So I take it you are unwilling or unable to put me straight, as I said before if anyone can explain to me where I went wrong I will not hesitate to put the biggest, reddest apology this site has ever seen.

Any takers?

Oh dear - what a mess. Not only the quotes going all to cock - but a misunderstanding/misreading as well. Sorry JLFS - I'm with others here - I don't know what Rosemary wrote that's got you so wound up.

Consider answering bil's post:

I just think there is a misunderstanding.

The thread is about age of consent in Spain. Were the thread about age of consent full stop, you would be right.

I really don't think she was singling out the Spanish merely linking to the thread title.

I believe that where the misunderstandings arise during forum discussions is when people try and differentiate between the UK and Spain as though they are different planets; Lord Haw Haw offers his wisdom, people get wound up and common sense flies out the window.

Particularly affected are those with a deep understanding of both countries who have lived under both cultures, perhaps equally, and there are a few on here. The rest of us don’t understand such passion and wonder what’s going on when the rockets are launched.

I’ve said it before, from my perspective I can’t see an appreciable major difference between the Spanish and the British, although I can happily reel of a thousand minor, irrelevant ones should I have to.

JLFS Is your first language not English by any chance? Rosemary said...

"When I was working in the UK I often dealt with families where paedophiles had been involved and several of these perpetrators were Spanish and could see nothing wrong with having sex with the underaged or with family members"

She makes no mention of other nationalities but is speaking specifically about Spanish paedophiles seeing nothing wrong with their actions.

To try and help you comprehend, if she had wanted to say they were the ONLY ones who had no guilt feelings she would have said something like "and only they could see nothing etc."

Time to get out that big red apology I think

where paedophiles had been involved and several of these perpetrators were Spanish and could see nothing wrong with having sex with the underaged or with family members


I don't believe a word anyway, I'd like to hear just how many and it what circumstances the poster worked with paedophiles. How many Spanish paedophiles did you work with in the UK? Their families must have been there too. Of course they all admitted their guilt to you and saw nothing wrong with having sex with family or underaged children.

Me thinks you're living in a fantasy world to score a ridiculous brownie point on an internet forum.

Come on Bil, I am not asking you who has right opinion, I am asking as you know a lot about grammar, more than most on here, and you have never sheid away from this type of "grammr query in the past.

All I wan to know if there is a Defing or relative clause in the post, that would make anyone else part from me read it that way. I feel that Goaty and Cman did too, but I cant be sure.

I really feel I should apologise to Rosemary if I am wrong, there is always the possiblity that she phrased herself wrong without any intention to cause friction and misunderstandings.

I have often read things wrong on here and admitted it needed, so As a grammar buff, could you not point out in a grammatical aspect where I am wrong.

I am not interested in the content of post 16, just the finer points in the English grammar.

Do you not know that you can create a reletive or defing clause by illimination.

Ie, There were 50 painings in the gallery, 22 of the were oil paintings and were good.

By reading this I would presume the other 28 were not good, even though it has not been mentioned, so in my opinion, they do not read to put the other 28 were not, as it is self evident.

Or have I got that worng too.

I can easily see where you are coming from, but I do think you are wrong.

Let's look at the example you give. " There were 50 paintings, 22 of them were oil, and were good."

That sentance says nothing concrete about the remaining paintings. You might infer that the remaining were not oil, but you couldn't be certain. The rest of them might also be oil, but bad, or they might be a mix of media (including oil) some bad some good. The only concrete thing you could say would be that if there were more than 22 that were oil, then those 'extra' oils would definitely be bad. I think that to really understand the meaning of the sentance, you need to know the question preceeding it.

For example if it was "So how many of the paintings were any good?" You might reasonable infer that the unsaid following comment was that the rest of the paintings were a) shite, and b) not oil.

If the preceeding question was " So how many of the paintings were oil? " all you can tell is that 22 of them were oil, and all the oil paintings were good.

The only thing you can infer is that the remaining 28 were not oils.

To summarise, as I said before, the meaning of the Oddities post hinged on what they were answering, to whit the title of the thread.

She said

" I often dealt with families where paedophiles had been involved and several of these perpetrators were Spanish and could see nothing wrong with having sex with the underaged or with family members"

All she says there is that some paintings were Spanish and they were bad.

All she says is that some paedophiles were Spanish, and were shameless.


I can clearly see how you might make the misunderstanding that she was being offensive to Spanish people, but trust me, she wasn't.

This is a simple case of two decent people falling out over a simple misunderstanding, and nothing more.

I'd like to see it end there.

Yes I read it that way too. I am with you and goaty here

Maybe Oddities just wanted to make the point that there are Spanish paedophiles too (which of course there are), but it read as though Spanish inherantly see nothing wrong with pardophilia and incest.

The point I was trying to make is that the fear of paedophlilia is worse that the action itself as it stops parents and children doing things that are normal in society. For what I have seen and experienced, Spanish young children are incredibly sociable with both relatives, other children and strangers. I dont want that friendliness restricted because of the fear of something that will not happen to very many children.

Sorry, can't agree.

She said " I often dealt with families where paedophiles had been involved and several of these perpetrators were Spanish and could see nothing wrong with having sex with the underaged or with family members"

That says nothing about the inherent nature of Spaniards, but everything about the inherent nature of abusers.

She says of the paedos she dealt with SOME/SEVERAL (not ALL, which would have been dodgy) were Spanish.

No abuser ever sees anything wrong, and were the thread just about the age of consent generally, you and JLFS would be right. However the thread is specifically about the SPANISH age of consent.

That makes all the difference.

Ok bil that is your take, butC man read the same as me, even though the quotes are messed up, it was mine that he agreed with, a mirale in itself but that is another story

The thread was originaly about the age of consent ,but when had veered off and incest was brought into it (not by me), which we all know know has no age af onsent it is totally illegal no matter what age.

So that part of your theory does not hold water. So the post to me was not about the age of consent any longer.

I would presume anyone who has had a job dealing with sensetive issues, such as this, is usually well versed and very vigilant in the language and phrasing they use, because if anything is misunderstood, it could lead to a whole lot of trouble in their professional life.

true - speaking as the mum of 2 girls of nearly 12 & 15, just because they can, doesn't mean they will - thank god........


& clearly judging by the teenage pregnancy stats in the UK, just because they can't doesn't mean they won't

I have to admit to being horrified when I first found out about the age of consent here - particularly as a mum of girls - but somehow because it isn't such a big deal and is discussed more openly, and because sex & contraception education (at least where we are) is so good, less kids seem to be having sex at a young age, or at least getting pregnant

Miracle miracle, we read it the same, and I presume that you would find it quite offensive put like that.
although I must admit I have found myself agreeing with quite a few of your post recently, there must be something I can take, to help with that condition
coz it is a bit worrying---


K on the way.

English is not my first language, and the part of your post that is in red, is exactly what I am saying, She singles out the Spanish as the ones thinking it is not wrong, and not other nationalalities, so arent we agreed on that point, that is the the part that is think is bad, or have I got that wrong too?

So what are you really trying to say? You are saying that I sould apologise but agreeing with me at the same time, confusing the issu even more.