Amazon defends 'Pedophile's Guide'

[Raphaeline]

Re: Amazon defends 'Pedophile's Guide'

I really struggled with finding the line between freedom of speech and some bastard encouraging and aiding pedophiles.

But after talking about it with Dark last night, it comes down to what's best for society. I agree with Medusa that there is a huge difference in fiction and a step-by-step guide, and the latter is too dangerous. I'm not talking about legality here, I'm talking about Amazon's ability to publish it, and I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed to, but I'm saying that they shouldn't.

[ChainLightning]

Re: Amazon defends 'Pedophile's Guide'

I've realized something. In these last couple of pages, particularly, the last few posts, anyway.

I am a very sick and twisted individual. Like the joke about a man and a boy walking through the woods on a moonless night, with the kid whimpering about being afraid of the dark - the man says, "stop whining. You're not the one that has to walk out of here alone." I don't have any 'too disgusting to discuss' kind of idea, about a great many topics. Real or imagined. I don't have an "off limits" area.

That puts me into the position of protecting others, only, because my concerns, about me, are nil. I watch out for what might be hurtful or even dangerous to others, and have no such prejudice for my own self.

I really *am* demented.

[Ophidia]

Re: Amazon defends 'Pedophile's Guide'

[quote author=B. de Corbin link=topic=766.msg12339#msg12339 date=1289561130]
And if this were the sort of place where things like that are routinely posted and left up, how many of us - who also love free speech - would continue to come here?
[/quote]

[quote author=thalassa link=topic=766.msg12343#msg12343 date=1289564620]
All of about five seconds.
[/quote]

I would probably continue to come here as long as there were other discussions taking place. I have the freedom to not read any thread that I don't want to read. There are a lot of threads I ignore because I'm uninterested. In fact, I think I might think a bit more highly of PF if some of the more controversial topics got left alone instead of ending up locked because things get too personal and heated.

That's the one thing I don't, and probably never will get, about censorship, blacklisting and banning certain things. We, as human beings with free will, have the choice to watch or read things, or to not watch or read things. If we don't want to read or watch something, why do we feel it necessary to prevent anyone else from watching or reading it? Why do we want to prevent anyone from even creating things that we personally find offensive? Why do we care so much about what other people do?

A disclaimer - I do understand about preventing people from creating real-life records of certain actions, like child molestation, rape, murder, etc. Those are criminal acts in most countries. However, just writing or drawing or creating fictional scenarios in which no one is actually harmed? Why fight so hard to ban it?

[Medusa]

Re: Amazon defends 'Pedophile's Guide'

[quote author=ChainLightning link=topic=766.msg12377#msg12377 date=1289575805]
I've realized something. In these last couple of pages, particularly, the last few posts, anyway.

I am a very sick and twisted individual. Like the joke about a man and a boy walking through the woods on a moonless night, with the kid whimpering about being afraid of the dark - the man says, "stop whining. You're not the one that has to walk out of here alone." I don't have any 'too disgusting to discuss' kind of idea, about a great many topics. Real or imagined. I don't have an "off limits" area.

That puts me into the position of protecting others, only, because my concerns, about me, are nil. I watch out for what might be hurtful or even dangerous to others, and have no such prejudice for my own self.

I really *am* demented.
[/quote]
I am exactly the same way. I just wear pink while doing so.

[AzazelEblis]

Re: Amazon defends 'Pedophile's Guide'

Dang. There goes my plan to buy a few copies, and distribute them to Psychology students that might be interested in studying this behavior.

[ChainLightning]

Re: Amazon defends 'Pedophile's Guide'

If it weren't for the fact that the (albeit obscene) content would offend so many... I'd offer up a faux debate on the matter, for psychological and theoretical exercise.

[Tylluan Penry]

Re: Amazon defends 'Pedophile's Guide'

I think this whole thing illustrates the dilemma of free speech rather well. I believe passionately in free speech - without it I fear we could well be living back in the Middle Ages. I don't like the idea of censorship - a faceless 'they' deciding what's best for everyone else to read and watch and hear. After all - they have to read/see/listen to it first, and there's no evidence that it damages the censors, is there?

But I'm human. I'm a wife, mother and grandmother. And if some bastard preyed upon any of my family and I then discovered they had taken their ideas from that bloody book, then not only would I personally flay them alive, but I would go after the directors of Amazon and do the same to them.

I suppose that makes me a hypocrite.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Amazon defends 'Pedophile's Guide'

Censorship is a dead issue.

There's the internet, for one thing...

Electronic copies of anything can be made and distributed to interested parties easily.

Print copies can be easily made of anything, and distributed to interested parties.

There is little likelihood that anything could actually be quashed, if there are enough people who want it.

