To trust dads, more than men without children, at parks? :(

[debson]

I feel bad about this, but I have no clue if it's a normal way to feel and I can normally guess what Mumsnet would say so don't bother, but I really don't know about this.

I was in the park earlier with DC (5 and 9) I always sit on the bench closest to the only exist.

There have been a couple of times when a father (who clearly has DC at the park) help youngest DD onto the monkey bars for example, then just go with their kids on to a different bit of equipment. We are a friendly village and do tend to interact with the DC (if it's obvious they go to same school, etc.)

However, I've had it once where (and this is with 9 year old DD and no contact involved) a man was pointing to bits of the rope that DD should put her foot onto (you know, to help her get to the top) and I went over and made casual convo and he had no children there

Is it wrong to have not even thought for a second about that dad, but felt uneasy about that man for the rest of the time while we were there?

I don't know whether you would be out of order, but you would be questioning his right to be there.
Im sorry, I'm not sure what you mean by this?

I'm not though Boney as I'm talking hypothetically. Basically you've either for a reason to be there that's valid (picking up / supervising a child) or you're there for another reason. And that reason is likely to be peculiar.

El

A few reasons could be:

• there is a bench in there and there are no other benches for a good while, like at our local park
• he used to go to this park when younger and visiting it brings happy memories
• he may have additional needs/be elderly

Thus it might be odd but not predatory. It's a shit place to target Young children as they will never be alone. I'd be more worried by a solitary man walking back and forth outside a park (seen this before).

I can understand if an older child was in the park on their own though as around here if you're 8ish onwards you're often seen in the park without supervision.

I'm not saying it looks good but i just don't see demonising healthful, either.

But the general consensus is to be careful around any stranger with your child. Nit everyone can be trusted.

Put it this way, the work I do involves a lot of sex crimes etc. against children, and men without children are no more likely to be pedophiles than men with children. In fact, I'd venture a guess that the majority of cases I've worked on have involved men with children. More women than you'd like to believe, too.

So, yes, you are being unreasonable. Just remember that your DH was once a man without children.

Often when I take DD to the park, I end up sat in the play area by myself, no child in sight. She doesn't play that much on the swings etc. and once I've got bored of playing whatever game, or if she's got some older kids to play with. They disappear into the trees around the edge or off somewhere well away. DD is allowed to be out of my sight in the park, but she's not yet old enough to walk to the park by herself, so I'm pretty much stuck there.

I often have conversations with other kids - generally ones who know me of course from the school or previous park trips - but it's not impossible it could be someone completely new. No parents have ever seemed bothered -but maybe the police get loads of reports-

Helpful and not, sorry.

Elisheva

I mean that you are questioning his right to be where ever he is. Whether you are "out of order" or not is subjective.

callycat1

You maybe talking hypothetically, and yes they may have a reason to be there, but you don't know if they are the parent, friend, or male member of the family or even male childminder that is picking up the child.

As to other reasons being peculiar, many workmen arrive after school and have to hang around, electricians, builders, computer specialists, cable fitters, ceiling replacement, washing machine repairman, all have to be done when the children have left and not all turn up in sign written vans/vehicles.

So we should happily accept strange men at schools because they might be repairing the washing machine?

No one would think it remotely strange?

I don't have a school age child, to hang round the local school would therefore be strange behaviour. But this goes round in circles. Some of you are a dream for sexual predators, so eager and determined in your belief that paedophiles were invented by the tabloids. And you're too intelligent to be taken in by that. It's only stupid people who believe a 'paedophile round every corner' isn't it?

I don't think this should just about men. I would find it just as odd if a woman went into a child's play area without children and interacted with strangers' kids. It's not the done thing... It would be nice if we lived in a world where adults could innocently chat and play with children they don't know, without suspicion. But unfortunately that's not the world we live in and I would not be entirely comfortable if an unknown woman, or man, without kids, came into the play park and started helping or playing with my toddler.

Having said that I'm imagining a closed off play area, not open parkland, as I can't think of any parks near us that are not fenced off/separate from the rest of the park.

Yes callycat1 it is only stupid people that believe that there is "paedophile round every corner", the rest of us realise that not everyone is a paedophile and that there maybe other reasons for someone being somewhere.

Meanwhile, whilst you are looking at 'stranger danger' your child is being abused by a close relative.

I was repeatedly sexually abused by my father and subsequently taken into care, Boney, I do know relatives pose more of a risk.

