Amazon and the Pedophile's Guide: Censorship? Decency? Beyond the Pale?
An interesting thing happened yesterday. A self-published e-book carried by Amazon.com, titled The Pedophile's Guide to Love and Pleasure: a Child-lover's Code of Conductby Philip R. Greaves II became the target for a huge protest on line. It offers advice to pedophiles on avoiding retaliation, and gives "first person" accounts supposedly by children in sexual relations with adults. This outcry against this title went viral in the electronic world and the backlash mounted through the day. Amazon's first response was:
"Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable. Amazon does not support or promote hatred or criminal acts, however, we do support the right of every individual to make their own purchasing decisions."
However, the book, as of this morning, is no longer available after disappearing, reappearing, then disappearing again last night. They still carry books that cater to Holocaust deniers and other hate groups, as well as graphic dog fighting and cock fighting videos.
So how do I feel about this? Honestly? Conflicted. I'm against censorship, but am I willing to stand by that principle when it comes to a guidebook for pedophiles? No. As a mother, as a Buddhist, as a human being, I can't defend that. But where does the line fall? I discovered while researching this that Apple's bookstore is so strict about content that they do not carry Ulyssess or the Kama Sutra. I suspect they don't have Tropic of Cancer, either. They're a private company, as is Amazon, and that is their right, like any indie bookstore, to decide what they will and won't carry. I think Apple is too stringent, to the point of silliness. But where does the line fall? Do we protect books on torturing people? If not, do we protect books detailing the horrors of the Holocaust or the Khymer Rouge? Or Abu Garaib? I have research books on murder and poison. Are those dangerous? In the wrong hands, yes.
So much of censorship is abhorrent to me, but this? Is freedom of speech more important than the children who will be preyed upon by the readers of this book? Not that a book can make someone a pedophile, but this one apparently tells you how to be a better, smarter, less likely to be caught one. Where does the line fall?
As a side note, last week it was brought to my attention by a blog I belong to, that there was an iPhone app (Apple) which was really offensive and derogatory to trans sexual people. I called and complained, apparently along with a lot of other people. It was gone by the next day. Was that censorship or me exercising my free speech rights? What happens when there's a movement to ban all books with positive gay content? How will I feel then?
One peroson's idea of basic human decency is another person's censorship.
"Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable. Amazon does not support or promote hatred or criminal acts, however, we do support the right of every individual to make their own purchasing decisions."
However, the book, as of this morning, is no longer available after disappearing, reappearing, then disappearing again last night. They still carry books that cater to Holocaust deniers and other hate groups, as well as graphic dog fighting and cock fighting videos.
So how do I feel about this? Honestly? Conflicted. I'm against censorship, but am I willing to stand by that principle when it comes to a guidebook for pedophiles? No. As a mother, as a Buddhist, as a human being, I can't defend that. But where does the line fall? I discovered while researching this that Apple's bookstore is so strict about content that they do not carry Ulyssess or the Kama Sutra. I suspect they don't have Tropic of Cancer, either. They're a private company, as is Amazon, and that is their right, like any indie bookstore, to decide what they will and won't carry. I think Apple is too stringent, to the point of silliness. But where does the line fall? Do we protect books on torturing people? If not, do we protect books detailing the horrors of the Holocaust or the Khymer Rouge? Or Abu Garaib? I have research books on murder and poison. Are those dangerous? In the wrong hands, yes.
So much of censorship is abhorrent to me, but this? Is freedom of speech more important than the children who will be preyed upon by the readers of this book? Not that a book can make someone a pedophile, but this one apparently tells you how to be a better, smarter, less likely to be caught one. Where does the line fall?
As a side note, last week it was brought to my attention by a blog I belong to, that there was an iPhone app (Apple) which was really offensive and derogatory to trans sexual people. I called and complained, apparently along with a lot of other people. It was gone by the next day. Was that censorship or me exercising my free speech rights? What happens when there's a movement to ban all books with positive gay content? How will I feel then?
One peroson's idea of basic human decency is another person's censorship.
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Cat
(new)
Nov 11, 2010 11:53AM
this issue is a huge one but its my personal opinion that no book should be banned. i can understand the disgust that such a title would promote but, in the end, no one person has the right to draw the line in any certain position for other ppl. we must simply notify and educate but not ban. amazon, and other such literary sellers, need to put into place a notification key or something similar where books are tagged clearly when they hold specific content to educate the reader and make sure that those categories such as this are only available to 18+ who - hopefully - have the maturity to understand what they're reading. the solution is never banning, history has proven that.
reply
|
flag
