Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  how-to guides

Anderson Cooper, Keeping Pedophiles (And Their Booksellers) Honest

Things we know make Anderson Cooper “mad” (or, in Andy’s television world, “stoic”): Lying about how much money Obama spends on international travel, and Amazon.com selling The Pedophile’s Guide to Love and Pleasure, which can be delivered to your Kindle in seconds right now.

The book from author and self-identified celibate pedophile Phillip R Greaves II — described by one website as “a rogue scholar with respect to the topics of religion, sexuality and politics” — is his “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.”

Yes, an actual guide for pedophiles. And Amazon isn’t pulling it anytime soon, saying in a statement, “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.”

Yuck, right? Even yuckier, notes Cooper — whose producers seem to have read some passages from the book, YUCK — is that some of the advice Greaves gives to pedophiles is that if they are disease free, they don’t have to wear condoms.

Now here’s hoping this post becomes the No. 1 Google result for “Anderson Cooper pedophile.”

By:           MAX SIMON
On:           Nov 11, 2010
Tagged: , , , , , , ,

  • 22 Comments
    • Jake the libertarian
      Jake the libertarian

      Ugh… just ugh….

      Nov 11, 2010 at 12:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jake the libertarian
      Jake the libertarian

      I do love the Silver F

      Nov 11, 2010 at 12:55 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jake the libertarian
      Jake the libertarian

      @Jake the libertarian: Damnit! Stupid browser keeps screwing up!!! I am trying to say ugh… pedophiles = bad… silver fox = sexy and good.

      k, done now

      Nov 11, 2010 at 12:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nasty
      Nasty

      That’s just disgusting. Seriously, if it’s illegal why is he even allowed to write a book about it?

      Nov 11, 2010 at 1:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kenny
      Kenny

      As a gay man, I’m so tired of gays being compared with these fucking weirdos. Children can NOT consent to sex. I don’t believe in vigilante justice. But, as a parent, I’m not sure that I could refrain from harming some sick bastard if they victimized one of my kids.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 2:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Aaron in Honolulu
      Aaron in Honolulu

      What reason should Amazon have for keeping that book. I like Anderson’s porn analogy.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 3:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Scott
      Scott

      I can’t comprehend why these people try to justify themselves. I feel bad for them, but at the same time I really don’t.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 5:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jake
      Jake

      The material in the book is clearly monstrous, but that doesn’t justify Amazon removing it. If you don’t like the material, don’t buy the book. If Amazon starts deciding what books can and cannot be sold then where do they draw the line? How about books that include illegal acts within them? That will leave a lot of fiction banned…..

      Nov 11, 2010 at 7:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kay
      Kay

      Good for amazon for taking off the link. Now take down the listing.
      We take very seriously the protection of our children.
      Teaching pedophiles how not to get caught is a new low for freedom of the press. Wake up people.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 8:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jake the libertarian
      Jake the libertarian

      @Jake: Well I thought Anderson made a good point about that. Amazon already censors what they sell. They don’t sell pornography. That’s totally fine… no company should have to sell porn if they don’t want to. But if you draw the line a porn, which millions enjoy and is perfectly legal, why on earth is pedophilia acceptable? I will be boycotting Amazon as long as they sell this trash.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 10:13 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jake the libertarian
      Jake the libertarian

      Further to my last, that’s not the same thing as government banning a book, which as my name implies… I would never support.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 10:14 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • BubbasBack
      BubbasBack

      When is this queen gonna come out? Pass the beer. Burp.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 11:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jimmy Fury
      Jimmy Fury

      @Jake the libertarian: The problem with the porn analogy is quite simple.
      Porn is not “perfectly legal.” There’s an age limit on who can purchase porn and that age limit is different in different states. Some states also draw lines declaring what sort of porn is acceptable and what kind gets banned for being too graphic.
      It’s much easier for Amazon to just have a blanket no-porn-policy than to try to program the necessary systems required to prevent illegal purchases. The decision not to sell porn is technical not moral.

      Also, the analogy falls flat because no matter how disgusting it is, and it is disgusting, the pedobook isn’t porn. Yes, it’s gross, vile, disgusting, tasteless, horrific, and if i had the capacity to be offended I would.
      But it is not illegal to write about illegal things. Even in terms of non-fiction how-to guides. There are thousands of how-to-grow-pot books that you can buy in any bookstore that will prove that.
      So as bad as it is, there is no legal or logical argument to pull it.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 11:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • An Ally
      An Ally

      As you have no doubt heard, Amazon is selling (and has been for years) another pedophilia title, though not in ebook form. It is categorized as Gay & Lesbian nonfiction. I am surprised there has not been loud protest from the community.
      http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Loved-Boylovers-David-Riegel/dp/0967699703/

      Nov 11, 2010 at 12:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dave
      Dave

      Banning books—even vile, disgusting books—is never OK. And pressuring booksellers not to carry books you don’t like is ultimately the same as banning them.

