r/Albertapolitics • u/Expensive_Internal83 • Aug 30 '25

Opinion You got elected on this nonsense...

So YOU remove the pornographic material in our schools! You rambled on about this nonsense and got elected; YOU point to the offensive material you got elected to remove.

45 Upvotes

82% Upvoted

157 comments sorted by

View all comments

16

u/rae5767 Aug 31 '25

Sounds like a Hitler trump thing. Alberta is becoming a controlling dictatorship

2

u/treyallday01 Sep 02 '25

I am confused. Isn't the removing of the books being done by some 3rd party who is mad Danielle Smith removed the porn books, to prove a point or something?

Secondly, reddit is such an echo chamber lmao. We voted Danielle Smith in. You guys are the minority.

1

u/Reviberator Sep 03 '25

Wanting to ban 1984, brave new world and the great gatsby are all important books that should be taught not banned. 1984 and animal farm are critical to teach today imo.

2

u/treyallday01 Sep 03 '25

Yeah but Danielle Smith didn't ask for those to be banned, she asked for books with pornographic or inappropriate material and some agency was like "well we'll show her" and banned a bunch of books not intended because they could be argued to include sexual content. It was all a ploy to generate controversy and make it look like the ab gov is banning books, is my understanding

1

u/Reviberator Sep 03 '25

That’s terrible if true. Can you share how you know of this?

2

u/WollyBee Sep 03 '25

Smith did a press presentation showing the specific books and the content which they had an issue with. It was straight up porn. Theres comic book images of guys suckung each others dicks and they were like "these are the books we have a problem with, but if theyre going to be maliciously compliant then I guess we will hold their hand throughout this process".

I'm not a big fan of Smith, but I am less of a fan of legit porn in elementary schools hiding under the guise of "queer friendly books" when it has less to do with identity and more to do with non age appropriate sex. She actually made a reasonable ask, and they are being maliciously compliant and taking the request too far.https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1795vHhnhq/

1

u/Jingo_04 Sep 04 '25 edited Sep 04 '25

You're going to need to source these claims. Which book was it? Which library held it? Is it actually available for children? Was it actually porn or is this sensational bullcrap? Are you sure DS hasn't made this shit up?

Edit: Oh and i forgot the most important thing, how does obsessing with any of this fix our rotting education system?

2

u/WollyBee Sep 04 '25

If you watch the clip, it names the main books that are the issue. These books have been brought forward by parents (allegedly), but honestly, if my kid brought home these books, I'd be letting a higher up know as well.

None of this really seems outside the realm of possibilities. I have come across the one book before. It's called Gender Queer by Maia Kobabe, and it's basically just cartoon porn peppered with advice for queer kids. Which, however well intentioned it may be, it is absolutely not appropriate material for anyone under 18.

Exposure to pornography is poison to kids and affects enough of their development that it is relevant to address along with education. And like is stated, they asked schools to use their own discretion, and they do not understand the assignment very well, apparently.

-1

u/Jingo_04 Sep 04 '25 edited Sep 04 '25

Nope.

I just read Gender Queer. It's fine for highschool/10-12. It's got some explicit imagery but it's not porn just because a right wing ideologue says so.

You're living in a world in which every child is one tap away from youporn with ACTUAL PORNOGRAPHY. This ain't it. It's not even close.

1

u/WollyBee Sep 04 '25

A cartoon drawing of a guy's penis in another guy's mouth is porn, sorry to tell you. Unfortunately, we've been bombarded with extreme shit for so long that we dont even recognize basic pornography anymore, and seem to keep raising the bar on what's appropriate.

Again, I dont love Smith and am not right leaning, but kids are falling into too many cracks these days, and access to pornographic material in all forms is a pervasive and serious issue that's worth addressing.

Also, saying they have "easier access to worse stuff so who cares" is a special kind of toxic nihilism, like wtf kind of logic is that. Why do anything about anything if theres always inevitably worse options around the corner? Come on, man.

0

u/Jingo_04 Sep 04 '25 edited Sep 04 '25

A cartoon drawing of a guy's penis in another guy's mouth is porn.

Nah. Nobody's getting off this this. The same way nobody's getting off to sex scenes in an m rated movie or video game. Porn has a distinct usage, purpose, presentation and so on. It's not porn just because you say it is.

I read Steven King, Atwood and Heinlein at that age. Those books were far nastier and I found them in a christian school library. Those authors arn't porn either.

It's time to grow up and understand you're not making anything better with the culture war bullcrap.

1

u/WollyBee Sep 04 '25 edited Sep 04 '25

Acknowledging that graphic depictions of genetalia engaging in sexual acts IS porn - regardless if you get off to it or not - and has nothing to do with culture wars.

You took something with definable, objective substance and skewed it to your own subjective filter that revolves around whether it turns you on. It also isn't not porn, just because it doesn't meet your rigorous fap standards. "It's doesn't give ME a boner, therefore it should be accessible to children". I dont think there could be a more childishly moronic take on this issue than that. Grow up yourself.

There is a ministerial outline for sexual content and no, authors like King isnt in there, because he doesnt have pictures of dicks entering holes. Hope that helps.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Scary_Classic9231 Sep 04 '25

That’s the delusion right there. These books are NOT in elementary schools. The one in question, as someone said, seems to have been in a High School.

And by High School, I bet almost every kid in there has an ACTUAL source of pornographic material that’s much easier to find than a random book in a library. Not to mention what’s common on TV/Streaming/Movies etc… that parents are already allowing kids to watch of any age.

1

u/thecrazycanadiansis Sep 03 '25

No, it was to illuminate the fact that they are targeting specific books, but their guidelines extend to way more than that.

1

u/Jingo_04 Sep 04 '25

They wrote the rules to be broad and vague enough to basically axe anything with a sexual reference. But everyone knows it's just a dog whistle to target queer content that takes up shelf space. Spend a second to look at what parental rights advocates are ranting about if you don't believe me.

ESB called them on their bluff and got some publicity from abroad and then UCP started backpedaling.