Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   South Carolina's legislature out to prove that reading is fundamentalist   (nytimes.com) divider line 29
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

2922 clicks; posted to Politics » on 21 Apr 2014 at 8:41 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



29 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-04-21 08:45:00 AM  
Sounds fishy.
 
2014-04-21 08:51:14 AM  
I'm assuming that the majority of students there are over 18. The summer reading assignment was optional for students. Whenever some neo-confederate or libertarian yammers on and on about states' rights, this is the type of story worth pointing out to them.
 
2014-04-21 08:53:54 AM  
A parent complained? Are you taking the class? Then shut the hell up.

Also, if you have an issue with the reading list, did it occur to you to approach the school instead of running to congress?
 
2014-04-21 09:00:49 AM  

PanicMan: A parent complained? Are you taking the class? Then shut the hell up.

Also, if you have an issue with the reading list, did it occur to you to approach the school instead of running to congress?



Also, it's a f*cking college. Some freaking helicopter parent is upset because their adult son or daughter is going to read a book that included a picture of lesbians having sex?  Oh dear god no - that'll surely warp the fragile little mind of that fully grown adult who has probably watched hours of internet porn at this point in his/her life.
 
2014-04-21 09:01:30 AM  

DeArmondVI: I'm assuming that the majority of students there are over 18. The summer reading assignment was optional for students. Whenever some neo-confederate or libertarian yammers on and on about states' rights, this is the type of story worth pointing out to them.


People in Best Carolina biatched up a storm years ago over the freshman reading assignments.

This was the 2002 assignment, because how DARE we attempt to understand current events.
www.amana-publications.com

And they got particularly frothy over this one:
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2014-04-21 09:01:34 AM  
Haven't read/heard of the source material.  Is the claim of lesbian sex graphically described true/accurate?  Because if so I need to read that book.  For...  Educational purposes.

Or is this a case of a fundy crying because they heard the book mentioned lesbians?
 
2014-04-21 09:05:00 AM  

UNC_Samurai: DeArmondVI: I'm assuming that the majority of students there are over 18. The summer reading assignment was optional for students. Whenever some neo-confederate or libertarian yammers on and on about states' rights, this is the type of story worth pointing out to them.

People in Best Carolina biatched up a storm years ago over the freshman reading assignments.

This was the 2002 assignment, because how DARE we attempt to understand current events.


And they got particularly frothy over this one:


At least it wasn't this:

http://www.korea-dpr.com/lib/209.pdf

On the art of cinema,

By Kim Jong Il
 
2014-04-21 09:19:03 AM  

UNC_Samurai: And they got particularly frothy over this one:
[upload.wikimedia.org image 230x345]


Wuh? Were they offended by depictions of poor people?
 
2014-04-21 09:24:02 AM  

Wendy's Chili: UNC_Samurai: And they got particularly frothy over this one:
[upload.wikimedia.org image 230x345]

Wuh? Were they offended by depictions of poor people?


There's a line in it that calls Jesus a "Wine guzzling vagrant, and Socialist."  Apparently.
 
2014-04-21 09:26:17 AM  
This is satire, yes?

Someone please tell me this is satire.
 
2014-04-21 09:28:44 AM  
Sounds like a typical case of "my money is my money, but your money is our money"
 
2014-04-21 09:34:22 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: This is satire, yes?

Someone please tell me this is satire.


They don't call us the FacePalmetto state for nothing.

Satanic_Hamster: Or is this a case of a fundy crying because they heard the book mentioned lesbians?


Yes.  In the long and gloriously unbroken tradition of their ilk, these book-banners (as well as play-banners) have acted out vociferously against a work that they themselves have never read.  It is all hearsay and terrified reaction to the same.

Fun fact: CofC's "Good Reads" program is entirely funded by a convocation fee assessed on students, like so many non-academic things.  The retaliatory drop in funding thus is relegated to a purely-political shot at the faculty of the college.  Never mind that the state General Assembly overrode the $100,000+ search committee hired to find the next CofC president, instead installing long-time state senator and GOP GOB Glenn McConnell who has no relevant experience.
 
2014-04-21 09:38:39 AM  

Chummer45: PanicMan: A parent complained? Are you taking the class? Then shut the hell up.

Also, if you have an issue with the reading list, did it occur to you to approach the school instead of running to congress?


Also, it's a f*cking college. Some freaking helicopter parent is upset because their adult son or daughter is going to read a book that included a picture of lesbians having sex?  Oh dear god no - that'll surely warp the fragile little mind of that fully grown adult who has probably watched hours of internet porn at this point in his/her life.


Yep. And I'd bet real money that neither the parent or the senator actually read the book.
 
2014-04-21 10:08:22 AM  

Satanic_Hamster: Haven't read/heard of the source material.  Is the claim of lesbian sex graphically described true/accurate?  Because if so I need to read that book.  For...  Educational purposes.

