Pedophile Advice Book for Sale on Amazon

[LAGC]

Poll question: Pedophile Advice Book for Sale on Amazon

Amazon.com Inc. is selling a self-published guide that offers advice to pedophiles, and that has generated outrage on the Internet and threats to boycott the retailer.

The availability of "The Pedophile's Guide to Love and Pleasure: a Child-lover's Code of Conduct" calls into question whether Amazon has any procedures - or even an obligation - to vet books before they are sold in its online stores.

In a statement to the website TechCrunch, Amazon said:

"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."
..
..
This isn't the first time Amazon has sold material that promotes illegal activity. It is currently accepting pre-orders for the hardcover version of "I Am the Market: How to Smuggle Cocaine by the Ton, in Five Easy Lessons" by Luca Rastello.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/11/10/entertainment/main7041349.shtml

Well, what do you think DU? Protected free speech, or do we have another reason to hate on Amazon?

[kimi]

1. WTF???

The author says: "This is my attempt to make pedophile situations safer for those juveniles that find themselves involved in them, by establishing certian rules for these adults to follow," says a description of the book on Amazon. "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."

There's a BETTER nature of "pedosexuals"??? Pedosexuals?? What world am I living in??

No, I believe in freedom of the press, but this is beyond bizarre and sick.

[SweetieD]

11. Pedosexual? Good lord. I feel sick.

[kimi]

13. Yeah, and I ordered a book from Amazon earlier tonight

before I read about this s&*t they are selling.

Ugh. I feel really sick now.

[TwilightGardener]

30. The idea that pedophiles will follow certain "rules" while abusing

their victims, AFTER they've already willfully violated the law AND a massive societal taboo by deciding to molest to begin with, is insane. Amazon has essentially allowed a man who should be under serious psychiatric care to make money advocating a sick crime. I don't think this "book" will be on sale for long. On edit--apparently it's already gone.

[mahina]

2. Are you telling me that book is actually for sale on Amazon?

I don't want to search Amazon for that title. Please post a screen shot of the book on Amazon, because I find that beyond literally incredible.

Thanks.

[LAGC]

3. Interesting.

I just searched for it on their site and it shows up in the search results, but if you click on the title of the book it gives a "404: Document not found."

I did notice that there were 2886 reviews, almost all of them were 1-star (the lowest possible rating).

Edit to Add: it appears to be available on Kindle only.

[kimi]

4. Found it

but oddly when I click on the link it shows an error.

[proteus_lives]

5. It's a private company.

Get rid of it.

Let pedos trade this filth in alleyways.

[hfojvt]

6. well they have been selling this book for quite some time

which I think is just as demented

Here's the description

"is a young, beautiful fashion photographer in Paris. One day her lover, Rene, takes her to a chateau, where she is enslaved, with Rene's approval, and systematically sexually assaulted by various other men. Later, Rene turns her over to Sir Stephen, an English friend who intensifies the brutality. But the final humiliation is yet to come."

Then too, are the collected works of John Norman, such as

http://www.amazon.com/Slave-Girl-Gor-Gorean-Saga/dp/0759204543/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1289460343&sr=1-3


The stories all revolving around the concept that society works better when women are slaves.

And there is other crap that most decent people find to be very objectionable

http://www.amazon.com/Way-Things-Ought-Be/dp/B002E8NB8Y/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1289460576&sr=1-1

http://www.amazon.com/Atlas-Shrugged-Ayn-Rand/dp/0452011876/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1289460630&sr=1-1

[lillypaddle]

17. Do you find "The Story of O" objectionable?

I don't think you can compare certain consensual acts between adults to Pedophilia.

[hfojvt]

29. all well and good

except that this does not sound consensual, does it? "where she is enslaved, with Rene's approval, and systematically sexually assaulted by various other men."

Did I miss the part where she gave consent to being kidnapped and imprisoned?

[lillypaddle]

31. It is BDSM fantasy

You have to understand the genre. or not. Anyway, this has nothing to do with pedophilia, and to equate it to such shows a lack of understanding. I'm certainly not recommending that you read this type of fantasy, or that you even attempt to understand it, but it is DIFFERENT from the material addressed by the OP.

[hfojvt]

33. so it's different?

rape is different than homicide and both are different from child molestation and all three are different from statutory rape. That does not make any of them GOOD things, does it?

