I find something SO ironic about this. But that’s all I’m going to say at the risk of being banned.

That’s right . You don’t rewrite history and you sure don’t rewrite Mark Twain . The teachers can discuss it and explain it . Kids can handle it .

This is the result of liberal political correctnesss. We’re not allowed to offend anyone these days. People need to stiffen up and learn to let things roll off us.

Big Eddie said:
That’s right . You don’t rewrite history and you sure don’t rewrite Mark Twain . The teachers can discuss it and explain it . Kids can handle it .

The same kids who are being denied Mark Twain at school are constantly listening to music outside of school which says the same word that got Twain taken off the shelves.

The best way to learn and change the society for the better is to look at the mistakes of the past. DO not censor Huckelberry Finn. The kids can be fine with it. Its always right to educate the kids by telling them about the disturbing stuff from the past so that they don’t repeat it in the future…

Remember when liberals used to be AGAINST book burnings & censorship? My how times have changed.

Leave Huckelberry Finn as is, unchanged, and unedited. Presenting the book allows the teachers the opportunity to have a discussion on the issues and show how our culture changes over time. HF was appropriate for children when I was in school and it is appropriate for them now. Sheltering children from reality is not always doing them a favor.

timzank said:
Remember when liberals used to be AGAINST book burnings & censorship? My how times have changed.

Does you mean conservatives are still FOR book burnings & censorship?

I wouldn’t want my kid to read that. Just remove the word and change the title or add “adapted for the year 2011″ or something of that nature. You can teach children historical injustices some time else in a better more appropriate setting.

Scott_in_MI said:
The same kids who are being denied Mark Twain at school are constantly listening to music outside of school which says the same word that got Twain taken off the shelves.

You are dumb. No moral equivalence.

@Colby: While I’ll agree that a censored version should be labeled as “revised”, I have no problem with the idea of taking out the word (that you or the anchor couldn’t say on television) because it would make the book more appropriate for a wider audience.

A quick Google shows that though it mostly appears on junior high reading lists, a few schools list it for as low as 5th. And speaking personally, it’s a book that I’d like for my daughter to read, but she’s never heard or read the word and though it may be historically accurate, I have no desire to introduce it into her vocabulary.

After all, she has friends of all races and though she’s learned about the slave era and we’ve taken her to historic sites from that timeframe, though I’d like for her to read the book, I haven’t pushed or suggested the idea because of that word.

Call me politically-correct or a bleeding heart liberal, but I’d prefer a revised a edition and because Mark Twain was all about making the Benjamins, I’m sure he’d have no problem with the scheme.

Thank you. Yes. If you don’t like the word in the book, don’t teach the book. Do not censor. This sounded so 1984-ish to me when I heard it earlier today. And I’m not one who uses 1984 in the context of policies I disagree with.

So pathetic. This really isn’t about political correctness as much as guilty white guys trying to take an eraser to an ugly history. This is like censoring the Sistine Chapel so kids don’t have to see genitals. It is just not worth it.

Magister said:
And speaking personally, it’s a book that I’d like for my daughter to read, but she’s never heard or read the word and though it may be historically accurate, I have no desire to introduce it into her vocabulary.

For Christs sake what are ya gonna do when she’s 35? She’s gonna hear it someday isn’t she? Why do you feel the need to rewrite history?

timzank said:
For Christs sake what are ya gonna do when she’s 35? She’s gonna hear it someday isn’t she? Why do you feel the need to rewrite history?

1) If you can , fob off any tough discussions to the teachers.

2) If the teachers won’t do it , ban/censor it.

I have less of a problem with this than perhaps I should…

Clearly label the title “censored” or “altered” or something… AND include a few pages in the book explaining the original word, its original literary intent, the reason for the adjustment, and what it all means.

While I don’t like the idea of altering the original text… the idea of kids reading this book out loud in class, dropping n-bombs all over the place, or using them in test answers… I don’t know, it makes me equally uncomfortable.

Gasket said:
You are dumb. No moral equivalence

wow you really told me

Okay – First of all, though I haven’t really been following the story so I don’t know how much has been reported, but we’re talking about one edition of a public domain novel being published by one company. It’s not like every copy of the book ever produced from this point forward will be revised, it’ll just those from this one company and if none of the other versions are to your liking, then you can publish an edition of your own.

