Why are Americans so fucked up? What is wrong with you people?

>library patrons can sue the library if they put fetishslop outside the adult-only sections and refuse to put it back
Total nothingburger

>>25293488
christcuckery. most mindraped population on the planet, it's forever funny that they're so proud of it
>>25293508
>americans describing nothing: okay so imagine a burger

>>25293488
There's a strange phenomenon where conservatives and liberals are completely afraid of being offended by something. If anyone or anything diverges from their world view or structure they cannot cope. American whites are turning into niggers.

File: You_Are_A_Pirate__with_lyrics_.png (139 KB, 428x240)

139 KB PNG

>>25293458
Time to teach our children new values.

this law is probably there for a good reason and makes a lot of sense, a photo of a sign doesn't tell the whole story, believe it or not

>>25293521
>this law is probably there for a good reason
kek
>and makes a lot of sense
KEK
>a photo of a sign doesn't tell the whole story
"we're inbred hicks and we're utterly terrified by books"

>>25293521
If it was anyone under 16 or something you might have a point. Can't imagine the justification for anyone under 30 needing to register at the desk

>>25293524
The sign is retarded but the justification is probably the same as bars that card anyone who looks younger than 40, there's some sub-18 teens who legitimately look older and some people in their 20s who legitimately look younger, it's just easier to card anyone who looks vaguely below X age. Especially because just as bars have to deal with law enforcement stings, this library will have to worry about the same + also shittertards itching to #cancel a library lol

>>25293524
>Can't imagine the justification for anyone under 30 needing to register at the desk
I believe it's to prevent an under 18 to pass himself off as older

>>25293458
>We heckin free speech warriorz n sheit
>Okay I'm going to write a book featuring human sexuality
>REEEEEE I'M GOING TO FUCKING LAWRAPE YOU
What else is new

>>25293458
Sounds pretty retarded. I don't know anybody who's going to the fucking public library to jerk off other than homeless drug addicts.
Certainly not kids.

It's a shitty law so bureaucrats can pretend they're doing something.
It's not going to stop people from watching porn.
It's not going to "restrict education access" either. Kids don't go to the library except when they're dragged there by their parents or on school field trips and you had to have a photo ID to get a library card before this law anyways.

>>25293458
Red meat for the GOP base because it triggers the libs, nothing more

>>25293539
And if the kid really is that one in a million nerd that loves going to the library all the time, all the parent has to do is sign a waiver for them to get an unrestricted library card and they don't have to accompany their child every time anymore.

>>25293524
Age of adulthood should come at 33 to be honest.

All political discussion in the United States consists entirely of the most retarded, hyperbolic, "hot takes" imaginable.

>duh democraps is trying to use liberries to get kids hooked on porn!!!!!!!
>duh republicucks is trying to ban books and liberries!!!!!!!
Jesus fucking christ shut the fuck up I hate all of you

>>25293458
The most retarded person you know thinks this is a good idea.

>>25293539
>homeless drug addicts
Have you tried befriending other kinds of people?

>>25293577
Are you friends with another kind of person who jerks off in public libraries?

>>25293539
If we know homeless adults are going to a place to jerk off maybe we really shouldn't let unsupervised children be roaming around there.

>>25293621
I'm going to go to a playground and jerk off and when you protest I'm going to suggest you take your kids elsewhere

>>25293488
>why are Americans
>why
None of your business, Hans
>>25293514
Sorry about your father. At least you got his old fedora.

File: Pol_Pot_(cropped) (4).jpg (30 KB, 196x252)

30 KB JPG

>>25293522
Okay.

>>25293628
>mindraped and proud!
we know

>>25293572
Good, we hate you too

>>25293632
At least I wasn't raised by a single mother

File: _91408619_55df76d5-2245-4(...).jpg (54 KB, 976x850)

54 KB JPG

I don't like it when people tell other people what they can and can't read.

>>25293634
Yes you were.

>>25293508
>>25293514
lol

File: 1769224948454784.png (2.27 MB, 1024x1536)

2.27 MB PNG

>>25293641

>>25293621
In actual civilised societies people are simply not allowed to masturbate in public.

>>25293458
hahaha that's so fucked up

>>25293458
>under 30
can't drink until 21, can't read until 30
america is a fucking nightmare

>>25293647
My wife bought me a Switch 2 late last year and I made a face like that.

>>25293521
hows that boot taste, faggot?

>>25293572
except the republicucks clearly are trying to ban libraries, as evidenced by OP.

>>25293663
Thats not what the sign indicates but I apologize since you're an ESL.

>>25293669
Still not gonna support Demoncraps. He'll i don't even like democracy period.

I like how everyone else has to be punished because a few retards jerk off in there or whatever the “reasoning” is

>>25293675
Sorry. Let me correct myself.
can't read until 18, can't drink until 21
america is a fucking nightmare

>>25293679
I like how anyone jerking off in a library is probably over 18 anyway.

>>25293458
i think it's a moral duty to teach kids how to pirate books. every kid who's old enough to read on his own should learn how to access anna's archive, and if the adults in his life don't want him to read something they can explain to him why he shouldn't.
>>25293679
the thing they're trying to avoid is kids having access to "inappropriate" books.

