Anyone else hyper vigilant that some men may be pedophiles

[Cantgetwarmbrr]

I wasn’t like this before I had my Dd, she’s 5 now and just always in the back of my mind I wonder about people and hate feeling/thinking like this. For example, really nice, married guy neighbour with a son who walks his dogs and chats on to my Dd, which is nice 🤷🏻‍♀️ I even felt on guard when taking her to Santa as one Elf guy kept telling her how beautiful she was. It’s a horrible way to think, it’s just always there at the back of my mind. I can’t ever imagine letting her go to sleepovers etc, but know I’ll have to one day.
Does anyone else have this in the back of their mind sometimes?
I even said to Dh that I’d never leave her with another male, even close friends of ours etc, who I love and have known for years, why am I so paranoid about this? Does anyone feel similar?

Yes. It is more prevalent than people think (see the post upthread with relevant statistics) and there is no harm in cultivating strong boundaries.

There is no obligation or rule that says you have to do sleepovers. We don’t (these days it’s due to a health reason) and it’s never been an issue.

Pay closer attention in situations where your guard might be down. Churches and places of worship tend to cultivate a ‘love and trust everyone’ culture, but be mindful that someone with bad intentions might choose that environment for a reason.

Likewise sports, arts and music activities that have lighter-touch inspection requirements than nurseries and schools.

I was often surprised by how relaxed other parents were about leaving young children (5-8) at large group parties in public buildings such as sports centres. Sure the hosting parents are ‘supervising’ the 20+ children but they are often quite happy to let individual children trail in and out of the room to the toilets without paying much attention.

In general, trust your instincts and if you’re concerned, always report upwards.

Teach children proper words for genitals and have a parenting style that prioritises openness and trust and always being on their side, rather than judgement and only valuing them being "good" - they are then more likely to tell you if anything happens to them.
Follow your instincts.
This is what we do.
We don't currently allow sleepovers and are cautious but reasonable with who we allow to be alone with DC.

We are also very open with anyone who is likely to be alone with our DC at some points about our family culture and approach to safeguarding, the importance of teaching consent, boundaries, correct names for genitals, no secrets, transparency, open communication.

In reply to your comment @Greenshake, I absolutely did NOT mean socio-economic means of identifying paedophiles. The groups I teach are disparate in most ways.
What they appear to share is a lack of aggressive testosterone. They are kind, soft, warm, polite, inoffensive. The kind of men that women feel safe with. They often hold down decent jobs, and appear very sensitive and safe. They are likeable and personable and appear kind.

All of this!

Also, people bring up ‘safeguarding’ policies and that women are safer- statistically that is true, and safeguarding policies obviously help, but you can’t rely on either 100%.

The female head of safeguarding for a primary school around Wigan was convicted recently for a massive string of sexual offences against children.

https://www.wigantoday.net/news/crime/wigan-deputy-head-who-admitted-to-horrific-catalogue-of-child-sex-crimes-has-been-jailed-for-13-years-and-four-months-3504370

Being concerned about CSA is never a "waste of time"

Just as well I wasn't referring to CSA then, isn't it?

Go back and read the post again. It's abundantly clear that's a reference to a situation whereby society has descended into unfettered anarchy.

Your point that it would require a breakdown of society to make child abuse a real concern is painfully wrong

I have never made any such point.

@Disco50 yes, that's my opinion too

See what you mean by 'type' now

You did make such a point, it's on here in black and white.

could you tell us what is the type so we can be more careful when men approach our children? thank you

No, I did not.

You have completely misinterpreted my post, which happens from time to time, but I most assuredly have not made any such point, or "argued against" vigilance, or dismissed CSA as not worth worrying about.

I know you didn’t mean socio-economically. I disagreed with your view of a “type”.

I’m also like this but I work in children’s safeguarding and understand just how prevalent child sexual abuse is. I therefore don’t think you’re being unreasonable if you have some anxiety around sex offenders but I would say if you feel that these thought patterns are happening very regularly and feel unmanageable or all consuming I’d refer yourself for cbt.

It's not a type as such more a presentation....normal

They walk amongst us

As for sleepovers.... my DD was filmed in the shower at a sleepover....by the friends older sister and her boyfriend!

My DP works with the police and sadly meets them all the time... usually done for child pornography. It upsets me so much how many cases there are. So, while it is unhealthy to distrust people like this and we shouldn't leave in fear, it would also be naive to think evil is not out there and it can be literally anyone. I have a DD too so I totally empathise with you. I try to stay positive and not become paranoid without a reason, plenty lovely men out there too, but definitely my radar is always switched on. X

I was molested by a family member as a child and although I am fairly well-adjusted about it now (I think!) it does make me wary when it comes to DD, even with my own family. It took me a long time to leave her alone with DP. I don’t think I put that fear on to her, although we do talk about privacy and bodies and consent etc.

You have made some very bizarre arguments on this thread.

I just looked at the report, and it is sickening. I don't understand how anyone can be so complacent about this, and dismiss what these men admit to as "bravado".

https://childlight.org/searchlight-2023-dashboard

Turning a blind eye to avoid trouble in the family is common

Peer on peer abuse can happen too. Don't be so fixated on the most obvious types of abuse. It can happen to anyone by anyone.