Right now the book does not appear in many schools and it goes untaught in many jurisdictions. Perhaps some of those schools will add it back to their curriculum with the revised edition and if your kid’s school is currently teaching the original, but they decide to change to the revised, then go to a school board meeting and question the decision.

timzank said:
For Christs sake what are ya gonna do when she’s 35? She’s gonna hear it someday isn’t she? Why do you feel the need to rewrite history?

I’m sure by the time my daughter is 35, she’ll have heard the word and by that time we’ll have discussed it, but she’s not 35 at this time and I see no reason to introduce it just so she could read this one book.

…and again, neither Colby nor the anchor said the word on a news broadcast, which isn’t targeted toward children. So, if it’s so acceptable and is arguably an important part of the story, then why didn’t they utter its name?

After rewatching the clip, I heard Colby mention junior high as the appropriate age. Perhaps for literary analysis, but Huck Finn was an enjoyable book much earlier. Perhaps eight to ten years of age, similar to the characters? I personally first read it at age seven, IIRC, right after Tom Sawyer. Oops, some references to Injun Joe and the topic of alcoholism, along with dipping a girl’s pigtails in an inkwell. Racist, sexist, and not at all PC. Guess the sanitized and revised edition of TS will be on it’s way shortly…

Even as a child I found ways to evade censorship. I would guess that most children by age ten will have been exposed to plenty of things their parents wish they had never seen or heard, from television, movies, the internet, and their peers. Take the sad example of Jessi Slaughter. She is only 11, but after watching her youtube rant, I don’t think reading TS or HF is going to injure her development any. An unsupervised webcam is a far worse choice than a Mark Twain book IHMO.

Oh, and because I’ve been kind of servicey today, I’ll let anyone know who might care that because they’re all in the public domain, “Huckleberry Finn” and the other Twain books are available for online reading via Project Gutenberg.

Of course, if Gutenberg didn’t limit their library to free, non-commercial distributions, I’d suggest that anyone offended by the change to “slave” (like Roger Ebert), but who doesn’t want the n-word, download a copy, change the offending word to “cupcake” and then republish it via Lulu for Amazon sales.

Let’s see, now we have to remove the “N” word for “Vanity Fair” and “Show Boat” and maybe remove the “Jew” word from “Merchant of Venice.” It’s all stupid and Colby Hall is a twit for his “their intentions were good” speech.

George C said:
1) If you can , fob off any tough discussions to the teachers.
2) If the teachers won’t do it , ban/censor it.

Personally, I wouldn’t want a teacher to discuss the term with my kid and I don’t trust them to properly explain the meaning. After all, they’re just teachers and most are no more qualified to give literary analysis than anyone else.

Scott_in_MI said:
wow you really told me

I’m still recoiling from you referring to black people as animals in the other thread. Yes, your analogy was specious and stupid.

PS) And, I’m going to tread lightly for obvious reasons, but I find it kind of interesting and perhaps a statement on media that a television station in one of the literary and artistic capitals of the world, which is surrounded by hundreds of schools and dozens of colleges called Colby to give his opinion about education.

Helix said:
After rewatching the clip, I heard Colby mention junior high as the appropriate age. Perhaps for literary analysis, but Huck Finn was an enjoyable book much earlier. Perhaps eight to ten years of age, similar to the characters? I personally first read it at age seven, IIRC, right after Tom Sawyer. Oops, some references to Injun Joe and the topic of alcoholism, along with dipping a girl’s pigtails in an inkwell. Racist, sexist, and not at all PC. Guess the sanitized and revised edition of TS will be on it’s way shortly…

Even as a child I found ways to evade censorship. I would guess that most children by age ten will have been exposed to plenty of things their parents wish they had never seen or heard, from television, movies, the internet, and their peers. Take the sad example of Jessi Slaughter. She is only 11, but after watching her youtube rant, I don’t think reading TS or HF is going to injure her development any. An unsupervised webcam is a far worse choice than a Mark Twain book IHMO.

Like the TSA groping, the Left is setting the stage for even more draconian control over people. We’re all supposed to get used to it so when they start silencing others, the First Amendment will be redefined.

