Amazon selling HOWTO ebook for "Pedosexuals," TV pundits froth at mouth


I expect more than one cable news channel to devote mega time over the next 24 hours to "The Pedophile's Guide to Love and Pleasure," a Kindle download which purports to be a HOWTO guidebook for "pedosexuals."

Oh, there you go, just as I'm composing this, Anderson Cooper tweets that Dr. Phil will be on tonight for that very purpose.

From the product description, such as it is:

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.

Liter sentences!

Presumably, Apple's digital bookstore would never allow this to happen, or so the sales pitch goes. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? (When) will Amazon remove the book from sale, and/or should they?

Amazon said in a statement that it "believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable." Discuss.

Update: Welp, now folks are loading /b/-type images to the product page. One screengrab below...



  1. Wait, wait…are you saying that horrible people can put horrible things on the internet? No…that’s not true…that’s impossible!

    Quick! Everyone freak out and boycott Amazon! And the library! And every bookstore to every carry a copy of “Mein Kampf” or “American Psycho”!

    At least we have Dr. Phil to bring his utterly useless folksy nonsense to the issue. I’m sure a comparison to some kind of farm animal in distress is being crafted in his noggin even as I type this.

    The more attention heaped on this vile little e-book the more money the author makes for making it and more more attention he/she/it receives. We’re giving the bastards just what they desire, you know this?

  2. I believe has the right to sell this book. They also have the right not to sell it. I hope they decide not to sell it.

  3. OMG. 1500+ reviews (or comments, as I highly doubt anyone has bought it at all) and a few of them I checked had dozens of comments on the reviews.

    One person who reviewed and talked about the Streisand effect got this as a comment.

    “anyone who condones this crap should post their home address so we can blow your heads off and save overselves some takes payer money later. ”

  4. More importantly, you know the writers at NBC are already working out how to use this as a plot device in an upcoming Law and Order: SVU.

  5. I was writing something else, but I deleted it, simply because there is no rational way to argue this. But when push comes to shove, I’ll go with free speech. However I think the author better understand his free speech may come with some push and shove.

  6. I saw that on amazon to day too, it was generating enough traffic that it showed up next to Bush’s memoir. I got a kick out of the reviews and user submitted photos anyway.

    It reminded me of the Anarchist Cookbook; like it or hate it, there it is, and in a free society there isn’t much you can do about it.

    1. “It reminded me of the Anarchist Cookbook; like it or hate it, there it is, and in a free society there isn’t much you can do about it.”

      Sure there is. You can make it not a free society. Easy peasy, done and easy.

  7. Oh for crying out loud.

    Seriously, people? What do you think this book is going to change? Improved ways to snatch your kids while you’re distracted by the shiny display at Walmart? You think we’re going to get Pedo-ninjas?

  8. As long as both partners have passed the age or majority, there is no question of pedophilia. So, a ninety-year-old is not a pedophile if its partner is thirteen and they both live in New Mexico.

    If this quote is any indication, it’s an existentialist masterpiece.

  9. Pedo dude uses credit card (with all his personal info attached) to buy pedo howto book on Amazon. Pedo dude gets v&d before he finishes reading book. What’s the problem?

  10. This is absolutely disgusting and vile.

    Yet it seems important to note the difference between theory and practice here.
    Maybe someone will use this to do something bad, and that is criminal (and should result in balls being put on display in the town square), but a book like this is merely disgusting and vile. Like so many other books, movies, games, stories, websites and people.

    Count me out of the book burning.

  11. …Aaaannnnddd clicking on that link has now put that book in both my Amazon and Google browse histories (I’m using Chrome). Thank you, boingboing for the unintended consequences.

  12. I think that this is how things are supposed to work in a free market economy: If something is objectionable, people don’t buy it. If they’re really angry, they boycott the seller. Amazon chooses to sell or not to sell, to listen to a vocal segment of its customer base or not. In turn, Amazon is accountable to its shareholders for its decisions. It’s the circle of life.

    It is, however, a slippery slope for Amazon. Pull this book? Pull one of a thousand books that various groups for various reasons find objectionable. Where does it end? Naughty pictures? Lolita? Films by Roman Polanski?

    If you find the book objectionable, don’t buy it. If you aren’t satisfied with that, boycott Amazon. If that doesn’t satisfy you, have your broker divest. If that doesn’t satisfy you, picket outside Amazon’s headquarters, or get /b/ riled up, or light yourself on fire in protest. Most Americans run out of steam at step 1 above. Anything more requires effort.

    1. Ah, the old “slippery slope” argument. How about a book that is a “how to” murder people and get away with it? Or, better yet -Amazon can’t sell lock-picking tools, because they’re illegal, because they are tools used to commit crimes. This book is a “how to” tome on how to commit pedophilia (a crime) and get away with it. There’s no slippery slope here. Pull the book, nobody’s going to use an instance of pulling a book that purports to help you commit a crime, and a despicable one at that, with pulling a book that you just don’t agree with. It’s a simple truth that every act does not initiate the dreaded “slippery slope” . . . . pulling this book wouldn’t either.

      1. “Amazon can’t sell lock-picking tools, because they’re illegal, because they are tools used to commit crimes.”

        No, Amazon chooses not to sell lock picks. The similarly high-profile site sells them – there’s nothing necessarily illegal about lockpicks. You can also buy those inflatable car door openers and slim jims. And black powder. And crossbows.

        “This book is a “how to” tome on how to commit pedophilia (a crime) and get away with it.”

        There are also how-to murder books, how-to steal books, and how-to make bombs books. This most certainly IS a slippery slope issue, as you’d be hard pressed to justify why anyone would need a how-to make bombs book, which is exactly why authors are not required to justify the existence of their writings.