File: 1600651837095.jpg (52 KB, 1024x682)

52 KB JPG

>>25293458

>>25293458
This is what happens when you're governed by illiterates

>>25293669
>photo of a library existing
>see! look! it's banned!!!
Go watch msnbc or whatever boomer libshit slop you fill your mind with, queer

>>25293757
this better be fucking bait

>>25293458
What's frustrating isn't that these laws are written by idiots, it's that they're often retarded about the very subject they're trying to legislate.

The law as written bans "descriptions of sexual or intimate acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated, masturbation, excretory functions, and nudity". How do these retards not realize how broad that language is?

They're writing it as if it's a visual medium, the underpaid hick staffers probably copied the language verbatim from a law on X rated movies in the 1950s, but it makes no fucking sense for BOOKS. If your book contains a description of someone pooping or walking around naked then it's considered an 18+ only book. the law was so broad they accidentally banned the fucking bible!

Of course they've been sued dozens of times and they keep revisiting the law to 'fix' it, but again, they're retards, so they keep making it worse. Last month they amended it to provide an exception for works that have significant artistic or scientific work because they realized they accidentally banned textbooks, art books, religious works, etc., but then added a "when taken as a whole" clause at the end which effectively negates the law outright. anything less than a literal Playboy is fine then, so what the fuck is the point?

Taxpayers are going to lose tens to hundreds of millions of dollars in lawsuits for the world's stupidest virtue signaling.

>>25293757
Far more honest (and stronger) to simply say "yes, if you're a kid the library is banned. Fuck you." instead of this retarded mealy-mouthed "ummm ackshually sweaty technically no because ackshaully" routine

>>25293458
A lot of you retards are getting baited. It's literally just this >>25293508. Look up the code and read it yourself. Although, I doubt that will help some of you troglodytes because you can't even be bothered to read the sign in the OP
>STOP
>TO PROCEED BEYOND THIS POINT
>THIS POINT
It's literally an ID checkpoint for the adults only section. Get over yourselves.

>nooooo children should be exposed to my bbc anal prolapse erotica or else its christofascism

>>25293775
... there's an adults only section in a library? What, like De Sade or something?

>>25293775
What is in the "adults only" section? And how could anyone know that from the picture? It's just the sign and a library desk. It could be at the door for all we know. Or just beyond where they keep all the books for toddlers.

>>25293775
You confirmed you could technically look up the law's text without doing it yourself. Why would you set yourself up for failure like this?

The law is so broad it could apply to nearly everything. As such it's easier to ban entire sections of libraries, or even libraries outright, then risk someone suing because you have a copy of the bible in the all-ages section.

>>25293778
What kind of library are you people going to?

>>25293772
>it's that they're often retarded about the very subject they're trying to legislate
they're retards who don't care about the ostensible "subject they're trying to legislate"
>How do these retards not realize how broad that language is?
it's broad on purpose because they're trying to get rid of any book that smells vaguely faggy
>the law was so broad they accidentally banned the fucking bible!
>anything less than a literal Playboy is fine then, so what the fuck is the point?
again, they don't actually care about the purported aims of the law. they either know this bans the bible and don't care because they'll ignore books they like that flout the law, or they don't know it bans the bible and don't care because they don't care about what they say they care about. they're afraid of reading about two tranny faggots fucking each other in the ass and they want you to be afraid of reading about it too. that's all this is

>>25293775
I could've figured that out

>>25293786
None of the rednecks that voted for this have stepped foot in a library since 2nd grade. They think it operates akin to Youtube and there's an evil cabal of pedophiles just waiting to expose your innocent kids to Else Spiderman Pregnant .epub

>>25293780
>>25293775
>>25293508
you can literally see the books on the shelves behind the sign. the easiest one for me to identify was "code red", which appears to be some kind of tom clancy knockoff, not "fetishslop". looks to me like the law is broad enough to de facto restrict everything outside of the children's section.

>>25293775
>adults only section
there has never been an "adults only" section in a library ever

>>25293775
>HALT. PROVIDE GOVERNMENTAL PROOF OF IDENTIFICATION IMMEDIATELY OR BE BARRED FROM THIS AREA OF THE PUBLIC LIBRARY. THOSE WHO DO NOT COMPLY WILL BE FINED OR JAILED. THIS ANTI-THOUGHTCRIME MEASURE IS FOR YOUR OWN SAFETY, PLEASE COOPERATE IN ADVANCE
>this is fineeeeeee what's the big deal
Raped

>>25293792
If they wanted to just ban books they should have done that. Instead they just made it easier for private citizens to sue.

and because the places being sued are public agencies it's just robbing Peter to pay Paul. it's not even that actually, it's telling a mugger to rob Peter and then not even getting a cut of the take.

>>25293775
>adults only section of the library
You haven't set foot in a library in years, have you

>>25293804
>If they wanted to just ban books they should have done that.
a direct ban would almost certainly be struck down by the courts. they're trying to backdoor it. they expected libraries to proactively remove stuff. librarians of course understand that would be a fucking insane amount of work and are just restricting access to the whole collection to avoid liability instead.

>>25293508
Why are librarians such perverts that they NEED to display this stuff, even to the exclusion of children from the library?

>>25293669
The libraries could simply get rid of the adult content. They are refusing because they are, more than likely, obstinate libtards.

>>25293837
librarians are not going to spend countless hours to go through every book in their collection every time this law changes to see what is in compliance and what is not. they have more important things to do and could not run the library if they had to do that.
if the state of idaho does not like this, it can create a commission to issue an index librorum prohibitorum for the whole state and take the burden off the individual libraries. it probably wouldn't even be a violation of the first amendment if the rule was just "you can't check these out to minors" rather than "you can't stock these at all".

