Librarians are generally the first line of defense against censorious idiots, but apparently they’re letting just anybody learn the Dewey Decimal System these days: there is outrage over a Newberry-award-winning book in which the main character overhears another character tell the story of his dog being bitten by a rattlesnake…in the scrotum.
Yes. There is outrage over use of the S Word.
The book has already been banned from school libraries in a handful of states in the South, the West and the Northeast, and librarians in other schools have indicated in the online debate that they may well follow suit. Indeed, the topic has dominated the discussion among librarians since the book was shipped to schools.
Full story of “let’s all fulfill the stereotype of librarians as pinched, glasses-wearing, dried-up old harridans” at the NYT. But the true jaw-dropping moment of idiocy comes from Dana Nilsson, a librarian in Durango, Colorado:
Ms. Nilsson, reached at Sunnyside Elementary School in Durango, Colo., said she had heard from dozens of librarians who agreed with her stance. “I don’t want to start an issue about censorship,” she said. “But you won’t find men’s genitalia in quality literature.”
You won’t find men’s genitalia in this book either, dumbass: the scrotum in question belongs to a dog.
{ 6 } Comments
It occurs to me that, once upon a time, in actually rural America, knowledge of the reproductive anatomy and functions of common farm animals was understood to be more or less universal among children who had reached walking age. Only in a country of pretend rural-ness is such fastidiousness even thinkable.
What did they go and used scrotum, anyway? They should have used balls, nuts, or any other kind of technical term. Not this dirty word.
Somewhat fitting: A recent children’s book in Germany about human anatomy had an explorer traveling through the body in a miniature craft. It was quite nicely written, until you came to the part where the genitalia were described – and noticed that there was not part where the genitalia were described. That’s right, Timmy, people look like barbie dolls down there.
And if they do, scrotum is a nonsensical word, anyway.
“But you won’t find men’s genitalia in quality literature.”
What “quality literature” has this lady been reading?
I assume this is the same type of librarian who uses a bottle of white-out to paint underwear on the boy in “In the Night Kitchen”. Not that anyone would dare call that particular children’s classic “quality literature”.
Librarians are generally the first line of defense against censorious idiots, but apparently they’re letting just anybody learn the Dewey Decimal System these days:
Actually, we bloody *push* the DDC on anyone who wants to learn it – makes our job so much easier.
What did they go and used scrotum, anyway? They should have used balls, nuts, or any other kind of technical term.
The scrotum is not the nuts or the balls. It’s a little like confusing the labia with the ovaries.
The scrotum is not the nuts or the balls. It’s a little like confusing the labia with the ovaries.
Well, where I hail from (Germany), being bitten in the nuts or the balls is perfectly understandable despite being not anatomically correct in any dog attack out there. And it is only a little like confusing the labia with the ovaries, because the snake in question might have actually hit the balls in biting the scrotum, whereas it would have to be a magical bite in the league of the JFK bullet to hit the ovaries when biting the labia.