Catholic High School with Disturbing Reading Lists

[Jwlynas]

PRmerger, My point was about the maturity levels, not the different levels of gender in the class. The fact that its an all girl school will have little to no effect on the texts effect. Many have said it disgusted them it appauled them , it made them wish they had never read it… I’m pretty sure that will have been the point.

This point has been made before though, so I’ll stop my train of thought before it derails.

 

[Pro-Life_Teen]

Um…nope. There are no men and women students at my daughter’s high school literature class. It’s an all-girl Catholic institution. Says so on its website.

So there are women. 16-17, maybe an 18 year old if their birthday’s right.

Literature isn’t Disney. Bad things happen, they are written about. Some books are more detailed than others. I was reading adult books as an early teen- I’d read all the children’s and YA books already. I skimmed sex scenes knowing their immorality, but I didn’t toss the whole book aside. I read Grimm as a child, I owned Goethe’s Faust at 13.

Teenagers aren’t children. Both my grandmothers were married at 17. We don’t do that today- instead 14 year olds get pregnant and have abortions. We don’t talk about anything, or we portray the bad as good. The scene is terrible- it is supposed to be. It’s possible one of the girls in the class has been abused before. Do we never discuss it, pretend it never happened?

There’s protecting one’s purity, and there’s shutting oneself off from the world. It’s good to protect from sin, to help one stay chaste, but that isn’t a sex scene. It isn’t meant to be a porn novel.

As has been pointed out- the Bible has incest, adultery, murder. They are portrayed as sinners and punished as such. I’ve no doubt the father in the scene is somehow punished as well.

It’s graphic, but… that’s how the world is. It’s a fallen world. Some of us insist on calling abortions murder- which it is. But others are hesitant because it’s too graphic. Termination, haulting the pregnancy, “just fixing it.”
It’s a dead child.

Saying you’re “fixing it” is not the same thing as “dead child.”

You can get away with using vague words and euphamisms. You can say “terrible things were done” and leave it at that. But it doesn’t have the same emotional impact- some girls might not even connect that phrase with rape. It doesn’t make one care as much.

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

It is still a parent’s right to choose, not the teen- who is NOT footing the bill, and who may or may not be mature enough to read the material. To simply think all 18 year olds can read material based upon a birth date shows how much living some of the posters have not yet done. Come see me on your 40th birthday, those of you who have not hit it yet.

 

[pumpkinbeast]

I don’t think ANYONE who is opposed to this book proposed that teenagers should be sheltered from the fact that there is sin in this book. NO ONE MADE THAT POINT. Sorry for the caps, but I’m getting a bit frustrated, I’ll try to remain charitable… The people who are opposed to the book are opposed to the graphic nature of the language coupled with the fact that is it MANDATORY for these girls to read it. Some people are VERY disturbed by this kind of writing, myself included. If someone was to CHOOSE to read this book out of their own free will, knowing what it contained, fine, that’s THEIR choice, and there is nothing wrong with that. The problem lies in the fact that these girls are essentially being FORCED to read this very graphic book! None of the classic that I’ve ever read were graphic like that one passage posted from the book under discussion was. Yes, they contained incest, rape, murder, torture, whatever, but none were described, as far as I can remember(and maybe I read ‘edited’ versions but still), like incest is described in this book.

To reiterate: The problem IS NOT that the book contains sin. The problem is how it is described, AND that it is mandatory.

 

[PRmerger]

PRmerger, My point was about the maturity levels, not the different levels of gender in the class.

I am sorry that I did not make my point clearly. My point was not about the different levels of gender either. My point is that there are no WOMEN students who attend this school.

That there are no males is irrelevant to this discussion.

 

[PRmerger]

To all those who feel this material is acceptable in a Catholic high school:

*Would you also advocate showing these girls a video of this scene (including the graphic description of the man’s thoughts via voiceover)? *

Caveat: in this rhetorical situation, you would not be subject to any criticism for your decision by parents.

Just curious about why or why not…

 

[Jwlynas]

OutinChgoburbs - And that logic right there is why parents should be kept as far away from education as possible. It is not up to you to decide what is best for your child, its up to the child to find out. Whatever life experiences you have, and whatever you think of them, your child will have different ones, and discover something new.

