@DorkySupergirl Said
There was another thread about this on here, I forget by who and what the title was, I do remember stating that I would not be surprised of the author violated US obscenity laws.
In answer to your question, I was under the impression that obscenity laws in US deals only with things that are sexual in nature and would not have anything to do with a book about torture, like the book you mention. I could be wrong on that, but that was my understanding of this law.
They apply the Miller test and this is why in one state it can be acceptable and in one state be declared violating the obscenity law. The miller test has three parts.
1. does the work lack scientific, political, literary or artistic value
2. does the work describe in an offensive way, sexual explicit conduct defined by state law and finally
3. average person in community find the work appealing to prurient interest.
Based on this, the book could be fine in Colorado but not okay in Florida.
A different set of criteria exists in the UK, which (as was established by the case of D H Lawrence's book Lady Chatterley's Lover) is as good as unworkable. The criteria for establishing obscenity is whether the material is considered "Likely to corrupt and deprave".
Now, the moot point here, is.... Is it the material that corrupts and depraves, or would the reader already be corrupt and depraved in the first place, to consider reading it..?
I'm not a lawyer, so the argument is well outside the field of my knowledge or experience, but it does make a point here.....
With the exception of academics and criminologists, the only people likely to read this are those who are already likely to be prone to commit such acts. Therefore, the material, in itself, cannot be obscene under the above definition.
Whilst the work may be considered to be some sort of paedophile's guidance manual, the author is not legally responsible for any acts committed by those who read his work.
When it is considered that the book is likely to make the author into a social pariah, one feels that he must have had a motive for writing it that was strong enough to override his personal concerns for his standing in society. Only he knows what that may be, for sure, the rest of us can only guess..... and if he says the work was intended as a serious discussion document on the subject, then who are we to nay..?
I haven't seen the book, I haven't read it. I might do so if I were involved in study into the subject..... but it would be with a peg on my nose.
Censoring any publication, for any reason, is a very serious thing to do... even if we instinctively buck against the subject matter. Censorship on the grounds of obscenity - which is such a subjective thing - is a legal minefield.
.