Cyprus-Forum.com

[bill cobbett]

To my mind I think Sotos is to be congratulated for posting this though some might say that it was regretable that under the current situation he/she felt the need to clear it first.

It's a serious matter which requires serious debate, instead of which some here seem to be condeming him for even daring to raise the subject, especially in the context of the photo. For those offended by the original and now missing photo. It was the most harmless, boring, bland, photo of a young girl fully and normally dressed. A more inoffensive photo could not have been chosen, well within the limits of moral and legal propriety, even in the context of Soto's text. It now turns out to be a fake one to boot. Sotos I'm sure could have trawled the net and found something far, far more controversial, we all know he could, ( if I may say so) he/she presumably and wisely chose not to do so.

Another off-limits subject for debate just because a member choses to post an inoffensive photo to make their point ?

Think I'll go and find some offensive cartoons.

[SSBubbles]

You know what I understand why people got upset by this topic...but I dont see the reason why all of you attacked Sotos. I am sensitive too when it comes to children but its a serious thing here. I agree that the title Sotos chose and what he wrote latter doesnt really match.

The last 2 months I heard on the news about several men who got arrested for having sex with young children or touch them or watch naked pictures from children on internet etc....Sick sick sick...what made me angry and I was going to kill him if I was him...it was a case of an ankle who rape for years (since the age of 8 if I am not wrong) the daughter of his brother. I was going to kill him and not just take him to the police. That about pedophilia.

As for the rest Sotos wrote....well lots of teenagers are having sex from 13 until 16. I am not saying that are all like that but I believe that parents should talk to their kids. Discuss about sex and tell them that when they are in a relationship maybe their partners might push them for sex. Encourage kids to wait but not with the way that they will get punished if they have sex or scare them. When you say "dont" to teenagers you end up realizing that they are doing it because it was forbidden for them

Lena mou, forever the voice of reason

This was IMO only raised to shock and upset - end of story. Sotos was the author - so he got the replies

[SSBubbles]

To my mind I think Sotos is to be congratulated for posting this though some might say that it was regretable that under the current situation he/she felt the need to clear it first.

It's a serious matter which requires serious debate, instead of which some here seem to be condeming him for even daring to raise the subject, especially in the context of the photo. For those offended by the original and now missing photo. It was the most harmless, boring, bland, photo of a young girl fully and normally dressed. A more inoffensive photo could not have been chosen, well within the limits of moral and legal propriety, even in the context of Soto's text. It now turns out to be a fake one to boot. Sotos I'm sure could have trawled the net and found something far, far more controversial, we all know he could, ( if I may say so) he/she presumably and wisely chose not to do so.

Another off-limits subject for debate just because a member choses to post an inoffensive photo to make their point ?

Think I'll go and find some offensive cartoons.

Given the present climes, we ALL know why this was posted by Sotos

The picture had everything to do with it - regardless of how 'innocently' he was trying to portray it - and look how long it took him to delete it - orders from 'above' maybe - and no, I do not mean Admin!! Surprised at you bill - as I seem to recall you having children - daughters of your own!

I wash my hands of this thread

[pantheman]

You know what I understand why people got upset by this topic...but I dont see the reason why all of you attacked Sotos. I am sensitive too when it comes to children but its a serious thing here. I agree that the title Sotos chose and what he wrote latter doesnt really match.

The last 2 months I heard on the news about several men who got arrested for having sex with young children or touch them or watch naked pictures from children on internet etc....Sick sick sick...what made me angry and I was going to kill him if I was him...it was a case of an ankle who rape for years (since the age of 8 if I am not wrong) the daughter of his brother. I was going to kill him and not just take him to the police. That about pedophilia.

As for the rest Sotos wrote....well lots of teenagers are having sex from 13 until 16. I am not saying that are all like that but I believe that parents should talk to their kids. Discuss about sex and tell them that when they are in a relationship maybe their partners might push them for sex. Encourage kids to wait but not with the way that they will get punished if they have sex or scare them. When you say "dont" to teenagers you end up realizing that they are doing it because it was forbidden for them

Actually Lena, I disagree with you here, I still think it was wrong of him to raise that topic. There are a zillion topics he could have chosen and there are some moral codes that most decent people still wish to follow. Perhaps sotos or any one else would like to discuss their bedroom activities with their partners for us all to discuss o[penly? On the other hand, I bet not, because some things are just not a discussion point.

We all know it goes on and that it is wrong but put the words and an innocent picture together infers exactly that, shock, disgust and so on.