Or is this a case of a fundy crying because they heard the book mentioned lesbians?


The book is a graphic novel by Allison Bechdel, a cartoonist (she did the comic strip "Dykes to Watch Out For").  I read "Fun House" a long time ago, and I don't remember anything particularly sexually graphic, but either way, we're talking about cartoonish drawings, and not actual pictures.


The book is really about Bechdel and her father--she's a lesbian and he spent his whole life unhappy and closeted.  It's an autobiographical, coming of age kind of book.  It's about the pain of being closeted, the pain of coming out, the difficulties of a repressed generation staring down the (relative) freedoms of the next, and general parent/child relationship stuff.  It's a good book, and very well done in terms of graphic novels, but it's also depressing as fark towards the end (but I love depressing books).

It does not sensationalize homosexuality, or try to convert anyone.  The most dangerous thing about it, for conservatives, is that it openly demonstrates how harmful all their shame, denial, and abuse is to homosexuals, and it depicts homosexuals as real people with real feelings.  The horror.
 
2014-04-21 10:11:33 AM  
We want to send a message to the colleges and universities that their academic freedom comes with responsibility.- SC State Representative Gary Smith


That's some scary thinking right there. I thought academic freedom came with, you know, freedom.
 
2014-04-21 10:12:24 AM  

ckccfa: The book is a graphic novel by Allison Bechdel, a cartoonist (she did the comic strip "Dykes to Watch Out For"). I read "Fun House" a long time ago, and I don't remember anything particularly sexually graphic, but either way, we're talking about cartoonish drawings, and not actual pictures.


So you're saying that the scene(s) in question aren't even erotic?  If you can't even rub one out, what the hell are these people complaining about?
 
2014-04-21 10:19:24 AM  

Satanic_Hamster: ckccfa: The book is a graphic novel by Allison Bechdel, a cartoonist (she did the comic strip "Dykes to Watch Out For"). I read "Fun House" a long time ago, and I don't remember anything particularly sexually graphic, but either way, we're talking about cartoonish drawings, and not actual pictures.

So you're saying that the scene(s) in question aren't even erotic?  If you can't even rub one out, what the hell are these people complaining about?


It depicts homosexuals as normal people instead of depraved sex-maniacs, and we can't have that.
 
2014-04-21 10:19:41 AM  

rdu_voyager: That's some scary thinking right there. I thought academic freedom came with, you know, freedom.


We don't exactly send the best and brightest to Columbia around here, and also recall that state is the home of Bob Jones University and many other bible colleges, but Rep Smith's district is right there.  Of course, Greenville is actually a pretty cool city.  Strange.
 
2014-04-21 10:30:14 AM  

Arkanaut: It depicts homosexuals as normal people instead of depraved sex-maniacs, and we can't have that.


Yep.

You'd think at least one of these people would say, "Hey, before we flip our lid, maybe one of us should actually READ the passage in question to make sure that this is a legit complaint and not someone pulling our chains to make us look stupid."
 
2014-04-21 10:38:31 AM  

ckccfa: Satanic_Hamster: Haven't read/heard of the source material.  Is the claim of lesbian sex graphically described true/accurate?  Because if so I need to read that book.  For...  Educational purposes.

Or is this a case of a fundy crying because they heard the book mentioned lesbians?

The book is a graphic novel by Allison Bechdel, a cartoonist (she did the comic strip "Dykes to Watch Out For").  I read "Fun House" a long time ago, and I don't remember anything particularly sexually graphic, but either way, we're talking about cartoonish drawings, and not actual pictures.


The book is really about Bechdel and her father--she's a lesbian and he spent his whole life unhappy and closeted.  It's an autobiographical, coming of age kind of book.  It's about the pain of being closeted, the pain of coming out, the difficulties of a repressed generation staring down the (relative) freedoms of the next, and general parent/child relationship stuff.  It's a good book, and very well done in terms of graphic novels, but it's also depressing as fark towards the end (but I love depressing books).

It does not sensationalize homosexuality, or try to convert anyone.  The most dangerous thing about it, for conservatives, is that it openly demonstrates how harmful all their shame, denial, and abuse is to homosexuals, and it depicts homosexuals as real people with real feelings.  The horror.



Well, we can't have that, now can we?  Next thing you know, they'll want to vote.
 
2014-04-21 10:48:20 AM  

Satanic_Hamster: Arkanaut: It depicts homosexuals as normal people instead of depraved sex-maniacs, and we can't have that.

Yep.

You'd think at least one of these people would say, "Hey, before we flip our lid, maybe one of us should actually READ the passage in question to make sure that this is a legit complaint and not someone pulling our chains to make us look stupid."


Ah, there's the dilemma though, because reading is for f*ggots.
 
2014-04-21 11:00:12 AM  

Satanic_Hamster: Arkanaut: It depicts homosexuals as normal people instead of depraved sex-maniacs, and we can't have that.