If I ever hear “you’re young, you’re wrong” logic again I’ll be forced to be profane. I have an IQ of 162, was able to out-talk my english language and philosophy teachers. I have lived through family death, personal (albeit temporary. Operations are more dangerous than people admit…) death and have known success, failure, ectasy, moroseness… Wisdom is not age, its experience. Do not presume to know more merely through age.

I will concede there are many things about life I do not know, happily. but the limitations are not for you to presume without knowing me.

pumpkinbeast - Forced to read? The subject matter of courses is made clear at the beginning of every educational course. If there is likely to be scenes of a questionable nature it is mentioned, albeit generally ignored, much like the opening credits of a movie. The scenes themselves are indeed quite disturbing, as that is the point of them. To ignore the scene however is to exhibit ignorance, and no-one ever triumphed without understanding.

I apologise if I come across confrontational, I understand your views. But in all respect, the views are either ill informed or just close-minded. Would you stop your child learning self defence so that they never have to be in a fight? Or stop them from learning to cook so they never starve?

 

[SmartyPants]

I’d like to know if the OP has reached some sort of final resolution with the school on this. If so or when you do, OP please come back and tell us!

 

[Jwlynas]

*Would you also advocate showing these girls a video of this scene (including the graphic description of the man’s thoughts via voiceover)? *

That would be more media studies, but I’ll answer the question anyway

Yes, to put it bluntly. The movie scene would either be done correctly, in which case the impact would be great and the “pornographic” qualities would be toned down to lose all eroticism, or it would be done incorrectly, in which case a class debate on where the director/actors went wrong would be held.

Either way its a learning experience, either way its just a movie, much like the paragraph you sent was just a book. I have my doubts that PRmerger has ever been in an english lesson that focused on examining the texts. The scene, the paragraph, both would be broken down into tiny pieces, every aspect examined clinically, frame by frame. When this happens, all impact is lost in a sea of critical thinking and aloofness. It doesn’t make the acts portrayed any less vile, but it does make the wirteen scene itself almost completely without impact or meaning.

This from a Media/Combined English Literature and Language/Philosophy student with a side interest in dramatics.

So I’ve experienced these types of lessons

Edit: Apologies to PRmerger for taking your “no women or men in the class” comment out of context. My bad

 

[PRmerger]

I’d like to know if the OP has reached some sort of final resolution with the school on this.

No final resolution. As I presume you know, in academia nothing moves quickly. (This issue was first brought to administration’s attention in June, 2008, I believe.)

If so or when you do, OP please come back and tell us!

Will do!

 

[PRmerger]

.I have my doubts that PRmerger has ever been in an english lesson that focused on examining the texts.

Why do you believe that? Because I don’t draw the same conclusions that you do about this book?

 

[PRmerger]

I have an IQ of 162, was able to out-talk my english language and philosophy teachers. I have lived through family death, personal (albeit temporary. Operations are more dangerous than people admit…) death and have known success, failure, ectasy, moroseness… Wisdom is not age, its experience. Do not presume to know more merely through age.

Wisdom is not IQ points either.

 

[armywife]

OutinChgoburbs - And that logic right there is why parents should be kept as far away from education as possible. It is not up to you to decide what is best for your child, its up to the child to find out. Whatever life experiences you have, and whatever you think of them, your child will have different ones, and discover something new.

If I ever hear “you’re young, you’re wrong” logic again I’ll be forced to be profane. I have an IQ of 162, was able to out-talk my english language and philosophy teachers. I have lived through family death, personal (albeit temporary. Operations are more dangerous than people admit…) death and have known success, failure, ectasy, moroseness… Wisdom is not age, its experience. Do not presume to know more merely through age.

I will concede there are many things about life I do not know, happily. but the limitations are not for you to presume without knowing me.

Really! Well then, as a parent I’ll just step aside and let the school system teach my children anything they want.

What a load of C!@#!!! (Please excuse my frankness)

Jwlynas, what you describe in your post above is not parenting, it’s a serious lack of parenting. I’m very glad for you that your maturity level is as high as you think it is. Maybe you will always think that your future children can decide everything for themselves, and no one is saying that is wrong (although I definitely think it causes problems). It just does not mesh with most people here’s way of raising children.

As another poster has already said, it’s not the subject matter in general that objectionable. It’s the graphic depiction OF the act. It’s just not necessary for high school students.

 

[pumpkinbeast]

OutinChgoburbs - And that logic right there is why parents should be kept as far away from education as possible. It is not up to you to decide what is best for your child, its up to the child to find out. Whatever life experiences you have, and whatever you think of them, your child will have different ones, and discover something new.

