@mythago: Right....obviously I couldn't possibly be facing anything as difficult in my life as some mischaracterized book reviews is to your life.

And I AM special. Mom said so.

@floraposte: LOL how convenient! When I screw up at the office, I'm going to say it was a computer glitch. ;-)

1) We should make sure that lists are not ordered this way and or
2)We need to stop labeling our cookbooks by our sexual orientation.

@varro: Excellent point. Which is more of a "lifestyle choice", sexuality or religion?

@supercereal: For anyone who hasn't seen it already, I strongly recommend heading over to Gawker to watch the audition reels for this commercial, which were leaked and posted recently. Comedy fucking gold.

Adultery is not illegal, though, in many places.

Your second argument is a textbook example of begging the question. You're saying it's bad because it's bad.

IFILL: Let's try to avoid nuance, Senator. Do you support gay marriage?

BIDEN: No. Barack Obama nor I support redefining from a civil side what constitutes marriage. We do not support that. That is basically the decision to be able to be able to be left to faiths and people who practice their faiths the determination what you call it.
The bottom line though is, and I'm glad to hear the governor, I take her at her word, obviously, that she think there should be no civil rights distinction, none whatsoever, between a committed gay couple and a committed heterosexual couple. If that's the case, we really don't have a difference.

To all those with "its-between-consenting-adults" argument: So is adultery, but that doesn't make it right, does it?

To all those with "how-does-it-affect-you" argument: It certainly does, when the over-zealous media in an attempt to be politically correct tries to potray it as a 'normal' way of life - affecting our children.

It wasn't until the 1970's that interracial couples were allowed to be married. So yes, african americans were being discriminated in some similar ways. And yes, marriage IS a right, or the very least civil unions. Not to mention, that if homosexuals looked completely different, or were forced to display their homosexuality on their sleeves, do you think they would be able to vote? Not necessarily.

Also, they are missing a lot of rights that you take for granted. If someone is sick, their partner won't have visitation rights, or make life-changing decisions on their behalf. They can't be on their partner's insurance, no tax breaks, and there's a lot more. Adoption rights are down the drain, and step parental rights are no where near the same as heterosexual couples. And these are couples off the top of my head.

Your original post, by the way, insisted that Amazon deliberately de-listed LGBT books because Amazon disagrees with "a lifestyle they consider morally wrong". Now, Amazon first claimed that they were de-listing 'adult' books, and is now claiming the whole thing was a glitch. So by your own standards, they are lying.

I also hate that argument because it's so dehumanizing. News flash, fundies: we are more than simply breeding stock. Our marriages have real purposes beyond just crapping out the next generation of taxpayers.

I LOVE the whole "but a man and man can't have children!!!" argument that homophobes like to spew.

It's clear they don't think before they speak.

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: " How can a man and a man reproduce? Now how about a man and a woman?"

Uh, science? Plenty of couples who can't procreate through "normal" means use science. EVEN STRAIGHT COUPLES OMG! Like, Octumom or whatever her nickname is?

And adoption. There are TONS of babies and children who need good homes.

Tell me, should we tell all couples who don't choose to have couples or can't because they are infertile or for other reasons, that they can't get married? Since they can't reproduce?

Don't use reproduction as an argument, it's illogical.

@ilovemom: I try not to shop at places that tote the right-wing line, but sometimes you can't help it. Besides, I'm mostly okay with someone choosing to believe something I don't agree with, but if that business then goes out of its way to censor? Then I'm done.

2: you have no evidence that they are lying about "the reason they are doing it"

3: I never said people should continue to shop there. I simply pointed out that they are an independent business. They have the right to do their business however they feel is just. You're simply looking for a witch to burn, and therefore you're perfectly willing to trash them.

@pecan 3.14159265: Glitch my fucking *ass*! It's a pretty convenient glitch, dontcha think?

@MBEmom: Gotcha ;)

I never said anything about children not being exposed to gay people, either. One of our closest family friends, who has lived with us for a while and gone on family trips with us, my children call Uncle Dara. So, no, I don't believe children will "die" by interacting with gay people.

@Cassius98: I actually heavily volunteer for an equal rights group in Arizona -- people ARE taking a stand!

And I think even just TALKING about it is a good thing. But as an active member in the fight for equal rights, I gotta say, Prop 8 was almost a GOOD thing -- it's woken people up (gay and straight).

@trujunglist: You rock my socks off, dude.

And, Brawndo - if you can't make a truly non-biological lifestyle choice like creed at the flip of a coin, how in gods' names can you maintain that something as complex and unconscious as sexual orientation can be changed?
So, it's incumbent on you to switch your faith - really, truly, in the depths of your soul - then report back to us before continuing as you are on this topic.

+1 Everyone knows that fundamentalists hate reading; too much book learnin'll make you hate jesus

You're a fucking douchebag, but you're still allowed to go on doing your thing, which is apparently putting homosexuality on the same level as murdering millions of people. Doesn't matter who you use; Hitler, Stalin, whoever, the point is that you just said genocide is the same as homosexuality. You just said rape and child molestation is on the same level as homosexuality.
You're the fucking jackass, and your god is laughing at you for being so goddamn stupid. BTW, jesus wasn't a douchebag, even to lepers and prostitutes. Who the fuck are you?

