No Oral for My Boys

Over on my brother’s blog, he’s talking about the lynch mob that’s going after Paul Ruditis for his book RAINBOY PARTY (and he quotes a column from a wacko at Jewish World Review, which sure as hell isn’t this Jew’s world. This is the same nutcake who wrote "In Defense of Internment: The Case for Racial Profiling in World War II and the War on Terror" Need I say more?).

RAINBOW PARTY takes its title from high school parties where girls compete to give the most blowjobs to boys…and the boys compete to get the most head that they can.  Clearly, this isn’t the latest Nancy Drew, though if a guy is gonna win this, he’s got to be a pretty Hardy Boy.  I haven’t read the book, so I can’t say how graphic it is, or if its age-appropriate for teenagers. Be that as it may, I was struck by the Amazon review that Tod quotes:

Don’t buy it unless you’re going to burn it, May 25, 2005

Reviewer: PAUL C. FRY (Cleveland, OH USA) – See all my reviews

One reason that I’m giving this a lousy review because I’m a parent.
I’ve got two boys so far; I don’t want either of them giving or getting
oral sex when they’re teenagers. Or ever for that matter.

He doesn’t want his kid to ever have oral sex? And never  give it? Makes you wonder what poor Mrs. Fry’s sex life has been like (let me say here and now that when my daughter is an adult, I want her to have as much oral sex from her lover or husband as she would like. You go girl!). But Tod talks all about  the evils of oral sex, so I won’t belabor the point. What Tod didn’t do, and what I’ve done, is check out Mr. Fry’s Amazon wish list.  Most of the titles are right-wing political stuff and bible-related books like Scripture Matters: Essays on Reading the Bible from the Heart of the Church, They Think You’re Stupid: Why Democrats Lost Your Vote and What Republicans Must Do to Keep It, The New Faithful: Why Young Adults Are Embracing Christian Orthodoxy, Swear to God : The Promise and Power of the Sacraments,  Ten Things You Can’t Say In America, and Lord Have Mercy: The Healing Power of Confession. But he’d also like you to get him the  CD Sonic Bullets: 13 From the Hip by Bambi Molesters (I kid you not!).

Is it any wonder he  wants to buy a book to burn it…and prays that his boys never have to endure a blowjob?  Or, God forbid (literally, I suppose), that they should ever have to orally pleasure their wives’ milky womanhoods?

61 thoughts on “No Oral for My Boys”

  1. Patrick –
    Turn down your OppressionMeter(TM).
    Mocking one right-wing Christian’s views on sexuality says nothing about Christians or Christianity in general. Further, it’s rather an ironic statement coming from someone who wields generalizations such as “leftwing amorality seepage” on their own blog.

  2. Actually, I was refering to this:
    “Just a note: many devout Christians enjoy getting blowjobs. Their wives, unfortunately, don’t always enjoy giving them.”
    I think If I had written that about, say, Jesish women, Lee would be (rightfully) aghast.
    And you need to look up the word “ironic.” Nothing general about what I was saying at ABP. Nothing general at all. If you need detailed specifics, spend about 5 seconds on my blog and you’ll see there are a great many examples of this kind of garbage.
    In short, “Andy” … I’d like to invite you to go have sex with yourself.

  3. “Patrick” –
    So you’re lamenting what someone else said in the comments on Lee’s blog? Errr, ok. Please be more specific in the future so I can fine tune my sarcasm.
    As for generalizations, your mountain of anecdotes, firmly-planted flag of right-wing righteous indignation waving, stands tall beside the hill of beans.
    If you want violence, sex, and immorality, pick up the Bible sometime – it’s chock full of the stuff. I’ll also be more inclined to take right-wing religious morality more seriously when they stop playing a la carte Christianity (“Well, yes, yes, it does say to kill adulterers, homosexuals, and rebellious children, but that’s so passe.”)
    Regarding having sex with myself, I don’t believe I need your permission or invitation to do that. If I do, then I’ve been breakin’ the law, breakin’ the law for years. If I could actually f*ck myself, though, I doubt I’d ever leave the house.
    Have a nice day!
    “Andy” (diggin’ the quotes)

  4. Patrick, I was the one who posted this, and I’m sorry if it offended you. My point was that not all Christians (and I am one) have the same beliefs as the author of that review.
    I posted this at work and after thinking about it on the way home, I realized that trying to force others to follow your own moral codes, though usually associated in this country with the Moral Majority and such, is really independent of religion, although it frequently uses religion to back itself up.
    So complaining about this type of behaviour is not really against religion, it’s against busybodies.

