There is such a hysteria here...

I once volunteered to help coach a girls' soccer team - they were really desperate for adult volunteers. The connection was that my boss's daughter was on the team (that's how I know about it) and I like working with kids. So why not?

The shock this generated! Single male, no children, wants to work with preadolescent girls! Oh no, the horror!!!

I like kids, and I currently coach a mixed bag of boys and girls in martial arts. Despite advice to the contrary, I even touch them: a pat on the shoulder, showing how to do a certain technique, whatever seems appropriate. Physical contact is important, dammit.

What's a guy to do? There is always the danger that some parent somewhere is going to freak out...

So apparently, if you're a man, you're guilty even if proven innocent.

I've considered getting involved with the Big Brother organization.

I consider it for about 2 seconds before I come to my senses. For the exact reasons in this post.

And this is why I can't use the outdoor facilities at a membership-only park during the summer.

Because all adults are predators until proven otherwise, especially men.

What was that Rad was going on about - how people are lousy at evaluating statistics?

This sucks ass. I agree the chances of this guy getting to that age without a whiff of impropriety are slim to none. Unless he has dementia, which can bring out all sorts of inappropriate behavior. Kind of doubt he'd be tutoring then, though. My girls had a male swim teacher, and now have a male reading class teacher. I think it's great. They have a very active involved father who is married to me and lives with us, but the male perspective is invaluable.

Yes, there is hysteria about men and kids. On the other hand, it's not totally baseless. We've all seen those To Catch a Predator 20/20's. Not once, it the however many years they've been doing this, has a woman responded. So while very, very few men are sex predators, they are a much higher percentage than women OF sex predators. So I can sort of understand the hysteria.

How did this man get charged, if the girl never mentioned sex abuse and the parents didn't suspect it?

A moms listserve I'm on recently had the "when to send your boy to the public mens potty instead of taking him into the women's with you" topic. My answer was around 5 or when physically capable. Moms were aghast! Don't you know, men sneakily grab a feel from random boys in the restroom so often!! There were moms not letting their 12 year olds go! I'm sorry, but if you don't feel your kid is safe peeing while you're outside the door, you are in the wrong, wrong, wrong area of town.

When I was 12, My friend's parents rented a suite at a hotel for us to have a slumber party. They were there in the bedroom while we have the living room. We went downstairs in the evening to wander the lobby and pool area. Some business man started talking to us, asking our age etc. Then he told us he had something really neat to show us in his room. It MIGHT have been a documentary on Zebras, but we weren't stupid and didn't go. Probably should have told someone, but life goes on.

has a woman responded

That's because Perverted Justice, the group that runs the stings, only targets men.

I have the suspicion that some of what's driving this hysteria is that many women find pedophilia arousing, like your friends who fantasize about men touching little boys in bathrooms. But they're ashamed of these thoughts and so they project them onto other people. And this allows them to develop all sorts of lurid fantasies without taking responsibility for them.

momof4 said: We've all seen those To Catch a Predator 20/20's. Not once, it the however many years they've been doing this, has a woman responded.

There have been literally thousands of cases of teachers having sex with students over the past few years (I read one stat of around 3500 in 2008 alone). Guess how many were men?

I've worked with a lot of kids... tutor, camp counselor, school teacher, volunteer, etc. And there are certain guidelines to follow.

* Never be alone in a room with a child with the door closed
* Don't touch the child unless they touch you first... ie, if they hug you it's ok to hug back, and once that's been established you can pat them and such... if you're a woman. Guys need to be more aloof

... and so forth.

That's the way it is.

Marcus, stop projecting your sick child fantasies onto women.

Spork, I'd love to know where your 3500 in one year stat came from, and how did they get it? I know 3500 teachers weren't reported for it.