[lillypaddle]

38. All I'm trying to tell you is that a fictional FANTASY is different

from the actuality/reality. Not trying to convince you of anything. If you can't see the difference in a "how to molest a child" book and an adult fantasy about domination and submission, I can't help you. My discussion about this ends with that.

[hfojvt]

40. you apparently can't see

that people get ideas from fantasies just as much as they get ideas from 'how to' books. So you are saying you would find this less objectionable if the pedophile book was written as a fantasy instead of as a how to?

Seems to me that that would just involve a fairly minor style change.

[blondeatlast]

43. A precious few really disturbed people MIGHT get those ideas. I don't recall

a rash of shower murders after "Psycho" was released or a rash of pedophilia resulting from Lolita. The Story of O is fantasy that many consenting adults act out at times in private. Should they be arrested?

If you have evidence to the contrary, I MIGHT re-evaluate my statement.

Pedophilia is a crime because one party cannot consent. Children warrant society's protections. CONSENTING adults don't need that protection. It isn't a difficult concept for reasonably intelligent people.

[hfojvt]

47. actually adults need all kinds of protection from other adults

hence the laws against armed robbery, homicide, assault, rape, etc., etc. Those things are crimes because one party DOES not consent.

Here's some evidence to the contrary, although they do not mention many details. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copycat_suicide

And what are pedophiles if not a "precious few really disturbed people"? And a how to book, unlike a novel, is not going to plant ideas in the head of a reader who is just looking to be enetertained.

[blondeatlast]

56. What part of "CONSENT" needs explained?

Crimes are inherently not consented to by the victims. Really, is that that difficult a concept for you? there's a world beyond your own narrow view out there.

con·sent   /kənˈsɛnt/ Show Spelled
Show IPA

–verb (used without object)
1. to permit, approve, or agree; comply or yield (often fol. by to or an infinitive): He consented to the proposal. We asked her permission, and she consented.
2. Archaic . to agree in sentiment, opinion, etc.; be in harmony.
–noun
3. permission, approval, or agreement; compliance; acquiescence: He gave his consent to the marriage.
4. agreement in sentiment, opinion, a course of action, etc.: By common consent he was appointed official delegate.
5. Archaic . accord; concord; harmony.

[lillypaddle]

54. You got that right. n/t

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[startraveler]

68. I think maybe you're sharing a little too much, blondatlast nt

[blondeatlast]

34. +1. I don't care (not do I think about) what consenting adults do.

Pedophiles are another matter entirely.

[hfojvt]

42. neither do I necessarily

but where, pray tell, is the CONSENT in kidnapping, imprisonment and rape such as the book describes and ultimately describes the female victim ENJOYING the process and the results. It seemed pretty obvious to me that the dude who wanted to buy that book, standing in my store with his daughter, probably had the idea of doing the same things to his wife and perhaps also his daughter with the idea, since the story ends with the now broken female lead saying "I love you" to the person who had her kidnapped, imprisoned and raped. That guy was probably gonna think "beyotch will thank me in the end".

At least I am not gonna take that chance. I opened my store to sell Vonnegut to sell Poul Anderson and Asimov and Twain and Dostoyevsky and Scott Nearing and Calvin and Hobbes, and not to sell harmful crap. Person wants to buy that, they can get it from Amazon.

[blondeatlast]

46. I love the movie "Psycho." I love Stephen King's books, especially "Misery"

and "Carrie."

I've read and watched them many times. I've never thought about imprisoning or killing ANYONE.

I've read the Story of O and even mimiced a few scenes with a cooperative partner. I still kick that partner's ass at basketball, even though I was the "O."

[hfojvt]

49. the question is

what if I read the book, and mimicked some of the scenes with an un-cooperative partner? Would it still be just good solid fun? It seems to me that the book is much less dangerous to a female reader than it is to a male one.

Misery and Carrie do not exactly make the murderers or kidnappers into heroes, do they? Nor do they suggest that the victim ultimately enjoys the 'game'.

I used to love Dean Koontz books too, until he took a gratuitous swipe at Vonnegut.

Isn't there a trial going on now in Utah?

