Let's just not teach the kiddies to read.

That'd save us from having these interminable arguments about the naughty bits. Like, for example, in the current case, the word "scrotum." Yes!

Ms. Nilsson, reached at Sunnyside Elementary School in Durango, Colo., said she had heard from dozens of librarians who agreed with her stance. "I don't want to start an issue about censorship," she said. "But you won't find men's genitalia in quality literature."

"At least not for children," she added.

Of course in the book ("The Higher Power of Lucky," by the Newbery Medal-winning Susan Patron) it wasn't a man's genitalia, it was a dog's. And of course Ms. Nilsson wants to start an issue about censorship (Howard Stern-type shock treatment! she wailed).

But censorship is not the solution, is it? I mean, you can't just ban books because they mention body parts - where would it end? Get rid of scrotums, they'll just start writing about something else, those Howard Stern-type shock treatment anuses. Like, ankles.

“A lady’s ankle was pretty shocking stuff,” she added. “To the point they often had separate men’s and women’s staircases in Victorian houses in order not to risk the person walking behind a woman getting a glimpse of her ankle.”
(University of Texas)

No, the only answer is, just don't teach them to read. And outlaw TV.