Texas

I really wish we could give teachers some semblance of independence back in their classrooms. Firing her just for using an unapproved version of an approved novel is ridiculous.

Is that something to get fired over though? There's still context missing here - assigning a non-approved book alone seems like something you reprimand someone over, not fire them. Was there something particularly egregious about that particular version of the book?

To be fair, it wasn't because she wrote about being hunted down by Nazis for being Jewish. It's because she wrote about growing ~~public~~ pubic hair.

It's been released with several edits over the years. The recently released version added back several passages that were scrubbed from the ones most of us read growing up.

Anne Frank wrote a diary. It's a personal diary. It wasn't written to be published.

New pages found writing dirty jokes and about sex: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/05/16/anne-franks-hidden-diary-pages-risque-jokes-and-sex-education/

On one hand, the "sanitized" versions give the historical context without the personal, sometimes very personal, items that Anne Frank intended to be private. On the other hand, including all of her real thoughts makes it clear that she was a normal, young, very human girl.

I think the full version should be available to anyone and everyone, but I also understand if the school curriculum needs to focus on the historical aspects and thus uses one of the older releases editions. But to be honest, it seems like the people who would have a problem with this have a problem with all sexuality, and they hate anything that destroys the narrative that people can shut off that part of themselves.