        Amazon can pull it if they like, but you seem to be advocating banning it with the force of law. I think you need to read up on your Constitution as well as recognize that the rights we enjoy are not granted to us by ANY document, they are inherent in our existence. That includes the right to write and publish ANY book ANYONE damn well pleases, no matter HOW vile it may be.

  13. The weirdest thing about it (I hesitate to say “funny”) was that when I went to that amazon page I got an embedded ad for Pampers diapers, complete with a picture of a smiling baby.

  14. I’m going to horribly butcher a Larry Flint quote right here, but I believe the message will be intact:

    “If the First Amendment will protect a scumbag like me, it will protect all of you.”

    I don’t like this book, I don’t like the idea of having these people exchanging tips on how to not get caught, I don’t like any of this.

    But I do like living in a country with (mostly) free speech, where people are free to go against the status-quo, and publish things that offend us. Non of us have the right not to be offended.
    I would rather have free speech and be bombarded with offensive material 24/7 than be perpetually unable to speak out.

  15. it might be useful to parents as a manual for spotting predatory tactics of pedophiles. it can go both ways.

  16. Has any1 actually read this? I see all those bazillion comments … what if it is just a collection of SF short stories with a really tasteless title to generate hype ???

    1. Read the author’s blurb.

      The term Pedosexual is what I find offensive.
      And were the book titled The Priest’s Guidebook for Pedophiles all y’all still 1st Amendmenting?

    2. Only the second comment on here: The book is pedo-agenda, and it’s crap. All the way from bad writing to content.

      And dissing this book is not a threat to free speech, not by a long shot, for the same reason child pornography is not protected speech.

  17. Umm, Xeni, is that an affiliate link you used to link to that book? I see “boingboing06-20” in the url.

    I don’t have a problem with aff links, btw. Just pointing it out to encourage some lively discussions here in the comments ;-)

    1. Oh, man. Funny.
      It sure seems like it was. I would love to see the breakdown of whether any of the referrals did in fact lead to a purchase, and if so whether BB ended up with any petty fraction of the purchase price in its accounts. Does Amazon’s affiliate program give you that much detail?
      If I was one who Cared, I might want to call for BB to donate that hypothetical income to some kind of worthwhile, related charity. But I’m not, and I just think it would be humorous to find out if any readers ended up buying a copy for themselves.

    1. You wrote, “I hope no one discovers that Amazon is selling books that, in graphic detail, describes how to kill a man by stabbing him in the neck:

      Title: “Army Combatives Hand to Hand Combat Fighting”
      Author: U.S. Army”

      Do you know what a red herring is?

  18. Uh, so, are we honestly to suppose that Amazon has never once exercised any kind of selection power over their catalogue?

    As the LA times article linked says, “The company issues guidelines banning certain materials, including offensive content, illegal items and educational test solution manuals. However, Amazon does not elaborate on what might be considered inappropriate content, stating that ‘what we deem offensive is probably what you would expect.'”

    What counts as offensive content, if not this? Why have that in your ‘guidelines,’ if not to ban this kind of thing from your store?

    Sure, they have the right to sell this in the US (though I bet some countries less absolutist about free speech would definitely consider this illegal). But it’s ridiculous that they are in fact selling it, and I would *love* to know about some books that they have in fact banned from their catalogue.

  19. I am reminded of the defense of squicky speech.
    But that’s not why I’m posting. I’m posting because I’m very sad that there’s not a ‘People who bought this also bought’… on the Amazon page. Disappointing.

  20. oooh maybe now I can publish my book ” the puppy killers cookbook” thumbs up Amazon! (of course im being sarcastic)……..there is the right thing to do and the wrong thing to do maybe Amazon execs should take another ethics class.

  21. I don’t think anyone questions the legality of… well wait, they probably do.

    I don’t think anyone who thinks about it questions the legality of this. But it seems like an obvious business decision: compare the revenue Amazon could potentially bring by selling this book to a half dozen idiots to the potential revenue lost to hundreds of angry people who will now buy their Tuscan Whole Milk and uranium samples from Wal-Mart instead.

  22. clicking on that link has now put that book in both my Amazon and Google browse histories

    Welcome to my life. Do you have any idea what my Recommended Videos look like on YouTube?

  23. “…it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable.”

    Objectionable? We’re not talking about mauve wallpaper here.

    More like morally reprehensible and possibly illegal (conspiracy to commit a felony).

    1. Indeed. A perfect gift for Father’s Day and a tome that should be on every responsible parent’s bookshelf. After all, how can you go hunting for something unless you have some idea of its mating habits? I suppose though that the general reaction will be “I am scared of pedophiles and wish to combat them with ignorance and/or the knowledge of them that I got from locker room jokes.”

      A long time ago the Toronto Zine “Gauntlet” published similar material. Does anyone remember what ended up happening there?

    2. After a drek filled morning of hand holding people while I recovered data for them, that one snarky line just made my day.

      Thank you.

  24. A responsibly written guide for pedophiles would explain that they are not evil for feeling sexually attracted to children but it is absolutely evil to ever act on their desires, and it would guide them through the process of getting themselves some professional help.

    I’ve seen estimates that as much as 1/3 of the phone sex business involves calls where the operator pretends to be underage. It’s something that’s very hotly debated within the phone sex industry.

    1. While it is probably like trying to pee upwind, i wonder how much of those calls was pretending to be within the range between 13 and 18 (or whatever the legal sex age is in USA).

      the thing is that the word pedophile conjours up the mental image of someone grabbing a baby from a crib, while in legal terms it is to have intercourse with anyone below 18 or there about. Thing is, the human body goes fertile at around the age of 13. end result is that there is about 5 years where law and biology do not agree, and biology usually have the upper hand.

      1. 13+ is not paedophile range, as I mentioned above. As for law, it would be something such as “carnal knowledge with a juvenile,” and if they used the term “paedophile” in such a situation they would really be grasping at straws.

