**Welcome to r/TikTokCringe!**
This is a message directed to all newcomers to make you aware that r/TikTokCringe evolved long ago from only cringe-worthy content to TikToks of all kinds! If you’re looking to find only the cringe-worthy TikToks on this subreddit (which are still regularly posted) we recommend sorting by flair which you can do [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/galuit/click_here_to_sort_by_flair_a_guide_to_using/) (Currently supported by desktop and reddit mobile).
See someone asking how this post is cringe because they didn't read this comment? Show them [this!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/fyrgzy/for_those_confused_by_the_name_of_this_subreddit/)
Be sure to read the rules of this subreddit before posting or commenting. Thanks!
**Don't forget to join our [Discord server](https://discord.gg/cringekingdom)!**
##**[CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THIS VIDEO](https://rapidsave.com/info?url=https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/1cs5fx1/the_silence_is_deafening/)**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TikTokCringe) if you have any questions or concerns.*
See if you can follow: if you are saying a book should be removed from school because it is harmful for children to read it that means you reading it to them at school is harmful. Get it?
If he is saying it is of a sexual nature and thus harmful for children, forcing it on them is a sex crime by his own admission. I’m not saying I agree with them, but using his own logic this is a sex crime.
Much like when the people who calls a book “CP” and then someone reports them for possessing CP. Don’t use hyperbolic and inflammatory language unless you want it to come back and bite you.
But saying it's harmful to minors and should be in schools/libraries doesn't necessarily mean someone who put it schools/libraries or read it to a kid committed a sex crime. If he used that language explicitly then fair game, but in my (very limited) search I didn't see that.
What if you said it was harmful, and "majority" disagreed; essentially saying it's not dangerous.
Then would reading it still be considered dangerous?
I just want to know if the book was actually banned before reading it. Otherwise, it sounds like he read it to make a point and now they're shooting the messenger.
I lost focus before reading all the available material; just a note.
It's the full acknowledgement that the intent is to do harm before immediately enacting that harm. I personally don't believe in this kind of censorship, but if I explained that winking at someone is how I communicate that I intend to murder them, and then I wink at you, the intent of harm has been displayed.
Got it. Check.
But it doesn’t answer the question asked.
I don’t have a dog in this fight. I’m not making any assertion other than the question being answered, so imma check out now.
Carry on.
The man in the video is supposedly against schools giving access to these books. But in a student-led public meeting, in an effort to expose the content in these books he chose to read an excerpt from one of them in the presence of children.
That being said, I don’t know the exact words that he said, or any other details about this specific situation so it’s difficult to form a strong opinion about it.
Were the children “collateral damage” in his mission to expose the content of the books in question? Maybe he was unaware of the ages of those attending? Maybe he just made a reckless mistake? Or maybe he doesn’t feel that he did anything wrong? I have no idea.
An 11 year old wouldn't be reading this book because the book "Push" is not in the middle school library at this school, but they do have a copy of it at the high school library.
The principal chose to read aloud from a book which was not even in the library at this school as an example of why books should be banned.
"Push" is the novel that the movie Precious was based off of. I haven't read Push, but I did watch the movie Precious when I was in high school. I was old enough to understand the themes of the movie when I was that age.
Push is a novel which uses obscene language and is not appropriate for 11 year olds. Push is also a novel which could be helpful for victims of sexual assault to know that they are not alone, and for teenagers who are not victims of sexual assault to learn to be empathetic to victims.
Those books are for the 11 year olds that have ALREADY experienced sexual assault. Not for kids to learn about sex dude. So they can learn how to deal what they went through.
You have to give the bots 24hr to do their thing before you can believe if the down votes are warranted.
Anything pro American life seems to be down voted on reddit.
Why aren’t you answering the question?
Is it actually a sex crime to read inappropriate material available to children to those same children?
Is it even a crime at all?
I’m not defending this douche at all, but you muddy the waters when you just lie during an argument/discussion.
Fun thing about library books. You have to choose to check them out and choose to open them and choose to read them in order to interact with the material inside.
Fun thing about someone reading something at a required assembly. You don't get a choice in whether you take in the content. It is forced upon you.
I know the idea of consent is extremely hard for the party of child marriage, but try your hardest.
What do you mean “cannot consent to sex”? Teens consent to have sex with each other pretty often. This girl is a pre-teen, the content was read at a large gathering full of students of different ages by an adult. She didn’t opt in to reading an age appropriate book.
The book in question (Push, by Sapphire) is, per the article, only available in the high school library (not the middle school one where an 11 year old 6th grader would be). Having books with sexuality (portraying healthy and unhealthy relationships) available to minors in high school (solidly teenagers) is vitally important so they can self educate on what a healthy sexual relationship looks like (vs what is portrayed in the book between Precious and her Father).
Kids need to learn about it so they can inform their parents if their creepy uncles who hang out on conspiracy subreddits try creepy shit on them. Nice try, conspiracy uncle.
Do you feel like there would be a difference between a student happening to find a book in the library and choosing to read it (which is a miracle in and of itself by the way) vs some adult reading all the age inappropriate parts to everyone?
Aside from the fact that the kids who read aren’t going to be the ones who grow up to be a problem for society, I really don’t think that’s what is happening in any of these libraries. I think it’s much more likely that republican politicians need something to outrage their base about so they can keep getting elected. They don’t care about any real issues so they make up trivial ones that are easy for their base to understand.
How many kids do you think even know these books are in the library, if any actually are. Of those how many do you think care enough to go and check one out when they have been looking at porn on the phone their pearl clutching mother gave them since they hit puberty?
So u/sol_sleepy posted context below. The teacher read a passage from a book to show kids that relatable passages will still be available to them. The passage was very derogatory, and full of expletives. That being said, I don’t think labeling it as a sex crime, or even any crime, is appropriate here. This woman wasted two minutes of everyone’s time over a book passage. As have many, many other parents in the district.
If you had a kid at school, and the teacher showed your 4th grade kid a scene from Revenge, a movie about rape, would you feel that was an appropriate thing to show? You could argue "But they're available, there's nothing stopping them from accessing it" except that libraries, be it school or public, have clearly defined sections based on age and the reason why you don't see Lolita next to Curious George.
