Folio Weekly vs. Clay Yarborough

[Pavers]

Posted without comment...

From: Yarborough, Clay
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 5:07 PM
To: Peyton, John
Cc: Davis, Daniel; Fussell, Ronnie; Gubbin, Barbara
Subject: March 11 Folio

Mayor,

I walked through the door of a Jacksonville Public Library today and my attention was immediately caught by the cover of the March 11, 2008 issue of Folio Weekly with the words "Whip It Good" thereon. Pages 17-23 contain a long, explicit article (with photos), entitled "House of Pain," about a sadomasochism residence on the Westside. The article also explains, in-depth, the details of a stage show performed at a local nightclub in which sexual acts and abuse are graphically simulated, and speaks of the audience members "…groping each other…"

Here is more (edited for content), taken directly from the article:

Page 17 â€" A man’s [genitalia] is pierced with a ring

Page 18 â€" Bigamy and [male anatomy]

Page 20 â€" References the nightclub show in which sexual acts and abuse are simulated

Page 21 â€" Graphic, specific language about a man’s preferences of sadomasochistic acts

Children are encouraged to visit our city’s libraries and most, if not all, City-buildings are accessible to the general public, which includes children. This publication has now been out for over 2 days, and what has prevented a child from picking it up and reading the article, looking at the photos, or also seeing scantily clad women in advertisements on pages 3 and 59?

It is deplorable and incredibly tarnishing to the City of Jacksonville and the Jacksonville Public Library system to have a publication containing vulgar expletives, explicit and graphic sexual content, and details of such a stage show, readily accessible and available to children walking into a library and public building in our city. Would you let your child read it?

I request the Folio Weekly publication (and stands) be immediately removed from any and all libraries, buildings and/or properties owned by the City of Jacksonville, including from on the corner of Hogan and Duval Streets outside City Hall.

Please acknowledge receipt of this email and immediate course of action.

Thank you,

Clay Yarborough

[Steve]

Wow - this is where the whole freedom of the press and censorship thing comes in.  When I saw the isue, I had a feeling that this was going to crop up.

Personally, I don't feel this is tarnishing to the city - are we honestly to believe that this is the only city that has these publications?  We can also remove the Out In The City newspapers as well - they are talking about (OMG) homosexuality!  Dear God.

Downtown (especially the Library) needs to be a place where censorship needs to be kept at an absolute minimum.   The Library needs to be a place where all ideas are accepted, not just ideas that are acceptable to a six year old.  If I had children, there are topics in the library (or even Chambin's or Borders) that I wouldn't want my kid reading.  that doesn't mean burn them.

By the way, should a six year old be roaming around anywhere by themselves, or should they not be with an adult.  My guess is that the adult (parent or otherwize), so long as they have a brain, sould not be teaching the six year old about this stuff, thus censorship should fall where it belongs - in the parents hands.

[Driven1]

i agree with Clay here.  no censorship or freedom of press issue here.  a municipality has a choice on what publications it wants in its public libraries.  if removed, the city will not be saying "you can't print that"  - that would be censorship, but rather "we choose not to endorse it by removing it from the public libraries."

and it is tarnishing to our image.  btw, they weren't just talking about OH! - homosexuality.  if u read it, it was much beyond that and an article that was meant to cause controversy - and it did.  will sell more ads for folio, but should rightfully also end up with the weekly being removed from the library.

you, me and my 80 year old grandfather don't own Chamblins or Borders - we do own the public library.  things here should be held to a higher standard - especially when it is an elective, private publication such as folio that is in question.

and yes -  a 10 year old should be allowed to "roam around" a public library by herself while her mother is reading -say, a cookbook. 

[Steve]

Is every topic in the New York Public Library acceptable to a 10 year old?  Should we jsut remove anything that is unacceptable to children.

Now, I would agree that Folio Weekly (any issue) probably should not be displayed in the children's section, but it absolutely should be in the library.

There are some days that I find Ann Coulter offensive.  Should we remove the Times-Union as well?

[Driven1]

may i recommend the following...