No they did not. They said they don't support gay marriage now.

No wait, seems I have a different spoof!

Dang, beat me to it. :D

@GnvrRckr: t s nt lfstyl, dmbss.

@kth: Grg Bsh hts Gy ppl.

It's amusing you're posting here and feel differently: cognitive dissonance much?

Let's apply your logic here to a different situation. Let's say that I don't hate Christians, but I don't condone their lifestyle. Would it be reasonable for me to support laws that ban Christians' right to go to church? After all, I don't hate them, and I'm not telling them they can't privately be Christian, but I just have a problem with them acting our their religion. Would that be fair and okay with you? Because it's the exact logic you're using. Only being a Christian is much more of a choice than being gay is, so actually your logic is even WORSE and more offensive.

As for your ridiculous rationalization about procreation, your theory would only hold water if gay marriage actually reduced the procreation rate. There is no evidence that it does, and there is no evidence that people become gay by choice. And most gay people are born to straight parents, so that's why they don't "die off".

Wht hd mstypd hd bn th wrd "ws" nd ys mssv ntrnt pnts g t y dch bg fr pntng t t "wr" nstd f "ws". Fckng rtrd. S g n bck nd pt tht fsh dck bck n, thgh hnstly y'll prbbly njy t bng nsrtd sd wys nt y ss mr thn tng t.

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: He/she is likely being critical of their government using religion as law.

You do know, Brawndo, that the United States of America is a SECULAR country based on SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE, right? Do you need a definition of secular and seperation of church and state? Your religion does NOT belong in our laws, period, end of discussion.

Lk ll f th dt cnsmrst rdrs wh gv bd rvws fr 12 pck f plts bcs thrd prty sllr scrwd p nd shppd sngl plts. Thy wrn't rvwng th plts, thy wrn't vn rvwng mzn.cm's sl f th plts. Thr s sprt vn fr rvwng thrd prty sllrs, bt th 'svvy' cnsmrs cldn't fnd t.

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: And gay people who have had straight parents, grew up in straight households, and grew up in very right-wing religious households STILL GROW UP TO BE GAY. Explain that, please. How is that a "choice"? And why would a large group of people make a "choice" to be discriminated against and marginalized?

And where is that evidence of yours that it is a "choice"?

href="#c12047431">Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: I think what you said is a load of crap and religious zealots have no place in politics or law-making. But, you know what? I fully support your right to say it. We are ALL born with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, provided it doesn't interfere with someone else's rights. So, how is a gay marriage affecting your rights? Would your personal rights be taken from you simply by the act of a gay couple getting married? I'm really curious here because you seem so willing to take someone else's rights away because you don't like what they do or because your religion tells you its wrong. You have to remember that laws are made by the government, not by the church since there is still a separation between church and state. Rape, murder, sodomy (with an unwilling partrner) are all acts that infringe on the victims' rights and should be outlawed because of that. Gay marriage doesn't infringe on the next person's rights, so why should we take that right away form a gay person?

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: Um, yeah, animals in the wild (and pets) have gay sex and gay "relationships" all the time. It's natural and normal. Anda lways have been.

"they fundamentally could reproduce."

If one is infertile, how can they "fundamentally" reproduce? They can't.

Oh, and you seem to be conveniently forgetting that gays and lesbians have kids ALL THE TIME, either through science or adoption.

So your arguments are, once again, illogical.

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: Bahahahaha, no it's not. Please, then, explain to me why animals (not humans) also have gay sex?

Oh, and sources please? That aren't right-wing propaganda but real scientific studies. Oh, yeah, they don't exist.

@Ubik2501: "Otherwise something like Prop 8 wouldn't have passed in California." Not really. It was the rich Mormons.

@ilovemom: Maybe most people don't check the political leanings of the places they do business with.

I'm sure some people know and don't care but I doubt most people even look that information up.

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: Cite your sources, or you're just spouting nonsense.

I know they aren't removing the books from their collection or anything, but the Amazon sales rank feature is still an excellent tool for finding new books to enjoy. The idea of people being deprived of discovering Edmund White is just sad :(

@Munchie: Oh, I see, when a minority is tired of being considered second-class citizens, we're "whining". Right.

Obviously I do not condone homosexuality. That means the acts that are being homosexual. Again this is where we do not agree, but I trudge on. I do not believe that the acts of homosexuality are correct in terms of nature, ie a completely homosexual group will eventually die off due to the inability to reproduce. By recognizing the union of two homosexual people, the state is effectively condoning this activity. An activity which I believe is against nature.

Now I'm sure you'll want to bring up heterosexual couples that choose not to have children, or couples that cannot have children. Yet they are able to be married. Yes, because even though they can't or choose not the have children, they fundamentally could reproduce. Is it the states business if we reproduce? It is in the states best interest that its citizens continue to reproduce at a rate at least equal to that of its mortality rate. Otherwise the state will soon cease to exist.

