How do you feel about explicit sexual scenes with children in

>>8817474
>Should it be illegal to write about it
m8

>>8817474
Nothing should be illegal to write about, nothing. If it's in bad taste then he'll be rightfully ostracised but actively arresting someone for something they wrote? You're going into dangerous territory there.

>>8817474
Go read Lolita

>>8817474
Nothing should be illegal to write about if it doesn't seriously violate someone's privacy and safety

>>8817474
Nice try FBI, I won't say a thing.

File: tinkerbell_circles_by_zuleta-d4atw3u.jpg (259KB, 900x1276px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 900x1276px

>>8817491
Seconded. Weird choice of pic there, OP.

>>8817490
There's only one remotely erotic scene, which is very brief.

>>8817474
>Should it be illegal to write about it in detail
Of course not. What kind of stupid question is that?

>>8817489
>>8817491
Funny story, the guy behind 2girls1cup and similar extreme films was arrested by the FBI a few years back.

Turns out selling bestiality videos across state lines is a federal offense. Who knew?

>>8817491
>>8817617
Thirded. some people get off on that stuff you know. Have you ever been to /cake/?

>>8818702
>selling bestiality videos
bruh, that's just illegal no matter how you do it

It shouldn't be illegal to write about.
But, should it be illegal to publish?

>>8818725
No, it should be legal to publish. The day we stop publishing something because it's immoral or offensive is a sad day to think about. It would be reasonable to restrict where it's displayed or advertised, but this could probably be left up to the vendor that is selling it.

>>8818746
what if the entire book were simply smut?
Like there's no pretence of artistic merit to it, its literally just written child porn.

>>8818759

who cares? obviously its not going to be accepted by the masses and will only be read by the niche few that are sick enough to do so. and all the contrarian /lit/izens who will praise it and call it the GOAT.

Also imposing a law that makes it illegal to write child porn will just cause WAY more child porn to be written.... Do you not understand basic human nature?

>>8818724
>Who knew?

Using the American framework for freedom of speech there's pretty much no basis for making it illegal. That said you'll have a very hard time finding a publisher if it's outright pornographic. Public opinion counts for a lot and most of the censorship done in countries like America is done by the distributors of media to themselves rather than by an outside force like the government, in order to prevent public backlash against them.

>>8818759
Then let the people decide. Why do you want the state to regulate everything? If people don't like it they won't buy it and will more than likely organize a boycott against vendors that sell it and the publisher that distributes it. By contrast, a government ban on something is a surefire way to make certain that people who otherwise wouldn't have read it are now very interested in getting their hands on it.

>>8818912
especially if the ban was imposed due to a particular book
that book would become an overnight bestseller

There's money to be made writing child porn. Pedos like to read books, too.