Comments on: Cindy Crawford-Daughter Bikini 3PIC

By: michelle

michelle — Tue, 29 May 2007 21:31:34 +0000

what is so appealing about this anyway? for gods sake, shes a little girl, what does she have to show? the only person who would look appealing in a bikini for a swimsuit shoot would be those who have curves, long legs, and of course, breasts. usually this fits into the category of a WOMAN. not a freakin’ toddler. this is so sickening, and for her to be exposed to something like showing her body at a young age like that is even more appalling.

By: fremax

fremax — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 04:02:26 +0000

hahaha americans are sicker than taliban,
draw a curtain over their children…

*lol*

By: harpo

harpo — Sat, 24 Feb 2007 18:20:21 +0000

in holland 8 yr old girls walk around beach towns
topless. americans are such pathetic prudes.

By: stopbeingparanoid

stopbeingparanoid — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 19:44:14 +0000

Stop being so paranoid. Pedophiles are pedophiles no matter what your child is wearing – and her (or him) wearing less or more clothing than what you “think* is “normal” will not change that either way.

By: sal

sal — Sat, 25 Nov 2006 03:54:49 +0000

Are you kidding me? Do you people not take your children to the beach? These pictures are nothing compared to what I have seen at the beach. Do you not think if a pedophile wanted to see a child he would find it no matter what. These pictures are tame. I really don’t understand the controversy. Sooo ridiculous!!

By: May

May — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 20:00:12 +0000

Wow. I was expecting these half-naked provocative pics. One article I read even mentioned that Cindy’s daughter was allowed to pose in a thong.
Nothing wrong with these pics. Little girls wear bikinis. People! In Europe and many other countries girls at that age don’t even wear bikini tops. They run around beaches with the bottom only. Only in North America do we associate this with pedophiles. If a man is sick it is not society’s fault and it certainly should not be the fault of little innocent girls.Besides, there’s a difference between taking pictures of little girls with their legs spread open and taking some of a girl eating fruit.

By: Sebastian

Sebastian — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 17:09:23 +0000

I didn’t know there was a too-do over Crawford’s pics. But I agree with Permalink, the “hysteria” has gone too far and become tacky. I think it is a sickness in t his country that portrays truely hidden feelings of the populace.

By: Fanny

Fanny — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 06:14:37 +0000

hello people!
You need to wake up all! So it’s nothing that a little girl poses on a magazine in a bikini? How many perverts are going to jerk off looking at this innocent child. it makes me sick in my stomach. Don’t you know there is sick people out there?

By: motherof5

motherof5 — Sat, 23 Sep 2006 07:59:42 +0000

Says the pedifileâ?¦. Where you looking at the photo above or at the much much worse topless photo. And can you be hysterical enough over pediphiles?

By: carl

carl — Sat, 23 Sep 2006 06:12:32 +0000

This is it? This is the “hot” provocative photo of Cindy Crawford’s that caused so much controversy? THIS IS NOTHING!!!! I’ve seen more provocative poses on ebay. You people need to get a life, and quit your witch hunts. It’s a good thing you don’t work for me and bring crap like this in for me to waste my time, over, i’d give you the boot.
Get a life and get out of your PEDOPHILE HYSTERIA!!!