Book Banning?

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

So I’m watching Anderson Cooper, and he’s talking with Dr. Phil about a book that is currently on sale on Amazon.com that is basically promoting/teaching about pedophilia. The book is called “The Pedophiles Guide to Love and Pleasure” and is basically instructing pedophiles on how to go about abusing children and get away with it, do it in a more “acceptable” way. Many people are upset about Amazon selling this book and are threatening to boycott, and Amazon is taking a hypocritical stance on this, saying that they won’t censor what they sell to people because it’s their choice as to what they want to buy, yet they refuse to sell porn – which is legal.

I’ve always been strongly against book banning, yet I find myself so utterly repulsed by the idea of this book that I’m almost leaning towards the destruction of every copy of it. I’m wondering if you people have any thoughts on this? Are some books so disgusting they should be banned/destroyed? If so, what are the terms? It seems like such a slippery slope. I mean, some people are offended by Little Red Riding Hood because they say it endorses animal cruelty. Is this point of view any less valid than me being offended by a book endorsing pedophilia?

2

Blurred,

Don’t ban any books no matter how repulsive you think they are. I’m with you, although I would probably use the purchaser info to compile a hit list… :imp: The issue isn’t the book, but the venue. Amazon sells to any and all age groups. That’s the problem. A 12 year old can order this book through Amazon? There is something wrong with that. There never will be agreement as to what is permissable, but there can be community consensus as to where info is obtainable. So don’t ban any book. Just watch who buys this book and follow them home… :evilfun:

The latest: Amazon has pulled the book off its offerings.

3

Ban them, burn them, publically torture and kill the author.

4

I saw this story develop, too! The book does seem to be trash. IF it advocates for the molestation of children (who has actually read it? – probably not 5% of it’s “reviewers”), it would be prudent of Amazon not to sell it. Legally, free speech has always included limits…doesn’t this book fall beyond them?

Also, a lot of people are saying the book is a 4Chan hoax created by members of 4Chan (an infamous online message board) or something. It doesn’t appear that the news networks have caught on to this, but I’m inclined to believe this is true. The author’s description of the book on Amazon included several obvious misspellings: "an attempt to make pedophile situations safer for those juveniles that find themselves involved in them, by establishing certian [sic] rules for these adults to follow. I hope to achieve this by appealing to the better nature of pedosexuals, with hope that their doing so will result in less hatred and perhaps liter [sic] sentences should they ever be caught.” Also, the “related pictures” link on amazon was full of related 4Chan memes like “pedobear” etc.

5

What Tentative said.

But seriously have a chat with Amazon too. Children have already been sexualized far too much.

6

I find it hard to believe that a 12 year old would be interested in such a book. If they were, it would probably be a good idea, as it can help children avoid becoming prey.

I think it is the responsibility of the parents to monitor and selectively control what their children consume. Technologies for helping parents control which movies, TV shows and video games their children have access to are already around. It is possible that books are next.

Finally, Amazon bowed to public pressure. I think that’s an excellent example for how society can make its voice heard without the need for coercive government action.

7

Thank you for your responses.

I’ll say again,I’ve always been against book banning. I think it actually makes books more appealing to some people, or at least to me. When I was in 6th grade, my local highschool tried to ban 2 books for homosexual content (I grew up in a small town in the midwest, if that helps explain it at all) but the art teacher and the librarian fought against it, got the ACLU involved, and the attempt to ban the books was unsuccesful. What the school did do was, at the beginning of every school year, send home a sheet of paper for parents to fill out stating that their children did or did not have access to “restricted materials” in the library, and so left it up to the parents to censor what their children could read. My own mother, being of the opinion that I was smart enough to decide for myself, never censored me. When I got into highschool, I specifically sought out those books in the library because I wanted to find out what the big deal was. Had my school not tried to ban those books, I probably never would have known about either one of them and doubt I would’ve given them much thought had I come across them as I combed through the stacks.

8

A hoax wouldn’t be at all funny. A funny hoax would be something like:

Idiot’s Guide to Trafficking Rocks

How to Sell Prescription Narcotics (With Map of Floridian, “Pain Clinics,” Included)

Don’t Use Your Credit Card…and Other Useful Tips for Evading the FBI

See, those kinds of books would be funny and would make a good hoax, but there are some things that should not be joked about. If 4Chan (whoever that is) is responsible for this, then they should be shut down, unless they are doing it for the reason Tentative joked, which would be to compile a list of potential offenders. That’d be awesome.

