# The role of men in modern society



## Bushman (10 August 2012)

There is a news article today that genuinely made me sit up with a start and wonder about men's role in modern society.

http://www.theage.com.au/travel/tra...arating-men-from-children-20120810-23y7q.html

I've attached the article, but as a brief it is a travel story about a Sydney fireman being asked to move seats when an air stewardess noticed that he was sitting next to two unaccompanied minors. Instead, he was swapped with a female passenger due to standing airline policy. Incredible that this man who by all accounts has led an exemplary life and has not been a threat to anyone should be humiliated in front of a packed airline for being, well, a man. 

So the message from corporarte Australia is undoubtedly that as you are a man, then statistically you must be a threat to others? 

This has made me think about what it means to be a man in today's society? Also if society is increasingly heading down the risk management path then what does it mean for the teaching profession, pediatrics, coaching and other such professions where men work with 'unaccompanied minors'. 

Now I am a father and would be appalled if my kids were subjected to a situation where a man posing no threat to them was arbitrarily moved; the message here to the kids is that a man should be feared. Doesn't this then diminish all male role models in their eyes? 

Ultimately we life in a modern society that favours homogeneity over overt displays of gender and also a litigious society that is fed stories about male stranger danger. No wonder males are confused ... 

Then again, being a white anglo male, maybe it is karma that all this discrimination we have dished out over the millenium should now start to come back our way. 

Interesting times ...


----------



## Joules MM1 (10 August 2012)

Bushman said:


> There is a news article today ........
> Interesting times ...






> he estimated to be between 8 and 10 years old.




is it just me or do you find, that, that there is no mention of the effect on the two kids as the worst part of the story.......i mean, wot does it instill in them?....that this is normal?.....so they grow up with this twisted normality of how to treat one half of the human population, that is, this is exactly how they can expect to be treated when theyre adults.......a broad brush stroke protectionism for the sake of insurance and litigation .....**** me!

bear markets.......


----------



## prawn_86 (10 August 2012)

Society is becoming increasingly androgynous with men becoming more feminine the further Western societies develop.

Most of males originals 'uses' such as strength, speed, hunting, being the sole provider etc are no longer required and hence the message is that we as men no longer need to display these characteristics for fear of political correctness and no real way to productively utilise these capabilities.

I believe some ASF members were even bemoaning the unfairness and competitivness of sports, which is one of the few platforms men have in which to compete physically against each other...


----------



## Bushman (10 August 2012)

Joules MM1 said:


> is it just me or do you find, that, that there is no mention of the effect on the two kids as the worst part of the story.......i mean, wot does it instill in them?....that this is normal?............




Yeah that is the bit that really troubled me about this story . Kids learn from adult behaviour and in this instance they must be sitting there and going that this guy is a threat to us. Why else would they move him? If they are boys, do they then grow up thinking they are a threat? 

Ultimately, what right does a Virgin (or any corporation) have to make a call like this?


----------



## Julia (10 August 2012)

I'm not sure that it's an anti-men attitude so much as an exaggerated response to the threat of paedophilia.

The incident described is awful for everyone concerned and silly.

If the airline has determined they will have such a policy then they should effect it when the seats are originally allocated.  Not that hard to find a clearly female name to sit next to the children.

If it makes you blokes feel any better, we women are not immune from suspicion either.  I participate in a mentoring program in the schools, usually primary level, and despite having a Blue Card, I was initially told never to be alone in a room with a child for my own protection.  Also, never actually touch a child.

I get the bit about not being alone in a room with a kid, but if a child is in tears over something imo there's nothing as useful as a hug.

Institutions and organisations like airlines seem to take the view that prevention is the best protection.  You can see their point, but we lose a lot of humanity in the process.


----------



## Bushman (10 August 2012)

Julia said:


> I'm not sure that it's an anti-men attitude so much as an exaggerated response to the threat of paedophilia.
> 
> The incident described is awful for everyone concerned and silly.
> 
> ...




