The social media universe was abuzz today with the announcement that resulted in many calling for the boycott of Amazon.com weeks before the holidays.

Phillip R. Greaves recently self-published the Kindle title The Pedophile’s Guide to Love and Pleasure. The editorial description (typos included) is as follows:

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.

Admittedly at first glance, I agreed with the world. The book should be banned. I’m the parent of two small children. Goodness knows I don’t want more pedophiles in the world nor do I want them to know how to commit crimes and not get caught!

But as a librarian-type and Communication major I am well-versed in First Amendment Law and have also been well-trained in the subject of intellectual freedom and the freedom to read. Books, art, and other materials exist that we don’t agree with. But the key question here seems to be should one be permitted to publish materials that help people to commit crimes? Should Amazon or other publishers publish such materials?

Other works that come to mind are:
The Anarchist Cookbook that contains instructions for the manufacture of explosives, rudimentary telecommunications phreaking devices, and other items.”

Hit Man: A Technical Manual for Independent Contractors that provides detailed instructions about how to…execute and cover up a murder. Apparently this book did cross a line. From pbs.org:

• In 1993, a man named James Perry followed the author’s instructions, killing three people. Subsequently, relatives of the deceased successfully sued Paladin for aiding Perry in the murders.
• The Fourth Circuit stated that in order to charge a publisher with aiding and abetting a crime, the publisher must intend for people to use the article to commit an illegal act. In coming to its decision, the court noted that Paladin’s book was “so comprehensive and detailed that it is as if the [author] were literally present with the would-be murderer” during the crime.

First Amendment 101

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The law has its limits and has been refined through the years with rulings on obscenity, pornography, slander, even the right to criticize the government (Jon Stewart anyone).

The court ruling that seems to apply most to Greaves’ book is the Brandenburg Test.

Merely teaching or advocating unpopular ideas must be distinguished from teaching or advocating the duty, necessity, or propriety of acting on those beliefs. The right to speak and organize cannot be abridged no matter if the group’s message and purpose are repugnant to American values (such as KKK speech). In order for government to intervene, the speaker must subjectively intend incitement (imminent evil), use words which are likely to produce action (imminent action), and openly encourage or urge incitement (suggesting, for example, it’s a duty to commit a crime).

Source: http://faculty.ncwc.edu/mstevens/410/410lect08.htm

I followed the story on and off today. According to TechCrunch, Amazon defends the book remaining for sale on their site:

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.

I decided the only way to make a reasonable decision about this was to actually read the book which meant I had to buy it.

I paid the $4.79 for the book and cringed a little at the thought that this is the first ebook I’ve ever bought.

My Facebook friends were shocked that I bought the book.

Even my husband was shocked and a little angry when he found out I used our his Amazon account to buy this book. He even asked me to publicly post a disclaimer that I bought it for research and that he is not interested in the content of the book at all. I hereby attest to that. Please don’t arrest my husband because I bought this book.

My Review

The table of contents:
Facts and Fallacies
Two Tales of Pedophilia
What Can Be Learned
The Animosity of Parents
The Roots of Pedophilia

Initially the book is quite tame and I see an honest account of one man’s struggle with his sexuality. Just like the atrocious summary posted on Amazon.com the writing is filled with typos. The author attempts to separate a  pedophile or “one who loves children” from a child molester or someone who sexually abuses children. When one hears the word pedophile one thinks of children. The focus of this book however is on relationships between adolescents and adults. Greaves advocates masturbation rather than physical contact with anyone under the age of 18.

At this point Greaves has passed the Brandenburg Test. He is explicitly telling people not to commit a crime. In fact it is so bold that I have to wonder if it was done on purpose to remain within the bounds of the law.

The second chapter contains explicit, first-hand accounts from adolescent boys who have had sexual encounters with men. The content is probably disturbing to most people.

The rest of the book takes an unexpected turn as Greaves suddenly descends into guiding principles such as (typos once again included), “Patients is a virtue. That much is true, but it is also a doorway to friendship and love.” There are also explicit guidelines of what kind of touching and sexual acts are appropriate versus inappropriate. The rest of the book, hundreds of pages, all contradict the opening statement:

The change in tone and content is so rapid that I have to go back and forth to make sure I didn’t miss a transition.

Conclusion

The book is poorly written, sexually explicit, and will offend and/or anger many readers. Personally I do not agree with a single statement in the book. Personally I have a lot of opinions about the author. However the issue at hand is not what I personally believe, think, or feel.

The author has a federally protected right to express his thoughts. Are some of the depictions in the book illegal? Yes. Does the author suggest it’s a duty to commit a crime? Not at all. Does he advocate the duty, necessity, or propriety of acting on his beliefs? No.

In my opinion, much as I don’t like it, the book passes the Bradenburg Test. No matter how poorly written or disagreeable the content is, I must admit that it was a fascinating to see a glimpse  into the mind of a pedophile. As a mother I learned some things that might protect my children. As a mother I learned some things to look out for.

The Boycott of Amazon.com

I understand the argument. Amazon.com is a business and has a right to censor materials. However Amazon.com allows individuals to self-publish to Kindle. Amazon DTP has the following policy:

5.1.3 Digital Book Rejection. We are entitled to determine what content we accept and distribute through the Program in our sole discretion.

I will not boycott Amazon.com for selling this book. There are probably other books that Amazon.com sells that I don’t agree with or might find offensive in some way. I choose not to buy those books just like I choose what I watch on TV or listen to on the radio.

I will not boycott Amazon.com if they decide to refuse selling this book either. This has already received more attention than was warranted. In fact, I think we’ve all been part of a brilliant social media publicity campaign to promote this book–a book that most people would have never heard of.

To me the bigger issue is how quickly the crowd turned today and turned this into a witch hunt. I’m surprised at how many called for the boycott of Amazon.com. I would love to know how many of the people who called for this boycott actually read even an excerpt (which is free) of the book. When did we start judging books by their covers…or titles? Is this book dangerous? Probably not. Will this book cause someone to become a pedophile? Not unless he or she was already so inclined. Did I learn something? Yes. However because of the title many made a judgement about the book. I wonder if people will judge me because of this blog post?

I don’t want to live in a society where censorship is expected or the norm. Do we want Amazon.com censoring material any more than we want the government censoring material? If you don’t like it, don’t read it.