Sexualizing Children??

This entry is part of an ongoing conversation taking place from time to time at File770, among other locations.  As is frequently the case in passionate discussions, the topic tends to shift depending on the speaker.

For the most part, my interlocutors are aghast at the many legislative efforts to limit the books that are available in public libraries and public schools.  And honestly?  I share their concerns.  Many of the books that end up being impacted by these initiatives are things that I read decades ago.  Many of the newer titles are equally unworthy of attention either legislative or administrative.  

Reasonable people can disagree about the relative merit of a children's book that features a farting main character.  No reasonable person would suggest locking up a teacher or a librarian for including it in a school library.

The problem is that books featuring farting characters, or books by George Orwell (irony!) are not the subject matter that is driving the issue.  Focusing on farting characters or on "To Kill a Mockingbird" or any other largely inoffensive work is a purposeful attempt to deflect the discussion away from the core issue.

Sexualizing children.

What follows is very much my part of an adult discussion that involves adult materials.  If raw images of sexual body parts offend you, then please move on to something else.  I have some very nice book reviews to read.

For everyone else...

For the purpose of this discussion, I am going to focus on children that are in the 11-14 year old age range.  At the youngest, this cohort is definitely prepubescent.  They are not physically prepared to engage in sexual relationships.  They are not sufficiently emotionally developed to engage in a sexual relationship.

Below is a selection of images from the "Butterscotch" series by Milo Manara.  "Butterscotch" is the story of a man who has been wiped down with an invisibility cream.  He runs around groping, molesting, and raping women.  The story also focuses on one woman who is the focus of his attention.  How does she respond to his actions?

Is she repelled?  Does she fight back?  Is she in any way distressed at the situation?

Generally, no.

To paraphrase those philosophers of song, AC/DC, she cums and cums again.

Click to embiggen if needed

Is this the sort of material that a public school teacher or librarian should put into the hands of a young girl as a positive example of future sexuality?  No.

This is porn.  The action of a public employee handing this sort of material to a young girl includes an implicit suggestion that the behaviors being displayed are appropriate to the circumstances.  Any public school teacher or librarian who purposefully puts this material in front of any youngster, boy, girl, or in between, should discover that they are a prime candidate for dismissal.  A random adult providing this material to a child would correctly become the focus of some very pointed questions from law enforcement.

Milo Manara also has a series called "Click" where our protagonist is a young woman who has become the subject of a machine with the ability to inspire overwhelming sexual desire on her part whenever it is turned on.  The person with the control of the machine who can turn it on and subsequently turn her on with a simple "click" is a man, natch. 

I've been aware of Milo Manara's work for decades.  He is a great artist.  I would never suggest that his work is appropriate for young children.  I'm guessing that Mr. Manara feels the same way.

Why is this relevant to the current discussion?  Because there are a select number of graphic works that present the same level of sexual content that are being procured by public employees for inclusions in libraries that are used by young children.

Four such titles are:

• Gender Queer
• This Book is Gay
• Flamer
• Let's Talk About It.

There may be more, but these are the four that seem to be the primary cause of concern.

Click to embiggen if needed

These books depict a wide range of behaviors that are inappropriate for young children.

One book depicts two fifth-grade boys experimenting with oral sex. It doesn't matter if the book depicts two boys, two girls, a boy and a girl, or some other combination, no fifth grader should be provided with encouragement-by-example to engage in sexual relationships.  The objection is not that gay sex is being depicted.  The objection is that the book depicts children in the fifth grade (11 to 12 years old) engaging in sexual relationships as a normal and reasonable activity.  It isn't.

One book includes descriptions of the process for setting up an account on social media accounts designed to facilitate random sexual encounters (i.e. Tinder et. al.).  The book also provides some "tips" for hiding those apps from parents and other responsible adults.

Imagine recommending that young girls sign up for such services where they will inevitably meet older men.

In "Let's Talk About It" one character is enthusiastically masturbating.  In another image from that book, a character is spreading their butt cheeks wide with an invitation for another character to insert their penis.

Let's be honest.  In the process of passing from childhood, through puberty, and into adulthood, most people figure out masturbation.  Humanity has survived for millennia without needing to provide illustrated instructions to children for people to figure that out.

Also, let's be honest.  Humanity has had homosexual activity and bisexual activity for millennia.  Cultures have responded to that activity in various ways.

What is new is the modern desire to push sexualized content on ever younger children.

Adults are free (or should be free) to create sexually graphic images of adults for the benefit of other adults.  Publishers should be free to choose to publish them.  Distributors and retailers should be free to choose to sell them.  Or not to - that's also a valid choice.

But focusing the content and marketing of sexual material on young children should be beyond the pale.  Such behavior by adults should be seen as a clear error.

My challenge to my interlocutors is to address this situation described above.

Do not deflect into a discussion about fanciful characters that fart alot.

Do not deflect into a discussion about "To Kill A Mockingbird" or other classics.

Do not deflect into a discussion about edge cases where teenagers who are days away from the age of majority are exposed to titillating content.

Do not deflect into a discussion about whether children should be exposed to Michelangelo's "David" or other serious artwork.

Address the issue at hand.  Should young children be exposed to material designed to create the perception that it is normal and appropriate for children to engage in sexual relationships?  Should young children be encouraged to hide those relationships from their parents?  Should public employees be spending public money to make this material available to children?

Understanding my interlocutors as I do, permit me to respond to the first spurious assertion that will be used.  They will say, "Dann, you just don't want children to know about gay sex!  You are a homophobe."

You are wrong.  I'm not arguing against age-appropriate sex education.  I'm arguing against gratuitiously sexualizing children regardless of their gender orientation.

Please constrain yourself to responding to that issue.

Hopefully, I can return to doing normal book reviews soon.