this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2025
952 points (98.6% liked)
Political Memes
9213 readers
2760 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
And people are free to call out how creepy it is, as well as the people defending a child orgy scene.
And that's just one instance of kid sex in King's books.... You gonna defend the scene from The Library Policeman where King describes a young boy being raped in graphic detail too?
This thread is giving serious “depicting something in fiction is the same as promoting it” conservative book-banning vibes.
Point to a single person calling for a book ban. Go on.
We have all known that the book contains this scene for years. And yet, none of us are calling for bans. One person made a tongue in cheek rhetorical question as a joke, and then a bunch of people came in to defend their beloved child orgy scene. We're just calling you freaks out for defending your beloved child orgy scene so adamantly, because you love child orgies. It's weird.
Can’t help you there, haven’t read it.
And nobody said anyone’s calling for bans- I’m saying I’m seeing people make the same arguments made by reactionaries to justify bans.
Why are you stepping in to defend a book you haven't read from a strawman argument that people aren't making?
Not defending a book. Calling out shitty arguments. Couldn’t give two shits about scary clown book. Care a lot about people using shit arguments that can be weaponized by bad actors.
Reading comprehension. Get some.
Which arguments?
You’re literally in here calling people pedophiles for suggesting that there may be some literary context to something that makes people uncomfortable.
Sorry buddy, you can't gaslight me. The people I called pedophiles were being such vile, open pedophiles that their comments got removed. Because they were being pedophiles.
I don't think there is much of any kind of literary context that can defend writing multiple pages of children having sex in graphic detail, especially in a book where the sexual abuse of children is not a primary theme, nor anything regarding child sexuality being a major theme of the book. It literally just takes a turn from "children scared of scary clown" to "the 11 year olds all decide they Must pressure their friend into a gangbang so they won't die virgins" and then moves on from it entirely as if it never happened. The context of the story is entirely unchanged if you remove the scene, as we can tell from EVERY adaptation of the book into film.
Point to those arguments. Go on.