Utah outlaws books by Judy Blume and Sarah J Maas in first statewide ban
theguardian.comSuch bans tend to have the opposite effect of what was intended: people become curious as to why the books were banned and then go and read them. The lure of forbidden fruit is real.
The books by Maas are NYT bestsellers, so a great many people already know of them.
And this is just a ban from public schools in libraries. So people will still go buy the books at the local Barnes and Noble or online off Amazon.
Calling these book bans is like claiming Facebook "bans" news in Canada. They're not going to be carried by school libraries or be part of the curriculum. You're still free to read these books and give them to your kids to read. It's like saying churches "ban" the Koran because they don't teach it in church.
You can have a ban in certain areas or times without a state-wide prohibition.
Consider the sentence "In 1995, California was the first state to enact a statewide smoking ban for restaurants." at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_smoking_bans_in_the_Un... .
Or from a 2003 article at https://www.orlandosentinel.com/2003/10/16/french-students-f... :
> DOMONT, France: French high school students are up in arms over attempts by teachers to ban them from smoking between classes. "We're not allowed to smoke anywhere on the school grounds any more. They treat us like babies," said Melodie Gambero, 17, a student in Domont, north of Paris, who went on strike with fellow students last week against the new rules.
Just like, how the "California ban on singing or chanting at religious services" at https://apnews.com/article/7c11840c31de504a939c926f63006102 did not preclude singing or chanting at home.
The headline says that the books are "outlawed" and "banned" in Utah. Its clickbait. An accurate headline with say "Utah bans school libraries from having books by....".
The other headlines you quote specify where the ban applies (restaurants, religious services, schools). This headline does not and states it as though its a state wide prohibition.
All your examples are actually bans though. They prohibit people from freely engaging in certain behavior. The distinction I'm making is not that the Utah school book ban is contextual or based on location, it's that it's not really a ban at all. They're not going to teach these books or make them available to students. Nobody is telling students "you can't read these books." Would you call video games "banned" because they're not available at the school library?
Is your point that "ban" is the wrong word because students are not banned from reading such books, even at the school library, so long as they bring their own copy?
That's a very narrow and non-standard use of the term. The ban here applies to banning the school from providing such books, and I can easily find other examples where "ban" is used to describe restrictions on a school placed by the district or legislature.
- "Across the United States, many states have actively banned the sale of soda in high schools, and evidence suggests that students’ in-school access to soda has declined as a result." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4658713/
- "Bill Introduced to Ban Sale of Sports Drinks at Schools" https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/bill-introduced-to-ba...
- "Bans on School Junk Food Pay Off in California" https://archive.nytimes.com/well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/0... (that's a state-wide ban)
- "Last year, 44 percent of school districts banned junk food from vending machines, believing that by eliminating unhealthy foods, they'd encourage kids to eat better." https://www.medicaldaily.com/vending-machine-bans-schools-en... (these are district bans)
- In Texas, the "state pulled french fries in 2004 and banned deep frying completely in 2009", https://www.dallasnews.com/news/education/2013/06/28/new-usd...
Just because the school is banned from proving soft drinks, candy bars, sports drinks, and french fries, that doesn't necessarily mean students are prohibited from bringing the same from home.
FWIW, my local library bans children from using the library computers to play fighting and shooting games. That is a ban. Even if a child may play the same game on their own device while at the library.
My library also has video games to check out. If the state made a law prohibiting the library from doing so, yes, that would correctly be called a ban on providing video games.
It's not a very narrow and non standard use of the term. A ban is a prohibition on doing or having something. That's been the standard definition as long as I can remember. Is Swahili banned in schools because they don't teach a Swahili class?
Those are almost all hyperbolic news articles. News articles are designed to stir emotion. Just because multiple click driven publications misuse a word because it drives clicks doesn't mean that's the proper use of the word. A school "banning" themselves from selling junk food isn't a ban, if they didn't allow students to eat junk food at school, that's a ban. I don't sell junk food, is that a ban because you can't buy junk food from me?
This has all gotten ridiculous.
> Is Swahili banned in schools because they don't teach a Swahili class?
No. Because no one banned Swahili.
By contrast these books are banned from inclusion in the school library because they have been banned, by policy, from inclusion in the school library.
> A school "banning" themselves from selling junk food isn't a ban,
Not relevant given that I highlighted how the schools were banned either by the district or by state law, not banning themselves.
Which would, per your definition, make it a ban.
Would you prefer seeing only scholarly publications describe it as a ban?
