Amazon selling repulsive book.

[Remudamom]

http://www.amazon.com/Your-Mongoloid-Tips-Feeding-ebook/dp/B007TD93AY/ref=sr_1_fkmr1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1334494943&sr=1-1-fkmr1

 

Please go over and complain.

[NanceXToo]

No idea what this book is actually meant to be about, but did you read the one 3 star review left on Amazon for this book? Thoughts?

[JudoMom]

No idea what this book is actually meant to be about, but did you read the one 3 star review left on Amazon for this book? Thoughts?

 

It looks like the 3 star review was removed? I know it was there earlier, but I didn't read it.

[NanceXToo]

It says:

 

"I saw the outrage from a friend over this book and IMMEDIATELY agreed that this was deplorable and beyond wrong; HOWEVER, I decided to check it out a little deeper, and came to the conclusion that it could very easily be talking about the anthropological form of the word, as opposed to the hateful one that is so wrongly used against our loved ones with DS. So, I battled with myself for a bit on whether I should buy it for the sake of research, which I obviously ended up doing (hence the review). I read through it and THANKFULLY, this book has NOTHING to do with DS. It is, indeed, in reference to the little used term used for populations that share certain traits such as an epicanthic fold - populations such as many of the Asian races, Arctic, etc. The author basically puts a completely fictional spin on the anthropological term and basically goes on to say that they were their own race (as opposed to a term that lumped several different races together, which is why it ended up being obsoleted due to advances in that science), and have lived on in hiding, did not evolve, so on and so on. It is purely a work of nonsense, however, it is not one of a hateful sort.

 

Update: After reading a comment on, and then re-reading my review with fresh eyes, I'd like to add the following:Imagine there were still cavemen around and you could have one for your own. That's what this book is about. It's not about any human group that is on the face of the earth today. After reading the book in its entirety, I'm not sure how the term hateful can really be used when the subject matter is not linked to any group in reality. It's almost the same as saying The Zombie Survival Guide is hateful to zombies, IMO."

 

...So I'm not sure what to think, it seems that a lot of people are jumping to conclusions that it must be a book making fun of people with Down Syndrome and getting angry about that, though I'm assuming most of them have not read the book. Then this person says they have read it and it has nothing to do with that?

[Remudamom]

Well, I did read the review, and honestly this was my first opinion too, because I could not believe that anyone would be ignorant enough to target Down's people. Even if they aren't that simply makes the book inconsiderate with an ill chosen subject and ignorant instead of vicious, nasty and hateful.

 

Stuff like this rolls off my back. I don't care about names and nasties. But I have three friends with Down's and I'm pissed for them.

 

ETA I have not and will not read this book, but several reviews say it does indeed mean DS.

[Butter]

Odd that the 3 star review was removed. He seemed to quite possibly be one of the only people who had actually read the book. No doubt the book certainly sounds like it would be offensive, whether it is was written to make fun of kids with DS or not. However, most of the reviews seem to be jumping to that very conclusion. I've seen other books maligned the same way in Amazon reviews written by people who have no read the book or are opposed ideologically to something the book is about (such as a book about global warming with negative reviews written by people who don't believe in global warming).

[JudoMom]

It says:

 

"I saw the outrage from a friend over this book and IMMEDIATELY agreed that this was deplorable and beyond wrong; HOWEVER, I decided to check it out a little deeper, and came to the conclusion that it could very easily be talking about the anthropological form of the word, as opposed to the hateful one that is so wrongly used against our loved ones with DS. So, I battled with myself for a bit on whether I should buy it for the sake of research, which I obviously ended up doing (hence the review). I read through it and THANKFULLY, this book has NOTHING to do with DS. It is, indeed, in reference to the little used term used for populations that share certain traits such as an epicanthic fold - populations such as many of the Asian races, Arctic, etc. The author basically puts a completely fictional spin on the anthropological term and basically goes on to say that they were their own race (as opposed to a term that lumped several different races together, which is why it ended up being obsoleted due to advances in that science), and have lived on in hiding, did not evolve, so on and so on. It is purely a work of nonsense, however, it is not one of a hateful sort.

