Batters - of course I find child abuse disgusting, but I also find the sexism in SML's attitudes repugnant. Everyone is entitled to have their opinions deemed "valid", including the view that someone else's point of view is bigotted. Just because she is a woman doesn't make her immune from having sexist attitudes, and I take offence from her views.
Last month we ran a national conference with the National Children's Bureau (the child protection agency) on the problem of the lack of men in childcare. We heard of the problems that men in childcare face (the assumption that they are potential abusers) - things which their female co-workers never face. We also heard that they were as capable childcare workers as women, and we addressed the problems of child protection in this context. Most men had to use self-protecting strategies (for example, always having a witness present when they changed nappies) to prevent false accusations, and the conference concluded that all workers should use these measures to a. increase child protection and b. ensure that there is a measure of equality of treatment of workers. There are some places (e.g. Sheffield Childrens Centre) where the male/female staff ratio is 50:50, but generally, men are only about 2% of the workers in childcare, and they face considerable obstacles (not least from the attitudes of those like SML) in their work.
Why would a man want to work with children? After a hard days work yesterday I got to bathe, feed and settle my son into bed, and it was the absolute highlight of my day - we had masses of fun in the bath and a lovely snuggle before bed - why wouldn't a man want to work with children - it's a magical, precious and wonderful thing to do - hugely rewarding - hard and valuable work.
Tigger - I'd love to lighten up, but this is a discussion about child abuse - not a "light" topic really.
SML - you said..."I checked with the nursery beforehand and got an assurance that they didn't employ male staff" - would you give me the name of this nursery? They are almost certainly breaking the law.
Tigger - I emailed Adrienne Burgess (author of "Fatherhood Reclaimed" and leading fatherhood researcher in the UK) about references showing that men who were closely involved with their children from the start were less likely to abuse their children - this is her reply:
"yes - definitely - fathers who sexually abuse their daughters are likely to have 'missed' a chunk of their early childhood through being away (sailors in the Liverpool docks - a common phenomenon, I am told) or have been physically around but not greatly involved in playing with/feeding/caring for them. The thought is perhaps they feel less 'fatherly'. I also think the sexual abuse may in many ways be a distorted bid for intimacy. I cite the first study in my book - last chapter - section on abuse figures I THINK. Sebastian Kraemer may be more up to date on the recent research - I am convinced that more than one study has shown it. Vicky Phares MAY deal with it in her chapter in THE ROLE OF THE FATHER IN CHILD DEVELOPMENT (3rd edition)."
Sorry for the long post.
Here's a joke to lighten the mood:
How do you get Pikachu onto the bus?
Pokemon