Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Danny Allen | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
@Nick: How? Really, how? As someone pointed out in the comments of his post; isn't hypocritical to get all upset that someone is doing this to the GLBT community and be perfectly fine with (even happy about) this happening to any other target because you don't like them? That the system could be screwed up for one group means that the system could be screwed up with for every group.
@Gothamite88: Actually, that's his point. He could have gone after books on "Oprah's Book Club" or the "NYT Bestsellers" list to make the same point. Doing it that way would have made it instantly obvious that someone was exploiting Amazon's systems... instead he went after the LGBT books which many right wingers do consider inappropriate, thus opening up the possibility that it was intentional.
This was done with malice of forethought to damage Amazon's reputation, not to demonstrate an exploit.
BTW, quick note before anyone looks up my book there, I have updated the paperback version to 2nd edition at [lulu.com] for FAR cheaper than the hardback Amazon 1st edition. ^_^
@cudthecrud: It's not a shameless plug. I actually plugged his book in the previous thread(it was relevant, go read), but I of course plugged the more expensive hardbound edition. He's simply pointing out to those that may have missed the update that there is a cheaper option.
@A Snake a Snake... OH it's a Snake!: A link tag with a disguised url would have been so much cleverer. Although maybe a little more inappropriate, and slightly mean to any teenage girls reading. Wait are any teenage girls reading?
@eagles3: And likely ban-worthy at that point, not to mention you could could end up costing someone their job if inappropriate content pops up when the wrong person is wandering by.
Which, loses a little of its hilarity at that point.
However it happened, it represents a tangible loss of income for Amazon in lost sales (all that disposable income that gays supposedly have,) and more expensive, the intangible, long run suspicion that Amazon is not gay-friendly. As a straight person, if I thought that Amazon was anti-gay I would not shop thre, as I would call that family UNfriendly. (Gays are families too!)
Do you think Barnes and Noble puts "All I Could Bare: My Life in the Strip Clubs of Gay Washington, D.C." at the front of the store where kids can ask mommy what a strip club is? Moron.
@b33rl0rd: Yes, they do and should put books like this up for prominent display. Have you been to Bookstore in the past decade? The memoirs of former strippers have been quite common fare. How do I know this, it's not because it's a genre I routinely go looking for, it's because they have displayed them right up front.
There is nothing inappropriate about this title or the cover. You're scared that a child may read the words "strip club" and ask a question that leaves their parents stammering? So the child, completely clueless of the subject matter is not who you want to protect, it's the adult. I'm a parent. I think I could handle this question. You wouldn't be able to?
@daveNYC: you on the other hand, your kid will probably be pregnant or will have impregnated someone by the age of 13 because you didn't want to explain how the world is to your child. i love parents who think, "if i don't tell my kids about sex and drugs they'll never find out." good job. moron...
@b33rl0rd: Your comment shows ignorance of the situation.
It's not like anyone is saying Amazon should putting these books on their homepage. The problem is these titles won't show up with a public sales ranking or in the best-seller lists -- often a factor in how shoppers make their purchases.
Even a brick and mortar store will post a best-seller list (yes there have been controversies with stores editing that too, but generally a best seller list isn't messed with).
You give me the search results, and let me do my own filtering. It's not like Amazon has any truly pornographic material to peddle. This wasn't a "think of the children" policy, this was a "think of the easily morally outraged dipshits" policy.
If the subject of the book is essentially romance, the book should be considered mainstream. If the subject of the book is essentially sexually explicit content, then the book should be considered adult.
And notice that I did not qualify either the romance or the sexually explicit content by whether or not it was straight- or gay-themed--that aspect is completely irrelevant to the classification as either adult or mainstream. It seems Amazon, however temporarily, misunderstood such distinctions.
@bosskev: I disagree with your definition of mainstream. Based on what you stated, the majority of Amazon shoppers looking for romance titles are either homosexual or approve of homosexuality. And the reality is... that just makes no sense whatsoever. I'm sure the number of minors that search romance titles would astound you. I'm sure the miniscule number of minors struggling to understand their sexuality would most likely be intelligent enough to search "gay romance". I don't believe for one second that straight-or-gay romance titles are on the same plane, and I doubt Amazon's marketing executives would, either.
The fact is, other gay titles were unaffected. This was 2 books. An error. This is a molehill turned into a mountain. I guess if you can't successfully condemn churches or government, then go after the private corporations to set your agenda.
@Jafro: " Based on what you stated, the majority of Amazon shoppers looking for romance titles are either homosexual or approve of homosexuality."
Jafro, I must politey inquire, what the fuck are you talking about? I neither said nor implied any such thing. And I certainly didn't say that romance novels could not also be categorized in many other appropriate ways, just that it would be wrong to automatically smack a label of "Adult" on a book ONLY because the storyline included gay relationships. To be sure, the "Romance" books can certainly be sub-categorized by other elements, including a section/filter for "straight romance" and a section/filter for "gay romance". But please don't assume that a gay romance novel is necessarily sexually explicit, certainly not any more so than a Jackie Collins novel.