 

Update: After reading a comment on, and then re-reading my review with fresh eyes, I'd like to add the following:Imagine there were still cavemen around and you could have one for your own. That's what this book is about. It's not about any human group that is on the face of the earth today. After reading the book in its entirety, I'm not sure how the term hateful can really be used when the subject matter is not linked to any group in reality. It's almost the same as saying The Zombie Survival Guide is hateful to zombies, IMO."

 

...So I'm not sure what to think, it seems that a lot of people are jumping to conclusions that it must be a book making fun of people with Down Syndrome and getting angry about that, though I'm assuming most of them have not read the book. Then this person says they have read it and it has nothing to do with that?

 

Did you read the Look Inside preview? It ends with an extremely derogatory line toward Asians (that their slight frames, almond shaped eyes, and unruly hair are shameful physical scars from accepting the mongoloids as equals).

 

I don't know if what the author intended, but the word mongoloid is well known as a derogatory term toward people with Down Syndrome. Even if the author is a clueless 20something and meant no harm, it is still offensive to many parents of those with DS (including a sweet friend who rarely gets upset).

[NanceXToo]

Well, I did read the review, and honestly this was my first opinion too, because I could not believe that anyone would be ignorant enough to target Down's people. Even if they aren't that simply makes the book inconsiderate with an ill chosen subject and ignorant instead of vicious, nasty and hateful.

 

Stuff like this rolls off my back. I don't care about names and nasties. But I have three friends with Down's and I'm pissed for them.

 

ETA I have not and will not read this book, but several reviews say it does indeed mean DS.

 

I haven't read it either and won't (just not interested), but I don't feel I have enough information to get all heated up and lodge a complaint with Amazon because it's feasible that the three star reviewer was correct and that the author didn't intend anything offensive regarding special needs/DS at all. I just don't know. (I agree with you that it was still probably ill chosen but not necessary hateful). And this is coming from a parent not of a DS child but one with mental retardation, so it's not that I have no empathy toward how DS parents might feel, I just think it is POSSIBLE that someone might have started a chain reaction of angry misinterpretation.

[stripe]

Asian people have "unruly hair"? What on earth?

 

There are a lot of weird e-books on Amazon because basically anyone can post them, or at least that's my understanding.

[Remudamom]

It's at least offensive to Asians.

 

Very ill chosen. I do have to say the term Mongoloid, to me, has nothing to do with DS. I think Mongolians and the horse breed.

[NanceXToo]

Did you read the Look Inside preview? It ends with an extremely derogatory line toward Asians (that their slight frames, almond shaped eyes, and unruly hair are shameful physical scars from accepting the mongoloids as equals).

 

I don't know if what the author intended, but the word mongoloid is well known as a derogatory term toward people with Down Syndrome. Even if the author is a clueless 20something and meant no harm, it is still offensive to many parents of those with DS (including a sweet friend who rarely gets upset).

 

No, I didn't read that...I'm certainly not a fan of that although that is a separate issue from what everyone seems to be upset about, which is thinking this is a book meant to mock special needs/down syndrome kids and nothing more. But there is someone who read it saying it is not that at all. Yes mongoloid can be a well known derogatory term toward people with Down Syndrome. It's also a well known anthropological term though.

 

Look, I'm not looking to defend the guy. I don't know anything about him or his book and I don't really care to. I'm not even saying no-one should be offended by it...I can definitely see why people may find it offensive. I'm just saying me personally I wouldn't start screaming at or boycotting Amazon for allowing something to be sold that bashes special needs people when I don't even know that to be true.

[leeannpal]

Amazon sells quite a few books that repulse me.

[NanceXToo]

Amazon sells quite a few books that repulse me.

 

And this is definitely true! I DID send angry emails and threaten to boycott when they published the how to guide for pedophiles. I was glad to see that one pulled.

 

But they still sell plenty of others I think are horrid. TTUAC, for one. I'd rather see the how to beat your baby book yanked than this silly mongoloid one. Just saying.

[Remudamom]

I see both sides. I feel bad for my friends who are offended by this, life is tough enough you know?

 

But if I had seen this myself I don't think I would have linked it with Down's. For me it's a tough call, but at the very least I'd say it's odd that Amazon is carrying this book.

