This is a bit of a weird one. Was trending in the r/books subreddit, so hope its okay that i’ve effectively reposted here.
The headline made me assume she’d been caught disseminating genuine harmful and visual CSAM after having published the book, but the entire contents of the article make it seem like the woman was prosecuted solely on the basis of the book she wrote.
If a book is bad enough to get someone arrested, why was it allowed to be published in the first place?
Nonetheless, I’m hearing from many redditors that her dedication was a sexually suggestive address to her own children. Some also say this dedication was sexually explicit, but i haven’t seen anyone explain why and it didn’t come up in the article itself.
Possibly she was found to be abusing her own children because of the weird dedication to them?
Regardless of whst she was actually arrested for and how fair it is, i was pretty disturbed at how creepy the redditors defending her sounded.
These laws are insane. It’s a book. It’s not real. It’s not images. It’s instructions for how to imagine shit yourself. I’m doing it right now, and you can’t stop me! Is it illegal now to imagine shit?!?
For the record, it’s a gross book, but why the ever loving fuck is it illegal?
One of the hardest things for people to do for some reason is decouple kink and morality.
Ultimately one needs to accept that people will be turned on by things that gross them the fuck out.
Society is not ready to cross that gap apparently.
There’s a real push to get pedophilia treated as a kink - can’t imagine what could be spurring that - and the article feels very much like part of that. What she was prosecuted for wasn’t the DDLG content, it was the graphic sexualized depictions of a toddler elsewhere in the book. It’s… very strange the article ignored that part and tried to imply it was just the ageplay she was prosecuted over.
What she was prosecuted for wasn’t the DDLG content, it was the graphic sexualized depictions of a toddler elsewhere in the book
Thank you for getting to the bottom of that
Imagine how easy it would have been to just not include that scene and thus keep herself out of jail.
And again - what were the editors or publishers doing? Is this a “straight to Amazon” self-publish?
Thank you for getting to the bottom of that
Phrasing.She apparently added the CSAM material to the manuscript after her editor approved it - that’s why the editor wasn’t found guilty. I’m not sure what the exact process she used is, but I assume that was the last review step before it went to the printers/ebook site and she just sent the changed files instead. It looks like it was independently published too, so either self or on demand publishing service which explains why there was no review after the editor / why she was able to make changes after it was “finished.”
She apparently added the CSAM material to the manuscript after her editor approved it - that’s why the editor wasn’t found guilty. I’m not sure what the exact process she used is, but I assume that was the last review step before it went to the printers/ebook site and she just sent the changed files instead.
That’s genuinely malicious… and she was basically hedging it all upon the assumption that only pedos would read her work, so nobody would complain about it. Or she grossly overestimated how many of them there are in the world, and thinks that kind of thing flies in the real world.
Yeah I just mean in general this whole situation the article is about is a huge mess. This is a controversial opinion apparently but I’m anti pedophile. My opinion about people associating kink too strongly with morality is separate.
The article is also a bit of a mess.
The book is about an 18-year-old woman named Lucy who roleplays as a toddler with Arthur, an older man who is her father’s best friend.
Not my kink, but that shit is not CSAM either
Chisholm - who sat down to read the entire book - found the female protagonist was implied to be a child despite repeated references to her being 18.
I wonder how one can claim that a character in a book is a child despite repeated references to her being 18. Maybe he asked the characters’ parents or was suspicious when a fictitious character refused to show him an ID.
Even if she spoke like a child during sex as a consenting adult, that was role play which was legal, she put to the officer.
A Crime Stoppers complaint led police to find 16 hard copies of the book at Mastrosa’s home while executing a search warrant in March.
So, the only CSAM material found with her are copies of her own book.
Horrible article, to the point that it seems like it might be trying to softball pedophila by presenting it like thats what the accusations were about - the aged-up kink content wasn’t the issue, it was the incredibly graphic sexualized descriptions of a three-year-old from the perspective of an adult man that were the problem. Day-ruining stuff to read, and yeah while I still disagree with the laws (state suppression of art for moral reasons seldom being a win for society) I can really see where they were coming from with this one.
Australia has fairly broad laws on what constitutes CSAM compared to many other countries - it appears that the descriptions in the book were graphic enough to count under the Australian legal system, and that’s what she was prosecuted for. I can’t find any source claiming she was prosecuted for abusing her own children or produced “real” CSAM though - as far as I can tell it’s entirely centered around the book.
See If I was, for some reason, going to write a book like that, I’d at least look into whether it was legal first
I think that perhaps the kind of person who would write a book like that in the first place isn’t exactly predisposed to… thinking things through.
Badly titled bad article about bad laws.
A christian charity executive wrote a DDLG fiction … Because of course they did. That really should be the extent of the article, but that isn’t even newsworthy. The fact that she was arrested for writing a book is beyond stupid; what a tremendous waste of time.
All that effort would be better spent catching abusers, but I guess they’re all too rich and powerful and holding public offices, so the legal system just does bullshit like this to make themselves look busy.
💯
(DDLG, not ABDL. Unless there was also ABDL stuff in there I guess, I for sure didn’t read it.)
I’ll defer to your expertise
(/s [& to each their own]. I think you’re correct: I’ll edit my post. Thank you. ABDL came to mind first due to memey shockfactor and I forgot how diverse the age play kink domain is…)
