[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by augustjen

• If the book is about adult erotica then why does the title appear to be aimed to attract at a child?

• Does the cover art seem to be aimed at a child audience? Books aren't generally displayed by word-title alone, and there's a reason for that--the cover tells a lot about the intended audience.
  
  By your logic, Heinlein's "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" could be a BDSM manual.
  
  

  A child of seven may come across this book (remember Amazon doesn't appear to have a filter),

  A child of seven can't legitimately use Amazon's services at all. Amazon's Conditions of Use state:
  "If you visit or shop at Amazon.com, you accept these conditions." (probably unenforceable, but still relevant) and "If you are under 18, you may use Amazon.com only with involvement of a parent or guardian."
  
  A seven-year-old who finds Amazon's erotica section is doing so with the hypothetical consent of his parent(s).
  
  

  he/she reads the titles and believes this book is about, 'Daddy your eye's are too big, your ears are too big, your teeth are too big'; there are connotations to the story "Little Red Riding-Hood". Also, one of the books are offered for free, which could be another draw for a child.

  Also from the TOS: "Amazon does sell products for children, but it sells them to adults, who can purchase with a credit card or other permitted payment method."
  
  To have an Amazon account to get ebooks, even free ones, you need access to a credit card. Which 7-year-olds have access to credit cards?
  
  

  I don't know a child over the age of 10 that would call her Dad 'Daddy' - unless of course they were after staying up late. The title appears to violate the special Daddy/Child trust.

  I've known kids up to the age of about 14 to call their parents "Daddy" and "Mommy," and sometimes considerably later than that, depending on the family.
  
  

  In the subtitles of the book, there is a mention of 'step-dad', but apart from the difference in DNA, surely a step-dad is no less a father that a biological one.

  There's a substantial legal difference as well. Father and child cannot marry, no matter what happens to them later in life; a step-parent who gets divorced can later marry the step-child. A step-parent can be the same age as, or even *younger,* than the step-child.
  
  

  It's against International Law for anyone to have porn images of a child or children on their computers, AND for good reason. IMO written words hold far more sexual tension than images. Words have a way of fixing the subject in our brains through our imaginings

It's not against any US law to have *text* describing sex with a child or children. The laws against images are specifically related to real, human children, and what they endure in order for someone to get those images--depictions of fictional "children" are legal, because they aren't subject to child abuse.

Child-porn laws in the US relate only to human children, not fictional characters. This is not the case in every country--Australia criminalizes all depictions of sex with minors, possibly including most teenage movies (the law doesn't clarify how explicit the depictions need to be)--but in my country, the laws about "obscenity," which is based on public community morality, is not the same as "child pornography," which is based on protecting real children from harm.

I do believe the imagination at times can, for some, transfer to a real situation. No exaggeration, I have stared into the eyes of a crazed murderer! Agreed I was playing a paint-ball game at the time. The guy concerned got a bit carried away, his face told everything he was thinking at the time, and it took a while to detach this guy from his fantasy.

Did he kill someone?

Did you report him to the police as likely to kill someone in the future?

If not, aren't you culpable if he does kill someone in the future?

I would posit that, unlike your imaginings, he may know he has this level of rage, and has sought out a venue where releasing it is safe--it's channeled into a game where, if he becomes overwhelmed, the worst that happens is that he shoots someone with a few extra paint pellets.

In the UK yesterday, the body of a 12 year old girl was found at her grandmother's house, apparently the step-grandfather has been arrested and charged with her murder. At this stage of the case, the cause and motive of death is yet to be established.

Could there be a possibility, that this apparent murderer would have read this book if he stumbled upon it? If he had read this book, or one like it, could this have tipped him over the edge?

That's an awfully big stretch. You're not even saying there *is* a connection, just that you--who have not read the book, nor the detailed reports about a murder--believe that it's possible that one could've caused the other. You would, apparently, like to ban books "like" this one, without stating what that similarity is.

How would you identify "books that might inspire crimes against children?"

If we're going to discuss books as inspirations for crimes, shouldn't we start with the bible? Given the number of criminals who've done truly horrific things "in Jesus' name," shouldn't it be banned for public safety?

Or is it possible that books with content that some people find objectionable can be read by most people responsibly, and those who are unhinged will find *something* to justify their desires and actions to themselves?