Naked as a Jay Bird!

[Cass]

When pedos are caught they often reveal they have had hundreds of victims going decades back. Victims who were strangers, victims of opportunity.

 

[mkycrzy1971]

I'd disown any family member or friend who came across a nude picture of any child on a child porn site. Innocence isn't based on what other people have done with innocent pictures of you. Talk about blaming the victim. Did you notice the word "accidentally"???? I now for a fact that sometimes we stumble upon sites that we do not mean to when doing a search....I one time (when searching my last name) came across a posting on a message board from a distant relative searching for a sexual encounter from either sex!!! Can you believe he used his REAL name??? If someone takes a picture of you (as an adult, fully dressed) at a theme park, photoshops it onto a naked body that isn't yours and distributes it on a website that you never see - are you harmed? Do you protect yourself against that possibility? Sorry, I think you are taking this to a whole new level...that IS over the top.

And pedophiles don't need naked pictures of children for their purposes. A kid in a swim diaper. A kid in a too-small bathing suit. A kid in a too-large bathing suit. A kid in a bathing suit which fits well and is adult-styled. A kid in a princess dress. A kid who ran into the fountain in their clothes and got soaked. I've just snipped the way those kinds of pictures can be used because it's not fit for a family website. This we cannot avoid...but our children being vulnerable to predators while completley nude (in public)...yeah we can avoid that.

Now, that said, I'm trying really hard to teach my child that nudity isn't appropriate in all situations. Me too[/B]Going commando isn't appropriate in all situations, etc. But pedophiles are really far down on the list - and I spent a couple of years working for a group that does research into crimes against children.

See Bold, navy print for response...

 

[Freyja]

So you're saying you could leave your topless/panty clad kids at the beach and not worry about who was around?

How on earth did you reach that conclusion? Part of being a parent is worrying about the well being of your children. To be honest, I don´t worry any more or less about them when they are wearing panties instead of swimsuits to the beach. At their current ages I would never leave them alone at the beach anyway. By the time they reach the age to go to the beach alone I guess they won´t be skinny dipping. If they do, it will be their responsibility.

 

[Limmer]

I don't find a little kid playing naked offensive, nor would I make my kids stop playing with them.
Much more disturbing, IMO, was when I went into Zellers the other day and in the little girls section (sizes 4-10) were bras. Formed, padded bras. I have never met a 4 year old that needs a bra and even for those girls in size 10 that might need a bra, what mother in her right mind would buy her daughter a PADDED TRAINING BRA. I thought this was truly sick. What kind of a sicko comes up with the idea for a padded bra for a 4 year old?

 

[Freyja]

Actually this is completely wrong. The reason the victims are almost always targeted by family members or other trusted people is precisely because they are trusted and are far less likely to be caught/punished if they target somebody close. Some families cover up the dirty little secrets. Some simply refuse to believe that the trusted individual could do such a thing. "Successful" pedophiles are successful because they don't target strangers, who are likely to scream and yell or be watched over by their families in public places. Parents are usually on their guard to protect their kids at Disney. Maybe not so much when their kids are spending the day at Uncle Marty's house. (Apologies to people named Marty... I just needed a name for the hypothetical.)

Once again... that is not to say that kids are never victimized by strangers. They are. But this is so rare as to be newsworthy when it happens. Unfortunately, it's far more common amongst family members -- so much so that such cases aren't newsworthy.David

Plus that those cases are much less likely to get out in the first place. Most children are threatened and feel such shame that they keep silent about these horrible ordeals.

 

[Alesia]

I don't find a little kid playing naked offensive, nor would I make my kids stop playing with them.
Much more disturbing, IMO, was when I went into Zellers the other day and in the little girls section (sizes 4-10) were bras. Formed, padded bras. I have never met a 4 year old that needs a bra and even for those girls in size 10 that might need a bra, what mother in her right mind would buy her daughter a PADDED TRAINING BRA. I thought this was truly sick. What kind of a sicko comes up with the idea for a padded bra for a 4 year old?

WOW!!! That is disturbing

 

[Freyja]

WOW!!! That is disturbing

I agree! Now that is sexualization of a 4 year old! Sick!

 

[dqpowell]

When pedos are caught they often reveal they have had hundreds of victims going decades back. Victims who were strangers, victims of opportunity.

Can you provide some references for this? The cases in which this is true (hundreds of victims, going back decades) are always people in positions of trust -- not strangers. Pedophile priests being moved from parish to parish to cover up wrongdoing. Teachers. etc.

The fact is that complete strangers cannot possibly do the kind of thing you describe for "decades" and get away with it. Every time a child is abducted out of the blue by a complete stranger, it is newsworthy and massive searches are undertaken. Nobody could do that repeatedly and get away with it.

David

 

[Cass]

Off the top of my head the creep who molested the little girl at the Swan hotel in Disney recently (and was caught) had sexual offenses against children going back decades.

I am not going to spend my time looking up links for you, if you don't think a pedo will take advantage of a child they come across randomly, then I think you have your head in the sand. I am not talking about ritual molestation, like incest within a family - I'm talking about the pervs walking around who go for a feel or whatever, when they have a chance. Lesser crimes/sexual interference/touching that go unreported and/or not prosecuted because they are not as serious as rape.

 

[Freyja]

Off the top of my head the creep who molested the little girl at the Swan hotel in Disney recently (and was caught) had sexual offenses against children going back decades.

I am not going to spend my time looking up links for you, if you don't think a pedo will take advantage of a child they come across randomly, then I think you have your head in the sand. I am not talking about ritual molestation, like incest within a family - I'm talking about the pervs walking around who go for a feel or whatever, when they have a chance. Lesser crimes/sexual interference/touching that go unreported and/or not prosecuted because they are not as serious as rape.