[JudoMom]

I see both sides. I feel bad for my friends who are offended by this, life is tough enough you know?

 

But if I had seen this myself I don't think I would have linked it with Down's. For me it's a tough call, but at the very least I'd say it's odd that Amazon is carrying this book.

 

:iagree:

 

I borrowed the book on my Prime account and read through it (I returned it and removed it from my account already, though, since my boys' Fires share an account with mine and I don't want them to read it). It really does depend on how you view the term mongoloid--it could be used as the anthropological term or it could be used as a derogatory term toward people with DS. In addition to the Asian comment, he also talks about how the French are the only race to welcome them and willingly procreate with them. He describes mongoloids as being very primitive with low IQs, as well as being viscous and a group who is known for r@ping. Considering his comment about Asians, though, I would lean toward the argument that he wasn't using word as an anthropological term.

 

My heart hurts for my friend. I won't threaten to boycott Amazon, because that's not realistic for me. I can click on a button and ask them to look at the book to see if it needs to be removed for being offensive. It is a fine line for me, though, because I'm wary to censor because it's such a slippery slope. And I know it's easy to self-publish now and get your stuff on Amazon (I know two people who have done it, and I have issues with both, but because of completely different reasons).

[mommymilkies]

And this is definitely true! I DID send angry emails and threaten to boycott when they published the how to guide for pedophiles. I was glad to see that one pulled.

 

But they still sell plenty of others I think are horrid. TTUAC, for one. I'd rather see the how to beat your baby book yanked than this silly mongoloid one. Just saying.

 

I did, as well. This one is certainly gross, but not enough that I feel freedom of speech wouldn't cover it. So I won't petition Amazon. I DEFINITELY would not buy it and financially support it, though.

[gardening momma]

It says:

 

"I saw the outrage from a friend over this book and IMMEDIATELY agreed that this was deplorable and beyond wrong; HOWEVER, I decided to check it out a little deeper, and came to the conclusion that it could very easily be talking about the anthropological form of the word, as opposed to the hateful one that is so wrongly used against our loved ones with DS. So, I battled with myself for a bit on whether I should buy it for the sake of research, which I obviously ended up doing (hence the review). I read through it and THANKFULLY, this book has NOTHING to do with DS. It is, indeed, in reference to the little used term used for populations that share certain traits such as an epicanthic fold - populations such as many of the Asian races, Arctic, etc. The author basically puts a completely fictional spin on the anthropological term and basically goes on to say that they were their own race (as opposed to a term that lumped several different races together, which is why it ended up being obsoleted due to advances in that science), and have lived on in hiding, did not evolve, so on and so on. It is purely a work of nonsense, however, it is not one of a hateful sort.

 

Update: After reading a comment on, and then re-reading my review with fresh eyes, I'd like to add the following:Imagine there were still cavemen around and you could have one for your own. That's what this book is about. It's not about any human group that is on the face of the earth today. After reading the book in its entirety, I'm not sure how the term hateful can really be used when the subject matter is not linked to any group in reality. It's almost the same as saying The Zombie Survival Guide is hateful to zombies, IMO."

 

...So I'm not sure what to think, it seems that a lot of people are jumping to conclusions that it must be a book making fun of people with Down Syndrome and getting angry about that, though I'm assuming most of them have not read the book. Then this person says they have read it and it has nothing to do with that?

I looked up the term "mongoloid" and I agree that it seems to have nothing to do with Down Syndrome (I used wikipedia).

[gardening momma]

ETA I have not and will not read this book, but several reviews say it does indeed mean DS.

I wonder if they jumped to that conclusion, or if they actually read the book.

[JudoMom]

I looked up the term "mongoloid" and I agree that it seems to have nothing to do with Down Syndrome (I used wikipedia).

 

According to Websters, it can, and the fellow who wrote the book didn't capitalize it. Of course, in this day and age, that doesn't mean anything necessarily.

[KirstenH]

Yeah, I'm not on board with forcing Amazon to pull things because they're offensive. I think the hundred-plus one-star reviews on that book pretty well warn shoppers away without Amazon having to step in and play Nanny. Free speech is a beautiful thing that sometimes looks very ugly. The author has the right to his vile opinion, and the rest of society has the right to tell him he's an offensive @ss. Looks to me like the system is working.