  5. I wasn’t intending to bash Christians. Or Republicans. Some of my best friends and relatives are both. Some of my best friends and relatives are gay and lesbian and Democrats, too.
    You’re my friend, and you’re a Republican. We can respect each other and have different political views and religious backgrounds.
    But Patrick, I think even you would agree that someone who is a devout Christian — or even a devout Jew — is much more likely to disapprove of any oral sex among adults than, say, someone who isn’t religious at all and is, perhaps, a liberal Democrat. (Remember, the article that prompted this discussion appeared in Jewish World Review)
    It didn’t surprise me that those folks in Kansas City who wanted to ban some classic novels in public schools were deeply religious Republicans. Or that the lawmaker in that same state who wanted to ban books written by, or about, homosexuals from public libararies was a Republican as well. Or that it was liberal organizations and individuals who opposed both those efforts.
    It didn’t surprise me in the same way it wouldn’t surprise you that a campaign for legalizing gay marraige, upholding a woman’s ‘right to choose,’ or opposing prayer in schools is led by Democrats. I would be shocked to see a devout Christian or a Republican getting behind either of those causes, wouldn’t you?
    I haven’t read RAINBOW PARTY, so I don’t know if it’s something appropriate for teenagers to read or not…that’s a decision for each parent to make on their own. But I was amused, and shocked, by the response from Mr. Fry, who suggested burning the book and didn’t want his sons to ever have oral sex.
    Were you surprised to find out, from his Amazon Wish List, he was likely a devout Christian or a Republican? I doubt it. You would have been shocked, however, if his Amazon Wish List reflected that he was probably a liberal Democrat.

  6. “Andy,” or “fake Andy”:
    I think you’re missing the point — probably because of your low IQ. I don’t know where you got the idea I’m a prude. Again, you need to spend a total of about 5 seconds on my blog to see that I am not.
    Please, please go fuck yourself. It really would put my mind at ease.
    BTW … comparing Rainbow Party to the Bible … nice touch.

  7. Lee:
    A little sloppy posting on my part there. Again, I wasn’t saying you were Christian-bashing. I was saying “Graham” was Christian bashing and I thought that was really, really classless on his part.
    And look, the dude Paul is out there. And burning books is stupid.
    But Michelle Malkin is not a “wacko.” and not wanting books like this in your schools doesn’t make you a “wacko.” It makes you a concerned member of your community.

  8. Andy, I have to say, I really enjoy reading Patrick’s blog. And I enjoy listening to Rush Limbaugh. Do I necessarily agree with their views…no, but I think its a good idea to be open to different perspectives on things.
    In fact, I warmly encourage you to read Patrick’s thoughts on my post:
    While we disagree on some things, I can get behind this:

    Well, I’m a rightwing nut and a new dad, so I agree with the general sentiment of the guy’s review, which is outrage. But I’m also a First Amendment absolutist, so I don’t condone book burning. But I do condone book not-buying.

    He also says I am out-of-touch because I have no idea who Michelle Malkin is. I’m ashamed to say my friend is absolutely right. I never heard of her until yesterday.

  9. “Patrick,” or “Darla”:
    Low IQ. Nice one; been working on that all morning have you? Quite the zinger!
    I never said you were a prude. I was responding to your generalizations of the left-wing, while complaining about someone’s (humorous) generalization of another group. Do try to keep up.
    I’m also worried that fucking myself would put your mind at ease. I’d say that’s a rather unhealthy obsession with the sex life of a single individual (but then God seems to share it as well, so you’re in good company).
    Glad you liked the comparison of the two books. Don’t blame me, I had no hand in writing either one (if I had, there’d be more explosions and supermodels).
    Anyway, rather than muck up Lee’s terrific blog by continually poking you with a pointy stick, I’ll leave it with another “have a nice day.”
    Hugs and bugs,
    “rEaL aNdY”

  10. Oh, wait, an important point has been lost in this important debate. Is oral sex among adults okay? Would you hope that your child, when he or she grows up, never has to experience it?