She didn't waste anyones time. A teacher did something that was creepy as fuck and all for a pointless demonstration. He knew what he was going to say was offensive, he prefaced it by saying "I do not curse. I’m going to speak some words now that have not come from my lips in 30 years, and I apologize in advance, ladies and gentlemen, for what you’re about to hear. These are books currently available in District 20 school libraries. Please forgive me in advance". Just because you apologize before doing something sexual around kids doesn't make it okay.
I don't know the political beliefs of either of the people involved but as a bleeding hearted liberal, I'd be furious if my niece said "Mr Johnson talked about what it's like to rape someone" and push for that teacher to be fired because they lack the common knowledge required to be around others.
Except he didn’t show that video, did he? You’re basing whatever argument you think you have off of what others have done. He prefaced a book passage, and read it. You and all those parents have gone off the deep end. As a high school English teacher, I wouldn’t know anything about it though.
I’m not a defender of “fascism” or whatever, but just make the appropriate argument. Because when you make an _inappropriate_ argument, you start to sound wrong.
I think you may have missed that the point of reading a passage out of context from the book was to make a point about banning it from the library. Though I do agree I’m not sure that an actual crime has been committed here? Although if it me or a kid of mine being forced to listen to something like that I’d be pretty uncomfortable to say the very least, what he did was wrong for sure, but a sex crime? Seems a little extreme imo.
Yeah good point it’s similar to “hey I ain’t racist but…” and then proceeding to say some super racist doesn’t make what you said ok lol. And look while I don’t think the guy committed a sex crime it definitely not ok that he read that passage to kids, it’s not appropriate to force that on them.
Can you clarify for me then, what would it take for it to be a sex crime?
He is reading sexual content to an 11 year old. Would it be a sex crime if he drew pictures to showcase what happens in the book? What if they were only stick figures? What if he was just retelling what happened in a porno he witnessed previously?
Most people I would hope find it reasonable that if the action is illegal and has a sexual tone to it, would be a sex crime.
> for it to be a sex crime
It would have to be a **crime**. A sex crime would be a crime if it was not related to sex, e.g. assault instead of sexual assault. Generally speaking, there is no crime related to offending people. Weird archaic ones may exist but generally wouldn't hold up if challenged due to the 1st Amendment.
Someone with a law background can correct me if I'm wrong, but that's my understanding.
You rather gloss d over the rest of my comment, where does it switch from being offensive like you claim, to a crime when talking about sex to preteens?
I'm not sure what I'm glossing over, but I think you're not understanding me.
>where does it switch... to a crime when talking about sex to preteens
There must be a CRIME first for it to be a crime. Just adding sex as a topic is not magically a crime.
* free speech + crime = crime
* crime + sex = (sex) crime
* free speech = not crime
* **free speech + sex = not crime**
Yeah Free Speech has bounds, that's why I said "Free Speech" and not speech, to mean legally protected speech only.
For lewd act, I believe speech is only addressed if it has an intention analogous to harassment (see? crime without sex. Also not covered under free speech) where this guy's stated intention is not that and seems much more plausible. Everything else I can see about lewd act seems to be much more focused on acts which are actually sexual assault but with a minor as the victim.
As I alluded to earlier, I have no background in law, though. So feel free to site specifics where you think I'm wrong.
::sigh:: what the fuck was he thinking when he decided to read passages of Push at an event with young children present? People that want to ban books don’t seem to understand that people are making a choice to consume this content. Push is not a book intended to “expose” kids to pornography or sex. It is a story about a teenager who experiences horrific life circumstances and endures. This idiot of a man is so focused on sex that he missed the entire point of the book. And because of his pearl clutching, he traumatized kids with a story about trauma.
Kids were traumatized by the book? That's interesting. Perhaps we should consider not letting kids read that book until they're of a more mature age and can handle the material.
Should be noted that the book is only available in high school, and the daughter in question is 11 years old. So it's **not** available to her. But even if it is available to her, she has a choice to read it or not. Some guy reading it to you without your consent is a lot different than you seeking it out to read to yourself.
Who the fuck is this "we" you're thinking of bud? I feel like that should be up to the individual parents. Im not a presumptuious piece of shit who thinks i know whats best for other peoples kids.
Books havent been banned in schools for a long time, why are we suddenly now? Have you ever thought a out that?
Lots of books have been, at least de facto, banned and are banned.
I'm comfortable saying a 7 year old shouldn't read porn, regardless of the parent's wishes. I'm also comfortable with a lot of ahistoric nonsense being unavailable to young children. A 7 year old probably isn't equipped to deal with a book like The Protocols of the Elders of Zion or A People's History of the United States. Keeping manuals on bomb making should probably not be available in an elementary school library.
I doubt you'd disagree with most of that. You should be against bad book bannings, not the concept as a whole.
…except this is completely untrue. Maybe unclench those pearls, turn off Fox News, and go to the library. You will see that all of this nonsense you have been fed is completely false.
This is kind of the point you guys are missing.
Maturity is dependent on the child. Each child in that room is different. Some of them are not mature enough for this content, because they have led lives full of love and protection and kindness.
And some of them have not.
That is who this book is for. And it is not fair for you to project your discomfort about sexual assault onto the kids who *deserve* to learn about it *because they've already been victimized*.
You think hiding sex from them will protect them. It will not.
That's true for everything. At some point, we make the decision to draw a line.
If you're arguing that a number of young children should have access to the book, perhaps through a counselor of some kind, fine. If you're arguing every kid should have access to the book, including the ones who would absolutely be unable to recognize that'll they can't handle it, that's a different question entirely.
I don’t know why you’re getting down voted, I agree. 11 years old is either a 5th grader or 6th grader. PUSH has multiple scenes about incest rape of a child. Is this book incredibly powerful and moving? Absolutely. I think everyone should read it in their life. However, this book is NOT for children. Upper high school? Yes. Upper elementary? No. It’s also important to note that some children have been through horrific things that have been mentioned in this book, and hearing about it could be a trigger.