        @mgfarrelly That’s one of the reason why I’ve given up on the ideas of any jobs that would put me in any kind of contact with children, some of the other reasons being the cost to receive the training for such jobs in relation to the pay you get (teachers around here, for example, get paid pretty much minimum wage, if that). It’s really sad that, as a man, one can be afraid to get a job simply because of how society might look at them. For those interested in anime, just refer to Hanamaru Kindergarten (new male teacher at a preschool, nothing perverted) for the ways people react -_-

  25. @Xeni I was kind of puzzled that no-one had yet screamed “BB is making money off pedosexuals!!” so I thought I’d try and expedite the hilarity.

    @tweaked Yes, it would be humorous :-)

    I’d also love to see “People who bought this also bought…” but that section of the page at Amazon doesn’t seem to be showing for me.

  26. I just clicked the Amazon link and a picture popped up that said ‘Shame on you Amazon’. Has Amazon been hacked? I would think that /b/ would be all in favor of this book.

  27. /b/ has hacked the Amazon page…put up pedo bear, the pope and other images under alternate product images.

  28. Putting aside my own personal feelings, I find it interesting to look at this situation from a somewhat anthropological view. Allow me to play devil’s advocate, for a moment.

    Child marraige is a widespread phenomeon, one with global reach. There are numerous cultures and nations which currently promote or allow children to be married, and consequently be involved in sexual activities. Yet, these places and traditions are largely out of sight, and therefor out of mind.

    The Western world sees morality through the lens of a specific set of tabboos, ones which sometimes do not apply in other parts of the world. Cannibalism is alive and well in the world today, as is blood sacrifice, as is self-flaggelation, as are many other “unsavory” behaviors. Yet there is not much outcry, largely because even when the West hears about these tabboo breaking peoples, they manage to psychologically distance themselves from the events, and to marginalize the people who practice them. Only when it comes home does it truly cause alarm.

    I cannot speak for the quality of the book in question, nor for its legal or moral implications within Western nations. But I can at least remind readers that what is abhorant to the West is not universally so. As a concept, pedophilia is no more intrinsically wrong than any other sexual behavior. Rather, it is culturally problematic, for a variety of complex reasons. While it is perfectly possible for a moral system of pedophilia to exist without abuses, it is arguably very unlikely for such a system to develop, given existing societal tendencies and norms.

    That said, there is an important distinction to be made between a concept as a concept, and a flawed and harmful execution of said concept. It might be illuminating to consider which of the two is a larger factor in one’s personal distaste or aversion.

    ~D. Walker

    1. It is different from most other sexual “practices” in that it is predatory, rather than being between consenting adults where everyone involved has gone in knowingly. It is analogous to rape, rather than a sexual proclivity.

      This is the kind of crap pedophiles tell themselves to make it seem like it’s okay and they aren’t really hurting anyone.

  29. I thought it was pretty clear cut. Certain types of publication are outright illegal; e.g. child pornography, bestiality, etc. Thought that would extend to ‘instructional guides’ as well.

    Maybe this is only a law in NZ/Australia?

    1. Bomb-making books, such as the Anarchists Cookbook, are legal aren’t they? The Karmasutra is legal, however many of the positions in it are technically illegal in many US States that still have ‘blue’ laws on the books.

  30. This quote keeps entering my mind:

    “Any publicity is good publicity.”

    This outrage sure is feeding the troll.

  31. Did they just take it down, or did the page crash?

    On a side note, look at the author’s other books. Explains a lot.

    1. Yeah, that’s probably because someone posted something they shouldn’t have under the images section. It’ll probably be back up soon. Also refusing to sell vile material isn’t censorship, advocating for it’s destruction is censorship.

  32. As I understand it, it’s a self-published ebook? Oh, the horror.

    Freedom, folks. You Americans say it’s your bag, and I love you for it. But sometimes freedom seems to only apply when it’s stuff that you like. That’s A Bad Thing.

    I’ll be disappointed in Amazon if they remove it because it’s an easy thing for the mob to sink their boots into (and let’s be honest, /b/ is only getting involved for the lulz, not because they’re self rightous white knights).

  33. Mein Kampf and Goebbels’ writings discuss — clearly to any reasonable person — the mass genocide of anyone who is not an Ethnic German and were used to justify Mengele’s incredibly twisted vivisection and sexual twistedness with twins. Yet, American law allows them to be published.

    American law also allows people to mock Jesus Christ and the Pope, the President of the US, and to cling-wrap themselves whilst otherwise naked and take pictures and sell them.

    All of these things offend someone.

    The act of taking advantage of a child by an adult is offensive to me.

    It is far more offensive — to me, to civilised people — that some arbitrary person’s morals and / or fear that a particular work would corrupt them or their children means that I am in danger of being ‘corrupted’ as well and that some TEXT is going to magically brainwash me.

    It is certainly true that MANY, MANY people demonstrate, over and over and over, that they are not capable of informed and rational decisions despite legal status as “adults” and that some people who are legally minors have the ability to make the wisest decisions in the world (Seriously: Find me a two-and-a-half-year-old who thinks War is a good thing.).

    NEITHER of these is a legitimate reason to deny those of us who /are/ adults and who /might just possibly be capable of critical thought/ from being able to consult the thoughts of OTHER PEOPLE.

    IF the author is ACTUALLY aiding, abetting, counselling, commanding, inducing or procuring actual pedophilia, lock the author up after a fair trial and forbid him / her from making any profit from the book.


  34. Phil seems to be a Baha’i follower, and claims to have been introduced to sex at the age of seven by a ten year old girl (join the club). Writes glowing reviews for his own books, and just found out how to pull an Alice Cooper (Headlines, Flush the Fashion, 1980). Does anyone know how NAMBLA has responded?