A case of the cure being worse than the disease


----------



## DB008 (10 August 2012)

Spot on Bushman

British Airways compensates man for sexist child seating policy


> British Airways has compensated a passenger who was “humiliated’ over its policy of not allowing single male flyers to sit next to solo child travellers on its planes.
> British Airways cabin crew told Mirko Fischer to move after he swapped seats with his wife and ended up sitting next to a boy he did not know.
> Mr Fischer, 33, accused staff of harassing him and said the policy contravened the Sex Discrimination Act.
> BA apologised to the businessman but denied the policy was discriminatory.
> ...




And

Surprising Habits Of The Female Pedophile 


> Back in 1984, a study done by Finkelhor & Russell estimated that about 5% of female children and 20% of male children exposed to sexual predation were abused by women. More recent research among victims suggests that the rate of female predation is alarmingly higher than we thought back then.


----------



## numbercruncher (10 August 2012)

Virgin should get sued over this issue - only way they learn and show remorse for such ridiculous behviour.


----------



## Julia (10 August 2012)

Bushman said:


> A case of the cure being worse than the disease



Yes, indeed.



numbercruncher said:


> Virgin should get sued over this issue - only way they learn and show remorse for such ridiculous behviour.



It's not confined to Virgin.  ABC Radio this evening covered the story and had an interview with an airline journalist who said all airlines pursue the same policy.  They just do it undetected, as I suggested earlier, thus covering themselves and not insulting any passengers.

That seems reasonable enough, I suppose, in today's ridiculously over-sensitive society, so hardly a case for taking action on the matter.

Just a hypothetical question for you, numbercruncher:  What do you think should have happened had the airline not moved the adult passenger and he subsequently turned out to inappropriately touch the children?
Who would be held responsible?
Remember an airline takes responsibility for the safety of unaccompanied children as far as I know.


----------



## IFocus (10 August 2012)

The policy would likely have come from their insurance company trying to reduce a perceived exposure. 

If it was my kids I actually would prefer a female sitting next to them.


----------



## bellenuit (11 August 2012)

In addition to whether the policy is fair or not, I was appalled at the insensitive way it was handled. When the stewardess asked a female passenger to take the place of the male passenger, she didn't say "Our policy is that men are not allowed to sit next to unaccompanied children", but instead said "HE is not allowed sit next to minors". I could imagine how embarrassing that must have been to him, with no explanation offered.


----------



## Tink (11 August 2012)

Yes, bellenuit, agree. 
The way it was said and handled, no explanation given on policies, just, you cant sit next to that man.
As Julia said, it should have all been handled before boarding the plane, or at least an explanation given on their policies.
How long have minors been boarding planes unaccompanied (10 and 8 years old)?
All new policies that have had to be created?


----------



## numbercruncher (11 August 2012)

IFocus said:


> The policy would likely have come from their insurance company trying to reduce a perceived exposure.
> 
> If it was my kids I actually would prefer a female sitting next to them.




If it was my kids I would much rather the NSW firefighter who probably has a bluecard and definately has a thorough background check.

The woman could of been any old crack addict hey ?

And ask the 8 and 10 year old boys who theyd rather sit next to , a random woman or a NSW firefighter , I know what I would of chosen at the age of 10 .....

And ask the insurance company who they would rather have in that seat - Im sure they would say Virgin made the wrong discrimitory sexist choice.

And further more this need'nt of happened if Virgin had any logistical planning skills at all.

Moral of the story is if your a male, fly Qantas.


----------



## tinhat (11 August 2012)

A friend of mine picked up her unaccompanied minor off a Virgin flight at Sydney airport recently and he wasn't even being supervised in arrivals. There's a hot tip for paedophiles.


----------



## Julia (11 August 2012)

numbercruncher said:


> If it was my kids I would much rather the NSW firefighter who probably has a bluecard and definately has a thorough background check.
> 
> The woman could of been any old crack addict hey ?
> 
> ...



The policy exists across all airlines.


