Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

5 Bumps

Michigan mother wants to ban Anne Frank because it's "pornographic"

Imagine my shock when I clicked the link on Twitter and it did NOT go to The Onion...

http://gawker.com/mother-wants-pornographic-diary-of-anne-frank-pulled-484400273

Full disclosure - I have not read the unedited version of the diary that wasn't published until after her father died.  Even still, based on the section quoted in the article, that's no more graphic than the basic biology that should also be in the 7th grader's science textbook.

Is the Diary of Anne Frank too racy for precious little jr high snowflakes?

Answer Question
 
NotPanicking

Asked by NotPanicking at 12:46 PM on Apr. 29, 2013 in Politics & Current Events

Level 50 (416,493 Credits)
Answers (32)
  • I don't remember that being in the book and can't figure out for the life of me how Anne knew all that stuff anyway. I know I may sound ignorant but if the female genitals are covered with hair then how would she know it's red down there? How did she know about the clitoris?

    They re-released the diary about 20 years ago after her father died, and put in all the stuff he left out, mostly stuff about puberty and how much she couldnt' stand her mother. As for knowing how it looked, all you need is a mirror.
    NotPanicking

    Comment by NotPanicking (original poster) at 2:02 PM on Apr. 29, 2013

  • p.s.s. I should have read the article first. I see now that the edited version is what I read in school so no wonder I don't remember the "offensive" part. I could see how this might be sexually charged for an adolescent with raging hormones. It would certainly be awkward for the class if some shy guy or girl was asked to read that part aloud in class or worse, discuss it! Can you imagine all the hard penises walking around the school after that class? I'm not sure how I feel about kids that age reading it. The book itself shouldn't be banned but maybe that age group would be better suited for something else classic. I can't believe I'm actually saying that since at that age I would have picketed to have it put in schools but as a grandmother of kids that age, they would be devastated and not attend school on days that had to be read. Not kept home by parents, just wanting to miss discussions about "that".
    admckenzie

    Answer by admckenzie at 2:08 PM on Apr. 29, 2013

  • " As for knowing how it looked, all you need is a mirror."

    Not necessarily true. I just went in the bathroom, got a mirror and a flashlight and can't see a lot of what was described. I can't imagine attic lighting being very good either.
    admckenzie

    Answer by admckenzie at 2:10 PM on Apr. 29, 2013

  • That's almost as ridiculous as One Million Moms bitching about the Geico commercials with the pig because it "promotes beasiality".
    maecntpntz219

    Answer by maecntpntz219 at 2:12 PM on Apr. 29, 2013

  • " Now they will get the AFA and One Million Moms behind it. "

    if i was that mom id drop the whole thing the moment i found out those douchey groups were supporting me!!
    okmanders

    Answer by okmanders at 2:17 PM on Apr. 29, 2013

  • lost- that's not the one I read in school! lol
    josiesmommy00

    Answer by josiesmommy00 at 2:27 PM on Apr. 29, 2013

  • I can see One Million Assholes getting behind this goddamned stupidity...
    Nos4

    Answer by Nos4 at 3:28 PM on Apr. 29, 2013

  • Say what you will about me (and I'm sure you will...), but I'm going to lean against the CM masses on this one. When I read the passage that is being talked about, my eyebrows definitely raised. I think if DD wants to read the book or if her school has it as a reading assignment, I would make sure she got the old version.
    AllAboutKeeley

    Answer by AllAboutKeeley at 4:05 PM on Apr. 29, 2013

  • I can see why that passage or ones like it could make come parents uncomfortable. I would think it could make some teachers uncomfortable as well...My thought is this: Even though I would not be upset if my 12-13 year old child read it. There is also this, the passages like that one are irrelevant to the reason the kids are reading the book in the first place I see no harm in going back to the original print that does not include them.
    But_Mommie

    Answer by But_Mommie at 5:06 PM on Apr. 29, 2013

  • It's basic anatomy, that's all.

    The mother clearly has hangups about her body and sex and has transferred them to her daughter. Want to be that she's never touched on sex ed with her daughter? Want to bet that the discomfort at the words used stems from never having used the correct terms for body parts? That she refers to her "lady parts" or her "vay-jay-jay" or her "girly bits"?

    Pornographic? Gimme a break ...
    winterglow

    Answer by winterglow at 4:07 AM on Apr. 30, 2013

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.