  35. Looks like the book has been pulled.

    On the bright side – to those of us you who were out back smoking a bowl when God was handing out respectable sized endowments, if you read the excerpts at Amazon, you now know where to get condoms that don’t make you feel like you’re washing your feet with socks on.

  36. Unfortunately if I want the Libertarian Utopia I dream of, I have to allow this and other vile shit to be available.

    While it might make common sense to ban or exclude certain texts, the problem with that is once that sort of procedure is in place, what is banned is on the whim of the keepers.

    The last thing anyone wants is a Fahrenheit 451-esque hell. Yes, yes, to say excluding one book will lead to the banning of all of them is melodramatic and unlikely. But I could see genres or texts from certain cultures being banned if the wrong people were in power. It has happened before.

    For the record – pre-pubescent pedophiles are sick fucks who need castration or a bullet in the head.

    1. Someone deserves to have their balls cut off or be killed because they happen to be attracted to children? I think you need to re-evaluate who the real sick fuck is here.

      (hint: it’s you)

      1. First off, there is chemical castration. No ripping off of parts here. Well – even surgery is usually doesn’t involve ripping. Anyway-

        Second – more than one pedophile has suggested or opted for chemical castration to control their urges or as the only way to prevent them from re-offending.

    2. You do know that “prepubescent paedophiles” is redundant right? For early puberty it’s hebephillia and later pubery ephebophillia. Also, most “paedophiles” that you hear about in the news aren’t really paedos, but people who are opportunistic. Rather than targetting them only because they’re young, they target them because they’re an easy target, and it could really have been anyone of any age group. What gets me is the relatively recent moral outrage against such people.

      This whole anti-paedo thing was only really started about 50 or so years ago, and from the looks of things the pendulum is starting to swing back. Just look at the kids these days and you’ll see more of them are sexual active than before at a younger age, and some of them abuse their age to blackmail people after they’ve unknowingly had sex with a minor (thinking they were older). Currently, the laws and public views are so skewed that even being falsely accused of being a paedophile or the ilk can completely ruin your life.

      1. re: “You do know that “prepubescent paedophiles” is redundant right? For early puberty it’s hebephillia and later pubery ephebophillia.”

        Thanks for the clarification.

        I can almost understand/forgive the latter two. From an evolutionary stand point, they would be what we are wired to want. Cavemen weren’t waiting for some arbitrary age to procreate. Even in more civilized times this would be the age to get married and start to have children.

        1. Very wise – do you spend a lot of time being stampeded by lynch mobs?
          Like most moral panics, this one appears to perpetuate itself, and seems to invest the taboo with a cachet it might lack otherwise.
          Btw, every victim I’ve spoken to was abused by a family member, and was silenced by their family afterwards, and made to feel like they caused it. Its not books like this that protect the abusers, its the highest moral virtue in our society that does it – family solidarity.

    3. While your emotion is understandable, advocating murder for those who have sexual thoughts about a child is out of line. Pedophiles do not ask to be such. Every account I’ve heard from someone with this illness indicates that it’s a horrible affliction. By saying that anyone afflicted with what is clearly a mental illness should be murdered or castrated is arguably encouraging the problem to grow. To wit:

      1. Society hates pedophiles, and vilifies those who admit having the problem, even those who haven’t acted on it. (People in many US states cannot even attempt to seek treatment without mandatory reporting to the police. Result: more untreated pedophiles and more sexual abuse.)

      2. Moral pedophiles, in a vain attempt to self-manage their illness, try to ignore their feelings. This never actually works, so they become marginalized, and some seek relief among the pedophile community. Because of the great hatred of people who admit to having this illness, the pedophile community has a rallying cry and can feel justified for feeling oppressed by the majority.

      4. Pedophilia is driven further underground, away from treatment and towards books like this which justify the destructive behavior.

      5. Parents and other well-meaning people feel good about “doing something about pedophilia” when in fact they have likely encouraged its growth and put their children at greater risk.

      Mental illnesses are not treated by bullets to the head. Chemical castration is an option, though surely some pedophiles could be treated less drastically before they harm a child. But this is only an option if they’re allowed to admit to having a problem in the first place.

      IMHO, the real problem here, aside from actual pedophiles harming actual children, is our society’s Puritanical and often hateful reaction to anything considered sexually deviant, even if it’s just a thought. Until we can accept the spectrum of sexual thoughts and behaviors as intrinsically human, we will never solve the pedophile problem.

      1. re: “While your emotion is understandable, advocating murder for those who have sexual thoughts about a child is out of line.”

        I never said murder. I was advocating suicide. I dislike murder just as much.

        Forgive me if I suggest people who are – for what ever reason – compelled to prey on children do something to prevent themselves from doing so. I suppose I – we as a society are protective of children, as we should be. Victims of these acts not only can’t defend themselves, what they are exposed to is something that they can barely grasp.

        I agree that treating it like a mental illness, and that reaching out to these people would be a positive step. Mental illness as a whole is woefully inadequate (though I suppose a bit better than the old asylum days.)

        re: “IMHO, the real problem here, aside from actual pedophiles harming actual children, is our society’s Puritanical and often hateful reaction to anything considered sexually deviant, even if it’s just a thought.”

        Aaaannnnnndddd this is where you lost me. I don’t think this is in the same category as people recoiling from leather and whips or the idea of gay sex. I can’t see how this would be different if we were less Puritanical and prudish. Even “boobies everywhere” Europe looks ‘down’ on this.

        There are people who have the same sick compulsions to murder. I can’t justify pedophiles actions any less.

        1. But most children are raped by their parents or other relatives, their parents’ friends or teachers/priests/etc. The boogie men pedophiles who are buying how-to guides for the Kindle are really not the problem. Focusing on them is a distraction from the in-house abuse that dominates the child-rape reality.