[blondeatlast]

57. CONSENT. Clearly you don't understand this very simple concept. nt

[lillypaddle]

61. It's really very simple

(okay, I guess I lied - I continue to be drawn into this ...)

it's all about CHOICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Children, due to the nature of the fact that they are CHILDREN, cannot give consent to sex for the obvious reasons. On the other hand, adults can consent to a variety, if they are so inclined, of sexual activity. If you like it or not, if it disgusts you or not, it is the choice of the ADULT individuals involved. This has NOTHING to do with the OP!! The OP is about a manual for seducing children. Sheesh. What is your problem????

If an adult wants to shit or pee all over another consenting human being who is NOT a child, and it doesn't hurt anyone else, what fucking business is it of yours???? :banghead:

[readmoreoften]

64. No, then it would be rape. Can you not distinguish between fantasy and reality?

Are you psychotic or delusional?

Let's ban action heroes while we're at it. Some delusional person might grab a woman off a high building and try to fly away with her out the window. :eyes:

[readmoreoften]

63. +1

[TuxedoKat]

52. OMG!!!

I read John Norman's first Gor novel years ago and it was pretty good, so I got the several more in the series, being young and uneducated. I gave a few to my dad to read and he got disgusted after the second or third book because of the way women were treated. I kept reading them hoping the "hero" would get back together with his wife and things would change for the slave girls. They just kept going further and further into the slave girl fantasy stuff and the women got treated progressively worse. I finally got bored with them and didn't read them any more. This was back in the early '80s so I can only imagine how bad they are now.

[uncle ray]

7. honey pot?

[Codeine]

8. I remember seeing something similar in the old Loompanics catalog

in the late 80s - early 90s.

[LAGC]

9. Loompanics has some interesting books.

Claire Wolfe is a libertarian author that rails against corporations as much as she does against the government:

http://www.loompanics.com/Articles/LittleBrother.html

I actually ran into her once at a shindig in Missoula, Montana where libertarians of all stripes were conspiring to all move to a "free state" (they ended up deciding on New Hampshire) and form a libertarian utopia there. It was kind of an interesting idea, getting a bunch of people of like-minds to "take over" a small state.

I know Loompanics also used to carry a bunch of books on acquiring fake ID and living underground, which could be useful information if fascism ever takes firm hold in this country. So I am a little torn on books that promote less-than-legal lifestyles... some might have their uses some day, and it would be a shame if they were censored in a free society.

But yeah, I guess the bottom line is, Loompanics (like Amazon) are private companies, so while they shouldn't be forced by government to not carry certain information, they certainly have power to voluntarily censor material themselves. Guess it just boils down to whether they will make more money on the sales of said product, or lose more due to people boycotting them for carrying objectionable products.

[Codeine]

10. Amusingly

Loompanics went out of business largely because Amazon and Google wouldn't let them advertise their books because of the content. Now this?

[Turborama]

12. 3 DUers think it's OK for a pedophile instruction manual to be on sale anywhere?

:wtf:

BTW From how it was explained on AC360 earlier, that book does more than "detailing criminal activity". As I said, it's an instruction manual for child molesters/rapists.

[tomm2thumbs]

14. other... my guess is they will share the addresses of people who order it with the authorities

or am I being naive?

[hughee99]

15. No sharing necessary, I'm sure under the Patriot Act,

the government already has unfettered access to this information, either officially or unofficially.

[WillowTree]

16. It's not on Amazon anymore, just for the record.

[PeaceNikki]

18. Do you know that all of the hubub the media is creating pushed it to the top 100?

Yesterday AM it was ~151,000 on the kindle bestsellers list. Last I heard, it was 80.

Amazon is not responsible for protecting the public from offensive content. Amazon/Kindle sells books that are deeply offensive to many (e.g., The Koran, Mein Kampf, Tori Spelling's memoir, etc.) Why should they serve as the moral authority and censor content. How about just not buying it and stop giving it free infomercials?

[Exilednight]

19. I am going with other. Amazon has the right to sell the book, but .........

we as consumers have a right to boycott their store.

I don't agree with the "overstep their bounds". They are well within their bounds to sell the book, being a private company and such. Should they sell it? No. Can they sell it? Yes.

[MadHound]

20. As disgusting as it is in this particular case, I have to stand for free speech.

Otherwise where do you draw the line? No pedophilia books first, then no Lolita, then what?