  11. Lee –
    I consider myself a right-leaning libertarian atheist. I have friends both religious and areligious, and from all across the political spectrum. So, I’m very open to other opinions and beliefs (but I also enjoy arguing them, as I’m sure you can tell).
    What started this was my thinking that Patrick was calling you out for insulting Christians (since clarified). From there it took on a life of its own, and – admittedly – I was enjoying it. 🙂
    Like I said, sorry for pooping on your carpet there. Love the blog.

  12. “Faux Andy”:
    Keeping up just fine … in fact, I’ve lapped you.
    Here’s what you wrote:
    “As for generalizations, your mountain of anecdotes, firmly-planted flag of right-wing righteous indignation waving, stands tall beside the hill of beans.”
    Um, that’s a labored and inartful way of telling me I’m a prude.
    Not sure if you knew that.
    And yes, having you fuck yourself would put my mind at ease because I would then have some assurances that I no longer have to engage in this gunfight of wits, to which you brought a knife.
    Anywho, I’m off to the mountains of Western Maryland.
    Lee: love the blog. Hate the Christian bashing. “Phony Andy”: Have fun fucking yourself.

  13. Patrick –
    Please, your harsh words wound me so! Can we not be friends? If you cut me, do I not bleed?
    P.S. My “labored” comment was in reference to your “many examples of this kind of garbage” that reflected the “leftwing amorality seepage,” as if the right-wing has a corner on the morals market.

  14. The original outrage over this book was whether it is appropriate reading for kids (including teenagers). I suppose if the parents want to buy the book for their own children, that’s their business. But it’s not an appropriate book for a school library. The sexual practices of adults is irrelevant.

  15. But it’s not an appropriate book for a school library.

    Have you read the book, Kitty? I haven’t. So I don’t think it’s right for me to say whether the book is appropriate for a school library or not unless I’ve read it.

  16. I love it when people condem a book they haven’t read. How stupid is that? Especially since the message of the book is AGAINST kids having sex. It’s a CAUTIONARY tale. Even the most right-wing conservative parent would like the message behind this book. Here’s a review from amazon
    Reviewer: WisestGirl (Cali) – See all my reviews
    Okay, parents, read a teens review…I hate to break it to you, but this stuff happens. I’ve been to 3 different high schools, one of the top boarding schools in the nation, a top california all girl’s school, and a public school, and let me tell you–it’s everywhere! I am sorry that its harsh, and yes its gross, but your kids are exposed to this and that isn’t going to change. rather than trying to keep this book away from your kids and pretend this isn’t happening, you should read it with your kids and TALK ABOUT IT! i read this book with my mom, and it was one of the best discussions we ever had. we talked about the motivations behind the different characters, and we had an honest discussion about what I would truly do if i was in that situation, and how to deal with these kinds of things, like peer-pressure and friends who are prematurely and overly sexual. i’m so glad i have a mom who is willing to talk to me about real stuff and not just pretend its not happening. because guess what? i’m 16 and haven’t done more than kiss, not that i haven’t had an incredible amount of chances, but because i know better because i could talk honestly with a parent who wasn’t totally in denial and who was open to discussing hard things, like the stuff in this book.
    so honestly, parents, WAKE UP and realize this book is your frickin best friend if you don’t want your daughters and sons to be EXACTLY like the characters in this book. cos whether you like it or not, it’s happening. so get over it and TALK TO YOUR TEENS about this book and what goes on, with the sex and the peer pressure–you’d be surprised what they’re dealing with that you don’t even know about.
    oh and one more detail that it appears you all missed–the clear moral at the end was not one promoting oral sex and promisquity–what, like 39 students got STD’s? Yeah, that’s a promotion. Come on, if you actually read the book, you’d realize that at the end the happiest, healthiest couples were not having sex, and didn’t end up going to the rainbow party. they didn’t submit to peer pressure and made wise decisions that they were comfortable with, even though it was really hard. THAT IS EXACTLY THE MESSAGE YOU WANT FOR YOUR TEEN! realize that its not honest books like these that make teens act the way they do these days; sheltering them from books like this won’t help becuase guess what? their friends are doing this–its happening at their schools! just because they don’t read about it doesn’t mean it won’t happen all around them, and hey, they just might participate! you will help your teen by talking openly and honestly about the kind of material in this book. censorship vs. honest talks and educated advice? hm, i wonder…