          1. re: “But most children are raped by their parents or other relatives, their parents’ friends or teachers/priests/etc. The boogie men pedophiles who are buying how-to guides for the Kindle are really not the problem. Focusing on them is a distraction from the in-house abuse that dominates the child-rape reality. ”

            I’m sorry… how are these not pedophiles because they are known the victim and their families? Now granted I haven’t read the content of the book, but I fail to see why these people wouldn’t be interested or perhaps benefit from such a book.

            You are absolutely right that vast majority of victims are abused by family and friends. The ‘stranger danger’ fear is not where the danger is in reality.

            Any logic clouding emotion I have is from my experience of knowing several abuse kids. My friends brother adopted 6 foster kids from 2 different families (with as many fathers). All of them were abused at some point. The eldest boy they had to institutionalize. The second eldest boy ended up acting out and abusing the other kids as well. (Yay, learned behavior!) The hell these kids have been through and have yet to go through is hard to imagine.

            Personally I doubt anything in that book is going to have such supa dupa secret info that will suddenly make one an ace predator. And like I said before, I don’t think banning it or taking it down would matter in that respect. And referring to my first post here, I was against it. Just as I would be for other ‘dangerous’ books.

            On a side note – did I have a message of mine removed? If it was moderated, fine. If it was just lost in the tubes of the interweb I might repost it.

          2. I’m male and work with children/young adults as a librarian. Simply by dint of my gender I’m suspect to many people. I’ve had people flat out question why, as a man, I would even want to be around children at all, let alone do such shameful things as run storytimes for them or design programming about science and literature.

            The panic about pedophiles has poisoned the atmosphere. The sad fact is that the person most likely to harm your child is you, or a close relative. The creepy pedos in vans who this kind of “book” might appeal to are (blessedly) rare.

            In my career, I’ve had children talk to me as a safe adult, and I’ve acted as a reporter to the police on more than one occasion. In all those cases, it was family members.

            This kind of scare/panic story does nothing to help those kids. Absolutely nothing. They need adults they can talk to safely, they need teachers and librarians and police who have been trained to look for the signs of abuse and how to help kids open up and talk when something awful is going on. Shouting boycotts at a book-seller does not make kids any safer. And making kids safe is the whole damn point.

          3. re: “I’m male and work with children/young adults as a librarian. Simply by dint of my gender I’m suspect to many people.”

            Man – I hear you. I attend this weekly event with a bunch of home school kids. The other day I was being helpful by offering to take one of the boys to the restroom. That was when I was informed it was policy to only let the moms take them o_0. So even the fact I am there every week and my own kiddo is among them, I have this taint about me.

            Now that I think about it, my wife and kiddo were in an elevator at a hotel and this older gentlemen with his wife made a comment that put my wife off. For the life of me I can’t even remember what it was, but we talked about it and both agreed the guy didn’t mean any harm. She spotted them later that day and just gave them and FYI that others might freak out more over what he did. Him and his wife were completely mortified. The thought had never crossed their mind that what was familiar between them and their grandchildren might be misinterpreted in today’s “everything is going to kill you” world of paranoia.

            You are right that the ‘stranger danger’ paranoia is misplaced. Penn and Teller’s Bullshit did an excellent piece on it. Yes there are the guys in the candy van down by the river. But as you and others have pointed out, most cases are family and ‘trusted’ people in the community they know.

          4. In the UK not too long ago we learned the astonishing statistic that in the pre-school/nursery education sector there is now exactly ONE male teacher in the entire country. And some rapidly declining percentage of primary schools have any males teachers either (ISTR it’s below a quarter of them.)

            And it’s all because of the same nonsensical panic that refuses to actually address the underlying issue (whatever it is) and instead demands instant retribution. And, unfortunately, our short-term political models mean that politicians do better pandering to that if they want to stay on the gravy-train.

        2. OK, I hear you about the murder vs. suicide distinction. I (understandably, I think) misinterpreted your comment.

          However, I strongly disagree with your assertion that society views gay sex far differently than pedophilia or other destructive sexually deviant behaviors. Are you not familiar with the widespread arguments lumping gay marriage in with pedophilia and bestiality? I really don’t think much of America is willing to distinguish one “sexually deviant act” from another. In fact, the trend is towards a marked conflation of gayness (male gayness especially) with pedophilia. Indeed, that sentiment has been expressed over and over as people (including some of our elected representatives) attack the concept of gay marriage, and gayness itself, as a sexually deviant act deserving of punishment.

          Many people in our society still view the acts of masturbation and non-procreative intercourse as morally reprehensible. When you start with that view as a baseline, there is little or no space for a potential pedophile to express his/her mental illness and seek treatment. Until people can admit that they have a problem without fearing extreme retribution, the problem will persist.

          I am not defending pedophiles who have harmed children — they should absolutely be prosecuted and brought to justice. But until we reconcile our extreme judgments against those perceived to be sexually deviant, we won’t be able to properly treat people with this problem.

          1. melodist you are my hero. feels so good to read a rational response amidst so much panicked ignorance. i agree with everything you have said.

            people should be punished for their actions, not their thoughts.

          2. Why thank you!

            Dan Savage is largely responsible for these insights. He talks to a lot of people on his podcast who have harmful sexual urges, and sometimes he’s able to help them channel their energy into a responsible, consensual behavior (with adults) before anyone is harmed. I have also heard him, with an obviously heavy heart, counsel people away from talking to a mental health professional because the laws in their state do not protect them, requiring an automatic law enforcement involvement even if no harm has taken place.

          3. re: “However, I strongly disagree with your assertion that society views gay sex far differently than pedophilia or other destructive sexually deviant behaviors. Are you not familiar with the widespread arguments lumping gay marriage in with pedophilia and bestiality?”