@Ubik2501: Except they aren't "silent" -- they are loud and rich.

@Gokuhouse: It was discrimination, though eharmony sucks balls so whatever.

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: Wow. That went RIGHT over your head, didn't it?

Oh right, because they whine the loudest about "inappropriate" books.

However, there's a fairly large "silent majority" across many faiths and demographics that still insists upon restricting gay rights, and I cannot ethically condone or agree with that.

To extend the analogy, I guess the religious homophobes are those stranded Imperial Japanese soldiers who've been trapped on islands for decades who still believe Hirohito's a living god at war with the USA. There was a "valid" reason at one time, but that reason's not been valid for quite a long time and its victims are wandering the Pacific deserts adrift out of ignorance which is less in their control. Tragic, but not quite so sad. But a life wasted that could be doing Good Work instead.

I'm unsure where The Skipper, Gilligan, MaryAnne, Ginger and The Professor fit in. But there's a lot of hammock-sharing, pearls & dresses, Piña Colatas and a neat, well-pressed, over-achieving gentleman who's just a bit smarter than his peers living there. So I'm guessing that's the island you'd go to of the three if you wanted a really good time.

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: I believe in science and fact (being gay is not a choice or a lifestyle), not bigotry and hate.

Now, do you have any other dumbass comments in your bag of tricks?

[www.amazon.com]

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: Oh, really? Then why aren't you answering my questions?

For the millionth time: How does gay marriage effect YOU or straight marriage?

Without mentioning religion, since we're a secular country.

I've still yet to hear a logical answer.

I'm trying to stop and calm down this thread. Obviously you don't seem to want that. I'm sorry for you. You are obviously very emotionally tied to this subject.

[a href="PutTheURLHere"] PutTheHyperlinkedTextHere [/a]

Only "><"s for the "]["s.

Neat, huh? :D

maybe Amazon doesnt want to sell homo books?
Its like this whole new fad is being dumped upon us. I dont care if your gay, crooked or slanted like the eiffel tower. If your gay and happy. Great, that doesnt mean you have to parade all over the place and expect people to cater to your genre as if its ok.

@Ubik2501: You won't hear it. It doesn't exist.

100% FAIL.

There is no objective argument for not granting equal rights to homosexuals. At the very least, I haven't heard it - all I've heard are homilies about the "right" way of living (if you want the government to legislate religious morality, go to Saudi Arabia) and a thousand strawmen that don't hold up to scrutiny.

If you can present an objective, non-religious argument for restricting the rights of homosexuals, I'm very interested in hearing it.

@pecan 3.14159265: Oh no, I know many Christians who aren't homophobic, and I even know Christians (and Jews! And Muslims!) who are gay.

So, fyi, I was talking only about and two the "Christian" homophobes here, not elsewhere.

@Coach Cal Is My Dream Weaver: Uh. It's called being against bigotry.

And perhaps we'd listen if they actually had some thought-out, original, logical arguments. But they don't.

So I take it you're a bigot, too? You have that right, but we have the right to call you out on it and be against it, you know.

"Never" is such a GWB word.

@Scarlet_Begonias_and_a_touch_of_the_Blues: I've asked several times for these homophobes to explain to me how gay marriage personally effects them, their marriage, or any other straight marriage, and how gay rights in general effect them. No answer, as of yet. Surprise!

I don't mind people going "OMG! This had gay folks in it and I'd never have read it if I'd known!" if they GIVE IT A FAIR RATING. It's useful for people to know what the book contains.

Me, I really just want teachers to stop having their kids review books in lieu of writing proper book reports. Gah.

@GuinevereRucker: A "right" way of living? What?

Why is being gay so wrong? And don't mention religion.

@GuinevereRucker: "What kind of god would not possess hatred for things like rape, genocide, murder, thievery"

Oh, there it is! The homophobia's only argument: "OMG! We hate rapists, it's okay to hate gay people!" False. You're comparing someone's sexuality -- which is an inherent part of someone, something they can not choose, just as you did not choose to be straight -- to MURDERING and RAPE. It's NOT the same thing. Sexuality isn'g an "act" or a choice.

Your argument is illogical.

Since we're in a secular country, give me an argument against gay people and gay marriage that does not mention religion. Dare you.

What if they only wanted to delist "Gay Porn" so the filter would have worked on Erotica ANY Gay & Lesbian, but was entered as Erotica OR Gay & Lesbian.

If it was AND what was the chances it would have created such a SH*Tstorm? They have been slowly blacklisting books and authors for a month now and if it were not for this "glitch" most people would not know about it.

@Yoko Broke Up The Beatles:Agreed or onces that are rated 1 star because of amazons mess up and not the quality of the product.

There are too many gaps in theor logic to even bother fighting most of the time.