Remember, Modern Liberalism/Progressivism is about control. We need to oppose liberals at every step.

ImNotBlue said:
I have less of a problem with this than perhaps I should…

Clearly label the title “censored” or “altered” or something… AND include a few pages in the book explaining the original word, its original literary intent, the reason for the adjustment, and what it all means.

While I don’t like the idea of altering the original text… the idea of kids reading this book out loud in class, dropping n-bombs all over the place, or using them in test answers… I don’t know, it makes me equally uncomfortable.

I completely agree.

Do any of the people who are against this actually have kids? Do you really want young immature children to read (aloud) the n-word in the context it’s used in the book?

Just make a kids version of the book that omits this word, then when they’re more mature they can read the original.

Magister said:
Personally, I wouldn’t want a teacher to discuss the term with my kid and I don’t trust them to properly explain the meaning. After all, they’re just teachers and most are no more qualified to give literary analysis than anyone else.

It’s a shame Huck didn’t have two Mommies . That, we know the teachers are qualified to explain.

SWWT said:
Do any of the people who are against this actually have kids? Do you really want young immature children to read (aloud) the n-word in the context it’s used in the book?

Completely agree ! Better that it is only used ,devoid of any context , in song lyrics .

Magister said:
Of course, if Gutenberg didn’t limit their library to free, non-commercial distributions, I’d suggest that anyone offended by the change to “slave” (like Roger Ebert), but who doesn’t want the n-word, download a copy, change the offending word to “cupcake” and then republish it via Lulu for Amazon sales.

Super ! The classics are now Mad-Libs .

George C said:
It’s a shame Huck didn’t have two Mommies . That, we know the teachers are qualified to explain.

Of course we’re getting off into AOL chat territory, but other than the fact that not all teachers are created the same, you’ve touched upon one of the reasons that I wouldn’t trust whichever random teacher pulls the “Huck Finn” straw to teach the cultural aspects of the work.

I can’t remember which grade it happened, but I was extremely disappointed and quite livid, when one of my daughter’s teachers told her that people of the same sex can’t get married.

We had never differentiated the relationships among our family friends and relatives who were “married” for all intents and purposes, whether they were a same sex couple, legally married, a civil union or a man and woman “living in sin”.

Of course, we know some couples (of all persuasions) who prefer the word “partner” and if that was their choice, we’d honor it, but as far as my children were concerned there were no differences in the relationship between any pairing of people because all they knew was that they loved each other.

What my daughter’s teacher told her about same sex marriage was legally correct in that jurisdiction, much like the n-word was used by some people at a particular time in our nation’s history, but I felt the teacher had overstepped the bounds by correcting her and because random teacher may not hold the same values as myself, I don’t trust them to teach racism and racial epithets as history.

Naturally when my daughter is older and better understands the difference between opinion and fact, plus when she’s more comfortable questioning the things she’s being taught, it’ll be fine and she’ll be well-grounded. But, I don’t want to teach her hate or that hate exists and I’d like for her to read Huck Finn, so I have no problem that an English professor wants to run-off 7,500 copies in a revised edition.

Magister said:
What my daughter’s teacher told her about same sex marriage was legally correct in that jurisdiction, much like the n-word was used by some people at a particular time in our nation’s history, but I felt the teacher had overstepped the bounds by correcting her and because random teacher may not hold the same values as myself, I don’t trust them to teach racism and racial epithets as history.

No child should attend school without legal representation.

Clarification: When I say “hate”, I mean as it is relates to that single word. We’ve been to the Civil Rights Museum; we’ve sat on the replica of Rosa Park’s bus and we’ve seen the laser that traces the route of James Earl Ray’s bullet. We’ve also toured plantation homes and slave quarters, civil war battle sites and we’ve touched upon aspects of my family’s personal history.

I just don’t want to introduce her to that particular word because you’ve heard it, it’ll always be there.

^there should be a “once you’ve heard it” in that last sentence and while I’m here…

The Count said:
No child should attend school without legal representation.

I just quietly fumed, bitched to my friends and taught my daughter about legal definitions in response to the same sex situation, but when her music teacher said that she felt sorry for kids who didn’t go to church, we and other parents had her disciplined and on her third strike, she was fired.