  17. Back to Lee’s vital questions:
    Is oral sex among adults okay?
    Okay? Well, I suppose it depends on the adults, as sometimes it can be positively amazing. Other times, yeah, just ok. 😉
    Would you hope that your child, when he or she grows up, never has to experience it?
    I hope my daughter (and upcoming 2nd child, boy or girl) has a fulfilling and happy sex life. However, much like the idea of my parents getting funky on one another, I’d rather not try to imagine it.

  18. Anonymous – please, don’t be silly. Everyone knows that if you stick your head in the sand, the real world ceases to exist. It works even faster if you say to yourself “I can’t hear you, lalalala, I can’t hear you.”
    Seriously though, you make excellent points.
    What continues to amaze (amuse?) me though is that you can probably find hundreds of books on the school library shelves packed with violence (e.g. Lord of the Rings), and no one seems to mind. However, let someone talk about a penis and it’s the end of the world as we know it.
    This is how the world ends. Not with a bang, but with a weiner.

  19. I’m curious to know what would be appropriate for a school library — it’s a question I’ve pondered before while shaking my head at the fucktards over at, and those who wanted The Perks of Being A Wallflower banned in Wisconsin recently and all sorts of other issues surrounding these basic core issues of what is right for kids to read. Is it appropriate for a ten year old to read books which contain sex and violence? Probably not. But for someone 14? 15? 16? 17? I can tell you this much: I started reading adult novels around the age of, oh, 10, and I’d wager Lee did, too, as well as our sisters and to no ill effects. (Well, other than the odd thing that we all have blogs…and are writers…). A school library should provide controversial materials — controversial on both sides of the moral agenda — because it is that very ability to explore and discover ideas that makes for a healthy and well-informed person. I don’t care for Michelle Malkin’s point of view on most things, but I would fight to the death for her point of view to be heard and stocked on shelves of all libraries. So you don’t like a book about teenagers sucking orifices that ends up being a cautionary tale. Fine. Don’t read it. But you should celebrate that a book like that can be written and published without the author being imprisoned for his views, not belabor the fact that it offends you, despite the fact that you’ve never read it…sort of like how I feel about James Patterson, actually.

  20. Yeah Malkin is crazy wingnut pundit who claimed the Japamese Americans deserved Manzanar. I want those views heard loud and clear and on shelves at libraries. I want Anais Nin there too. The problem with conservatives is they like to censor other ideas; or smear them as perverted. In the marketplace of ideas, that’s a bad one.

  21. Just a note here: when I looked at Rainbow Party yesterday, when I wrote my little blog item about it, it’s Amazon rank was in the mid-thousands. Today: 865. Now, I need to get some controversy going on about my new book…

  22. Must you read a book to know it’s good or bad?
    What if you had read other books by that author that were horrid. Must you read the new one to know it’s as bad as the others?
    What if someone who’s taste you trusted read the book?
    What if the cover offended you? Why would you put yourself through the torture of reading the book to know if it truly offended you or not?

  23. “The problem with conservatives is they like to censor other ideas; or smear them as perverted. In the marketplace of ideas, that’s a bad one.”
    Ah grow up ya sanctimonious malformed paltroon. What a loada boring blah. The problem with leftoid whack jobs is they do so insist on censoring any idea that doesn’t conform to their own reationary views.
    How can the left be in the “marketplace” of ideas? They’re in the welfare state of ideas. A far scarier place.