Your point doesn't make much sense. You seem to be saying that in an anarchist society 1 in 20 men would commit paedophilic acts, but not to worry, as we are in a society that has controls it's only 1 in 100.
For a start 1 in 100 is not that different to 1 in 20. Secondly that's the conviction rate. The real rate must be at least double .

But even if it isn't, 1 in 100 men is say a 1 in 20 chance if there are 5 men in your own family who have access to your child. Or if your child has a few sleepovers, a couple of male primary teachers, goes to a couple of sports clubs etc, it could soon get to a much higher chance than that , that they'd be in a position where an adult male they know and trust has malign intentions.

Nothing about that is vanishingly rare.

If I've misunderstood what you meant I think you need to clarify as I've read your post carefully.

You have made some very bizarre arguments on this thread

You appear to have misinterpreted my points, so it's not a surprise they appear "bizarre".

I don't understand how anyone can be so complacent about this, and dismiss what these men admit to as "bravado"

Assuming this is, again, a reference to my point, I did not "dismiss this as bravado". I made the point that in blind surveys which have no consequences for the respondents, the data can be skewed by the fact that the freedom from consequence means people are at liberty to lie, embellish, and engage in bravado, partly because they know there is no comeback, but also out of sheer devilment because they know it will produce wonky results.

I have personal experience of this phenomenon in action, but I'm not going to get into specifics because it involves certain unsavoury topics that I don't really want to discuss, and they aren't really appropriate for this topic.

Just so we're absolutely clear here, the comments and arguments I've made in this thread were prompted by, and solely in relation to, another poster bringing up this study.

When I've referred to not seeing the point in wasting time worrying about a hypothetical, the hypothetical in question is a society where all the instruments of state listed have broken down irretrievably, where people do not practice safeguarding and vigilance, and where there is no fear whatsoever of consequence. This is not the society we live in, nor is it ever likely to be, so this is why I see no point in spending time worrying about this particular hypothetical.

What I am emphatically NOT suggesting, and never have, is that people should not concern themselves with CSA, or be vigilant with regard to the welfare of their children, and I certainly have not implied that CSA would only become an issue of concern is society broke down into anarchy.

I am also in no way "complacent", merely highlighting that the study posits a situation that is not comparable to real life, or how society actually functions, so that needs held in mind when we are talking about real life, and real society.

Ok so you don't believe the survey. Fair enough, these things are notoriously biased. And you think the fact that someone may find out would put off many of these men. Again you're probably right. But even so do you really think 1 in 20 is that different to 1 in 100? To the extent that it would change the way you behave? To me 1 in 100 is still a high risk. I mean obviously that 1 in 100 men do not a use every child they come across. But still.

I think everyone’s dodgy and no one can change my mind about that. There is a lot of CSA in my family and I don’t think people actually realise how common it is.

People that say you’ll have to let your child go to a sleepover at some point. Well no, no you don’t actually. I don’t see anything wrong with your thinking at all. It’s better to be weary about everyone then trusting every Tom, Dick & Harry

No, you pretty much are correct, with the caveat that I certainly wouldn't say "not to worry"

I would take exception with the point that 1 in 100 is not that different to 1 in 20.

That is a significant difference, especially if we are talking about a population of 25 million or so adult males.

I also make no claims about anything being "vanishingly rare".

In essence, I'll just reiterate what I said in the post above, i.e. I think you have to be cautious about drawing any conclusions from a study that posits a situation that does not reflect reality, especially as to how it pertains to risk, because what you would then be doing is spending your time worrying about a hypothetical risk in a hypothetical situation, rather than an actual existent risk in your lived reality.

To borrow the adage again, I'm sure more people would also rob banks if they knew they would never be caught than do in reality. Banks are still robbed regardless, but banks ameliorate risk based on what actually happens, not on what would hypothetically happen in a hypothetically lawless situation.

So just to be absolutely clear, this is a commentary on the study, and my concerns about drawing any firm conclusions from it, and I am in no way suggesting anyone should stop being vigilant, or stop being worried, or stop being wary of men etc etc.

Not so much "I don't believe it", more that I'd be cautious about trying to apply anything it suggests to reality. See the post above.

The six year child sexual abuse enquiry outlined the most frequent sexual abuse that happened to children.

The most common was in the family. Stepfathers are more likely to sexually abuse than biological fathers. Don't if you are dating advertise that you have children and their ages e.g. on a dating site, it may attract paedophiles.
The next most common is children sexually abusing other children. You need to give your children sex education and talk about normal sexual exploration with other children and when it is coercion. People always ignore this as it is quite upsetting to realise your children's friends could sexually abuse them.
Then it is children in some kind of institution from boarding schools, to sports and music schools, to children's homes and penal institutions.
And then religious organisations. As someone says above religions that promote loving each other and being non judgemental whilst it brings positives, can also lead to people ignoring warning signs. And various religions have actively covered up abuse by their clerics.

Generally it is about being critical and not just trusting people. The example someone gave of a friends husband offering to take her children to the toilet is a major red flag. Paedophiles are attracted to situations where it is easier to abuse e.g. children's homes and boarding schools, or to parents who are too trusting, with weak boundaries, or because of their own issues such as mental health can not adequately protect their children.
There is an issue as well with people who are normally critical, but trust other people like themselves e.g. trusting implicitly other home educators if you are one, or trusting other evangelical Christians if you are one.

Personally I let my children go to sleepovers. But even if I could afford it I would have never have sent them to boarding schools.