>>25293847
They probably have a good idea of what is and is not prohibited, and frankly, I expect they intend to keep those books around regardless of the consequences. You could have an exclusion for good-faith mistakes but that's not really what would happen, is it? They are not dumb, they are obstinate.

>>25293847
>just create a commission to blah blah blah
shut the fuck up yuropeasant, in america we actually get things done. if we dont like something, we use violence to eliminate it. "muh commission," fuck you

>>25293856
>They probably have a good idea of what is and is not prohibited
"a good idea" is not sufficient when there is a financial incentive for finding edge cases.
>You could have an exclusion for good-faith mistakes
we are talking about a real law that actually exists, not a hypothetical proposal. it "could have" a lot of things, but actually doesn't.

File: this_retarded.png (314 KB, 601x397)

314 KB PNG

>>25293458

>>25293773
>if you're a kid the library is banned
It's not though. A kid can still go to the library and check out any book he likes.
Your faggoty little hyperbolic hand-wringing is what leaves room for conservacucks to change the topic.

The critique should be about how this dumbass law is supposed to do anything to prevent children's access to pornography, not about how it "bans children from libraries". Suck start a shotgun you absolute retard.

ITT: people who need a hard drive check

I'm sure this will be the one time that restriction and censorship will only ever apply to the things I personally dislike.

>>25293665
It tastes like nigger tranny cum. you want a lick?

>>25293815
>>librarians of course understand that would be a fucking insane amount of work
>people with jobs when asked to do their job in exchange for money

>>25293892
You would know that taste.

>>25293458
Zion MIGA tards are truly cancerous.

>>25293521
>makes a lot of sense
>a photo of a sign doesn't tell the whole story
If a photo of “a sign doesn't tell the whole story,” then how does it make “a lot of sense,” you inbred, zion don jewboy?

>>25293883
Yup. Any faggot who loves Zion Don probably needs a hard drive check because we already know Trump and his cabal of jewish pedophiles rape kids, and most of his brainwashed supporters wish they could and are so proud in supporting a jewish-adjacent (spiritually as well) child rapist, that the closest they will ever come close to what Trump is downloading cheese pizza. Kinda poetic how all the low iq losers that stormed the capitol and were pardoned by this jewish pedophile cabal/administration were all subsequently arrested for possession of CP or actual child rape

>>25293863
They obviously didn't include it because they knew that tons of librarians, who lean leftist, would say that everything was an honest mistake.

>>25293900
I get what you're saying but I attest you're trying to make a blanket statement on a tangibly related demographic. Since that's the case, the killing fields are waiting for you.
>>25293918
What if you're just a white guy who think high school girls are hot? You're probably a zoomer who gets mad because our dicks are bigger.

>>25293868
Retardation actually raises your SMV

>>25293907
>inbred
Tick tock

>>25293947
>obsessing over genitalia
You have to be Jewish with how neurotic you are. It’s remarkable that you fags can’t go one post without discussing genitalia. Hence why you think about raping kids all the time, you dysgenic freak

>>25293458
1A?
Lol.

>>25293966
>1A?
doesn't apply without restriction to pornography :\

>>25293971
>everything I don’t like is literally hardcore pornography
It’s so tiresome

>>25293458
Baaaaased. I'm all for anything like this because it disposes of the myth that we live in a society where literature is valued.
We are all post-literate shortform "content" consuming p-zombies and should act like it.
My fondest memories are being dropped off at the library as a kid to browse the stacks.

>>25293458
>July 1, 2024
Why do I care about this old news? The alternative would be that they burn the offending books which I would personally prefer but still would oppose on principle.

>>25293991
Even softcore pornography is restricted :\
Too bad you're having an hystrionic anuerism. I'll pray for you.

>>25293514
>>americans describing nothing: okay so imagine a burger
Or we can imagine your culture, Jacques

File: this-book-is-gay-small.png (625 KB, 1207x1479)

625 KB PNG

>>25293458

>>25293458
porno is irrelephant, divorce tears families apart and separates children from fathers but everyone has to go on a moral crusade against porno

>>25294078
I didn't imagine there would be manuals on how to sexually molest children.

File: intro-1730120756-978029891.jpg (70 KB, 780x438)

70 KB JPG

>>25293458
The Idaho ban on libraries you say? Gee, that's funny. Let me ask you, how can a man fit Idaho in a library in the first place?

>>25293458
No book should be banned, even if it had CP in it. It's a book.

>>25294042
>an hystrionic anuerism
lol should've spent more time at the library

>>25294091
people say its the hegelian dialectic but its an ancient satanic strategy that you see everywhere, starting with superstition or atheism

>>25294078
>>25294232
what's the actual threat model here
is the theory that teenagers who have unrestricted smartphone access are going to just not know what grindr is?
the way the book talks about it does not seem great but i'm having a hard time imagining it being new information to anyone who reads it

>>25293458
Who? Nigger, I don't care.