Magister said:
I just quietly fumed, bitched to my friends and taught my daughter about legal definitions in response to the same sex situation, but when her music teacher said that she felt sorry for kids who didn’t go to church, we and other parents had her disciplined and on her third strike, she was fired.

So a happy ending for everyone then .

George C said:
It’s a shame Huck didn’t have two Mommies . That, we know the teachers are qualified to explain.

Word.

Fact: Reading Mark Twain to children is acceptable but you need a permission slip to recite the pledge of allegiance! That’s being politically correct for liberals is getting out of hand!

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
I find something SO ironic about this. But that’s all I’m going to say at the risk of being banned.

Go ahead and say it, Michelle-in-Utah. It’s not as if we’ll lose anything if you are banned (which, in your case, is always a paranoiac whine and not a reality) and your son will get to see his mother from time-to-time.

Just4thefax said:
Fact: Reading Mark Twain to children is acceptable but you need a permission slip to recite the pledge of allegiance! That’s being politically correct for liberals is getting out of hand!

Let’s see, the former has to do with free expression and the latter with the establishment of a religion. You’re right. Identical. Complete equivalency.

By the way, the permission slip canard is, like all canards, BS.

George C said:
It’s a shame Huck didn’t have two Mommies . That, we know the teachers are qualified to explain.

Because they read Beckerhead’s new book?

This is a very good commentary, Colby, and I appreciate your doing this. I detest seeing literature destroyed like this. We have an unhealthy dynamic in our nation. So many parents no longer parent by dealing with their children. Instead, that interaction with the children is left to the schools and government (through libraries, after school programs and the like). The new model for parenting is complete detachment and neglect of the children, but healthy doses of criticism of the schools and government when they fail to meet the parents’ expectations of how the schools and government should be parenting their children. It’s Biazarro World, and it permeates everything in our society.

I’ve got to agree with Mr. Hall on this. It’s a very dangerous step to be taking.

I also agree with Colby, and I applaud him for not invoking the “road to hell” cliche’ with regard to good intentions.

This is somewhat complicated, though. I personally believe that children should read Huck Finn, and have the same conversation I had about it with my folks. I would do the same with my kids, because the book makes some very powerful statements about race.

On the other hand, I completely understand those who disagree. The n-word has a unique power in our language, and the argument that it’s power as a blunt instrument outweighs its literary value is a valid one. I think it should be up to the individual parents and children to decide about this.

But in editing the book, the door is opened to other forms of censorship, and while I normally don’t find “slippery slope” arguments all that compelling, here, it is.

I think a less dangerous way of dealing with this would be to redact the word to n***er. In that way, you’re blunting the force of it, as you would with an obscenity, but without removing its footprint from the book, or our history.

@TRRK: That’s all, well and good, but using the AP wire story from WPIX that Colby likely used as a primer before going on the air: “Huckleberry Finn” is the fourth most-banned book in American education. It was removed from the New York City elementary and junior high school in 1957.

This means that any kid who was in fifth grade at the time the book was banned in that particular district is now 64 years old and through parental action or under the fear of reprisals, the book is primarily no longer being taught.

So, the idea that an educator has spurred this conversation is actually the flipside of your lament and not only could his option of a limited edition, edited for television version possibly get it into more schools, but perhaps more parents will request the original text to be reintroduced into the system.

Again, the professor is only planning an initial run of 7,500 copies to be printed in February. The book is public domain and there’s no shortage of unedited versions in print or available online.

Magister said:
@TRRK: That’s all, well and good, but using the AP wire story from WPIX that Colby likely used as a primer before going on the air: “Huckleberry Finn” is the fourth most-banned book in American education. It was removed from the New York City elementary and junior high school in 1957.

This means that any kid who was in fifth grade at the time the book was banned in that particular district is now 64 years old and through parental action or under the fear of reprisals, the book is primarily no longer being taught.

So, the idea that an educator has spurred this conversation is actually the flipside of your lament and not only could his option of a limited edition, edited for television version possibly get it into more schools, but perhaps more parents will request the original text to be reintroduced into the system.

Again, the professor is only planning an initial run of 7,500 copies to be printed in February. The book is public domain and there’s no shortage of unedited versions in print or available online.

