Satan's Bookclub

Don't we all have some kind of gay agenda now? If we don't, we should go out and get one. I't is the hip happening agenda to have. Even penguins are pushing it. Loon sent me the following link:

Parents Complain About Book's Undertones
"SAVANNAH, Mo. - A children's book about two male penguins that raise a baby penguin has been moved to the nonfiction section of two public library branches after parents complained it had homosexual undertones.

The illustrated book, "And Tango Makes Three," is based on a true story of two male penguins, named Roy and Silo, who adopted an abandoned egg at New York City's Central Park Zoo in the late 1990s"

Oh, those parents should be so proud of themselves. Because, at the top of my list of concerns about society today, "penguins turning our kids gay" comes right before "slapping the bejeezus out of South Dakota" and that oil addiction everyone is talking about.

Posted by jodi at 07:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

Hey kids, do you like audio books? Do you like listening to audio books on your iPod? I know I do!

I'd have to say, if Satan's Bookclub were going to endorse an iPod cover, it would have to be this one, from Podstar.

It comes in eight evil designs. But only for the nano, which I do not have. More's the pity.

Link via popgadget.net

Posted by jodi at 10:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

I've been feeling a particular guilt over my neglect of Satan's Bookclub. I'd like to tell you I am working on a new book review for The Thin Place by Kathryn Davis. It's absolutely true, I am. But then, I decided that actions speak louder than broken blog promises, and I'd talk about it when I was done. Then I saw this on Blog of a Bookslut.

The Vatican says Harry Potter could lead kids to Satanism.

Awww...yeah!

Posted by jodi at 09:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

I learn so much from my daily RSS feed of Blog of a Bookslut. With a name like that, how could I not? Today I learned that Nerve.com has a monthly Henry Miller award for best sex scene in a book published in the English language. Categories are Most Literary Merit, Heat, Originality, and Overall. Each month's winners will go on to compete in a year end competition.

Seems to me, that would be something Satan would keep his eye on, very closely.

Posted by jodi at 10:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

There I was, promising to straighten up and get down to business, and then life hit me with a couple more punches to the noggin. I'm sorry, we've just had a couple of deaths in my family within a week of a each other, so it's been a bit overwhelming. Just give me until the end of the month, and then we'll figure out what to do about the bookclub book, and I'll start paying attention to book news. And maybe I'll review The Historian. I haven't started it yet.

In the meantime, please enjoy this story of a woman who thinks she knows Harry Potter better than J.K. Rowling, so she wrote a revised edition of Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince. And her issue is not what you'd think, at first, if you have read the book. It has to do with romance. And I have to say, I agree with J.K. Rowling on this one. This woman is crazy! The romantic relationships have been obvious for many books.
(Link via Bookslut)

edited to add: I have no idea if that article is true... given the source, it could be a parody. You never know. Either way, it's funny. I thought it was real when I first read it, but after investigating the site a little further. :)

Posted by jodi at 09:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

I've been a bit distracted. Personal issues. Love, Sex, Death, internet connection issues, the release of Sims2 for the mac. The usual. Not devoting myself fulling to the work of Satan. But I have to tell you, this gave me new inspiration. It's the Parents Against Bad Books in Schools review guidelines. Why, I may just apply some of their techniques when doing my own book reviews. Do you think they'd mind?

For each type checked above also indicate level of vividness/graphicness using the following as a general guide:
Basic (B): large breasts
Graphic (G): large, voluptuous bouncing breasts
Very graphic (VG): large, voluptuous bouncing breasts with hard nipples
Extremely graphic (EG): large, voluptuous bouncing breasts with hard nipples covered with glistening sweat and bite marks.

Here's to hoping that some of you are enjoying EG sexual content in your lives as we speak.

Via Dr. Frank

Posted by jodi at 08:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

A tribute to those who "undermine free and personal liberties."

From blog of a bookslut

Posted by jodi at 10:37 AM | Permalink

This is very sad and upsetting. A school that services kindergarten through 8th grade is firing their librarian in order to hire a computer teacher. Now, I love computers as much as, probably more, than next girl. But I remember going into the library at least 3 times a week, and asking my librarian "now what? what should I read next?" And she always had a suggestion. She paid attention to what I read and was interested to hear what I thought about the book. I became an avid reader. Which is good, because I learned a lot about the computer from books.

What really cheeses me off is the lack of value we, as a country, place on education. Military military military. ... fuck the environment... fuck public schools.... yep, that's about it. If a school is forced to chose between a librarian, and a computer teacher, that school is not getting enough money. I hope everyone remembers this sacrifice the next time a school levy comes on the ballot in Tamworth NH.

from bookslut, who thinks they've f'ed with the wrong profession, as librarians like to fight. Yeah!

Posted by jodi at 12:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

The Guardian talks to Judy Blume about the book every teenage girl read behind their parent's back, Forever. Except for me. My mom bought it for me. She knew what was about and felt I was old enough to read it. I think I was about 14 or 15... maybe? Anyway, we were living in Tulsa Oklahoma back then, which we all know is such an oh so book friendly place, and the bookseller actually tried to talk my mom out of buying the book for me, explaining to her about the teenage fornication it contained. My mother acknowledged that she knew what was in the book and insisted that I was old enough, and mature enough to handle it.

