Sheffield Forum
The Stupidity of The Sun
Home > General Forums > General Discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 16-06-2003, 16:10   #1
kittykat
Forum feline
 
kittykat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Dore
Total Posts: 895
Look at this and tell me, do YOU find it sick? cos what i see is a pick of a baby and thats it. If i saw it, say, in a photoframe in someones house i wouldnt be shocked or think they must be a pedofile, id think aaw what a cute baby. How irresponsible of the sun to attach this meaning to it.

Look:http: http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2003272362,00.html
__________________
This is a LOCAL forum, for LOCAL people...we'll have no trouble here...

I dont own a cat, and im not cat like in any way..dont ask me anything about cats!!
  Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links - Register and/or Login to hide this ad.
Old 16-06-2003, 16:16   #2
RPG
Registered User
 
RPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Escafeld
Total Posts: 2,218
it wouldnt be sick in the parents or family's house, but in another persons it could be kinda classed as well, embarassing.
__________________
RPG - Not-Moderator
Out! Out! Out! You demons of stupidity! - Dogbert/Scott Adams
  Reply With Quote
Old 16-06-2003, 16:22   #3
Mo
Registered User
 
Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NE Derbyshire
Total Posts: 2,111
Sorry but I have to disagree. I don't find it offensive but it's hardly a dignified pose for the poor child. Can't think what the parents are thinking of allowing it to be printed.

Perhaps Kitty you aren't aware of just how much pedaphilia there is around these days. As a mother I am (sadly) constantly on the lookout for things which may be putting my children at risk.

Would you like to be photographed sat with your legs wide open
  Reply With Quote
Old 16-06-2003, 16:24   #4
kittykat
Forum feline
 
kittykat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Dore
Total Posts: 895
Yeah but only if that person was a pedophile or thought of it that way, it might be a strange taste in pics but not SICK. I think its quite cute. Wouldnt have it up in my house personally but its still quite cute.
__________________
This is a LOCAL forum, for LOCAL people...we'll have no trouble here...

I dont own a cat, and im not cat like in any way..dont ask me anything about cats!!
  Reply With Quote
Old 16-06-2003, 16:29   #5
kittykat
Forum feline
 
kittykat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Dore
Total Posts: 895
Quote:
Originally posted by "Mo"

Sorry but I have to disagree. I don't find it offensive but it's hardly a dignified pose for the poor child. Can't think what the parents are thinking of allowing it to be printed.

Perhaps Kitty you aren't aware of just how much pedaphilia there is around these days. As a mother I am (sadly) constantly on the lookout for things which may be putting my children at risk.

Would you like to be photographed sat with your legs wide open
Yes im aware, but i still dont find this picture sick its just a little baby, weve all seen naked babies before and usually people find them cute to look at. There is the odd few who find it more than cute, but why cater to their weird, sick ways and find it sick ourselves. Surely its the pedofiles who are sick, not the kids the lust after?
__________________
This is a LOCAL forum, for LOCAL people...we'll have no trouble here...

I dont own a cat, and im not cat like in any way..dont ask me anything about cats!!
  Reply With Quote
Old 16-06-2003, 16:43   #6
Neo
Registered User
 
Neo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: S7
Total Posts: 140
Send a message via MSN to Neo
There's a very fine line these days to cross..
Unfortunately, my opinion is that this picture crosses those lines, since it is almost advertising a market for that kind of thing..
__________________
So what do you need? Besides a miracle.
Guns. Lots of guns.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16-06-2003, 17:36   #7
max
Leftie epeeist
 
max's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Stannington
Total Posts: 10,219
Surely it's the Sun at fault? If it hadn't been for them then this debate would not have started. It's up for auction as a piece of art and would not likely to have come to the attention of anyone other than those interested in it as a piece of art. Now that it has been exposed to a larger audience it has become something completely different.
__________________
The study, published in Psychological Science, claims that right-wing ideology forms a 'pathway' for people with low reasoning ability to become prejudiced against groups such as other races and gay people. - Daily Mail Feb 2012
  Reply With Quote
Old 16-06-2003, 18:26   #8
robh
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Total Posts: 219
Nothing wrong with the photo. Aren't there still seaside postcards featuring naked infants with their bits on display?

