This is literally what YouTube is like though. The less educational content is, the more likely they are to remove or age restrict it. NileGreen made a video about this recently, it’s kinda long but you can watch it if this sounds interesting.
1984 is more appropriate for adolescents than for kids under tweens. If anyone has read the ending, the imagery in Room 101 is pretty graphic. There are also sexually suggestive imagery in the middle of the book.
The best dystopian book for kids that warns of authoritarianism would be Fahrenheit 451 and Animal Farm imo. The latter was my introduction to George Orwell by my teacher just before I entered adolescence.
I don’t follow american book ban list. Is it actually ban?
I don’t think it’s currently on any ban lists in the US; if it is, it’s just in a few odd corners. It has been on ban lists around the world in the past for various reasons.
https://pen.org/report/beyond-the-shelves/
Disproportionate to publishing rates and like prior school years, books in this prominent subset overwhelmingly include books with people and characters of color (44%) and books with LGBTQ+ people and characters (39%).
Over half (57%) of the banned titles in this subset include sex-related themes or depictions, due to ramped up attacks on “sexual content.”
Nearly 60% of these banned titles are written for young adult audiences, and depict topics young people confront in the real world, including grief and death, experiences with substance abuse, suicide, depression and mental health concerns, and sexual violence.
If you pick around for schools with bans, you can occasionally find 1984 on the list. But that is primarily because of the extramarital sex scene between Wilson Smith (the protagonist) and his lover Julia.
Interesting. Thanks for sharing.
Any librarian worth their salt would find a secret way to get that kid his book
I watched the library in my high school downsized repeatedly during and after my time in school.
They went from half a dozen librarians to one. They purged their collections of microfilm and whittled away any research tools that weren’t just on a computer. They stopped ordering new books for the most part by the time my sister graduated.
I believe they’ve since renovated the space to convert a big chunk of it into more classrooms.
Just buy a tesla and a smartphone. Those are the spy machines described in the book. The difference is that the 1984 government had to hide that stuff in your house and now, people even pay for them.
The 1984 government did not hide that stuff in your hozse. The telescreens are the centerpiece of any appartements. The difference is that in the book, everybody knows they are supervised and fear the supervisors, while today, nobody cares.
everybody knows they are supervised and fear the supervisors
They regularly saw friends and neighbors persecuted by police. We don’t really see that in the modern day. There’s no cop who bangs on your door because you did a wrongthink online.
They regularly saw friends and neighbors persecuted by police. We don’t really see that in the modern day.
Maybe you don’t…
The UK CPS would like a word with you concerning your problematic online speech…
Every big tech company has bent the knee to trump. While I don’t find it likely that widespread crackdown would happen because someone shit talked cheeto Hitler, it’s not beyond the realm of possibilities. At the very least, it’s more plausible that he might use connections to dig up dirt on political enemies.
Honestly don’t do anything you wouldn’t want a fascism regime knowing about on any PC running Windows or MacOS or any smart phone.
On that note, what Linux distro are best for privacy?
At this point, any of them.
Strictly speaking, fully loaded Kali Linux (or an equivalent build) so you can learn to do subversive things against adversarial networks.
But really, if you just want an operating system under your control, every version of Linux will do that for you.
But Hannah Montana Linux will do it for you with the most style.
On that note, what Linux distro are best for privacy?
Funnily enough, GrapheneOS Android.
All popular general purpose Linux Desktop distros suck in terms of privacy and security out of the box. It is possible to configure stuff like SELinux but that is very far above what even a competent Linux user is able to do properly.
Tails and QubesOS are amazing in terms of security and privacy, but their lack of general usability means very few people are going to use them day to day. For most users, they are impractical.
GrapheneOS has a mix of security, privacy and usability that makes it attractive choice for anyone somewhat competent with technology and caring for privacy.
Admittedly I’m not keeping up on this, so maybe outdated but it used to be Tails.
Kali took Tails’ place a few years back, I think.
Kali was more for pen testing, hacking. Tails was a live disc that defaulted to tor and other privacy focused use.
True.
Depends on your opsec scope and use case. It also depends on the software you are running ontop like your browser or other services that probably have even more data on you.