According to the Catechism of the Catholic church, that’s incorrect. The PARENT is the one responsible for their child’s education. They can entrust that responsibility to someone else, like a school, but the finally responsibility rests with them. And certainly not the child! Adult children are the ones who have control over what they learn and what they don’t, not teenagers.

If I ever hear “you’re young, you’re wrong” logic again I’ll be forced to be profane. I have an IQ of 162, was able to out-talk my english language and philosophy teachers. I have lived through family death, personal (albeit temporary. Operations are more dangerous than people admit…) death and have known success, failure, ectasy, moroseness… Wisdom is not age, its experience. Do not presume to know more merely through age.

I will concede there are many things about life I do not know, happily. but the limitations are not for you to presume without knowing me.

pumpkinbeast - Forced to read? The subject matter of courses is made clear at the beginning of every educational course. If there is likely to be scenes of a questionable nature it is mentioned, albeit generally ignored, much like the opening credits of a movie. The scenes themselves are indeed quite disturbing, as that is the point of them. To ignore the scene however is to exhibit ignorance, and no-one ever triumphed without understanding.

I apologise if I come across confrontational, I understand your views. But in all respect, the views are either ill informed or just close-minded. Would you stop your child learning self defence so that they never have to be in a fight? Or stop them from learning to cook so they never starve?

Yes, forced to read. These girls are being REQUIRED to read this book for school. Like I said, if someone was to choose to read this book on their own, that’s fine. The issue I have is with people being forced to read this.

 

[LilyM]

Jwlynas, while I take some of your point, the fact is adults ARE responsible for what they expose teens and younger children to.

Being in a position of authority and influence, parents - and teachers - will have to account to God for how well they cared or failed to care for the souls of their children and students. That means they must consider carefully, from a spiritual standpoint as well as a secular one, what reading material they give them.

Paul says something about this issue. He mentions how priests and bishops and/or rulers will answer to God for those in their charge (can’t think of the exact cite off the top of my head, I’m sorry) and the obligation is surely no less for parents and teachers.

 

[Joe_5859]

To reiterate: The problem IS NOT that the book contains sin. The problem is how it is described, AND that it is mandatory.

I think this is a nice succinct summary of the OP’s main point. As tends to happen frequently here, both sides seem to be speaking to two different issues. This is a good reminder.

And that logic right there is why parents should be kept as far away from education as possible. It is not up to you to decide what is best for your child, its up to the child to find out.

I mean this with all do respect, but… :bigyikes:

I appreciate your point that we should not sell young people short or presume that they have nothing to offer. Indeed, we do not want to do that.

But any parent who leaves their kid to raise themselves is not doing their job. Parents are the primary educators of their children, as the Church frequently reminds us (Declaration on Christian Education 3, GDC 226, etc.). Children will be educated by someone. If parents don’t step up to the plate, then they leave their children at the mercy of the school system, the media, and whatever else they come into contact with.

 

[Pro-Life_Teen]

Teenagers are adult children to a degree. I’m certain he doesn’t mean 7 year olds should pick whether to learn addition. But a 17 year old can read this book and learn. Learn the background of the author, the history, the characters… I asked my English Professor if she thinks this book could be read as a high-schooler, she said yes- if taught correctly. Being as it is a Catholic school, it’ll probably be taught in a correct context.

I picked my classes. In High school I picked what I wanted to learn that was elective. I asked my parent’s advice, but I chose. Freshman college student- I picked all my classes for next semester. Parents are to educate their children, but teenagers can be mature enough to pick which level of English they want. The OP mentioned this was an Honours English class. Honours teach things more in depth, more detailed.

And as for the book being forced- it isn’t. It’s mandatory reading, but people can pass a class on a book and never read it. Taking notes is all it takes. It’s quite possible that scene will be skipped or skimmed, not read in detail over and over.

As for learning themselves… one can watch National Geographic and read books from the library and educate oneself in that manner. To that degree, the child should and can teach themselves. Their own interests, their own pace. School is important and so is being taught at home, but nothing wrong with studying up on your own.

 

[MamaZona]

Teenagers are adult children to a degree. I’m certain he doesn’t mean 7 year olds should pick whether to learn addition. But a 17 year old can read this book and learn. Learn the background of the author, the history, the characters… I asked my English Professor if she thinks this book could be read as a high-schooler, she said yes- if taught correctly. Being as it is a Catholic school, it’ll probably be taught in a correct context.