  24. Mark, the problem isn’t merely to do with whether the book offends or doesn’t offend. It is with people like Paul Fry who want to burn it and make sure that nobody else reads it.
    Malkin is almost as bad. First off, she misleads by calling it a ‘children’s book’, when it is properly a ‘young adult’ title. The implication being, of course, that it is being marketed at 10 year olds, when as far as I can gather it is not.
    And Malkin goes further: “In a small sign that decency and common sense still survive in the marketplace, a number of children’s book sellers are refusing to stock “Rainbow Party.””
    In other words, Malkin would cheer if the book were to be undistributable, and thus no-one could read it. She doesn’t couch it in language as clearcut as that of Fry the would-be book-burner, but her message is clear.
    On a side note, I’m not at all sure that this whole ‘rainbow party’ thing isn’t merely an invention like the whole jelly-bracelet flap of a couple of years ago.

  25. Holy crap. Someone actually used the Advertisng slash Marketing slash “let’s exploit children bogus phrase “young adult”.

  26. Why wouldn’t this book be appropriate for a high school library?
    Oh, I know. Because people like Malkin would rather pretend that sex between teenagers doesn’t exist, rather than giving them opportunities to talk openly about it. A book like this is a CAUTIONARY tale, but the naysayers can’t get past the fact that – GASP! – sex (even oral sex) is mentioned. Let’s just close our mouths, put our fingers in our ears and cover our eyes and pretend that our teens are all virginal and pure and would NEVER get the idea to have oral sex if books like this weren’t on the shelf.
    How about this? How about you let the kids read the FICTION they want to, but you maintain the kind of relationship with them where they can come talk to you about their concerns, especially concerns about sex? How about you trust your teens to do the right thing, because you’ve raised them according to your morals and you trust them to behave according to what you taught, rather than sending the message that you think they are so immoral, untrustworthy and naive that they can’t even be trusted to read a piece of fiction that is more or less about the dangers of having random sexual encounters? Anyone?
    (sorry about the long rant).

  27. “Holy crap. Someone actually used the Advertisng slash Marketing slash “let’s exploit children bogus phrase “young adult”.”
    The phrase “young adult” has been used in my local library since the 1960’s (to denote kids who have moved up past the children’s section). Since when is it an exploitative marketing term?

  28. Hidaly Ho i came over from Pat “always wrong” Hynes website 😉
    the problem i have more is this book is bad because reading the publisher’s promo kicker and some of the reviews it really glorifies these things and doesn’t address them realistically. and thats where I a non christian have a real problem here. these kind of events usually have booze around them, usually have porno to help “get the kids in the mood” and usually have high school ( at the middle school parties) and young college ( at both the high school and middle school parties of this type) hanging out
    this isn’t something to get such a fluffy treatment
    I’m not going to stick up for the silly amazon review but this is a bad book

  29. I was a social worker for many years and before that an AIDS educator. Now I’m a writer, so this post intersects several areas of interest of mine. One of the first misconceptions you get over in doing the jobs I’ve done is that young people are constitutionally “innocent.” All props to Rousseau, but young people are just inexperienced. They live in the same world, see the same things, and do the same stuff that we “mature” folks do.
    Thinking that you can ban books, ideas, images, or recordings from them and therefore keep them noble or on the right track is an ultimately fruitless enterprise. They’re going to do what they want one way or the other.
    What you can do though is talk with them, share with them and offer them directions to go in. (You can set absolute boundaries too, but the older they get, the less effective they become.) Fiction provides a great way of helping to guide, of offering a perspective they hadn’t thought about and an opportunity to discuss a different way of doing things.
    Sex is on young people’s mind from the get go — it’s supposed to be, or else we wouldn’t have made it this far from the primordial ooze. Pretending otherwise does no good. Let young people read what they want, just be there to talk to them about it afterwards.

  30. Yes, yes, yes, young people know about sex and talk about sex and think about sex and some/many/most engage in sex. Kids sneak their parents’ stash of naughty magazines, too. When my son was 8 he befriended a kid whose father had a massive collection of stroke mags. Buy whatever you want for your home, give it to your kids if you want. Fornicate with the vacuum cleaner if that’s your pleasure, but some materials are not appropriate for school libraries.

  31. Hey, you know what? You guys are right. Rainbow parties are already happening in schools, so we might as well publicize them.
    And since a lot of teachers have sex with their underage students, we shoudl allow kiddie porn in the school library. Hey, I don’t have my head in the sand. It’s happening anyway, right.

