# Required Reading **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 17, 2009, 10:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432 "2009-09-17T10:08:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/141 "2009-09-25T13:47:33Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > … I knew kids in HS that were probably like the girl in question and they grew up just fine if not a little later than their peers. They are today well rounded and successful. Despite the silliness of your persistence in referring to real literature that, among many other things, includes dealing with the romantic/erotic lives of its characters, as “porn” … despite the goofiness of your Einstein comment (and I am sure Einstein that read whatever he could that passed for porn - he was apparently quite a randy person) … I will grant you this. There are kids who emotionally mature later than than their peers do. Some may blossom with time and experience as they leave their parents’ homes. Maybe this young woman will. Maybe not. But this class was not for the emotionally late blooming in maturity. It was designed for those advanced in both intellectual and emotional maturity, not for those who had intellectual capacity but lacked in maturity on either count. I am still waiting for the answer to my straight forward questions - Was this student well chosen for a program that required exposure to different cultural perspectives that may be objectionable from “our” culture’s vantage point? (And yes that includes other cultures’ greater comfort with portrayals of sexuality.) Has she demonstrated that she has leaned the openess of mind to other ways of thinking that is the goal of such a program when she states, explicity, that she shouldn’t have to read something she “disagrees with”? (Yes, that is her quote.) Has the goal of helping educate her about different cultural perspectives been well served by allowing her to self select what aspects of another culture she should be exposed to? And to those I will add - Should an IB Diploma program have to include, as part of it application, a statement such as: “The IB Diploma program is designed the emotionally and intellectually mature student who desires exposure to a variety of cultural perspectives, some of which they _may_ even initially find objectionable. Do not apply to this program unless you and your parents feel that you can accept and maturely deal with themes and images appropriate for a college level audience in all aspects.”? (Of course she could have still taken a regular level literature class and stayed in an IB program - not all classes need to be at upper level.) ---
**Author:** ![Anaamika](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Anaamika](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anaamika)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/142 "2009-09-25T14:29:21Z")
I just…I don’t particularly want to get involved in this discussion, but presumably the girl has a vagina, yes? Why is it so wrong to talk about another girl touching her own? This hangup about female sexuality is damaging our girls for life, in some cases. It’s way worse for kids to hear their elders talking about boobs and vulvas dirty, filthy things than it is for us to see or hear about them. High school is the perfect place to start reading things out of your comfort zone when you still have your parents and your teachers around you, ready to help you and pick you up if you have a hard time. In college no one gives two shits about you, really - they’ll kick you in the deep end if you’re not quick enough. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/143 "2009-09-25T17:58:09Z")
This girl isn’t a child; she’s a baby. A pampered, stupid baby. The MATURE way to deal with this is one of three ways: 1. Drop the class without making a fuss. 2. Read the book without making a fuss. (Skimming or skipping the racy bits being an acceptible way of doing this - it’s not like those parts will be _tested_.) 3. Don’t read the book and be sufficiently bright to discuss and be tested on the material without having read it.\* What is NOT mature is reading a racy bit, getting all steamy as a result, getting uncomfortable and guilty as a result of your steaminess, then whining to your parents to get them to force the school to give you equal credit for reading Judy Blume instead. Poor baby wants to have her cake and eat it too. Waah waah wahhhh. - This is not impossible - I blew off a number of books in high school with no discernible negative effects. Now, I wasn’t in an advanced class, but if you’re sufficiently bright I presume the principle still applies. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/144 "2009-09-25T18:04:19Z")
I’d really like to know what she’s reading instead, but [I did find this note while I was searching](http://www.baynews9.com/content/36/2009/9/16/521826.html): > [@](#): > > Also, the district say students can take a zero on the book and still pass the class by reading two of the three required reading assignments. ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/145 "2009-09-25T18:31:59Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I’d really like to know what she’s reading instead, but [I did find this note while I was searching](http://www.baynews9.com/content/36/2009/9/16/521826.html): She’ll never do that. She’s obviously a grade whore who thinks she can win the system by raw numbers. I have a few close friends who are college professors and they HATE these people but they generally have no choice but to pass them-- usually with As, even. It’s one of the more bizarre ways to finish school without learning a damn thing. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/146 "2009-09-25T19:04:34Z")