I picked my classes. In High school I picked what I wanted to learn that was elective. I asked my parent’s advice, but I chose. Freshman college student- I picked all my classes for next semester. Parents are to educate their children, but teenagers can be mature enough to pick which level of English they want. The OP mentioned this was an Honours English class. Honours teach things more in depth, more detailed.

And as for the book being forced- it isn’t. It’s mandatory reading, but people can pass a class on a book and never read it. Taking notes is all it takes. It’s quite possible that scene will be skipped or skimmed, not read in detail over and over.

As for learning themselves… one can watch National Geographic and read books from the library and educate oneself in that manner. To that degree, the child should and can teach themselves. Their own interests, their own pace. School is important and so is being taught at home, but nothing wrong with studying up on your own.

I mentioned on another post this thought: If you can drive a car, you can read a book. If you lack discernment enough to pick a book, you probably shouldn’t be given the keys to a potentially deadly weapon.

By 17, people can enter the armed forces with consent of a parent (correct me if I’m wrong) and some have already entered college. Some are married–and not just because they got “in trouble” necessarily. I believe a lot of these “kids” more than have the capacity to handle this material in a mature fashion.

Still, given the heartfelt outcry of the sincere individuals on this thread, I think the school should give an alternative to students and parents alike. Some students may genuinely be as uncomfortable as their parents are with the subject. Traumatizing students/parents and breeding enmity between teachers/parents (who should be partners) isn’t exactly the best way to go.

Parents know their children best, and perhaps there are many valid reasons to keep certain teens from this subject. They may lack the readiness. The parents and teens themselves should be free to decide this, without pressure.

The word here should be COMPROMISE. Complete censorship goes too far, complete acceptance does also. To me, it would be most prudent to leave alternatives for those who feel strongly about the matter rather than cramming it down their throats (who likes that???)

If you make learning miserable, that’s the best way to make sure no one ever wants to do it again. I don’t think anyone (on either side of this discussion) wants that to happen.

 

[KCtheMommy]

I mentioned on another post this thought: If you can drive a car, you can read a book. If you lack discernment enough to pick a book, you probably shouldn’t be given the keys to a potentially deadly weapon.

By 17, people can enter the armed forces with consent of a parent (correct me if I’m wrong) and some have already entered college. Some are married–and not just because they got “in trouble” necessarily. I believe a lot of these “kids” more than have the capacity to handle this material in a mature fashion.

Still, given the heartfelt outcry of the sincere individuals on this thread, I think the school should give an alternative to students and parents alike. Some students may genuinely be as uncomfortable as their parents are with the subject. Traumatizing students/parents and breeding enmity between teachers/parents (who should be partners) isn’t exactly the best way to go.

Parents know their children best, and perhaps there are many valid reasons to keep certain teens from this subject. They may lack the readiness. The parents and teens themselves should be free to decide this, without pressure.

The word here should be COMPROMISE. Complete censorship goes too far, complete acceptance does also. To me, it would be most prudent to leave alternatives for those who feel strongly about the matter rather than cramming it down their throats (who likes that???)

If you make learning miserable, that’s the best way to make sure no one ever wants to do it again. I don’t think anyone (on either side of this discussion) wants that to happen.

BRAVO!! :clapping:

Yeah, really, why could their not be two books offered? One a little less intense and that is slightly less shocking or as some parents feel: sexually inappropriate.

OP I suggest you take the above poster’s ideas about compromise and offer it as a solution! A good one would be The Book Thief by Zusack. The most sex is a kiss, a quick little one at that. It’s about a girl who grew up in Nazi Germany with Foster Parents as her mom was put into a camp for being communist. The foster parents don’t agree with Hitler and they suffer for it. They also hide a Jew in their basement. It is simply amazing – geared towards teens, and one of the best books I have ever read in my LIFE. It’s a very serious and scary subject – like the Bluest Eye – but not sexually driven.

Hope this helps?

 

[Consecrated]

OutinChgoburbs - And that logic right there is why parents should be kept as far away from education as possible. It is not up to you to decide what is best for your child, its up to the child to find out. Whatever life experiences you have, and whatever you think of them, your child will have different ones, and discover something new.

:nope:
Please tell me you’re not a teacher.

ETA: I just noticed the quote in your sig. Ironic.