Naked children in the park - who is right?

[Oysterbabe]

We're currently enjoying the sun in the park with DD 4 months (who is enjoying it by being asleep in the shade) It is packed with families as you'd expect. In the group next to us there are two little girls, I'm going to guess about 4 and 5, who are having a lovely time running around and playing completely in the buff. I was saying to DH that I wouldn't let our DD run around naked at that age in such a public place. There could be any number of dodgy characters watching on and getting off on it. He thinks it's fine, that they're still young enough to get away with it. Also in the unlikely event there is a lurking paedo, they're completely oblivious and it's not going to hurt them at all, you can't live in fear.
Who's right? Am I being too Daily Mail paedo round every corner or is it correct to be cautious about such things?

Why do they need to be naked though?

And why do they need to be clothed? I don't think anyone at least, I know I'm not is saying that if you go to a park, you should strip your children(!), but that if your children are naked, don't worry about it. Rather than chasing after your children because they've taken off their T-shirt or pants or wherever you draw the line, just let them enjoy themselves, and when you need to leave, they can dress then.

Well I've just skimmed the thread again peppermint and the vast majority of nasty self righteous posts are coming from the 'you're all a bunch of hysterical prudes' camp

I read it the other way too, though I'm guessing that you think I'm one of the "nasty self righteous" posters, judging by some of the responses I've had to my posts. Because I dared to point out the law, clarify why Stephen Gough keeps getting arrested, gave links to research about the correlation between prudery and promiscuity/teenage pregnancy, had a different and therefore irrelevant opinion to someone who said life was better with clothes, and pointed out to those who claimed you should wear pants so you don't see genitalia, that you don't see female genitalia when naked... Oh well...

I was saying to DH that I wouldn't let our DD run around naked at that age in such a public place Just remember that you may not have a choice

How about we just let people make the decision on behalf of their own children and not stress about it too much?

I only discussed the threads I had contributed to Sparkling, so yes, was being selective in that sense.

Itsmine, sorry - I really didn't mean to make it sound like I had more important stuff to do (like work) rather than be on MN... it was more of a "I have been pissing about NOT working for about 12 hours now, and I really should get on and not be distracted by potties and nakedness, so if you excuse me, I'll get my coat!".... I could have easily have written, "off to wash the dog", which I have also done, to avoid doing any work again....

I don't think my DH thinks the topics are not valid... in actual fact I think he would be ardently supporting the OP's DH on this one, as he thinks letting the kids be au naturel and not covering up their bodies because of other people's issues is an important thing in life.... he is a bit of a naked-er though - he once did have a sauna (in Germany - so it's ok) with his then girlfriend and her mother (his potential MIL!) - even that is too far for me with the a-ok naked-ometer.

A bit off-topic, but he just rang me actually, to say he'd had a "Jerry Maguire" moment where he's emailed the boss in reply to an email the boss sent (who is a man) and the final line he had written was "we mustn't be scared of being too posh to push!".... He didn't tell me what the context was about, but took umbrage at the fact a man who has never had to make a decision about child birth used the term in the first place, and then in a way which seems derrogatory towards women choosing c-section over natural delivery.... I thought perhaps he shouldn't have said anything as I don't think the emailer had given it too much thought and had probably just used an expression which he didn't realise was actually demeaning... but DH said that was the point - everyday sexism and the like... I said I would post a WHBU to find out!

No chance would I let mine run around naked in public either ! Just so happens I came across this thread after reading about a bloke that lives round the corner from us who has just been charged with taking photos of kids in our local park and making indecent images to share on Internet !! Just backs up my view even more ! Paedophiles are everywhere just half of them not been caught and they end up being people you'd never have guessed so best to be on guard at all times !!

Boobz

You were also a bit selective in your sampling. It's good you and your DH agree, but not altogether surprising, given you married the guy.

We disagree on most things, actually, especially when I am being a nob. So he is my filter to check I wasn't being unreasonable/a nob.

But I see your point.

I don't have an issue with naked children running about. Nor do I have an issue with children wearing clothes. Either is fine by me.

I do think it's really odd to think that telling a child that what's inside their pants is private is going to offer much protection. As if that's a new thing that no-one has ever thought of before. In fact it's something I've never said to my children as I think it could do more harm than good.

I have taught then that no-one is allowed to touch then in any way, anywhere, that makes them feel uncomfortable. Or speak to them in a way that makes them feel uncomfortable.
I've taught them that no trustworthy person will ask them to keep secrets from other people that they love and trust. Surprises are fine. Secrets are not.
I have told them that they will never get into trouble for speaking out if someone hurts them. And anyone who says they will is lying.

Knowing the statistics on who is most likely to hurt my children. I, personally, feel that the whole pants rule thing could so easily be twisted into something that could be used to prevent a child asking for help. It's far too simplistic.

I personally wouldn't let my boys run around the park naked. Everyone has a phone camera these days and it's easy to take photos without being noticed and then to upload etc.

But also, they do a lot of climbing on logs and a grazed knee is bad enough.

YABVU. It's just kids having fun.

We stayed in a little cul de sac when my kids were small and I knew all my neighbours well, we would all have bbqs the paddling pool out in the summer but I always made sure dd had knickers on even when she tried to strip off! You don't know who's watching

I agree with you OP

Shattered2013, were those children naked or clothed? I would bet they were clothed. I know people will say you shouldn't make it even worse by letting kids go naked etc etc, but if a paedophile is going to take pictures of children in the park they are going to do it whether the kids are dressed or not.
This is partly why I think the paedo on every street corner is a bankrupt argument in this particular scenario.

even when the kids are clothed there are pps who poopoo the pedo on the street corner or in the bushes or where ever. But they are around where ever cc are ,aren't they?

Hmm. Paedophile taking a click of my daughter in a frock. Paedophile taking a close up of my daughters bare vulva. Which one is worse? Dunno...

Gordon Bennett.
The over exaggeration does nothing to help your argument, IMO.

The one thing that I find confusing is the parents, I must say I have an even notice mainly with parents of girls and not just water parks even at the beach, Which I will be happy playing around by the water in the swimming costume and the parent will make a point of telling the child to keep the costume on but when it comes to giving the child something to me the first thing they do is Who take their kids swimming costume off and let them eat whatever there are eating naked until they have stopped eating then they put the costume back on so they can go back into the water and only one occasion it's a child had finished eating each time they wanted a bit more food it was straight off with a costume eat what I want to eat and in costume back on

Is it me or is this incredibly odd not the first time I noticed this?

What is the point of continually taking on an off the kids costume?

Doesn't this just confuses child more?

And curious is there anyone here that does that ?

Never seen that. Could be because it's not nice sitting in a wet costume unless you are somewhere really warm.

LoveFromUs - "I don't even let my boys who are 6 and 4 have their tops off whilst in the park."

Wow. That is a very odd stance to take.

You mock an op but do not give your,s?