"Though not shocking, the author's heavy-handed attempt to titillate his immature readers with that scrotum passage"
-Jean Carent

And a dog being bitten in the balls would be arousing or exciting to children how, exactly?

I find this "controversy" rather amusing. I remember being in second grade and one of my classmates saying "You're nuts!" to a friend. The other said "What about my nuts?" and pointed downwards. Or when I was in first grade and a group of girls were gossiping about male genitals, trying to describe what they had never seen and only heard about. This is another example of adults finding something unacceptable in a subject that children joke and laugh about.

Nick, Mirepoix,

Um, from what I read, this book has not actually been banned from U.S. libraries. Some libraries have not ordered it, true, but they don't order every book released anyway, even award winners. Librarians talk to each other and discuss whether particular books are appropriate for particular age groups (you wouldn't bother to stock Orwell's "1984" in a school library that served 5-7 year-olds and you probably wouldn't keep "See Spot Run" in a Junior High library) but that isn't the same as banning a book.

There are plenty of real controversies out there and places where classic books, movies, and plays really are being banned. Do we really need to create an outrage where none exists?

J H, California, USA

I'm a parent of a 25 yr old, 23yrs. ,16yrs.and 3 yr old as well as 2 stepchildren ages 9 and 11 yrs.
Good Lord we are talking about the word scrotum. Are there really people out there that repressed? Would it be better to say balls? No? If there is anyone out there who honestly thinks their 9 yr old or older hasn't heard the more crude versions of the word scrotum ( balls, nuts etc..) on the playground then someone is ill informed. We need to be thanking the author for teaching kids the appropriate term......scrotum.

melinda, rowlett, tx

I completely agree with Marty of Wichita

Jack, Sunnyvale, California

Though not shocking, the author's heavy-handed attempt to titillate his immature readers with that scrotum passage doesn't inspire confidence that the book itself will be worth reading (no matter how many awards it may have won). Also the 'ing' in 'saw a rattlesnake...biting his dog, Roy, on the scrotum' doesn't convey very well the speed of a rattlesnake strike.

Almost any reference to the genitals is likely to gain the attention of this age group, though, and I suppose that the boy's confusion of 'scrotum' with 'sputum' is supposed to be amusing. (The few 12-year-olds who understand that passage will congratulate themselves.) If the rest of the book is good, I'd buy it. In any case this isn't state censorship ("second print run of 100,000"). It's a matter of taste and judgment of educational utility in selecting the limited number of books that can be included in a school library.

Jean Carent, Columbia, USA

It may seem like a small thing, but the next book will have more descriptions, and a slow erosion will occur, until we have children reading softcore porn. I know all the free speechers out there want us to subject our kids to everything as early as possible, but I disagree. Suppose you were a shy little girl, and in class you were asked to read this out loud not knowing what it meant. Do you think the cruel side of some of the children out there might have them making fun of this girl and embarrasing her? No, save the sexual an genital references for the parents. And by the way, all of you out there that don't have kids, shut up! THis issue doesn't affect you and you don't have the same responsibilities as we parents do.

Larry, South Texas, USA

For the record, librarians are not supposed to ban books for ANY REASON. The American Librarian Association (the largest, oldest and most respected association of librarians) hosts a Banned Books Week emphasizing the evils of this sort of censorship.

It is a shame that Dana Nilssonand others feel it necessary to abandon their duties as librarians in favor of controversy and censorship.

-a librarian

Robin, Denver, CO

If it weren't for the United States, people in Amsterdam might have suffered from decades of Nazi or Stalinist oppression (including censorship about matters of substance) -- and might still be suffering from it. The United States is now the major power in opposing the kind of fanatics who killed Theo van Gogh in the Netherlands.

Though not shocking, the author's heavy-handed attempt to titillate his immature readers with that scrotum passage doesn't inspire confidence that the book itself will be worth reading (no matter how many awards it may have won). Also the 'ing' in 'saw a rattlesnake...biting his dog, Roy, on the scrotum' doesn't convey very well the speed of a rattlesnake strike. If the rest of the book is good, though, I'd buy it. In any case this isn't state censorship ("second print run of 100,000" - many are buying it). It's a matter of taste and judgment of educational utility in the selection of the limited number of books that can be included in a school library.

