Guđin gjörđu brú til himins af jörđu

Where do you draw the line when it comes to literature and its content? Hypothetically if you would let Jeffrey Dahmer write books about trepanation and acid lobotomy to create brain dead sex slaves, publish them, and let children read those for educational reasons, would it be justifiable? Could you call it a warning against homosexual deviance or an eye-opening, progressive look into the sexual exploration of the modern human?

Unfortunately, everybody nowadays are special snowflakes that experience severe mental trauma when they read books that aren't approved by censorship.

>where do you draw the line? same as the line between porn and "tasteful nudes" -- I know it when I see it.

The pedo manuals that Germany burned in the 30s

>>7368 Everything written by Magnus Hirschfeld was burned as well.

>>7368 You got any titles? Just asking for research purposes only Present Day, Present Time! AHAHAHAHAHA!

>>7367 What you really mean is that you never draw the line.

Generally, I think that most things can be written about provided that they don't write about harmful things (basically all the bad -philias) with the intent of entertainment or education. It's easy to tell the difference between someone writing an instruction manual on how to commit rape vs some soykafty author using rape as a plot device distastefully. Trouble is that authorial intent isn't always obvious for everyone and doesn't matter if a bunch of people misinterpret something, which means either a book/novel/etc gets branded as soykafty and shelved forever or gets unwarranted attention. Intent needs to be an established factor before the content of something is considered imo.

Yes Here https://youtu.be/qtqP_gA0rXA

>>7384 What distinguishes fiction from actual intent? It doesn't matter how you interpret it because it is still written down and someone made the effort to produce this thought which in turn got manifested as an idea.

surprising even myself I think I might be a free speech absolutist in some sense. Then again maybe I'm just tired. I say if Mr. Dahmer writes a book, gets it published, whatever, fine. Shouldn't neccisarily stop him nor pressure publishers to stop him, etc etc. Of course, if he wrote it before he was discovered, it would seem to constitute a confession of his crimes and should bring about his doom. And if he opted to write it after being discovered, well, in a just society he'd have about 15 minutes to write it before his trial concluded and his execution was completed if he was lucky. Assuming a just society that is, which, alas, we don't have.

>>7347 >Could you call it a warning against homosexual deviance or an eye-opening, progressive look into the sexual exploration of the modern human? It would clearly be neither. Dahmer is neither representative of gay people nor the modern human and their sexual explorations. It would just be a glimpse into the mind of Dahmer. Elliot Rodger's manifesto included details on how to run a perfect, in his view, society, and his musings on race and sex but it's clearly not an educational piece on any of those topics. >let children read those for educational reasons, would it be justifiable Depends on the age and context. University or high school kids studying abnormal psychology? That's fine. As part of nutrition lesson? Not so much.

>>7396 Sounds like you are sitting on the fence in order to not hurt anyones feelings.

>>7395 There is no distinction. Only actions speak louder than words.

If I like the writing it can exist, if I don't, the author should be killed. Simple as.

Americans have the attention span of a negro. They need instant gratification which makes reading impossible. The American society is reminiscent of a giant ADHD internment camp. People constantly need to entertain themselves with guns, amusement parks, grotesque amounts of food, cinema visits, electronics, social media, acquisition of wealth, gambling, strip clubs, NASCAR etc. It's a contrived mindset that gives off this vibe of unrest and lack of peace. Nevertheless, Americans can support a large economy because of this. Their search for novelty in their daily life makes them compulsive consumers that fear boredom. You could say that anything goes because the American society is rootless and has no internal values so talking about drawing a line in terms of content is meaningless.

>>7421 This. Couldn’t have said it better.

>>7421 Americans are deprived of real culture so it is not surprising that they seek pleasure in the most shallow entertainment and status symbols.

>>7415 Couldn't agree more, friendo

If you are unable to draw the line yourself I would say you lack internal inhibitions against repulsive behaviour. In other words if you're a sociopath you could justify anything. Dahmer is an example of how far people can go if they have zero recognition of transgressions.

>>7493 Pretty much all pedophiles in a nutshell, like Nabokov.

>>7613 Ummm.... that infamous book was meant to be against those people. It is always held up as an example of the "unreliable narrator" style in literature. He even published statements denouncing the pedophiles who saw it as some sort of vindication or justification. I have a feeling you didn't read the book yourself.

>>7633 https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1992-31531-001 >Argues that Vladimir Nabokov was, in fact, a pedophile, as was the principal character in his celebrated novel, Lolita (1958). Nabokov's pedophilia is traced to his having been sexually abused by his uncle as a child. His pedophilia was, it is argued, further rooted in his grandfather having married his lover's daughter to provide a socially acceptable cover for his relationship with the older woman. Lolita (the story of a man who marries a woman to pursue a sexual relationship with her daughter) is an inversion of such intergenerational blurring. Nabokov's pedophilia is traced as well to an unresolved oedipal conflict. When Nabokov's father died, oedipal themes suddenly became prominent in his writing. There are plenty of people that realize there is an element of honesty in that book that people try to dismiss as fiction.

