You've Been Spotted: Ten Top Women
Bombers visit injured hockey player
Rachael Ray coming to area
Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2007 > February > 20 > Entry
The childrens’ book says what?!?!
There’s a new blog here at DDN.com that I can’t get enough of. Vick Mickunas, one-time radio star and currently a book reviewer for the paper, has taken his “Book Nook” online as a blog. Mickunas is thoughtful, funny, prolific and I always learn something from him.
Sunday, I learned that librarians sometimes are in favor of banning books. As someone who makes his living off the First Amendment, and therefore opposes censorship, I was suprised to find I sort of see the librians’ point on this one.
Mickunas gets extra points for the killer headline — “What rhymes with totem?”
That’s right, folks. There’s a childrens’ book that uses the word “scrotum.” It’s called “The Higher Power of Lucky” and it’s a Newbery Medal winning book by a respected author.
My first reaction was simply this — “why?” Why use that word in a childrens’ book? In an interview with the New York Times, the author says the book is about coming of age and learning body parts parts and that it is aimed at children age 12. But some of the librarian critics point out that the main character in the book is 10 years old and say the artwork and style of the book is more typical of the “under age 10” genre.
The Newbery judges say the book is just fine for kids. But what is the appropriate age to learn about the srcotum?
My kids are ages 8, 6 and 4 and I think they are too young yet for that conversation. I guarantee at least the older two would immediately ask me what that word means if I were to read them this book. A couple comment’s over at Mickunas’ blog suggest the librarians are just being uptight. But I have to tell you, I would not read this book to my kids.
But if someone can tell me word-for-word how I could delicately explain what a scrotum is to a six- or eight-year-old, I will reconsider.
Permalink | Comments (26) | Categories: Teaching and Learning
Comments
By jw
February 25, 2007 8:45 AM | Link to this
Censorship? Do you think that book publishers send all their children�s books to schools so that school librarians can open each big box to decide which books can go on the shelves and censor the ones that cannot? Many schools, primarily schools that serve poor children in Ohio, no longer have school libraries. At those that do, the school librarians often have very limited resources for purchasing new books. How could any librarian be accused of censorship when he or she may have only $500 to purchase new books? Scott, how many of Dayton�s charter or public schools even have a school library this school year? Do the children of City Day have a school library? But with limited resources or not, it is absolutely the responsibility of the school librarian with support and input from students, staff and parents to determine what is educationally appropriate to add to the school library�s collection. Whether or not to purchase a book that introduces the word “scrotum” to children is an appropriate decision that each school librarian must make within the context of his or her own school community. The only censorship crime is the censorship that starts with investing so little in school libraries in Ohio.By Caroline
February 23, 2007 8:43 PM | Link to this
On the same note, when I was 12, I checked out 1984. My grandmother looked in the book, saw the scenes with the prostitute, and called the library to complain because they would check out such a book to a child. If she had looked more clearly at what I was reading, she would have realized that she should have been proud that her pre-teen was reading such a classic.By lou
February 22, 2007 9:54 PM | Link to this
If a child under 10 can get a book from the library and the parents never know, what else is the child doing the parent doesn’t know? Even if my child goes to the library with someone other than I, we read together at that age. My son has known the correct name of all his body parts since he was 4 and asked what balls were. They hear the slang names, whats wrong with the real names. And Scott, I understand how you feel, my son asked about female parts and it was much harder, but I still answeres all his questions using the proper names.By Oldprof
February 22, 2007 7:27 PM | Link to this
Well well, I’m amused that there seems to be automatic censoring software that turns the word “peonis” (omit the o) into p*s. I’m going to guess that DDN is using blogging software from some commercial provider that’s confused about what constitutes adult conversation vs. profanity.By Lea
February 22, 2007 2:39 PM | Link to this
I agree with you, OldProf. However, again this is aimed at children my daughter’s age who are already well aware of their sexuality. Again I wonder though - is it overtly sexual to describe something by the correct terminology? If not, why the asterisks?By oldprof
February 22, 2007 9:57 AM | Link to this
Age-appropriateness. This book, aimed at age 12, is not a “children’s” book but a “pre-teen” or “tweener” book. As for whether younger children should be taught polite terms like p***s, scrotum, v****a, rectum—yes, I think so, my boys never used baby-talk euphemisms for their anatomy. Whether it’s used properly in children’s literature depends on the context; in a potty-training video or book, certainly—in a book of nonsense rhymes, I don’t know—and overt sexuality is inappropriate for grade-schoolers.By Mary