Not all these points are all that powerful. There wouldn't be physical evidence from fondling, inappropriate touching. A clean criminal record doesn't mean anything. I knew molesters who were guilty only of one crime: molestation. An 8-year-old can get confused, especially if the identification came some months after the abuse, and certainly if the guy lost 20 pounds in the interim. If she knew him in a certain context, and dressed a certain way, she might not have been able to identify him in another context and other clothing.

Marcus, stop projecting your sick child fantasies onto women.

This is what I'm talking about.

It's interesting that your first instinct was to accuse me of being a pedophile.

Sexual hysterias have been documented since the middle ages, and they are always carried out by women.

Louviers is probably the most famous - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louviers_possessions

This same dynamic was recognized by psychologists who'd analyzed the pre-school molestation panics in the 80's and 90's. The common element was a core group, made up almost entirely of women, who developed very elaborate fantasies about what 'must have been' taking place.

So when you see groups of women going on about how they know that dirty men must be having sex with children in public bathrooms, or on little league baseball fields, or in school cafeterias, you've got to ask what motivates this sort of thinking.

A man was recently arrested in england under suspicion of pedophilia for playing soccer in the park with his own children

It's obnoxious and fallacious to use the argument that "we've seen one or more cases of this therefore it's okay to tar all members of a group".

Here's the story of a 51 year old mother who killed her 16 year old son and then herself earlier this week. http://www.ktvu.com/news/20150665/detail.html

Glenn Sacks can show you studies demonstrating that #7: Most child abuse and parental murder of children is committed by mothers, not fathers and #13: Children are 88% more likely to be seriously injured from abuse or neglect by their mothers than by their fathers.

Look, I'm not saying women should not get custody, I'm just saying judges should be very careful about giving them custody, and should always look to protect the child. Won't someone think of the children?

Momof4 - I'll have to recant my stat, I am unable to find it again (it was a while ago that I read it).

Nonetheless, it seems like a week doesn't go by where I don't read about another female teacher having inappropriate relations with a student. Although I will contend that the victims in such cases are usually much older than 8, so perhaps my point is moot.

@lujlp:
Actually, I think that he didn't have a license to play in the park. Seriously. It didn't have anything to do with pedophilia.

@Markus:
The Louviers link was very interesting. Why is it that men never get caught up in sexual hysteria? I love how the treatment for hysteria is orgasm. Maybe hysterical women just need vibrators?

Note that the root word for "hysteria" is the Greek word for some part of the female reproductive area (don't know the specific word).

Because the Greeks just assumed that being female made you crazy.

Maybe they were on to something?

Naaaah. All behavior is learned, right? It's just that all men learn to be ignorant brutes, which makes women crazy! Yeah, that's the ticket!

Reading the account at the link, I am left with the impression that no one on the jury, in the prosecutor's office, or judge's seat was clear on the concept of reasonable doubt.

Testimony of an 8 year old girl unsupported by any other evidence = reasonable doubt.

I know that the guilty verdict can withstand appeal, because we cannot establish a rule that an 8 year old's testimony alone is insufficient to convict, but guys, c'mon...who would not have reasonable doubts about a story like that from a kid? Jury totally blew it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/21/AR2007102100144.html

Here's an AP Investigation that talks about 2500 cases filed between 2001 and 2004. Things to note: apparently 90% of the abusers reported are male, AND the investigation makes clear how the majority of abuse goes unreported.

So you can decide for yourself what sort of case gets reported, what doesn't, what gets charged and what doesn't, how much is real and how much is witch hunt.

But the magnitude of all cases, real or not, does seem to be in the ballpark.

@Tyler in order to get a licence to visit a pubic park(whole other abuse of power but thats for a different post) he needed to pay the cops to perform a background check to search for past instances of child sexual abuse.

Let that ink in a moment, in order for anyone in england to sepnt time with their own childern in public they must get an offical "I'm not a pedophile" certificate from the government

I agree with Spartee, this is all about reasonable doubt. No evidence at all, and it looks like it was actually impossible for him to be there that day from his alibi. When it's just one word against another, and one of those people is only 8...