Jean Carent, Columbia, USA

It is amazing isn't it how anyone could think that the word scrotum would in some way mentaly scar a child? Or offend their religious upbringing. Actually to affect it in any way? This is just another embarassing moment for the moral majority. Obviously from past behavior they have no shame. But to again want to ban a book because it uses the medical term for a body part which is in no way meant sexualy is ridiculous! That is like saying crotch is sexually perverse. To refer to a dog's scrotum in some way is going to make children want to think about sex or imorality? Or is it their huge fear that the child might ask them what the word mean's and they might have to honestly answer a question their child ask's about a body part ? We all know they have a huge aversion to being honest with their children. I remember when I was a child of nine and I knew what ball's were and scrotum and nutt sack and so did all the other kids. Christian and otherwise. It wasn't a secret from anyone and if you didn't know the other kid's would clue you in right quick.

Marty, Wichita, Kansas

I think it is appropriate to ban the book as children may attempt to inject them.

stuart, warsaw, poland

On our small ranch the kids participate when the calves are meat-balled (dare I use the word castrate...).
The next logical step for these obese frustrates, excuse me, librarians, would be to ban beef from the school menu.

Ben, Blue, Texas

I'm sorry, but what could parents possibly fear about their children reading the word 'scrotum?' "Oh Dear God, they'll learn the medical term for a body part!" Are they afraid that by reading about the word they'll suddenly want to...what? see one? become one?
This is ridiculous and indicitive of hte way that the American culture chooses to focus on the inconsequential and frankly laughable things while ignoring a war built on false pretenses.
As a child and adolescent I know that the "banned" title simply made me want to read the book more, in fact it still does. I expect this to backfire in their faces, and assign a much more tawdry nature to the word for children just learning it than had they read it on their own.

Jo, Vancouver, BC Canada

I wonder how many awards it would have gotten if it substituted the word fire-water instead of rum and wee-wee instead of scrotum on the wow-wow instead of dog. And Johnny cash is too riske....lets try....... the ave maria... yeah..that would make for an awesome book.....THAT NO ONE WOULD LIKE TO READ...EVER!!!!!!!

GERRY, hallandale, florida

Anything which gets American children to read is good.

Rich, Boston, MA

So, er, there's nothing inappropriate about the heroine of the book hanging around with someone who drinks half a gallon of rum in his car, but using the word "scrotum" is way out of line. Am I missing something?

Michelle, Birmingham, UK

Blinded by PC again!

Mention of an anatomical part causes uproar, while dysfunctional behavior such as overdrinking and drug addiction are OK for 9-12 year olds to read about...what RUBBISH.

Whatever happened to children being allowed to be children for the few years that they can? Why does drug addiction and binge drinking have to be SHOVED down their throats when they are still in their wonder years...just because a few kids are forced to live through these horrors doesn't mean that every kid has to have it set in their brain at such an early age.

As far as "scrotum" goes, I'm sure any kid has enquired about this part of his anatomy before he has turned 9...and if a girl, surely there is a way of explaining this that the PC police would approve of.

I'm so glad I was raised when I was...able to see the wonders of the world without some facist PC nutcases telling me what I can and can not see, do, or learn.

Peter, Las Vegas, USA

While I wouldn't dream of banning the book due to its use of the word I do question why the author felt the need to put it in. Why did the dog need to be bitten on the scrotum? Anywhere else would have done just as well. It somehow seems more purile that the author put it in than people want to ban it.

c williams, London, UK

I'd rather have my kids using the "S" word in a proper way than using the vulgar word "balls" that we always listen on TV!

Rosy, Bogota, Colombia

It's OK to lie about going to war, it;s ok to let all and sundry own guns, it's ok to medicate your people at the drop of a hat, it's ok to be the world's biggest polluter, but my word, don;t ever mention scrotum for the harm it might do...

