Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it,
follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given
their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Amazon Screws Up. Allows, Then Takes Down Book on Man/Boy Love
Posts
Sure, they did backpedal, but regardless of how they choose to define censorship, it clearly isn't all-inclusive. They aren't selling Hardcore Submissive Supersluts XVIII, either.
Amazon does sell porn and sex toys.
Either way, considering how deep (ha!) their catalogue goes in all other categories, I'd be surprised if there wasn't some censorship at work here. Unless there are specific rules for listing stuff that most porn publishers don't fulfill.
I don't necessarily think Amazon is in the wrong here, however we do have an actual example of them self-censoring. You are just guessing about the porn stuff. Not only are your guesses irrelevant, I don't see how they matter anyway. What are you trying to prove? That if they also self-censor porn that it is okay to self-censor this other thing? That's not a logically sound argument either as one could then argue that both forms of self-censorship are wrong.
Judging by the titles and images, I doubt they were primarily novels about adults (though how a cartoon character can actually have a legal age is another discussion).
This was several months ago, so maybe they took them down, but I doubt that.
I never said it was okay, I'm saying there seems to be a rather overt correlation between the two examples, and that their own definition of censorship is clearly busted.
How is there an overt correlation? Can you prove that they carry every single book and every single movie in existence? If not, I consider your "observation" the product of bias. You have zilch for proof that they actively shy away from specific pornographic products. You are doing a store search, saying "hmm, not that many hits," and leaping directly to the conclusion that they are self-censoring the porn they vendor. It's not a factual observation, and it has nothing to do with this scenario where we have actual PROOF that they self-censored.
Sorry for the misinformation.