We’re Still Trying To Ban Books?

One of the greatest books I have ever read is “The Diary of Anne Frank”. That book wrecks me. I have nothing but the utmost respect for Anne Frank. When Justin Bieber went to The Anne Frank house and wrote:Truly inspiring to be able to come here. Anne was a great girl. Hopefully she would have been a belieber.” I wanted to rip him apart (more than I normally do). Then the pictures of him shadow boxing and wearing a hoodie and sunglasses in her house surfaced and I wanted him to be waterboarded and tortured.

That’s how much this girl and that book means to me. It means that much to a lot of people. That book is an inside look at the torture that someone experienced during one of the darkest times in our world’s history and it’s told with the purity of a child.

Gail Horalek of Northville, Michigan has declared war on this piece of history. Horalek wants the book banned. ”The problem is the school is giving the seventh graders inappropriate material and not explaining it to the parents.”

Horalek is talking about the unedited definitive edition of the book. At first Horalek said she thought it was “awesome” that her daughter was doing a school project on the book until her daughter told her the  ”graphic passages” were making her “uncomfortable.” Firstly, no 12-year-old is going to use the phrase “graphic passages” and I highly doubt she’d say “uncomfortable”.

This is the passage the mother is objecting to:

“Until I was eleven or twelve, I didn’t realize there was a second set of labia on the inside, since you couldn’t see them. What’s even funnier is that I thought urine came out of the clitoris…When you’re standing up, all you see from the front is hair. Between your legs there are two soft, cushiony things, also covered with hair, which press together when you’re standing, so you can’t see what’s inside. They separate when you sit down and they’re very red and quite fleshy on the inside. In the upper part, between the outer labia, there’s a fold of skin that, on second thought, looks like a kind of blister. That’s the clitoris.”

She is objecting to a 12-year-old reading the word labia, clitoris, and vagina. I do believe I had to watch a “changing bodies” video when I was ten. I knew all of that language earlier than that….you know why? Cause I have a vagina and I explored it like an other young girl. That’s right–girl’s play with their vagina’s. I guarentee that this girl has touched her vagina and is well aware of the two sets of lips, the and the location of the clitoris. I’m sure some of her friends have even had sex or given head at that age. When I was in middle school in MICHIGAN in the mid 90′s two girls age 11 and 12 were pregnant.

Sorry, mom you can’t save your little girl from knowing about her vagina. You also can’t burn books. I thought we got over banning and burning books. I thought we evolved passed that. But I guess Michigan, the state I grew up in, is a little behind in the times.

Horalek is demanding that the school go back to teaching from the older, edited version of the book that doesn’t include the uncomfortable passages. You know what else is really uncomfortable? The fact that a young girl had to hide in her attic to try and escape being murdered for her religion. Know what else is uncomfortable? The way the book abruptly ends because she was found and sent to a concentration camp where she died along with 6 million others.That’s really uncomfortable.

Maybe we should worry about things that are really hurting our children.



You Might Also Like ...

Abuse vs Art: Is There a Line?

Eva Ionesco is a French model and actress but she’s making headlines for something other than her career. When Eva was eleven, she made her American modeling debut—in Playboy. Eva is the youngest person to ever appear in the magazine. That’s not all of it; Ionesco’s mother, Irina Ionesco, took the pictures.

Irina Ionesco is a self-taught photographer who gained attention due to explicit images of her daughter. Many of the photos feature coquettish poses, fetishistic clothing, and nudity. Eva has sued her mother and won 10,000 Euro ($13,213) in damages, as well as the negatives of the many explicit photographs taken of her between the ages of four and 12 years old.

Eva has said the photos resulted in her “stolen childhood” and made a movie about life with her mother called, “My Little Princess”. This isn’t a new story to Americans, however—we’ve lived through this with Brooke Shields whose own mother set up a nude photo shoot for her then ten-year-old with the hopes of a Playboy spread as well.

Evan Rachel Wood is another star whose mother pushed her to act, learn French, and modeled her daughter after Jodie Foster. Evan is quoted as saying, “I actually got to sit down with Jodie and I thought, ‘Not that this is a bad thing, but you’ve haunted me my entire life. I don’t know whether to kiss you or punch you.”

In the age of Dakota and Elle Fanning, the Olsen Twins, and Honey Boo Boo, there will never be a shortage of stage mothers trying to live through their children, or trying to cash in on them for that matter. The real question is how much responsibility does society have in this?

Should Playboy also have been sued for publishing the nude photos of an underage girl? Should Brooke Sheilds mother have been prosecuted for sexualizing her daughter? Should the director and producer of Blue Lagoon have to stand trial for exposing her in that film?

