Mrs Fenn and that crying child incident revisited.

[jassi]

Kate was not moaning that Madeleine's disappearance affected her sex life.   Kate was pointing out how the visions of Madeleine if she was with a Paedophile turned her off sex.  Something the father of Holly Wells praised her for bringing out in the open, but then you wouldn't understand these things.

The visions that Kate had were also what Gerry had,  if your child is missing and you don't know where that child is or with whom your imagination would run riot.   Images came into Kates head,  images she could not stop from filling her brain.   With what words would you describe it?   Kate was being honest and if she upset snowflakes then so be it. Kate wanted the reader to actually imagintion the horror of what she was seeing and being tormented by and using the exact wordsto describe what she saw was the only way she could get that across.

Why should she want that ?

[Robittybob1]

Why should she want that ?

The right to free speech comes into it.

[jassi]

The right to free speech comes into it.

Yes, I understand that, but why should SHE think we needed to know the details ?

[Robittybob1]

Yes, I understand that, but why should SHE think we needed to know the details ?

Its a woman's prerogative, whatever that means!

[Lace]

Yes, I understand that, but why should SHE think we needed to know the details ?

To relate to the reader the full horror of having your child abducted.   Then again if you didn't want to know,  don't read the book in the first place.

Holly Wells father said he had a vision of Holly naked in a bath,  that was before he found out what had happened to her.   I bet some readers thought 'oh fancy saying he imagined his daughter naked in a bath'.    Maybe if the murderer hadn't been caught and Holly's dad mentioned his vision,  then some may have said he had killed her.  That is how some people work.

[Holly Goodhead]

Yes, I understand that, but why should SHE think we needed to know the details ?

If she hadn't have given a detailed account I quite imagine some would say it was too sanitised. 

[Robittybob1]

Its a woman's prerogative, whatever that means!

"Its a woman's prerogative to change her mind."

[Venturi Swirl]

Apparenly much better that the erm um you know ... erm um yeah like erer um.. T9  trying to recall important things but recalling minute details about stupid things.

from puglove "Kate should never have written that book.".. i never read it.some of my friends did and I saw unbelievable headlines on the paper racks.  Kate moaning about how their daughters disapearance affected their sex life. FFS! and the utter shocking detailed accound of her daughters genetalia- wholly inappropriate!

I agree the book should never have been written it was a sham by all feedback  heard.

A detailed “accound” (sic) of her daughter’s genetalia??   

[Venturi Swirl]

Yes, I understand that, but why should SHE think we needed to know the details ?

Did it upset you?  There are no in depth details, just a brief sentence conveying the horror of the kind of thoughts that go through the minds of those who believe their child may be in the hands of a paedophile.  If you find such matters too disturbing to even think about then spending years and years frequenting forums where this supposedly contentious sentence is trotted out with tiresome regularity would seem  an odd pastime for anyone so sensitive and easily shocked.

[jassi]

Did it upset you? There are no in depth details, just a brief sentence conveying the horror of the kind of thoughts that go through the minds of those who believe their child may be in the hands of a paedophile.  If you find such matters too disturbing to even think about then spending years and years frequenting forums where this supposedly contentious sentence is trotted out with tiresome regularity would seem  an odd pastime for anyone so sensitive and easily shocked.

Not at all, I don'y give a monkey's for what she writes.

I was expressing surprise that others should be in the least interested in her utterings

[Venturi Swirl]

Not at all, I don'y give a monkey's for what she writes.

I was expressing surprise that others should be in the least interested in her utterings

Yes, I find it similarly surprising that so many sceptics become morally righteous Mary Whithouses over the use of the words “torn genitals”.  It’s almost a case of protesting too much IMO, slightly creepy in other words.

[The General]

Yes, I find it similarly surprising that so many sceptics become morally righteous Mary Whithouses over the use of the words “torn genitals”.  It’s almost a case of protesting too much IMO, slightly creepy in other words.

I don't see it that way, I don't take exception to the words per se. I haven't read the book, so don't know the full context, but the phraseology does seem an odd way to describe the fate of your own daughter. I'm sure it was ghost written in some way, so maybe that was creative licence on their behalf.

[Holly Goodhead]

Yes, I find it similarly surprising that so many sceptics become morally righteous Mary Whithouses over the use of the words “torn genitals”.  It’s almost a case of protesting too much IMO, slightly creepy in other words.

I think it depends where you're coming from as to how you view this.  For those that believe there was no abduction and T9 were involved it seems odd.  For those of us who believe MM was abducted its entirely normal that you would jump to the conclusion the motive was sexual and your mind would gravitate to the sheer horror of a grown man sexually assaulting/raping a girl under 4 yoa.  When KM published her book she was of the opinion 'Tannerman' was MM's abductor. 

[Venturi Swirl]

I don't see it that way, I don't take exception to the words per se. I haven't read the book, so don't know the full context, but the phraseology does seem an odd way to describe the fate of your own daughter. I'm sure it was ghost written in some way, so maybe that was creative licence on their behalf.

I don’t think there is any evidence that the book was ghost-written, and I think Kate McCann is intelligent enough not to need a ghostwriter.  Iin fact if anything that sentence is evidence to me  that it wasn’t as it has a total ring of authenticity to it, something that someone whose child hadn’t gone missing in such circumstances might struggle to imagine themselves.  But Kate’s book would certainly have been appraised by an editor who clearly did not think that that sentence was so beyond the pale as to need to be removed.  I’ve only ever seen it criticised by self-righteous sceptics,  I wonder why that is.

[Holly Goodhead]

KM acknowledges her editor, Caroline North, who apparently guided her and encouraged her through the process.