[AsahinaKimi]

21. I have an idea

Someone should buy them up and send them as gifts to FOX NEWS.

[uncommon]

28. Amazon is not bound by the First Amendment. Congress is.

Why is this so lost on so many people?

[blondeatlast]

37. Private enterprise is not bound by the First Amendment.

That's why Democratic Underground can tell RW-spouters where to get off.

[Catherina]

62. This is not a novel, this is a how to.

Having worked with children who were abused, in no way can I support this. The line is where an unconsenting victim is hurt.

advice to pedophiles afraid of becoming the center of retaliation.

“This is my attempt to make pedophile situations safer for those juveniles that find themselves involved in them, by establishing certian 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 sentences should they ever be caught.”

The screams of a child. No. We have the duty to protect them from these horrors.

Would free speech protect a book that explains how to kidnap, rape, murder a runaway teenager and get away with it?

[Nye Bevan]

22. If I owned a bookstore I would not stock that book.

Censorship has nothing to do with it. It would be my voluntary decision. I am a big Amazon fan but shame on Jeff Bezos for not feeling the same way.

[blondeatlast]

35. I wish more people would understand this very simple point. nt

[cbdo2007]

23. How is this a free speech issue? Amazon has the right to sell whatever book they want.

People on DU really don't seem to understand "free speech"

[RainDog]

24. and people have a right to boycott businesses that sell products others find repulsive

and tell others about it.

that's the way free speech works, too.

[cbdo2007]

27. I know, that's what I'm saying. It isn't a "free speech" issue it is a corprorate inventory issue.

"free speech" does not mean that everyone has to have inventory of your book, it just means that the government can't control your speech.

Boycotting a business isn't "free speech" either, it's capitalism.

[uncommon]

26. Exactly - Amazon is a business, not the government.

[LanternWaste]

53. While still others seem not understand...

While still others seem not understand social mores.

[cbdo2007]

59. Was this response meant for me??

Strange, as I didn't give an opinion on whether or not they should sell the book or not.

It isn't up to me, it is up to Amazon and I'm not on their Board of Directors. I can only control and determine whether or not I will shop at Amazon depending on the decision they make.

My post was more in reference to people saying this was a "free speech" issue when it has nothing to do with free speech or the govt blocking free speech.

[uncommon]

25. They already did censor it. And it is absolutely not protected under the First Amendment.

Aside from the fact it's filth, Amazon has no requirement to grant an "author" the privilege of selling a book on their site.

[MellowDem]

32. It is an interesting concept...

Obviously, pedophilia is in some ways quite "natural" in that it has been around for thousands of years and was openly accepted in many ancient societies. Having a book that tries to instruct pedophiles on how to control their urges safely (supposedly as the book says) seems rather like an exercise in clinical psychology or something more than anything meant to be offensive. It just seems to be dealing with reality and trying to make the best of the situation.

Unless this book does indeed advocate illegal activity, I fail to see what is wrong with it. There are no doubt numerous publications on how other people, such as rapists, murderers, etc., should act or control their urges to make them better or safer for society that would seem to follow the same approach.

So, knowing the little I do about the book, I would say protected free speech.

[blondeatlast]

41. Writing the book is protected. Selling the book is a business decision

and does NOT violate the author's free expression entitlement.

As to the rest of your post... :wow:

[MellowDem]

48. I was answering the OP's question...

not the poll. Of course it is up to Amazon one way or the other. But I don't think the book should necessarily be banned.

As for your response, it seems rather typical and lacking in any sort of critical thinking. So now you are implying I myself am a pedophile or worse for looking at an issue objectively and dispassionately. For some subjects, society, and DU especially, just can't handle that yet.

What do you think psychologists do when they have to treat pedophiles? Are those psychologists psychos? Crazy pedopervs? Championing the pedo cause? NAMBLA members?

If you are born with an attraction to children, you're going to have to deal with it some way, and I'd rather that a pedophile who has never acted out try to control themselves rather than abuse children. I suppose the standard would be to have all pedophiles turn themselves in for psychiatric treatment, but considering a lot of people can't get that level of care and that I'm guessing most pedophiles wouldn't want anyone to know their feelings, I don't see the harm in putting a book out there to help them. Obviously, if the book's purpose is to just abuse children and get around the law, then that's different. But from what little the book was described, it's hard to tell the purpose of the book, especially since the MSM generally loves hyperbole.