----------



## Bushman (11 August 2012)

yep i would much rather a firefighter sit next to my kids than say a women who is childless and has no experience with children. Also the message is so mixed. This guy would be a hero if he goes and saves a child from an inferno but when he steps on a plane he is a 'potential pedo'?

Also the thinking behind this is so flawed; I would suggest that statistically speaking there would no chance that a professional male who has never committed a sexual assualt against a minor would suddenly and opportunistically offend in an airplane.

It is so highly offensive and takes this 'all men are potential predators' myth to its extremes. 

Ultimately we all bemoan the lack of community and human connection in our modern world. But how can you foster a sense of community when everyone demonstrates this irrational fear about 'strange' men. 

Also what happens if the man was a male whose ethnicity was not 'anglo saxon' or if the man was homosexual? Would this then be seen as discriminatory?

Disgraceful ...


----------



## DB008 (11 August 2012)

I think 18 is a respectable age to marry a girl, if you intend to do so at a young age.

5 is a bit young, as is 13 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/journalismcompetition/girl-brides-in-yemen

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2001029/Child-brides-young-5-married-secret-middle-aged-men.html


----------



## numbercruncher (11 August 2012)

Julia said:


> The policy exists across all airlines.




You sound rather sure about that ? but not much actual proof ?




> While Virgin Australia was adamant that it was not alone in implementing such a policy, Qantas has not responded to repeated attempts to clarify its position from Fairfax Media today.
> 
> However, the BBC reported Qantas and Air New Zealand had a similar policy in 2005, after a businessman successfully sued British Airways on the grounds of sex discrimination after he was moved away from an unaccompanied child on a flight.*
> 
> Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/travel/tra...think-again-20120810-23y7q.html#ixzz23DKzdcUc


----------



## disarray (11 August 2012)

Bushman said:


> Then again, being a white anglo male, maybe it is karma that all this discrimination we have dished out over the millenium should now start to come back our way.




this is rubbish and there is no way we should be wearing some communal guilt for our society or its history.


----------



## Julia (11 August 2012)

numbercruncher said:


> You sound rather sure about that ? but not much actual proof ?



Before I put you on Ignore again, I will repeat that this was clearly stated by a spokesperson for the airline industry on ABC Radio National on Friday evening.
If you want to check, you can look up the ABC website.  It was on the "Drive" program.

And, before you start asking me for 'proof', perhaps consider that you need to have some basis for suggesting it's only Virgin that maintains this policy.

Too silly.


----------



## Julia (11 August 2012)

Bushman said:


> yep i would much rather a firefighter sit next to my kids than say a women who is childless and has no experience with children. Also the message is so mixed. This guy would be a hero if he goes and saves a child from an inferno but when he steps on a plane he is a 'potential pedo'?
> 
> Also the thinking behind this is so flawed; I would suggest that statistically speaking there would no chance that a professional male who has never committed a sexual assualt against a minor would suddenly and opportunistically offend in an airplane.
> 
> ...



Bushman, I understand how offensive it seems, and sympathise entirely with the poor bloke who was so insensitively asked to move.  The problem is not really with the policy per se, imo, but rather with the incompetence of the cabin crew, following the failure of the seating allocation system to discreetly ensure a female was sitting beside the children.

Isn't it reasonable for airlines to protect themselves against the remote possibility of something untoward occurring, as long as no one's feelings are hurt?
If you rock up to your flight and are allocated a seat between two other blokes, rather than beside two children, are you going to look round the plane and say to yourself :"oh goodness, there are two children over there with a woman sitting next to them who doesn't seem to be their mother:  I wonder why I'm not allocated the woman's seat?"

No, of course you're not.  Let's just allow the airlines to mitigate any potential problem as long as no one's feelings are hurt and chalk this one up to woeful incompetence on the part of Virgin on one occasion.
Hopefully the firefighter will be given a free flight somewhere and the apology due to him.


----------



## medicowallet (11 August 2012)

I am someone who has clearances in dealing with children.
I have dealings with children which by necessity are beyond what the ordinary person is permitted to do.