Let me pose you a question: What kind of god would not possess hatred for things like rape, genocide, murder, thievery? Is that the kind of god you would serve? Not me. That would either be an impotent god (who couldn't do anything about it), or frankly an evil one.

I think you need to separate hating *people* (in which you are correct about Christ) and hating *acts*. Had to clarify that.

As for your question, everyone has a moral compass or code. There are different sources for these and different systems you can fall into - Behavioral, Humanistic, Altruism, Ethics of Authority, Utilitarianism, etc. Mine happens to come from a source that is different from yours, and I place all authority on it. That's why I love gay people and yet think the lifestyle is immoral.

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: What facts? You have no facts. You seem to want to ignore science so you can insist that being gay is a choice (it's not). You call being gay a "lifestyle" (it's not). You say you don't "hate the sinner" but it's clear you do (you even said you hate flamers).

You're homophobic. That's obvious. That's fact. It's not name-calling when it's fact. You've made it clear. You've practically tattooed "I HATE GAYS!" on your forehead.

@GuinevereRucker: OH, but it's okay for you to hate! I see.

Gotta love them internets.

Id just like to know what Consumer Reports would think about all this.

I'm glad you are able to separate these :)

@JulesNoctambule: For being "Christians" they sure throw around the word "hate" a lot.

And one day someone might actually explain how a gay marriage actually effects a straight marriage, but I've yet to have someone actually explain that. Imagine that!

@Bobby Smith: O, I see, since we're still fighting for our rights, and since we've been fightingn for our rights for decades, and our right not to be opressed and treated like second-class citizens, I guess we should just give up!

NOT.

@MBEmom: "The point I am trying to make is that I don't think they are concerned about minors, which is the only valid reason to do this."

I don't buy that. Minors can talk and see and hear about teh gays and not die. Promise.

@maruawe42: "I will not jump on the gay rights bandwagon and disapprove when a business decision of a company is not completely politically correct. "

Ah, so you'll just roll over and let businesses treat their customers like crap! You have that right, of course, but I, and thousands of other consumers, have the right to DISAGREE with what a business does and NOT DO BUSINESS WITH THEM.

It's called "consumerism".

@arcticJKL: Just as "straight" does not automatically mean "adult content", "gay" is not automatically "adult content" and the thought that it is is pretty harmful and needs to stop.

As an old Murphy's Computer Laws posted used to say, behind every computer error, there are at least two human errors - one of which is blaming it on the computer.

More likely, this was an ill-advised policy decision implemented in the most stupid and clumsy manner imaginable to make a subtle wrong become a much more obvious one.

(Note: Comment I thought nailed it from CBC.CA's article on it.)

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: But you ARE homophobic, dear, and cleary not all that bright.

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: "atually now I'm just feeling like hating you. "

Since it's quite clear you're not a Christian, why are you so anti-gay?

Then again I guess you don't have to be religious to be homophobic.

The gay marriage debate is much like the abortion debate, just endless back and forth from two highly entrenched sides. We're never gonna get a clear winner anyway.

@jallopy: "Slippery slope, thats what it is."

What's that slipery slope, exactly? And don't mention humans marrying animals or children, since they aren't, you know, consenting adults. So please, explaint hat slipery slope. Oh! And please, explain how a gay marriage -- a marriage that has nothing to do with you -- effects your straight marriage.

I hear all this "BUT IT WILL EFFECT ME!" but know, you know, reasons.

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator:"Actually I'd be quite happy if I could also get the freedom of speech thing taken from jack-asses like yourself."

Uh. You do realize you live in the United States of America, right?

The most charitable interpretation here would be that amazon applied the worst filter in the history of the universe here and some tweaking will fix the problem. (I've seen filtering/sorting in the past that lets Harlequin Romances past but snags other similar romance novels ... largely because Harlequins are so formulaic and Harlequin is so up-front about content that whoever's doing the sorting doesn't feel the need to go through them. So I could imagine them letting certain mainstream romance publishers through while running smaller publishers through an overeager filter.)

But that would sort-of call for a faster and more horrified PR response the moment they realized the filter was this bad. :) So either we can't be this charitable or their PR team needs some work.

I'm more offended by amazon's choice of books to censor than I would be by finding the books in search results. Amazon's claim that it's doing this to serve its "entire customer base" is insulting. Am I not a customer?

Although I suppose if you live in an adequately repressive community, there's going to be a certain trivial number of people who up and say, "Phew, now that gay marriage is legal, I'm getting out of my farce of a straight marriage to let my freak flag fly!" Maybe that's why NOM is so threatened ..... ;)

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: Yeah, they've got PLENTY of rights...what are these nancies complainin' about?

Give 'em an inch, and they'll take a rainbow mile...

@Anne Hawley: My 12-year-old-like sense of maturity couldn't stop laughing at the "butts" tag.

But the "DIAF" is also excellent.

That sounds about right.

My favorite was tag "DIAF". I have to be honest, that reflects my sentiments for that sort of people somewhat accurately.

Then get the fuck out of the United States of America. I'm sure Saudi Arabia would be glad to have you.

