Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
Do they specifically mention how banning porn is a step towards attacking queer people?
If you read Project 2025 you would find that literally on Page 1 they equate pornography with "the spread of transgenderism and drag queens" and claim that all of the above are "invading their school libraries" so all further references to combating "pornography" in the text also means transgender people.
You can read it for yourself here and I strongly advise you to do so to stay informed. The enemy has laid bare every single one of their tactics and remaining ignorant to it is irresponsible.
You’re intentionally misrepresenting what it says, what a surprise.
That sentence is in reference to the “pornographic” transgender-advocate book in schools that have extremely graphic pictures and descriptions about things like “sucking girl dick” and so on. It’s not equating pornography with transgenderism at all.
What's the name of that book you/they are referencing?
Red states have already passed legislation classify any book that has any form ofnLGBT representation as obscene and not fit for school libraries. It's the same process on a bigger scale.
Source?
Your mom
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/banned-books-lgbtq-transgender-black-people-of-color-pen-america-rcna193879
That doesn’t support your comment at all.
Also, this:
How about just not describing how to eat someone’s arsehole in a book for 4-6 year olds? Ever thought that might be inappropriate?
Again, please let me know what book you're talking about, I'd love to judge it for myself.
Rape?
Incest?
I mean, these readings are all acceptable for children by christian standards right?
Tell me more about how it's LGBT books that are the issue.
Wow this literally could not be any more of a bad faith take. You decide to ignore the entire article for a statement by the lying administration spokesperson.
🙄
The entire article is bullshit, pretending that it's about something it's not. Just don't give graphic, sexually explicit books to children. Why is that so hard for you guys?
I'm still waiting on those titles. Care to share them and prove me and the article wrong?
I'm sure you can google the books that were "banned" (though not really banned, just removed from school libraries as they were highly inappropriate). Just like they don't put playboy magazines in schools, they're not "banned" they're just not in school libraries.
See here's the thing, it's not my job to prove your argument correct. So if you aren't going to take the time to defend your own point, why should I take the time to do it for you?
No titles to prove these books were inapropriate? Then stop posting and stop lying that these removals and bans aren't just targeted attempts at censoring authors writing about non-cis non-het non-white topics.
You don’t have to prove my argument correct, but I don’t care if you don’t want to look it up. These books and pictures of them were everywhere for weeks/months, and politicians and parents etc were told to stop reading and showing images from them because they were too graphic when they were appealing to get them removed in parliament and in school meetings lol.
I dare say you already know the books and graphic illustrations that I’m talking about anyway.
Downvote all you want, that doesn't change the fact you're a liar.
Then prove it.
What are the titles of the graphic sexually explicit books that you believe are being give to children?
just do a web search with "project 2025 porn" and marval at it... it is amazing
here is a good write up example https://www.gratefulweb.com/articles/project-2025-war-porn-privacy-and-progress