9

Pav,

I think the idea that the book was a trap for sex offenders is ridiculous. I highly doubt that is/was the case. Not least of which is because I think it would be rather silly if the federal government were going after potential sex offenders. If it is a hoax, I agree with you; it’s not at all funny and is in the worst taste.

10

That’s what the Federal Government should do, go after everyone that ordered that book. Subpoena Amazon’s sales records, get search warrants for all of their (the people that purchased) houses and take their computers away to be looked at by a computer forensics person. Everyone that had any kind of (you know what) on their computers could be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Oh yeah, and then you increase the penalty for possession of (subject matter) to Capital Punishment, because as I love to say, a bullet is cheaper than a cell.

If it’s a hoax book, then that site needs to be shut down immediately.

11

Pav,

Where we differ, then, is that I don’t think it is, nor should be, a priority, if a function at all, of the U.S. Federal Government to go on a witch-hunt for pedophiles. Their energies are necessary elsewhere at the moment and furthermore, the only reality in which it would be acceptable for the Fed to step in is if there were a proven pedophile epidemic of some strange sort. And imo it would not be very intelligent for the Fed to go about an investigation in this way. I’m sure some people bought the book out of curiosity to find out what exactly the book contained. In such cases, those customers have committed no crimes and cannot be assumed to be pedophiles. No warrants can legally be granted on such minimal evidence. As I said, it would be a poorly executed witch-hunt. Sure the Fed could keep tabs on their activity, but there have got to be better ways…

12

Where else are their energies necessary? The drug trade that they can do nothing to stop, but can merely only contain? Besides, if you devote additional resources to attempting to stop pedophiles, then you have to hire more agents, and that is job creation! Here’s what you do, anything that you are devoting to trying to catch/prosecute marijuana traffickers, stop it, and devote all of those resources to stopping pedophiles instead.

If they only bought the book out of curiosity, then they will have nothing to worry about when the computer forensics searches are conducted, will they? I would also say that buying that book is enough to constitute probable cause to search the computers, the people are clearly showing an interest.

I see your point, though. How about this:

Subpoena the sales records and cross-reference them with the Registered Sex Offenders database, if you hit a match, then you definitely have probable cause to do computer forensics on their computer and prosecute thereafter.

Oh yeah, and since you will have their IP addresses and E-Mail addresses, you could set up a sting operation on the cheap with respect to getting them to solicit minor-oriented material. You could do that with everyone, fairly inexpensively.

13

Pav,

:laughing: True.

Perhaps.

14

Don’t ban or burn books. If you do, you are being totalitarian and if you are going to be totalitarian, at least have the decency to do it properly and kill all the minorities, all your enemies and burn the churches.

Strive to educate people to make a good decision rather than to take away there choice. If kids want to know about and read this pedo book, simply tell them as a responsible adult what its about and why its bad. Most kids have actually heard and joked about this for years by the time they reach middle school.

If you are worried about pedophiles being encouraged and gaining new ways to molest children, they have already heard all the secrets this guy has to tell.

Personally i’m all for a totalitarian state but all the hippies want individual rights and what not.

15

Just reviving this thread for people to comment here about banned (or supposedly banned) books.

Rules of power by greene (correct me here)

Dungeons and dragons guide books

Are you for or against banning books?

16

And this is where you lost the entire debate, point and standing you had.

You were perfectly honest about your premise and i commend that, but i would like you to understand what you just did there. I will help: “Should i be able to delete things that i am disgusted by?”

If you formulate the question like that, then the answer will be absolutely and 100% a hard no.
Never.

Who do you think you are to censor 8+ billion other people based solely on your own taste?
Would you tolerate this line of thought from anyone else? That they are disgusted with anything related to you so you should be “removed” from the picture?

The only route you can go with this argument is by reflecting on damages.
If the book, ANY BOOK, is a risk, if the book does harm, if the book provably caused/causes damages, then you have a ground based on which you can justify silencing it.

The problem is self reflection.
Do you want the thing banned because its damaging, or do you want the thing banned because as you put it, you are disgusted by it?
If you can be honest about this single question, then it will let you understand the nature of the problem.

Epic thread necro.
The answer is above.
Is there a feasible/objective reason for banning anything, or is it just “butthurt”?

Thats pretty much the alpha and omega this question comes down to.
Why would i support the banning of anything just because someone is butthurt about it? Should i be able to silence others and destroy things based on my own taste?
On the other hand, if the said thing causes damages, risk, harm, then we have something to discuss, yes.