There’s a celebrity culture in the country and we tend to forgive these people because they make more money and have a better life than we do. It’s all covered up by saying, “its art”. When does it cross the line from art to abuse?



You Might Also Like ...

Feminists For Attachment Parenting

photo of time magazine attachment parenting pics In the journal “Sex Roles,” a study was done regarding “attachment parenting.” Apparently, feminists are more likely to defend “attachment parenting” than people who identify as “non-feminists.” And you know what I have to say about that? Hogwash … I call hogwash on all of this. I do not think that feminists are definitively for “attachment parenting” all across the board, and I’m going to keep using quotes because I find that title for that behavior ridiculous.

Personally, I’m pretty sure this is just a pack mentality situation. Feminists are so used to fighting and protecting women doing what they feel they need to do that they’ve lost sight of some of the actual issues. Attachment parenting will never be okay with me. Seeing a 5-year-old boy with his mouth on his mother’s breast will never be okay to me. Buy organic, people! Or frequent a farmers market if you are so concerned about the nutrition your kids are receiving.

“Attachment parenting” is causing a whole bunch of mental issues that no one seems to want to discuss or own up to. I’m in a baby book under what not to do because my mother rocked me to sleep. She said I was her last baby and she was going to rock me no matter what anyone said. Doctors and friends told her that if she didn’t let me gain independence I would have a hard time leaving her and they were right. I had horrible separation anxiety from my mother and my home. There were several times in my life from ages 6-22 that I couldn’t leave my house because my anxiety was so bad it was the only place I ever felt safe. It took a lot of work to get over that and sometimes I still feel the need to get on a plane and hole up in my mother’s house, and yes, I blame a lot of that on the rocking to sleep and the coddling that my mother defended so vehemently. So what exactly would breast feeding ’til age 7 done to me?

Feminists just want to protect women and that is a noble fight, but sometimes you have to choose your battles. Just because a woman does it, it doesn’t mean it’s right or it’s defendable. Everyone has a right to parent their child the way they see fit and society doesn’t need to be sticking their nose in people’s homes unless the child is in danger, but when you put it on the cover of Time magazine, you make it society’s business and that’s where the feminists come to protect. They’re like the cavalry. But feminists! Please stop and reconsider, or maybe I should just say “consider.” Consider the issue and the repercussions before you jump in and fight the good fight … some fights just aren’t worth having, and frankly, that’s because whatever you’re doing in your personal life may not be suitable for someone else. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander? Well. Not necessarily.



You Might Also Like ...

‘Peace, Love, & Misunderstanding’: A Film Review

photo of peace love and misunderstanding poster pictures It’s been a while since there’s been a good, strong, well-done feminist film and I’m excited to say that ‘Peace, Love, & Misunderstanding’ is one of them. It stars Elizabeth Olsen, Catherine Kenner, and Jane Fonda, which is a winning combo, ladies.  This movie chronicles three generations of women who are trying to find a way to understand each other after years of familial disintegration. Written by Joseph Muszynski and Christina Mengert and directed by Bruce Beresford, ‘Peace, Love, and Misunderstanding’ is a film about understanding, multi-generational empathy, and learning from both your mistakes and your success.

I really liked this film because I’m a young feminist who has recently become very close with my grandmother, who is not a feminist in any way. I think Zoe’s (Olsen) struggle in being a young feminist is interesting to watch as she navigates through both her grandmother and mother’s relationship (the two haven’t spoken in 20 years).  Zoe’s mother (Keener) is the complete opposite of her mother (Fonda) and has never allowed her children to meet their grandmother. But when marital problems hit, she packs up the kids and heads back home to her mother (‘Hope Floats’, anyone?). Over the course of a few summers, they get to know each other and begin to repair a very fractured relationship, all the while learning about each other and life itself along the way.

Feminism is present in many forms in this film. Grandma Grace is a second-wave feminist flower child who loved the 60’s and free love and feels women should do whatever they want and feel is right. Diane (Keener) was born at Woodstock—and has rebelled against it ever since. She is an uptight New York lawyer, highly educated and financially self-sufficient. She sees her mother as a flippant selfish woman. Then there is young Zoe (Olsen) who’s somewhere in between both of them. Her feminism is not fully formed yet, and watching it mature is the fun of this film.

I really liked the idea of this film because feminism itself is so fragmented and dysfunctional. You have people like us that think you can be feminine and feminist then you have people that think you have to be very masculine to be feminist. You have slut-shaming and slut walks. People who think that being a stay-at-home mom is feminist and some that think only if you are self-sufficient and making your own way are you a feminist. It’s a very confused path and this movie illustrates that with its multiple generations and nuances of relationships. Anyone who enjoys feminism and chick flicks should probably check out this movie.



You Might Also Like ...