The point of having it as a childrens book though is to present it as a non-issue. Saying that your child isn’t ready for non-traditional lifestyles would also mean she isn’t ready for “traditional.” Either she gets the idea that people who love each other get together and start a family or she doesn’t.
Huh? Can I get an explanation for that?
Why are you, of all people – a fellow queer – bashing love and acceptance for all varieties of families? Or are you jumping on me for something else?
I don’t get it.
If you take things entirely out of context like that, you’re just bound to come to the wrong inference. I was referring to the fact that the U.S. military has long had ridiculously obsolete opinions on homosexuality. That’s awfully hard to argue against, but if you want to try, by all means…
But the fact is that the U.S. military just recently re-classified homosexuality as a mental disorder, which by any account makes it a ridiculously obsolete opinion.
True, after all the outrage from all quarters for that, including John McCain’s, the military kindly changed the reference from “mental disorder” to a list that includes the designation “defect”, but that hardly reveals any enlightenment on the issue.
I guess you missed the part where I already acknowledged that.
I never called you a liar. I simply doubted that there was no information on either the inside or outside of the front or the back, and challenged you for not reading a page or two before bitching about your excessively over-delicate sensibilities and suggesting that the publisher had engaged in some kind of conspiracy to trick people to buy the book and only then open it!
I never even insinuated that a parent had to read each entire book while standing in the bookstore. I simply pointed out the very, very obvious fact that you could have saved yourself a lot of grief (if that’s what you want to call it) by simply reading a page or two or even browsing it a bit. I find it quite strange and inexplicable that someone would buy a book, even for (or perhaps especially for) a child, without even glancing at the contents!
[QUOTE=Jman267]
e of you “broad-minded, tolerant” posters?
The moral is simple. Sex perverts do NOT reproduce children. They recruit. That is NOT anyone’s opinion or religion. This is SCIENTIFIC, OBSERVABLE PHENOMENA. What the sex perverts needed was SOMEONE (the zookeeper) other than themselves and God to REPRODUCE for them since they can NOT. They needed their own god. Since the Creator wouldn’t do it.
[QUOTE/]
Utter bollockes. Speaking as a sex pervert, while I havn’t reproduced as of yet I still could. And have absouly no interest in “recuiiting” anyone. And for the record, capital letters don’t stregthen your argument.
Has anyone ever found the concept of a fundamentalist Christian lambasting the evils of “recruiting” …well, a little ironic? Am I alone on this one?
One point to consider: maybe these guys are being ‘recruited’ by the gay community and not only that, they have to struggle to resist. It makes sense to troll the fundamentalists if you want some man ass.
You’re right, you didn’t call me a liar. You did say you were doubtful that the summary on the back cover doesn’t indicate that the penguins are male. Until you’ve seen the book yourself and can come up with a cite that the summary on the book does indicate that, I’m going to take your doubt as an attack on my honesty.
So clearly, you aren’t bothering to read all of my posts. I was not in a bookstore. I was in a library. I never said we were in a bookstore. At a bookstore, we will be carefully going over the book(s) the kids want to buy for content, age appropriate-ness, and interest to the child in question since they’ll be using their hard earned cash to pay for it. At a library, I want to encourage them to pick out whatever kind of book they want - all I do then is a quick glance to make sure it’s age appropriate for them. If they get home and find they don’t like it - it’s no big deal, it can go back to the library next week. See the difference?
And yes, I could have read a few pages. In my experience though, the summary on the back or inside cover is sufficient. In this case, it wasn’t.
I’m not. And until Jman showed up, neither was anyone else in this thread.
Jman267, if a homosexual came up to me in the mall and bit me, then yes, I’d say get rid of them. Funny thing. I don’t recall that happening. I recall them shopping like the rest of us.
Indeed, shopping and reproducing or if not biologicaly reproducing, nurturing…like my aunt who helped out her wife with her son when his father wrote him off. Or Dan Savage who has a child with his boyf…with his husband. Or the women I met who was gay and disabled, who was adopting a disabled 7 year old. Who had very little chance of a famliy otherwise.(But who had to lie about who she was because of idiots like you.)
