Michigan GOP candidate Tudor Dixon wants a new book ban: No divorced characters

[catbyte]

It's a ludicrous idea that reflects the real Republican plan: Education is about social control, not learning

By AMANDA MARCOTTE
Senior Writer

With so many radical Republicans running for office across the country, there's been relatively little coverage of Tudor Dixon, the Trump-endorsed Republican nominee for governor in Michigan, who's running against incumbent Democrat Gretchen Whitmer. But Dixon, whose name admittedly should belong to the socialite villainess of a Harlequin romance novel, is definitely one to watch in the "how far-right can Republicans get" sweepstakes that is midterm-watching. She has described working women as having "lonely lives," declared a 14-year-old incest victim to be a "perfect" candidate for forced childbirth, and, unsurprisingly, backs Trump's Big Lie. During her debate with Whitmer on Tuesday night, Dixon accused Michigan schools of distributing "pornographic" books.

Naturally, Dixon's idea of what constitutes pornography was lurid but entirely vague, such as "books describing how to have sex." Which could mean anything from actual sex education books to books that simply have sex scenes, a category that encompasses classics like "Romeo and Juliet" and also the Bible. (Neither of which are pornography, a commodity readily available on the internet should Dixon desire to grasp the distinctions.) Whitmer responded by noting that there are many opportunities for parents to be involved in children's education, but also that there's a "duty to make sure that all children feel accepted and safe and can learn and play when they are in school."

So there was plenty of vagueness all around, but a Democratic PAC called American Bridge 21st Century dug up an audio clip demonstrating how expansive Dixon's views are when it comes to controlling what students are allowed to read. In it, she proposes that books featuring divorced characters are just too spicy for most kids.

Link to tweet

snip

Dixon's anger that her child learned something about the lives of kids with divorced parents is clearly a pretty extreme example. But as the Pew study shows, it's on a continuum of Republican hostility toward a fundamental tenet of modern education, which is that it's important for students to learn about the world that exists outside their own homes and families. Thriving in the diverse, dynamic world of 21st-century America means learning not just that there are people who aren't exactly like you, but how to get along with them. Forcing kids to remain ignorant about the legacy of racism or the existence of queer people (or divorced people!) might temporarily make life easier for parents who don't want to have uncomfortable conversations. For the kids themselves, however, it's a hurtful failure to offer them basic tools for life in the real world.

Full article

[get the red out]

1. They can't read books about Trump

And he is their great "profit"!

[ProudMNDemocrat]

2. Good one.....

[reymega life]

3. I don't like divorce because I was a victim of it at age 10 my mom and dad split.

it traumatizes children and just fuck divorce.

[catbyte]

4. It sucks, but that doesn't have much to do with banning books that includes what happens to over 50%

of marriages in America. Education is supposed to prepare kids for life, and unfortunately, that can include divorce. And it would stigmatize children of divorce, a condition they're living with through no fault of their own. Ignoring the problem is why teenage childbirth rates are so much higher in red states.