>>7647 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dedovshchina Russians are a strange kind of people. Pedophiles and latent homosexuals that rape younger males just for soykafs and giggles.

this is such a bizarre framing of the issue of censorship idk why its so common. look, if you read that hypothetical dahmer book, it presumably wouldnt be because you were looking for tips on making sex slaves, right? it would probably be because youre curious about his methods, or want to see how his mind works, or something like that. you arent a slave to authorial intent. you are capable of critical thought. so why on earth cant you manage to project that self perception onto other people? what exactly is going to happen if you let the general public read a book like that? what, are they going to say "actually this whole serial killing thing seems like a good idea"? of course not, thats ridiculous.

>>7347 what does drawing a line on literature have to do with having children read it for educational reasons? If people are handing the book out to children its pretty fuarrrking weird and shows something wrong with society, but publishing a book doesnt equal handing it out to children

>>7647 Do you have the whole article, not just the abstract? Not much to go on there. Besides, even if he had these tendencies he was still vocal about people who acted them out or who used his novel as justification. The book was not supposed to be a promotion of child abuse.

>>7652 not him (and havent read lolita), but its important to think beyond what an author consciously intends when youre analyzing a piece of literature. imagine you have a photograph of a late 19th century family posing in front of their house. the photographer's conscious intention may have been to create a nice portrait to share with their friends, or whatever people of the time did with photographs. but we as critical observers, with the benefit of hindsight, can draw so much more out of it. there's of course the zeitgeist angle. photographs like this tell you how people dressed, what their houses looked like, etc. do they smile for the photograph? do the husband and wife hold hands or embrace? what does this reveal about the attitudes towards displays of affection at the time? then there's details about the people themselves. perhaps the husband is wearing a somewhat showy anachronistic hat which evokes nostalgia for the early 19th century. perhaps this reveals something about his political inclinations, and by proxy some of the attitudes of people like him. books are the same way. the authors words will always say much more than they intend, and youre missing an entire dimension of analysis if you look beyond stated intention.

>>7654 That was a really long winded way of explaining one of the points I already implied there, while telling me I missed it.

>>7650 I think OP means that children can get the wrong ideas no matter what your intentions are. There are numerous accidents involving children and firearms where children think the gun is harmless. Same thing applies to deviant sexual content that twist their minds. Children can come into contact with wrong ideas just like firearms that they think are toys.

>>7669 sure, but no one (I hope) thinks every book should be written and prepared for an audience of naive children and childish adults, what horrible literature we would have if that were the case. So sure, let dahmer write his book. That doesn't mean I want it required reading for fourth graders. And *that* doesn't mean I wouldn't possibly want to give it a gander myself, or perhaps to let my kid read it if I thought he'd take it reasonably and get something out of it.

>>7670 Hey someone agreed to publish Willie Pickton's book after he confessed to murdering 49 people (only 6 convictions) but it's not in school libraries or anything. Apparently it's not very good though.

>>7347 If it doesn't contain a clear and legitimate imminent call to specific violence on a specific person(s) then it should not be censored in any way. Likewise for all drawn and animated content no matter how realistic. I regularly pick up these books at the pre-teens/teens section of the local library, where they should be: https://www.fakku.net/books

I know a child murderer called Ian Brady wrote a true crime book, an analysis of several prominent murderers. It was intended to be a kind of insight into the psychopathic mind, with some existential mental gymnastics thrown into the mix. I read it whilst working night shifts.

>>7367 Any art made to create good feelings without any intellectual or spiritual purpose is porn. Almost all "tasteful nudes" are porn. Almost all art is porn, which like all drugs should be legalized and treated not as a crime but as an illness.

>>7421 If yt can be dum like nignog, can nignog b smart like yt? I've met only a handful in my life so I can't speak, but they've had the full capacity for being fuarktards or inspirational just like everyone else I've met. But anyway, I don't care about that, your post reminds me of file related. Search for "feckless" for the specific part but the whole thing is really good.

This is an interesting direction for questioning. I'm pretty anti censorship, but I'm also aware of like, incentive factors. Many people crave the renoun represented in having a published book. Not that I think anyone is out there thinking "Oh how do I get my name on a famous book... I know! Murder". But even so, it sends the wrong signals. I'd be more ok with books written by psychologists about murderers, but to be honest, I don't think they would have nearly the same insight as the mindscape created in words from the murderer themself. Perhaps scrubbing the name of who the person was would have some of that "fuk you don't kill people" feel I want. But on the content itself, 99.99...% people read the book cause of morbid curiosity or a desire to better understand and prevent murder, but some epsilion of the population wants to murder, and having a body of literature passing between these people does seem bad. We don't want the state of the art to get pushed forward when it comes to this stuff. In spite of that, I remain pro freedom of speech. Not sure where that leaves me. Confused I suppose. Confused and wanting.

>>7730 >I don't think they would have nearly the same insight as the mindscape created in words from the murderer themself Don't underestimate how completely unaware most people are of their mental inner workings. They would probably reveal lots of stuff inadvertently though, if you were to read between the lines. Since it's a psychologist's job to read people everyday, I'd probably prefer their professional insight. Also a sentenced criminal would probably spend a lot of words trying to prove their innocence one way or another, or provide context that in their view justifies their actions or at least mitigates the level of guilt, makes the reader feel sorry for them, etc. On the other hand if the killer were a talented writer, that might be different. Of course they might try to manipulate the audience and actually succeed. I'd love to read such a thing if it existed.

>>7347 Broh what the fuarrrk? Drink some water and go for a walk.