Pink to Give Away Banned Books at Florida Tour Stops

AProudLefty said:
Critical race theory (CRT) is an interdisciplinary academic field devoted to analysing how social and political laws and media shape (and are shaped by) social conceptions of race and ethnicity. CRT also considers racism to be systemic in various laws and rules, and not only based on individuals' prejudices.

Pretty easy to understand.
Click to expand...

1nhqpl.jpg
 
NiftyNiblick said:
I see your point.

My mind doesn't go straight to children's books
and I went to elementary school before such books were made available.

I can see where they'd be a good thing.
I wonder how all the liberals in Boston became liberal,
because we had nothing like that growing up.

The Irish and Italians were set up by Democratic Party bosses when they arrived,
registered as Democrats after getting help with citizenship, and also got help settling in.

But that was a totally different set of liberal issues back then.

Those were what came to be known as FDR Democrat issues in the decades that immediately followed
but on non-fiscal issues, the immigrants were still very conservative on social issues.

How the woke issues came to the forefront, I'm not sure,
but Boston still has a lot of socially conservative Democrats.

Still, we have a Chinese woman Mayor, a black woman Attorney General,
and a white lesbian Governor. It's a different kind of social conservatism.
Click to expand...

Are these women performing their elected office duties competently? No hints so far of corruption or misuse of power? If so, then it's all good.

Despite the fact that Boston has been liberal for a long time, do you think any of them would have been able to be elected in the 1950s? 1960s?
 
Let me just clear up the lack of knowledge being displayed here about CRT by explaining how it works in terms anyone--well most people--can understand.

CRT is derived from Critical Legal Theory that came from Critical Pedagogy.

Critical Pedagogy is a radical Leftist education theory that holds all education is indoctrination and propagandization. That is, the purpose of education is to teach politically correct thinking to the student such that they will reject by critically examining what they are later told as being inconsistent with their indoctrination.

Critical Legal Theory extended this to the law by holding that there are favored and dispossessed groups in the way laws are structured.

Kimberly Crenshaw a radical Leftist Marxist who invented the academic theory of Intersectionality-- Digressing for a moment:

Intersectionality looks at the social and economic identity of an individual or group and seeks to determine that individual's or group's privilege or repression / discrimination compared to other individuals or groups.

That explains that.

Anyway, Crenshaw took her idea of Intersectionality, and combined it with classical Marxist didactic on class struggle and Critical Pedagogy / CLT to come up with CRT.

CRT holds that you are a member of a group or class that is either oppressor or oppressed on the basis of race. Everything you do is looked at through the lens of racial content. Groups that are deemed oppressors based on their perceived or claimed privilege (from Intersectionality) are racists under CRT. Oppressed groups cannot be racist as they are the victims of racism, not producers of it. Only groups deemed oppressors can be racist.

In classic Marxist theory this would be the bourgeois and wealthy versus the workers and poor. The bourgeois and wealthy are oppressors, and the workers and poor are oppressed. There is no exception made for either group. That is, if you are poor you cannot oppress others, only be oppressed.

Thus, in CRT all Whites are racists (eg., oppressors). At the same time, all Blacks are not racists and cannot be racist because they are oppressed, not oppressors. That's one example of CRT applied.

So, by extension, you get the radical Leftist idea of White Privilege. All Whites are racist. Or, America is a racist nation. It must be in CRT as it is majority White and they are the oppressors. CRT would argue that simply "Browning" America will shift things in favor of the oppressed races and overcome the racism of Whites.

In terms of K - 12 education, this is applied using the methods of Critical Pedagogy to indoctrinate and propagandize the students into accepting this version of racism created out of CRT. The application is usually subtle and done within each lesson plan and inserted into textbooks. There is no in-your-face--well, for the most part--application as those using CRT and Critical Pedagogy know that will just meet resistance rather than acceptance.

The examples I gave, like those from the Manhattan Institute, show that students are widely exposed to ideas that CRT would seek to indoctrinate them with. That, in turn, shows that CRT is indeed being used in K - 12 education widely as a teaching methodology / pedagogy.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Let me just clear up the lack of knowledge being displayed here about CRT by explaining how it works in terms anyone--well most people--can understand.

CRT is derived from Critical Legal Theory that came from Critical Pedagogy.

Critical Pedagogy is a radical Leftist education theory that holds all education is indoctrination and propagandization. That is, the purpose of education is to teach politically correct thinking to the student such that they will reject by critically examining what they are later told as being inconsistent with their indoctrination.

Critical Legal Theory extended this to the law by holding that there are favored and dispossessed groups in the way laws are structured.