When I was on a jury we were told that circumstantial evidence was like missing a brownie off a plate, following the trail of crumbs to your child's room, and when you find your child they have chocolate around their mouth. You didn't see it but you can pretty much guess exactly what happened. There is no chain of circumstantial evidence here, aside from the idea that all man are just a heartbeat away from raping anything they see.

I dunno. The YMCA -- hardly a bastion of progressive thinking -- has tons of boy camp counselors and plenty of grown men involved, too. I love that girls get to see guys in nurturing roles and I've never once in many many years heard a single parent express any concern.

And Jerry, your contention that "most child abuse and parental murder of children is committed by mothers" is likely true but completely worthless as a stand-alone stat. Because mothers/women are overwhelmingly the caretakers of children. Now, if you could tell me who is more abusive per hours spent with a child that might mean something.

@lujlp: Oops. You're exactly right. I guess I concentrated on the fact that the government was so in his business that he needed a license to go to a public park with his own kids.

On another note, I'd prefer it if everyone in the media would stop using the term "pedophile." I think we need to be more concerned about child molesters. One is a paraphilia, the other is a crime.

"most child abuse and parental murder of children is committed by mothers" is likely true but completely worthless as a stand-alone stat.

It's not worthless if you're trying to keep kids from being abused and killed.

But it is worthless if you're trying to find a way to blame men.

Is that what you mean?

Given that I just said I send my kids to camps with male counselors, I'm hardly trying to blame men. But there's sure a lot of blame women going on around here.

Statistics can be manipulated to mean about anything, and in this case he was using it to make a point about mothers being more evil than fathers -- which isn't what the statistic demonstrates. I suppose we could also say women hug their children more than men or show at at school for emergencies more often than men -- but that's only because they tend to be the primary caregivers. Per hour spent with children men are probably damn fine huggers.

"And Jerry, your contention that "most child abuse and parental murder of children is committed by mothers" is likely true but completely worthless as a stand-alone stat. Because mothers/women are overwhelmingly the caretakers of children. Now, if you could tell me who is more abusive per hours spent with a child that might mean something."

That was sort of my point. We are very fond of taking one incident and smearing entire groups of people with it, and of taking statistics and abusing them.

So when momof4 says that she's seen To Catch a Predator and therefore it's not such an evil injustice to consider all men harmful, well.... But regarding your debunking of the stats, all I can say in rebuttal is that stats like that, and statements like mom's are used daily at feminist sites to justify gender inequality.

Me, I think the courts should offer women the opportunity to prove that the men who take care of kids offend at the same rates as the women, by having an rebuttable presumption of joint shared custody.

The big list: Female teachers with students

Most comprehensive account on Internet of women predators on campus . . .

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=39783

"mothers being more evil than fathers -- which isn't what the statistic demonstrates."

I agree that stats can be manipulated and the view from 90,000 feet is not the same as the view from 1 foot away, but taking out the word evil and replacing it as "dangerous to children", well, that's exactly what those stats show.

...

"Myth #4: Mothers are children's "first line of defense" against child abuse.

In reality it is mothers, not fathers, who commit the overwhelming majority of child abuse, neglect, and parental murder. According to the US Department of Justice, 70% of confirmed cases of child abuse and 65% of parental murders of children are committed by mothers, not fathers.

According to the US Department of Health and Human Services, adjusting for the greater number of single mothers, a custodial mother is five times as likely to murder her own children as a custodial father is. A study of confirmed child abuse cases published in the Journal of Child Abuse and Neglect found that mothers abuse their children two and a half times as often as fathers. The Third National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect (1996) found that children are 88% more likely to be seriously injured from abuse or neglect by their mothers than by their fathers."

and

" Most child abuse and parental murder of children is committed by mothers, not fathers.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration on Children, Youth, and Families, Child Maltreatment 1997: Reports from the States to the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (Washington DC, :GPO, 1999). See: www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cb/publications/ncands97/s7.htm.