I don’t disagree, nor do I diminish the complexity of this issue. To be sure, my education was not typical. I attended German schools in what would have been the equivalent of 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th grades, and then I enrolled in boarding school in the Northeast. I read Huck in the 8th grade. Those of us from Texas and the South were made visibly uncomfortable in classroom discussion. At that time, most of us had been rigorously instructed to use the then correct term, “Negro” and to never use the other “n” word. So, in reading Huck, we were all impressed by the sheer power of language, and in discussing Huck, in class and in the required paper, we also learned of the evolving nature of language. I’d have to say the experience was one of the pivotal moments in my education.

The teacher’s approach was, of course, pedantic, almost clinical.

When I returned to Austin the summer following reading “Huck”, my parents continued the learning process by some pointed applications. Now, Austin, even then, had a more California-like approach to race and race relations. But, in visiting relatives in East Texas and even Dallas and Houston, we were still finding segregated restrooms and restaurants and the “n” word being used commonly.

I’m not too sure that, without that two-prong approach Huck would have worked so effectively and well for me. And, I know, today, in crowded classrooms and with neglectful parents, that is possible. But, if Huck becomes simply a family-friendly, politically correct travel story, it’s value is diminished. In fact, it ceases to be valuable at all I should think.

My sisters, who went to public school in Texas, did not read Huck until college, nor did they read “To Kill a Mockingbird” and “Catcher in the Rye” until then because of banning. That was a loss for them.

So, I agree, Huck needs to be introduced, read and discussed with a great deal of care and planning. Those are rare commodities for cash-strapped schools and time-strapped parents. If the alternative is banning or radical editing, however, I think we as a culture lose and our children lose.

The Real Royal King said:
To be sure, my education was not typical. I attended German schools in what would have been the equivalent of 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th grades, and then I enrolled in boarding school in the Northeast.

So?

The Real Royal King said:
My sisters, who went to public school in Texas, did not read Huck until college, nor did they read “To Kill a Mockingbird” and “Catcher in the Rye” until then because of banning. That was a loss for them.

Your familiy should have moved to Dallas/ Ft. Worth where “Huck ” was taught in public schools until 2007. Who knew that liberal Austin would lead Texas , championing censorship three decades ahead of the curve.

The Real Royal King said:
So, I agree, Huck needs to be introduced, read and discussed with a great deal of care and planning. Those are rare commodities for cash-strapped schools and time-strapped parents. If the alternative is banning or radical editing, however, I think we as a culture lose and our children lose.

As it stands right now, the book isn’t being taught in most US schools, though it may appear on some optional reading lists. So, the question seems to be whether we stick with the status quo that was started by people old enough to have been Bill Clinton’s parents, we make a pre-emptive effort to have the book reintroduced into the curriculum in it’s original form, or we allow schools to have the option of teaching the revised edition.

Of course, we have no say in whether the professor will actually publish his version and as I stated earlier, if it was available, then I’d probably buy a copy for my daughter because she doesn’t live in the late 19th century and not only do I want to protect her from the word, but I see no purpose in having her bombarded by a character only slightly older than herself using it with such frequency.

And of course, if some type of movement were to occur that would get the book added back to the schools, then I see no reason that we shouldn’t revisit all of the banned books because just as this particular novel has some historical and cultural context, the same can be said for “Catcher in the Rye”, “Of Mice and Men”, “A Wrinkle in Time” and many of the other books that have landed on the list over the years.

But again, the professor may or may not publish his revised edition and it would have no effect on the availability of any other version. Though, what we’ll probably end-up with will simply be a continuation of the status quo until an individual educator asks for an exemption to teach the NewSouth edition and due to its availability, schools would be forced to revisit their existing policy.

IOW: Everybody wins and whether the book is printed, we don’t get a vote.

After attending Wetherby pre-prep in England, I moved on to Chateau de Rosey in Rolle, Switzerland. Then it was on to two years at Eton, after which I transferred to the University of St. Andrews. While there, I often bumped into Prince William, and during one rousing discussion over tea and biscuits, the prince mentioned that he had enjoyed reading Huckleberry Finn. I of course told him of my revulsion at the ‘n’ word, but when I speculated on how Twain may have reacted had he ever seen the size of Brisket Palin’s thighs, the prince was so amused he expelled a bit of Darjeeling onto his Louis Moinet Magistralis.