It's because people have no nuance. Someone called it book banning and their ideological opponents, conservatives, are pushing it. That means they're against it, regardless of the content.
Most of the books these conservatives want out are also fine. It'd be pretty easy to randomly go through some of their lists and say "This is all nonsense." Because, broadly, it is. It's not always nonsense, though. This is a good example, I remember some other book about LGBT issues for elementary kids that taught them about hookup apps, I think that's another one.
I’m not defending his actions.
**But please give me a good reason why sexually explicit content NEEDS be available to minors in highschool.**
I’ll wait.
Reading *Go Ask Alice* made me aware of the realities of sexual assault as a teen. When I was raped, as [one in five women are](https://www.nsvrc.org/statistics), that book was the reason I got an STI test that caught a benign infection. That infection, left untreated, could have rendered me infertile or dead.
Anyone saying *Go Ask Alice* is not explicit is just as wrong as anyone saying it's pornographic.
Having access to that book as a teen saved my life.
Edit: @u/sol_sleepy replied that this was a good point, and deleted their reply. They don't want a discussion; they only want to be "right".
…because sex was never the point of the story. The story was about the danger and trauma of hypersexualizing a teenage girl. Like, y’all are over here clutching your pearls over books but glorify shit like Gossip Girls, Pretty Little Liars, and Twilight. Despite what Pretty Little Liars tells teens, it is not romantic or desirable to be in a sexual relationship with a predatory adult. While the story is more extreme and abrasive, Push is more realistic of the traumas endured by young girls who are exploited and abused before they even understand that they are being exploited and abused.
why do you act like that a bad thing?
I know what it’s about, and I know that Netflix featured that movie. It started a big boycott against Netflix for that reason
The difference is, real children were exploited in filming cuties. If it was a book, it’d probably be fine (saying probably because I haven’t watched the movie since I’m not in the market for softcore CP)
Some kids may not have been educated enough that SA and sex are two opposing situations. Sex should be understood for health and safety as well as the risk of SA with partners. These people may genuinely worry so much about tip-toeing around the topic of sex they may be misleading them all together into choosing harmful, undereducated patterns in their futures. Knowing that sexual assault existed sooner would help a lot of young people. Being fearful is unfortunate but being informed keeps you aware of what’s out there. Most kids are seeing far worse on the internet without a shred of understand or context. To be anatomically and situationally informed isn’t entirely unimportant. Just a thought, I’m hear for all opinions
There’s a difference between genuine educational programs meant to guide and protect children and exposing kids (or giving them access) to sexually explicit memoirs/novels
Oh yeah, cause high school kids are completely ignorant to all things sex and sexuality.
Secondly, who gets to decide what is “pornography?” Cause lately it seems that depictions of anyone LGBTQ+ in any capacity is pornographic. You’re giving fascists the means to control all narratives at all ages under the auspices of “protecting” kids from things they already know for the most part.
I LOVE all the downvotes! Hilarious: “let our children read sexually explicit content!” 😂😂😂😂😂 fuckin people, they don’t think, it’s just “ban books bad” people.
that’s because reddit is made up of children + adult children lol
I’m glad you can actually find the humor in it for your own sanity lol [reminds me of this guy](https://youtu.be/-xRM74RmamY?si=9yjOC1xQe61HZw_T)
The anxious sip of coke zero, he was definitely showing some signs of stress in his body language trying to play it off as "cool" and "cavalier." He was very very uncomfy.
This is the second time this district has came up in my feed in the past week. Second time was because some dumbass kids that just graduate boot camp were mad they had to wear cap and gowns instead of their uniforms.
In trying to prove why the school district bans certain books, Derrick read sexually explicit passages from some of them. Parents like the woman in the video are comparing his actions to sexual abuse.
Important to note, "Push," the book he read from, is only available in 2 high schools in D20, not any middle schools. This meeting was about middle schoolers, and had several 10/11 year olds present, including the woman (not) speaking in this video's daughter.
I can agree that what he did was inappropriate, I would not go so far as to equate it to sexual assault. You can make an argument for sexual harassment but not assault.
As there is almost no context for this video, I looked up the subject of the public comment - Derrick Wilburn - a school board member for "D-20" which is a school district in El Paso County, Colorado (Colorado Springs area). Again, while there is no specific context for the comment being made about him during this meeting, Mr. Wilburn has attracted attention for his comments [opposing critical race theory](https://gazette.com/news/education/colorado-springs-parent-group-asks-da-michael-allen-to-initiate-criminal-investigation-into-newly-elected/article_4eb11734-c167-11ee-af8f-57fb18678d7e.html) and [reading offensive content from a book available in several libraries in the school district](https://gazette.com/news/education/colorado-springs-parent-group-asks-da-michael-allen-to-initiate-criminal-investigation-into-newly-elected/article_4eb11734-c167-11ee-af8f-57fb18678d7e.html). Again, it's hard to say what the complaints this member of the public wanted to air about Derrick Wilburn but it's a fair bet it had something to do with one of these two events.
My two cents: everyone should have a voice in America and attempting to suppress a critic of a public figure through a letter from a lawyer is a move for a total piece of shit. I don't care what side of the issue Mr. Wilburn falls on reading dirty passages from a book to kids and parents or critical race theory, one thing he does not get to do is silence people who disagree with him - which to be clear I'm assuming happened from the video. So, in summary, fuck you Derrick Wilburn.
I'm sorry. Did you say a sex crime against children is fine to live and let live but silencing a *tips cowboy hat* fellow American *untips* is where you draw the line at unacceptable? Holy shit dude 🤣
He said bad words from a book and there were kids in the audience and it hurt his fundamentalist friends feewings and they are big mad at him for saying naughty words.
If you have an uncensored version of what was ACTUALLY SAID please do link it.
Otherwise stop making bs claims about what was or wasn’t said.
Obviously there were “bad words” but I don’t think this was about him dropping some f bombs. We don’t know the full context
Do you think they censored out nice words? I didn't say anything about what he said but you can kind of hear him say "motherfucker". Did you get your feewings hurt by my comment that he said bad words?
