Parents objecting to male nursery staff changing nappies

[popehilarious]

www.nurseryworld.co.uk/nursery-world/news/1168681/parents-uncomfortable-with-male-practitioners-changing-their-childs-nappy

Hope the clicky link works.
The male staff are usually the key workers who would normally change nappies but some parents object.

I'm not a safeguarding expert but presumably the same rules and policies apply to both sexes of staff? How can a nursery as an employer discriminate duties on the basis of sex, or would this fall under the exemptions (ie asking for same-sex person to do intimate care) where the child is female? I'm a bit muddled about this.

My son had male nursery key workers who were great role models.

Clearly missing the point here. Women suffer so much abuse and discrimination because of long rooted sexism and harmful gender roles based on the sexism. For some reason posters here think that it's ok to discriminate purely based on someone's sex in this case because "statistics", the current situation is as is it and sexism in this instance is just "staying safe" ,instead of trying to improve things for the future - in this case women and men seen as equally capable carers and all the benefits for women that would come from this.

But this same "statistics" and "staying safe" logic can be applied to the stabbings example. Long-standing systemic racism has led to a situation where "statistically" young people of color are predominantly committing these stabbings. Therefore, it's fine to discriminate (avoid) someone purely based on their race because "I'm just staying safe" based on "statistics" cause the current situation is what it is. But by doing so you are actually perpetuating the systemic racism. The same way avoiding male nursery staff perpetuates systemic sexism.

BTW - if it really was about abuse statistics and not your own sexist prejudice you'd be keeping your child away from family members instead.

@chickenyhead
“But the thing is that of men that are sex offenders around 60% are white, 30% black.

So? Statistically I would trust a black man more than a white man when it comes to unsupervised access to my preschooler”

Your conclusion is completely wrong for the statistic you quoted. If it is the case that 60% sex offenders are white and 30% black, you have to compare that to the population of white and black. I think U.K. is 86% white and only 3% black. So you see blacks are 12 times MORE LIKELY to be sex offenders than whites using the statistics YOU quoted. So it makes zero sense that you’d trust a black man more than a white one on the basis of that statistic.

statistically" young people of color

Men. Not women. MEN. Poor men. And that is why this analogy really doesn't work at all. Because obviously I am far safer with a black woman than a white man.

And I am not saying we should maintain the status quo and the men should play football I am saying these are reasonable concerns and pretending they are not or that it is just like racism is not good far anyone.

Lol. Really funny
The exact same posters arguing that male nursery workers are likely to do csa to a child (even though statistically it is family members) are doing a 180 when they find out that female nursery workers are more likely to physically abuse or neglect a child and going “oh, but that must only be their own children surely”

It’s that sexist bias coming forward. You accept the statistics that conform to your sexism and reject the ones that do not.

I will accept my incorrect comment, but the actual point I was making and which still stands, is that most CSA in this country is perpetrated by white males. It is just an actual fact.

Ignoring that fact just to meet your own agenda or appear woke is your choice.

Freedom of choice. Its not a risk I would be taking personally.

It’s more likely that it’s someone known to the child, which includes childcare and teachers, aswell as family and friends.

@ShesDressedInBlackAgain
“I just can't think of ever hearing of women murdering babies they weren't in a parental relationship with.”

Just google “nanny beats” baby, toddler, child
You’ll see some horrifying incidents of child abuse by female child caregivers.

So, all this worry over csa by a male caregiver when your kid getting smacked around by a woman childcare giver is more than twice as likely.

that female nursery workers are more likely to physically abuse or neglect a child

Are they? Where is that from?

I am fairly well convinced that my children are at more risk from men than women yes. Willing to be convinced otherwise though?

And given that I know I am not going to kill them, if your study relates to parents I can ignore it but if it tells me something else it is more relevant. But I'm not sure it does does it?

Why will you not accept that the majority of sexual abuse is carried out by men? It’s a fact.

Just google “nanny beats” baby, toddler, child

Ah, no you're ok

So, all this worry over csa by a male caregiver when your kid getting smacked around by a woman childcare giver is more than twice as likely.