Child abuse perpetrators are 62.3% female. Child fatality perpetrators are 62.8% female. The mother/father ratio is actually greater than this, because many of the male abusers counted are not the biological fathers but instead step‑fathers, boyfriends, etc.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, Third National Incidence Study Of Child Abuse and Neglect: Final Report Appendices (Washington D.C., U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1997, pp. A‑63‑A‑64.

The estimated total is 264 parental murders of children committed by single custodial mothers and 11 by single custodial fathers. There are roughly five times as many single custodial mothers as single custodial fathers.

Warren Farrell, Father and Child Reunion: How to Bring the Dads We Need to the Children We Love, Penguin Putnam Inc, 2001, pp 75-77.
"

Let's face it, the sheer imbalance shown here shows, as momof4 would agree, that we cannot trust mothers or women to be left alone with children.

Sad, situation.

264 murders to 11, and women 5 ties as likley to have custody

264+11 = 275

275 / 6 = 45

So for men and women to abuse at the same rate after adjusting for "ease" of accsess the men need to start killing four times as many children as they currently do

Well JulieA there you go, even when ajusting for the fact that women have more access they are still more prone to violence and abuse

Whats your next agrument to try and discretit the findings?

Seriously? When did this become about mothers abusing? Of course they do it more, they're AROUND the kids more and do most of the parenting. If you could snap your fingers and put most of the time and work for caring for children on men, I bet you'd see the abuse numbers reverse too.

I didn't justify blaming all men. Did you READ my fucking post? Or just the 1/4 sentence that you could twist as something to argue against?

JulieA:

Go read this: http://www.ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume6/j6_2_4.htm

Beside noting how often women lie about rape, abuse, etc. (which is really a lot), it also makes the point about mothers being the biggest abusers of children (ecspecially boys) and also that the least safe place for a girl to be is in the home of a single mother (and the safest in the home of her biological father).

It apparently helps you personally if you can maintain the "woman good/men evil" facade (and your denial is truly impressive!) How about entertaining the idea (at least briefly) that both genders include good and bad people. Try repeating this to yourself a few times: "Some women are bad, some men are good" and then look arounbd you for real life examples. I'm sure you'll find some.

Mo4:

The present assumption in the "common wisdom" is that ALL MEN ARE SEXUAL PREDATORS.

This is the burden we bear. It is not only unfair, it is patently ridiculous.

There are laws being written all over the world that codify this "common wisdom".

It's only a matter of time before a man walking his child to the store is arrested on suspicion of being a molester for holding the child's hand.

Do you not grok this, or do you just care not to?

Tired Guy -

What the fuck are you talking about?

Can't be bothered with you otherwise. I've got work to do and kids to pick up -- before the babysitter gets here to give me a night off. The babysitter is a really nice young man. If only he knew how much I despised his entire gender and felt they were all out to molest little ones.

Its already happend brian.

And Momof4 did you not read Jerry's post?

He quote sorce that show even after ajusting for women being aound children they abuse at a greater rate then men

Supposy you had 100 women with 100 children and 50 of those women abuse their kids

now suppost you have 10 men with ten children and 5 men abuse their kids.

Adjust for the numbers and you see that while the women abuse more kids in this little senario they do so at the same rate as men.

So if jerys govenment compiled statistics show that that wmone abuse more AFTER adjusting for the fact that women have kids in their presence more often then men that should tell you something

As to when did it become about mothers abusing? Its becuase they do it more often both in sheer numbers and in statistic ratios.

The better question whould be why do we ignore the fact that mothers abuse more, dont you think?

JulieA trired guy is talking about the fact that when adjusting for numbers of women who have custody they still abuse at a higher rate then men.

That is to say the data show that if men and women were to hypotetically have perfct even distribution of child care women would still abuse children more.