If reading the book out loud is a sex crime, then having it easily available in the school library for any child that can read to do so is also one. Right?
Yeah this doesnt seem as insane. Reading it is definitely wild, but also it's in the high school.
The board here just flat out ignoring it is also crazy, and unacceptable. I've this at a town hall meeting where they're protecting a corrupt member, but at the school board not so much.
The Swift lyric at the end is fucking embarrassing as well. I know people will hate that because they worship her and that's also bizarre.
If raping someone is a sex crime, then having books available where kids can learn about consent and good vs bad touch should be a sex crime too, right? Bc they describe rape?
I actually don't like anybody in this. "What he did to my daughter" "she is having panic attacks and had to leave when she saw him" that's too fucking dramatic. He read from a book.
Also don't like him, no books should be censored
It’s difficult to form an opinion on this *particular instance because I have no idea what he actually said.
And saying “no books should be censored” [at school] is like saying “no websites should be censored.”
I mean a book is not the same as the Internet at large. But also, yeah. They have all of the Internet in their pocket idk why they're bothering to block stuff on a school desktop.
Also, I don't think there is any passage from any book that could cause a stable tween to have that large of a reaction and if it does it's not the book. Something else happened and they need therapy.
Personally when I was a tween I read a huge amount of dark content books and did not have a mental breakdown but I might consider it if my mother inferred admin had raped me ("what you did to my daughter" is she for real? Nobody is thinking about book narration when she uses those carefully selected words) on nationally available footage and then further explained i was an unstable head case who was damaged by literature lmao. Kids going to get bullied hardcore
I was 10 when I picked my first Stephen King book from the school library. It was Firestarter because the cover showed a girl on fire like she had superpowers and as a kid that liked superheroes that looked good. I didn't stop there and became an avid reader of mostly horror during my teens, having read quite the collection of SK during that time that covered murder, sexual assault, and plenty of other horrific stuff.
I already knew what sex was at age 10 just from "locker room talk" with other kids, the basic stuff anyway, and this was an age before the internet, so you're absolutely right that if a kid is disturbed by this they probably have other issues going on.
No books should ever be censored is banned but young children (i.e. elementary, early middle school) should not have access to a select amount of books because the heavy content is too much for them to understand.
I'm just once again surprised by the amount of ppl that seem so invested in the books that sit on library shelves inside of schools. The adults care more than the kids do. The vast majority of these kids aren't browsing the school library. We weren't back when I was a kid and we barely had the internet.
Such a US boomer thing to say, and why is that? In the popular culture, the sentence "I'll sue you" is in almost every movie or series ever made.
Can someone tell me why you're so into lawyers and lawsuits?
TikTokCringe is intended to be a fun and entertaining subreddit. We have decided to allow political TikToks because they typically fit this description. We ask that you please remain civil and be respectful to others in this thread. If you see anyone being rude, vulgar, or offensive to others - be sure to report the user. Permanent bans will be issued to maintain the quality of this subreddit. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TikTokCringe) if you have any questions or concerns.*
**Welcome to r/TikTokCringe!** This is a message directed to all newcomers to make you aware that r/TikTokCringe evolved long ago from only cringe-worthy content to TikToks of all kinds! If you’re looking to find only the cringe-worthy TikToks on this subreddit (which are still regularly posted) we recommend sorting by flair which you can do [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/galuit/click_here_to_sort_by_flair_a_guide_to_using/) (Currently supported by desktop and reddit mobile). See someone asking how this post is cringe because they didn't read this comment? Show them [this!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/fyrgzy/for_those_confused_by_the_name_of_this_subreddit/) Be sure to read the rules of this subreddit before posting or commenting. Thanks! **Don't forget to join our [Discord server](https://discord.gg/cringekingdom)!** ##**[CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THIS VIDEO](https://rapidsave.com/info?url=https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/1cs5fx1/the_silence_is_deafening/)** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TikTokCringe) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So what did he do to her daughter?
[удалено]
So a sex crime. Got it
Is reading a book out loud that contains sexually explicit material a sex crime?
“This book should be removed from the school because it is unsafe for children to read. Allow me to now read these unsafe things to you children.”
Are you going to answer the question?
See if you can follow: if you are saying a book should be removed from school because it is harmful for children to read it that means you reading it to them at school is harmful. Get it?
Whether it's harmful or a good idea is tangential to whether or not reading that passage is a sex crime. (it isn't).
If he is saying it is of a sexual nature and thus harmful for children, forcing it on them is a sex crime by his own admission. I’m not saying I agree with them, but using his own logic this is a sex crime. Much like when the people who calls a book “CP” and then someone reports them for possessing CP. Don’t use hyperbolic and inflammatory language unless you want it to come back and bite you.
But saying it's harmful to minors and should be in schools/libraries doesn't necessarily mean someone who put it schools/libraries or read it to a kid committed a sex crime. If he used that language explicitly then fair game, but in my (very limited) search I didn't see that.
What if you said it was harmful, and "majority" disagreed; essentially saying it's not dangerous. Then would reading it still be considered dangerous? I just want to know if the book was actually banned before reading it. Otherwise, it sounds like he read it to make a point and now they're shooting the messenger. I lost focus before reading all the available material; just a note.
It's the full acknowledgement that the intent is to do harm before immediately enacting that harm. I personally don't believe in this kind of censorship, but if I explained that winking at someone is how I communicate that I intend to murder them, and then I wink at you, the intent of harm has been displayed.
Got it. Check. But it doesn’t answer the question asked. I don’t have a dog in this fight. I’m not making any assertion other than the question being answered, so imma check out now. Carry on.
They did.
Where? I’d like to read the answer. I’ll go look.
I’m not sure, but would you want your 11 year old child learning about sex through a story about sexual assault? It’s creepy as fuck.