It’s never about the kids
Some really do think it is. And I feel sorry for them. My ex-wife’s mother was one that put her in one of those teenage camps. Convinced they were what could help her by the church and her friends. But she’s just not smart. Very gullible. I really don’t think she would have had she known. The zeitgeist of the times were not as abundant as it is now.
Is 1984 banned? That was mandatory reading…
It and Fahrenheit 451 are, ironically, among some of the most banned books in the US.
1984, Fahrenheit 451, To kill a mockingbird and several others were among the banned books in my school.
Ironically tho, Mein Kampf was still sitting proudly on the shelf. Of a middle school library…
That’s funny, they were both required reading where I am in the U.S.
It was banned in both the Soviet Union and the US.
In the Soviet Union it was banned for being anti-communist.
In the US it was banned for being communist.Orwell was trolling before it even existed lmao
Nah he was just anti-authoritarian and both the US and USSR governments saw themselves reflected in the text
lmao, yeah thats why i love his books.
its crazy to me how people will read it and not realize the main point was anti authoritarianism/totalitarianism, and think it was about socialism despite orwell himself being a democratic socialist. Most be up in the list of most misinterpreted writers
It comes down to framing. You put Animal Farm (unapologetically anti-Soviet Union) and 1984 (more broadly anti-authoritarian) on the required reading list for high schools. You haven’t provided any education around Marxist theory anywhere in the curriculum besides “communism bad”. That lets you transfer the idea that the USSR is representative of all leftist thought, and these books are about the USSR. Breeze over all the stuff in 1984 that points to any kind of leftist theory–which Orwell helps with because he expects people to get bored and skip that whole bit–and boom, Orwell becomes an anti-leftist icon.
If Homage to Catalonia were also added to the curriculum, this whole farce would be torn down.
True. without much context other than knowing animal farm was written against the soviet union for example, it’s easy to think that.
Orwell becomes an anti-leftist icon.
Honestly this is a really interesting phenomenon, where very famous figures being leftist/socialist is conveniently left out. MLK, Einstein, Orwell, Picasso, Nelson Mandela. They were all socialists yet that is not taught.
Footloose amusingly enough as well.
Is it because the title track has the line “kick off your Sunday shoes?”
Presumably because it’s about a real thing that made them scared in the 1800s and they’re scared they’ll be scared of being scared.
As others have told you, yes. And the worst part is the justification is usually because Winston and Julia have sex. And it’s not titillating. Orwell was not exactly writing erotica.
Yes, and I’m glad that it is.
record skip, everyone stares at HawlSera awkwardly, guns are cocked and pointed at her
Because when you tell a people that a piece of media is too evil and vile to ever be looked at, that only makes them wanna read it more. I guruan-fucking-tee more people have read 1984 now that they’re not allowed to!
Points for self awareness, and for Streisand effect.
yes they are literally banned at most schools in my state. Along with books that have LGBT charicters in them
Literally 1984
On Elon Musk’s X, animal abuse is the safe content.
Killing small animals? So like Barron Trump is alleged to have done:
how old is he now? Is it finally ok to set upon little Baron?
This, I find it weird that I keep getting people saying “YOU CAN’T MOCK BARRON HE’S JUST A CHILD!”
He was a child 8 years ago, people age.
(I will admit, even I forget this from time to time… Like when I saw Ant MAn 3 and was like “Wait, why’s the cute little girl who basically sold these movies by being best character now a generic angsty teen… oh… right… live action, the actress aged… and there’s been a time skip… and a tonal shift… right”
Was born March 20th, 2006. He’ll be 19 in a couple months.
Holy shit, how was this not bigger news? I like to think I keep up with things but this is the first time I have read any of this.
Trump was nearly 60 when he had him. Barron could have genetically predisposed mental health issues.
Barron could have genetically predisposed mental health issues because he’s a Trump. Look at the rest of them.
He looks so sad about not getting the book lmao
This kinda hits different when you replace cats with cows.
If you’re killing the cow in the same way the people in those videos kill cats, then it doesn’t hit much different at all.
There’s definitely a line here, but I suspect that we disagree on where that line is.
If you think cows are killed in anything but abject horror, I’d recommend you at the very least watch Dominion, which was linked above.