File: lit top 100 2025.jpg (644 KB, 1102x2497)

644 KB JPG

>>25293785
>The law is so broad it could apply to nearly everything
Just out of curiosity, I looked up the law to see if this was true. Here's the relevant text of the law that's named in OP's pic:
>Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a school or public library, or an agent thereof, shall not promote, give, or make available to a minor:
>(a) Any picture, photograph, drawing, sculpture, motion picture film, or similar visual representation or image of a person or portion of the human body that depicts nudity, sexual conduct, or sado-masochistic abuse and that is harmful to minors;
>(b) Any book, pamphlet, magazine, printed matter however reproduced, or sound recording that contains any matter pursuant to paragraph (a) of this subsection or explicit and detailed verbal descriptions or narrative accounts of sexual excitement, sexual conduct, or sado-masochistic abuse and that, taken as a whole, is harmful to minors; or
>(c) Any other material harmful to minors.
So what would this apply to? A solid chunk of the '25 top 100, turns out
>Lolita
>Ulysses
>Gravity's Rainbow
>2666
>Slaughterhouse-Five
>Ovid's Metamorphoses
>Confessions of a Mask
>The Canterbury Tales
>One Hundred Years of Solitude
>A Clockwork Orange
>The Holy Bible
>Infinite Jest
>Journey to the End of the Night
>Demons
>The Sailor Who Fell from Grace with the Sea
>In Search of Lost Time
>Faust Part II
>Finnegans Wake
And you could make a case that it'd also apply to
>War and Peace
>Anna Karenina
>The Aeneid
>Wuthering Heights
>The Sound and the Fury
>Dracula
>The Picture of Dorian Gray
>The Catcher in the Rye
>Plato's Symposium
>>25293895
An attorney general inclined to enforce broadly could probably build a colorable case against twenty or thirty books on this list. Imagine how long it'd take to read all of them on top of your normal 9-5, because the librarians have to do shit on the clock so they can't really read at work. Now imagine you had to read every book in the library to see if it ran afoul of this law, and if you get it wrong you get sued and lose your job. We're talking thousands of books, assuming no acquisitions, which isn't feasible. So your options are as follows; a) do nothing, get sued, lose your job, library closes b) read every book in the library, which means you can't service patrons because you're too busy reading to filter for the government censor, and which also means you have to stop acquisitions because no time to read them, and which also means you can only provide books that you or your coworkers have had time to personally filter -- and remember if you get it wrong you're fucked, so anything that could maybe vaguely possibly violate this law is out c) cordon off entire segments of the library and say you can only go in them if your parents give approval or if you show your ID. Which is what they chose to do

>>25294241
I'm not sure what your point is.
because it's possible for an adult to groom a child over grindr (which is illegal) it should be possible for them to do the same through an instruction manual?

>>25294254
nta but what grooming is happening? does the author include his phone number and address at the back with a note that reads "hot sexy kids let's meet up" or something? just seems like a sex ed book for gay teenagers desu

>>25293521
If I had to have my mom with me every time I went to the library, let alone was banned for being under 16 years old, I would be so so much stupider and ignoranter and boorisher.

File: 001.gif (21 KB, 220x220)

21 KB GIF

I'M NOT LETTING THE FEDS SCAN MY ID SO I CAN READ A BOOK IN THE LIBRARY

>>25294254
an "instruction manual" for... what, exactly? and who is doing the grooming here?

you know how a kid gets *actually* groomed on grindr? they're gay but they have nobody to talk to about it. they know about grindr because it's famous and if they have a smartphone they obviously know about it already. ignorant, nervous, embarrassed, and with no real life people to talk to, they download it, lie about their age, and then try to act older than they are, and eventually end up in an unhealthy and dangerous situation.

You know how you *actually* stop grooming? You demystify and de-stigmatize the subject. You encourage them to educate themselves, ask questions, support them. You make them aware of the risks. In total, you make their real life support network strong and more trustworthy than a complete stranger.

Same deal with drugs, with dangerous sports, with sex. When you're ready to be a parent I hope very much you'll remember a little bit of this interaction.

>>25294413
lol fags have more institutional and cultural support than straight boys do

>>25293458
You can thank perverted libshits for this.

>>25294413
>Same deal with drugs
Is the implication that you should support your children doing drugs safely or what?

>>25293458
Your picture isn't a ban on libraries
What are you talking about

>>25294251
Kids (high school, whatever) genuinely should not be allowed to read Ulysses or Gravity‘s Rainbow. I don‘t want future generations to have been shaped in exploratory formative years by Leopold‘s sissification and Slothrop paramour crawling in their hole at night to yell at him about all the GIs she let sodomize her.

Granted the American of it comes in where you have that fetishistic slop next to The Canterbury Tales or Metamorphoses which are just plain bawdy. This is more of a cultural stewardship question than anything but since that fight is a century in the rearview mirror I‘ll settle for keeping kids away from Joyce until they‘re old enough to know better.

>>25295118
Cry mofe

>>25295105
>Is the implication that you should support your children doing drugs safely or what?
I believe the implication was
>You demystify and de-stigmatize the subject. You encourage them to educate themselves, ask questions, support them. You make them aware of the risks. In total, you make their real life support network strong and more trustworthy than a complete stranger.
If they take drugs anyway, it would still be better than the alternative.

Let me put it this way would you rather your kid be getting blackout drunk with knowledge of the safe sleeping position or without it? And if your response is "what is the safe sleeping position?", congrats, your support network was shit.