"Do School Junk Food Bans Improve Student Health? Evidence from Canada", in Canadian Public Policy, https://www.utpjournals.press/doi/full/10.3138/cpp.2016-090
"Examining Compliance with a Statewide Law Banning Junk Food and Beverage Marketing in Maine Schools", Public Health Reports, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/003335491212700...
"Banning All Sugar-Sweetened Beverages in Middle Schools", Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/...
"Breaking habits: The effect of the French vending machine ban on school snacking and sugar intakes", JOURNAL OF POLICY ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT, https://cris.unibo.it/bitstream/11585/606157/6/CapacciS_JPAM... (this banned all vending machines from primary and secondary schools, no matter what was sold).
With a Google Scholar search I could easily give hundreds of similar citations.
> I don't sell junk food, is that a ban because you can't buy junk food from me?
Are you being serious or merely cantankerous?
If the school librarian wants to have keep a copy of the 1975 book "Forever ..." by Judy Blume in circulation, and state law prohibits it, why is that not a ban?
It is, after all, "a prohibition on doing or having something."
If a school want to have a soda vending machine on campus, because of the extra revenue it brings the school, but the district changes policy to prevent that option, why is it not a ban?
I recognize "A Court of Thorns and Roses" because my wife likes to complain about it. To hear her tell it, they're middling fantasy novels that are popular because they include graphic sex, but otherwise have a stereotypical plot and flat main heroine who is nevertheless irresistible to all the male characters. Sounds similar to how "Fifty Shades of Grey" captured the attention of an audience who wasn't previously familiar with that sort of content.
The Salt Lake Tribune has an article [1] on this. If you want more on Utah, see the Tribune's articles on [2] the divide between Mormon and non-Mormons in the state, and [3] how long people in the state will have access to abortion.
[1] https://www.sltrib.com/news/education/2024/08/02/utah-book-b...
[2] https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2024/08/07/how-utahs-lds-vs-...
[3] https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2024/08/05/how-long-wil...
"outlaws" in the sense that they won't be in school libraries or used in classes, title is misleading.
they will surely be pushing to ban from amazon next, just watch
I am sure it's perfectly fine and constitutional, right?
Yes. Well maybe not perfectly fine. But it is constitutional. It isn't a public bag, just removal from public schools. Generally adult books and belong in schools. The issue here is these (or some of them) are aimed at young adults. You can question whether the books meet the pornography/indecent bar or not.
My daughter recently started reading Maas. Definitely one of those "oh %@#!, my daughter is growing up" moments.
> ...because they were considered to contain “pornographic or indecent” material
Guess the christian bible isn't going to last long there then.
Lagniappe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_book_burnings#/media/File...
to be fair to WAYX, unlike Utah they weren't being hypocritical, in that I don't recall any part of the bible that claims it's more popular* than the Beatles.
(for creatures that the creator had an inordinate fondness for, even beetles get short shrift; all I've found is Lev.11:22 "ye may eat ... the beetle after his kind ...")
* how should we measure popularity? By Google hits, Jesus wins, hands down, but by platinum record multiples (Amy Grant being in the single digits), John had a point.
Reminds me of a joke:
"A shark could swim faster than me, but I could probably run faster than a shark. So in a triathlon, it would all come down to who is the better cyclist."
On first thought, a shark would make a pretty good roadie: they don't need to shave their leg hair, for instance.
However, it appears that both basking sharks and great whites peak at only 5.5 W/kg, while professional human cyclists can sustain such output.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30209042/
(incidentally, everything old is new again: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41179954 )
The Nazis did not like the Bible: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_Christianity
They were not exactly keen on Jewish saviour and scriptures written by jews!
The Bible is not popular with a lot of people now either. People have been arrested in the UK for reading aloud from offensive bits of the Bible.
Considering that Mormons are not Christians, I don't think they care
It's my impression they believe they are?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormonism#Relationship_with_ma...
For the downvoters: specifically, I had been remembering Lot when making the original comment, but I'm sure examples of biblical indecency can easily be multiplied.
If you go to a pubic library the bible tends to fall open at Ezekiel 23:20
In those days the second "B" of the ontological acronym must've been "Babylonian"?
Broadcasting Babylonian Cuneiform ?
I guess so.
BBC's world service, at its height, provided content not just in cuneiform but also other internationally used scripts, including translations/transliterations of their most popular programme, the gardening show "Paradise in a 𒊬: big joy from small holdings".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Mesopotamian_units_of_...
Just call a cult a cult