But hey, let,s take that possiblity away.
No, no; that’s how they recruit. Unless it’s just a little nip, which only makes you bi.
Naah, he had that whole flashback-in-a-rockpainting to his wife and kid being killed. Actually, now that I think about it, I just assumed it was his wife…
Now, the two Brontotheres, Frank and Carl? They were gay.
Hell, if a homosexual routinely came up to me in a mall with a handful of tracts espousing lies about heterosexuality and the evils of the heterosexual lifestyle and tried to get me to agree to come to his gay club every Sunday and bring my kids and sign them up for Gay Camp this summer where they swim and fish and praise the name of Liza Minelli, lest they burn in the everlasting torment that is Peoria…
I’d be annoyed. And I might ask security that they escort them outside. More likely I’d just walk away and get a latte and a soft pretzel.
And even then it’s only around the full moon. Or at college.
Especially Sarah Lawrence.
I’m just sayin’…
Well, sure, I guess I would have got your inference if you’d said that col_whatever’s username indicated he was a policy-maker in the military…maybe. I don’t hold with Fred Phelps’s point of view that everyone in the military condones homosexuality because of the don’t-ask-don’t-tell policy, and I also don’t hold with the point of view that everyone in the military condemns homosexuality because of the don’t-ask-don’t-tell policy. So being or having been in the military has nothing whatsoever to do with anybody’s views on homosexuality.
Thank you. I’ve only seen it once but I knew I remembered a gay character.
But isn’t this what muldoonthief is missing? He would like to have a world where warnings come for his values, but this world doesn’t come with warnings for everyone’s values. Gay parents don’t get the choice. Their kids are going to be exposed to the shutter shock that not all children have two fathers or two mothers.
My sister’s children grew up knowing that one of their aunts lived with another “aunt”, and it hasn’t (yet) caused permenent damage. (They’re still young, so we still don’t know if they will catch teh gay, cross your fingers for us. And you, in the front row, stop crossing your fingers that they will catch it.)
Really, unless you disapprove of something, what is wrong with it coming up at age four?
I think it is. I think muldoonthief is of the opinion that all picture books in a library should be “safe” for all children. And I know that if he thinks this through to the logical conclusion, he’ll see it can’t be so.
My Fundamentalist relations don’t want their four year olds exposed to books containing witchcraft and magic. Frankly, that’s a lot of picture books. My friends who only read Science Fiction and Fantasy think they are wonderful. I’m not too fond of the Jesus books. We go out of our way to find books with positive portrayals of Asians (not easy) and watch for books with negative racial stereotypes (which do exist). I don’t care about non-traditional penguin families - muldoonthief does - to me “And Tango Makes Three” is a wonderful adoption story - regardless of the gender of the parents - and I didn’t have nearly enough of those in my picture book library. There are a LOT of parental agendas out there, and many of them do conflict.
He is right that picture books usually don’t blurb the back. There is often - though not always - some cover flap copy (and I’m almost sure there is in this case, but I’ll have to get my hands on the book to check) - but honestly, if you aren’t going to flip through the text at the library, you probably aren’t taking the time to read the flap, either.
Tokyo Player & Dangerosa, I’ve said it a few times, but I’ll say it again:
The book DID have a summary on the back, and I DID read it. The summary, while accurate, did not mention the fact that the 2 penguins the book was about were male.
If the summary HAD mentioned that, I would never have posted in this thread. I would either have taken the book home and read it to her as written, or read it to her with Silo changed to a female as I did. But either way, I would have been able to make that decision with some warning, and not at the last second.
I’m going to the library tonight, so I’ll find the book and post exactly what text is written on the back cover and inside flap.
ding I did set myself up for that one quite well
sigh I step outside for a MINUTE and look what comes tracking in here. starts dusting