Stuart Murray, Amsterdam, Netherlands

This makes me wonder: Why is it that we assume that knowledge about sex is bad for children? In every part of the world, through almost all of human history, almost everyone lived in one-room houses, and children saw their parents having sex. This doesn't seem to have harmed them. What is it that we're afraid of?

Mara MacSeonin is worried about it, whatever it is. She uses the word "innocence" when she means ignorance. We need to disentangle these words. They have nothing to do with each other.

Phil, Springfield, VA

Im surprised nobody complained about the half gallon of rum....

Ian Kemmish, Biggleswade, UK

[quote]An award-winning children’s book about a ten-year-old girl seeking answers about life has provoked an uproar in America because it uses the word “scrotum” on the first page[/quote]
First Ive heard of it, and it was burried deep in the international section. I dont know where this "uproar" exists, except in the reporters imagination.

Dave Gillam, Mishawaka, Indiana USA

Please do not assume that this article speaks for all Americans. I for one, am against most book banning in schools as is my librarian mother.

Concerned American, Every town, United States

This sort of thing is tragic, considering most American 9-12 year olds know more than they need to, as it is. In a country where the average 10 year old watches nothing but MTV, one can hardly say that a book that uses proper anatomical terms is dirty! I currently live here, but I can only say that this attitude and hypocrisy has sharpened my dislike of America, in general.

Sandra, New York City, NY

I'm glad that there still exists 'prudishness' - or what some may define as 'decency' - in the world. Children are children, and should remain so. Merely because many Western adults have become moral degenerates does not mean that we should be inflicting the same kind of libertine, unbridled approach upon the infinitely malleable and fragile minds of our children. Allow them to retain their innocence, for heaven's sake; permit them the freedom to avoid the harshness and difficulty of life for as long as they possibly can. It is inappropriate to expose children to certain terms before they are emotionally equipped to understand it; do not defend the use of inappropriate terminology by evoking the great god Science, or that our depressing status quo validates the eradication of childish innocence. Grow up, adults, Indeed!

Mara MacSeoinin, Cambridge , Cambridgeshire

I went and bought the book immediately for my child. It's a lovely book with a sweet ending. What does this say to all 9-12 year old boys who have scrotoms? I am so angry at the reputation the United States has for censorship. Hey, maybe we can put the books in a pile and burn them!

fontaine, millington, tn/usa

I read this articles without feeling a crumb of surprise. This is from the country where a recent showing of the Vagina Monologues in Florida was made to change its name to the Hoohaa Monologues after one offended woman complained.
It baffles me how a country that is afraid of anatomically correct words can house one of the worlds largest porn industries.

Nikki, Manchester, UK

How absurd-

would they seek to ban a book that says "urinate" rather than "pee"?

or refers to an "anus" rather than a "botty"

or how about a book for 12 year olds (some of whom are probably having sex already) which mentions that babies are the product of unprotected intercourse rather than something the stork brings?

I can understand that there may- only may- be an argument from not providing kids with slang or "vulgar" language, but failing to tell things the way they are is just daft.

JR, London, UK

Please do remember that it concerns a country where a 4-year old is expelled from school because of touching his teacher's breasts. There is no end to the American hypocrisy...

Charles Winter, Antwerp, Belgium

To me it is sad that the prudish attitudes of a few adults is stifling the litterary experiences of children. The words that are creating this debate are perfectly scientific words. As a premedical student, I have used these words and with little thought about them being crude or inappropriate. I think that the librarians and teachers that object so strongly should take a look at why they have such distorted attitudes about these scientific words. There is nothing more inappropriate about the word scrotum than there is about the word cerebellum. When people stop making a big deal about words that cause them personal discomfort, then kids will be able to learn about scientific things, without being polluted with nonsense like calling body parts by euphamisms that don't change what you are really talking about. We are talking about real science words here, not obscenities. Grow up adults!

Amber, Tucson, AZ