Posted on 09/08/2007 2:52:54 PM PDT by decimon
These days, if Rian Romoli accidentally bumps into a child, he quickly raises his hands above his shoulders. "I don't want to give even the slightest indication that any inadvertent touching occurred," says Mr. Romoli, an economist in La Cañada Flintridge, Calif.
Ted Wallis, a doctor in Austin, Texas, recently came upon a lost child in tears in a mall. His first instinct was to help, but he feared people might consider him a predator. He walked away. "Being male," he explains, "I am guilty until proven innocent."
In San Diego, retiree Ralph Castro says he won't allow himself to be alone with a child -- even in an elevator.
Cont...
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
As perverted as these crimes were, many may see the covering up of this heinous behavior as equally evil.
By "institutional churches", I think most freepers would read that as "Catholic churches". Their problems didn't begin with the outing of sexual abuse and if that has created more problems, I believe the abuses and and the dishonest, criminal handling of them both contributed to it.
These crimes were finally and rightfully exposed. Yet I doubt other religions are immune to the same kinds of actions within their churches. My point: the media seems to delight in finding any fault they can muster against the Catholic religion. Our big city, liberal newspaper is one example.
me too. lately I have been wanting to live in the asteroid belt, thats like 350 milliom miles away
You did the right thing...although CSD might have been a close second.
That Ted Wallis blurb...and some of the other comments about being “too afraid”...shows a high level of cowardice.
If you see a kid in trouble...help him/her. You could apply that rule to adults too, but that’s more of situational thing.
Sexual offender notices would be anecdotal unless the DOJ or the LE agency in your area has stats on them of the sort you are writing about.
Dateline? Puhleeze. Stick with the DOJ. They probably have what you are looking for.
I do not disagree with your thoughts on percentages of violators, just your sources.
This article is 100% true. I am so skiddish around kids because I don’t want to be labelled.
True. As am I. This is a true story:
My brother was a little league coach with 6-7 year old kids. On of the kids fell really hard on somthing in the basepath and scraped his hip bad enough to where there was visible blood...
My brother’s first instinct was to look at the wound to see how serious it was...then immediately thought better of it. I would have involved pulling the kid’s trousers down far enough to see the wound.
That is where we are at right now.
yes, unfortunately the parents are often worse than the kids.
“It seems to me—no facts to support—that males are far more likely than females to be unjustly accused of any kind of sex crime than women.”
I suppose it depends on what type of sex crime you are talking about.
The Duke case highlighted the concerns you brought up, and like many other situations discussed here - the actions of a small minority of jerks wind up hurting everyone else.
As far as sex crimes against young kids - unfortunately the majority of those crimes are committed by men.
I know that 99% of men are honorable and trustworthy. But the actions of a small minority of deviant, drugged out, porn-addicted freaks has created this fear.
I’m not sure what your definition of “sick” is.
I’m sure many who abuse others are sick.
I think drugs often come into play.
But there is such a thing as people who are just plain selfish, mean, vindictive, and violent.
How do you explain evil?
It’s a mystery.
“To be fair, though, there are also plenty of whacko men. One saving grace is that they’re all a minority of the population.”
yes...hopefully whether you’re talking male or female, the “whackos” are in the minority.
Although sometimes I really do wonder....
Its like you have to have permission to play with kids or even give them a hug without thinking that someone thinking you are a creep. I am like this with my brother’s kids and my friends kids. Its sad and pathetic that its come to this.
Now live with the consequences.
That's a disturbing statement. There's a common attitude of "Well, better safe than sorry!" when it comes to children and child abuse...at least where men are involved. Virtually no abuse is enough for the state to interfere with a mother.
The double standard is palpable. Those who advocate the "better safe than sorry" approach seem to be blind to the consequences of that approach. It's fundamentally changed the relationship between men and children, even their own children.
There's no great leap of logic between "Men can't be trusted around children," to "Men can't be trusted around their own children."
Your post is just #48, that's as far as I've gotten; undoubtedly before I get to the end I'll see some of this:
---Poster will successfully point out that current situation is alienating men from their children, at a time when most people think the opposite should happen.
---Poster will reply that we need to have men involved in their children's lives.
---Poster will reply that the danger to men is imaginary, as it makes no sense to her, as a woman.
---Some "real man" poster will reply that any man not willing to go to jail to have a relationship with his own children is no man at all.
---Another poster will chime in that this thread, instead of illustrating the danger to children, has become another woman-hating-men thread.
Perhaps you could speak to the consequences of your "better safe than sorry" viewpoint...breezy dismissal just isn't cutting it.
could you be more specific?
I can remember during the '80s when a feminist was universally ridiculed for describing all men as "potential rapists." She was seen as being fringe. Change the word rapist to "pedophile," however, and it's become conventional wisdom.
You can't speak for me, and if you're speaking for yourself...shame on you. I don't consider someone more suspect because they happen to be the same religion as a terrorist...I condemn Muslims to the degree they as a group seem to support the terrorist's actions and to imply that "we had it coming." I condemn them because of the attitude I see, that Muslims exist on a separate plain from us mere dimmhis and that it's ok to lie to us.
Do you see any similar support for pedophiles among men?
“I don’t consider someone more suspect because they happen to be the same religion as a terrorist..”
And yet, most people agree that the politically correct rules concerning airport security screening (search the 60 yr. old grandmother and not the 25 yr. old arabic man) doesn’t improve safety much at all.
I was responding to a post that was blaming the MSM - and women for this “fear” of men.
My response would be similar to those muslims who complain that the MSM or christians are responsible for “fear” of young muslim men.
Or...a fellow catholic who blames the Boston Globe, the MSM, or anti-catholics for the “fear” of priests.
Most muslims are not terrorists...most priests do not molest.
It is the actions of a few that hurt many others.
The “fear” is based on the fact that the few people who have done these terrible deeds fit a profile.
That is why police investigators bother with profiling people for particular crimes.
AS someone else pointed out..when it comes to the crime of a pregnant mother having her baby cut out of her stomach, and the infant is missing - you can bet the perp is a woman.
This doesn’t mean all women are potential baby-nappers.
Likewise...when it comes to a parent’s worst fear...abduction of a child, rape, and murder...the culprit is almost always a man.
This is where the “fear” comes from.
Have you read the whole thread?
My grandson took a job this summer as a counselor at a day camp. I was happy that he got this job, but thoughts of him being in a position to be accused of unsavory behavior by any kid certainly crossed my mind. I never asked him if other counselors are always present on field hikes, etc. Camp's over now; no problems.
This is a very real consequence of a societal attitude. Yet, some on this thread have breezily dismissed it as, "Some people don't like the truth." I would like to leave them to the unfortunate consequences of their stupid, short sighted thinking; problem is we're in the same boat.
Explain to me then, where the line lies between "All men are evil," and "All men are potential pedophiles."
Unfortunately, it's not a great distance from "don't trust strange men," to "don't trust men," and we're there already.
Amen to that. Just compare the way their mom allows them to go out dressed, versus Dad's standards...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.