More talk on scrotums:
Ms. Nilsson, reached at Sunnyside Elementary School in Durango, Colo., said she had heard from dozens of librarians who agreed with her stance. “I don’t want to start an issue about censorship,” she said. “But you won’t find men’s*** genitalia in quality literature. At least not for children.”
Oh yeah? In the Night Kitchen by Maurice Sendak, Caldecott Honor
***PS. Dana Nilsson also seems confused about the differences in species: all men may be dogs in her mind, but that scrotum belonged to a canine, not a human.
PPS. For the duration, all of my posts will include the gratuitous addition of the word censor scrotum, including revised versions of recent posts.
February 17th, 2007 at 7:46 pm
I thought of one immediately, too -
(Newbery Winner) Lois Lowry’s Anastasia who almost names her little brother ONE-BALL REILLY.
February 17th, 2007 at 7:48 pm
Ooo, you’re quick.
February 17th, 2007 at 8:10 pm
Chikin, I’m balls to the walls, or I’d think up another book with anatomical goodies in it. Give me a day or two to ponder.
;> Candie
February 17th, 2007 at 8:18 pm
February 18th, 2007 at 10:38 am
I’m trying to start a movement to refer to all over-the-top censors as “nut sacs.”
February 18th, 2007 at 10:54 am
P.S.
From Dunk, chpt. 29, page 187:
“You can come up if you promise not to kick me in the balls again,” he said.
February 18th, 2007 at 10:58 am
Good thing you didn’t say scrotum. Your book would be featured on the NYT, and lots of people would be buying it.
Hmmm.
February 18th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
We’re of like minds. Two peas in a pod.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:06 pm
Location: sacked out
It’s good that you’re taking a firm stance on the use of the word scrotum. I hate when authors flop around on issues.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:08 pm
If we don’t stand firm, the censors will become more bold in their attempts to emasculate us all.