My philosophy is to demonize no one, especially people who are born with (or through bad experiences obtain) a condition they cannot help. I know it's really easy and acceptable to demonize pedophiles, but they are people too, and I'd rather that they get help than remain anonymous (and potentially harmful) to the society around them. I'll only say that your response is the easy and stupid way out of thinking about these things. It is very similar to how Free Republic deals with the subject of homosexuality.

[Confusious]

65. Defending fucking pedos

Now I've seen it all.

Fucking disgusting.

They aren't "born" like that. pedos are pedos because they were abused as children. And now they destroy other lives.

Fucking disgusting.

Pedos are NOTHING like homosexuals. homosexuals don't go after children who can't consent.

Fucking disgusting.

[Mimosa]

69. Not all pedos were 'abused as children'

There are plenty of people who were abused as children by adults who never, ever developed the slightest inclination to abuse children, sexually or any other way.

Also, it's questionable whether the criminals who molest children even tell the truth about their own pasts or anything else. Maybe many, but certainly not all, were sexually abused as children. It has been said that 1 in 5 or 1 in 6 females have been sexually abused to one degree or another as children. But the figures for adult females sexually abusing children fall nowhere near that proportion.

[MellowDem]

73. Thanks for the false accusations...

I never defended pedophilia or compared homosexulaity to pedophilia. I just said that the way it is discussed here is similar to the way the subject of homosexuality is dealt with on Free Republic. Namely, demonization, ignorance, and a complete lack of empathy or willingness to emphathize. And anyone attempting any sort of basic human understanding of said group is automatically labeled something or other. Basically, it's a very ignorant way to go about looking at the world. It's nice and black and white.

God forbid anyone come in and mess up your precious preconceptions and easy labelling of whole groups of people, much less try to show them as human. Pedophiles have a mental disorder, just as many other groups do, and while this disorder is obviously potentially very harmful, it's not something they can help that they have. Some countries used to castrate any pedophiles they caught. To me this isn't much different than the inhumane ways that many mental disorders were "treated" just a couple decades ago.

If many pedophiles were themselves abused as children and that has caused them to become pedophiles, then they need help. If a book can help them, I don't see the harm in it. Many on here seem to label pedophiles (or other groups) as "less than human". I don't think that is ever a reasonable conclusion and can only lead to bad things.

As for the cause of pedophilia, there are a number of theories, and one is that it can be biological. Considering the vast majority of pedophiles are men, there could be something to that, but maybe not. Either way, mental disorders are not voluntarily chosen by people.

As for the tone of your post, the ignorance of your reading of my post, and all that, well, it's pretty fucking mean and stupid.

[blondeatlast]

58. Not even close. I just thought that the rest of your gibbersih was

uneducated and nonsensical.I still do,

[MellowDem]

74. Well, thanks for being a bully about it...

instead of discussing something or giving your opinion, you just want to point out that you think it's gibberish. That's pretty fucking mean and immature.

[blondeatlast]

36. Other: Any retailer or used book dealer or library can choose what to put on their shelves--

that is not limiting free expression.

When I worked at a library, we chose not to carry Kevin Trudeau's crap books because first, they were crap, second, we were forced to buy directly from Trudeau. We told him to take a hike.

[Toucano]

39. Other

Free speech allows me to write and publish on any topic, no matter how profane or vulgar.

Free speech does not OBLIGATE anyone to BUY or SELL my book.

[closeupready]

44. Choosing not to sell it is not censorship.

:eyes:

[haifa lootin]

45. No, but deciding it after threats and coercion amounts to the same thing.

It's just a 'moral majority' (so to speak) effecting the de-facto censorship.

[closeupready]

50. I have heard absolutely nothing about any coercion or threats of coercion.

THAT would be illegal; selling the book - or NOT selling the book - would not be illegal, as far as I know.

[cbdo2007]

51. It isn't censorship - it's Capitalism.

The business has the option to stock any book they want to and the public has the option of buying at whatever stores they want to, for whatever reason.

[Puregonzo1188]

55. Wasn't this already a story? I remember Bill O'Reilly boycotting amazon over this.

This was at least 6 years ago, if not more.