IMHO (as Eliko would say)

[bill cobbett]

To my mind I think Sotos is to be congratulated for posting this though some might say that it was regretable that under the current situation he/she felt the need to clear it first.

It's a serious matter which requires serious debate, instead of which some here seem to be condeming him for even daring to raise the subject, especially in the context of the photo. For those offended by the original and now missing photo. It was the most harmless, boring, bland, photo of a young girl fully and normally dressed. A more inoffensive photo could not have been chosen, well within the limits of moral and legal propriety, even in the context of Soto's text. It now turns out to be a fake one to boot. Sotos I'm sure could have trawled the net and found something far, far more controversial, we all know he could, ( if I may say so) he/she presumably and wisely chose not to do so.

Another off-limits subject for debate just because a member choses to post an inoffensive photo to make their point ?

Think I'll go and find some offensive cartoons.

Given the present climes, we ALL know why this was posted by Sotos

The picture had everything to do with it - regardless of how 'innocently' he was trying to portray it - and look how long it took him to delete it - orders from 'above' maybe - and no, I do not mean Admin!! Surprised at you bill - as I seem to recall you having children - daughters of your own!

I wash my hands of this thread

My dear bubbles - it's because I have a daughter of about that age that I feel it should be discussed from timto time and yes I agree that S posted to provoke, and why not, that to my sick mind is OK. It was an innocuous photo that in the context of the text made people think, debate, react, be sick - the whole range of human reactions I suppose. Sometimes it's ok to do that, to get these reactions - in my humble and sick opinion.

[Feisty]

I don't think it a bad taste topic for discussion, it is a tabboo subject that the internet has expanded massively.
Why do we in the UK, for example, treat people who cheat the government of money far worse than we treat paedophiles?
How are they treated in Cyprus?
Why is someone not standing up and shouting very loudly about this terrible injustice?
Is it time that the out of date judges were chucked out of office and people with a bit more a clue about life put into office?

[Sotos]

To my mind I think Sotos is to be congratulated for posting this though some might say that it was regretable that under the current situation he/she felt the need to clear it first.

Thanks bill. I didn't need to clear it first. I just made a controversial post because some people asked for controversial topic! Now instead of discussing the topic we are discussing if I should have made the post I asked admin only after many people started to say that I shouldn't start the topic. Admin said it is ok to discuss it! He just said that because that picture was not mine and that the person who is in that picture could not agree with its placement in this context that the picture should be removed. He said that if I wanted I could put a picture of myself when I was a child I don't have any problem with admin about this. I think maybe he is right about the picture. But about the topic I think people should either discuss the topic or not participate in this topic if they don't like to discuss it!!

[denizaksulu]

The topic itself is not wrong. This evil surely can be discussed. What I found out of order is the picture of an 'innocent' child, from now on linked to this topic.

[Feisty]

The topic itself is not wrong. This evil surely can be discussed. What I found out of order is the picture of an 'innocent' child, from now on linked to this topic.

Only if people refuse to move forward from that and actually discuss this very serious issue it will.

I didn't see the forum yesterday so I didn't even see the picture, but surely that's what is needed to get people stirred. Paedophilia is the abuse of innocent children.

[bill cobbett]

To my mind I think Sotos is to be congratulated for posting this though some might say that it was regretable that under the current situation he/she felt the need to clear it first.

Thanks bill. I didn't need to clear it first. I just made a controversial post because some people asked for controversial topic! Now instead of discussing the topic we are discussing if I should have made the post I asked admin only after many people started to say that I shouldn't start the topic. Admin said it is ok to discuss it! He just said that because that picture was not mine and that the person who is in that picture could not agree with its placement in this context that the picture should be removed. He said that if I wanted I could put a picture of myself when I was a child I don't have any problem with admin about this. I think maybe he is right about the picture. But about the topic I think people should either discuss the topic or not participate in this topic if they don't like to discuss it!!

My apologies for my misintepretation. I am pleased to hear that Admin asked for it's removal solely on what are presumably copyright grounds and look forward to you posting photos which have no copyright restrictions.

Can I say something else about provocative pictures. Some weeks ago some one - I think it was VP - posted some pics alegedly of an exhumation of bodies, the victims of an incident during the inter-com troubles. Created a lot of pages of debate. He was vilified by some and supported by others. There can not have been more offensive pictures, but because of the debate generated ( I would say ) a member, with first hand, contemporary witness, came forward and light was shed on the incident and the truth emerged.

( By the way Sotos if any 18yo came anywhere near my 12 year old daughter I would beat them to near-death )