Male nannies/childminders

[Lottapianos]

Just listening to a discussion on the radio about male nannies. The general feeling is that having men work with young children is a good thing. No argument there!

However, the reason given is not because men are 50% of the population and it's good for children to spend time with both men and women so they can start to see both sexes as equal. The reason is that 'men and women play differently' - men are more 'rough and tumble' and kids love that Oh and some boys are growing up without a man in the home and they need a male role model in order to develop normally and not grow up gay. Or something

I really do get sick of all this essentialism - men do this, women do that - in the same way as I can't stand people talking about how boys and girls are inherently different. I really think that putting people into boxes based on their biological sex is stifling and unfair - what happens to people who don't 'perform' in the way they are expected?

Any thoughts on this issue?

Have none of you heard of Vanessa George?

I had a male teacher at primary school and he was fantastic, every child in the school loved him. He was an ex miner, both his sons went on to become teachers too.

Men and women are both equaly able to abuse children, not just sexually but in other ways.

Eatsbrains
Yes paedophiles will seek out ways to be close with children, but that applies just as much to women as men. In fact the attitude of suspicion of men in childcare makes it very easy for a woman to be in a position to abuse a child.

What a shame an interesting post on a thoughtful subject has degenerated to the paedophile hysteria debate.

To answer the original post, I had to work briefly in a small primary school last year which had 3 male teachers in year 6, 4 and 1. They were all very professional teachers and, like all teachers, had their own individual style of teaching which the children responded to well. From what I can see over the last few years, male teachers at primary level is increasing as I have come across male primary teachers of all sizes and descriptions (young and single just out of teaching college, older family men, men in gay partnerships etc) which must be a good thing for staff and pupils to have that balance. As far as I know, none of the men I have come across have incurred any kind of suspicion from parents or other staff or seem to have considered the possibility of it themselves.

I met one man who was training in a nursery environment who was very highly thought of by parents but has sinced moved into primary Key Stage 1. I know only one single man who is training to be a child-minder and he has had comments from the trainers and other women to the effect of "so are you doing this alongside your wife?" but, on discovering that he isn't, their reaction has been very encouraging and positive.

So let's hope that times are changing and young children will reap the benefits.

DH applied to do a course in childcare and some of the comments were shocking. Lots of, "so why do you want to work with children?" comments, usually with raised eyebrows.

Isn't it the case that something in the region of 95% of sexual crimes and about 90% of violent crimes are perpetrated by males?

In the light of this wouldn't it be appropriate and sensible to be 10 to 20 times more cautious about giving males access to vulnerable people than females? Since by simply not employing males you will have significantly reduced the likelihood of those vulnerable people being abused?

A friend of mine is a primary school teacher and was horrified to find out the creator of an amazing internet resource for teaching those years ('sparkle' something -I can't remember) was found to have been guilty of child porn use or some such thing. Being 'amazing' with kids doesn't preclude being a manipulative abuser.

I'm not saying all men are abusers - that would be preposterous, but as others have mentioned here, male abusers are determined to get close to vulnerable people despite it meaning they are breaking the gender mold to a certain degree to do so.

To suggest all this reality shouldn't be relevant when employing men to work with the vulnerable is (and this is probably the only time I'll use this phrase in my life) 'political correctness gone mad.'

Isn't it the case that something in the region of 95% of sexual crimes and about 90% of violent crimes are perpetrated by males?

And what is that as a % of the male population? What % of those crimes are against children?

"And what is that as a % of the male population? What % of those crimes are against children?"

I don't have those stats, nontheless it would be prudent to be 10 to 20 times more cautious when employing males than females to work with vulnerable people.

And thinking about it, considering the overwhelming dominance of women in caring roles, its still pretty shocking that vulnerable people are still more likely to be abused by males.

We don't live in a society where we try to pre-empt everything, we don't treat everyone differently because of statistics that prove something, should we not let black people into shops as they are more likely to steal? Should we not let men drive as they are more likely to get into accidents? This kind of hysteria surrounding paedophilia and child abuse is ridiculous and the people on this thread are generalising all male child carers as paedophiles, despite the fact a tiny amount of them actually are, and yet again, almost 90% of sexual abuse is comitted at home, so why don't you keep your husbands away from your children? Because it is ridiculous to generalise half of the population of the planet...

What I don't quite understand is that when I asked the "how do you feel about men in childcare?" question in _chat a couple of months ago, the response was overwhelmingly positive, with only a couple of nay-sayers. Yet here, in FWR, where talk is of equality, the replies are far more of the "Oh, no, peedo!" variety.

Interesting.

Can you imagine what it would be like to be in the majority of male child care workers who are decent people and be constantly accused of being a pedophile.

It's a wonder any of them do it.

Some of the posters on this thread ought to be ashamed of themselves.