And then she punched the bookseller in the face for daring to question her parental judgement. Ok, no, she didn't. But, yay my mom for valuing my abilities to process the information in this book and not go out and get knocked up.

Posted by jodi at 09:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (5)

And so do we, in the bookclub. I have very fond memories of the Reading/Signing for his previous book "If Chins Could Kill: Confessions of a B Movie Actor," and I am thrilled to find out he is coming to Seattle on June 27th for his new book "Make Love - The Bruce Campbell Way." [Which comes out on June 1st]

If you are a Bruce Campbell fan, try to get out to see him, if he comes to your town. You will not regret it. If you are not a Bruce Campbell fan, shame on you. Email me and I will provide you with some steps you can take to rectify that.

Groovy.

Posted by jodi at 04:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

Children's author Lisa Westberg Peters cancels visit to elementary school when she is asked not to speak about her book "Our Family Tree: an Evolution Story," because of it's controversial nature. Controversial? Since when is evolution controversial? It's science. She calls it censorship and she's right. I don't get it, even in the 1980's in Oklahoma they taught evolution. I took a genetics class for pete's sake... that's ALL about Darwin! Oh well, it's the school's loss.

To the creationists out there, I ask you to repeat after me "Separation of Church and State."

Thank you.

Also, I find it hard to believe that there is only a 49% chance I'll go to hell. But yay me for 100% sloth!

Posted by jodi at 04:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

From Bookslut..

The Oklahoma House of Representatives has passed a resolution that would ban books on gay families from the children's sections of public libraries. The bill's sponser, Republican Sally Kern, does not see this as cencorship, because she is not asking anyone to throw the books away, or burn them.

Shame on you, Sally. And shame on the 81 members that voted in favor of this resolution. And shame on Oklahoma.... you see why I left?

Posted by jodi at 04:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)

Generally, I am in favor of anything that gets people to read. The NYT has an article about the increase of book sales in grocery stores. I hoping that this means people who did not read a lot will get into reading, and then expand their tastes beyond the top ten books from the Best Sellers list. I've purchased books at the grocery store, because I wanted the book, and it was there. Usually at a discount. But nothing can replace the joy of going into a book store and exploring. Finding something new on which to take a chance.

You'll need to sign in to read that article, but just go to Bug-Me-Not to get an ID and password. If you are morally opposed to giving your email to read a newspaper article. Like me. I'd rather buy the paper and read it, than give my email out to a large, corporate website like the New York Times.

Posted by jodi at 09:56 AM | Permalink

And you know I say that with love.
The National Review's Deroy Murdock is going after librarians in his article on the Patriot Act.

"These dangerously naïve or clandestinely seditious librarians are beyond foolish. They potentially jeopardize the lives of American citizens.

No square inch of this country should be a safe harbor where terrorists calmly can schedule the slaughter of defenseless civilians. Whether fueled by sincere civil libertarianism or malignant Bushophobia, those who thwart probes of Islamo-fascist library patrons have the same impact: They make it easier — not harder — for terrorists to kill you."

I had to look up the word "seditious." Man, I don't think Mr. Murdock knows what he's up against. Librarians can mess you up bad. He's a foolish man. Not to mention paranoid, and perhaps a wee bit fascist.

From Bookslut., who also puts their money on the librarians.

Posted by jodi at 11:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

but... you'll have to excuse my lack of book review for Down on Ponce. I'm currently experiencing a time of hectic activity that's been in the planning for months. Soon to reach the apex, at which time I can resume my normal self centered interests. I worked over the weekend! yuck! But the way I figure it, I might get that review done sooner, rather than later, simply because I have to finish my taxes! Nothing makes more things magically finish than having to do something far less pleasant.

Anyway, Iris tried to post this link, about more protective parental shenanigans, but was experiencing technical difficulties. Anyone else experiencing technical difficulties? Let me know.

Oh... and start thinking of ideas for the first bookclub selection. Someone suggested Lamb, by Christopher Moore, and I am so all over that idea with mint jelly. Any other ideas? [the mint jelly comment, while subtly genius, is not mine. It's actually what is signed on the inside of my hardback copy of Lamb. By the author.]

Posted by jodi at 10:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Perhaps I should give up before I start as I fear I will never manage to write a description as great as "Anti-Christian, angel-spanking, Satan-grade evil".

Although not recent I felt I had to share this excellent piece of journalism by Mark Morford.

Posted by Louise at 11:56 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

The American Library Association publish a handy, dandy PDF chart that is an invaluable reference when planning your next soon to be banned novel. Research ahead of time can save the heartache of not making the "challenged" list later. Lose that abortion theme that will barely raise a complaint and be sure to include plenty of offensive language and sexually explicit content.

I like that there were 20 challenges based on "inaccuracy" and 16 for "insensitivity". Do you think people who complain about sex education in books would be okay if it was inaccurate sex education? you'd think they would be fine with that on principle.

Posted by Louise at 12:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)