[kalanamak]

I read the "look inside" and it seems like parody to me. Just the cover drawing seems rather Hunter Thompson-ish enough to get that across.

 

Ho hum.

[Desert Rat]

Yeah, I'm not on board with forcing Amazon to pull things because they're offensive. I think the hundred-plus one-star reviews on that book pretty well warn shoppers away without Amazon having to step in and play Nanny. Free speech is a beautiful thing that sometimes looks very ugly. The author has the right to his vile opinion, and the rest of society has the right to tell him he's an offensive @ss. Looks to me like the system is working.

 

:iagree: Freedom of speech means letting someone speak even if you don't agree with what is said or if it offends you. Offended by the book? Don't buy it.

[Word Nerd]

Yeah, I'm not on board with forcing Amazon to pull things because they're offensive. I think the hundred-plus one-star reviews on that book pretty well warn shoppers away without Amazon having to step in and play Nanny. Free speech is a beautiful thing that sometimes looks very ugly. The author has the right to his vile opinion, and the rest of society has the right to tell him he's an offensive @ss. Looks to me like the system is working.

 

:iagree: Those who are linking to the book and drawing attention to it with calls for boycotts are also helping to publicize yet another crappy self-published ebook that few would have even known about otherwise. And at least some of the looky-loos will buy it out of curiosity.

Edited April 15, 2012 by WordGirl

[Sk8ermaiden]

I have an anthropology background and immediately viewed the book through that lens, especially given the actual content. It may be a stupid book, but I don't think it's what people here are railing on about. There is no way Amazon will yank the book. Their policy is absolute and total noncensorship, and they only pulled the pedophile book after tremendous pressure from almost every aspect of society.

[Elizabeth in MN]

These kind of books are why I bought a Nook and not a Kindle. It drives more business to Barnes and Noble from me though I still do some shopping with Amazon. Right now I am not buying from Amazon because of this book.

[Mergath]

Yeah, I'm not on board with forcing Amazon to pull things because they're offensive. I think the hundred-plus one-star reviews on that book pretty well warn shoppers away without Amazon having to step in and play Nanny. Free speech is a beautiful thing that sometimes looks very ugly. The author has the right to his vile opinion, and the rest of society has the right to tell him he's an offensive @ss. Looks to me like the system is working.

 

:iagree: If they start pulling every book that someone finds offensive, pretty soon there's not going to be much left. Not to mention there's a fairly large segment of the population that seems completely unable to comprehend the idea of satire, so that alone would wipe out a good chunk of books. And I know quite a few people who find the bible offensive, so you could kiss that one goodbye, as well as most other religious texts.

 

Better to just ignore the vile books, I think.

[justLisa]

I've never even heard of the word mongoloid:001_huh:

[jennynd]

It's at least offensive to Asians.

 

Very ill chosen. I do have to say the term Mongoloid, to me, has nothing to do with DS. I think Mongolians and the horse breed.

English physician John Langdon Down first characterized Down syndrome as a distinct form of mental disability in 1862, and in a more widely published report in 1866.[100] Due to his perception that children with Down syndrome shared physical facial similarities (epicanthal folds) with those of Blumenbach's Mongolian race, Down used the term mongoloid, derived from prevailing ethnic theory;[16] while the term "mongoloid" (also "mongol" or "mongoloid idiot") continued to be used until the early 1970s, it is now considered to be pejorative (as well as inaccurate) and is no longer in common use.[101]

------------

 

Chinese call DS as mongoloid Syndrome

 

This guy has no idea about history between Mongolian and Chinese. Chinese didn't accept Mongolian as equal. It simply a stupid and racist book.

Edited April 15, 2012 by jennynd

[Lisbeth]

Asian people have "unruly hair"? What on earth?

 

There are a lot of weird e-books on Amazon because basically anyone can post them, or at least that's my understanding.

 

Seriously! I envy Asian hair.

[Jennifer3141]

:iagree: Freedom of speech means letting someone speak even if you don't agree with what is said or if it offends you. Offended by the book? Don't buy it.