Gasket said:
I’m still recoiling from you referring to black people as animals in the other thread. Yes, your analogy was specious and stupid.

First off, how is it my analogy about kids being shielded from the n-word in a school library despite them listening to music with the same word stupid? Just because my argument is powerful and sound and you can’t refute it doesn’t make it stupid.

Second, can you please show me where I referred to “black people as animals?”

More Liberty2 said:
So?

So I have difficulty speaking of what would have happened in a more traditional school were these books read. It might have been the same, it might have been different. I should think that self-evident.

I think we underestimate the intelligence of children sometimes. In this context for the most part. The kids have heard the word and will continue to hear the word. Censorship of this nature is never good IMO

Helix said:
Leave Huckelberry Finn as is, unchanged, and unedited. Presenting the book allows the teachers the opportunity to have a discussion on the issues and show how our culture changes over time. HF was appropriate for children when I was in school and it is appropriate for them now. Sheltering children from reality is not always doing them a favor.

I totally agree with you.

MiddleRoader said:
In this context for the most part. The kids have heard the word and will continue to hear the word.

I mean nothing derogatory toward MiddleRoader, Helix or any of the other commenters, but I really have to wonder what kind of media your children are choosing to consume.

Scott_in_MI said:
First off, how is it my analogy about kids being shielded from the n-word in a school library despite them listening to music with the same word stupid? Just because my argument is powerful and sound and you can’t refute it doesn’t make it stupid.
”

It’s a sound analogy based on real world experience. In addition, it’s not just the music the kids listen to, it’s the music their friends listen to. Or people they pass by on the street, listening to Snoop Dog, Eminem, and Lady Gaga at high volume on their SUV or car stereo.

And Colby certainly knows quite a lot about “censoring.” Ask him. Ask me. Oh, already been there & done that. He himself is a Master Censor. Interesting that he would attack a process (censorship) in which he himself engages readily & at his slightest whim. Be careful what you say – no matter what your thoughts.

Magister said:
I mean nothing derogatory toward MiddleRoader, Helix or any of the other commenters, but I really have to wonder what kind of media your children are choosing to consume.

With all due respect , how out of touch are you ?

Magister said:
I mean nothing derogatory toward MiddleRoader, Helix or any of the other commenters, but I really have to wonder what kind of media your children are choosing to consume.

No offense taken. Not having children myself makes me really reluctant to criticize others, although that won’t stop me voicing a general opinion on the subject. For starters, there is no television in my house and if I had children that would probably still be true. Some of my library, CD’s, software, weapons, and roleplaying books would have to be off limits. For music, no rap would be allowed. Ever. Of course that would not prevent exposure 100%, as previously posted, but that is the best I could do.

One of the problems as a parent includes teaching your values (whatever they might be) to your children, especially about good and evil. The n-word thing ties into this, as you have a valid point about not wanting a child exposed to the realities of human cruelty too early. But waiting too long means the child will learn from the school of hard knocks instead of gaining the benefit of the parent’s wisdom and experience. Your kid. Your call.

tws258 said:
With all due respect , how out of touch are you ?

Perhaps through answering your question, I can illustrate one of the reasons that I favor having the option of a revised edition and a market for the book.

My daughter is in the fifth grade. She reads at a high school level and I’d like for her to have access to the book because we live about twenty minutes from the Mississippi River, near many of the locations that are used in the novel. Last year was also the centennial of Twain’s death and while we’re living in this part of the country, we plan to visit Twain sites and have taken daytrips to learn about other historical figures from this part of the world.

I’m sure as she gets older, she’ll want more freedom with her media choices, but as it stands now, her only access to television is the one in the living room and the one in my children’s playroom, which has every station blocked except for the Nicks, Disney, ABCFamily, PBS, a couple of Discovery and National Geographic networks, CNN and The Weather Channel. (I can’t swear that I’ve listed everything, but this is a fairly complete list)

Her only access to movies are those which air on one of those stations, those which we own, those that she gets from the library with her parent’s approval and those that we rent on her behalf.