There is no slippery slope, because homosexual marriage is between two consenting adults. This is in no way similar or related to somebody wanting to marry a sheep, or a child, or an inanimate object, because those things are not consenting adults. Consent and age are two big legal prerequisites for one person marrying another, and I see no way that allowing gay marriage would change that. Therefore, the slippery slope argument is invalid.

Find a better argument and try again.

@Gravy Spasm: Haha, nice reference.

*rolls eyes*

I don't think I'm buying the glitch reasoning, because I am paranoid.
However, yes, I am upset that GBLT books are deranked, but there's another issue at hand if this wasn't a glitch: when are we going to admit as a culture that we love us some smut?

@Mary Marsala with Fries: A private company has the HAS THE RIGHT to do whatever it decides to do and HAS THE RIGHT to sell or not sell whatever it wants, and a private company cannot keep you from seeing what you want to see.

Or were you thinking Amazon is some kind of public library?

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: So tell me: A gay couple gets married. This effects you ... how? No, please, tell me. How does this harm you or effect you in any way? Please explain.

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: Uh, not really. In most states (like Arizona!) they can get fired for being gay, since it's not protected. And not to mention the fact that they can't get married. Not equal.

@Radi0logy: Um, that's not the same thing? A store not being open one day out of the week is not the same thing as what Amazon is doing. Though if people want to not eat somewhere that is closed one day out of the week, they kinda have that right.

@Gokuhouse: "Why can't people let business owners run their business the way they want to? The eharmony case ended bad enough. "

LOL do you know what CONSUMERISM means? If we don't agree with the way someone runs their business, we have every right to say why, and NOT TO SHOP THERE! Which thousands of people are doing!

The eharmony case ended bad for eharmony.

Yeah that's just what we needed. Another stupid topic on gay rights. In case no one has noticed, we have been having debates about gay rights for years now. How is this news anything new?

What is it about you that gives you any place to say whether someone else should get to marry the one they love? What right of YOURS would be violated by two guys or two girls marrying? None. You can continue to live your little life completely unchanged by this.

You've already lost. Get over it.

Even though being gay is NOT a "choice", regardless of your "belief" otherwise, it's irrelevant whether it's a choice. You still don't have a right to use the government to oppress other people who aren't doing anything that harms you and just want equal rights.

Whose turn is it to be offended today? I can't keep track.

Dumb move by Amazon anyway.

@savdavid: Strange, their answer has changed. Initially they were telling people they were removing gay books because they were considered as having "adult content." The story sure changed fast!

Since it's not likely that the big cheeses of Amazon planned this particular effect, I suspect that they'll change back to the former policy on most of the titles. And I would support your right to complain to them if they do so.

And the reason people think it's a lie when Amazon claims it's a glitch -- seriously, do you work with computers at all? Do you realize how unlikely it is that any purely mechanical "glitch" could function in this way?

In short -- do your research before you accuse people of overreacting. Because the people who brought this to public attention did theirs.

[latimesblogs.latimes.com]

This is why I'm pissed... It's not the romance novels, It's the brilliant works that take YEARS of research to compose... but i do see where you are coming from... a romance novel is a romance novel... it's basic appeal is filth so there's no reason why it should not be flagged for adult content. I'm more concerned about plays like Tony Kushner's Angels in America which is still produced to this day.

And no I do not think anything differently of you seeing as I do not even know you. To be honest, if a disagreement over Amazon's policies is what tears people apart, there's really no hope for this world.

That said, there's a line - a very bold, distinctive, hart-to-miss line - and they crossed it. It left loyal Amazoners and homogays alike confused, conflicted, and thoroughly offended.

now on to breakfast... just another day, just another problem everyone has with the world

I really can't shop there until this situation reaches a satisfactory conclusion. I'm so pissed, and it's really too bad. How stupid can a company be.

I don't think it's pandering, necessarily, but it's also clearly not random. I would say that it's an intentional act implemented in a way that the company didn't plan, but that it may have been deliberate on the part of one of the functionaries who implemented it.

I wonder if something similar happened here, and Amazon.com removed the rankings to prevent manipulation.

@pecan 3.14159265: The things I've seen disemvowelled have been far tamer than this, so I have to assume they're just busy with other things. I was willing to apologize for being a dick and correcting grammar (although it's always mighty tempting)...but yeah...you can see why I didn't bother. :)

Hello,

Thanks for contacting us. We recently discovered a glitch in our systems and it's being fixed.

Thanks again for contacting us. We hope to see you again soon.

Please let us know if this e-mail resolved your question:

If yes, click here:

etc.

A "glitch"?

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: Haha, I don't even have to try to win this one. :) Thanks! I'm sure you'll be disemvowelled soon enough.

And try for the misplaced apostrophes and commas...that was what I was getting at, my dear friend.

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: You should really learn to use your brain before using your keyboard. Not my fault wikipedia used a apostrophe in their link (against recommended web standards!). Not my fault consumerist's (love y'all) coding didn't catch it.