To be very clear as to my statment:
If it is sexually explict content, straight or gay, it's adult.
If it's romanctic content, straight or gay, it's mainstream.
And, for the record, there ARE gay men out there interested in ROMANCE with little or no desire for the sexually explicit crap.
Wow! I wonder if they did that to my book?! It's poetry of my coming of age and discovering that I was gay, so the word "gay" is a keyword, or would it have to have the word "gay" in the title?
They should have excluded any books with people in it just to make sure they had the "adult" content problem covered. I find they stopped short of what could have been the book burning of the 21st century.
@Toastie: Being unable to find a book on Amazon.com erradicates it completely from existance?
Whaaa... evil Amazon won't show or let me search for the GLBTQ book I want! How will I *ever* get a copy now? If only there were some sort of physical store that sold books...
@coyote1284: Did the Nazi's burning of non-approved works eliminate those works? No, unless they had the only copy that existed. I don't read the books effected by this, but I'm not one to wait for something to hurt me to speak out about it.
@Toastie: Ohh, nice Godwin, you win! How can I ever counter a straw-man argument like that? Of course! A single internet retailer not selling a product is *exactly* like Nazi book burnings! Why didn't I see it sooner?
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
This was done with malice of forethought to damage Amazon's reputation, not to demonstrate an exploit.
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
BTW, quick note before anyone looks up my book there, I have updated the paperback version to 2nd edition at [lulu.com] for FAR cheaper than the hardback Amazon 1st edition. ^_^
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
h-h! knw mzn wldn't d tht t m!
BTW, qck nt bfr nyn lks p my bk thr, hv pdtd th pprbck vrsn t 2nd dtn t www.mtspn.cm fr FR chpr thn th hrdbck mzn 1st dtn. ^_^
04/13/09
04/13/09
/being a douchebag
04/13/09
04/13/09
Which, loses a little of its hilarity at that point.
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
Your autobiography got bumped due to its misleading title. Not so much as a sausage feast as a sausage snack.
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
There is nothing inappropriate about this title or the cover. You're scared that a child may read the words "strip club" and ask a question that leaves their parents stammering? So the child, completely clueless of the subject matter is not who you want to protect, it's the adult. I'm a parent. I think I could handle this question. You wouldn't be able to?
04/13/09
04/13/09
@daveNYC: you on the other hand, your kid will probably be pregnant or will have impregnated someone by the age of 13 because you didn't want to explain how the world is to your child. i love parents who think, "if i don't tell my kids about sex and drugs they'll never find out." good job. moron...
04/13/09
@elementary: yes, but the question is what if your kid asks "what is a gay strip club!?" Totally different question! ;)
04/13/09
It's not like anyone is saying Amazon should putting these books on their homepage. The problem is these titles won't show up with a public sales ranking or in the best-seller lists -- often a factor in how shoppers make their purchases.
Even a brick and mortar store will post a best-seller list (yes there have been controversies with stores editing that too, but generally a best seller list isn't messed with).
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
And notice that I did not qualify either the romance or the sexually explicit content by whether or not it was straight- or gay-themed--that aspect is completely irrelevant to the classification as either adult or mainstream. It seems Amazon, however temporarily, misunderstood such distinctions.
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
The fact is, other gay titles were unaffected. This was 2 books. An error. This is a molehill turned into a mountain. I guess if you can't successfully condemn churches or government, then go after the private corporations to set your agenda.
04/13/09
The correct answer, of course, is "Raunchy Books by Conservative Talk Show Hosts"
04/13/09
Jafro, I must politey inquire, what the fuck are you talking about? I neither said nor implied any such thing. And I certainly didn't say that romance novels could not also be categorized in many other appropriate ways, just that it would be wrong to automatically smack a label of "Adult" on a book ONLY because the storyline included gay relationships. To be sure, the "Romance" books can certainly be sub-categorized by other elements, including a section/filter for "straight romance" and a section/filter for "gay romance". But please don't assume that a gay romance novel is necessarily sexually explicit, certainly not any more so than a Jackie Collins novel.
To be very clear as to my statment:
If it is sexually explict content, straight or gay, it's adult.
If it's romanctic content, straight or gay, it's mainstream.
And, for the record, there ARE gay men out there interested in ROMANCE with little or no desire for the sexually explicit crap.
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
~Scribblings from a Sidewalk Notebook
It definately sounds like it's worth a read.
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
Whaaa... evil Amazon won't show or let me search for the GLBTQ book I want! How will I *ever* get a copy now? If only there were some sort of physical store that sold books...
04/13/09
04/13/09
04/13/09
I agree 100% and just clicked your little heart.
04/13/09