Ban men from working in nursery settings

[Aliceisagooddog]

After yet another paedophile has been found guilty of awful crimes whilst working at a nursery, surely we need to rethink this. The risks are just too great.

The problem is that in nurseries, many children will still be non verbal and not easily able to explain what is happening. Better to be cautious in safeguarding these children by restricting male access, and beefing up safeguarding procedures, staff numbers etc.

If you trest all men as potential.child abusers, what do you do about fathers and siblings?

Not allow male children to be alone with their own siblings?

Ban fathers from being alone with their own children?

Ban male teachers?

How do you expect anyone to have a family if you think all men are child abusers?

You have a very twisted and toxic logic.

I hope you don't have sons or spend time around young boys.

You have a really sick attitude towards men. I hope you are not spending any time around young boys.

Mens hurty feelings aren't my problem.

Funny that you're on here advocating for men to have intimate access to non verbal children, but you hope I don't spend any time around boys. You're so close to the point you can almost see it.

Most fathers have access to non verbal children.

🙄

Yes because that's exactly the same as a random man who happened to have a clean DBS having access to hundreds of kids for sure.

Great point 👍

Are you OK?

You're the one getting angry because I don't want children to be sexually abused to spare the feelings of men.

Out of the two of us I think I'm the one who is most OK.

In Singapore, male carers/teachers are not allowed intimate care like bathing or changing the nappies of the kids (thus additional tasks fall to female staff) but still there was a recent incident of a male cook sexually assaulting 3 children while they were napping. There have been horrific sexual abuse cases in Australia too. Hundreds of children had to be tested for stds following the rape of kids. If someone cannot come up with a similar level of horror involving female staff, they can sit down and shut up.

www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62dr1xl4gjo

Yes, female staff may commit abuse but sexual abuse is committed predominantly by men. Children are at risk no matter how fantastic some male staff are.

www.unsw.edu.au/newsroom/news/2025/07/childcare-sexual-abuse-men-children-risk

Jury prize for inane comeback.

It's really not an inane comeback. Children are much more likely to be abused in their own home than anywhere else, and much more like be abused by a man than a women in their own home. This risk then increases 100 times if that man is a step parent or step older sibling/not directly related to the child.

If people's concerns were genuinely to reduce the risk of sexual abuse to children (rather than jumpingon a bandwagon), they would push for a ban on children living with males they are directly biologically related to (so only allowed to live with biological fathers and brothers) before pushing for a ban on male nursery workers. And this is coming from someone who was sexually abused by a male teacher at school. But would I want a ban on male primary school teachers - absolutely not. And some of those are involved in intimate care due to increasing numbers of children starting school in nappies.

To be honest, men aren’t allowed to do intimate care on women, so why should kids be left in a vulnerable position?

Personally, I don’t see why they can’t just have a changing table in the room, so nobody is left alone changing nappies. Preschoolers are slightly more challenging as they need help and privacy, but even so, there must be workarounds.

Bottom line for me though is: A lot of these caters we’ve seen in the news would have had red flags in their personality.

Like that 17yo, or whoever recently. Did he really have a passion for young children? I can’t imagine somebody liege that getting the job, I don’t see how he even met the personality requirements.

For the people supporting men in nurseries - are you willing to take the risk with your own child? Would you still say that if you had to get your child tested for gonorrhea and other STDs as 1200 babies have had to do in Australia?

Paedophiles are 3 times more likely to work with children than other men.
Let that sink in.

According to official government figures, the scale of child sexual abuse is truly staggering:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tackling-child-sexual-abuse-progress-update/tackling-child-sexual-abuse-progress-update-accessible-version

Children make up only 20% of the population but are the victims in 40% of all sexual offences.

7.5% of all adults in England and Wales are estimated to have been sexually abused before the age of 16, according to the Office for National Statistics’ Crime Survey for England and Wales.

That equates to 3.1 million adult victims and survivors of child sexual abuse.

Fathers are significantly less likely to sexually assault their own biological children than unrelated males living with children or who have access to children.

Unrelated males are the single biggest threat to children.

I have no idea how anyone can read all of that and still talk about men in nurseries being a net positive thing.

Is it a shame for the genuinely good ones? Yes. One would hope they also would want to prioritise safeguarding above all else though.

that is not the case in fact. the vast majority 98% of sex offenders are men. and nurseries are no exception in men being a much higher risk. the convictions speak for themselves

Excellent article from Julie Bindel in the Telegraph that many on this thread should read.:

The latest child sexual abuse scandal to hit the news makes grim reading. A male nursery worker pleaded guilty to 26 charges relating to sexual offences against children, as well as the taking and making of pornographic images.
These offences include five counts of sexual assault of a child by penetration, and some of the images made depict the most severe abuse. <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.is/o/YGhlf/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/12/03/nursery-worker-filmed-himself-sexually-abusing-children/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Vincent Chan, who will be sentenced in January, is one in a long line of men who have worked directly with young children and been found guilty of sexual abuse against them. Only last year, Thomas Waller was convicted for raping and <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.is/o/YGhlf/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/11/14/teenage-nursery-worker-given-10-year-sentence-for-rape/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">sexually abusing children as young as three at a nursery.