            I don’t know where you live, but I am in the Bible Belt and have never been met with that sort of attitude. Yes I think some people find gay sex ‘icky’, and even more are uncomfortable with their idea of marriage being redefined – but I don’t think you can even begin to compare the two.

            Most people will have at least ‘one gay friend’. It is the extremely small majority with Phelps-like attitudes who would move if ‘the gays’ moved in next door or would shun them to the level pedophiles are shunned. Yes there are people who treat it as a sin, and some who see it as an illness or a bad choice. But I really don’t know anyone who would treat the two as the same.

          4. I live in California. Homophobia (and racism, for that matter) are alive and well, even in this “left coast liberal haven” as some like to call it. I can only imagine what it’s like in the Bible belt.

            I was involved in the anti-Prop 8 campaign in Sacramento in 2008, and while many people were kind and supportive, I have never been called a faggot so much in my life. My boss at the time, an obvious lesbian, was physically threatened by some angry Mormons. I encountered so much homophobia and hatefulness towards gays that it gave me insights into what it is like to be a minority (I’m a straight-identified white guy, top of the civil rights food chain).

            So, I must sadly disagree with you about the state of our country. We have come a long way in the last ten years, but there are so many who do not differentiate between sexual identity and sexually violent behavior. I do believe that everyone has at least one gay friend, and that this fact alone will force an attitude shift. Perhaps the messages of the most vocal haters have skewed my perception; I can only hope this is the case.

          5. I have to say I am surprised at some of your experiences living in one of the arguably most liberal states in the nation. Then again, it would also make sense if you were campaigning for a hot button issue for you to be a lightning rod for abuse. Something like that can make person’s emotions over come their normal polite reserve.

            In my limited experience, it is the vocal minority on both sides of an issue who make them so polarizing and insurmountable.

            Hey – lets have a Mormon joke (though it works for other denominations). How do you keep a Mormon from drinking all your beer on a fishing trip? Invite more than one.

          6. This further comment is a little disturbing, actually. “Vocal minorities on both sides” cause the problem of violent hatred toward gay people? Those who support the “hot button issue” of basic gay rights should expect to be “lightning rod[s] of abuse” from otherwise-“polite” and ordinary citizens whose understandable surge of emotion justifies their bigoted behavior?

            Forgive me if I’m wrong, but I detect a strong note of apology for homophobic behavior in your rhetoric. I’d like to be able to say it’s surprising from someone so ardent in the defense of children, but as several commenters have noted, concern about child rape and unpleasant attitudes towards any kind of allegedly suspicious deviancy in men often go hand in hand.

          7. Hmmm – either I am doing a bad job of explaining my thought process, or you are misinterpreting what I am trying to say.

            I am not condoning or excusing behavior, just thinking out loud why one would encounter more of it. Obviously if you are in the middle of something like that – you are going to encounter more out-lashes. I am sure many Democrats had never had anyone suggest they were a Communist until they got involved or vocal about 2008 election. One could wear their army uniform 100 days in a row and not be called a baby killer until they show up at an anti-war protest.

            This is just the reality of the world; the squeaky wheel gets oil, the popped up nail gets hammered down, etc.

            But for the most part I just don’t see a vast majority of people equating gay sex on the same level as pedophilia. Though I do agree that there are misconceptions for many people that gay = crazy for young boys, which obviously isn’t true. Are they out there – sure! But you can’t look at people like the Phelps klan and say their views represent a majority of America, nor a majority of Christians.

            And I never meant to trivialize or suggest that gays everywhere have a free and accepting life.

          8. That’s a pretty shocking experience, for someone living in the Bible Belt. I grew up as a gay teenager in North Carolina, and heard plenty of incredibly nasty things, including the comparison to paedophilia – I actually recall it coming up in a debate on same-sex marriage in my high school civ-ec class. I’m rather helpless to explain how you haven’t noticed that there are huge numbers of ordinary Americans, particularly in the South and Midwest, who have a violently hateful attitude towards homosexuality; I can only guess that it’s perhaps not always evident to straight people who haven’t had much contact with gay people who have been subject to such abuse.

            Why do you think so many gay teenagers (relatively) commit suicide? Because the popular kids tease them and shove them into a locker from time to time, just like all the other high school outcasts? Try again.

          9. “I’m rather helpless to explain how you haven’t noticed that there are huge numbers of ordinary Americans, particularly in the South and Midwest, who have a violently hateful attitude towards homosexuality”

            If one were to go by the loudest subset of society, one would conclude that most humans anywhere have a violently hateful attitude toward one group or more based solely on superficial traits such as skin color or where they live. I’m personally inclined to believe those gas bags are the real minority, and that for ever one of them spewing bile at this or that group, they have ten or more neighbors quietly going about their lives and wishing the extremists and fundies and tantrum-throwing Phelps-esque wastes-of-carbon would give it a rest. But these things are hard to measure and anecdotal evidence based only on our individual experiences isn’t much evidence at all, IMHO.

          10. “I don’t know where you live, but I am in the Bible Belt and have never been met with that sort of attitude”

            Well, the world is bigger than just the US of A, you know. Homophobia can still be pretty rampant in quite a few places. I assume you haven’t seen this viral video yet:

            Be warned, the above video is full of course language and hate speech, but it serves to illustrate an important point; not everybody has a “gay friend”. Not everybody considers gays to be human, even.

          11. I am aware there is a world outside the US, and the US and Europe have some of the most liberal views on gays. A Saudi Prince is trying to convince everyone he is just a murderer and not a gay murderer – because – you know – one of those things isn’t forgivable. Maybe he should move to Iran where there are no gays.

            But anyway the context in the conversation thus far was in the US.