February 22, 2007 9:48 AM | Link to this
“wellwhynot”, there is some irony in your “libertarian name” about this, but you could be right. I think it is good that the parental concerns and controls are paramount and considered. I am usually convinced that the majority is uninformed and wrong on a lot of issues, and later, the majority learns its lesson. I am glad you spoke up.By wellwhynot
February 21, 2007 10:02 PM | Link to this
I have to disagree with the majority here. I don’t think it belongs in a children’s book that may or may not be read with a responsible adult. Children can go to the library and borrow almost any book without their parent’s knowledge. It just seems to me there are other ways to teach a child “vocabulary” words. And, although I don’t believe it is an actual “movement”, our children have become sexualized at a more and more early age. If I had a choice as to the lack of knowledge I had regarding sexual issues when I was young as opposed to what children are subjected to in todays world, I would prefer to return to innocence.By Carol
February 21, 2007 7:47 PM | Link to this
Mary, I wasn’t actually imagining anybody eating rocky mountain oysters for Thanksgiving dinner. Where I come from (Iowa), that’s usually a party food. And they can be made from the testicles of either cows and pigs (or buffalo, I suppose). Just depends on who’s getting cut—I mean gelded—that week. You eat them breaded and deep-fat fried, just like tasty little meat balls. As for the turkey and mashed potatoes, I was just setting the scene for the possible crime.By Caroline
February 21, 2007 6:15 PM | Link to this
I think it is impossible for any of us to judge this book unless we’ve read it ourselves.By Angie
February 21, 2007 3:50 PM | Link to this
Scott, I like how you asked yourself “why use that word in a children’s book?” I would ask that as well. It seems to me that the author has other motives in mind. Maybe “pushing the envelope” to cause a stir is the reason the author chose to use the word in the story. Forcing children reading the story to question something that they normally wouldn’t have,yet, or pushing a parent into a discussion about gender differences and sexuality might have been the agenda all along. I, as a mother, plan to explain gender differences and sexuality steadily through controlled settings and discussions: not accidentally because the little children’s book I’m reading intentionally prompted the discussion for me. I understand that surprises in parenting regarding the “birds and the bees” are going to occur, but I’m certainly not going to invite or advocate such impromptu situations. I don’t think the true issue here is whether or not we are ashamed of or using the correct terminology for anatomical parts, rather it’s others presuming that they know what is good for our children and parents is a growing trend in literature and society today.By Mary
February 21, 2007 10:59 AM | Link to this
Carol, when it comes to picking at turkey and dressing, are you thinking of “gizzards” or am I confused? I have heard of dining on Rocky Mountain oysters - I think they were buffalo testicles. Then there are chitlings and brains and sausage casings.By Michelle
February 21, 2007 10:51 AM | Link to this
Scott, I’m too glad to see you rethink the issue. Now I also can see why you’re all uptight because all your kids are girls - they are all “Daddy’s little girls”. Perhaps, your wife can help out a bit on this part of parenting, it might be easier?! It is a good idea that you are willing to rethink this issue, certainly we don’t want you to go through “Carol’s example” in real life.By Lea
February 21, 2007 9:54 AM | Link to this
It’s interesting to me that certain words are filled in with asterisks when they are not obscenity but actual names for genitalia. I can understand even “a”, but this is not blanked out when “p*s” is? Come on. If this word for male genitalia offends someone they are either 1) immature or 2) probably not male. Our world has oversexualized even children’s movies and we can’t even spell out terminology?By gloria
February 21, 2007 6:22 AM | Link to this
It seems to me that using the correct anatomical name for a body part that 8 year old males have should not be a problem. What are parents calling this body part with their kids or are they pretending it doesn’t exist? I hope parents are talking with their children about their bodies AND using correct terms rather than slang. The furor is unfounded.By Carol
February 21, 2007 1:45 AM | Link to this
I’m glad you’re willing to rethink the issue, Scott. Here’s one more thing to think about. Let’s say your six-year-old hears one boy call another boy a “scrote.” If she knows what a scrotum is, she’ll probably wrinkle her nose in disgust and accidentally forget to give that boy a valentine next year. If, on the other hand, she’s never heard the word “scrotum,” she’s more than likely to call her sister a “scrote” while delicately picking at her turkey and mashed potatoes at Grandma’s Thanksgiving dinner. Sometimes information saves you more than it does your kids.By Scott Elliott
February 20, 2007 11:46 PM | Link to this
