks dog porn is enough to make my head explode....

My first, last and only encounter with dog porn was in college. I was doing an oral history assignment, collecting some stories from vets who'd been drafted and gone to Viet Nam about their experience. One of them said that the military had sponsored movies for them, and more than one of the movies was porn. He specifically mentioned one in which (whitefonted for those who don't want to have to scrub their brain out) a Doberman performed oral sex on a woman which apparently resulted in a lot of post-movie discussion about how you train a dog to do that.

Other vets said they got those movies, but they weren't officially provided. I was visciously cynical in college, so I totally bought the USG providing dog porn to soldiers, but now it seems unlikely.

My mother called the head of the English department to make sure that this teacher would not be allowed to teach Merchant of Venice, at least not to my class.

Really? Seems like it would depend on how it's taught. Did they assume that the teacher would just say "And so, children, Shylock had to be punished for being Jewish."? I ask because the year I taught English, I taught that play for the play and "To Kill a Mockingbird" for the novel, and worked a lot with the parallels of trials of the assumed bad guys. MoV was always much trickier though, and I'm still not sure I got it right.