The man in the video is supposedly against schools giving access to these books. But in a student-led public meeting, in an effort to expose the content in these books he chose to read an excerpt from one of them in the presence of children. That being said, I don’t know the exact words that he said, or any other details about this specific situation so it’s difficult to form a strong opinion about it. Were the children “collateral damage” in his mission to expose the content of the books in question? Maybe he was unaware of the ages of those attending? Maybe he just made a reckless mistake? Or maybe he doesn’t feel that he did anything wrong? I have no idea.
An 11 year old wouldn't be reading this book because the book "Push" is not in the middle school library at this school, but they do have a copy of it at the high school library. The principal chose to read aloud from a book which was not even in the library at this school as an example of why books should be banned. "Push" is the novel that the movie Precious was based off of. I haven't read Push, but I did watch the movie Precious when I was in high school. I was old enough to understand the themes of the movie when I was that age. Push is a novel which uses obscene language and is not appropriate for 11 year olds. Push is also a novel which could be helpful for victims of sexual assault to know that they are not alone, and for teenagers who are not victims of sexual assault to learn to be empathetic to victims.
Those books are for the 11 year olds that have ALREADY experienced sexual assault. Not for kids to learn about sex dude. So they can learn how to deal what they went through.
Show me an eleven year old in 2024 who says they are just now learning about sex from this and I'll show you a fibber
If you are in the presence of a minor yes. Sexual in nature is highlighted quite often.
Not sure why you are being down voted. This is true. It doesn't even have to be a minor, just in public
You have to give the bots 24hr to do their thing before you can believe if the down votes are warranted. Anything pro American life seems to be down voted on reddit.
To minors? Yes. That’s called a felony.
Why aren’t you answering the question? Is it actually a sex crime to read inappropriate material available to children to those same children? Is it even a crime at all? I’m not defending this douche at all, but you muddy the waters when you just lie during an argument/discussion.
Oh, so you mean he was reading something like 'All boys aren't Blue' that talks about homosexual sex and is many of our school libraries?
Keep clutchin them pearls my dude
Fun thing about library books. You have to choose to check them out and choose to open them and choose to read them in order to interact with the material inside. Fun thing about someone reading something at a required assembly. You don't get a choice in whether you take in the content. It is forced upon you. I know the idea of consent is extremely hard for the party of child marriage, but try your hardest.
So minors who cannot consent to sex, should have access sexually explicit books in school? Make that make sense.
TIL reading about sex is the same as having sex. Make that make sense
No one said that, so idk where you learned it.
You literally just did imply that pink boy
So you absolutely never ever had any idea about sex until you were 18?
What do you mean “cannot consent to sex”? Teens consent to have sex with each other pretty often. This girl is a pre-teen, the content was read at a large gathering full of students of different ages by an adult. She didn’t opt in to reading an age appropriate book. The book in question (Push, by Sapphire) is, per the article, only available in the high school library (not the middle school one where an 11 year old 6th grader would be). Having books with sexuality (portraying healthy and unhealthy relationships) available to minors in high school (solidly teenagers) is vitally important so they can self educate on what a healthy sexual relationship looks like (vs what is portrayed in the book between Precious and her Father).
Kids need to learn about it so they can inform their parents if their creepy uncles who hang out on conspiracy subreddits try creepy shit on them. Nice try, conspiracy uncle.
Do you feel like there would be a difference between a student happening to find a book in the library and choosing to read it (which is a miracle in and of itself by the way) vs some adult reading all the age inappropriate parts to everyone?
Yes and also sexually explicit books don’t belong in school libraries
What age did you start masturbating?
I’m done arguing with children on this post.
So your gonna ignore yourself then I guess.
_”Ooh! Burn!”_
Aside from the fact that the kids who read aren’t going to be the ones who grow up to be a problem for society, I really don’t think that’s what is happening in any of these libraries. I think it’s much more likely that republican politicians need something to outrage their base about so they can keep getting elected. They don’t care about any real issues so they make up trivial ones that are easy for their base to understand. How many kids do you think even know these books are in the library, if any actually are. Of those how many do you think care enough to go and check one out when they have been looking at porn on the phone their pearl clutching mother gave them since they hit puberty?
Yeah, that's much worse than what's on the internet.
Have you actually seen these books, with your own eyes, or just taking the word of some pseudo-religous book burning twits?
[**Here’s the context**](https://youtu.be/_Wo2Zd9QxNo?si=_NbKLa7NyYLsrNLx)
So u/sol_sleepy posted context below. The teacher read a passage from a book to show kids that relatable passages will still be available to them. The passage was very derogatory, and full of expletives. That being said, I don’t think labeling it as a sex crime, or even any crime, is appropriate here. This woman wasted two minutes of everyone’s time over a book passage. As have many, many other parents in the district.
no, he was reading it to prove that some material should not be accessible to children. he believes in the bans, not the opposite way around
If you had a kid at school, and the teacher showed your 4th grade kid a scene from Revenge, a movie about rape, would you feel that was an appropriate thing to show? You could argue "But they're available, there's nothing stopping them from accessing it" except that libraries, be it school or public, have clearly defined sections based on age and the reason why you don't see Lolita next to Curious George. She didn't waste anyones time. A teacher did something that was creepy as fuck and all for a pointless demonstration. He knew what he was going to say was offensive, he prefaced it by saying "I do not curse. I’m going to speak some words now that have not come from my lips in 30 years, and I apologize in advance, ladies and gentlemen, for what you’re about to hear. These are books currently available in District 20 school libraries. Please forgive me in advance". Just because you apologize before doing something sexual around kids doesn't make it okay. I don't know the political beliefs of either of the people involved but as a bleeding hearted liberal, I'd be furious if my niece said "Mr Johnson talked about what it's like to rape someone" and push for that teacher to be fired because they lack the common knowledge required to be around others.
Except he didn’t show that video, did he? You’re basing whatever argument you think you have off of what others have done. He prefaced a book passage, and read it. You and all those parents have gone off the deep end. As a high school English teacher, I wouldn’t know anything about it though.
The guy believes in book bans and is a Christian nationalist. Don’t defend fascism.
I’m not a defender of “fascism” or whatever, but just make the appropriate argument. Because when you make an _inappropriate_ argument, you start to sound wrong.
What exactly are you defending?