>>25295126
>"what is the safe sleeping position?"
The one where they are at home tucked into bed and not doing drugs. What an insane suggestion that everything should be "demystified and destigmatized" as if all knowledge is of equal value. None of your cohort are going around saying that we need to destigmatize Fascism.

>>25295142
Funny how the real application of his points is that we should do exactly that so that kids are learning theory and reading the artists from Pound to Heidegger instead of being exposed to /pol/slop and coming at it from a place of poorly-understood anxiety.

>>25295142
>None of your cohort are going around saying that we need to destigmatize Fascism.
Teaching about fascism isn't stigmatized by the left and is broadly encouraged. Literally what the fuck are you talking about?

Right wingers are the ones that want fucking Maus banned.

>>25295142
>he one where they are at home tucked into bed and not doing drugs
Oh, I'm sorry they choked on their own vomit and died. That was the wrong sleeping position. Better luck next kid.

>>25295142
You're teaching your kid to drive. Do you have them wear a seatbelt?

Well, no, of course not. Why would you? You teach them to always drive safe, to check and maintain their car, to drive defensively and only at the right times in terms of weather and visibility.

Now that I think about it, a seatbelt would only make them drive MORE recklessly, because now they know they have a safety net! In fact maybe they never would have learned that car accidents are even possible if it wasn't for driver's ed planting those insidious ideas in their head.

Your fascism non-sequitur is strange when most schools have multiple sets of curriculum about that very thing. You're so convinced this issue is political and I'm somehow your ideological opposite that you think this is an own to me.

>>25295118
>high schoolers genuinely should not be allowed to read Ulysses or Gravity's Rainbow
Cannot imagine posting on /lit/ and genuinely holding this opinion

>>25295142
>The one where they are at home tucked into bed and not doing drugs. What an insane suggestion that everything should be "demystified and destigmatized" as if all knowledge is of equal value
Alcohol is the most common drug on the planet, teens will run into it at parties, with friends, wherever. They're going to get drunk. You can plug your ears and yell NUH UH NUH UH NUH UH THEY GONNA REMAIN PURE NUH UH NUH UH or you can face reality -- you can't be with your teenager every single moment of every single day. When they inevitably encounter Smirnoff in a water bottle, would you rather they have the dirty, icky, gross knowledge that they need to fall asleep on their side, or would you rather they remain pure and spotless and innocent and choke on their own puke?

>>25293458
Boy oh boy, finally a library where homeless people and shit their pants in peace while junkies shoot up heroin in the bathroom

>>25295142
>telling your kid about the safe sleeping position is like saying it's okay to be a nazi
Did you smoke your breakfast this morning?

>>25295367
Well one creates a society of stunted development deadbeats and the other a society of healthy youth with an appreciation of their historical culture but where only the first is acceptable in this upside-down world we‘ll start at equivocating and then move to the truth.

>>25295489
???

>>25295184
>>25295185
>>25295335
>>25295361
>>25295367
Everybody here is extremely emotional and cannot formulate a rational response to something that is simple without contrived exaggerations. All I said was that not all knowledge is of equal value and apparently that caused a mass consternation event.

I'll be honest, I'm just a little disappointed in the low quality of the discourse on here these days.

What is is with Americans and making everything a felony? Imo the only things that should be felonies are murder, armed assault, armed robbery, rape, serious stuff like that. America's judicial system creates a culture of fear where you can have your life destroyed and thrown in prison for culture war shit.

I think the most annoying thing about this conversation is people being intentionally obtuse and trying to conflate "teaching" and "teaching about."

In the example given above, everyone is saying that leftists don't stigmatize "teaching about" fascism, but that's not the same thing as "teaching" it. Nobody needs to play stupid about this. Just admit that don't think all information and viewpoints are equally valuable and then we can dispense with this insane notion that this is about broadly protecting information, just information that you agree with.

>>25295516
Just take the L little man.

File: IMG_8249.jpg (286 KB, 1170x1830)

286 KB JPG

>>25295533
For (You)

File: 1750673008843130.png (238 KB, 446x466)

238 KB PNG

>>25295533
>We all replied to you with histrionics
>That means you took the L
???? Utterly befuddling.

>>25295516
If you're ever lucky enough to move out of low-information hypotheticals into the real thing you'll hopefully remember this conversation and reflect.

>>25295523
This is not what happened. Legislature does mean creating new laws, but those new laws are not always enforced via a felony.

Here's how this law works: you enter a library see a potty training book for kids. Due to this retarded law's broad scope, that's technically an adult-only book. So this law enables you to write a letter of complaint, and now the library has 2 months to relocate the book.

If the library doesn't do this, you can sue them and be awarded at least $250 in damages.

Who enforces this? Nobody knows. The law doesn't actually say. You don't call the cops, libraries and librarians aren't going to prison. However, the law does open them up to infinite lawsuits, so they're financially compelled to do something to minimize their exposure.

>>25295530
Nobody understands the distinction you're trying to make. You need to speak in plainer terms.

I learned about fascism in many different ways. I learned of it in an objective way in Civics class. I learned about it in practical examples in History and Geography. I learned about it via allegory in English class. I can now, and could then, take out just about any book on fascism I wanted from the library.

The only way I can make sense of your desire is that you're saying "I want a class that tells kids why fascism is good". Is that true?

>>25295546
LLM sloppa

>>25295546
>Nobody understands the distinction you're trying to make.
You have gotta be yanking my chain. You know exactly what it means.

