You've been looking in the wrong direction, the dangers are coming from the Left - read OP

See? Here I thought we were actually going to have a good (dare I say it, nearly friendly) discussion, but no. You had to go and misrepresent what I said. Honestly, boards would be better if you just asked for clarification instead of just putting words in people’s mouths.

What I actually posted was:

That “Absolutely not”. Is quite the important part of that sentence there.

“I’m not against” which does not mean that I “support editing works of fiction, re-writing the context of how the authors wrote the books.”

Honestly, where do you get off with that? How can I actually engage with you with such wilful misrepresentation?

The originals should be still there for anyone interested. I said so in the post.

@[Deleted User]

I read flaneur's post and it was clear from the start he didn't agree with editing books.

You started with a good point but it descends into misrepresenting a poster's reply and then continuing in a series of posts, instead of saying, "ok you agree with me, lets discuss another point now", or even just passing by, no comment.

So why do you keep asking so?

There have been edited versions of books for as long as I can remember.

My younger brother had this kids version of Bram Stokers Dracula when he was six

While it has the same core characters and the author"s name its a lot different to the original version.

He also had similar versions of the likes of Treasure Island, The call of the wild etc.

Saying this is a new dangerous phenomenon from the left, is very silly or disingenuous

Ambivalence is unacceptable in our highly polarized society.

Texts have been edited for as long as the written word has existed. However, if one chooses to read an expurgated, sanitised or slightly altered version of words in a book, who the fuck cares as long as the original is still available for purists.

At the moment I'm re-reading the original 'The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn', which has come under fire from all sides over the course of its publication history. Conservatives actually banned the book outright at one point and the NAACP have had numerous issues with it from the 50's. Currently it's available in its original form and a more palatable form for people who might be sensitive to the word "nigger", which is repeated again and again during the course of the story because of the time it was set in.

If readers wish to read the book where "nigger" is replaced by "slave", then go for it.

If items, however, are being permanently censored or banned outright, such as with the ridiculous video nasties scare led by the conservatives in Thacherite Britain, then that's a different matter altogether.

You’ll casually ignore context when it suits your purposes; what makes you believe other people should be held to a different standard than the same standards which apply to everyone, including yourself?

Your casual use of hyperbole for example in characterising anyone’s use of language which you have issues with as “an assault on language”, and then ascribing that to the far-left? That tiny minority which is represented in Academia? Utter nonsense to suggest it has gained any traction in mainstream society. It’s only the culture warriors who go scouring social media for the latest trivial news in a long list of “things we should all find offensive” by way of characterising them as threats to society. If you’re caught up in that world, then it’s reasonable to assume everyone else is seeing what you’re seeing, but in reality - they’re just not. People have greater concerns than some pinhead academic who they’ve never heard of before has had it pointed out to them that they’re a dickhead.

Everyone can’t see that language is policed to a far greater extent than it was a decade ago, because you haven’t provided any context let alone evidence for that statement. That’s also why most people can’t agree that we’ve taken a step backward, because they don’t know ’from what?’ It’s not that anyones ignoring context, it’s that you haven’t really provided any other than vague references, grandiose statements, and broad generalisations based upon what appears to be nothing more than the first thing which enters your head at any given moment.

I normally pass over everything you write because, frankly, it's worthless. But even just glancing at what you've written here has shown that you didn't even understand the point I made in the first place. You read several words and then climbed back onto your hobby horse.

It appear everybody is in broad agreement that by all means, edit books to your hearts content, AS LONG AS YOU HAVE ACCESS TO AND CAN STILL READ THE ORIGINAL.

Look at us all, getting on like a house on fire.

(Which it is!)

What’s the next danger from the left you want to discuss @[Deleted User]?

Right-wing - "Colleges are shutting down free speech by not allowing certain subjects to be taugh or discussed!"

Also right-wing - "I don't think trans rights should be taugh or discussed in colleges!"

Hmmm.....