What's with the tramp stamp on her back?
That's a little disturbing. Excuse me while I wash my eyes out
I get it up, I get it up in the dark, I make her feel I'm not a holy man

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

Because of all the fuss. Duh.

If there was nothing wrong with the pics, why were they pulled? You must not have kids.

Man, you poeple are so freaking out over this.
She DID NOT sell those pics.. Her friend took them for her fashion line! They were for fun! They weren't meant for pedophiles and I really don't see how she made her daughter pose in seductive poses! She is running on the beach with her friends, and the one one where she is turned looks adorable! I guess you see what you are looking for, in my case a young girl having fun.. and sickos see what they want!

The big difference is that you are not posing your daughter in seductive poses that would appeal to a pedophile and having her wear makeup. Look, these pics weren't released in Star magazine or the Enquirer. Rather, Patsy(I mean Sin-dy) was deliberately trying to make money by selling her daughter. She's a madam and Kaya is a prosti-tot. Sick!
Do you not watch the news? Did you not hear about the child molestor who just executed young girls at the Amish school? It's child pornography like this that leads to such events. Your daughter is fine. But if you were to sell pics of her in her topless strong bikinis, you'd be part of the problem, too!!

I think the photos are super cute.
My daughter has 2 really cute string bikins, she is 2. She looks adorable in them IF a peadophile gets attracted by this then he is sick.
She usually just wears the bottom as she has nothing to hold the top on. I don't see anything wrong with this. Those photos are tastefull! The rest of you need to CHILL OUT a little.

Nothing wrong with 1 and 4 in my opinion. But no2 is disturbing. I don't see why young child wear bikinis full stop, let alone string like bikinis. The topless one would have been fine if she hadn't posed like that (children go topless at that age since there's no breasts).
Dance?-I am! And I'm Wild And Dancing!!

While ITA that the third pic was kind of off, there is nothing wrong with a 5 year old hugging her little friend or running @ the beach or eating in a bathing suit. Even with her topless, if she were just running in a sprinkler or something it wouldn't be a big deal.
I think with the rash of sex crimes in the world, people are looking for a scapegoat and they blame pagent moms, parents of child models, etc instead of the actual culprit, pedophiles. THEY are the ones who do these terrible things and children who model could just as easily be snatched off the street on the way home from school!
I think people are looking to make a big deal out of nothing. These pics were taken by a friend, not for profit or a modelling campaign. I think instead of throwing your minds in the gutter, just leave it as a little girl playing with her friends @ the beach.
I have tons of photos of my 5 year old in her 2 piece Tinkerbell bathing suit @ the beach, the sprinkler, etc. I'm pretty sure I have a baby picture of her toddling through a sprinkler in a diaper. Am I negligent too?
Melon
"There Is CLEARLY A Typo Here, Because You Ain't No Champion Sweetheart" Trish Stratus

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

Are you saying I am tastless? I took a pic of my niece the other day she had no shirt on. She is also five. She was running around in the sprinkler.
I don't know. Let's compare. Pay special attention to pics 1 and 3 Sin-dy had taken of her daughter. Did you pose your photos so that it appeared that the string of your niece's 2-piece bikini was about to come undone? Did you pose your niece to stand in a provocative manner so that she had her back turned to the camera but looked over her shoulder in a seductive manner with 'come f!5b4ck me' eyes? In general, did you set up full lighting and put makeup on your niece and pose her before taking your pics to make her look like she was an adult? If so, then you are as sick as Sin-dy.
If not, then I'm sure your pics are harmless and represent a true 5-year old. Either way, you aren't planning to exploit your niece in marketing ads across the country like Sin was.

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

I think it's important to note that the photos WERE NOT MEANT for modelling purposes, they were just some nice pictures Ciny had a friend take of her daughter.
I'd consider them tasteful, although the girl is a bit young to be posing like that. Child pornography though? that's a stretch.

This message has been deleted.

Are you saying I am tastless? I took a pic of my niece the other day she had no shirt on. She is also five. She was running around in the sprinkler.

This message has been deleted.

Here, in the United States, we have very stringent laws concerning child porn. The topless could be considered child porn; the pose is extemely suggestive and not appropriate for a child of 5.
Because of the umber of sex crimes committed against children, the US is taking child porn very seriously. In fact, many parents here are afraid to take photos of their naked children (i.e., in the bathtub) because stores are required by law to report ANY suspicion of child porn pictures. Tere was even a case where a mom took NORMAL naked pictures of her young child (I think she was about 4 or 5) and was arrested for child porn after she got the pictures developed. An obvious overreaction, but I'd rather by safe than sorry.
We do not need pictures like this floating around that show children in a highly sexualized manner. Think this is bad? In law school, I wrote a research paper on these so called "child models" and found this website where PARENTS put their daughters' pictures online advertising them as "models":
WARNING: These pictures are not "porn" per se, but they show children in suggestive poses.
http://www.childsupermodels.com/
Cindy's picture of her topless daughter would be right at home on this site.
Websites like these are the reason why we need to watch our children carefully. Like it or not (and I certainly hope NOT), there are people who are sexually attracted to children, and pictures that are seemingly innocent can be fuel for these perverts. Cindy should be ashamed for allowing her child to be represented in this manner. I am 24 and I know better! My mom had raised 3 successful daughters (24, 24, 36) and she was horrified at the topless picture!
I survived the PA and NJ Bar exams, July 25th, 26th, and 27th 2006!!