 

I could not agree with you more. I also have to wonder at anyone who would rate a book without reading it. That's way sicker than any book could possibly be...

[kalanamak]

I've never even heard of the word mongoloid:001_huh:

 

You youngster, you.

 

This was the word used in school by the teachers when I was a kid (post-Sputnik, pre-moon shot). It was not meant meanly. The mean word was REtard. I heard it only once. There was a special ed class at our school, and they had their own building, a duplex they shared with the K class. We saw them on grounds, and for the Christmas show, and everyone was a little hushed and overly polite about it. When told to use "Down's" when I was about 15 or so, I was told it was because it was insulting to Mongolians, not insulting to Down's kids.

[ElizaG]

I have no idea what's inside the book, but did notice that one person (commenting on a 5-star review) said, "I hate racism and hate speech. I implore Amazon to stop publishing ignorant hate speech that has absolutely no artistic merit."

 

This is an interesting example of postmodern discourse.

A hate divided against itself cannot stand. I wonder if he's now petitioning for his own comment to be deleted. :001_huh:

[TXMary2]

I've never even heard of the word mongoloid:001_huh:

 

I have never heard it associated with DS. I always think of Mongolia when I hear the term, which makes more sense in context with this book since the author is talking about Asians.

[thefragile7393]

If I reported every single book that Amazon or B&N has offensive to me I'd never get off this computer. I've got little time as it is for important things lol.

[Kathryn]

Yeah, I'm not on board with forcing Amazon to pull things because they're offensive. I think the hundred-plus one-star reviews on that book pretty well warn shoppers away without Amazon having to step in and play Nanny. Free speech is a beautiful thing that sometimes looks very ugly. The author has the right to his vile opinion, and the rest of society has the right to tell him he's an offensive @ss. Looks to me like the system is working.

 

I read the "look inside" and it seems like parody to me. Just the cover drawing seems rather Hunter Thompson-ish enough to get that across.

 

Ho hum.

 

:iagree: Freedom of speech means letting someone speak even if you don't agree with what is said or if it offends you. Offended by the book? Don't buy it.

 

I could not agree with you more. I also have to wonder at anyone who would rate a book without reading it. That's way sicker than any book could possibly be...

 

All this. And I want to reiterate the idea that it is absolutely deplorable to go and give poor reviews to a book you haven't even read merely because you think you disagree with what it's subject matter might be. I've had to wade through a sea of these sorts of reviews to decide whether to buy something that Ken Ham's legions attacked. It's childish, annoying, and displays a special kind of ignorance.

[momto2Cs]

It really does depend on how you view the term mongoloid--it could be used as the anthropological term or it could be used as a derogatory term toward people with DS. In addition to the Asian comment, he also talks about how the French are the only race to welcome them and willingly procreate with them. He describes mongoloids as being very primitive with low IQs, as well as being viscous and a group who is known for r@ping. Considering his comment about Asians, though, I would lean toward the argument that he wasn't using word as an anthropological term.

 

The bolded was my first thought... that it was a reference to the three general anthropological categories of Mongoloid, Negroid, and Causasoid. Looking at the responses here though, perhaps not!

[MistyMountain]

I'm not sure how I feel because the one positive review said it was not about down syndrome and I have a feeling most of the reviews are from people who didn't read the book. If it is mocking people with DS or Asians that is beyond low but maybe it isn't. I didn't read the book so I can't say for sure. It was a poor choice to use that term and the cover choice was poor too. If it is talking about the mongoloid race then it is horrible but if it is about a fictional race from another universe then it could be just a really poor choice of wording.

Edited April 15, 2012 by MistyMountain

[Dolphin]

Just clicked on the link, and it didn't work. Did an amazon search, no results. Your complaints might have worked:001_smile:

[A.Balaban]

Just clicked on the link, and it didn't work. Did an amazon search, no results. Your complaints might have worked:001_smile:

 

:iagree:

 

Amazon has a bunch of weird stuff. Oh well.

[Trish]

Censorship and all that.

[jewellsmommy]

Just clicked on the link, and it didn't work. Did an amazon search, no results. Your complaints might have worked:001_smile:

 

 

Yep. Me too