> [@even\_sven](#): > > Well, actually, yes. > > If you are so uptight about sex that you are unable to read a piece of literature because it includes a few explicit passages, then you are not going to be able to read a reasonable chunk of the literary cannon. As such, you could hardly call yourself well-versed in literature, could you? > > Furthermore, we are sexual creatures. Sexuality is one of our strongest driving forces, and has shaped our minds, our culture, and our world in general. As such, any contemplation of the human condition is eventually going to involve some aspect of sexuality. Thus, any philosophizing about the human condition (a common intellectual enterprise) is going to necessarily involve philosophizing about sexuality- either directly or indirectly. This of course, is why sex shows up so often in great literature. They aren’t being prurient- they are trying to say something about the human condition. And there is so much to say! Sex is and always has been a thing surrounded by mystery, love, shame, fear, ecstasy, obsession, contentment and all those crazy emotions we feel. That’s prime ground for thinking! > > If you think you have solved the mysteries of human sexuality, or you have a view so rigid that you cannot even entertain other ideas briefly, you just are not going to be able to think meaningfully about the entirety of the human condition. > > And I’d have no problem in saying that yes, you are intellectually hobbled. I’d say the same thing of anyone with beliefs that make them close books, block out words, suppress ideas and reign in their thoughts. That’s the opposite of intellectual. Sorry. She is 16 years old and that is in the realm of age of emerging sexuality. She did not feel comfortable with it. She is not an adult nor should anyone be forced into situations they are not sexually comfortable with in school. Your premise that someone with different moral standards than yourself is intellectually hobbled means that everybody who is at odds with your standards thinks you’re a moron. I got news for you, all the women I’ve dated who were late bloomers turned out to be excellent lovers. Moral fiber or shyness never stopped someone from learning how to fuck with enthusiasm. Passion is the art of loving someone physically and it’s not done at the end of a phone cord (or the descriptions thereof). ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/147 "2009-09-25T19:19:57Z")
Lord knows the world should protect everyone from anything that could potentially make them uncomfortable at all times :rolleyes:. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/148 "2009-09-25T19:35:04Z")
> [@Cisco](#): > > Lord knows the world should protect everyone from anything that could potentially make them uncomfortable at all times :rolleyes:. Absolutes. Nice. How about we not protect anyone from anything at all times. We’ll just put Penthouse in High School Libraries. I see your :rolleyes: and raise you a :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/149 "2009-09-25T19:45:10Z")
Well **Magiver** I guess I’ll have to give up on hearing your answers to my questions. Maybe you had someone black them out for you? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/150 "2009-09-25T20:00:17Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Well **Magiver** I guess I’ll have to give up on hearing your answers to my questions. Maybe you had someone black them out for you? Your questions form a strawman argument that attempts to link explicit sexual material to cultural awareness. They are not related. That’s your answer. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/151 "2009-09-25T20:08:13Z")
So no answer it is. Very well. Good day sir. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/152 "2009-09-25T20:20:02Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > So no answer it is. Very well. Good day sir. Passive aggression doesn’t suit you. If you don’t like my answer that’s too bad. You can’t link sexually explicit material as a cultural necessity. It’s a non-argument. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/153 "2009-09-25T21:00:15Z")
Heh. I call it “being polite” given what I was stopping myself from typing out. After all, I don’t want to waste my warnings. Still. I will contain myself and take it bit by bit deducing your answers from your nonanswer. You believe that sexual mores and attitudes towards sexual material have either nothing to do with culture, or that, at the minimum, should, in an international program for advanced HS Juniors and Seniors, be selected to the level of the most sensitive culture and emotionally immature reader, or at least also be appropriate for a fifth grader (by your so called test of logic by taking it to the extremes). Therefore, you believe that her behavior and statement - “It’s not fair that I have to read something that I’m totally against” after having gotten to a brief explicit section on page 11 of a large work of a critically acclaimed piece of literature, informs us not at all about whether or not she is prepared to be exposed to things that she may be, well, totally against. Her mind is open despite her statement that she does not want to be exposed to things she is against. And learning that the appropriate response to uncomfortable material from another culture is refusing to read it, or to even to compromise by having parents (or others) black out “offending” sections, or take the lumps of just passing the class anyway without reading it, or dropping to a regular literature class, has taught her a valuable intercultural lesson and well prepared her to be exposed to uncomfortable and alien ideas in the future. Yup. The best way to deal with ideas you disagree with is to not listen and to refuse to compromise in any way. A tantrum will work every time. That is your answer and it _is_ too bad. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/154 "2009-09-26T13:11:51Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Heh. I call it “being polite” given what I was stopping myself from typing out. After all, I don’t want to waste my warnings. Still. I will contain myself and take it bit by bit deducing your answers from your nonanswer. > > You believe that sexual mores and attitudes towards sexual material have either nothing to do with culture, or that, at the minimum, should, in an international program for advanced HS Juniors and Seniors, be selected to the level of the most sensitive culture and emotionally immature reader, or at least also be appropriate for a fifth grader (by your so called test of logic by taking it to the extremes). Therefore, you believe that her behavior and statement - “It’s not fair that I have to read something that I’m totally against” after having gotten to a brief explicit section on page 11 of a large work of a