A lot wrong with anyone who finds it sexually exciting, they should be undergoing psychiatric treatment (When I'm not in my usual wet wishy washy liberal mood I might suggest psychiatric treatment involving electrodes attached to their genitalia but I wouldn't really mean it).

Something wrong with the Sun for reprinting it - I expect they want a re-run of those near public lynchings of rumoured paedophiles (which included a paediatrician 'cos the people were to thick to know the difference). That kind of thing sells newspapers.

Maybe something wrong with us getting indignant about it - to some extent classifying naked babies as porn makes some social inadequates think it is porn. It's a bit like when we banned legitimate ownership of licensed hand-guns for target practise - the result of the ban was that now there's a much more active black market and the same guy that can get you a target pistol will also offer you a kalashnikov and if you ask nicely he can probably lay his hands on a rocket launcher.

And there's lots more to worry about - what about erotic underwear for pre-pubescent girls? What message is that broadcasting? It's down to parenting, I'd not want my child photographed naked (to preserve his dignity and not infringe his rights) or clothed in an erotic manner, or fully dressed but in a suggestive pose.

The photographer (and presumably the child) is Dutch and public nudity for all ages is more acceptable there than here. We Brits have a bit of a problem with some confusion about nudity and sexuality, we can't cope with the concept of the Scandinavian mixed sauna either - Well I've been there and done it and there is nothing remotely sexual about nudity in that context. Its a body, we've all got one, get used to the idea.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16-06-2003, 20:15   #9
kittykat
Forum feline
 
kittykat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Dore
Total Posts: 895
Exactly.. the fact that in todays society we cant see a picture of a baby and link it with sex is disgusting really, and if the sun were so bothered about it.. why publicise it? And of all papers to moan about nudity too ... this coming from one that shows pics up celebs skirts and nude women on a regular basis
__________________
This is a LOCAL forum, for LOCAL people...we'll have no trouble here...

I dont own a cat, and im not cat like in any way..dont ask me anything about cats!!
  Reply With Quote
Old 16-06-2003, 20:16   #10
Tony Ruscoe
Bolton Boy
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Sheffield
Total Posts: 582
Wasn't there some guy a couple of years ago who took his photos of his young child to be developed at Boots and because there was a photo of his child naked in the bath, the person working there phoned the police...? (I'm sure I read about that when the papers went throught that phase of accusing everyone of being a paedophile.)

The thing with art is that it's always being misinterpreted. If there was a naked woman sat with her legs spread, some would say it was art whilst others would say it was pornography... and some people would treat it as art and others would be aroused by it (I guess). It's just the same here... but it's more sensitive because it's a child (and therefore would be illegal if it was pornography).

In my opinion, it's not sick by any means - but in the wrong hands it might be viewed in an unacceptable manner.
__________________
Tony Ruscoe
http://ruscoe.net
  Reply With Quote
Old 16-06-2003, 21:02   #11
Phanerothyme
Psychenaut
 
Phanerothyme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Here And Now
Total Posts: 14,822
the sun is mass
of incandescent gas
a giagntic nuclear furnace
where hydrogen gets burned
into helium
at a temperature of
millions of degrees
__________________
http://www.edl.me/ - click here for more information about the EDL. Then boogie.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16-06-2003, 21:08   #12
kittykat
Forum feline
 
kittykat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Dore
Total Posts: 895
mmm, but it can provide light entertainment when one requires it
__________________
This is a LOCAL forum, for LOCAL people...we'll have no trouble here...

I dont own a cat, and im not cat like in any way..dont ask me anything about cats!!
  Reply With Quote
Old 16-06-2003, 21:11   #13
Jon
Individual
 
Jon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Rotherham
Total Posts: 3,171
Least the Sun backed the troops in Iraqi more then i can say for the Mirror which i have read for over 1o years
  Reply With Quote
Old 16-06-2003, 21:31   #14
robh
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Total Posts: 219
Quote:
Originally posted by "Tony Ruscoe"

Wasn't there some guy a couple of years ago who took his photos of his young child to be developed at Boots and because there was a photo of his child naked in the bath, the person working there phoned the police...? (I'm sure I read about that when the papers went throught that phase of accusing everyone of being a paedophile.)
Almost right, it was newsreader Julia Somerville - and looking for that story I found a couple of interesting articles on the subject:
http://www.spiked-online.com/Articles/000000005520.htm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists...450901,00.html
  Reply With Quote
Old 30-07-2006, 01:24   #15
Mr Prime
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Paddington
Total Posts: 3,224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mo
Perhaps Kitty you aren't aware of just how much pedaphilia there is around these days. As a mother I am (sadly) constantly on the lookout for things which may be putting my children at risk.