OK. I get it. You’re all telling me I’m uptight and repressed! Perhaps there’s some kind of body part naming sensitivity training I can enroll in. Seriously, I found all the perspectives on this very intersting and it really has me rethinking my initial view of the issue. (And yes, my kids are all girls.)By Mary
February 20, 2007 4:07 PM | Link to this
I saw the author in an interview on CNN last night. She seemed to be cool and collected (I think a librarian by profession) and thought it important children learn body parts by their real names - instead of slang terms. Maybe if children were more exposed to the real names of body parts, they would not be as susceptible to sexual exploitation and intimidation by adults. The scrotum was on a dog that was bit by a rattlesnake - on page one of the book. The book got the Newberry? award.By Michelle
February 20, 2007 1:13 PM | Link to this
I totally agree with Lea on teaching our children the correct word for it. I also certainly don’t want my child to learn anything like it from someone else, except the teachers. I have a 6-years-old boy, and he knows the proper names for the basic body parts, including the private parts. I only teach him when he asks for it because that is an indication for me to know that he is ready to learn more about his own body or anything else that he needs to learn. I see it as one of ways to protect my child - teach him everything in the right way.By Rick
February 20, 2007 12:35 PM | Link to this
For several decades, there has been an effort to sexualize our children at younger and younger ages. Not just NAMBLA, but many books for children. One book, “The Chocolate Wars,” was anti-adult and had a couple of sexual references.By Nettie
February 20, 2007 11:59 AM | Link to this
I am completely against librarians censoring this book, or any other book, simply because they find it, or one word in it, uncomfortable. That being said, Scott, you are completely correct to not read the book to your children if you are uncomfortable with the word. That is called parenting, and you have every right to protect your child from seeing, hearing, or reading something he or she is not ready to be exposed to. Some parents may look at it as a good way to talk about the body and different gender parts, but others are not ready for that conversation, which is every parent’s prerogative. It just shows that parents need to preview all materials their children are reading and viewing so they aren’t caught off guard. After all, it’s hard to think up “totem” when your child is sitting right there while you read the book.By Carol
February 20, 2007 11:26 AM | Link to this
What’s wrong with using the right word for a body part? You don’t say if your children are boys or girls, but both need to know the proper names for the parts of their bodies that are least talked about. When I was growing up, we called my brothers’ penises their “ding dings.” As for the girls, we were Barbies. We didn’t have anything “down there,” or at least we didn’t have a word for it. That place wasn’t to be talked about. We all have genitals. If we don’t have words for them, then there must be something wrong with them. When we use the proper words for what’s “down there,” those parts of are bodies are no longer dirty and mysterious. I think you do a disservice to your children of either sex (am I allowed to use that word?) when you are so uncomfortable about their bodies (and yours?) that you can’t even give a name to their various parts. Words give them power and confidence—even words like “scrotum.” You’ve got one, don’t you? What are you so ashamed of that you can’t give it a name? Why not delicately explain to your children that a scrotum is a pouch that holds a man’s testicles. Let me know if you need help describing testicles.By null
February 20, 2007 11:18 AM | Link to this
I don’t see the problem with describing a body part with the correct name. I would rather see scrotum in a book than seeing a picture drawn on a bathroom stall in school that says balls. Teach children the correct term of anatomical parts is better than hearing them say what they learn on the playground. Think back about the first words you learned of body parts. Mine was not scrotum.By vick mickunas
February 20, 2007 9:55 AM | Link to this
Wow! Scott, I’m flattered. I have a lot to learn about this blogging stuff. I’m delighted to be able to do it. P.S. I love your blog!By daytondriver
February 20, 2007 9:25 AM | Link to this
I agree. 10 children were killed this morning by the word “scrotum.” Where there is shame in knowing your body parts is beyond me, other than adults sexualizing the scrotum themselves. Americans are true weirdos.By Lea
February 20, 2007 8:57 AM | Link to this
Assuming your children know that boys and girls are different, I would think that would be pretty easy. Much as I am a bit uneasy about even my kids (ages 8 and almost-12), I’d rather they knew the correct word for it instead of some of the slang I remember from my childhood! So… Here is your answer (assuming you have girls)… “You know how boys are different from girls? Well, the scrotum is the round thing behind the boy’s p***s. You know, that thing you call a “peepee” or “weenie”. You don’t have one ‘cause you’re a girl.” Easy enough? I suspect, if you had a boy, you’d have a lot easier time. Especially if the boy is younger and the older ones have changed diapers!