Would I be offended if a flight assistant asked me to move.. slightly.
Would I move without a concern.. certainly.

Why?

Because if MY children were unaccompanied on the flight, and I was entrusting the staff on the plane to provide them with a safe journey, I would expect them to do the same.  

However, I recognise that the sex of the adult should NOT make a difference, but unfortunately, the probability is probably in the favour of females being safer.

Remember at the end of the day, if ONE child is assaulted or feels threatened on a plane, unaccompanied, then that is one too many.

MW


----------



## DB008 (11 August 2012)

**Update on OT**

*Virgin review after 'pedophile' complaint - The Australian*



> VIRGIN Australia is rethinking its unaccompanied minors policy after a passenger claimed the airline treated him like a pedophile.
> 
> Johnny McGirr, a 33-year-old NSW firefighter, said he felt ashamed when a flight attendant asked him to move seats because men are banned from sitting next to unaccompanied children.
> 
> ...


----------



## tigerboi (12 August 2012)

medicowallet said:


> Would I be offended if a flight assistant asked me to move.. slightly.
> Would I move without a concern.. certainly.




not me at all i would of went absolutely ballastic...this man should take legal action asap...


----------



## Logique (12 August 2012)

Realistically,
who aside from their parents, actually wants to sit next to 8 year old kids on a plane? 

I have no problem with the Virgin policy, if implemented discreetly and professionally, which is the issue here. Virgin aren't dictating the wider society, they're just responding to the world as it is.

However that said, If I managed Virgin Airlines, I'd call in the cabin crew and ticketing staff to explain themselves, and it better be good if they want to keep their jobs.

There is no excuse for the way that firefighter was treated. At the very least, he deserves an apology and restitution from Virgin. Free flights for a year sounds about right.


----------



## Logique (12 August 2012)

These photos of her son and friends, were exhibited by a mother. 12 year old boys. No problem says the Fairfax press.



> Body of work sidesteps taboos -SMH  Aug 12 2012
> http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/art-and-design/body-of-work-sidesteps-taboos-20120811-2415p.html
> 
> When Ella Dreyfus exhibited photos of her son and members of his soccer team in 2005, she was surprised that some viewers were affronted by the images of 12-year-old boys naked from the chest up..


----------



## medicowallet (12 August 2012)

tigerboi said:


> not me at all i would of went absolutely ballastic...this man should take legal action asap...




Hence why it is not suitable for someone of your calibre to sit next to my kids.

What a great example that would be setting... quality

MW

I have no problem with you taking legal action, but to fire up is immature and irresponsible.


----------



## DB008 (12 August 2012)

You can't 'blow up/get aggressive' on a plane as you'll probably be escorted off and have the police question you.


----------



## tigerboi (13 August 2012)

medicowallet said:


> Hence why it is not suitable for someone of your calibre to sit next to my kids.
> 
> What a great example that would be setting... quality
> 
> ...




calibre yeah i know yours...just "slightly & certainly" when someone makes the worst inference against any man

so all you do is sure ah ok...go ahead  HUMILIATE ME IN FRONT OF ALL THE PASSENGERS AS TOO SUSPECT

TO SIT BESIDE 2 BOYS...sorry unlike you i wouldnt accept the total humiliation especially when ive done nothing wrong... but you go right ahead put your head down & hide...bet you got bashed up at school too...

tell you whats not suitable ...not showing any backbone for yourself...poor example to your kids id say NOT 

STICKING UP FOR YOURSELF...

MY CALIBRE i know its too much for someone of your small calibre...whats it like to be spineless??


----------



## Tink (13 August 2012)

Sadly, its the way of the world at the moment, and every day a new case is rearing its ugly head, aka Hey Dad.
I do understand why they have these policies, but I think they should have handled it better.
Rather than taking it personally, he should have asked for an explanation.

Very true MW, one case is one too many.


