Required Reading, or, "I bet this entry makes Fionnabhar mad."

triadruid's entry today with the bit about groups trying to ban required reading books with sexual content got me thinking about high school and the things that were on our required reading lists. I was trying to think of everything I read, and whether or not I have retained any of it, and generally sort of what good it might have done me in my life. I came to several conclusions, which were 1) that I received a fair portion of my sexual education from the required reading books, and 2) if the assigned books didn't contain some sort of deviant sexual practices, there really wouldn't have been much to catch the attention of a high school student anyway, so by choosing books with sexual content, teachers are increasing the chances that the students will actually read the books, and might, you know, accidentally learn something.

Now, conclusion #1 is what people are upset about, I know. This lobby represents the sort of people who don't want kids to have any sort of sexual education at all, because ignorant and pregnant at 14 is what god wants for sinner girls. But conclusion #2 is a lot more interesting to me. I'm thinking that, other than the Shakespeare plays and a few other notable exceptions from the HS required reading list, most of what I remember is the sex scenes, which means to me that in general, there wasn't a lot else to get excited about in the Lit'rachure.

To be fair, I also had a teacher one year who was very big on the idea of the Christ Figure, so, in addition to the nature of the deviant sex acts in each book, I could probably also tell you who the Christ Figure was. But really, except for Shakespeare, which I really liked for some reason, that's about it.

Required Reading, or, "I bet this entry makes Fionnabhar mad."

triadruid's entry today with the bit about groups trying to ban required reading books with sexual content got me thinking about high school and the things that were on our required reading lists. I was trying to think of everything I read, and whether or not I have retained any of it, and generally sort of what good it might have done me in my life. I came to several conclusions, which were 1) that I received a fair portion of my sexual education from the required reading books, and 2) if the assigned books didn't contain some sort of deviant sexual practices, there really wouldn't have been much to catch the attention of a high school student anyway, so by choosing books with sexual content, teachers are increasing the chances that the students will actually read the books, and might, you know, accidentally learn something.

Now, conclusion #1 is what people are upset about, I know. This lobby represents the sort of people who don't want kids to have any sort of sexual education at all, because ignorant and pregnant at 14 is what god wants for sinner girls. But conclusion #2 is a lot more interesting to me. I'm thinking that, other than the Shakespeare plays and a few other notable exceptions from the HS required reading list, most of what I remember is the sex scenes, which means to me that in general, there wasn't a lot else to get excited about in the Lit'rachure.

To be fair, I also had a teacher one year who was very big on the idea of the Christ Figure, so, in addition to the nature of the deviant sex acts in each book, I could probably also tell you who the Christ Figure was. But really, except for Shakespeare, which I really liked for some reason, that's about it.