[TNLib]

60. I think Amazon should follow there own policy and not sell books that support criminal acts

nt

[negativenihil]

77. What about books on criminology?

could those not be used as textbooks for criminals? (there are plenty of these books on amazon for anyone to purchase)

[Festivito]

67. I'd be interested in a psychologist's book about the book.

But, if banned, how would the psychologists get hold of it?

[4_TN_TITANS]

70. This has got to be the FBI fishing for leads...

Have that sent to your home address, if you dare!

[durkermaker]

72. or send it to someone you dont like via a gift card bought with cash

boy, wouldnt THAT be nasty?

[nadinbrzezinski]

71. Bad precedent for censored books week

serious. 1984 is also objectionable to some folks (in power and out but with influence)

So is Who Flew over a Cuckos Nest, and a few others like F-411...

[negativenihil]

76. +1! n/t

[negativenihil]

75. oh man.

Why not rage at the publishing company who printed this, rather than the middle man Amazon?

The crappy part about all of this is i understand the outrage (it's justified!) but at the same time i understand Amazon's position. I mean you CAN purchase books like Mein Kampf, The Anarchist Cookbook, Steal This Book (just to cite a few radical titles, i'm sure there's more). Yes, i understand none of these books are guides for child rape, but still - i think it's unfair to punish Amazon.

Once we start thinking it's ok to restrict what information and books the public is allowed to view, then the whole concept of free speech starts to get shaky. You have a right to voice your disagreement with such materials, and you have the right not to read/consume them.

I should probably put on my flame retardant outfit now.

[WestSeattle2]

78. LOL...let's hope flame retardant will not be needed. But I do think

the Amazon board of directors and shareholders need to address this as a corporate ethics question. As owners of the corporation, where do they draw the line? Clearly it's not yet carved in stone at Amazon. If I were a bookseller, I would not feel right profiteering off material that might place anyone, child or adult, in harms way by making them a target. What books would fall into this category? For starters, how-to books for pedophiles would seem a logical choice. But as many have stated, this is not a freedom of speech issue. They are free to write whatever they want. I'm just saying what I would not do to make a buck. I can certainly understand the fury directed at Amazon. Without a major distributor such as them, this book run probably would have been limited to a few hundred copies sold on bizarre websites.

[negativenihil]

79. Understandable

First - thank you for such a reasonable reply, it's appreciated :)

Anyway - my gut feeling in all of this, is that this book probably slipped through the crack at Amazon. They are so large that i could this being a possibility - getting rubber stamped for distribution along with a slew of other books one random day.

And you know, you're probably 100% correct - if Amazon had not listed this book it probably would have been limited to a few hundred copies on some crazy web site.

Honestly i'm finding this such a hard topic to debate.

[WestSeattle2]

81. It is difficult because there is not a "one size fits all" as far as

screening material sold at Amazon. That's why I think the board needs to step up here and put some kind of a plan in place to avoid these types of embarrassments in the future. I realize that if I were an independent bookseller, my own "creep" factor would suffice - if it makes me feel creepy, I wouldn't sell it. Of course something that simplistic would not be successful in an enterprise the size of Amazon. They have a tough job ahead of them that's for sure. Where I work we can't even agree on if the sky is blue; I can only imagine what a screening committee at Amazon would be like. No one in their right mind would volunteer to be on that committee. :crazy:

[WingDinger]

80. Why a BOYCOTT, and not a girlcott? Womencott or even Manicotti?

[hedgehog]

83. You need a little history lesson -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Boycott

I'd known about this for years, but only recently realized it happened within walking distance of where my grandparents are from.

[hedgehog]

82. I checked "other", because this is proof that Amazon doesn't

have any vetting process over what it sells. This isn't a free speech issue - the book has already been self published. Anyone can print anything they want to if they have the money, no one is required to sell it.

Amazon didn't "overstep" its bounds, because that would imply that there was actual thought behind the decision to sell this book.

[brentspeak]

84. Amazon is a private business and is not obligated to carry every book published.

Therefore, not carrying this repulsive book fails to qualify as "censorship".

[Mimosa]

85. Lots of books not offered on Amazon are available on independent websites.

I'm not going to go nutty condemning Amazon -I've bought so many books and other items including cookware- through Amazon as a portal.

This was a BAD business decision. As I understand they pulled that book from their offerings.