----------



## moXJO (13 August 2012)

medicowallet said:


> I am someone who has clearances in dealing with children.
> I have dealings with children which by necessity are beyond what the ordinary person is permitted to do.
> 
> Would I be offended if a flight assistant asked me to move.. slightly.
> ...




So by your theory I should suspect you of being a pedo due to being a man.


----------



## gav (13 August 2012)

medicowallet said:


> Remember at the end of the day, if ONE child is assaulted or feels threatened on a plane, unaccompanied, then that is one too many.
> 
> MW




And if someone OTHER THAN A MAN that assaults the child or makes them feel threatened?  

[video=youtube_share;Qh2sWSVRrmo]http://youtu.be/Qh2sWSVRrmo[/video]


----------



## Bushman (13 August 2012)

Tink said:


> Very true MW, one case is one too many.




Off course this is the case. Nobody on this forum would disagree. 

But in my view making a law abiding member of society feel like a 'pedo' simply because of their gender is an equal travesty. Unless there is clear statistical evidence that a previously law abiding individual would opportunisitically assualt a child on an airplane, then it is ridiculous to have moved the fireman. It is profiling and risk managment gone mad and it is resulting in a general erosion of a male's right (not to be humiliated, to the presumption of innocence etc) due to his gender alone! 

Also, where does child protection stop? What about car accidents and the awful and ongoing impacts on children? Where is the outcry, the moves not to have a child in a car as they could be injured or killed? There is not outcry because there is no hysteria. 

For those thinking Qantas is any better, there is a story out now about a male nurse who was treated the same way.


----------



## xyzedarteerf (13 August 2012)

this man should have agreed only if he was upgraded to Business Class and comp with unlimited refreshments.


----------



## JTLP (13 August 2012)

Simple - move the minors to a safer seat - and make up some lie about a better view - better ride or something


----------



## tinhat (13 August 2012)

JTLP said:


> Simple - move the minors to a safer seat - and make up some lie about a better view - better ride or something




Alternatively, stow unaccompanied minors in the cargo hold for their own safety.


----------



## wayneL (13 August 2012)

Perhaps we should remove any possible interaction between adult males and unaccompanied children? Would the alarmists be happy with that?

This would include teachers, doctors/male nurses, relatives (actually the most likely source of abuse), sports coaches, taxi drivers, bus drivers, your children's friend's parents... and the father FFS!!!

Of course one child abused is one child too many, but creating a dysfunctional dystopia in an attempt to remove risk... in the most absurdly improbable situations such as a crowded airliner is a bridge too f###ing far.

This is an outrage IMNTBCHO!


----------



## doctorj (13 August 2012)

So they have a policy of not allowing men to sit next to unaccompanied minors.  I wonder if they discriminate on gender in other aspects?  For example, male cabin crew who are physically more capable of protecting unaccompanied children or ensuring all pilots are male given its been statistically proven that a higher proportion of crashes involving female pilots are a result of pilot error than their male counterparts.

I for one support this policy wholeheartedly and hope the airline extends its policy of gender based discrimination to all aspects of its operation to ensure the highest possible safety for unaccompanied children. The fact that this airline only considers one small element of risk to unaccompanied children is unacceptable a sign they're just not taking it seriously.

Won't somebody think of the children?!


----------



## DB008 (14 August 2012)

Good thing that the other airline wasn't left out, would seem one sided. HA.

Qantas, your turn.

*Nurse 'humiliated' by Qantas policy*



> A nurse was made to feel as if he had a sign that read "kiddie fiddler" over his head after he was moved away from a young girl on a Qantas flight, he said.
> 
> Daniel McCluskie said he had a similar experience to a firefighter on a Virgin Australia flight when he was made to switch seats with a woman because he was sitting next to an unaccompanied child.
> 
> ...


----------



## cogs (14 August 2012)

Was this the same NSW fireman, while on a flight to spend 2 years cycling around europe to find his son who had been abducted by the mother?

I am not so sure why this particular story has created such interest, but I am glad it has been brought out in the open.