A RECIPE FOR EACH DAY OF THE MONTH SURE TO PLEASE YOUR PROVIDER/HUSBAND NO MATTER HIS MOOD WHEN HE COMES HOME FROM A LONG DAY'S WORK!!!!

he'll be saying, "gal, fetch me some more!"

ps - this board is quite 'centrist'   

[jbm32206]

Thanks, now he can plan the menu and have dinner ready when the businesswoman gets home.

[Driven1]

the only business MY woman better ever be doing is taking care of my children, my loins and my stomach!!!

[JeffreyS]

If I owned the typical sub shop or similar diner where I tend to pick up Folio I would probably take it out of sight for the week. In that vein if I where in charge of public displays for the city I would pull it for the week.  I don't think every thing in public has to be child friendly.  S&M features with graphic (for a child) pics seem a reasonable place to take a pass for the week.

P.S. Who felt bad for folio that they needed to run this. I know they want to be the editorial prees for Jville and that was just sad. Guess it paid the bills.   

[fsujax]

Go Clay! This is nothing but garbage. Guess times must be bad over at Folio.

[Steve]

While I don't agree with the censorship thing, I am kind of curious that there was no news in Jacksonville but this?

[pwhitford]

I really think some of the important sub-text of this article is being missed.  Yes, FW used the titillating topic of S&M to draw your attention to the story, but the article itself was as much about the attempts made by adherents to this lifestyle to form deep, human connections and family like bonds (no pun indented) amongst themselves in a world where they are defiantly "outsiders".  Many of them seem to be trying to work out their demons constructively instead of in ways that are truly self- or externally destructive.  It also went some way to show that this type of behavior is practiced by people who are otherwise quite "normal".  They even went to great pains to demystify the shows a little bit and to show how innocuous they really are.  As such, it was more a piece aimed at providing some understanding about a world most people here have no idea of.  People should really read the article before they condemn it.

Of course, having said that, I also do not believe this is in any way or under any circumstances an appropriate topic for a child.  However, to remove it entirely from the public discourse by limiting its circulation would be wrong.  Limiting FW's circulation limits its potential ad revenue, and limiting its potential ad revenue is exactly what will kill the publication.  I suspect an attempt to damage FW has more to do with this request than any desire to protect children.

Moreover, we can not allow a resource like our Main Library to be policed by the lowest common denominator, in this case protecting the mythical "child" wandering around the library.  How often has this cry been used to mask ideological censorship?  Does that same child we are trying to "protect" by removing FW also need to be protected from every other book in the library containing (usually what a small minority consider) "racy” or controversial subjects?  Is he/she not just as likely to wander among the stacks and happen upon (or look for) a book his/her parents would not want that child to have?  Are we to remove all of them from his/her possible grasp?  And what possible standard could we use to chose which materials need to be removed?  Do we lock away all Norman Mailer's books or the later writings of Mark Twain?  How about tossing books containing discussions of Evolution to protect their innocent minds?  

Lastly, let’s be realistic.  How many children are going to pick up FW for even a second to browse its content?  I have 2 sons, 8 and 10 years old.  This issue of FW is in my house right now and nether of them has demonstrated even a heartbeat’s worth of interest in it. It’s a newspaper for pity’s sake, the least attractive form of communication for a child that he/she can encounter.  We could publish the answers to the FCAT in FW and not one additional child in Jacksonville would pass the test because of it.

[JeffreyS]

I do not think this is a big deal. FW  is free to put out the articles it wants and both public and private entities who allow its distribution on their property should use their best judgment and values to decide if they want this issue distributed on their property.  There is no censorship issue here both parties simply do what they want with what is theirs or in their management.

[Driven1]

DEPLORABLE!

[jbm32206]

Are you talking about the one right above your post?

[Driven1]

may i recommend the following...



A RECIPE FOR EACH DAY OF THE MONTH SURE TO PLEASE YOUR PROVIDER/HUSBAND NO MATTER HIS MOOD WHEN HE COMES HOME FROM A LONG DAY'S WORK!!!!

he'll be saying, "gal, fetch me some more!"

ps - this board is quite 'centrist'