[thwayunion]

There is a clear difference between Hustler and a graphic novel that contains some sexual representations.

You are employing an old and tired strategy: latching onto any lewd expression and then dismissing the rest of the work whole cloth as purely pornographic. This is exactly the same strategy as was used in e.g. the Howl obscenity trial [1].

Anyways, I reject the premise. These books aren't attacked because they contain pornographic scenes. These books are attacked because of the people, identities, and viewpoints they represent and affirm. It's about bigotry, not the kids. As evidenced by the fact that these comments even crop up on articles such as this one, where the article isn't even about school libraries [2].

Sex and sexuality are deeply important parts of being human and it's possible to have uncensored discussion of this part of humanity without reaching for Hustler or hentai. I'm saddened that there are apparently people who aren't able to distinguish between uncensored discussion and straight up porn. Who cannot read or think or talk about sex without their brains pulling up hentai and pin-up girl style pornography. What an impoverished experience of humanity these people must have. No wonder they are so angry all the time.

[1] https://www.foundsf.org/index.php?title=The_Howl_Obscenity_T...

[2] See https://www.sos.mo.gov/CMSImages/LibraryDevelopment/FY22WebP... and https://www.sos.mo.gov/CMSImages/LibraryDevelopment/FY22WebP... $0.00 of the funds discussed in this article go to school libraries.

[tablespoon]

> There is a clear difference between Hustler and a graphic novel that contains some sexual representations.

Not in this case. Those images are 100% graphic porn (of the cartoon/hentai variety). I saw the pictures upthread. Porn that presents itself as "educational" is still porn (IIRC, that's also a actual real-people-having-sex porn genre).

> These books aren't attacked because they contain pornographic scenes. These books are attacked because of the people, identities, and viewpoints they represent and affirm.

You do realize those aren't mutually exclusive? The wrong people attacking it on the wrong grounds is not justification for stocking pornography in a school library.

[barbazoo]

> Not in this case. Those images are 100% graphic porn (of the cartoon/hentai variety). I saw the pictures upthread. Porn that presents itself as "educational" is still porn (IIRC, that's also a actual real-people-having-sex porn genre).

As I said, the first picture is taken out of context and the second one isn't even in the book. This book is porn the same way other educational material about anatomy and sexuality are porn.

[barbazoo]

> Anyways, I reject the premise. These books aren't attacked because they contain pornographic scenes. These books are attacked because of the people, identities, and viewpoints they represent and affirm. It's about bigotry, not the kids.

And most of the time the people referencing the book haven't even read it is what drives me nuts. It'd be so easy to pick things that were actually in the book but they always have to go one step too far and make shit up. We live in a world where these idiots read something and blindly share it without doing a shred of research. Anything that supports their bigoted views.