• Daniel Berry, NYC

    Don’t worry: they DON’T read the bible. The people who bray the loudest about this kind of baloney have no freakin’ idea what’s actually in the bible. But they’re very enamored of the idea of their own righteousness.

  • John

    Another ripe opportunity for mocking others and pointing out inconsistencies. Laura – how far down do you have to look in order to see other people??

  • Greg

    You left out the most graphic spread: One woman performing oral sex on the other. I’m sure if Duke sent out an illustrated Bible with visual rape and incest scenes, it would draw similar protests. http://hayunalesbianaenmisopa.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/funhome-alison-bechdel.jpg

  • The Great God Pan

    If they’re not refusing to read Ovid, they’re refusing to read a comic book.

    Entitled college kids will do anything to get out of reading the required material.

  • Karen

    It’s time these students put their big girl panties on and read the book. By not reading it, they simply prove Christians to be inflexible-read the book and debate the questions, challenge each other on an academic level. Are they afraid the book will make them gay? Grow up!

  • Perry

    What does it matter? Duke students don’t get much sex anyway.

  • Karen

    Speaking from your personal experience there, no doubt? Or rather lack thereof…

  • John

    I hate to say it, but you might want to actually read the article you’re talking about before criticizing it. The students clearly say that they don’t want to look at the images of naked women laying together and doing sexual acts, not that they don’t want to read about some other kind of sexual experience. Here’s a quote directly from the article:

    “The nature of ‘Fun Home’ means that content that I might have consented to read in print now violates my conscience due to its pornographic nature,”

    So, basically, they responded to your entire argument before you even wrote it… and you somehow missed it entirely.

  • Daniel Berry, NYC

    lame response. the whole friggin’ argument is lame. Time for these religious nit-brains to grow up and deal with the world as it is–not as some Hallmark-Card-worthy version of it tells them it “should be.” Otherwise they can go live in a trailer park in Texas.

  • Daniel Berry, NYC

    How about the story of Joshua and his boys spending the night partying with Rahab the Harlot who lived in the wall of Jericho (I think they call that “product placement) and sent the boys on their way in the morning?

  • Pingback: Duke Freshmen: Just Read the Book Already! | Endurability()

  • John

    You know what’s great about this country? You can choose to look at pornagraphic images, and they can choose not to. I would hope that you would preserve their right just like they would preserve yours (note that they didn’t mock or insult those who chose to read it).

  • Eric

    Not about their “right” to refuse to read. It is about their refusal to engage any new or challenging idea that might not reinforce what they already believe. The refusal raises the question of what they think education really is and why they bothered to go to college in the first place. If these conservative Christians think they *already* understand every idea or perspective not their own, what do they think they will learn over the next four years?

  • Diogenes

    As usual, Laura’s analysis is juvenile and insipid. The stories in the bible are dealt with in an utterly clinical way, absent pornographic illustration and comment (with the plausible exception of the Song of Songs; though I question the structure of Turner’s example in a contemporary rendering). Anyone who thinks the author is worthy of a ‘Genius” grant is not playing with a full deck. Any Christian who believes that such self absorbed scribbling is worthy of serious attention is sadly mistaken. It is not necessary to examine or explore all the myriad pathways of human confusion. When the Bible cites horrible examples of human behavior, it also points the way to correction. Allowing people to flounder in their own confusion is no virtue.

  • Eric

    “The stories in the bible are dealt with in an utterly clinical way, absent pornographic illustration and comment…” […] “Any Christian who believes that such self absorbed scribbling is worthy of serious attention is sadly mistaken. It is not necessary to examine or explore all the myriad pathways of human confusion.”

    I can’t decide if you know less about the Bible than you do education or vice versa, but either way, thanks for another object lesson in the problems of willful ignorance.

  • Ka Noir

    Ms. Turner, you highlight interesting points regarding the information passed on by this book of Fun Home and comparisons with the bible. However, you fail to mention which should be duly noted that Fun Home includes graphical R rated images that fail to include warnings. Be it comical vs actual, these are images unsuitable for viewers who may be drawn by their similarities to pornographical images. Please consider revising your article to include these details.

  • Larry

    If they want to be sheltered in their education and avoid looking at images which may be intended for adult audiences, there are plenty of “Christian colleges” for people to choose from. Duke University is not one of them. If they don’t want to read the book, they can expect lower grades in that class.

    There is nothing more lazy and ridiculous than Christians playing “martyr” but not expecting to face consequences for their actions. If you are foregoing something for your faith, it is supposed to be a sacrifice, not a free pass.

    TO paraphrase John Oliver, The 1st Amendment isn’t the star in Super Mario Brothers. It doesn’t make you invincible so you can just do whatever the hell you want.

  • Larry

    Why do 18 year olds need warning that what they are reading might be suitable for an adult audience? They are old enough to buy pornography, and are of the age of consent for sexual relations. They are assumed to be mature enough to handle nudity in an artistic/literary context without becoming drooling maniacs.

  • steve

    Please give your reasoning for you last sentence.

  • Martha

    You know – uh, hem – Christians don’t read those passages very often and don’t really study them a lot. It’s not like Jesus is the star in those, ya know.

  • Eric

    My reasoning is as follows:

    1. Diogenes’ comment about sex in the Bible shows he does not understand the Bible.

    2. His comments about “scribbling” and it being “not necessary to examine” new or challenging or controversial work shows he does not understand education.

    3.I give him the benefit of the doubt that he is not naturally stupid, therefore I conclude that these comments must stem from a choice to be ignorant about these topics.

  • Diogenes

    Actually my understanding of the bible is quite sound, based on over thirty years of study, and taking advantage of the scholarly work of orthodox theologians over the past 20 centuries. As far as “education” is concerned, if you’re extolling the virtues of the progressive hijacking of the educational process since the late 1930’s in America, you are the one ignorant of legitimate educational processes. I learned long ago, that just because a college “instructor” says it’s true; it ain’t necessarily so.