And he is talking about how you keep ignoring(denial) that little addendum to the conversation

"I didn't justify blaming all men. "

With your To Catch a Predator comment, you did do that. I just tried to do the reverse, and show how the statistics show that we really cannot trust any women to be alone with a child.

I've actually known many women that are great teachers, mothers, doctors, nurses, but still, the statistics show that our concern here is not "totally baseless".

I am not sure why you and JulieA are so defensive regarding this, I am merely reciting the statistics, reiterating my concern for the children, and establishing some simple steps the courts could take to protect the children. How can anyone misunderstand that or oppose it?

(The statistics that feminists, shrinks, and courts fail to examine are the sheer numbers of people (male and female) that are not engaged in abuse, or domestic violence used to justify their courtroom orders....)

JulieA;

I apologise if I mimsread your posts. I was under the impression that you were one of those women who thinks that women are usually innocent and men usually guily of beating their wives, children, etc (in other words giving the woman a good reason to divorce etc.). Yopu seem to base your opinions on personal anecdotes. By the way, I'm not arguing that there aren't bad men who do these things - of course there are many. But do you think there are many bad women out there?

What would be refreshing(and make me less tired) is if some women some where would acknowledge that rape/DV laws give women too much power over men and that there is a significant number of crazy women out there who use this power irresponsibly to the great detriment of the men in their lives. Some women have mental problems and some are just bad, greedy, deviant types.

HAve you ever met a "bad" woman JulieA. IF only 1% of US woman are "bad," then that's about 1.5 million women out there potentially beating their kids, clogging the court system with false accusations, and doing great damage to innocent men.

Do you think that giving these women so much power is a problem or is it insignificant to worry about these men in light of the problems women face? What's your answer (I'm genuinely curious)?

BTW, check out today's Dear Abby...

www.dearabby.com

Enough with the blame game.

Neither women nor men are likely to abuse children, the amount of child molesters out there is a low, low percentage of the population and does not justify this madness.

We need to be much more careful how we as a society respond to these accusations.

BTW, in response to an above comment, hysteria means "madness of the womb". "Hyst" like "hysterectemy"

Thanks, Nicole. I was pretty sure that's what it meant.

"I have the suspicion that some of what's driving this hysteria is that many women find pedophilia arousing, like your friends who fantasize about men touching little boys in bathrooms. But they're ashamed of these thoughts and so they project them onto other people. And this allows them to develop all sorts of lurid fantasies without taking responsibility for them."

This type of conspiracy-theory "logic" is ridiculous and unfounded. You might as well say the war against terrorism is driven by people who have secret fantasies of crashing planes into buildings, because otherwise why would they be expending so much energy thinking and talking about terrorism?

I had a woman threaten me with a domestic violence complaint once.

She said and I quote during an argument, "I'll call the police and charge you, I can pretend to be scared and frightened."

Suffice it to say, things didn't last, and by the way, I hadn't threatened her nor raised a hand to her in any way.

I don't beat those weaker than myself.

Fact is though, filing charges, flagrantly false or not, is destructive to the lives of men. We do need to rewrite many laws to eliminate their inherent biases, to correct injustices, and to criminalize those who abuse the system in order to abuse others, but doing so will be a long and difficult road.

Womens' sexuality is very weird Shannon. For instance many women become aroused when they view images of animals having sex. But very few men do.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/25/magazine/25desire-t.html?_r=1&pagewanted=1&ref=magazine

So it's not unlikely that many women experience something similar when thinking about sex with children. That doesn't mean that they're pedophiles or even that they find the idea appealing.

But it could help to explain the sort of extreme behavior and beliefs that you see surrounding the issue.

We demand responsibility from men because they can handle it. We don't demand the same from women or children ... for obvious reasons.

I've been teaching martial arts for almost 20 years, with students, male and female, from 4 to 74. I love the interaction. However, I would NEVER instruct in a private situation with any child or any female -- i.e., those individuals who are not held fully responsible for their actions.