Not my fault you forced me to invoke Godwin's law in the first place.

Also, isn't the point of separating such adult materials from other books to protect minors? I can't find it online and if I'm wrong I'm sure you'll point it out but kids aren't supposed to be purchasing from Amazon anyway, right? Don't you need to be 18 to do things like get credit cards and have a paypal account?

Yes, kids can hijack their parents cards. But does the danger of that outweigh the fact that by removing these materials, adults lose the option of purchasing them as well? I don't need Amazon censoring my reading materials, thank you very much.

If they are concerned that minors might encounter these adult materials at all, have an optional filter for parents that is password protected. That can't be so hard.

The point I am trying to make is that I don't think they are concerned about minors, which is the only valid reason to do this. It must be about offending a market that they don't want to lose. So, they technically make these items available but remove their rankings and make them difficult to find.

It seems to me like the folks at Amazon need to become acquaint themselves with a book called Fahrenheit 451.

Good thing about Amazon is that everything they sell, is also sold elsewhere.

So when did it become a thing if for whatever reason a person does not want to shop at a business anymore, they decide they have to make as big of a scene as possible to make sure everyone knows why they aren't shopping there? Just don't shop there, go elsewhere. Simple.

1. Have X number of people people tag a book as erotic or gay and it gets kicked out of rankings by their database

2. Tell your "precious god-fearing flock" to go and tag the following books.

Where amazon dropped the ball is that any time a book gets dropped from the rankings, it should be reviewed by a human to see if it is accurate. If that had been done, someone might have noticed that 50+ books showed up on the same day and caught the problem before it became this big blowup.

YOU {smack} CANNOT {whack} CENSOR {slap} THE {crack} PUBLIC {wham}!

Who you are and what you think your intentions are is irrelevant: You DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT to tell people-at-large what they can and cannot see.

Dammit, Amazon! Shape up!!

I should have gone with Pol-pot. Or Stalin. Actually Stalin was responsible for more deaths than Hitler. It's just Stalin was an equal opportunity killer.

No, we all must raise our pitchforks because Amazon must be lying when it says this is a glitch, and we all must stop shopping at Amazon because it made a mistake in its search parameters. Boooo...

/will keep on shopping at Amazon

Go to their webiste and contact them through the Help and leave a protest message.

[www.amazon.com]

It's a kids book!

@ajlei: heh, no, but the sequel Son of a Witch does. It does include the occult, though, which I know many Christians consider sinful. You know. Writing a fictional book. About fictional witchcraft. Yup.

@AnF-DuDe: @Trai_Dep: hahahahahahahahahahha!!!! awesome. so awesome. and true, too! that place always has those HUGE posters of half-naked homoerotic dudes on the walls...

@katstermonster: crap, the link didn't work...

[en.wikipedia.org]

"This is clearly an attempt to push a Christian agenda! How dare they flaunt their religiousness to us non-believers!!"

Said Trina McHolierthanthou from behind a police barracade. When asked if she had ever eaten at Chik-Fil-A before, she said that she hadn't had the opportunity yet.

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: By Godwin's law, YOU LOSE. Goodbye.

[en.wikipedia.org]'s_law

To me, it seems plausible. The "glitch" in Amazon's system would be actually be a fundamental design flaw that allows the system to be gamed. Leave reviews and tagging and flagging open to anybody without further validation/verification/review and this type of thing is almost inevitable.

'course I've never understood the trolls. Assuming this *is* a massive troll, do they give each other virtual high-fives now? And even though I am in an allegedly aggrieved group, I have to wonder just how different a stunt like this is from an Improv Anywhere "event".

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator: Let's play a little grammar and spelling game here:
"Well if WERE a "right-wing" nut, I'd ban all the lefty's books too. But they haven't done that. So, please, just go sit over in your corner with your coloring book and Obama stickers."

It doesn't surprise me that you're stupid AND homophobic. The two usually go hand in hand. We got your point. You hate gays (don't play that hate the sin, not the sinner BS with me.), we get your point, and were willing to be relatively polite, now go away.

@Ashley Albin: Well, it makes sense. The same people who hate gays also hate women who go to work or - GASP - use birth control! We are never supposed leave the house and our only education is supposed to be learning home economics and a christian homeschooling curriculum. We are supposed to be like the Duggars or else we're going to hell.

(steps up to megaphone)
Attention, all the people of America!
Gays can now get married!
It's quite permissible now to fuck sheep!
Being a child molester/rapist/murderer is allowed as well, because that's just who you are!
Adolf Hitler wasn't a bad man, he was just being who he was.
Good news is, we've gotten a massive influx of new sexual drugs! Your partner taking "xtenz" for that added vigor? You should take "releev", an anal suppository for next day soothing and comfort.

Guess you're happy now. So what address should I send the trail sample of "releev" to, mrsultana?

Was Amazon bought out by an ultra-conservative christian organization while we weren't looking? Like Focus on the Family or Concerned Women for America?