Kimberly Crenshaw a radical Leftist Marxist who invented the academic theory of Intersectionality-- Digressing for a moment:

Intersectionality looks at the social and economic identity of an individual or group and seeks to determine that individual's or group's privilege or repression / discrimination compared to other individuals or groups.

That explains that.

Anyway, Crenshaw took her idea of Intersectionality, and combined it with classical Marxist didactic on class struggle and Critical Pedagogy / CLT to come up with CRT.

CRT holds that you are a member of a group or class that is either oppressor or oppressed on the basis of race. Everything you do is looked at through the lens of racial content. Groups that are deemed oppressors based on their perceived or claimed privilege (from Intersectionality) are racists under CRT. Oppressed groups cannot be racist as they are the victims of racism, not producers of it. Only groups deemed oppressors can be racist.

In classic Marxist theory this would be the bourgeois and wealthy versus the workers and poor. The bourgeois and wealthy are oppressors, and the workers and poor are oppressed. There is no exception made for either group. That is, if you are poor you cannot oppress others, only be oppressed.

Thus, in CRT all Whites are racists (eg., oppressors). At the same time, all Blacks are not racists and cannot be racist because they are oppressed, not oppressors. That's one example of CRT applied.

So, by extension, you get the radical Leftist idea of White Privilege. All Whites are racist. Or, America is a racist nation. It must be in CRT as it is majority White and they are the oppressors. CRT would argue that simply "Browning" America will shift things in favor of the oppressed races and overcome the racism of Whites.

In terms of K - 12 education, this is applied using the methods of Critical Pedagogy to indoctrinate and propagandize the students into accepting this version of racism created out of CRT. The application is usually subtle and done within each lesson plan and inserted into textbooks. There is no in-your-face--well, for the most part--application as those using CRT and Critical Pedagogy know that will just meet resistance rather than acceptance.

The examples I gave, like those from the Manhattan Institute, show that students are widely exposed to ideas that CRT would seek to indoctrinate them with. That, in turn, shows that CRT is indeed being used in K - 12 education widely as a teaching methodology / pedagogy.
Click to expand...

TL;DR Just another steaming pile of Reichwing drivel. Thanks for playing!
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Are these women performing their elected office duties competently? No hints so far of corruption or misuse of power? If so, then it's all good.

Despite the fact that Boston has been liberal for a long time, do you think any of them would have been able to be elected in the 1950s? 1960s?
Click to expand...

The broads are doing great as far as I can see. Liz Warren, too.
The mayor might have one or two neighborhoods pissed off at her,
but no claims of corruption have been made.


We had women school committee members when I was a little boy,
but women in the licensed professions were common here before in most cities.

Still, it's really my generation that took to the streets and made Boston socially liberal.
We had a reputation for being socially staid up until then.
"Banned in Boston" used to actually be a thing, but we took care of that.

When I first got to school, women who lived in school accommodations were locked out of their dorms after midnight.
Male students had no such restrictions.

By the time I graduated, we actually had coed rooms on campus for whomever wanted them.
As went the schools, so went the city.
 
NiftyNiblick said:
The broads are doing great as far as I can see. Liz Warren, too.
The mayor might have one or two neighborhoods pissed off at her,
but no claims of corruption have been made.


We had women school committee members when I was a little boy,
but women in the licensed professions were common here before in most cities.

Still, it's really my generation that took to the streets and made Boston socially liberal.
We had a reputation for being socially staid up until then.
"Banned in Boston" used to actually be a thing, but we took care of that.

When I first got to school, women who lived in school accommodations were locked out of their dorms after midnight.
Male students had no such restrictions.

By the time I graduated, we actually had coed rooms on campus for whomever wanted them.
As went the schools, so went the city.
Click to expand...

The 1960s were sure a decade of great and much-needed change. We won't see that again, unless it's a conversion to a theocracy ala The Handmaid's Tale.

I always thought that "Banned in Boston" meant a book so pornographic, so vile, so licentious that they couldn't even tolerate it in liberal Boston. lol
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Let me just clear up the lack of knowledge being displayed here about CRT by explaining how it works in terms anyone--well most people--can understand.

CRT is derived from Critical Legal Theory that came from Critical Pedagogy.

Critical Pedagogy is a radical Leftist education theory that holds all education is indoctrination and propagandization. That is, the purpose of education is to teach politically correct thinking to the student such that they will reject by critically examining what they are later told as being inconsistent with their indoctrination.

Critical Legal Theory extended this to the law by holding that there are favored and dispossessed groups in the way laws are structured.

