Would you have said anything to the creepy guy?

[princessmom29]

I think your last paragraph is to the extreme. Somehow a man singing I wish they all could be little girls and thinking he is probably some kind of creep, isn't the same as hanging a black man or thinking everyone is a communist.

actually it is. You are making an assumption about someone's motivation without any real evidence, jumping to conclusion based on one and only one thing. It is exactly the same as assuming someone's skin color makes them dangerous, or because they went to one function or event they ar ecommunist. Prejudice is prejudice, some forms just seem to be more socially acceptable these days.

 

[LuvOrlando]

I have seen some bizarre stuff on here before but this thread has got to take the cake.

I do not accept that everyone out there is the world should be free of criticism &/or blame because if anyone act inappropriately he/she must, by default, suffer from some form of diagnosis which absolves them of accountability. I also do not accept that its ok to beat people up verbally who do not adopt this malformed distortion of what it is to be tolerant.

 

[princessmom29]

I have seen some bizarre stuff on here before but this thread has got to take the cake.

I do not accept that everyone out there is the world should be free of criticism &/or blame because if anyone act inappropriately he/she must, by default, suffer from some form of diagnosis which absolves them of accountability. I also do not accept that its ok to beat people up verbally who do not adopt this malformed distortion of what it is to be tolerant.

no one here is saying that, at least not that I see, just that perhaps "this guy is a weirdo predator" is not the ONLY possible explination for his behavior, and we really shouldn't be jumping to any conclusions, calling the cops, or labeling people at all without more information. Being "creeped out" by someone's actions and choosing to avoiod them is one thing, but actually confronting them about it based on about 30 seconds of knowledge when they did not approach or try to lure your child is, IMO, being hyperreactive and prejudical to someone who you have no clue about. If it bothers you, walk away, but I don't think being "creeped out" gives anyone the right to confront someone and accuse them of being a predator.

 

[NHdisneylover]

I have seen some bizarre stuff on here before but this thread has got to take the cake.

I do not accept that everyone out there is the world should be free of criticism &/or blame because if anyone act inappropriately he/she must, by default, suffer from some form of diagnosis which absolves them of accountability. I also do not accept that its ok to beat people up verbally who do not adopt this malformed distortion of what it is to be tolerant.

Nothing about the interaction as described by the OP causes me to think that the man has any sort of mental illness or diagnosis of any kind--NOR does it strike me as even remotely predator like. I think jumping to either conclusion is silly at best and really cruel or dangerous at worst--and jumping to the predator conclusion is certainly the worst of the two.

How about, this was a normal guy, he said hi and then turned around and amused himself singing under his breath and when the OP said "dude" and gave him a dirty look stopped because he assuemd SOMETHING he was doing bothered the OP (probably the fact that he was singing in general--who would assume it had to do with what the y were singing?). That is all I see--a guy who said hello and then when on his way minding his own bussiness. I guess I do think that people who are minding their own business and not disturbing anyone should be pretty free of criticism. Is that so wrong?

 

[Carly_Roach]

I have seen some bizarre stuff on here before but this thread has got to take the cake.

I do not accept that everyone out there is the world should be free of criticism &/or blame because if anyone act inappropriately he/she must, by default, suffer from some form of diagnosis which absolves them of accountability. I also do not accept that its ok to beat people up verbally who do not adopt this malformed distortion of what it is to be tolerant.

I didn't think it was possible to verbally beat someone up. But now that I've heard the phrase, I think I have a better understanding into the mindset of how some can allow a verbal exchange with strangers to be something they choose to dwell on for the rest of their lives.

Personally, I'm against using terms for things they're not appropriate to. An assault is a physical attack by someone who appears to be able to cause bodily harm if not stopped. I don't accept that there is such a thing as a verbal assault and I think it's wrong for people to twist the word "assault" like that. To do so robs the word of it's meaning and impact for the sake of drama.

 

[Magpie]

The problem with giving people a pass for trusting their instincts is that some people's instincts are so whacked that they can't be trusted. Look at the parents who don't let their children out of their sight - they're trusting their instincts. Look at the men who get accused of being potential child molesters when all they did was take a strange child's hand to cross the street or take a job as a mall Santa Clause. They're accused by people who seem to get a pass from society because they invoked the, "I'm a parent who's trusting my instinct" clause.

Funny how the woman who drowns her children doesn't get a pass when her instincts tell her the end of the world is near and she wants to save her children from the horrible death her instincts have told her is sure to happen. Better that they die her way rather than being burned alive or run through with spears. She has an instinct, too. She likely saw herself as making the ultimate sacrifice for the love of her children, yet we call her crazy (or worse) and throw her in jail.

I'm all for following your instincts. Following our instincts has kept us out of trouble and away from harm since the beginning of man. By all means, trust your instincts that tell you to remove yourself, and your children, from the situation. However, I stop relying on other people's instincts when someone makes a serious charge against another human being based soley on personal opinion, which can be skewed and/or biased.

60 years ago that line of reasoning got many black men hung in the South and fed McCarthyism in the Senate when people were accused of having Communist tendencies simply because they acted or spoke differently. You'd think we'd have learned by now that witch hunts are bad.

I love you!

(But only in the most platonic, Dis-appropriate, non-threatening kind of way. )

This comment is so over the top. You were not there-he could have JUST been singing. Really, people sing all the time in stores. He also may have been mentally handicapped-this could be an another explanation.

Op, are you a man? Sorry, but if you are, over reacation on your part. Not everyone is out to get your little girls. My husband wouldn't have batted an eye. I might have found him amusing but nothing else.

To be fair, I don't think the OP over-reacted *in the moment*. Whether intentionally or not, the man ahead of him in line triggered the OP's parental instincts. The OP did what any big dog (or Papa Bear) does when he senses a threat to his family - he barked. The man backed down and the OP let him go.

I respect parental instincts. But I think it's important not to over-analyze them.

Example: My husband ran outside metaphorically "barking" the other day when he spotted a man walking into our backyard. Turns out the fellow was a meter reader - who is legally required to ask permission before he strolls onto our property. My husband chased him off. End of incident. We did not sit around afterward imagining scenarios in which the meter reader was actually an ax murderer in disguise casing our house for an invasion. What good would that have done us?

I have seen some bizarre stuff on here before but this thread has got to take the cake.

I do not accept that everyone out there is the world should be free of criticism &/or blame because if anyone act inappropriately he/she must, by default, suffer from some form of diagnosis which absolves them of accountability. I also do not accept that its ok to beat people up verbally who do not adopt this malformed distortion of what it is to be tolerant.

"Verbally beat up..." is that how you feel when people disagree with you, and debate you point by point?

I can definitely see the parallel between a physical fight and an intellectual debate. But by posting on a board like this, I think you are voluntarily stepping into the octagon (even if it's sometimes a very nice, supportive, cushy octagon with lots of hugs).

You don't have to try to "win" every fight. You can always refuse to debate the issue. You can say, "I'm going to agree to disagree." You can also set your own standards and refuse to engage with people who don't fight by your rules.

Me, I don't ever consider someone stepping up and challenging my beliefs an assault on me. I consider it an invitation to a rumble.

 

[IdesOmarch]

You should have tazed him.