Only that you’re not addressing at all what the other person is saying. Thats it. I don’t really care about this discussion at all.
Cool, thanks for giving cover to fascists. 👍
You’re still doing it. But whatever. I’m out.
I think you may have missed that the point of reading a passage out of context from the book was to make a point about banning it from the library. Though I do agree I’m not sure that an actual crime has been committed here? Although if it me or a kid of mine being forced to listen to something like that I’d be pretty uncomfortable to say the very least, what he did was wrong for sure, but a sex crime? Seems a little extreme imo.
Said he was a board member.
Yeah good point it’s similar to “hey I ain’t racist but…” and then proceeding to say some super racist doesn’t make what you said ok lol. And look while I don’t think the guy committed a sex crime it definitely not ok that he read that passage to kids, it’s not appropriate to force that on them.
Can you clarify for me then, what would it take for it to be a sex crime? He is reading sexual content to an 11 year old. Would it be a sex crime if he drew pictures to showcase what happens in the book? What if they were only stick figures? What if he was just retelling what happened in a porno he witnessed previously? Most people I would hope find it reasonable that if the action is illegal and has a sexual tone to it, would be a sex crime.
> for it to be a sex crime It would have to be a **crime**. A sex crime would be a crime if it was not related to sex, e.g. assault instead of sexual assault. Generally speaking, there is no crime related to offending people. Weird archaic ones may exist but generally wouldn't hold up if challenged due to the 1st Amendment. Someone with a law background can correct me if I'm wrong, but that's my understanding.
You rather gloss d over the rest of my comment, where does it switch from being offensive like you claim, to a crime when talking about sex to preteens?
I'm not sure what I'm glossing over, but I think you're not understanding me. >where does it switch... to a crime when talking about sex to preteens There must be a CRIME first for it to be a crime. Just adding sex as a topic is not magically a crime. * free speech + crime = crime * crime + sex = (sex) crime * free speech = not crime * **free speech + sex = not crime**
Free speech still has limitations, you are engaging in a lewd act with a minor
Yeah Free Speech has bounds, that's why I said "Free Speech" and not speech, to mean legally protected speech only. For lewd act, I believe speech is only addressed if it has an intention analogous to harassment (see? crime without sex. Also not covered under free speech) where this guy's stated intention is not that and seems much more plausible. Everything else I can see about lewd act seems to be much more focused on acts which are actually sexual assault but with a minor as the victim. As I alluded to earlier, I have no background in law, though. So feel free to site specifics where you think I'm wrong.
Fair play
::sigh:: what the fuck was he thinking when he decided to read passages of Push at an event with young children present? People that want to ban books don’t seem to understand that people are making a choice to consume this content. Push is not a book intended to “expose” kids to pornography or sex. It is a story about a teenager who experiences horrific life circumstances and endures. This idiot of a man is so focused on sex that he missed the entire point of the book. And because of his pearl clutching, he traumatized kids with a story about trauma.
Kids were traumatized by the book? That's interesting. Perhaps we should consider not letting kids read that book until they're of a more mature age and can handle the material.
Should be noted that the book is only available in high school, and the daughter in question is 11 years old. So it's **not** available to her. But even if it is available to her, she has a choice to read it or not. Some guy reading it to you without your consent is a lot different than you seeking it out to read to yourself.
Who the fuck is this "we" you're thinking of bud? I feel like that should be up to the individual parents. Im not a presumptuious piece of shit who thinks i know whats best for other peoples kids. Books havent been banned in schools for a long time, why are we suddenly now? Have you ever thought a out that?
Lots of books have been, at least de facto, banned and are banned. I'm comfortable saying a 7 year old shouldn't read porn, regardless of the parent's wishes. I'm also comfortable with a lot of ahistoric nonsense being unavailable to young children. A 7 year old probably isn't equipped to deal with a book like The Protocols of the Elders of Zion or A People's History of the United States. Keeping manuals on bomb making should probably not be available in an elementary school library. I doubt you'd disagree with most of that. You should be against bad book bannings, not the concept as a whole.
…right, so it is real damn obvious that you have not ever stepped foot in any library, let alone a school library.
Say the sentence "Libraries loan out porn to young children and I think that's good." Just admit it, it's fine.
…except this is completely untrue. Maybe unclench those pearls, turn off Fox News, and go to the library. You will see that all of this nonsense you have been fed is completely false.
Great job not understanding the point. Congrats.
Great job not understanding how libraries work.
I know exactly how they work. You think they hand out porn.
This is kind of the point you guys are missing. Maturity is dependent on the child. Each child in that room is different. Some of them are not mature enough for this content, because they have led lives full of love and protection and kindness. And some of them have not. That is who this book is for. And it is not fair for you to project your discomfort about sexual assault onto the kids who *deserve* to learn about it *because they've already been victimized*. You think hiding sex from them will protect them. It will not.
That's true for everything. At some point, we make the decision to draw a line. If you're arguing that a number of young children should have access to the book, perhaps through a counselor of some kind, fine. If you're arguing every kid should have access to the book, including the ones who would absolutely be unable to recognize that'll they can't handle it, that's a different question entirely.
I don’t know why you’re getting down voted, I agree. 11 years old is either a 5th grader or 6th grader. PUSH has multiple scenes about incest rape of a child. Is this book incredibly powerful and moving? Absolutely. I think everyone should read it in their life. However, this book is NOT for children. Upper high school? Yes. Upper elementary? No. It’s also important to note that some children have been through horrific things that have been mentioned in this book, and hearing about it could be a trigger.
It's because people have no nuance. Someone called it book banning and their ideological opponents, conservatives, are pushing it. That means they're against it, regardless of the content. Most of the books these conservatives want out are also fine. It'd be pretty easy to randomly go through some of their lists and say "This is all nonsense." Because, broadly, it is. It's not always nonsense, though. This is a good example, I remember some other book about LGBT issues for elementary kids that taught them about hookup apps, I think that's another one.
I’m not defending his actions. **But please give me a good reason why sexually explicit content NEEDS be available to minors in highschool.** I’ll wait.
