Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written,alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: 25 Classic Books That Have Been Banned
Date: Sun, 25 May 2025 09:13:04 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <v8g63k5g170o9imcvss7g9lul27mib4po6@4ax.com>
References: <03gqqj562r4vi0kpi2vl8flsi59jsbot56@4ax.com> <volvhp$34acl$1@dont-email.me> <100r948$bvlu$1@dont-email.me> <100u0ld$15sv8$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Injection-Date: Sun, 25 May 2025 18:13:05 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8b38e5a873e79c9f6e1f89844f907459";
	logging-data="1536868"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/lsFFQBOW3p9ZApmtlQVZxCu9E4/+sLl8="
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
Cancel-Lock: sha1:sJ/1RVdgFj+gwoVBbOKhlb+UFP4=
Bytes: 2110

On Sun, 25 May 2025 02:52:29 -0000 (UTC), Mike Van Pelt
<usenet@mikevanpelt.com> wrote:

>In article <100r948$bvlu$1@dont-email.me>,
>Robert Carnegie  <rja.carnegie@gmail.com> wrote:
>>So some of the "top 100" seem to be (1) not
>>actually banned, or (2) not the most popular.
>
>I still want to see a "Banned Book" list that is *books*
>*that* *are* *actually* *banned*, as in not permitted to
>be printed or sold.
>
>This "A grammar school librarian determines that this book
>inappropriate for a grammar school library", or even
>"One parent complained about this book, and their complaint
>was reviewed and filed appropriately" is a pretty weak sauce
>definition of "banned".

Yes, these people are behaving like ... well, like most Republicans.
Although they clearly are not Republicans.

Which greatly confuses the issue of proper vs improper behavior.
--=20
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"