On the other hand, I did a little poking around, and it looks as if there are a good number of people who agree that Mead’s first book was considerably more problematic than the excerpts I vaguely remember from my 101 course — although I’m betting that their reasons are very different from these judges’.

It would seem, as well, that the fifteen judges — comprising fourteen men and Phyllis Schlafly — are rather afraid of issues of gender and sexuality.

I like your idea for a Scary Books course. What happens, though, when you try to move the concept of “scariness” away from the ideological silliness these folks commit? Is such a thing possible, or are the ultra-conservative would-be “values” dictators the only ones who see books as scary? How would you feel about having students read The Turner Diaries or doing rhetorical analyses of http://www.resist.com or http://www.stormfront.org (please note who I’m linking to here, and who I’m not linking to) — or even reading some of the more gruesomely misogynistic portions of American Psycho (warning: really ugly prose description)?

And my pet peeve: anyone who says Dewey advocates teaching isolated “skills” hasn’t read Dewey. Progressive education needs good critique, but I’m so tired of this conservative misrepresentation of progressives.