zlacker

>>GavCo+(OP)
I'm a gay man and I think we are going to far with this PC nonsense. I had a hard time growing up in the 90s knowing I was different and being tormented by my peers, so I'm happy to see gay "normalized" in current pop culture more because I think it teaches the younger generation to accept themselves and others. However I feel that it's going to far, for example I started reading a novel the other day but gave up a third of the way through because every character was some form of LGBT or interracial or something. It made the story seem fake and unrealistic. I think editing classic books is wrong even if it is covering up something like hate or bigotry. History forgotten is history bound to repeat itself.

>>double+ls1
Children aren’t exactly reading as literary historians. The tropes that have been lightened up in these changes are things like equating disfigurement with evilness, fatness with moral failure, femininity (in women) with virtue. Kids will absolutely repeat the unkindness that they pick up in works like these. If you read through them, the changes are not “covering up” anything or “forgetting” history, they’re clearly there to lessen the ambient amount of ridicule against certain groups of people that kids get exposed to.

And - this happens all the time, you can look at Enid Blyton and things like Biggles for properties that have quietly changed language here and there to keep them from getting too dated. Panties get bunched when the currency changes from pounds and shillings, the _Spectator_ trots out another piece about wokeity sending us all to hell because Noddy and Big Ears aren’t gay any more - but those books stay in print.

>>bjowen+4R1
Downvotes, hilarious.

If Mark Twain is more to your taste, go have a browse of an early 20th centry edition and see how you feel about teaching the language in that to your kids.