          12. “re: “However, I strongly disagree with your assertion that society views gay sex far differently than pedophilia or other destructive sexually deviant behaviors. Are you not familiar with the widespread arguments lumping gay marriage in with pedophilia and bestiality?”

            I don’t know where you live, but I am in the Bible Belt and have never been met with that sort of attitude.”

            I’ll see your Bible Belt and raise you West Michigan. This wretched hive of scum and villainy wraps itself in the flags of old-time religion and white supremacy with a level of homophobia unseen outside of theocratic countries. Gay sex is equated with pedophilia and bestiality every time the (now-topical) subject of gay discrimination comes up. It’s not even a conscious decision; it’s knee-jerk and reflexive.

          13. Yes – I am sure there are many people and many places where this is true. I still say you will find a much, much more tolerant attitude towards gays then you ever will with pedophiles. This doesn’t include EVERYONE, of course, but I think one just has to look at popular culture, music, TV, Movies, Books and then tell me which group fairs better? Which one is shown more often? Which one of the two has characters appearing in the top shows week after week?

            We can even look at the micro-chasm of BoingBoing. We are up to 155 replies on this post, and only 10 for the one about hot gay zombies.

          14. How does one best defend against such conflation of homosexuality with pedophilia? Are there any studies one can point to that definitively rule out a biological origin for pedophilia?



  37. Unless the book itself constitutes child porn or falls under other specific laws, I would say that it can be legitimately published and sold. Gods know there’s much worse material already out there, on this and many other topics.

    But to the “discuss” point: Amazon’s off base here. I’m not arguing that they should pull this off the shelf, but they really can’t argue that doing so would be “censorship.” Freedom of speech does not require that anyone else publish or distribute your words; it only means that nobody can forbid them from disseminating your ideas if they are so inclined. Amazon can, and should, set their editorial policy to draw the lines wherever they see fit… and should have the courage to state clearly what those policies are (even if they’re “we go by our gut feel, and after looking it over this one didn’t cross the line for us.”)

    I’ve never particularly believed in banning this sort of material, or hate speech, or most other offensive writings. Among other things, if it’s an open transaction then police &c can track who’s creating and buying it, and watch for patterns which suggest they’re serious and dangerous.

  38. This isn’t an issue of free speech – no one is saying that the perverted author of this crap is not allowed to say whatever he wants. It’s about corporate responsibility and protecting children. All of the examples of Mein Kampf, Anarchist’s Cookbook etc. are meaningless because they don’t explicitly endanger children. I believe that this book does. I also assert to all those out there who see no problem in amazon publishing this that lines do need to be drawn somewhere and one that always must be drawn is protecting children who are unable to protect themselves.

  39. Based solely on the description provided here, it sounds like it’s supposed to be ‘how to satisfy your urges without being a creep who takes advantage of kids’. Wouldn’t that be a good thing? But then, based on some of the reactions here, it sounds like that’s not what it actually is.

    1. if it’s “without being a creep” then why does it talk about you don’t need condoms if you’re disease free – sounds pretty creepy to me.

  40. Wow, talk about people overreacting. I’m guessing it’s possible to post things for sale without having a human approve it first, with the understood possibility that if it violates any Amazon guidelines it may be removed.

    So in response to someone posting a book, which presumably Amazon will remove if they haven’t already (it worked fine a little while ago when I looked) people claim to be not only boycotting Amazon, but canceling their accounts permanently (seen in the comments on the blog where the guy bought the book).

    If one really feels strongly about it, I can understand boycotting and protesting and whatnot until Amazon does something. But permanently vilifying Amazon before they even have a chance to react? Give me a break.

  41. All of the examples of Mein Kampf, Anarchist’s Cookbook etc. are meaningless because they don’t explicitly endanger children.

    If you think that Mein Kampf didn’t explicitly endanger children, you might want to re-read some 20th century history.

  42. looks like it’s withdrawn – now I wonder if there will be any sort of official statement by Amazon or if they’re hoping this will just blow over. I have to admit I have mixed feelings about which I’d rather see them do.

  43. Amazon UK Age Restrictions

    “Certain items available on are age restricted. By placing an order for one of these items you are declaring that you are 18 years of age or over. These items must be used responsibly and appropriately.”

    I can’t find any mention of this on the US site. Does Amazon age restrict any books or is this just some weird regulation to keep knives out of young hands?

  44. Courtesy of dead-pan comic Dmitri Martin, “You can say ‘I love kids’ as a general statement, that’s fine. It’s when you get specific that you get in to trouble. ‘I love twelve-year-olds.’”

  45. Did anyone else see this?

    “Phillip R. Greaves, 2nd is a rogue scholar with respect to the topics of religion, sexuality, and politics. He was first introduced to sex at the tender age of seven, by a ten-year-old girl, who had watched her parents doing it through a keyhole.”

  46. so let me understand. it’s something to mock when anderson cooper or ‘dr’ phil talk about this but it’s OK FOR BOING BOING to post about it? one question: WHY IS THAT?

  47. I think I recall this book, or at least the author, from an old Loompanics sampler in the 80s / early 90s. Lots of articles on how to fake your death, improvised weapons, what to do if the feds turn up at your door and so on, some Bob Black and Ace Backwords, a couple of nice Robert Anton Wilson articles, and this completely neutral paedophile author interview – in marked contrast to much of the other alt press stuff relating to the subject, which tended towards the tiresome Peter Sotos end of the spectrum.

    Of course back then you had to walk several miles, crawl through a hedge and remember the secret knock to get access to the underground bookshop, so there was very little fuss.

  48. i think justin bieber needs to take a stand.
    this is his opportunity to actually stand for
    something. i back him all the way. justin, babe.

  49. My mental health hospital has about 275 people. Approximately 80% are there because they were sexually abused as children. That includes the men and the women.