Would you like to be photographed sat with your legs wide open
There is no more paedophilia around today than there ever was that is unless you believe that a factory now pumps them out on a production line, in which case you should stop reading comics like Duh Sun.
  Reply With Quote
Old 30-07-2006, 01:59   #16
Strix
Registered User
 
Strix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: SF of course!
Total Posts: 32,269
I hate how much of a grip of us the sun has - dictating how the masses think

look at the hysteria created in this thread alone

I despair of the fact that parents in general now seem to think if you don't have a child in tow, you're some sort of child molester - which then gives them carte blanche to treat you like you're a monster or sub human

__________________
Mr Strix is running the half marathon today so please donate to Support Dogs - a Sheffield charity
see what Rain Rescue is up to - To donate, text RAIN04 £(£3/£5/£10) to 70070
  Reply With Quote
Old 30-07-2006, 12:07   #17
purdyamos
Prickly Goo
 
purdyamos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The Oort Cloud
Total Posts: 7,742
The fact that this is from the continent speaks volumes. We are so puritanical and histrionic about bodies. We are repressed and obsessed in this country. It makes me feel sad and sort of suffocated.

But the real point that enrages me about paedophilia debates is that the vast majority of abuse happens in the home, by family or familiars. If that photo *encouraged* filthy thoughts, then so do naked babies' very existence in front of dads, uncles, stepmothers, grandads, cousins, etc.

I don't think the photo is dignified, but I don't think it's disgusting. I think the festering suspicion being fuelled in people that there are monsters round every corner is far more dangerous, because our society is becoming stifled by paranoia.
__________________
KEEP AN OPEN MIND, BUT DON'T LET YOUR BRAIN FALL OUT.
People stand in their own shadow and wonder why it's dark.
  Reply With Quote
Old 30-07-2006, 12:14   #18
seriessix
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Total Posts: 1,701
Don't buy the Sun - Simple.
  Reply With Quote
Old 30-07-2006, 12:15   #19
koenigsinger
Once sharp, now soft
 
koenigsinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Bringing S7 cool to Beighton
Total Posts: 2,302
Send a message via MSN to koenigsinger
amen to that! wrap your chips in it, dont read it.
__________________
Hey! Hey! We're all Homo Sapiens aren't we?
  Reply With Quote
Old 30-07-2006, 12:21   #20
seriessix
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Total Posts: 1,701
http://www.anfieldroad.com/images/st.../sungutter.jpg


A surprising number of people seem unaware of the boycott of The Sun by supporters of Liverpool Football Club. Some don't seem to know it is boycotted, others don't know why. Some people rather disturbingly know why the boycott exists but still choose to buy it.

If you choose to continue to buy The Sun after reading this article, and the articles it links to, then you ought to stop calling yourself a Liverpool supporter. Collect any shirts or scarves you have, and hand them in to a charity shop. In fact you can't really call yourself a football supporter. The lies printed in The Sun that you will read about below were aimed at Liverpool supporters, people from Liverpool, people from the North of England, football supporters of any club. If you fall into any of those categories you certainly shouldn't be buying, reading, or visiting the website of that newspaper. If you are a decent human being you will be steering clear of it from now on, even if you've not done so before.

If you buy the paper regularly already, print off all of this information, and save your money tomorrow. Read these articles instead. If you still want to buy that paper the following day I would be surprised.

The boycott of The Sun goes back to April 1989. At the time of writing that is almost 17 years ago. On April 15th 1989 a disaster took place which resulted in the deaths of ninety-six Liverpool supporters at Hillsborough, the home ground of Sheffield Wednesday, during an FA Cup semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest. Ninety-six people had their lives crushed out of them. Many more are said to have ended their own lives since as a consequence of that disaster. A lot of injustices came out of that disaster, far too many to list here. For more information visit the Hillsborough Justice Campaign website at http://www.contrast.org/hillsborough and please try to support them.