There are numerous cases in which men appear to have taken jobs working with young children precisely in order to gain access to them. Also last year, Craig Ordish was <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.is/o/YGhlf/www.staffordshire.police.uk/news/staffordshire/news/2024/april/man-jailed-for-sexual-offences-at-nursery/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">sentenced to 10 years in prison for child abuse offences against children at a nursery in Staffordshire.
Surely it would make sense for us to ban men from working directly with young children in nurseries? <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.is/o/YGhlf/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/01/04/grooming-gangs-scandal-cover-up-oldham-telford-rotherham/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The vast majority of child sexual abuse perpetrators are male. Whenever I point this out, I am told that “women do it too” – which is the same argument I get when I speak about domestic violence and homicide, largely perpetrated by men towards women.
Critics will point to the rare example of serious harm caused by a woman, as if it’s a “gotcha” moment. But exceptions don’t make the rule, and every single reliable piece of research and statistical evidence from morgues, police stations and courts tell us that it is relatively and extremely rare for a woman to sexually abuse children in educational and care settings.
Figures from the Ministry of Justice, published in 2024, found that the overwhelming majority of defendants in child sexual abuse prosecutions were male. Female defendants proceeded against for child sexual abuse offences represented just one per cent.

The latest Office for National Statistics figures <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.is/o/YGhlf/www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/abuseduringchildhoodinenglandandwales/march2024" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">report a similar trend: the vast majority of the perpetrators of child sex abuse were men, with 91.3 per cent of all victims saying their abuser was male and 94.2 per cent of female victims saying they were abused only by males.
Of course, the majority of men do not abuse children, but because we can’t distinguish between men who abuse and those who don’t, it is impossible to know which are dangerous and which are safe with children. Therefore, we should keep all men out of spaces in which they have access to young children. Feminists and child protection experts have argued this for decades.
When feminists argue against men in female-only spaces (changing rooms, rape crisis centres, hospital wards, etc.), we do so because of the risk. We do not argue that all men are perpetrators of sexual violence and harassment, rather we point out that enough of them are to make it a safeguarding issue. And when we say that “trans women” should not be allowed in female-only spaces, it’s exactly the same argument: because they are men, they pose the same risk as other men.

We should take a lesson from Australia. In July this year, Joshua Dale Brown was <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.is/o/YGhlf/www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/07/01/children-tested-disease-australia-childcare-rape-charge/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">charged with more than 70 sexual offences against children, including rape. Because early childhood education is a heavily female-dominated field, this case focused on the implications for male childcare workers.
Previous research into child sexual abuse by men in such settings found that male workers were often under less scrutiny, due to efforts made to appear non-discriminatory.
This creates the perfect storm: sexually abusive men are able to hide in plain sight. Whether we like it or not, men with a sexual interest in children are more likely to seek work in early education and childcare – indeed, in comparison with other men, they are almost three times more likely to work with children.
Arguments against preventing men from working in nurseries include concerns that children need good role models of both sexes. This is, of course, true. And there are plenty of other settings and circumstances in which children can safely and happily be around men, from their own families and from the wider community. It is simply not worth the risk to continue as things are.

archive.is/YGhlf

We exclude ALL men from women only spaces due to the risk of sexual violence. Infants and toddlers are infinitely more vulnerable than women.

We don't say that ALL men are predators.
That's a red herring.
We say that a significant number are but we have no way of knowing which ones these are so we have to exclude ALL men as a result.

Approximately 2% of children will be sexually assaulted by their biological fathers which is devastating. However, 17% of children will be sexually assaulted by their stepfather. Why is the risk so much greater with a stepfather? Because they are unrelated males.

Having unrelated males in a nursery is like putting a fox in a hen house.
The outcome is predictable and preventable.
Children's safety trumps men's desires.

Well said. I don't think as a society we are willing to face up to such uncomfortable truths. So the most vulnerable pay the price.

Wow!

This is wrong. Where would you draw the line, no school teachers who are male? No male doctors treating children? No male nurses working in children’s wards.

We need better safeguards not to cut half the population out of doing certain jobs!

I would draw the line at men having intimate access to non verbal children.

Teachers at mainstream schools don't need intimate access, and the children are verbal.

Doctors and nurses have to have a chaperone for intimate procedures, and the parents are there anyway.

It's totally beyond me how so many people are reading a thread about a man who sexually assaulted an unknown amount children hundreds or thousands of times, and use the opportunity to leap to the defense of men rather than children.

Your username is very apt.

This thread is about nurseries.
No-one has advocated banning male teachers but much stronger processes and policies are required to prevent sexual predators abusing children in their care.

We know this from daily/weekly court cases involving adults who were abused as children by stepfathers, teachers, doctors, nurses, sports coaches, scout leaders, priests, etc, etc, etc.

98% of perpetrators are the male of the species.

As mentioned already, pedophiles actively seek employment which gives them access to children so that they can abuse them. They are 3 times more likely to work with children than men who are not pedophiles. We can't just stick our heads in the sand - it's innocent children who are suffering as a result and who end up with a life sentence.

Nice, because I call you out on an idea that is sexist you resort to trying to rage baited me by commenting about username. That shows you've lost the argument. Saying men can't work in a certain field is sexist and wrong - there would be outrage if someone said something similar about women.

Thankfully, the poll suggests you are in the minority, others can see you're wrong too.