(She also has a Hulu account, but it’s registered to block inappropriate programming and my kid’s computer is our family library which is between my office, the living room and the kitchen, so she’s always near some sort of supervision. Oh, and I’m a stay-at-home, work-from home Dad, so someone is always here)

She doesn’t listen to popular music. The radio in her room stays tuned to NPR and we buy her disks, plus whenever we’re in the car and I scan through the radio, she’ll often complain because she’d rather listen to her own music. On long trips, she’ll often listen to her Walkman and for the most part on those occasions, she’ll either listen to some of her music or quite often, a book on disk. (Though that doesn’t really go on for a long time because I like to narrate, discuss the topics of the day or use the passing scenery to teach some kind of lesson)

As for her friends, we know all of them whom she visits outside of school. I’m sure as she gets older this will become less often true, but that’s the situation at this time and though I haven’t met any that I’d call worse than obnoxious and spoiled. Due to the way she’s been raised, I don’t expect her friends to become a potential problem until at least the teen years.

I realize that I’ve now gone full-throttle into AOL Chat mode and the short answer is that my oldest is in fifth grade, but it also serves to show how I protect her from hate or inappropriate content and though we’ve discussed the Holocaust, slavery and some of the bad parts of history, her exposure has been largely managed by having involved parents.

(Though, please don’t think that I’m passing judgment on others, it’s just the what we’ve done.)
—

ETA – Helix: Thanks for the kind words.
—

PS) I should also note that though my kid doesn’t like popular music, so it doesn’t apply to me, but it doesn’t appear from a glance that most of the songs Rachel listed as Billboard’s top twenty from last year and those currently on the chart contain very many offensive words.

Wasn’t gangsta rap like ten years ago and we’re now in the age of Glee?

PPS) After reading through my last comment (ignoring the stilted phrasing and editing errors), I recognize that if you combine it with my previous AOL Chat, it’s no longer a secret that I’m the type of person, a lot of commenters to this forum hate.

Magister said:
I realize that I’ve now gone full-throttle into AOL Chat mode and the short answer is that my oldest is in fifth grade, but it also serves to show how I protect her from hate or inappropriate content and though we’ve discussed the Holocaust, slavery and some of the bad parts of history, her exposure has been largely managed by having involved parents.

I understand your vigilance , however we all only need remember our own childhoods to know that not all parents feel the same way, and children being children will often get into/discover/find out things sooner than perhaps we would wish.

Magister said:
^there should be a “once you’ve heard it” in that last sentence and while I’m here… I just quietly fumed, bitched to my friends and taught my daughter about legal definitions in response to the same sex situation, but when her music teacher said that she felt sorry for kids who didn’t go to church, we and other parents had her disciplined and on her third strike, she was fired.

Would you have also objected had the teacher said he was sorry for children of Global Warming Deniers? Or is that a religion that you believe should be taught in school?

Magister said:
PPS) After reading through my last comment (ignoring the stilted phrasing and editing errors), I recognize that if you combine it with my previous AOL Chat, it’s no longer a secret that I’m the type of person, a lot of commenters to this forum hate.

It’s not the length, it’s the quality. A detailed explanation lets people on the thread understand where you are coming from, and why you have made the choices you did. A longer post means less chance of a misunderstanding.

RichS said:
Would you have also objected had the teacher said he was sorry for children of Global Warming Deniers? Or is that a religion that you believe should be taught in school?

It was a charter school that served a science-based community. I was on the committee charged with planning its permanent structures and was a board member for the foundation to fund them. We contracted with a “green” architect to design LEED-compliant structures and for a while, we even considered building the gymnatorium out of strawbale.

So, there weren’t any global warming deniers among the parents and if somehow a teacher with those beliefs had been hired, their contract would not have been renewed.

What about listening to rap music?

Mediaite’s Colby Hall: Censoring Huckleberry Finn A ‘Dangerous Precedent’ For Education

I see that Mr. Hall watched Glenn Beck’s dissertation on this book.

The book also contains the term “Injun” which is repeated numerous times. As a member of the Ute Nation, I take no offense as I know that term was used to refer to our people. When I was a child, we used to play “Cowboys and Injuns.” It was fun.

Anyone ever hear of the “Bureau of Injun Affairs?” It’s a part of the Department of the Interior; it’s run for Injuns and by Injuns.

2011 new style !

http://www.nike4world.com