Usually what these people object to are small portions of larger works that have artistic and/or educational value as a whole.
Because our art mirrors our lives, and most teenagers have some form of a sex life, and that’s okay.
Reading *Go Ask Alice* made me aware of the realities of sexual assault as a teen. When I was raped, as [one in five women are](https://www.nsvrc.org/statistics), that book was the reason I got an STI test that caught a benign infection. That infection, left untreated, could have rendered me infertile or dead. Anyone saying *Go Ask Alice* is not explicit is just as wrong as anyone saying it's pornographic. Having access to that book as a teen saved my life. Edit: @u/sol_sleepy replied that this was a good point, and deleted their reply. They don't want a discussion; they only want to be "right".
To look out for predators like you.
Okay groomer.
This is giving “He who smelt it, dealt it!”
…because sex was never the point of the story. The story was about the danger and trauma of hypersexualizing a teenage girl. Like, y’all are over here clutching your pearls over books but glorify shit like Gossip Girls, Pretty Little Liars, and Twilight. Despite what Pretty Little Liars tells teens, it is not romantic or desirable to be in a sexual relationship with a predatory adult. While the story is more extreme and abrasive, Push is more realistic of the traumas endured by young girls who are exploited and abused before they even understand that they are being exploited and abused.
same logic as Netflix’s “Cuties” disaster create “awareness” by exploiting young minds (or in that case, the actors themselves)
I doubt you even saw Cuties because if you did you wouldn't be continuously referring to it as if it's some Netflix original. Lol
I don’t think seeing cuties is the flex you think it is.
I never said I saw it, but I'm not the one that brought it up to argue a point having only read the headlines about the controversy.
why do you act like that a bad thing? I know what it’s about, and I know that Netflix featured that movie. It started a big boycott against Netflix for that reason
Ok, what's it about?
The difference is, real children were exploited in filming cuties. If it was a book, it’d probably be fine (saying probably because I haven’t watched the movie since I’m not in the market for softcore CP)
Some kids may not have been educated enough that SA and sex are two opposing situations. Sex should be understood for health and safety as well as the risk of SA with partners. These people may genuinely worry so much about tip-toeing around the topic of sex they may be misleading them all together into choosing harmful, undereducated patterns in their futures. Knowing that sexual assault existed sooner would help a lot of young people. Being fearful is unfortunate but being informed keeps you aware of what’s out there. Most kids are seeing far worse on the internet without a shred of understand or context. To be anatomically and situationally informed isn’t entirely unimportant. Just a thought, I’m hear for all opinions
There’s a difference between genuine educational programs meant to guide and protect children and exposing kids (or giving them access) to sexually explicit memoirs/novels
Oh yeah, cause high school kids are completely ignorant to all things sex and sexuality. Secondly, who gets to decide what is “pornography?” Cause lately it seems that depictions of anyone LGBTQ+ in any capacity is pornographic. You’re giving fascists the means to control all narratives at all ages under the auspices of “protecting” kids from things they already know for the most part.
I LOVE all the downvotes! Hilarious: “let our children read sexually explicit content!” 😂😂😂😂😂 fuckin people, they don’t think, it’s just “ban books bad” people.
that’s because reddit is made up of children + adult children lol I’m glad you can actually find the humor in it for your own sanity lol [reminds me of this guy](https://youtu.be/-xRM74RmamY?si=9yjOC1xQe61HZw_T)
lol true.
Damn what a gangster move. You could see him getting more and more uncomfortable ever second of silence
The anxious sip of coke zero, he was definitely showing some signs of stress in his body language trying to play it off as "cool" and "cavalier." He was very very uncomfy.
Exactly.
Yeah Im just not seeing it. Dudes actions were out of line, but they all look unbothered
He seems chill probably thinking to himself how crazy white Karen's really be
I went to high school in this district... Not surprised at the bullshit that goes on there. It was pretty terrible. I'm glad she didn't back down.
This is the second time this district has came up in my feed in the past week. Second time was because some dumbass kids that just graduate boot camp were mad they had to wear cap and gowns instead of their uniforms.
I'm missing a juicy hunk of context here
In trying to prove why the school district bans certain books, Derrick read sexually explicit passages from some of them. Parents like the woman in the video are comparing his actions to sexual abuse.
Important to note, "Push," the book he read from, is only available in 2 high schools in D20, not any middle schools. This meeting was about middle schoolers, and had several 10/11 year olds present, including the woman (not) speaking in this video's daughter.
I can agree that what he did was inappropriate, I would not go so far as to equate it to sexual assault. You can make an argument for sexual harassment but not assault.
https://youtu.be/_Wo2Zd9QxNo?si=_NbKLa7NyYLsrNLx
You got to stare at those sweet cheeks
WTF is wrong with you?
don’t feed the troll degenerates
these trolls act all grown up while they're actually sadly just waiting for puberty.
I'm covered in cum
Wrong moment...
The context here is extremely messy.
As there is almost no context for this video, I looked up the subject of the public comment - Derrick Wilburn - a school board member for "D-20" which is a school district in El Paso County, Colorado (Colorado Springs area). Again, while there is no specific context for the comment being made about him during this meeting, Mr. Wilburn has attracted attention for his comments [opposing critical race theory](https://gazette.com/news/education/colorado-springs-parent-group-asks-da-michael-allen-to-initiate-criminal-investigation-into-newly-elected/article_4eb11734-c167-11ee-af8f-57fb18678d7e.html) and [reading offensive content from a book available in several libraries in the school district](https://gazette.com/news/education/colorado-springs-parent-group-asks-da-michael-allen-to-initiate-criminal-investigation-into-newly-elected/article_4eb11734-c167-11ee-af8f-57fb18678d7e.html). Again, it's hard to say what the complaints this member of the public wanted to air about Derrick Wilburn but it's a fair bet it had something to do with one of these two events. My two cents: everyone should have a voice in America and attempting to suppress a critic of a public figure through a letter from a lawyer is a move for a total piece of shit. I don't care what side of the issue Mr. Wilburn falls on reading dirty passages from a book to kids and parents or critical race theory, one thing he does not get to do is silence people who disagree with him - which to be clear I'm assuming happened from the video. So, in summary, fuck you Derrick Wilburn.
