Amazon.com and “The Pedophile’s Guide to Love and Pleasure: A Child-Lover’s Code of Conduct” – I’m going to leave alone the mess of the author of this book and the content. Wait—no I’m not. The author has been spouting off that his work pushes to teach true pedophiles better guidelines for dealing with kids…that “penetration is out” yet “touching and fondling” is okay. No sir, it is not and if you (or any of your material’s readers) are engaging in such activity, may the justice be swift, painful and may karma visit you in a manner that is unholy.
On to Amazon. To me, they dropped the ball by trying to have it both ways. If you have a digital services content policy in place that states that offensive material and “titles which may lead to…illegal activity” are prohibited, then why did you post this piece for sale in the first place? Hello, touching and fondling kids is illegal. Giving someone a playbook on how to molest kids in a “better” manner is offensive.
Now, because they posted the material for sale then buckled under the pressure of backlash and boycott threats, it looks like they are engaging in a form of censorship. I don’t agree with this child-lover trash, yet I must stand by the protections in our country for the author to be able to write and express it. Amazon is correct that people then have a right to decide if they want to purchase it or not. However, they as a company either stand by their policies or not.
Demi Lovato – There is a lot to be said (and not positive) about a societal machine (Hollywood, the music industry) that systematically makes money off the backs of children. The situation with Demi Lovato smacks an immediate reminder to the breakdown of Britney Spears. Remember her head shaving incident?
So “close family” sources say that Demi has had a history of emotional and physical issues and has been “fighting demons her whole life.” Um, has anyone attempted to intervene along the way and get her some help? I’m pointing to these “close family” sources and her folks since I have no expectation that the managers, accountants, lawyers and Disney execs profiting off her brand would step up. An evolution into cutting usually has a trigger source. And I’m sure that her recent “incident” of cold cocking a dancer isn’t the first cry for help. Is it now since Demi is 18—and no longer the easy bankable child star with an image to protect—that we will now not hide what is going on?
Cam Newton – Here’s another example of adults profiting off their kid. The system is supposed to work that college and high school athletes are not being paid (as professional athletes are) for their talents. The “reward” if you will is being moved up to start in high school and then being recruited to college on scholarship because of one’s talents. From college, a student hopes to continue to shine with the potential to then be drafted into the pros of their respective sport. Along the way there is big money to be made in the college (and even now high school) systems and getting the most talented athletes to a school is a competitive business.
It makes sense that schools themselves and/or booster supporters would find a way to skate past the rules and help get deals made. What is the hot mess here is how, allegedly, Cam’s father made statements to folks on what it would take to get his son to certain schools—even naming a figure. Rumor has it that Cam even left the final decision on where he went to his father. So, daddy dearest, I get how knowing and watching everyone else get a cut from an athletic star’s potential and eventual performance can be frustrating. But soliciting extra benefits violates NCAA rules, so for a couple hundred thousand you put your greed out there without consideration for the fallout and cost (when caught) it will have on your son? The potential detriment to his player status at the college and maybe future pro career? Really?
Barbara McDowell 