Finally a straight answer, cheers.
Then what is the problem when my position is the same but simply pointing out that I would chose not to for reasons of personal taste, i.e I do not think I would be either entertained or enlightened.
And horror of horrors suggesting that if it attracted a large audience For it's entertainment value I would consider that to be a negative outcome.
Bump for fmf
Originally posted by FMFSo are you now claiming that societal taboos do not control behaviour at the extremes such as bestiality or say the sexual abuse and murder of children. It is not the case that I personally need the taboo status to prevent me from engaging in either of the above criminal acts but I do not know about you or anybody else.
Bump for kevcvs57.
Familiarity does not only breed contempt it also desensitises any given population to that which they are being exposed to, and whilst this is not an issue for the vast majority, what about borderline personalities.
1 edit
Originally posted by kevcvs57They "might" be anything. Either you want to censor the book or you don't. I oppose censorship. If you read it and "like it" and you murder children then let's hope you are caught and punished. Like I said, don't read the book if you don't want to.
So you do not think somebody who would 'like it' (a book describing the sexual torture and murder of children) might have some issues that need addressing.
Originally posted by kevcvs57What about them?
Familiarity does not only breed contempt it also desensitises any given population to that which they are being exposed to, and whilst this is not an issue for the vast majority, what about borderline personalities.
If through his book "familiarity breeds contempt" for Ian Brady, then I'm all for that.
Originally posted by FMFNot a straw man fmf just trying answer this loaded question.
Yet another extraordinary straw man. What is the matter with you?
"What "taboo" are you personally likely to "relax" because of the "natural tendency" you say you have? Could you give me an example of one of these "taboos"?"
Is this your not so subtle way of calling me a liar because I do not embrace the publication of such books with the same enthusiasm as yourself, the test of being against censorship is when you deplore something but defend someones right to publish it anyway.
"You're against censorship, you say, so what do you propose to do to protect us preemptively from book reading "borderline sociopaths" ?"
Unless I am mistaken that has been my position throughout this thread, if you think differently please direct me to the post.
Originally posted by FMFLet me rephrase it then; what about their potential victims.
What about them?
If through his book "familiarity breeds contempt" for Ian Brady, then I'm all for that.
Do you think criticism and censorship are the same thing. I am beginning to think that you would like to censor my criticism.
I cannot imagine that Brady could be rendered more contemptible.
Originally posted by kevcvs57I haven't called you a liar. Another odd straw man.
Is this your not so subtle way of calling me a liar because I do not embrace the publication of such books with the same enthusiasm as yourself, the test of being against censorship is when you deplore something but defend someones right to publish it anyway.
Originally posted by kevcvs57What do you mean, 'what about them?' You raised the question of "borderline sociopaths". What is it you have to say about them? And of what consequence is it to the publishing of this book?
Let me rephrase it then; what about their potential victims. .
Originally posted by FMFStill not answering any questions then, is every question you do not want to answer just disregarded as a straw man, why should anyone answer your myriad of questions when you are obviously not going to answer theirs?
What do you mean, 'what about them?' You raised the question of "borderline sociopaths". What is it you have to say about them? And of what consequence is it to the publishing of this book?
Originally posted by FMF"You're against censorship, you say,"
I haven't called you a liar. Another odd straw man.
In the same post you outright accuse me being condescending, I thought I was just offering an opinion on the validity of publications which give the perpetrator a voice that their victims will never have.
I shall repeat again because you seem to keep forgetting, I am against any kind of censorship, but I will retain the right to criticize any publication that I chose to criticize.
You have reacted to almost every one of my posts in a pithy and obtuse manner pretending not know what I mean by phrases such as: morbid voyeurism, and societal taboos, apparently you have never heard of the phenomenon of desensitization.
My concerns about borderline sociopaths and the effects of this kind of publication becoming mainstream and profitable are that life has been known to imitate art, and the possibility of a real life serial killer becoming a popular culture anti hero.
what do I propose to do about I hear you ask, well nothing, because short of censorship there is nothing to be done. I am simply expressing a preference for it remaining a minority sub genre.
Originally posted by kevcvs57I don't support censorship. I don't think the publication of the book in the OP should be blocked. I don't think there is any question mark over the "validity" of the book. I am not any more or less concerned about "the possibility of a real life serial killer becoming a popular culture anti hero" as a result of this book being published. The book does not affect my concerns about what "borderline sociopaths" do. I don't intend to read it myself. If I wanted to, then I would, and I have no reason to believe that it would "desensitize" me or "relax" my adherence to societal taboos. I am not going to make snide or elitist remarks about the people who do read it. I don't think insights like the ones that may be in this book are for experts only. I don't think the fabric of society is under threat in any way. I am not responsible for what psychopaths do.
Still not answering any questions then, is every question you do not want to answer just disregarded as a straw man, why should anyone answer your myriad of questions when you are obviously not going to answer theirs?