I remember leafing through Playboy and Hustler mags at Borders when I was a kid. Barnes and Noble never had an adults only section either. This issue really only makes sense for libraries inside elementary schools, not regular libraries.

>>25293539
If you pay attention to current trends in publishing, literature is being quietly phased out and replaced with AI generated fetish slop pornography about women being raped by dark and brooding Epstein types which is then marketed to underage girls as "dark romance".

This is probably a move to get ahead of the inevitable backlash of pedophiles trying to sell porn to your children under the guise of "reading good" by making it seem like anyone against that is a cringe conservative that wants to force people to show IDs to use a library.

Your tax dollars are going to fund this btw, every AI genrated slop novella trying to make your underage daughter's pussy tingle at the thought of getting violently raped by a billionaire vampire in his billionaire mansion will be paid for by you, personally, in the form of book preorders from millions of libraries across the country

You cannot hate America enough.

Amazon & bookstores don't require age verification, BTW.

>>25295516
>says something retarded
>people make fun of him for being retarded
>EVERYBODY HERE IS EXTREMELY EMOTIONAL AND
kek

File: Untitled.png (400 KB, 510x826)

400 KB PNG

>>25295530
>In the example given above, everyone is saying that leftists don't stigmatize "teaching about" fascism, but that's not the same thing as "teaching" it.
You're right. "Teaching about" something isn't the same thing as "teaching" something. Teaching something involves actively encouraging someone to engage with something if not direct practice.

Now then, do these book bans focus on books that "teach" or "teach about" material? Can you show me on the doll where the book touched you?

I feel like moving from Florida to Idaho would be amazing. Both in demographics, weather and culture.

>>25296351
Too bad you live in China lol

>>25295530
>we can dispense with this insane notion that this is about broadly protecting information, just information that you agree with
the library contains many books on fascism, anon. if they don't have the fascist books you like, you can request them through interlibrary loan.

>>25293458
>the law requires public libraries and schools to relocate books deemed "harmful to minors" into restricted, adult-only sections
>law allows individuals to submit written complaints about materials that contain "sexual conduct". Libraries have 60 days to review the challenge

Fucking lmao amerifats will stop at nothing to shit up an outpost of education. "Parental responsibility be damned, help me government!" from the "anti-socialist" Mecca that values what was it again? Free speech?
Land of the deranged Israel worshippers.

>>25293530
/thread

>>25296352
We have a heckin' based and redpilled governor, but every time I go outside it's like Mexico and Africa joined forces

It's called malicious compliance and too many US libraries are run by kid fiddlers.

>>25296348
You have to be playing a fool if you are going to suggest that they aren't actively advertising the gay/trans shit. By "destigmatize" they mean teaching, not teaching about. I implore everyone not to play dumb. I'm so fucking tired of this rhetorical technique.

>>25296354
Books on fascism or fascist books? Are librarians fighting for the latter? Try to read the posts you're replying to.

File: 202412-0000485269.jpg (70 KB, 651x1000)

70 KB JPG

>>25296414
>actively advertising the gay/trans shit.
>By "destigmatize" they mean teaching
Neither of those words mean teaching. I'm not being cute. I'm not employing rhetoric. I'm telling you you are wrong. People, myself included used "teaching about" language because that's what was being attacked. Nobody was trying to equivocate that shit with "teaching". If they were just trying to restrict access to books that "teach" harmful shit, nobody would give a shit.

Also, to be clear, I asked you about what was being banned. Here. I'll help, so you can see I'm not employing any rhetorical technique. Here's the full text of the law this thread was made in connection to.
>https://legislature.idaho.gov/sessioninfo/billbookmark/?yr=2024&bn=H0710
Your delusions about what was going on in schools and libraries is completely fucking irrelevant to what is being asked.

Did the language in this law restrict teaching or teaching *about*?

>Harmful to minors includes in its meaning: the quality of anything tangible whether derived through the medium of reading, observation or sound, or of any play, motion picture, dance or other exhibition performed before an audience, or of any description or representation when it appeals to the prurient interest of minors as judged by the average person, applying contemporary community standards, and depicts or describes representations or descriptions of human male or female genitals, pubic area or buttocks with less than a full opaque covering, the female breast with less than a full opaque covering of any portion thereof below the top of the nipple, covered male genitals in a discernibly turgid state, any act of masturbation, any act of homosexuality, any act of sexual intercourse, physical contact with a person's clothed or unclothed genitals, physical contact with a person's clothed or unclothed pubic area, physical contact with a person's clothed or unclothed buttocks, physical contact with a female's clothed or unclothed breast, human male or female genitals when in a state of sexual stimulation or arousal, flagellation or torture by or upon a person who is nude or clad in undergarments, a mask or bizarre costume, or the condition of being fettered, bound or otherwise physically restrained on the part of one who is nude or clad in undergarments, a mask or bizarre costume which are patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community with respect to what is suitable material for minors and includes, but is not limited to, patently offensive representations or descriptions of: intimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated; or masturbation, excretory functions or lewd exhibition of the genitals or genital area. Nothing here in contained is intended to include or proscribe any matter which, when considered as a whole, and in context in which it is used, possesses serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors

Behold! Nudity!

>>25296499
>If they were just trying to restrict access to books that "teach" harmful shit, nobody would give a shit.
Totally fucking wrong and you know it.

>>25296515
Bro, you aren't supposed to concede that that's not what they're doing. That was your entire fucking argument.