Markus makes an interesting point.

I was a child back in the days of the hysteria over child murders and molestations & so on and so forth, that child abuse mania was all over the place.

I was an unusual child I suppose, I watched the news a lot, didn't know all of what they were talking about, but every speaker about these horrors that were supposedly being perpetrated, was a woman. I don't recall a single prominent male advocate regarding that period, though there were men involved in the process of course, police, prosecutors, and the like, the ones who made the public statements about those multitudes of molesters...were all women.

Never thought about that before. I suppose it has something to do with the way women perceive male sexuality as being virtually all consuming. They find a man they like and think, "He's different" well we have to wonder what they think he's different FROM.

The vision of this all consuming brutish male sexuality is such that it is only natural that the female imagination, which is no less active than the males, might take the inaccurate and even outlandishly wrongheaded understanding of male sexuality, and make it even more predatory and perverse.

How much more likely is this at a time when men are overtly and publicly demonized by a movement pursuing so called "equality" in society, and is it not reasonable to suggest that this demonized viewpoint might have significantly inserted itself into our culture and our codified legal system after decades of such activity, even in spite of the fact that reasonable people are well aware of the facts of the matter, that most men are not predatory or dangerous to women or out to rape everything with a pulse and a hole, that women who are the first line of defense against child abuse or abduction by virtue of their numbers in terms of being the primary care givers, are also the first line of offenders ready to carry out acts of cruelty, neglect, and abuse, by the very same fact of their more common presence?

I forget who said it here, I believe it was a female poster, but someone said that they worried about the likely eventual backlash, when the pendulum swung as hard the other way, against women, as more and more men grew outraged and tired of being socially and legally penalized and demonized. Feminists would do well to remember that the further they push the pendulum one way, the harder it will likely swing when they drop it. If we wish a just society and true equality, the laws must change, but so too must our culture.

And we are far better off starting the move towards reason NOW, than trying to push things again later. Where does one begin?

Start at home. Good luck.

BTW,

I realize that any man who criticizes any woman, or any aspect of femininity whatsoever, or who generally sticks up for men, is a MISOGYNIST who should be shamed and/or shouted into silence!!

We can't take attention off of the ladies, now, can we?

Okay, some of you are making things up on the fly. Let's all agree that child abuse is a special case - abuse of anybody is bad, after all - and start with investigation, rather than going on about what we "think".

"Think" is in quotes because I have discovered that the bulk of what people "know" is superstition and lies.

There is a real difference between an information source and editorial commentary.

Here is the Bureau of Justice Statistics page. Although I am pessimistic that any of you will search for knowledge for its own sake, you should go there to see if the blurb you read in the LA Times or on WND is based in reality.

Keep in mind that there are many ways to influence the presentation of a statistic. First among these is the wording used to convey the result. Be sure of the meaning. Next, there are assumptions you must question. Does society really wish to call out this or that group as violent? Is there interference in the way this data is gathered?

Lastly, be aware of your own confirmation bias. If you believe a thing, you're not likely to go out and find ways to break your belief. This is a severe impediment in discussing issues of personal import. Your belief does not dictate reality; it is a construct of your own, to enable you to get through another day.

It is my hope that no matter what you say, you will go and find out whether it is correct before you say it. Our hostess does an amazing amount of research - that's one of the reasons I'm here - to be derided by people who have read one newspaper article and thought of their crazy uncle as "proof".

Its not that women CAN'T handle it. Its that right now as the law is written, it is assumed that they can't, and so despite the fact that they can, they simply "DON'T" or "WON'T" if they do nae HAVE TO. Abdication of responsibility is a common trait, but only for women and children is the law codified to guarantee it.

I know there are many women who can and do go above and beyond what the law says, but as Socrates pointed out when he said that a man with an ring that made him invisible could not long resist the urge to steal, responsibility and justice are things that are either enforced by society, or not followed at all.