Check stats on the number of male teachers now and why there are so few, it's not because of the wages.

As a loving caring innocent father, this story pails into insignifigance when compared to mine being dragged through the biased family court system purely because of the power of a female comment and old beliefs of times gone by. I wont get into the false comments made, how I was destoryed and how my son was abused by the mother, needless to say any female or attendant on that flight could have made false accusations against that innocent man and he could have been entangled in the Australian legal and destroyed for life.

If it was the NSW fireman I am talking of he knows exactly what I mean.

It's all about safety of our children, but this is akin to no blacks next to whites.


----------



## bellenuit (14 August 2012)

There are some precedents being set here that are disturbing. For instance, should a man not be allowed enter a swimming pool if there are some children there and no other adults, or perhaps be forced to keep a certain distance from the kids when in the pool. Or even be asked to leave the pool if all other adults have exited.

I do not subscribe to the theory of children's safety above all other considerations, particularly when the potential for adult misbehaviour is low or even if possible, would be of a very minor nature that would perhaps go unnoticed by the child. Such improbable and perhaps insignificant misbehaviour could be far less damaging to the child than the message that child may be learning from the preventative policies. That all men are not to be trusted. That it is ok to humiliate a person just because that person is a man and is trust into a situation not of his choosing. What if the child were at some stage to be interfered with by a female adult and the only other person for the child to confide with were a male. The child might be so conditioned that it does not report the situation to the one person capable of protecting it.

Allowing a child to be exposed to some low level danger may in the long run be preferable to trying to ensure 100% security. Wrapping a child in cotton wool is no different in this situation than others such as not allowing the child to engage in active sports in case of injury.


----------



## DocK (14 August 2012)

A simple solution could be for airlines to employ "supervisors" for unattended minors (blue-carded and suitably scrutinised, naturally (and of either sex imo)) and to apply a levy on the ticket sales to such passengers to cover the cost.  As a parent I'd be happier knowing that a suitable adult would be with my child from arrival at airport to collection at the other end if I had to let them fly unaccompanied.  I'd prefer not to have any stranger, male or female, in a position to cause them any distress.  I was of the impression that kids on their own were supervised by the flight attendants, but this must be incorrect?


----------



## numbercruncher (14 August 2012)

Maybe airlines should ban minors travelling alone or supply child minders for a fee - who lets 8 and 10 year olds travel by themselves anyway ? Irresponsible parenting.


----------



## gav (14 August 2012)

wayneL said:


> Perhaps we should remove any possible interaction between adult males and unaccompanied children? Would the alarmists be happy with that?
> 
> This would include teachers, doctors/male nurses, *relatives (actually the most likely source of abuse)*, sports coaches, taxi drivers, bus drivers, your children's friend's parents... and the father FFS!!!




Oh, stop being so rational!


----------



## Julia (14 August 2012)

DocK said:


> A simple solution could be for airlines to employ "supervisors" for unattended minors (blue-carded and suitably scrutinised, naturally (and of either sex imo)) and to apply a levy on the ticket sales to such passengers to cover the cost.  As a parent I'd be happier knowing that a suitable adult would be with my child from arrival at airport to collection at the other end if I had to let them fly unaccompanied.  I'd prefer not to have any stranger, male or female, in a position to cause them any distress.  I was of the impression that kids on their own were supervised by the flight attendants, but this must be incorrect?



It's a long time since I worked for an airline, but what used to happen was this:

The parent/child minder brought the child to the check-in, having already reserved the seat for an unaccompanied child. 

 The ticketing clerk issued the boarding pass and at the same time notified the cabin crew who was that day on ground duty that the child was ready.

The ground staff member introduced herself to the child and looked after him/her until the boarding call.

She then took the child onto the aircraft and to the seat, giving him/her suitable reading material etc.
The cabin crew were always aware of how many unaccompanied children were on the flight and they were recorded separately on the preflight passenger count.

On landing, one member of the cabin crew personally took the child to meet the ground staff who had previously made contact with the person who was to collect them.