>>25296519
I'm saying that the theory that nobody would give a shit is wrong. They do give a shit and the books ARE meant to teach, not teach about. That's the entire point of this shit. It's subversive and the people peddling it know that, but they play coy. People have been doing this since Alinsky, it's not new. Everybody knows now.

>>25296523
>the books ARE meant to teach
If they were you could show that.

>It's subversive
This! This right here is you outing yourself! This is about behavioral control. Subversive doesn't mean the books teach jack shit. Teaching about shit is often enough to subvert systems and orders. That's always why book bans and burnings happen. You aren't mad people are being encouraged to engage in certain behavior. You're mad people are being told that behavior can even be engaged in because then they might want to do it for themselves. This is just cracking down on heresy, same as it ever was.

>>25296523
The conflict between people that teach others how to live and people that teach others how to decide how to live is eternal.

>>25296538
>If they were you could show that.
There are screenshots in this thread already of one such book. Do not dumb here. No dumb area.

>This! This right here is you outing yourself!
Yes yes, I've fallen into the trap of calling people who want to subvert things subversives. It's not a value judgment, just a statement of fact. You are more than welcome to try and peddle heroin instruction manuals to students, but when people push back on it, don't pretend to be a fucktard and say it's just about access to material. Tell them that you want people to know it's behavior they can engage in!

>>25296541
Indeed. Or you can spend an evening on 4chan pretending not to know the difference, which is also a fun pastime.

>>25295335
>You're so convinced this issue is political

NTA but restricting access to books is 100% a political matter

>>25296538
>You're mad people are being told that behavior can even be engaged in because then they might want to do it for themselves. This is just cracking down on heresy, same as it ever was.
trvke

File: 51i6NPbMHrL._AC_UF1000,10(...).jpg (139 KB, 760x1000)

139 KB JPG

>>25296553
>There are screenshots in this thread already of one such book
That book doesn't actually tell anyone to do anything beyond kiss before sex and handle testicles with care.

The first is innocuous. The second is something we teach kids anyway well before sex-ed, as anyone that has ever played sports can attest.

Nowhere in that pic is anyone actually told to engage in sex, or perform any other immoral act.

Mayhaps you have some sort of deep seated psychological issue where you interpret the sight of a naked man as a flashing neon instruction to BE GAY?

>>25296601
The communist finally reveals himself

>>25296553
>Tell them that you want people to know it's behavior they can engage in!
I never denied that? Fun Fact: Teaching kids about fascism also means they learn it's something they can engage in. I'm not for removing books about fascism from school either.

Part of teaching people about how to find their way in life invariably involves teaching them about shit they should not do so you can put it in a context where they can recognize that. A person is more likely to walk off a cliff in the dark.

Yes, I want kids to be taught they can kill, rape, do drugs, steal, cheat, lie, etc. You got me. Cause that's better than them finding that shit out on their own the hard way.

Worry less about what knowledge kids have and more about what values they have.

File: clown.png (362 KB, 471x848)

362 KB PNG

>>25296608
>Pointing out someone is a repressed homosexual is Communism
And the award for stupidest post of the day goes too.

File: fuck up.png (29 KB, 237x345)

29 KB PNG

>>25296616
>too.

>>25293516
It's more like liberals force evil filth everywhere and conservatives ineffectively fight against this

>>25296601
>Nowhere in that pic is anyone actually told to engage in sex, or perform any other immoral act.
I'm not following your exchange but this is such a dumb criteria. Oh it only counts if they explicitly tell you to do this!!
That's idiotic.

Why would anyone ever go to Idaho?

>>25296627
Maybe they're trying to visit each state

>>25296621
>Oh it only counts if they explicitly tell you to do this!!
>That's idiotic.
To be clear, the criteria is the difference between what constitutes "teaching" and "teaching about".

Do you have an alternative criteria beyond instruction? Or are you just going to walk back this entire discussion and admit you're for banning teaching about shit?

File: images (2).jpg (30 KB, 689x290)

30 KB JPG

It's called malicious compliance.

>>25293458
To be quite honest, libraries should have a more dignified reputation and shouldn't be used as kindergartens, daycare centers, nor as gathering points for the local homeless and drug addicts.

File: Parental_Advisory_label.svg.png (26 KB, 1280x800)

26 KB PNG

>>25296559
You're right, but it's not like abortion or gun control where it "belongs" to any side. Wanting unfettered access to books and knowledge does not automatically make you a rightist or leftist, which is what anon was assuming.

Said a different way, both sides have attempted to ban or restrict books and knowledge, whether they're liberal soccer moms or conservative pearl clutchers

>>25296621
>Oh it only counts if (...) explicit
It'd be surprising if this is news to you, that's been the primary criteria for rating and censorship across all forms of work since forever.

Even then the restriction is often incorrect or morally wrong.

>>25296665
No. The law is very poorly worded and opens up libraries to infinite liability, thus libraries are forced to do insane things like that pic to minimize culpability.

The initial law was so broad people could sue over the bible, potty training books, religious art books, etc. being accessible to kids. It took 2 years and many lawsuits for lawmakers to finally correct this problem last month.

I want to read the school of venus

>>25293488
It's a misguided attempt to put an end to the stream of sexual material aimed at children. Unfortunately this degeneracy cannot be solved by law.

