Did you know that 'Lolita' is sitting in the Barr Smith Library, right now? Or how about 'Mein Kampf'?

Furthermore, these books are in the main collection of the Library. That means any one of the approximately 70,000 students or staff members could borrow, photocopy, or lend the book to someone else. 

These books are not just 'offensive' or 'controversial'. Let's call out these books for what they truly contain: child sexual abuse material and violent extremist material, both of which are highly illegal to possess, let alone to be distributing on such a scale. The author of 'Daddy's Little Toy', a book which sexually objectifies children under the guise of 'erotic fiction', was arrested and found guilty earlier this year. So why does a book like 'Lolita' get a free pass? No matter how long ago the book was published, no matter how well-written, or no matter how 'subversive' or 'kinky' it is, we as a society must rightly condemn any material which reduces children to objects of sexual gratification. We must do anything and everything it takes to stop this from spreading.

These books not only contain material depicting torture and cruelty towards children and the most vulnerable members of our community, but glorify them. There is a reason why detectives, judges, concerned parents, and members of the general public fight so hard to stop depictions of the abuse of children and vulnerable minority groups from running rampant, whether these be real, fictional, or AI-generated. It is because a society that allows unlimited tolerance towards even the most depraved ideologies destroys social cohesion from the inside. To not express any opposition towards the most harmful of ideas, by allowing them to be actively disseminated, is equivalent to granting moral permission for crimes against humanity.

Adelaide University is a institution open to all members of the public, including children. There are several childcare facilities and even a Children's University on campus. And while the vast majority of us would never even dream about hurting a child, it only takes one madman to be radicalised and become a real and present threat to the University community. 

If for some reason, someone wanted to access a copy of this material for legitimate research purposes, they would of course be allowed, given that their research ethics proposal had already been approved by the University. There is no reason why these books would need to be publicly accessible, in any case.

Adelaide University must remove books containing child sexual abuse and violent extremist material from public access. Any refusal by the University to act, or any delay, is morally indefensible, criminal, and downright repulsive.