I’m not trying to cause offence, but is there an ethical way to eat animals, or does it become unethical as soon as we have the means and ability to not do so?
It seams like for a lot of people, thier traditions and culture outweigh thier personal ethical benefits and thats the biggest problem that has to be overcome. Some places do not allow for growing sufficient and complete protein to feed the population, for example Egypt or Bangladesh. It seems that the cultures might be harder to overcome in these places.
I was thinking maybe insects as a protein source would be a positive step for these locations. But thats obviously hard to overcome culturally. What do vegans think of eating insects?
Veganism seeks to exclude animal exploitation and cruelty as far as is possible and practicable.
For a Western audience, where one would have access to a well stocked supermarket, that would generally mean a complete boycott, but it does ultimately come down to the individual to decide what is and isn’t practicable. If you have nessary medication that contains animal products, or is tested on animals, for example, I don’t think you’d find anyone expecting you to give that up.
As for insects, they’re within the kingdom of Animalia, so yes, veganism applies to them too. That said, you can’t go through life without ever stepping on an ant, and I don’t know anyone who’d place the exact same value on an fly and a cow. One has a vastly more sophisticated brain and nervous system. That said, I generally don’t try to play “utilitarian calculus”.
Ultimately it’s a “do your best” situation.
It’s unlikely that insects (or any animals for that matter) are a better use of the land, because ultimately animals need to eat plants, too, and they use up a good chunk of the energy themselves.
Occasionally, you can grow grass where proper crops won’t and animals can graze there, but to my knowledge, this isn’t particularly relevant in practice, because farmers will typically feed more nutrious food to minimize the time until the animals can be slaughtered.
You talk about complete protein, by which I assume you mean the amino acid distribution, but I find it hard to believe that the inefficient land use of animals is offset by them converting some of the amino acids to be better suitable for us.
Because ultimately, if you manage to grow more lentils and whatnot, you can totally just eat more lentils to reach your 100% of each amino acid.
Wealthy cultures eat significantly more protein than is actually needed, for example.Insects can be fed on food scraps.
at least the cat stretched its legs once or twice whereas the cows were stuck in torturous positions their entire miserable life, steeped in their own shit on the verge of suffocation due to crowding. its all fucked
obligatory https://watchdominion.org/
Or replace cats with billionaires.
Fat cats
Nsfl
Thanks for the warning. Not clicking that and ruining my day.
You know the book is old enough to be in the public domain nowadays, and you can legally download a copy of it using the same device they use for watching those videos, right?
The proper reaction to finding out that librarians are legally barred from lending certain classic novels to children is not, “oh that’s okay, they can just download it.” Especially when we’re literally talking about a book dealing with suppressing speech.
On the contrary, I’d say that’s an instructive example demonstrating why the book continues to be relevant over 75 years after its release.
Also, if anything, banning it would likely only serve to increase interest in it since the best way to get a rebellious teenager to do anything is to tell them they aren’t allowed to do it.
It’s only instructive if the kids you think should download books that they can’t get at the library are taking your advice to do so. And I doubt they’re on Lemmy.
Furthermore, as the husband of a librarian who is (if she is still in Indiana when they pass the bill they intend to pass) at risk of imprisonment if she allows children to have access to books on a ban list, I have to tell you that this is about more than just kids having access to a specific book.
I mean, it’s literally the premise of this comic that the kid goes to a library that has already banned the book. How does he know it exists at all? And if he thinks he ought to be able to get it at the library, why wouldn’t he think of trying to find it on the Internet instead?
Kids these days were literally born after the iPhone was invented, they have never even known a time where you couldn’t access the Internet from almost anywhere in the world using a device small enough to fit in your pocket, and somehow you think they’d be too stupid to even try?
I get where you’re coming from, but that isn’t the point
I can only surmise the point here is a fact-free circlejerk completely lacking in humor or self-awareness?
I completely believe that’s the only thing you can surmise
Do the kids know that?
There are several links to free, legal copies at the bottom of the book’s Wikipedia page.
Also, if you type “1984” into YouTube, the first result is this full audiobook recording. It’s really not difficult to find.
If you’re dedicated you can find anything. That’s not the point though.