This article concentrates on one piece of injustice that could so easily have been avoided. That could so easily have been made a little better, if not fixed, in the intervening years. Lies were printed as fact in a British newspaper, and that newspaper has still not made an unconditional apology for what it printed. Its editor of the time has never made an unconditional apology in all of that time.


The headlines and sub-headlines on the front page of The Sun newspaper on the Wednesday following the disaster were as follows:

“The Truth.
Some fans picked pockets of victims
Some fans urinated on the brave cops
Some fans beat up PC giving kiss of life.”

So just four days after their loved ones had died, four days after they had narrowly escaped death themselves, Liverpool supporters were confronted with those headlines. People actually believed those headlines. Those who were there did not believe the headlines of course, nor did those who knew people who had been there. Unfortunately though a lot of people did believe those headlines; people who were not Liverpool supporters, perhaps supporters of another team or people who did not follow football at all. The headlines sewed seeds in so many people’s minds that the 96 supporters died at the hands of their own kind. All lies, all proven to be lies, yet never put right by that publication.

For more on the media coverage, visit http://www.contrast.org/hillsborough/history/media.shtm,
http://football.guardian.co.uk and Wikipedia .

The Wikipedia article says: “The story accompanying these headlines claimed that ‘drunken Liverpool fans viciously attacked rescue workers as they tried to revive victims’ and ‘police officers, firemen and ambulance crew were punched, kicked and urinated upon’. A quote, attributed to an unnamed policeman, claimed that a dead girl had been abused and that Liverpool fans ‘were openly urinating on us and the bodies of the dead’.”

Read that last bit again, it really was printed in a national newspaper.

Liverpool legend and the manager of the club at the time Kenny Dalglish was greatly affected by the tragedy. He attended numerous funerals and visited people in hospital, some of whom were in comas; he spent time with those that had lost their loved ones. In his autobiography he talks about the Disaster and recalls the media coverage:

“The press coverage was difficult to comprehend, particularly the publication of pictures which added to people's distress. There was one photograph of two girls right up against the Leppings Lane fence, their faces pressed into the wire. Nobody knows how they escaped. They used to come to Melwood every day, looking for autographs, and that photograph upset everyone there because we knew them. After seeing that I couldn't look at the papers again.

When the Sun came out with the story about Liverpool fans being drunk and unruly, underneath a headline 'The Truth,' the reaction on Merseyside was one of complete outrage. Newsagents stopped stocking the Sun. People wouldn't mention its name. They were burning copies of it. Anyone representing the Sun was abused. Sun reporters and photographers would lie, telling people they worked for the Liverpool Post and Echo. There was a lot of harassment of them because of what had been written. The Star had gone a bit strong as well but they apologised the next day. They knew the story had no foundation. Kelvin MacKenzie, the Sun's editor, even called me up.

“How can we correct the situation?” he said.

“You know that big headline – ‘The Truth’?” I replied. “All you have to do is put ‘We lied’ in the same size. Then you might be all right.”

Mackenzie said: “I cannot do that.”

“Well,” I replied, “I cannot help you then.”

That was it. I put the phone down. Merseysiders were outraged by the Sun. A great many still are.

There is no excuse for buying or reading The Sun. None whatsoever. If you read that newspaper, or worse still you buy that newspaper, after reading this article and those other articles that are linked to, then you are not fit to call yourself a Red. If you support another team, you should still be able to see why that newspaper should be boycotted. No matter what competitions they are running. Regardless of any “exclusives” they claim to have, even if it is the only paper left in the shop. Saying you bought it to get some tokens to help your daughter’s school to buy a new computer is not going to get you off the hook. It’s really simple:

Don’t buy the Sun.

http://www.anfieldroad.com/
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT. The time now is 03:48.
POSTS ON THIS FORUM ARE NOT ACTIVELY MONITORED
Click "Report Post" under any post which may breach our terms of use.
©2002-2012 SheffieldForum.co.uk | Powered by vBulletin ©2013