But people assume that because relatives pose MORE of a risk, strangers pose NO risk. They do. It's simply about access. If you are prone to being sexually excited by children and there's one in your own family, then that's where you'll look. Failing that a friends children. It doesn't mean that all men with tendencies that way will look to their own families and so your children can skip amongst lone men in play parks without being at any risk. For starters many paedophiles ARE loners, they don't have family or friends. And parks are one of the places they gravitate.

cally

There is having a healthy awareness of danger and there is going over the top.

You post that many paedophiles are loners, this is true but not all loners are paedophiles.

"parks are one of the places they gravitate."
Yes, but there are many others.

If your child gets in to tabletop battles will you be assuming that all the lone men there are paedophiles? Will you think the same if your child takes a hobby where lone males are present?

Should all lone males leave clubs because a child starts there?

We aren't talking about clubs. I made it clear there was a massive difference between, say, a lone male attending something with children AND adults, and a lone male or lone female even going somewhere specifically for children. Which I think you know. But if you're absolutely determined that lone adults hanging around play parks are no risk, then I doubt anything I say will make much difference.

callycat1

I haven't said that there is "no risk", I have said that you can't ban/stop people from being somewhere because of your gut feeling.

Neither have I, it doesn't mean I can't personally think it's strange and keep them well away from my child.

your child is statistically more likely to be harmed by someone who knows them ... whether that person had children or not is irrelevant. Fred West had children.
You were there, surveilling your child, you've no idea what form danger comes in, doesn't matter - you were there watching your child, your child was safe.

All these crappy reasons lone men might have to hang around playgrounds aren't good enough (except maybe if there are NO OTHER places to sit and it's important you sit down, but then that's such an unlikely scenario it's almost a moot point). Either don't go or accept the fact that parents are going to be wary of your presence, which is fair on the parents' part. Get over it, it's not that much of a tragedy.

There is soooo much (what I'm assuming is) wilful obtuseness in this thread.

This thread is really sad.
I wouldn't worry about a man or a woman touching my ds's and helping them up into the monkey bars.
But most of the extreme comments are made by posters who have said they have been abused.

All these crappy reasons lone men might have to hang around playgrounds aren't good enough (except maybe if there are NO OTHER places to sit and it's important you sit down, but then that's such an unlikely scenario it's almost a moot point).

I gave a reason why my grandfather used to sit on a bench by the play things in the park earlier. It wasn't a crappy reason. You are very rude. And way too over-imaginative.

this is allegedly a 'free country'
so long as no-one approaches children in a playground there is NO REASON why anybody cannot sit on a bench nearby and maybe enjoy memories of when they took their children / grandchildren there
and no - women are very very unlikely to be paedophiles - 96% of them are men
I do find this 'othering' of people because they are childless (or now their children have grown up) and therefore suspect when out in public extremely distasteful.

mollie123 the man the OP encountered was talking to her daughter.

It's only stupid people who believe a 'paedophile round every corner' isn't it?

Yes, it is only stupid, hysterical people who believe that.

In some ways I think that we have almost a reverse to what used to happen. People USED to think child abuse did not happen in the family and it was stranger danger.

Now I am the first to say the tabloids are often stupidly hysterical and screechy and over the top about paedophiles, not to mention hypocritical - I remember the Sun and the News of the World supporting laws naming and shaming sex offenders, at the same time having photos of half naked teenagers on page 3.

But this has meant that educated and middle class people almost see an alarmist attitude about sex offenders as something shrill and hysterical, something only 'stupid' people are concerned about. They think child abuse only happens in chaotic dysfunctional homes with multiple step fathers, it doesn't happen in THEIR home, and stranger danger is a myth the stupid proles harp on about, so THEIR child is safe.

So stand their on the playpark and watch the elderly man smile and interact with your child and smile smugly to yourself because YOU know he's just a lonely man. He couldn't be there for any sinister reason. Only stupid people believe that, don't they?

MoreCoffeeNow if you're grandfather missed being a teacher so much, okay fine go to the playground once in a while but you can't get offended at people being cautious. You're being ridiculous to call me "very rude" and "way too over-imaginative". Especially when you're just throwing these words out there without any explanation. Pedophiles aren't nearly uncommon ENOUGH for me to not be wary when there are men (or women, only to a slightly lesser extent) in areas for children with no apparent reason to be there. Being wary doesn't mean actually accusing individuals of being pedophiles it simply means being aware that they could be.

Are you more offended by people being wary of lone men in playgrounds because of wanting to 'defend' your grandfather?

So stand their on the playpark and watch the elderly man smile and interact with your child and smile smugly to yourself because YOU know he's just a lonely man. He couldn't be there for any sinister reason. Only stupid people believe that, don't they?

Yes.

Because sensible people would never leave their DCs unsupervised. So, even if there was criminal intent, it couldn't happen. And the chances that the elderly gent is a paedophile are very, very small.