You people tell me you've never watched Terminator? Conservatives are going to really sterilize everything.

>>25295356
Zero argument found.

>>25297237
>The law is very poorly worded and opens up libraries to infinite liability
You're retarded. It's malicious compliance.

>>25296616
I noticed you did not deny being a communist.

>>25297420
Why can't leftists just say what they mean instead of veiling their true motivations with feigned ignorance?

>>25297409
when a child says 2 and 2 make 22, you don't argue with them. you just pat them on the head and laugh

>>25297420
The law's exact text has been posted multiple times in this thread. As written, the law could ban the Bible. The lawmakers clearly didn't want it to ban the Bible. It's a poorly worded law.
>>25297453
>Why can't leftists just say what they mean instead of veiling their true motivations with feigned ignorance?
Why can't Idaho lawmakers? I know, and you know, and they know, and the librarians know, and everyone in this thread knows that the law's really only meant for tranny faggy books. But that isn't what the law says, and the lawmakers know that they can't write a law that says "any books about trannies or fags or tranny fags are banned" because that law would immediately be overturned. Plus, they can't just make a list of books they want gone, because the week after the law's passed some publisher will come out with a new tranny faggy book that isn't on the banlist. So the law's written as it is... which allows people to sue their local library for providing copies of the Bible without parental supervision or consent.

>>25297577
>Why can't Idaho lawmakers?
You won't let them.

>>25297446
I'm not a communist. I noticed you did not deny being the dumbest fucking poster in this thread. Or that you're still beating your wife.

>>25297580
Right, because it's illegal. It's called "viewpoint discrimination," not allowed by the 1st Amendment. The general idea is that the govt can sometimes regulate categories of speech (think obscenity, think true threats, incitement, etc) but it can almost never say "X viewpoint is allowed but Y viewpoint is not." This is the same protection that keeps the CA state govt from banning Hitler biographies or MacDonald books or whatever, btw.
>You won't let them
The most recent Supreme Court case about this was Reed v. Town of Gilbert (2015), conservative-majority court

File: american doomer.jpg (89 KB, 750x1000)

89 KB JPG

>>25293458
The constant tranny hate gets old. You retarded faggots would support making literacy illegal if you thought it would annoy trannies.

>>25297591
I am extremely dumb, but you are still a communist.

>>25297624
I don't even know why I'm supposed to dislike trannies, but I know I am.

File: Spoiler Image (190 KB, 960x1306)

190 KB JPG

>>25297641
>I don't even know why I'm supposed to dislike trannies, but I know I am.
why do you have this instinctual hatred? where does it come from? also but you know you are... what, anon? is it possible you know you are a -- that "I know I am a " -- I won't say it

>>25297648
>why do you have this instinctual hatred?
I have been taught to hate people who are different from me.

>>25295118
a teenager who would even want to read ulysses (almost none of them do) is not going to have a problem finding a copy
it's a fucking stupid thing to try to restrict, especially when any kid can go read unlimited amounts of "fetishistic slop" on ao3 on their phone and there is no realistic non-totalitarian proposal that could prevent this
you are not going to be able to control what kids read. give up.

>>25297420
You can read the law yourself, it's not very long. You can read the most recent modification to the law and why they were necessary. You can read up on the lawsuits that have been underway for years.

Like anon said, >>25297577, everybody already know this is a tranny faggot issue. Your problem is that this knowledge causes you to turn your brain off. "Well I hate tranny faggots, so therefore anyone that's on the tranny faggot side is wrong in all aspects, and everyone that's not on the tranny faggot side is right in all aspects."

But that's not how things works generally and it's very much not how it's working right now. Yes, sometimes even the tranny faggot haters can be wrong or mistaken, as hard as that may be to believe. This is one such time. More broadly speaking, you should really avoid turning your brain off and letting other people dictate reality for you.

>>25293868
It's crazy how smart Dubya sounds compared to today's politicians.

>>25293665
How is this "bootlicking" in any way? I swear people will just use words randomly

>>25293458
It's downstream of gay libraries sticking gay erotica and tranny propaganda everywhere.

>>25293521
Fucking retard

>>25297641
>>25297648
>>25297667
>Behold the left wing intellect

File: 1700582178282039.jpg (39 KB, 215x280)

39 KB JPG

>>25293458
you are all fucking retarded to think this is actually true.

no doubt some toothless law was passed that said something like
>you can't give kids text books on gay sex blow jobs
and leftist librarians made this dumbass sign as a politically motivated over reaction

this is EXACTLY like the
>don't say gay bill
in florida that was actually just a limit on teaching Sexuality to children under 12 and leftists morons tried to make it seem like gays were being outlawed

anyone falling for this is a fucking smooth brained NPC

>>25298668
>in florida that was actually just a limit on teaching Sexuality to children under 12 and leftists morons tried to make it seem like gays were being outlawed
They literally formally investigated a teacher for showing a Disney film with a gay character in it to her class.

>>25298712
Would you have been ok with her showing them some video essay defending pedophilia? That's how conservatives feel about pro gay media.

Have some empathy.

>>25298725
>Would you have been ok with her showing them some video essay defending pedophilia?
What's wrong with putting forward an opinion that you don't personally agree with? Children shouldn't be wrapped in bubble wrap.

Is this a palantir thing? Like submit your ID so we know what books you’re reading

>>25298725
>Have some empathy.
It's best not to humanize animals.