critically acclaimed piece of literature, informs us not at all about whether or not she is prepared to be exposed to things that she may be, well, totally against. Her mind is open despite her statement that she does not want to be exposed to things she is against. And learning that the appropriate response to uncomfortable material from another culture is refusing to read it, or to even to compromise by having parents (or others) black out “offending” sections, or take the lumps of just passing the class anyway without reading it, or dropping to a regular literature class, has taught her a valuable intercultural lesson and well prepared her to be exposed to uncomfortable and alien ideas in the future. Yup. The best way to deal with ideas you disagree with is to not listen and to refuse to compromise in any way. A tantrum will work every time. > > That is your answer and it _is_ too bad. I think I’ve been fairly clear on my position. High school is an age of sexual transition. We give the benefit of the doubt to the student. The book is a chopped translation of a well regarded Japanese author and not the encyclopedia of Japanese culture. If I’m a HS Principal and a get a phone call complaining about a book describing phone sex the conversation is going to be short. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2009, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/155 "2009-09-27T00:35:54Z")
If it were a Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck book … THAT would be cause for immediate execution. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2009, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/156 "2009-09-27T00:54:50Z")
I wasn’t aware Beck or Limbaugh were Japanese. The things you learn on the internets. ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2009, 5:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/157 "2009-09-27T05:30:37Z")
Here is another question, Magiver. [This](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNRovjo3O30) is an utterly typical high school dance team routine: the dancing is better than usual, the choreography is normal. It’s very sexual–lots of thrusts and booty-shakes. The outfits are conservative because it’s a hip-hop routine–I’ve seen dozens of dance teams do dances every bit as “sexy” wearing a leotard and tights. If a girl is a good enough dancer to make the team but isn’t comfortable with the sexy dances, should she be allowed to be on the dance team but not actually dance at football games and competitions? Not being on the team will prevent her from “excelling”–dance is a very attractive extracurricular for college admissions committees–but how can she honestly be considered part of the team if she didn’t do the dance? It seems to me like this is exactly the same situation. ETA: [Here](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uw_lGEKCA0&feature=related) is another one with the sort of outfits that are more typical. I can easily see girls uncomfortable with being this sexual in front of a crowd. But I don’t think that gives them a right to be on the team if they aren’t really dancing with the team. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2009, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/158 "2009-09-27T06:00:14Z")
> [@MandaJo](#): > > Here is another question, Magiver. [This](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNRovjo3O30) is an utterly typical high school dance team routine: the dancing is better than usual, the choreography is normal. It’s very sexual–lots of thrusts and booty-shakes. The outfits are conservative because it’s a hip-hop routine–I’ve seen dozens of dance teams do dances every bit as “sexy” wearing a leotard and tights. > > If a girl is a good enough dancer to make the team but isn’t comfortable with the sexy dances, should she be allowed to be on the dance team but not actually dance at football games and competitions? Not being on the team will prevent her from “excelling”–dance is a very attractive extracurricular for college admissions committees–but how can she honestly be considered part of the team if she didn’t do the dance? > > It seems to me like this is exactly the same situation. > > ETA: [Here](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uw_lGEKCA0&feature=related) is another one with the sort of outfits that are more typical. I can easily see girls uncomfortable with being this sexual in front of a crowd. But I don’t think that gives them a right to be on the team if they aren’t really dancing with the team. You’re comparing an extra curricular event to an advanced curriculum class so it’s an apples to oranges comparison. And the routine you cited had no explicit sex in it. If it resembled the book you would not be seeing a video of it. ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2009, 6:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/159 "2009-09-27T06:07:24Z")
Why is it an apples to oranges comparison? Both are optional, voluntary activities. Both matter to college admissions committees. For many people, being the actual object of sexual interest/actually being out there dancing like that while dressed in less than a Hooters waitress would make them very uncomfortable–it would have made me uncomfortable. Do you think those girls should be allowed to “be on the team” but not actually dance? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2009, 7:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432/160 "2009-09-27T07:54:28Z")
> [@MandaJo](#): > > Why is it an apples to oranges comparison? Both are optional, voluntary activities. Both matter to college admissions committees. > > For many people, being the actual object of sexual interest/actually being out there dancing like that while dressed in less than a Hooters waitress would make them very uncomfortable–it would have made me uncomfortable. Do you think those girls should be allowed to “be on the team” but not actually dance? It’s an apples and oranges comparison on 2 levels. First, the class is academic and affects her education as opposed to a cheer squad which is not an academic venture. Second, there is no sexual comparison. One involves explicit sex and the other does not. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/required-reading/510432.md?page=9)