At what age does an innocent boy that needs protecting from a big scary man, become a big scary man?

[needanewname]

Discuss.

"But someone's gender DOES affect the statistical probability of that person in committing violent crime. That's a well documented fact." Yes, it does - so if you are a policeman, looking for a violent criminal, you should start by looking at all the male criminals you have on your books. Then you look at all your other suspects - i.e. anyone with a motive - and interview the men first.

What you DON'T do is stop men in the street at random until you find the violent criminal you are looking for, because ARGH THAT IS INSANE WHY CAN'T ANYONE SEE THAT?

This thread has sent me off on a very interesting trawl through the day care sex abuse hysteria articles in Wikipedia. Though one or two cases seem to have been substantiated, the entirely groundless ones are a very strange cultural phenomenon.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-11760445

A link to some cases of female abuse and treatment programme

CrapolaDeVille honestly, coating prejudice under the guise of unpicking it is still prejudice. Passive aggressive is just that.

Crapola

Same point re rapists - men are much more likely to rape.

So you start by looking at your male suspects first.

You DON'T castrate all men in some sort of pre-emptive strike.

Honey....can you link to one about men too, in the interests of fairness.

Needanewname - I'm trying really hard to accept your argument and reply to you sensibly ( because I know this subject means a lot to you ) but I'm struggling.
You can't compare the genetic makeup of humans with shifts in social policy. Unless the government start putting something in the tap water ( like they did to prevent tooth decay ) men will continue to have the same sexual urges as they did 2000 years ago - why do you think having equal job opportunities stops men wanting sex?

Yes, it does - so if you are a policeman, looking for a violent criminal, you should start by looking at all the male criminals you have on your books. Then you look at all your other suspects - i.e. anyone with a motive - and interview the men first.

What you DON'T do is stop men in the street at random until you find the violent criminal you are looking for, because ARGH THAT IS INSANE WHY CAN'T ANYONE SEE THAT?

MIFLAW, I agree with you. That's why I AM happy to have my child looked after by a male member of staff.

I am challenging people who are trying to derail this argument by saying "but what about all the female abusers".

One of the reason female caregivers are not viewed with such suspicion as males is because, as a percentage, there are far fewer female abusers than there are males.

The question about whether men are viewed with more suspicion because they are under-represented in the caregiving arena is a totally different argument? I personally think it's the more interesting argument because we can't do much more than what we're doing to stop abusers, but we CAN do an awful lot more to get men better represented in the caring professions.

Nope....I haven't suggested that you do. But I understand (although haven't ever had a child in nursery) why some people are suspicious given the facts. People make judgements based upon personal experience and the wider world. I have a friend of the family who is entirely racist, hates blacks, I can't tell you how many screaming matches discussions we've had but he lived in Botswana and witnessed countless disgusting things....including the beheading joke of one of the men he was working with, men beheaded accidentally everyone else laughed and found it hysterical whilst this man was headless beside them. So whilst I cannot agree with racist views I can understand why this 60 year old thinks like he does.

"men will continue to have the same sexual urges as they did 2000 years ago" - i.e., in most men, to fuck adult women or post-pubescent girls and, in comparatively far fewer men, to fuck adult men or post-pubescent boys.

NOT to have any form of sexual relations with pre-pubescent children of either sex, because that is NOT the normal human sexual instinct.

Yes, I can now confirm that I think, based on the evidence of this thread, that I find your views indecent and cretinous.

I linked to this one about women in the interest of fairness, it has been stated that women only abuse when a man is involved, in that article it states that is not the case.

It also states that female abusers are around 2% of the total abusers convicted and that they aren't allowed to take part in the rehabilitation programme so I would have thought you'd be happy it backs up your 'low statistic of female abusers' it also says women are unlikely to reoffend but it does happen.

Again with regard to the statistics I'd say is this because women abusers are less likely to be reported or convicted?

And that was sensible!!!!!!!

Guess what woman have sexual urges too you know! In the past dh has demanded no more because he was tired or wasn't in the mood!

"there are far fewer female abusers than there are males" - there are certainly far fewer convicted female abusers.

But then, I guess you don't normally find what you're not looking for.

PS...Are you suggesting child abuse is at all relevant to sexual urges?

Hay kungfupanda im still here, just hiding a little because i am one of them big scary peado men. Please be gentle with the man repellent spray (it plays havoc wityh my allergies)

Sunshine, I'm afraid that due to the use of rape as a weapon in wars in Africa over the past decade, my stats stand.

As for men being a victim of their own doing when it comes to suspicion about men in childcare, surely then the impetus is for us to recognise childcare for the really important job and that those doing it should be financially rewarded accordingly. It really gets on my tits that it's a minimum wage job. It is highly skilled and regulated, I just don't get why people will pay more to the guy who valets their car than to the person who looks after and educates their children and why our government think this is OK. BTW, my Norweigan tutor also made this point. It is not a men working in childcare issue, it is a Why are women and children so undervalued issue.

"But I understand (although haven't ever had a child in nursery) why some people are suspicious given the facts." Well, I DO have two children in childcare and I DON'T understand it. Not a bit. Because it is mad shit as even a cursory examintation of the facts would reveal.

Carry on being an apologist for nutjobs if it makes you happy, but don't expect to convince me any time soon.

I love how you're twisting that one, seriously you guys just keep on getting better and better

I don't think anyone is trying to derail the argument by mentioning female abusers sunshine, they do exist, perhaps in smaller numbers than male abusers but as miflaw said society doesn't actively look for female abusers on the whole but it does brand men as being dangerous and predatory.

Totally agree with you that there need to be more men in care giving roles, unfortunately while society treats men with suspicion if they show interest in these roles then we will never have adequate numbers to challenge perceptions and prejudices.

Dione I agree, but I don't think that would be explored very well on this particular thread.

Miflaw - I was making a point.
A change in social policy will not change anyone's natural urges.
Have more people become homosexual since it became legal?

Don't have time to keep reading but wanted to say to MIFLAW that your post had me tearing up in recognition of men like my own husband who loves babies and little kids but daren't speak to them if he's on his own. One of the things I immediately adored about DH is that he always noticed small children and smiled, waved or made faces with them, even before he was a dad. I feel sick to think how this might be misinterpreted by the paedo-hunters.

Eh?

MIFLAW...it's not really for you to understand is it?

Dione....that's what I said further up. The suspicion about men is why are they building and lifting heavy stuff instead of 'nancying' around and looking after kids?

Sorry that was to primal