There was no additional charge made for this service.

It all worked perfectly well and the children were always given priority care and treatment.



numbercruncher said:


> Maybe airlines should ban minors travelling alone or supply child minders for a fee - who lets 8 and 10 year olds travel by themselves anyway ? Irresponsible parenting.



What rubbish.   See above.  I doubt any airline is going to let children just wander about an airport and out to an aircraft by themselves.
There are multiple reasons why it is sometimes necessary for children to fly without an accompanying parent/minder.   The airline staff usually more than adequately fill the role.


----------



## tinhat (14 August 2012)

numbercruncher said:


> who lets 8 and 10 year olds travel by themselves anyway ?




The Family Court of Australia does. One parent can take a child and move interstate or a long way from that child's usual home and enrol them in a new school at their new location. The other parent will need to go through the Family Court to seek recover orders. The legal process can take months if not years. In the mean time the Family Court may implement interim orders whereby the child needs to fly ever second weekend or so to visit their other parent.


----------



## Tink (15 August 2012)

Yes, I thought the same thing Dock, that the flight attendants would supervise the children.
This has probably been going on for years, and no one would know any different had the airline arranged the seating beforehand.


----------



## DocK (15 August 2012)

Lies, damn lies, and statistics.  The stats show that a paedophile is more likely to be male than female, therefore the airline/s have chosen to do what they can to reduce any possible cause of legal action against them - as is their right.  I agree with others who have stated that if the whole issue had been dealt with efficiently by the ticketing system then we'd all be none the wiser and no harm done.  Once it became apparent to cabin staff that a snafu had occurred, imo they should have either dealt with the incident in a far more tactful and discreet manner, or have left everyone where they were and simply supervised closely to cover their butts.  

I find myself feeling hypocritical on this issue, as while I certainly lament the lack of quality male teachers, nurses etc and would hate my young men-in-training to reach adulthood in a society that views men as dangerous predators, I also know that as a mother if asked whether I'd prefer my kids fly unaccompanied next to a man or a woman - without any prior knowledge of the actual man or woman I'd sit them next to a female due to those same statistics.  What a sad world it's become.....


----------



## disarray (15 August 2012)

DocK said:


> Lies, damn lies, and statistics.  The stats show that a paedophile is more likely to be male than female




it's not quite that clear cut ....

 Contact CSA (child sexual assault) was reported by 16% of males and 25% of females. *Men reported female perpetration of CSA nearly 40% of the time, and women reported female perpetration of CSA 6% of the time*

child sexual assault against boys counts too right? you can't just say "men are more likely to be paedophiles" as an excuse for discrimination and worse, demonisation. female sexual abuse of children is hardly acknowledged, let alone studied with the scrunity male perpetration.


----------



## Glen48 (16 August 2012)

last time I went back to OZ i arrived at 4 AM  and was pulled over by customs and had by bag X rayed every thing was emptied out and the bag X rayed again, for some reason there is a zip on the bottom which made the agents suspicious, my phone was taken and pocket search in my clothing, the agents came back several times open and closing the zipped I finally said charge me with some thing or let me go so at 5 AM I was allowed to leave and had missed my lift home.
As I was an aged male coming back from the Philippines I had to be a Pedo. in some ones eyes, I expect the same thing next trip.


----------



## bellenuit (16 August 2012)

Glen48 said:


> last time I went back to OZ i arrived at 4 AM  and was pulled over by customs and had by bag X rayed every thing was emptied out and the bag X rayed again, for some reason there is a zip on the bottom which made the agents suspicious, my phone was taken and pocket search in my clothing, the agents came back several times open and closing the zipped I finally said charge me with some thing or let me go so at 5 AM I was allowed to leave and had missed my lift home.
> As I was an aged male coming back from the Philippines I had to be a Pedo. in some ones eyes, I expect the same thing next trip.




You should be charged with only using one full stop in the first paragraph.


----------



## Glen48 (16 August 2012)

As well as starting a sentence in lower case.


----------

