Originally Posted By TALL Disney Guy This thread reminds me of the classic "Parking Garage" episode of Seinfeld: Jerry: "You should always carry a pad and pen!" George: "I can't carry a pen, I'm afraid it'll puncture my scrotum!" LOL! The only time I've ever heard the word in the media---until now. ;-)
Originally Posted By onlyme If I had written this story, instead of 'on the scrotum', I would have said, on the... musculocutaneous sac that encloses the testes and is formed of skin.
Originally Posted By onlyme >>I winced, does that count? ;-)<< Well, since you're a female, you get only partial points. You couldn't possibly understand that it only takes a slight bump or partial nudge on my 'musculocutaneous sac' to make me blurt out assorted obscenities. I wonder how long this topic will 'hang' on?
Originally Posted By TALL Disney Guy Are you kiddin'? This is WE. Soon in this thread everybody's gonna go 'nuts'!
Originally Posted By DVC_dad <<< I don't understand how people can be so uncomfortable with their bodies and bodily functions.>>> I have 6 kids, the oldest is 12 years old. I have 5 boys and one girl. I am completely comfortable with my body and have quite a bit of physical evidence to prove it. If my child were to wonder across the word and I had to explain it, I wouldn't freak out, I wouldn't call the school, I wouldn't start a book burning party. However, I trust that the people in charge of deciding what books are included in my child's school library, will use common sense and good judgement in picking wich books are there. This word, in this book, well I would expect that it would not be included in the collection. This is a circular argument, there is a very good case pro, and an equally good case con. No one said the book cannot be printed. There is no censorship here. However, any school, especially the private Christian School that my DD attends, has a right to exclude or for that matter include any book they see fit. If pressed, I say, the book should not be on the shelves of MY kid's school, but I have no problem with it being in print, and sold and whatever else. But then you aren't saying that the book SHOULD be on my kids' school library shelves are you? Of course not.
Originally Posted By JohnS1 I was going to ask why the author couldn't have simply had the rattlesnake bite the dog on the leg or nose or belly, but then I decided to read the excerpt. Now I see that she is one of these writers who want to be hip and edgy, who want to push the envelope, who want kids in middle school to grow up really fast and immerse themselves in the sadness and problems and filth of the real world instead of letting them have a few more years of happiness and imagination in their lives. Sigh.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad I guess in a sense I pay for people to make decisions that are in line with what I want for my kids. I don't want THAT book, and I am fairly sure it's safe to think I won't find that book at the school media center. That's not censorship, that's good ol' fashion "getting what you pay for."
Originally Posted By TALL Disney Guy Very interesting, John...and sad...and nice call on the dog body part (I didn't even think of that, lol---though I didn't read the excerpt).
Originally Posted By TALL Disney Guy While men looked at books and who wrote 'em, A snake bit many a scrotum. A woman cried out, Oh yes, she did shout, "Call 911! EMS must tote 'em!" (Hey, *you* try rhyming "scrotum"!)
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Now I see that she is one of these writers who want to be hip and edgy, who want to push the envelope, who want kids in middle school to grow up really fast and immerse themselves in the sadness and problems and filth of the real world instead of letting them have a few more years of happiness and imagination in their lives.<< Reading the excerpt, the book doesn't seem to be robbing kids of imagination. It's painting some vivid images, yes, and gives a peek into some of the troubling world of adulthood, but Huckleberry Finn does, too. To me, that makes the material a little more relevant and challenging -- that's what good books are supposed to be. As to the "naughty" word in question, I am quite sure every kid on the playground hears references to it dozens of times a day, and not using medical terms either. Honestly, I wonder sometimes if people forget what it is like to be that age.
Originally Posted By melekalikimaka If a person is offended by the word scrotum, that would tell me that I wouldn't be able to trust their opinions regarding my children. I'm not happy to let other people make those choices for me and I don't assume that because they're paid to made decisions, they will make the right one.
Originally Posted By JohnS1 Huh? Isn't it better for someone to err on the side of being too conservative with your children (which in this case means not indoctrinating or talking about politics, religion or sexual issues - which are matters for parents) which you can then remedy by introducing the language and concepts you want your children to have - than for someone to be overly open and risk stepping over whatever boundaries you may have established? Better for a teacher to stick to basic educational matters I would think since there are so many differences of opinions on the part of parents out there. And by the way, it is less the word that bothers me than just the tone of the story in question. It's a real downer in my opinion and not necessary to acquaint kids with the world of drugs and violence and alcoholism.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <However, I trust that the people in charge of deciding what books are included in my child's school library, will use common sense and good judgement in picking wich books are there. This word, in this book, well I would expect that it would not be included in the collection. > I don't know. This book won the Newberry Award, which is supposed to be for the best children's book of the year, right? So presumably this is a very good book, compelling story, etc. etc. I'd be more apt to say "why banish a really good book from your library on the basis of one word?" Huckleberry Finn contains the "n" word all over the place, which is uglier than "scrotum" could ever be, and every year a number of misguided people try to get it banished from their school libraries on that basis. Of course, Twain was not in sympathy with the characters using the "n" word, and was using it to SHOW their ugliness, but had to use it to be authentic. Even as a 12 year old, I understood that.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <As to the "naughty" word in question, I am quite sure every kid on the playground hears references to it dozens of times a day, and not using medical terms either. Honestly, I wonder sometimes if people forget what it is like to be that age.> Exactly. At that age, all the boys in my school knew any number of dirty jokes and dirty songs, none of which used the word "scrotum," which would have seemed hopelessly dry and clinical. And this was 30 years ago or more. Reading the word "scrotum" wouldn't exactly have corrupted us.
Originally Posted By JohnS1 From a writer's point of view, it also strikes me as unauthentic - would a drunk in an alleyway use the word scrotum? Hardly. So the author is attempting to be edgy but scientifically accurate at the same time. Remember too that the argument is not: Should such a book exist? but: Should such a book be used in schools? This reminds me of arguments where people think that the government not funding one thing or another is tantamount to its prohibiting something. Schools should be neutral, that's all. They should err on the side of not taking positions. Let parents go out and buy any books they want. That's capitalism and the Amnerican way!
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <From a writer's point of view, it also strikes me as unauthentic - would a drunk in an alleyway use the word scrotum? Hardly. So the author is attempting to be edgy but scientifically accurate at the same time. > The quote was in the narrator's voice, not the character's. When the character starts speaking, it is in earthier language; when the narrator does, it's more omniscient in tone. <people think that the government not funding one thing or another is tantamount to its prohibiting something. Schools should be neutral, that's all. They should err on the side of not taking positions. Let parents go out and buy any books they want. That's capitalism and the Amnerican way!> Should Huckleberry Finn be banished from the school libraries where parents (tyically, these days, black parents who object to the "n" word) complain? Maybe you think so, but I don't. And this was judged the best children's book of the year. I wouldn't ban it based on one word.