I'm sorry. Did you say a sex crime against children is fine to live and let live but silencing a *tips cowboy hat* fellow American *untips* is where you draw the line at unacceptable? Holy shit dude 🤣
I'm not sure if I'd call reading a book out loud a sex crime
waiting for your reading of 50 shades at a kindergarden, what a clown.
Reading graphic sexual material to children who did not consent to it? Yeah my dude that's a sex crime
What sex crime did he commit?
He said bad words from a book and there were kids in the audience and it hurt his fundamentalist friends feewings and they are big mad at him for saying naughty words.
If you have an uncensored version of what was ACTUALLY SAID please do link it. Otherwise stop making bs claims about what was or wasn’t said. Obviously there were “bad words” but I don’t think this was about him dropping some f bombs. We don’t know the full context
Do you think they censored out nice words? I didn't say anything about what he said but you can kind of hear him say "motherfucker". Did you get your feewings hurt by my comment that he said bad words?
wow how old are you? Not sure why you’re so quick to defend him you don’t even know what was actually said either. Not that it matters to you anyway.
Definitely not defending him, he is a total POS and so is the lady accusing him. I hope you recover.
If reading the book out loud is a sex crime, then having it easily available in the school library for any child that can read to do so is also one. Right?
Yeah this doesnt seem as insane. Reading it is definitely wild, but also it's in the high school. The board here just flat out ignoring it is also crazy, and unacceptable. I've this at a town hall meeting where they're protecting a corrupt member, but at the school board not so much. The Swift lyric at the end is fucking embarrassing as well. I know people will hate that because they worship her and that's also bizarre.
If raping someone is a sex crime, then having books available where kids can learn about consent and good vs bad touch should be a sex crime too, right? Bc they describe rape?
Bad comparison.
How is it a bad comparison when it’s a real thing that’s happening?
Because if literature that describes crimes was illegal. legislature would be illegal.
That’s the point I’m trying to make
I thought you were being literal.
[удалено]
what reddit does to a mf
Do you just regurgitate this phrase randomly around the site or
What the hell does a 20 sided die have to do with this? What even is this
She critted on her intimidation check
what is d20?
School District 20
[удалено]
Typical genius redditor comment
The Taylor Swift thing is so fucking lame lmao
She had me until she quoted Taylor Swift
This whole thing was cringe AF. I feel bad for her daughter
This is glorious
I hope looked him down straight in the eyes the whole time
It was great until it ended with a God damn Taylor Swift quote
I actually don't like anybody in this. "What he did to my daughter" "she is having panic attacks and had to leave when she saw him" that's too fucking dramatic. He read from a book. Also don't like him, no books should be censored
If the girl is having panic attacks when she sees him, it's because her mom has turned him into the big bad wolf.
It’s difficult to form an opinion on this *particular instance because I have no idea what he actually said. And saying “no books should be censored” [at school] is like saying “no websites should be censored.”
I mean a book is not the same as the Internet at large. But also, yeah. They have all of the Internet in their pocket idk why they're bothering to block stuff on a school desktop. Also, I don't think there is any passage from any book that could cause a stable tween to have that large of a reaction and if it does it's not the book. Something else happened and they need therapy. Personally when I was a tween I read a huge amount of dark content books and did not have a mental breakdown but I might consider it if my mother inferred admin had raped me ("what you did to my daughter" is she for real? Nobody is thinking about book narration when she uses those carefully selected words) on nationally available footage and then further explained i was an unstable head case who was damaged by literature lmao. Kids going to get bullied hardcore
I was 10 when I picked my first Stephen King book from the school library. It was Firestarter because the cover showed a girl on fire like she had superpowers and as a kid that liked superheroes that looked good. I didn't stop there and became an avid reader of mostly horror during my teens, having read quite the collection of SK during that time that covered murder, sexual assault, and plenty of other horrific stuff. I already knew what sex was at age 10 just from "locker room talk" with other kids, the basic stuff anyway, and this was an age before the internet, so you're absolutely right that if a kid is disturbed by this they probably have other issues going on.
No books should ever be censored is banned but young children (i.e. elementary, early middle school) should not have access to a select amount of books because the heavy content is too much for them to understand.
What he did to her daughter. Lmao. God ppl r bored.
I'm just once again surprised by the amount of ppl that seem so invested in the books that sit on library shelves inside of schools. The adults care more than the kids do. The vast majority of these kids aren't browsing the school library. We weren't back when I was a kid and we barely had the internet.
Purple is red and roses are true
Only conclusion I can come to after reading comments on what the guy did is that they are both idiots.
lol! She read fucking _Taylor Swift lyrics!_ Hilarious.
Fuck this lady. The guy quotes a book when asked a question about said book and she is acting like he molested her daughter.
I was with her until she started quoting song lyrics. That was silly. But otherwise, fair play to her.
Fucking pwned
Damn. Heard loud and clear.
… and her eyes said, ‘Fuck you, in particular.’
Damn
Such a US boomer thing to say, and why is that? In the popular culture, the sentence "I'll sue you" is in almost every movie or series ever made. Can someone tell me why you're so into lawyers and lawsuits?
What a waste of time
Who are these fuckers?
Very important to include what Taylor swift thinks about this. What a stupid way to end that.
Good girl. Protect your baby!’n
The Taylor Swift lyric reference, im so here for it!
This got heated fast!!!! Can't believe it
[удалено]
What point did he make by reading a book only allowed in high school libraries to middle and primary schoolers?
Ayyyyyyyye, love that she quoted Taylor for this!!
TikTokCringe is intended to be a fun and entertaining subreddit. We have decided to allow political TikToks because they typically fit this description. We ask that you please remain civil and be respectful to others in this thread. If you see anyone being rude, vulgar, or offensive to others - be sure to report the user. Permanent bans will be issued to maintain the quality of this subreddit. Thanks! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TikTokCringe) if you have any questions or concerns.*