1 Like
17

From Google AI

Anti-CRT (Critical Race Theory) book bans are a widespread, organized movement in the U.S. that has restricted access to literature focusing on race, history, and LGBTQ+ issues. Targeting school and public libraries, these initiatives often use CRT as an umbrella term to censor materials, resulting in a record 4,250+ unique titles being banned in 2023.

Key Aspects of the Anti-CRT Book Ban Movement:
Widespread Impact: More than half of U.S. states have seen legislation or local efforts to ban books covering racism.
Targeted Content: Titles often targeted discuss racial injustices, LGBTQ+ experiences, and historical, accurate depictions of American history.
Specific Examples: Books facing bans include Beloved by Toni Morrison, Ruby Bridges Goes to School, and various texts about Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr..
Surge in Challenges: 2021 saw an unprecedented surge in challenges, with 1,597 books targeted in a three-month period.
Drivers: The American Library Association reports that many challenges are orchestrated by conservative parent groups and political action committees, with some incidents involving threats.

Impact on Education and Access:
Educational Censorship: Critics claim these bans act as “educational gag orders,” restricting educators from teaching comprehensive history, including the history of white supremacy.
Chilling Effect: Librarians and teachers feel pressured, which may limit the diversity of literature available to students.
Role in Advocacy: Organizations like the NAACP argue these measures prevent students from engaging with accurate, crucial discussions about justice and equality

More from Google AI

The Trump administration has enacted sweeping bans on over 500 books in Department of Defense (DoD) military base schools, citing concerns over “woke” ideologies, “divisive concepts,” critical race theory (CRT), and “gender ideology”. These measures, initiated by executive orders, have targeted titles covering race, gender, and sexual identity, sparking a lawsuit from the ACLU for violating the First Amendment.

Key Aspects of the DoD Book Bans
Scope: More than 500 books were removed from Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) school libraries on military bases.
Targeted Content: Books focusing on CRT, race, gender, sexuality, and diverse viewpoints are being removed, including notable titles like The Color Purple and The Kite Runner.
Policy Basis: Executive orders by the Trump administration direct the Department of Defense to halt the “promotion” of ideologies deemed “un-American,” “divisive,” or relating to “gender ideology” and CRT.
Impact: A federal judge previously ordered the return of some books on race and gender, noting that the removals appeared to be based on “partisan motivation” rather than educational concerns, according to NPR.
Broader Context: These bans are part of a wider effort often associated with “Project 2025,” which encourages restructuring school curricula to remove topics related to race and gender equity, as outlined by the Mississippi Free Press.

Legal and Social Responses
ACLU Lawsuit: The ACLU and various groups have sued, arguing that these bans violate the First Amendment rights of students to access diverse educational materials, as noted by the ACLU.
“Wokeness” as a Target: President Trump has labeled these topics “wokeness” and has advocated for their removal, stating they are harmful, according to ACLU.
Controversy: The removals have been criticized for limiting access to literature and suppressing voices from marginalized communities, reports Truthout.

18

Is a perfect example of a book that is completely destructive and counter productive by its nature.
First and foremost because by the letter and ink, it instantly transitions everything and everyone into a racist.

View the world through race. Think of race. See nothing but race.

Any ideology with that premise should be instantly treated like a biological hazard and burned.
You can examine the question of race through the lens of a sane, functioning human being that is not trying to set up the entire nation and planet for a race war by dividing up humanity into cliques and tribes based on historical grudges and emotions.

At one point it was common sense and knowledge that we are all human beings regardless of race, gender, belief, color, ideology.
CRT is the polar opposite of that belief and embraces that we are all different, which would be still somewhat digestible, but it does not stop there and proceeds to set up victim and oppressor categories, power relations, structures and ultimately comes together as a communist manifesto that wants to burn everything down. As if this kind of trash had not happened dozens of times throughout history.

You dont want to live in the consequences of a world taught by CRT.

19

Would you ban anti-CRT books?

I have to say, some Cathode Ray Tubes were quite cool. There’s a small movement using CRTs for gaming, saying it has better refresh or colors or such

20

Be honest with yourself. What you’ve written here is the product of your mindlessly regurgitating the anti-CRT propaganda to which you’ve been subjected.

Demagoguery and its attendant propaganda only works on those who hold simplistic views of the world. Typically they employ simplistic lines of thought that they mistake for reason.

Why is that good enough for you? You don’t even understand yourself much less the world.