I suspect that this was a glitch. I sent them an email asking them to issue a public statement, though. If I don't hear something soon, I'll figure out another way to buy my prurient material (cough)... I mean, books.

@Brawndo_The_Thirst_Mutliator:
You "don't believe that marriage is something that two people of the same sex can have"? You think it isn't taking anything from them based on semantics? Who died and made you god?
(rolls eyes)
Okay, you win.

(steps up to megaphone)
Attention! All peoplez of America!
You will now have ONLY the same rights from now on that you have today!
Gays, you will not be allowed to marry!
Consumers, you will never get a fair deal on a credit card!
CEO's, you will always be able to extort and steal from taxpayers and your own customers!
But the good news is, women, you are allowed to have all the family planning you want since the religious nutjobs won't be able to change any of those laws either!

Happy?

I wrote Amazon and their response, I'm sure, came from someone who was a fan of Anal Persuassian, seemed I ruffled his feathers by my email. I wrote off Amazon for several months.

So, I searched today for "Persuasion" and Anal Persuasian does not come up. I think adult content should be in a separate area.... discrimination no, but some sort of safeguard, especially for graphic materials YES.

Regarding your post for Christian marriage ban. Id actually support it being more difficult to get married. I for one don't believe in divorce (except for the crazy shit some of you people will come up to dispute my statement, and further more, please give me the percentage of women beaten to divorce rate), and think it should be as difficult to get a divorce as it was when the Catholic church ruled the land. Also, fathering children out of wed-lock? Not unless you want some time in the town pillory.

I looked at the books that were "moved" and there are "straight" romance novels too. Seems to me that everyone is flirting with a double standard here when the only thing we are crying foul on is the gay novels.
or has anyone started an internet campaign for the anti-straight discrimination that is going on here.

Seems to me the authors are the ones who should be pissed. But they are probably getting higher sales due to all the publicity this is generating, so they will probably scream and cry about this to keep it in the news and sales up. Why does everyone look for controversy so badly?

okay, start posting about how i am either a corporate shill in on the conspiracy, or blatently anti-gay for writing this.

i first read about this last night...how appalling.

i'm a homo who uses amazon all the time. i won't be using it again until they repeal this bullshit AND apologize for it. glitch in the system, hah

@Dabby: They couldn't find a picture of a fundamentalist reading one. However, they did find a picture of:
1) Bigfoot doing the lambada with Elvis
2) Donald Trump shaving his head for charity
3) Amazon not putting its collective foot in its mouth while pandering to the religious right.

This action is not just a short-sighted business decision, but dangerous.

@aphexbr:
Daffy Duck might disagree, or rather, find it "dithpicable"...

@jallopy:
Yup, slippery (ahem) slope, indeed.
Deny gay people marriage? Then what can we take from them next? The vote? The right to sit at a lunch counter (or the modern equivalent)? Oxygen?
Maybe you find that sarcasm ridiculous, but so are the "slippery slope" arguments against gay marriage.
I only hope for the sake of people's personal education (not because I would support it), a constitutional ban on Christian marriage pops up. After all, they are the ones who are divorced from the sanctity of marriage.

@SMSDHubbard: Its not a question of hate. Its a question of disagreement. I do not agree with gay marriages. Thats it. Nothing more, nothing else. Slippery slope, thats what it is.

@Dafrety: And me, I will try and get other people to shop EVEN MORE there.

I have the notion that this "Love the Christian, Hate Christianity" approach would lack appeal to her, though. Do unto others... is a pretty hard (cough) cross to bear, you see...

I suppose you're not much of a Christian, since hatred of any sort is kinda against what that Jesus fella had to say. Since we've ruled that out, what position is it you have that makes you hate the homosexual lifestyle?

Sure seems like how the "market" is SUPPOSED to take care of stupidity.

Stop bitching about people calling bigotry by name.

That is why Amazon have a little drop-down menu to choose a specific department to search in. I do agree with a filter. if you don't want to see something that goes in that filter, why waste your time showing it to you?

You certainly would like to believe the video isn't realistic of how people actually think... I certainly hope people are punished if they wish to treat people differently because of a sexual preference. That same attitude was used towards black people not that long ago. Besides, how can people even claim anymore that there is some sanctity even left in marriage with the level of divorce rates...

The evangelicals would be organizing a boycott already if they'd started with heterosexual material.

This is one of those idiotic situations that's going to lead to nothing positive and nothing but bad press (and hopefully lost sales). It's a completely foreseeable and avoidable situation, yet they probably could not have done anything worse other than include "black" in the list of "adult" words.

So I guess we're even.

Had the word 'duck' been associated with adult themes then it would have been pulled too.

[www.flickr.com]

"Comments:I have an account with Amazon, and a Chase Amazon Visa. I'm considering discontinuing use of both, and closing my visa account over one incredibly silly policy change on the part of Amazon.com: the decision to remove the sales ranking of books with gay, lesbian and bisexual themes/information. That's unfair to the authors and the consumers. Everything I buy from amazon I can buy somewhere else with a clear conscience.
I'll wait to see how long it takes for your company to come up with a good public response and apology for this, but I can't imagine I'm the only person considering a boycott."

and just a couple of minutes ago i got the following email:

"Hello,

Thanks for contacting us. We recently discovered a glitch in our systems and it's being fixed.