Yep.

You'd think at least one of these people would say, "Hey, before we flip our lid, maybe one of us should actually READ the passage in question to make sure that this is a legit complaint and not someone pulling our chains to make us look stupid."


Please. They don't even do that with their own holy book, why would they even dare to crinkle the spine of such a godless work?

// "My pastor says this book has naughty pitchers in it, therefore ban it and any reduce funding for any college that promotes it, because academic freedom"
 
2014-04-21 11:14:03 AM  

Satanic_Hamster: You'd think at least one of these people would say, "Hey, before we flip our lid, maybe one of us should actually READ the passage in question to make sure that this is a legit complaint and not someone pulling our chains to make us look stupid."


Immaterial.  The people being pandered to are never going to read anything like "Fun Home" or see "How To Become a Lesbian in 10 Days" because they can't even accept that homosexuals are people, much less people able to have regular problems and laugh at themselves.  So the blowhard pol isn't going to be hamstrung by it, since the constituency doesn't care.

Arkanaut: Ah, there's the dilemma though, because reading is for f*ggots.


What you said.
 
2014-04-21 12:04:44 PM  

factoryconnection: Marcus Aurelius: This is satire, yes?

Someone please tell me this is satire.

They don't call us the FacePalmetto state for nothing.

Satanic_Hamster: Or is this a case of a fundy crying because they heard the book mentioned lesbians?

Yes.  In the long and gloriously unbroken tradition of their ilk, these book-banners (as well as play-banners) have acted out vociferously against a work that they themselves have never read.  It is all hearsay and terrified reaction to the same.

Fun fact: CofC's "Good Reads" program is entirely funded by a convocation fee assessed on students, like so many non-academic things.  The retaliatory drop in funding thus is relegated to a purely-political shot at the faculty of the college.  Never mind that the state General Assembly overrode the $100,000+ search committee hired to find the next CofC president, instead installing long-time state senator and GOP GOB Glenn McConnell who has no relevant experience.


It doesn't matter where the actual funding came from, if we are funding anything at the school it frees up funds to spend on bad things.

You know, that same BS argument that comes with every one of the "defund planned parenthood" pushes.
 
2014-04-21 12:45:42 PM  
It's a graphic novel with a few panels that show tits, a few that show bush, maybe a total of three panels showing girls going down on each other with a little bit of cartoony bush in the frame, and one panel that shows a the penis on a dead body on an embalming table. Hard R rating/uber lame softcore at most. And yes the legislators are giant tool bags.

/this state has been stuck on stupid since the 1820s
 
2014-04-21 01:23:34 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Satanic_Hamster: Arkanaut: It depicts homosexuals as normal people instead of depraved sex-maniacs, and we can't have that.

Yep.

You'd think at least one of these people would say, "Hey, before we flip our lid, maybe one of us should actually READ the passage in question to make sure that this is a legit complaint and not someone pulling our chains to make us look stupid."

Please. They don't even do that with their own holy book, why would they even dare to crinkle the spine of such a godless work?

// "My pastor says this book has naughty pitchers in it, therefore ban it and any reduce funding for any college that promotes it, because academic freedom"


Ezekiel 23:19-20
(19)Yet she increased her whorings, remembering the days of her youth, when she played the whore in the land of Egypt (20)and lusted after her paramours there, whose members were like those of donkeys, and whose emission was like that of stallions.


Best passage in the whole book.
 
2014-04-21 01:46:40 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: ckccfa: The book is a graphic novel by Allison Bechdel, a cartoonist (she did the comic strip "Dykes to Watch Out For"). I read "Fun House" a long time ago, and I don't remember anything particularly sexually graphic, but either way, we're talking about cartoonish drawings, and not actual pictures.

So you're saying that the scene(s) in question aren't even erotic?  If you can't even rub one out, what the hell are these people complaining about?


They're probably all so repressed that they could rub one out to just about anything, if they ever let their hands stray down there.
 
2014-04-21 03:06:11 PM  

DeArmondVI: I'm assuming that the majority of students there are over 18. The summer reading assignment was optional for students. Whenever some neo-confederate or libertarian yammers on and on about states' rights, this is the type of story worth pointing out to them.


No, because when they do it, it's about "morality," which takes precedent over all. When someone else does it, it's "governmental overreach and destruction of the free-market," a nicely political stance.
 
2014-04-21 03:44:33 PM  
I like this bit from the article:

"I don't have a problem with their academic freedom but they're asking someone else to pay for it," said Smith, who accused the college of promoting a social agenda. "We want to send a message to the colleges and universities that their academic freedom comes with responsibility."

Is this just now going to become the Republican run-to response to anything? I mean, seriously. You're complaining about paying for a farking PUBLIC UNIVERSITY. Yes, you're paying for their academic freedom. That's the point of a PUBLIC UNIVERSITY.
 
Displayed 29 of 29 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report