24 Comments
User's avatar
Sylvia Richardson's avatar

As a lifelong librarian and ex-parent-of two-kids-in Capo, can with equivocation say 1) this kind of censorship is wrong, period. And 2) Capo has much bigger and more important issues to be focussing on rather than hearing out lunatics.

Santa's avatar

So true, these lunatics are just in it for the show. As you mention, it is policy for a parent to opt their kid out of any book so why the F are these weirdos wasting everyone's time at these meetings?

PrincesspPicklePunch's avatar

Normally, I’m with you, but this article and the article before about Amber should have been focused on Trustee Bullockus and her lack of judgement. It took Trustee Bullockus 217 days to apologize for her use of the n-word while behind the scenes she was in the process of picking Amber as her IMRC rep. Someone known for not reading the books, semi-doxxing people, and for also defending Trustee Bullockus’s remarks to begin with.

Said another way, has Trustee Bullockus truly learned her lesson when in a board room full of people where the majority of people were upset and on the side of anti-racism, her pick for the IMRC, Amber Smith was pro-racism?????

I doubt it.

Not to mention the fact that after all of this, the board, save Trustee Castellanos (God bless her!), elevated her back into the vice-presidency for a second year in a row.

Jose's avatar

Yeah but you still posted a derogatory post about a local mom who was concerned about a book in Capo Parents - why would you do that? Local moms can’t have a voice about a book?

Renee's avatar

He post about local mom’s because he enjoys children having access to sexually explicit material. Groomers generally, after gift giving, compliments, sharing alcohol or drugs, love to ply children with pornography, written, or otherwise. They generally start with written soft porn and progress to videos. How do I know this you ask? I am a psychotherapist who treated SA survivors. People encouraging children to read, or engage in watching videos of pornography are setting the stage to engage the children. Why else would a body of people be so vested in sharing porn with young people?

Jose's avatar

I was actually responding to PrincessPickle, but you’re spot on about South Orange County Skidmark Jeff Pearlman.

Nina's avatar

Book banning has to be the silliest thing in the world in 2025. These kids can see anything under the sun on their pocket computers, and these parents are worried about them reading poetry about young love in Poet X.

Is Romeo and Juliet on that list of banned books? These kids defy their parents, get their friends into a gang fight that ends in murder, run away, get married, have sex and then kill themselves the next day. I'm not sure young minds can handle that.

Hollis Brown's avatar

Make Censorship Great Again!

Jeff's avatar

You also don’t have kids in the CUSD district yet somehow your gross opining on the happenings within CUSD are okay.

No one’s interested in your sexual…anything, least of all your wife, I’m sure - who, by the way, deserves a crown of eternal glory for having to crawl into bed next to you every night and endure God knows what.

We get it - you were a foul, nasty kid, but guess what: not every teen was like Jeff Pearlman in all his putrid adolescence.

Your naive “Oh, a teacher said it’s okay, so it must be so!” mantra is pretty much the exact opposite of the mantra of any real journalist - even better is your bragging about how many people you interviewed about a dead rapper, but let me guess: the left side of the Internet told you Poet X was good reading for teens so damn that Amber Smith for thinking otherwise! And! Your “horny” teen self liked that sex stuff so Poet X for all, it is!

Your wife has my condolences.

Jeff Pearlman's avatar

Everything you say may well be true. But, unlike you, I don't hide behind anonymity.

Jeff's avatar

Bravo! Jeff Pearlman, Hero of the Century! He willingly attaches his name to the crap he churns out!

Jeff Pearlman's avatar

I repeat, little coward. I am here, placing my name above and behind every opinion I share, every word I write. You, like Amber, hide in the shadows, scared, underwhelming, regurgitating the Sonja Shaw line. Be you, pony boy. Be you.

Jose's avatar

How very Trump-esque of you to take pride in being an obnoxious a-hole in public. Perhaps your questionable infatuation with your President is because he was able to coast his way to the top on his seemingly innate talent to be a d*ck while you’re stuck using your innate talent to be a d*ck tracking local housewives with whom you disagree from your computer.

Tony Kranz's avatar

Haha. This column seems ripe for the South Park writers to turn into a sequel to their San Diego piece. It would be a combo "Stay Classy" and "Jackin' it" bit given the calling out of the "wannabe journalist."

https://youtu.be/LKwW8PNZpOQ?si=pNgnJVIA30RZsMYg

Smitty loves you and is Jonesin' for some more of your attention.

Linda May's avatar

Very probing reporting, Jeff. I hope you had a good smoke after you finished.

DogsWillSaveUs's avatar

Watch the movie 'Pleasantville' ... This notion that sexually explicit material making its way into the schools is laughable, it's been there a lot longer than than these clowns have been alive. The problem is that these curmudgeons are tortured perverts far beyond any rationally sexual person. Guaranteed they've all touched themselves in an unpure manner to the tenets of things very similar to what they're reading.

Wannabe puritanicals

CarloMagno's avatar

The unintended farce generated by allegedly purist, rightminded, priggish buffoons is, frankly, priceless!

Pete's avatar

Citizens in a democracy, through their elected representatives, have the right to set the curriculum in public schools. You are more than willing to disagree with their decisions and advocate for your approach, but your tone here is condescending and off putting.

Nick's avatar

I'll take any number of botoxed Karens whining about sex in books over drag queens reading to kids.

Bradley Grower's avatar

"cheating on wife 1 with wife 2, wife 2 with wife 3, wife 3 with a porn star he paid off"

This sounds suspiciously close to what I have previously written: soulmate or plagiarist?

Spooky Smith's avatar

When you bring the heat like I do everything turns erotic.

Vince Trofimoff's avatar

The sheer hypocrisy is mind blowing. I can barely fathom it. Isn’t this the crowd that harps on parental rights? Yet they wish to control what children of other parents get to read? Amber gets to determine what my children read???

And what are they so worried about? That reading a book will turn kids into prostitutes? That a book will increase the rate of teen pregnancy? That god forbid (pun intended) that a book will make kids LGBTQ?? Seriously?

And not only are they the self-appointed morality police, the ultimate hypocrisy is that they are shining a huge spotlight on books they want to ban.

Have they even read the entire books? Doubtful.

Laura L's avatar

You'd think they would celebrate a heterosexual couple gettin jiggy...