I understand, but my point is that it really doesn’t take any more effort or dedication than going to the library does. In fact, it’s certainly no more difficult than looking up videos of animal cruelty (at least I don’t exactly just see them being suggested to me randomly).
Animal cruelty maybe not, but I know a few friends who get randomly shown car crashed and combat recordings and the like. I agree with your sentiment for the most part, but I think the real point is that books that should be required reading for young minds are being banned, while the majority of young people are on sites that will show you all kinds of crazy shit to keep you scrolling
Where is this book banned for children for being a bad influence?
Most recently in Florida. It’s been banned often in the United States, it’s also been banned in Vietnam
Just look for red states/cities in the US. More than likely its been banned there.
I don’t know why you’re getting downvoted. I also didn’t know this book was banned, and was going to ask something similar.
One would assume that Kurt Vonnegut would have some awareness about books
I mean, 1984 isn’t really age appropriate for children anyway. Not from the authoritarianism, but sexual and violent content and themes.
What age are you talking about? I read it for the first time when I was 13 or so. These library censorship laws do not differentiate between 6 and 13. They just make it so that everyone under 18 can’t access it.
I suppose I’m thinking of pre teens. It has explicit sex, as well as IIRC pretty strong description of how the main character is broken down by the torture. Even without the detail, the rawness of the theme’s presentation feels more than I’d want to give a 6 year old, even an 11 year old. Animal farm is much tamer, even if, properly interpreted, it’s just as brutal!
I don’t know where I’d draw the boundary, if I were deciding. For that matter I don’t think I agree with book censorship anyway: at 6 your parents should be protecting you more than the library rules. Maybe don’t have it on the shelf next to Famous Five though?
If there is a pre-teen able to read and understand Orwell’s language, and there are precious few of those, I think they could handle the sex and the torture. As the cartoon suggests, they’re seeing it on the internet regardless.
I disagree. The intelligence to understand the language is separate from the maturity to handle the content.
And yes they’re seeing things on the internet… and shouldn’t be. That’s a long-standing debate in society about how heavily to shield them from it. But do you think the fact an 8 year-old might see awful things on tiktok means there’s no value in telling them to wait a few years before reading a book like 1984?
What 8-year-old is reading any Orwell? You’re talking about something that is probably an issue for .00001% of people at that age. Like 3 or 4 prodigies. So why do these bans which, again, do not differentiate between 7 and 17, need to be in place?
Also, where are the parents of these 8-year-olds? Shouldn’t they be aware of what their child is getting from the library?
It sounds like we’re talking cross purposes now. I don’t know what children are reading Orwell. Not like in the comic, I imagine. For that matter, I hope most children are not, in fact, seeing videos of cats being killed.
see, this is what is being pointed out in the meme. Children are exposed to violence and sexuality every single day. Just because children shouldn’t be committing violence or having sex doesn’t mean they can’t read about it or know about it. Also how fucking ridiculous is it that we place violence and sex in the same sentence w similar weight.
Ignoring the 1984 element for now, this has interested me for a long time.
In the US if a movie contains nudity then its age classification is going to be high, the same as if it contained murder, torture, or other violent actions.
In Germany, anecdotally, nudity is rated as appropriate for a much younger audience than violence.
It makes a lot of sense to me, but I understand why it would take forever to adjust from “puritanical” values to something more open as an entire nation, for example.
I feel like I’m more inclined to go with the FSK rating than the US equivalents, or the UK ones, but that’s my viewpoint, complete with all my bias.
Have you read 1984? I have, and in my opinion it is inappropriate for children.
I also feel videos showing people killing cats are inappropriate for children, and I think most people agree on that.
The meme is pointing out the incongruity there. But it’s being taken as if people are allowing the cat killing videos therefore we should allow 1984 for children. And also implying the problem with 1984 is about political influence or such like. Rather, the problem (wrt children) is the way it handles adult themes, and also we should be protecting children from the cat killing videos also.
I read it in middle school and it was one of my favorite books for years after. The topics are not too adult for school. We should obviously protect children, but prudishness and politics should not dictate school libraries
Middle school is mid teens, right? I interpreted those children in the comic as younger.
In what way is the novel inappropriate?