  50. Does anyone have a definitive answer as to what is actually contained in the book? It could be anything from advice on how to live with a serious mental condition through to tips on committing rape. Speculation based soley on the title of the book doesn’t help the debate.

  51. A pedo and his five bucks are easily parted.

    Seriously, I doubt that there is any “information” in this publication that you couldn’t find for free using Google. The very idea of a “code of conduct” for criminal behaviour is pretty amusing in itself, as if someone were to write an “ethics of rape”.

    So why not let the pedos pay up to an obvious scammer? It would be one of those rare occations where two wrongs actually make a right.

  52. I would have thought that a code of conduct was exactly what a pedophile needed — starting with a thorough understanding of the concept of “informed consent”.

    I’m going to take a wild guess that the contents wouldn’t match my expectations, though.

  53. Interesting that Amazon still continues to sell Victorian literature like The Pearl which (so I’ve been told) pretty much covers all the sexual bases.

  54. Interesting that in free society, this author can speak out. But once among the prison population, he will doubtless try to keep his mouth firmly shut. (Wouldn’t it be bitterly ironic if the child of an AMAZON.COM employee becomes the reason for his incarceration?)

    1. “But once among the prison population, he will doubtless try to keep his mouth firmly shut.”

      You know what’s creepy (besides pedophiles)? Rape jokes. And the assumption that being raped in prison in part and parcel of the sentence.

      Oh, and speaking of assumptions, what makes you think the author is himself a pedophile? Or, if he is, one that acts on his urges? There’s such a thing as imagination, you know.

      1. You’re supposing the author just has a good imagination? Hmm. I don’t see the book categorized under Fiction.

  55. Sorry if this has already been asked…

    Regarding issues of “freedom of speech”

    The constitutional right to free speech does not include the right to have a book retailer sell your book, correct?

    Amazon removing this book would not violate any laws, I believe, correct?

    Whether they want to sell this book is entirely their choice, correct?

    Is there a constitutional lawyer out there?

    1. You are completely correct on all counts.

      (Not a constitutional lawyer, but a lawyer, and this isn’t really a nuanced area…)

  56. What a good read. I believe this book has the power to help people with different backgrounds get together and share wonderful relationship.
    -Zach Braff on “The Pedophile’s Guide to Love and Pleasure”

  57. As repellent as this is, I don’t really want amazon to censor books for me.

    On the other hand, they already do. I once found a list of weird books and looked them up on amazon. One was Fun, Games, And Big Bangs : The Home And Recreational Use Of High Explosives. I noticed it disappeared for a while and now there is only an “unavailable” tape. The book is not even listed. Though I figured buying it would get you on an FBI watch list. Various other books I can find on alibris but not amazon.

    I’m sure this pedobook will disappear, or maybe stay as a honeytrap for real peds. Imagine what lists you would get on if you ordered it.

    1. I agree with you. Buying this book is like inviting the Party Van directly over.

      btw: as others have pointed out, what’s up with the author’s typos in his description? Guess he had his mind, or, uhm, hands on the subject matter.

      “liter” “certian”

      I think writing “Pedophile situations…” is fairly amateurish as well.


  58. Ranking of injury:
    Severe beating or mutilation
    Light beating
    Spit on, insults, etc

    As a rape survivor, it’s horrible but survivable. Murder, no. Rape CANNOT be worse than murder: it must be almost as bad, always. Would you tell a rape survivor to their face they would be better off dead?

    Now, if you really think about the dynamics involved in the murder of children, and you wanted to minimise their chances of getting murdered, you would encourage them to convince him they would never tell, and that they should be completely obedient.

    Paedos who want ‘consensual’ (their definition, of course) sexual relationships don’t want to kill their victims, and only even threaten them out of fear.

    Results-oriented solution: Paedophilia should be viewed as drug addiction, molestation as a crime. Either should trigger treatment. And yes, it’s treatable. You can’t eliminate thought, but you can change behaviour.

    And that’s just about the rare ‘preferential’ types. Most family or clergy abuse is more opportunistic, and more harmful psychologically due to broken trust. Kids are rarely permanently damaged by seeing a stranger “flashing” them.

  59. After the uproar gets processed, consider investigating Roger Shattuck’s Forbidden Knowledge: From Prometheus To Pornography in which he discusses not censorship, but loss of innocence.

    (currently out-of-stock at Amazon)

  60. Strangely enough, I like the fact that such vileness has brought us all together in the spirit of crushing that which is evil.

  61. While we are at it, will the defenders of morality please berate Amazon for making this book available too? Shaping your children’s sexual identity by… George Alan Rekers??? (Hint: google the phrase “lift my luggage”. Illuminating.)

  62. Aww, the book is gone (as of 10am pst). I was at least hoping Amazon had the fortitude to weather the outcry and continue standing up for free speech. I may not have liked what was in the book but I should still be able to read it and be offended by it.

  63. Has anyone actually read this nugget yet? Didn’t think so.

    Also, doesn’t anyone out there remember that Jonathan Swift essay? The one about eating poor kids?

  64. I’m sorry, but the “one gay friend” sentence just screams the “I’m not racist! I’m friends with a black guy” kind of situation…

  65. If people want to read about pedophilia, or rape, or bestiality, or incest, (or any act of any kind without exception) that’s their business, and no matter how visceral a reaction us ‘normal’ people may have to the very concept of those acts, reading harms nobody in and of itself, and you’d be hard pressed to show a statistically significant correlation between access to such materials and subsequent emboldening caused by those materials resulting in harm where the absence of those materials would have prevented action.

    Once you bring harmful acts out of the realm of fantasy and actually assault or exploit other living beings, then you’ve crossed the line – you’ve violated human or animal rights, and then society has a duty to dole out justice.

Comments are closed.