Amazon Defends Pedophile Book - Page 52

kennyc · 12-31-2010, 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pushka

I think inappropriate sex is worse than violence in a movie. And I am a parent. Pedophilia always harms its victims; watching acts of violence probably wont.

What? This makes no sense whatsoever. Killing someone doesn't harm the victim? WTF?

You are mixing fact and fiction, substance and reality, free speech and behavior.

Inappropriate violence is okay, but inappropriate sex is not.

and who defines inappropriate?

Here we go round the mulberry bush, the mulberry bush, the mulberry bush.
here we go round the mulberry bush again and again once more.

penartur · 12-31-2010, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nguirado

This is an opinion that sounds right when you hear it, however, in upon deeper reflection, it's not. For those of you with young children, or even older children, what would make you feel more uncomfortable watching with your kids: Saving Private Ryan or a porno. Killing is worse than love, right?

First of all, i wasn't saying about porno. Showing a woman's breast is not making movie a porno.
Then, watching rivers of blood and guts and dismembered bodies would certainly make me feel uncomfortable watching with my kids (if i had any - i'm only 22 now).
And i clearly don't see anything wrong with some nude body on the screen if it is not a porno, and it not ends in itself but is a tool to describe some major point in a movie (e.g. i would be comfortable watching The Matrix: Reloaded with my children). I guess it is like the difference between erotic and porno. The same applie to violence though.

boxcorner · 12-31-2010, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pushka

I think inappropriate sex is worse than violence in a movie ...

It depends on what you mean by inappropriate sex in a movie. Sex in a movie has never disturbed my sleep, however violence in movies definitely disturbs my sleep. Guess I find violence a lot scarier than sex.

nguirado · 12-31-2010, 02:29 PM

Quote:

What? This makes no sense whatsoever. Killing someone doesn't harm the victim? WTF?

She said WATCHING violence. There is a point where violence has a lasting harmful effect. I'm thinking of nihilistic Faces of Death or Rob Zombie movies. I guess you're saying that X-rated movies are on that level?

You're right, however. We should compare similar things.

What would you rather your kids watch: Gladiator or 9 1/2 weeks?

Andrew H. · 12-31-2010, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nguirado

She said WATCHING violence. There is a point where violence has a lasting harmful effect. I'm thinking of nihilistic Faces of Death or Rob Zombie movies. I guess you're saying that X-rated movies are on that level?

You're right, however. We should compare similar things.

What would you rather your kids watch: Gladiator or 9 1/2 weeks?

I don't want my kids liking gladiator movies.

kennyc · 12-31-2010, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nguirado

.

What would you rather your kids watch: Gladiator or 9 1/2 weeks?

None of the above, how about 'Nova' or 'Masterpiece Theater'

But that says nothing about whether they should be available or not.

boxcorner · 12-31-2010, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nguirado

...What would you rather your kids watch: Gladiator or 9 1/2 weeks?

The first is a film about the type of violence that most people would consider completely abhorrent, uncivilised and illegal, if carried out in our society today. The second is an erotic film that some people might find obscene and offensive, however I rather doubt it would be illegal, if consenting adults were to carry out the activities portrayed. So, given the choice, I would prefer my kids (and grandchildren) watched sex, not killing. Am I the only one old enough to remember the 60s ... "Make love, not war"?

kennyc · 12-31-2010, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boxcorner

..... Am I the only one old enough to remember the 60s ... "Make love, not war"?

Dude! I'm a child of the 60's!

Shoulda been at woodstock, but was a bit nerdy at the time....now I'm a farmer with a fork! hee-hee!

boxcorner · 12-31-2010, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kennyc

Dude! I'm a child of the 60's!

...

Lest we forget, "Peace and love" is passé.

kennyc · 12-31-2010, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boxcorner

"Peace and love" is passé.

Pushka · 12-31-2010, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kennyc

What? This makes no sense whatsoever. Killing someone doesn't harm the victim? WTF?

You are mixing fact and fiction, substance and reality, free speech and behavior.

Inappropriate violence is okay, but inappropriate sex is not.

and who defines inappropriate?

Here we go round the mulberry bush, the mulberry bush, the mulberry bush.
here we go round the mulberry bush again and again once more.

Kenny Kenny Kenny you missed a couple of words to totally misconstrue what I said. I said "violence in a movie"
Unless the studios are now murdering people to make their movies real, then there no one is hurt.