I think the point that some of us are trying to make here is that a child is more likely to be assaulted/touched unapropriately at home than at Disney. Maybe you are sticking your head in the sand!

 

[Alesia]

Yes, sometimes terrible things happen, but how a child is dressed has nothing to do with being molested, just as how a woman is dressed has nothing to do with being raped.

 

[dqpowell]

If you don't think a pedo will take advantage of a child they come across randomly, then I think you have your head in the sand.

Again... I'm not saying NONE do this. I am saying such cases are rare, especially compared to the comparatively numerous instances of molestation by family members and other trusted individuals.

But just for the sake of argument, let's accept your assertion that molestation by strangers is common. Answer this, then: Do these perverts target only those whom they've seen naked in a fountain? Or is it simply the case that such pedophiles will target anybody, dressed or undressed?

We come back to the original point: Whatever the danger in a public place like Disney -- high or low -- do you really think the presence or lack of clothing on a toddler in a fountain will make any difference? The logical (and somewhat obvious) answer is "no." They will target those children that aren't closely watched, or that are wandering off alone. You said it yourself -- they are opportunists.

David

 

[Freyja]

Yes, sometimes terrible things happen, but how a child is dressed has nothing to do with being molested, just as how a woman is dressed has nothing to do with being raped.

Sadly, not everyone agrees.

 

[allyphoe]

Did you notice the word "accidentally"???? I now for a fact that sometimes we stumble upon sites that we do not mean to when doing a search....I one time (when searching my last name) came across a posting on a message board from a distant relative searching for a sexual encounter from either sex!!!

Count me as another who would disown a relative who claimed to have "accidentally" come across kiddie porn. Adult porn, sure - a slip of the finger will get you that. That's because adult porn is legal (and lucrative), and the best way to get you in the door is with an "accidental" freebie. Kiddie porn is mostly distributed privately (by email or login-required BBS) because giving out accidental freebies is the best way to end up in jail.

I one time (when searching my last name) came across a posting on a message board from a distant relative searching for a sexual encounter from either sex!!!

Oh, noes! I'm sorry you were traumatized by seeing text indicating that a distant relative might be bisexual / nonmonogamous / looking for love in all the wrong places, but that's not exactly the same as stumbling across proof of a felony. At least not since Lawrence v. Texas.

 

[alloyd1170]

When my almost 2 yr old daughter sees something she wants to try on in the stores, she completely strips (including her diaper). She puts up one heck of a fight to get her dressed again, and many times, I have to put the outfit she wants over the clothes shes wearing at the time!

 

[jenrose66]

Unless you are at a nudist beach clothes are to be worn in public, regardless of age. That poor little boy!

 

[mkycrzy1971]

The Mayo Clinic says you can contract HIV from urine? (I actually see a couple of studies touting a new urine test for HIV; they mention as an advantage that urine contains no infectious HIV.)

Not all bodily fluids are created equal. Most people's urine contains no infectious agents at all. You're much more likely to get sick from snot than from urine, and there are no "sneezing rooms" to ensure that most of it gets disposed of hygenically.

Not that I'd ever advocate peeing in any spot not specifically designed for it, including the privacy of my own backyard. (If anyone else wants to let their kids pee in their own backyards, not my problem!) But it's an "ick" issue, not a public health issue.

Yeah...I used to have the article saved but I had a computer crash and lost it...when i search google I come up with this http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=contract+aids+urine&FORM=MSNH
it is the second item down...the last sentence of the paragraph....the actual article is no longer attached to this search, but needless to say....mayo does say this as you can see for yourself...I have also attached some other links that indicate the said...

http://www.aproposinc.com/hap/catch.htm
http://familydoctor.org/online/famdocen/home/common/sexinfections/hiv/248.html

Maybe something has changed over that past several years and they no longer think it is possible...but according to the above links, it is possible...I am not sure, but to me a bodily fluid is a bodily fluid...snot...urine....blood/blood product...breast milk....etc...I am not taking a chance of letting my children play in someone's urine!!! And what if someone had blood in their urine?? Would YOU play in urine without any concerns anymore than you would play in a pool of blood??? I just know it is a "risk" that can be avoided....to think someone would think otherwise is truly disgusting in my opinion.

 

[dqpowell]

Unless you are at a nudist beach clothes are to be worn in public, regardless of age. That poor little boy!

You are well behind in the discussion. Many disagree with you about that, and the reasons why are strewn over the past 8 pages.

David

 

[mkycrzy1971]

Do you have any theories that support this? This definately does not fit the descriptions/studies of most pedofiles I´ve read about.

Check out the most recent case of a child being molested near the Swan pool...I think it was April 30, 2007...a real shame that some people prey on children!!

 

[Alesia]

Yeah...I used to have the article saved but I had a computer crash and lost it...when i search google I come up with this http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=contract+aids+urine&FORM=MSNH
it is the second item down...the last sentence of the paragraph....the actual article is no longer attached to this search, but needless to say....mayo does say this as you can see for yourself...I have also attached some other links that indicate the said...

http://www.aproposinc.com/hap/catch.htm
http://familydoctor.org/online/famdocen/home/common/sexinfections/hiv/248.html

Maybe something has changed over that past several years and they no longer think it is possible...but according to the above links, it is possible...I am not sure, but to me a bodily fluid is a bodily fluid...snot...urine....blood/blood product...breast milk....etc...I am not taking a chance of letting my children play in someone's urine!!! And what if someone had blood in their urine?? Would YOU play in urine without any concerns anymore than you would play in a pool of blood??? I just know it is a "risk" that can be avoided....to think someone would think otherwise is truly disgusting in my opinion.

The AIDS virus dies immediately after leaving the body