Kimberly Crenshaw a radical Leftist Marxist who invented the academic theory of Intersectionality-- Digressing for a moment:

Intersectionality looks at the social and economic identity of an individual or group and seeks to determine that individual's or group's privilege or repression / discrimination compared to other individuals or groups.

That explains that.

Anyway, Crenshaw took her idea of Intersectionality, and combined it with classical Marxist didactic on class struggle and Critical Pedagogy / CLT to come up with CRT.

CRT holds that you are a member of a group or class that is either oppressor or oppressed on the basis of race. Everything you do is looked at through the lens of racial content. Groups that are deemed oppressors based on their perceived or claimed privilege (from Intersectionality) are racists under CRT. Oppressed groups cannot be racist as they are the victims of racism, not producers of it. Only groups deemed oppressors can be racist.

In classic Marxist theory this would be the bourgeois and wealthy versus the workers and poor. The bourgeois and wealthy are oppressors, and the workers and poor are oppressed. There is no exception made for either group. That is, if you are poor you cannot oppress others, only be oppressed.

Thus, in CRT all Whites are racists (eg., oppressors). At the same time, all Blacks are not racists and cannot be racist because they are oppressed, not oppressors. That's one example of CRT applied.

So, by extension, you get the radical Leftist idea of White Privilege. All Whites are racist. Or, America is a racist nation. It must be in CRT as it is majority White and they are the oppressors. CRT would argue that simply "Browning" America will shift things in favor of the oppressed races and overcome the racism of Whites.

In terms of K - 12 education, this is applied using the methods of Critical Pedagogy to indoctrinate and propagandize the students into accepting this version of racism created out of CRT. The application is usually subtle and done within each lesson plan and inserted into textbooks. There is no in-your-face--well, for the most part--application as those using CRT and Critical Pedagogy know that will just meet resistance rather than acceptance.

The examples I gave, like those from the Manhattan Institute, show that students are widely exposed to ideas that CRT would seek to indoctrinate them with. That, in turn, shows that CRT is indeed being used in K - 12 education widely as a teaching methodology / pedagogy.
Click to expand...

1nhqpl.jpg
 
signalmankenneth said:
It's hard to believe we have book bans in the country?!!

Pink announced Monday she plans to hand out 2,000 banned books during her four concert dates in Florida. “Books have held a special joy for me from the time I was a child, and that’s why I am unwilling to stand by and watch while books are banned by schools,” she said in a press release.

The three-time Grammy-winning singer announced her collaboration with the national free speech organization PEN America during an Instagram Live with Amanda Gorman, the youngest inaugural poet in the U.S. Pink will also work with bookseller Books & Books to distribute four books from PEN America’s Index of Banned Books: Todd Parr’s “The Family Book,” Gorman’s “The Hill We Climb,” Toni Morrison’s “Beloved,” and Stacia Deutsch’s “Girls Who Code.”

Florida leads the country in book bans. In a study during the 2022 to 2023 school year, PEN America recorded more than 3,300 book bans across the U.S., a 33% jump from the previous school year. Of those books, 40% of the bans occur in Florida school districts, with 1,406 books off the shelf. Texas placed second with 625 bans. Book bans most often target female authors, LGBTQ authors, and authors of color. For example, the “Don’t Say Gay” bill, backed by Florida governor and presidential candidate Ron Desantis, prohibits K-12 teachers from discussing sexuality and gender identity in schools.

“It’s especially hateful to see authorities take aim at books about race and racism and against LGBTQ authors and those of color,” Pink added in her statement.

The pop singer has planned performances in Miami and Sunrise, Florida, on Nov. 13 and 14, and two shows in Orlando on Nov. 18 and 19 to close out her Trustfall tour. She will hand out books on Florida’s banned list at each show.

“We have made so many strides toward equality in this country and no one should want to see this progress reversed,” Pink said.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/pink-away-banned-books-florida-191600973.html
Click to expand...


There are no banned books.

If there were, the lying cunt would be arrested.

But she, like all Communists, is just a filthy liar.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Here's some interesting data from the site listed in the OP, Pen America. https://pen.org/report/book-bans-pressure-to-censor/

37 percent include themes or instances of violence and physical abuse (n = 2180). Of note, within this category, 1,134 instances are books that include episodes of sexual assault, which is 19 percent of all instances of books banned.

27 percent detail sexual experiences between characters (n = 1,560).

They don't give any figures for overlap, if any, in their statistics. But the above represents about half of all books banned by public schools. That is about half the books banned include explicit sexuality, domestic violence, or rape sequences. I really don't see how material including any of that is subject matter for a K - 12 public school in any form. That's for starters.
Click to expand...

And an adult can buy every last one of these books openly in Florida.

There are no banned books, the Stalinists are just lying, as always.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top