As it is now, a woman whom behaves in an irresponsible manner will find no end of apologists and persons willing to find a man to blame or make responsible for her, that is how the law is applied.

When it changes, we'll see I think, a much more even divide between men & women in terms of relatively decent conduct.

Although I suspect sexual hysteria will still be chiefly be perpetrated by female advocates.

Tired Guy -

Oh lord yes there are bad women, and good men, and bad men and good women. I'm always adding this caveat to my posts. I just don't know that many men who are scrambling to do right by their kids post-relationship. I do know a lot of women who are struggling without any child support and still allow full access to their kids at the ex's convenience. Maybe we just travel in different circles.

And women who shout rape should be dealt with, although I'm not sure how because we don't want to punish them so much they stop recanting, which would just mean more unfounded torture for men.

OK, boy babysitter is coming soon. Dinner with a good guy. Go men!

**BTW, check out today's Dear Abby...**

Ok, but I don't get it.

"DEAR ABBY: My wife and I have been involved in an ongoing debate about how to place the pillows on our king-size bed. Should the opening of the pillowcase face the outside of the bed or the inside?

I place my pillows with the opening facing the middle of the bed so the pillow won't show, while my wife does it the other way, and the edge of the pillow can be seen through the opening. Can you please settle this? -- PILLOW TALK IN ABILENE

DEAR PILLOW TALK: Hotels make up the beds with the opening of the pillowcases turned to the middle because the maids usually tuck the edge of the pillowcase inward. A specialist in the bedding department of my local department store says that in most homes, the opening of the pillowcase faces the edge of the bed. But the bottom line is -- there is no right or wrong way!"

Not that letter, the other one, about the man who kids are attracted to!

Here:

DEAR ABBY: I'm a 38-year-old man with no children. For some reason I tend to attract the attention of children wherever I go. Even though I make no attempt to speak to them, they often approach me. I know when children talk to strangers it makes their parents uncomfortable, but I don't want to be rude to the kids.

I was recently eating at an outdoor restaurant when a friendly little girl walked up, sat herself down at my table, and began asking me questions. I was terse but polite. She was soon joined by several other kids, all of whom seated themselves at my table.

Their parents, who had obviously not been paying attention, shouted at them to "get away from that man!" It created an embarrassing scene with the parents telling me I had no business talking to their kids. The other diners looked at me as though I was some kind of pervert.

I don't want to be rude to children, but what can I do to prevent things like this from happening again? -- CRYING "UNCLE" IN TEXAS

DEAR "UNCLE": The parents overreacted. The next time a child approaches and wants to talk, ask the child, "Did your mother/father say it was OK to talk to a stranger?" If the answer is no, then tell the child he/she must first ask a parent for permission.

> The next time a child approaches
> and wants to talk

It's easier just to scowl. There was a joke a few years ago that went like this: When a single man is traveling or moving through the community and a playful family of children starts to annoy, the correct response is to lean over to one of the parents, smile meekly and say "Y'know, according to the court, I'm not even supposed to be this close to kids."

Where's the part where-Adults should ensure that false accusations, and disingenuous assumptions, from anyone, have actual undesirable social consequences?

"An 8-year-old can get confused, especially if the identification came some months after the abuse"
oh please, he was around her several times a week, 8 year olds are old enough to grasp abstract concepts, my friends' kids had no problem identifying me even after I lost 60 pounds and hadn't seen them for 6 months.
If kids were as bad witnesses as you claim, then why believe the first accusation?

THe jury probably thought he was innocent, but should convict him "just in case", after all you can't be too careful.

what i cannot belive they did that

umm how is this even possible

Another thing I've really noticed is the fact for many people, poor credit is the results of circumstances beyond their control. For instance they may happen to be saddled with an illness so they really have higher bills going to collections. It would be due to a employment loss or perhaps the inability to do the job. Sometimes breakup can truly send the budget in the undesired direction. Thank you for sharing your thinking on this web site.