      Amazon carries racist books, anti-gay books, Holocaust denial books, pro-rape books, Glenn Beck books, and dozens of other kinds of books that many of us find disgusting and intolerable. As is almost always the case, the answer to vile ideas is better ideas, the answer to vile speech is better speech, and the answer to vile books is better books.

      I understand the rationale that lets people feel justified in wanting to see this book removed — pedophile books promote pedophilia! we’re helping the children! — but who picks and chooses which issues do and don’t get a say in the bookstore?

      If Amazon decided to ban pro-gay books because they “promote homosexuality”, gays and lesbians would have a shit-fit, and rightly so. If they banned teabagger books, the teabaggers would have a shit-fit, and rightly so. I may honestly believe that, say, Ann Coulter’s books do a positive harm to the world, and to their readers, and to the victims of her hateful rhetoric, but I wouldn’t in a million years suggest we ban them.

      In all our time on Earth, the one principle that nearly every free society has ultimately come to see as true is that the only fit judge of the value of an idea is the person to whom it’s communicated, not some third-party gatekeeper deciding what ideas can and can’t be shared.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 12:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • rrr
      rrr

      @Dave: Deciding not to sell a book in your shop or outlet is not the same as banning it, just like a store deciding not to sell an environmentally unfriendly or animal tested product in their store is not the same as banning those products. Banning is when the government makes a book or product illegal.

      If Amazon decided to ban pro-gay books because they “promote homosexuality”, gays and lesbians would correctly argue that is offensive because there is nothing innately wrong or harmful about homosexuality. Pedophiles can try to make the case that there in nothing innately wrong or harmful about pedophilia but they would be wrong and would lose that debate.

      As Anderson pointed out, Amazon does not have a policy of selling everything people want to market which they could use to try to defend selling this book. They are selective and will not sell pornographic material even though it depicts legal activities between consenting adults.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 2:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan
      Ryan

      @Jake, you’re “slippery slope” argument is just as weak as when the Religious Right says “if we allow gay people to get married, where do we draw the line? A man could marry his horse”. Amazon can draw the line wherever they want. If they refuse to sell this book, it doesn’t mean they won’t be able to sell any book that depicts illegal activities. That’s asinine. It’s not “censorship”. Its their right to sell or not sell any book for any reason. And they ought to not sell this one.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 4:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jake the libertarian
      Jake the libertarian

      @Jimmy Fury: I agree that there isn’t a legal argument to pull the book, but there is certainly a logical argument:

      The book is for pedophiles. Pedophiles are the scum of the earth. Amazon is a private company and can sell or not sell whatever they want. So by selling a book for pedophiles they are saying that they want pedophiles a customers and want their business.

      They are a book store dude… they don’t have to carry every book ever published. This is a terrible book designed to teach terrible people terrible things… I don’t think they should sell it and I wont be giving them any of my business as long at they support pedophile authors and pedophile paraphernalia.

      Seems logical to me

      Nov 11, 2010 at 5:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • csrdrunner
      csrdrunner

      DISGUSTING, DISGUSTING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
      America when are you going to wake up, how about all these people go to san franFREAKO or beserkly. Gotta wonder where the head honchos at amazon would be if something like this happened to their kid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      Nov 11, 2010 at 7:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jimmy Fury
      Jimmy Fury

      @Jake the libertarian: Then your understanding of the definition of logic is flawed. You do not like a book therefore it should not be sold. That’s absurdity not logic. If you do not like a book the logical thing to do is simply not purchase it.

      Nov 12, 2010 at 12:01 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • counterpoll
      counterpoll

      @No.20 Jimmy Fury :
      Amazon likewise retains the right not to sell any book for any reason. Your logic is confounding the consumer’s rights with the corporation’s. Choosing not to sell a book is not the same as choosing not to buy it or read it.

      Nov 12, 2010 at 12:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jake the libertarian
      Jake the libertarian

      @Jimmy Fury: You’re kind of a fucking idiot, aren’t you?

      Nov 13, 2010 at 6:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Queerty now requires you to log in to comment

    Please log in to add your comment.

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.