Click it. See for yourself.
> What matters is whether adolescents have a right to read it, w
They don't have any such right, best that I can understand the legal framework of the western world.
For instance, they don't have the right to have sex with adults. Anyone who claimed that they were being denied such a right, well... do we really need to spell out how those claimants would be treated?
Minors are permitted by responsible adults to read age-appropriate books. We don't say that refusing to put The Anarchist Cookbook up in 4th grade libraries is censorship. At least non-lunatics don't. There are books that they will be allowed to read once legal adults, but that reading earlier might have adverse developmental effects. It's generally agreed that actual pornography is one such category.
For me it was a playboy at 13, for my friends probably the same, but I'm sure the internet bring the age lower,and pack more actions.
When I think about your link of a graphic novel and the first playboy I read, I'm pretty sure any parent would prefer the graphic novel where a poorly done 2 image strip depicts a fellation, and the text besides is... Less than erotic let's say.
And btw: i read 'when I was 5 I killed myself' from Buten at around the same age (maybe 14), as well as flowers for algernon and 1984, I don't think they are age-appropriate books, but they are worth reading when adolescent, because you experience them harder, and formative.
Buten in particular wrote hard books.
I did. Please don’t call people liars.
It’s a graphic novel depicting a sex act, albeit not particularly erotically.
The entire point of my other comments was that I checked out other books in high school, books that are widely considered excellent and have been for decades, that contained far more explicit “inappropriate” content. The only things different here are the facts that it’s (1) drawn, and (2) concerns LGBTQ identity.
> They don't have any such right, best that I can understand the legal framework of the western world.
We live under a negative legal scheme, not a positive one. I’m not aware of any law that says that children cannot read what they’d like to read, either federal or state.
Obscenity in the US has a distinct legal test[1], one that you and I both understand this book (and Sophie’s Choice) would pass easily. It also doesn’t mention children anywhere.
Finally: nobody in this thread wants children to be hurt, or to be exposed to things that will hurt them. But books, especially ones that are presented and explainable within an educational context, do not hurt children. If anything, adults tend to hurt themselves and others more based on books than children do.