  32. Ok, let’s go by your standards, Patrick. Let’s take every book out of school libraries that deals with any subject matter we think our children should not have put in front of them. We’ll ban every book that references sex, drugs, violence, cheating, cursing, the occult, etc.
    What’s left? What will the kids be reading in class, because you’ve now taken a large portion of the classics off the school shelves.
    I think one of the original arguments on this book was not over it being in the school library, but whether it was age appropriate at all (to be called a young adult book). Taking the “if we don’t address it, it doesn’t exist” approach is not only naive, but dangerous. There’s not a kid in 7th or 8th grade who doesn’t know what oral sex is. If my kids read this book, I would think it open a perfect opportunity to discuss this issue with them, in the context of the book – which probably makes it easier for kids to talk openly to their parents about such things.
    But that’s just me. I’m of the school that keeping your kids informed about sex is a way to keep them from making mistakes.

  33. Rainbow parties are already happening in schools, so we might as well publicize them.

    I haven’t read the book, but my understanding is that RAINBOW PARTY doesn’t publicize or advocate oral sex parties… but, instead, talks about the dangers and negative consequences of that kind of behavior. Have you read the book, Patrick, or are you judging it by the hysterical rantings of other people who haven’t read it either?

    And since a lot of teachers have sex with their underage students, we shoudl allow kiddie porn in the school library. Hey, I don’t have my head in the sand. It’s happening anyway, right.

    To be honest, I think a young adult novel that dramatizes why it’s wrong for a teacher to get romantically involved with a student, and how it could happen, might be a very good book to have in a school library. A cautionary tale like that might be a very effective way to teach students how to recognize, and properly deal with, inappropriate advances by teachers. Would I equate a book like that with kiddie porn? No.
    It all depends how it’s written, how the story is told, and how the book is marketed to teens.

  34. You never read the book, but everyone who criticizes it is a wacko, huh? We’re trying to keep our children’s world from turning into a cesspool. Look’s like we have to fight through you to do it. OK.

  35. You never read the book, but everyone who criticizes it is a wacko, huh?

    I’m a parent of a young girl. I think it’s ridiculous, foolish and irresponsible to demonize a book you haven’t read. For all you know, the book is nothing like what some outrageously hysterical columnists (who also, incidentally, haven’t read the book) have described. On the other hand, if you read the book and believe that it’s inappropriate for young adults, that’s a different matter entirely. Won’t you feel stupid if you read it and discover it’s not bad afterall? That’s why I have neither defended the book nor criticized it myself…because I haven’t read it. It could be terrible and exploitative and inept… or it could be a worthwhile, cautionary tale that deals responsibly with the consequences of inappropriate sexual behavior among young adults.

  36. Lee:
    It’s just silly to say you can’t criticize a book you haven’t read. Particularly one that has received press coverage about it’s content (not just from conservative critics, but from such “rightwing” publications as USA Today.) This book is about the danger of contracting STD’s through oral sex; so you better use protection. Is that the only reason young girls and boys should not be having group orgies. The very idea is absurd!
    If your daughter brought home a book from school titled “The Holocaust Never Happened,” you wouldn’t need to read it to know it’s trash and to call the teacher up and say, “what the hell!?”
    I don’t accept the idea that you need to read a book to criticize its well-publicized content. Do you need to sit through a kiddie porn video to decide whether or not it’s right for you?

  37. I was going to rebut everything you wrote, Patrick, but I’ve come to the realization that you are an ignorant, closed-minded, fool who will never, ever attempt to see anyone else’s side of a story except your own, and who won’t tolerate anything that doesn’t fit into you narrow world view.
    You are also an idiot.

  38. Oh … so instead of rebutting “everything I wrote” you just call me names.
    Now that truly is the last resort of an ignoramous who has no defense for her reactionary, ill-defined world view.
    Grow up.

  39. If your daughter brought home a book from school titled “The Holocaust Never Happened,” you wouldn’t need to read it to know it’s trash and to call the teacher up and say, “what the hell!?”

    You make a very good point, Patrick…and also unintentionally showed my own hypocrisy. I have also judged books without reading them based on the title alone. I don’t have to read “In Defense of Internment: The Case for Racial Profiling in World War II and the War on Terror” to know it’s hateful swill.
    But the titles “The Holocaust Never Happened” and “In Defense of Internment: The Case for Racial Profiling in World War II and the War on Terror” clearly state the pov and intent of the author. “Rainbow Party,” as a title, does not.
    In this case, i don’t think it’s fair to judge the book without reading it.

