It turns out some people don't like the names for male anatomy either.
"The Higher Power of Lucky" is this year's winner of the Newberry Medal, the award in children's literature. Lucky apparently is the consumate eavesdropper, and she overhears someone saying that a rattlesnake had bit his dog on the scrotum.
The book is written for 9 to 12 year olds. Surely nine year old boys know they have scrotum, and it surely wouldn't hurt girls to know the names of male anatomy. As children reach upper elementary school and begin the changes of puberty, they deserve to know about their bodies. I remember the delicious insight I felt reading about Anne Frank's first period in a book when I was ten; Judy Blume's books did the same for generations of girls after me. It was a signal that authors understood me and what I was concerned about. I think our nine year olds can handle Lucky.
I'm guessing that the uproar really isn't about protecting the children. It's about protecting the adults from having to answer a child's question about a body part honestly. But isn't the role of the school librarian to provide information? And since when are proper names of the part's of the body worthy of censorship?
It's partly why I feel so strongly about parents introducing body parts when their children are still toddlers as I discuss in my book "From Diapers to Dating." It's also why I think faith-based institutions should play a role in sex education.
Apparently many parents agree. This morning, the book is number #35 on Amazon's list.