It's surprising, or not, how a bunch of otherwise intelligent women can come over all ill-informed and unsophisticated in their thinking when a chance to undeservedly bash a whole host of men.
It must be an odd space to occupy when one insistently calls for men in general to take more responsibility re child care, and have a greater profile in 'providing care', but then rely on some fairly discriminatory and reactionary thinking and attitudes in hoping it doesn't happen.

There aren't many places where apparent-feminists and the Daily Fail have a Venn Diagram share, but screaming 'paedophile' seems to be one of them.

"Yet here, in FWR, where talk is of equality, the replies are far more of the "Oh, no, peedo!" variety. Interesting."

Its obvious. The majority of people in the world are in denial about the prevalence of abuse and tend towards victim-blaming. The status quo is actually upheld by this and relies on it, and without it the world would look very different. FWR is about changing the status quo.

Most people have a shallow notion of equality that is basically 'men and women doing the same' which doesn't take the biological difference in vulnerability into account.

I am all for males being more involved in caring roles, but not in a purely politically correct way that puts vulnerable people at risk.

My thoughts exactly Felicity, especially as this board is meant to be about feminism/equality... I wonder if these people would mind being generalised and I hope they never have sons who want to go into childcare, so they can realise the absolute ridiculousness of their accusations.

so FoodUnit, what is 'purely politically correct' about a man being a child carer?

FoodUnit, I've said it before on this thread, and had no reply... Most child abuse takes place within the family. Would you ban fathers, or indeed family members, from nappy-changing and general childcare duties? And how does that square with men taking on more responsibility for their dc?

I don't have those stats, nontheless it would be prudent to be 10 to 20 times more cautious when employing males than females to work with vulnerable people.

No, not at all. You show a complete misunderstanding of statistics and probability.

According to this site

www.whiteribboncampaign.co.uk/Resources/violence_against_women

21% of girls experience some form of sexual abuse. That's 1 in 5 girls, so not having men in childcare is not stopping abuse.

Would you happen to know what % of boys suffer sexual abuse in childhood? Because peedos running loose in our nurseries don't usually care much about the sex of the child.

Would you ban fathers, or indeed family members, from nappy-changing and general childcare duties? And how does that square with men taking on more responsibility for their dc?

Thank you so much for posting this, if we want men to take responsibility for their children, then why do we label all male child carers as paedos? This community is a bit strange...

Not true OldLady. Read something I think done by NSPCC? saying that majority of paedophiles go for girls, a substantial minority go for boys and a minority go for either sex. Paedophiles largely do care about the sex of the child. But I dont want any child to be sexually abused - girls or boys.

I don't want children to be abused either, but keeping men oug of childcare won't stop the majority of the abuse, which occurs within the home.

it is true that more girls are sexually abused than boys are, from what we know. But...quite how that fact bears any relevance as to the prevalence of male nursery workers abusing any children is moot.

No, of course 'equality' doesn't mean everyone gets treated the same - in fact it's the opposite. But here FoodUnit and Eats are spuriously mixing stats and drawing invalid conclusions (abuse in the home/abuse in paid child care) for a discriminatory purpose.

"what is 'purely politically correct' about a man being a child carer?"

The 'politically correct' thing, would be to say 'men and women are equal now, all the abuse perpetrated by males is forgotten, doesn't exist and isn't a risk' in such a way that puts the vulnerable in harms way.

For men to work in care without this blanket political correctness would be to add safeguards to protect both the man from accusation and the children from abuse.

And the reason touching children is now taboo is not because of 'peedo hysteria' but because of very real acts of abuse overwhelmingly perpetrated by males. So the perpetrators deserve the blame for these measure, not those who want to prevent them from perpetrating.

FoodUnit - there is nothing 'purely politically correct' about men having the same opportunity to work in child care. The deductive reasoning otherwise is totally specious, but it's difficult for some people to let go of their totems.

Statistically more women are raped than men- should we stop women going out alone after dark for their own protection?

It's the same bloody stupid prejudiced arguement.

This is so very rich, two of the most well known feminists on MN promoting sex discrimination.

Eats & Food, tell us how you would phrase your argument to a woman who wishes to follow a career path that places her and those she works with in a situation where they could be accused of some kind of wrong doing? I doubt you would be talking about additional safeguards for the women over the men as they are more likely because of their gender to be the site of the problem.

Also let us say in 30 years time all the discussions of shared child care, parental responsibility, women being assumed to be the main child care providers, etc have not moved forward one iota. What would you then say the problem is, you clearly cannot argue that it is the attitudes of men that need to change as the numbers of men who would be willing to change their attitude and act as role models will have been kept artificialy low by allowing them to claim that women such as you do not want them involved as they may be a risk. So the patriarchy continues as a result of feminists arguing for discrimination. Not even positive discrimination at that!