  40. We don’t need you and the rest of your tolerant, open-minded “ilk” slipping this book into the public libraries under the guise of protecting free speech (“but if we exclude it, we’re “book burners”), so my three daughters can stumble upon it and conclude, “hey, its in library, so it must be mainstream”. Yea, I know we can “have a conversation” with our kids, and “reverse-engineer” the damage, but why should we have to? Do we have to have a conversation with our kids about bestiality too, to impress the Lee Goldbergs of the world?

  41. Speaking as someone who was once a 12 year-old boy desperate searching the library for dirty books, I can safely say that I am all in favor of “Rainbow Party” being included on the shelves.
    For the record, I am also a far right libertarian Born Again Christian who is proud to call himself a friend of uber-Jew liberal Lee Goldberg.

  42. Well, Patrick, I don’t really know what to say.
    What I mean by my above post is that you seem to demonstrate an elaborate understanding of all of the books’ points without ever reading more than a paragraph of it.
    You say that Rainbow Party glorifies sex at the same time you say that it denigrates sex, but only for spreading STDs. Then you say that telling children that they shouldn’t have sex because of STDs is stupid, because thats not the only reason you shouldnt have orgies.
    Well, Patrick, thats true, but it is important to remember how children think. Children have no conception of long-term consequences. If you tell a kid that not doing his english paper will hurt his understanding of Middlemarch when he is an adult, he won’t care. Tell him that he will fail his English class, however, and he will grudgingly go along with you.
    The same goes for sex. Tell a middle school kid that there are emotional consequences to sex, and he won’t care in the slightest; tell him that doing the nasty will give him painful blisters on his private parts and he will run screaming from every girl he sees.
    There are always consequences to our actions; the ones that grab our attention are the ones that happen tomorrow, and that may be what Mr. Ruditis is trying to show kids in this book.

  43. You asserted on your blog that “some outrageously hysterical columnists” who have described “Rainbow Party” have not read it. It is clear you are referring to me. If you are not, then what other “outrageously hysterical columnists” are you referring to–and how did you arrive at the conclusion that they have not read it? I obtained and read the book in its entirety before I wrote and published my column and my blog entry on the matter ( You have made an error and I would appreciate it if you would correct it.

  44. I stand corrected and regret my error. It wasn’t clear to me from your column that you’d actually read it. The fault is mine.
    I’ve ordered the book from Amazon so that I can have an informed opinion on this discussion.

  45. From USA Today
    “Suzanne Kelly, a buyer for the Chester County Book and Music Co. in West Chester, Pa., which will stock a limited number of Rainbow, agrees. She says the book’s message that oral sex “really is sex” and that teens can contract STDs through such sexual practices far outweigh the controversial story line.
    “I can’t imagine anyone reading this book and saying, ‘Hey, what a great idea. Let’s send out invitations,’ ” Ruditis says.

  46. …Do we have to have a conversation with our kids about bestiality too, to impress the Lee Goldbergs of the world?

    Your comment raises a question as to if you even have conversations with your kids. I picture a moment, not too far in the future, where “She has what?” rolls from one end of your home to the other — followed closely by “Damn Lee Goldberg and his ‘ilk’ for doing this to my daughter!” Far easier to kill the messenger, as they say.
    Yes, you should be talking to your kids about everything, be it Holocaust Denial or the merits of the original Star Wars trilogy vs. the new one . You had your three minutes of fun nine months before your child showed up. No use complaining about the fallout now.

  47. “Yea, I know we can “have a conversation” with our kids, and “reverse-engineer” the damage, but why should we have to? Do we have to have a conversation with our kids about bestiality too, to impress the Lee Goldbergs of the world?”
    Wow. Makes me wonder what you DO talk to your kids about. Uninformed is unprepared.


    At least that’s Tod Goldberg’s assessment of the young adult book about Lewinsky parties.
    His brother, Lee, picked up the story with his No Oral For My Boys; a heated discussion of comments followed.


Leave a Comment