Inappropriate sex is very easy to define. Any sexual act that is illegal is inappropriate! Or are we going to argue the legality of the law as it currently stands.

kennyc · 12-31-2010, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pushka

Kenny Kenny Kenny you missed a couple of words to totally misconstrue what I said. I said "violence in a movie"
Unless the studios are now murdering people to make their movies real, then there no one is hurt.

Inappropriate sex is very easy to define. Any sexual act that is illegal is inappropriate! Or are we going to argue the legality of the law as it currently stands.

And that is my point exactly you are confusing fact and fiction, talking and action, freedom to speak about something and doing something.

I'm not missing anything. If you want to discuss this let's talk apples and apples not apples and oranges.

Sydney's Mom · 12-31-2010, 10:07 PM

I am also a child of the 60's (missed Woodstock because I WAS a farmer). My parents didn't try to get books pulled or TV channels blocked - they just shut off the TV. My understanding is the pedifilia book did not have child porn images, so just having the book on its servers would not make Amazon guilty of a criminal act. Why couldn't we just choose not to buy it? I see a lot of stuff on TV when I am flipping the channels at 2 am which causes me to say to myself "I can't believe they can put this stuff on TV" I switch the channel. That is the purpose of the 1st amendment - the majority should not be able to ban the speech of the minority.

I'm actually kind of curious about the banned book. Although I think the subject matter is horrific, I am getting kinda curious about the hoopla. I don't think I will turn into a raving child molestor just for reading the book. But I guess I will never know. Because I would never BUY such a book. I don't need the someone else to decide for me.

nguirado · 12-31-2010, 10:35 PM

OK. I'd rather my kids see Gladiator. As long as the objectionable material isn't broadcast for free, I don't care, however. You can rent them for your grandkids or purchase cable. There's room for different parenting styles in this country.

boxcorner · 01-01-2011, 03:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sydney's Mom

... I see a lot of stuff on TV when I am flipping the channels at 2 am which causes me to say to myself "I can't believe they can put this stuff on TV" I switch the channel. That is the purpose of the 1st amendment ...

TVs outside the US have an on/off switch, instead.

12-31-2010, 10:35 PM	#779
nguirado Wizard Posts: 1,262 Karma: 1499080 Join Date: May 2010 Device: Nook	OK. I'd rather my kids see Gladiator. As long as the objectionable material isn't broadcast for free, I don't care, however. You can rent them for your grandkids or purchase cable. There's room for different parenting styles in this country. Last edited by nguirado; 12-31-2010 at 10:53 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Gnelfs - A Mother Defends her Daughter Against Demons	SidneyW	Self-Promotions by Authors and Publishers	6	01-21-2011 06:42 AM
Version epub du livre « Confessions d’un pédophile, l’impossible filtrage du net »	NicolasR	E-Books	10	03-09-2010 11:10 AM
Government Collectif : Confessions d’un pédophile l’impossible filtrage du web, v.1, 02/2010	NicolasR	ePub Books	1	03-02-2010 03:37 PM
Amazing Amazon New Book	jmb	Reading Recommendations	4	08-17-2009 05:17 PM
Amazon e-book reader	Chrism	Amazon Kindle	24	09-18-2007 10:41 AM

12-31-2010, 10:07 PM	#778
Sydney's Mom Wizard Posts: 2,899 Karma: 6995721 Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Idaho, on the side of a mountain Device: Kindle Oasis, Fire 3d Gen and 5th Gen and Samsung Tab S	I am also a child of the 60's (missed Woodstock because I WAS a farmer). My parents didn't try to get books pulled or TV channels blocked - they just shut off the TV. My understanding is the pedifilia book did not have child porn images, so just having the book on its servers would not make Amazon guilty of a criminal act. Why couldn't we just choose not to buy it? I see a lot of stuff on TV when I am flipping the channels at 2 am which causes me to say to myself "I can't believe they can put this stuff on TV" I switch the channel. That is the purpose of the 1st amendment - the majority should not be able to ban the speech of the minority. I'm actually kind of curious about the banned book. Although I think the subject matter is horrific, I am getting kinda curious about the hoopla. I don't think I will turn into a raving child molestor just for reading the book. But I guess I will never know. Because I would never BUY such a book. I don't need the someone else to decide for me.