I'm not arguing for censorship - it isn't even possible - would be like arguing that people should be allowed to fly by flapping their arms...

My problem is with Amazon - that they choose to be the source of distribution for such a thing, using "Free speech" as an excuse.

My problem is also with the idea that "I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." Honestly, as noble as this sounds, there are some things that I won't lift a finger to help somebody secure the right to say. If somebody wants to say this, they're on there own... If I have to give my life defending somebody's right to say something, it won't be this.

I would, however, give my life to protect your right to disagree with me on this issue.

[DanieMarie]

Re: Amazon defends 'Pedophile's Guide'

Well, since this has drifted into the topic of censorship in general, there is no such thing as complete lack of censorship. We all have it in some way, shape or form. In most democratic, western countries, it's usually defined by what the greater public finds intolerably offensive and obscene. Here, that means hate literature. In the US and Canada, it's nudity on television. We all have something that we wont tolerate that much.

[spartacandream]

Re: Amazon defends 'Pedophile's Guide'

[quote author=B. de Corbin link=topic=766.msg12676#msg12676 date=1289655691] My problem is also with the idea that "I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." Honestly, as noble as this sounds, there are some things that I won't lift a finger to help somebody secure the right to say. If somebody wants to say this, they're on there own... If I have to give my life defending somebody's right to say something, it won't be this. [/quote]
I agree with you on this one. Though also, no one has a right to say something that causes harm to another person, in this case, a child. One person's free speech ends where someone else's rights begin to be invaded.

[quote author=DanieMarie link=topic=766.msg12782#msg12782 date=1289677064]
Well, since this has drifted into the topic of censorship in general, there is no such thing as complete lack of censorship. We all have it in some way, shape or form. In most democratic, western countries, it's usually defined by what the greater public finds intolerably offensive and obscene. Here, that means hate literature. In the US and Canada, it's nudity on television. We all have something that we wont tolerate that much.
[/quote]
While that's true and all, I never really understood why we ban nudity and "obscene language" from television, as opposed to allowing people to pick channels to block from their children's view.

[DanieMarie]

Re: Amazon defends 'Pedophile's Guide'

[quote author=spartacandream link=topic=766.msg14570#msg14570 date=1290090447]
I agree with you on this one. Though also, no one has a right to say something that causes harm to another person, in this case, a child. One person's free speech ends where someone else's rights begin to be invaded.
While that's true and all, I never really understood why we ban nudity and "obscene language" from television, as opposed to allowing people to pick channels to block from their children's view.
[/quote]

I think it's a hangover from back when there was just a couple of networks and you couldn't block so easily.

But really after living here I don't understand why nudity is such a big deal in the first place. I mean, it's not like making it legal means people are just naked in the street...they're not. The only difference is attitude toward the human body.

But anyway, my point was more that there is always some censorship, everywhere. Each culture has some sort of rules and standards as to what is acceptable and where. You don't really get to say whatever you want, wherever you want....otherwise you could just publish whatever you want about whoever and you wouldn't have to worry about lawsuits, or parents groups complaining, or whatever. But that's not the case. It's not realistic to expect absolutely no censorship so I think it's important to define where the boundaries are.

[Dez]

Re: Amazon defends 'Pedophile's Guide'

Remember how I was on the fence about this, guys?

The guy was arrested. Goes into the book in greater detail. *barf*

[Crimson Horizons]

Re: Amazon defends 'Pedophile's Guide'

[quote author=Deseret link=topic=766.msg23778#msg23778 date=1292887255]
Remember how I was on the fence about this, guys?

The guy was arrested. Goes into the book in greater detail. *barf*
[/quote]

Again, having never read the book I cannot (or, more accurately, refuse) to comment on its contents. However, I will say that I disapprove strongly of the way the man was arrested. That's police baiting, pure and simple.

[Medusa]

Re: Amazon defends 'Pedophile's Guide'

[quote author=Crimson Horizons link=topic=766.msg23786#msg23786 date=1292889905]
Again, having never read the book I cannot (or, more accurately, refuse) to comment on its contents. However, I will say that I disapprove strongly of the way the man was arrested. That's police baiting, pure and simple.
[/quote]
If you want to actually make money off of teaching how to rape children...well guess what happens to you? The law comes looking for you.

[Shadow Dragon]

Re: Amazon defends 'Pedophile's Guide'

Personally, I'm happy that the guy is getting arrested. Encouraging pedophilia is despicable. But, like Crimson Horizons, I'm not happy on the actual reason they arrested him. Breaking a certain state's obscenity laws (which in my opinion are bs pure and simple) should only count when you're in that state. You shouldn't be able to arrest someone because their written work was in the state.