But isn't that your point again - what proportion of caregivers are female and what proportion are male?

Yet the same people will argue against unisex only toilets, because they don't feel safe...

Yes, boys are significantly less likely to suffer sexual abuse and when they do the perpetrator is usually not a close family member but someone known to the child or a stranger.
My child doesn't go to nursery.

But teachers have scant opportunities to root around in my DCs underwear

They actually have quite a lot of opportunity if safeguards aren’t in place. Plenty of occasions to “help” a child who has wet themselves, or needs a hand getting dressed, or going into a toilet to see what is taking so long.

There was a school local to me where a teacher abused several children while he was at that school.

www.ucl.ac.uk/jdibrief/crime/sexual-abuse-in-schools

I think it needs to be remembered that safeguards need to be in place all the time, not just during intimate care. This includes the workplace culture around safeguarding and reporting.

I read a SCR where a male nursery worker had abused a female child over a period of time. The abuse had often taken place in the few minutes when the children were coming back in from the outside area - the abuser would hang back and then cut through the nursery kitchen, which was empty at that time of day. Members of staff had felt uneasy about his relationship with the child, but not able to report their concerns.

Wow. So many people arguing that childcare is women's work.

In a baby room of 12 children with 3 male and 1 female worker, that poor woman is going to change a hell of a lot of nappies.

“my children are more at risk from men than from women”

Whatever. Your sexism is blinding you

Statistically most of your children are far more at risk from immediate family than male nursery workers.

Family isn’t dbs checked and doesn’t have safeguards in place when family members are with your child.

@bluebluezoo
Exactly. The risk is much higher in the family than outside it with childcare givers. And yet no one is posting that they’d never leave their kids with FIL and MIL because of risk of child abuse!

And this attitude or fear that any man who is a professional childcare worker is likely be an unnatural pervert bent on csa is just plain sexism.

As a whole planet right now - we are pretty barbaric. We pick on the weak.

Many men hurt women because they are weaker than them.
Men and women hurt children, because they are weaker than them.

So why are we like that? How can we as a planet evolve? It is a pattern that has repeated for a long time. Pick on the weak.

I think it is all about self love. The men that do these things are in pain. When you love yourself you do not lash out at everyone. I think we need to target what is causing this anger in certain men. Give them classes on self love, how to connect , how to have empathy.

Men are causing the majority of the abuse at the moment, but it is up to all of us as a whole world , to look at what is going on with them and how to help

I didn't say that I was so you needn't fret about that.Not understanding the risk men present as a group to women and children as a group is a massive issue. And one that only feminists and non-woke working class dads really seem to really get.

The discussion is about whether it's appropriate to treat individuals a particular way, discriminate about them, on the basis of their group membership.
It's entirely possible to understand class analysis and see that as a problem, even fundamentally wrong.

ignores study on child abuse because assumes it’s about parents

But it is about parents? It's about CPS in the US?

I am wondering if some posters realise that stats about race and crime aren't meant to show that you shouldn't leave your kids with black men or black women. It's meant to point out that it would be a racist way to behave and think. And its sexist when you make the same leap in the nursery instance.

Safeguarding is possible in a childcare setting. This is done by ensuring at least TWO adults are present at all times.

It’s simply not possible to have safeguarding in public changing rooms unless you post guards at every restroom. Or cameras but then you have safeguarding concerns over the camera data obviously. When The only safeguarding possible is sex segregation, that is a proportionate means to a legitimate aim, in my view. Otherwise, not. In this case the downsides of sex stereotyping in my view outweigh the risk given appropriate safeguarding procedures.

It’s an interesting issue where feminists can reasonably disagree though.

@angell84 If I am not comfortable with a male doctor lookig at my bits,
Why should I make my child have a strange man look at her bits?

Exactly!!!! 👏🏻 I absolutely would refuse too. It's my daughter's right

Well, statistically, women are more likely to murder a baby or child than a man. But ooooooh lets reduce “risk” by only having female nursery workers because men are statistically more likely to do a bit of csa

a bit of csa

(just a bit, mind)

It's amazing what people reveal about themselves unintentionally.