However, if you still want us to close your account, I want to make sure that closing your account won't cause problems with any open transactions or other websites you might visit.

Here are some things to keep in mind:

-- If you use your Amazon login on other sites, you'll also lose access to those accounts (Target.com, Bebe.com, BenefitCosmetics.com, Lacoste.com, Endless.com).
-- Any open orders you have will be cancelled.
-- Returns and refunds cannot be processed for orders on closed accounts.
-- Amazon Payments account will be closed and cannot be reopened.
-- You'll no longer have access to your Associates and/or Mechanical Turk account.
-- If you have an Amazon Web Services account, cancel your subscriptions for any Web Services prior to requesting that your account be closed.

If you've reviewed these items and still want to close the account, write back by visiting the address below:

[www.amazon.com]

Thanks again for contacting us. We hope to see you again soon.

Please let us know if this e-mail resolved your question:

If yes, click here:
[www.amazon.com]
If not, click here:
[www.amazon.com]

Please note: this e-mail was sent from an address that cannot accept incoming e-mail.

To contact us about an unrelated issue, please visit the Help section of our web site.

Best regards,

Vijay Akula
Amazon.com
We're Building Earth's Most Customer-Centric Company
[www.amazon.com]"

i notice they immediately jumped to the conclusion that i would want to go ahead and close my account, even though the original email said i was thinking of it, but would wait to see if they apologized to the authors [which i don't see any evidence of yet]

and when i sent the email, i didn't choose 'closing my account' as the subject line, but instead 'other questions and comments'

for now i will guess that mr Akula is overworked, overtired and about out of his mind with the mass of sheer vitriol that has been heaped upon the customer service email team today, so i'm going to leave it alone for the moment and see what tomorrow brings.

Hello,

Thanks for contacting us. We recently discovered a glitch in our systems and it's being fixed.

Thanks again for contacting us. We hope to see you again soon.

Bull.

It is, however, an amazing book.

and

Here's a complaint letter template on this blog:
[dearauthor.com]

And supposedly Amazon is now reporting it was a glitch

But this really isn't a website for dissecting the fine points of bigotry.

And if you think that Amazon considers being gay wrong and won't sell things that pertain to gays, you should check out the gay interest movie section, hubba hubba. Your whole point is moot.

apples, apples.

So if you're going to hate me, do it for the correct reason please :) I do not hate gay people. I would even go so far as to say I love gay people. I hate the lifestyle and the act.

I can't stand when people get these two things confused. If you're going to argue with me, let's at least clarify what we're arguing about.

@katstermonster: lol same here...appearently beacuse i'm not verry interested in fighting... and up untill recently (yeah I'm in highschool) I wasnt verry athletic I'm a clear cut case homosexuality! apperently most of my teammates are too according to this quack!

A glitch yah right. Report for your pink star.No wait we want your money to. Ah we love god ah atheists are good ah teens yah teens. The strawberries are gone theres a key a key I say the strawberries. Oh hell We are closing our business as we cannot please all of the people all of the time. Stupid stupid stupid advertising/marketing droid now loses job. LOL

On the other hand, I wonder what'd happen if the people offended by this would demand that Amazon remove right-wing propaganda.

/rant

Seriously Amazon, WTF? If you're going to de-list books from search ranking, don't start with GLBT books. Start with "straight" books, THEN get onto the other ones. Otherwise you get backlash like this. If you "censor" searches for "straight" material, no one will complain.

Disclosure: Child, friend, etc of many GL's

"Preventing Homosexuality"? Like how?

1. Remove all pink things from the home. Yes, this means slicing off your tongue! What's more important- your tongue or your son's sexuality ?

2. Same goes for any penis shaped objects. Many a boy has been tempted into perversion by corndogs!

3. Seal your son's buttocks with Super Glue. Purity takes precedence over pooping!

4. If alll else fails, give your son a sex change. Now you have a straight daughter! Kudos!

Not what the author had in mind.

Been awhile since I laughed that much.

As far as LGBT books getting censored, I'm sure it had to do with customers being more likely to tag them with sexual content ('oral', 'anal' tags for instance)labels than they are with hetero books. Biased, sure, but I'm sure that's something their filtering algorithm took into account.

Examples:
A book about official policy of Gays in the military?
A book chronicling gay rights?
A DICTIONARY OF HOMOPHOBIA? (Too bad it was printed b4 this)...

@Gorphlog:
While they are at it, amazon.com should remove the reviews of the product that only talk about how the product arrived to them in good condition.

This whole situation is too illogical and out of blue for me to be outraged about yet. Until Amazon releases something saying that they consider all books mentioning homosexuality to be adult items and not suitable for ranking, I'm chalking this up to some kind of disastrous glitch.