British "peedo" paranoia vs. normal foreign people

British "peedo" paranoia vs. normal foreign people

Author
Discussion

Orb the Impaler

Original Poster:

1,881 posts

197 months

Saturday 21st March 2009
quotequote all
Prompted to post this by the "how to remove my house from Google streetview cos peedos will use it" thread...

Obviously according to the Daily Mail and thick people everywhere who are unable to assess risk using their own brain, there are paedophiles on every street corner of the UK, fondling paper delivery boys and getting a lob on at the sight of your baby daughter. Or not. Probably. Never mind, gives thick, shaven headed blokes off council estates an excuse to thump someone, eh? rolleyes

When you go skiing in Europe and you need to get a chairlift up a slope and there is a foreign ski-school with trillions of little be-helmeted four year olds to get up there as well, what they do is when you get on the chair they bung one of these little kids on the lift with you for you to look after til they get off. It struck me that this would simply not be possible in the UK what with paedo hysteria and people so precious about your offspring. You'd need a CRB check before you could ski. Instead I felt perfectly at ease talking to the kids as we went up the lift, something I wouldn't be at all comfortable with in the UK.

This is I think a manifestation of the hysteria and utter nonsense that is going on in the UK. Why can French/Spanish etc have this approach? I suspect that the ratio of child molesters over there is similar to our own - it just proves what a bit of press hysteria and mob mentality can do. Quite sad really.

Mr_annie_vxr

9,270 posts

218 months

Saturday 21st March 2009
quotequote all
Vast majority of abused children are abused by relatives.

Chances of a stranger doing it are tiny.

randomman

2,215 posts

196 months

Saturday 21st March 2009
quotequote all
There are three main causes to Peado hysteria:






And definately top of the 'OH MY GOD WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE' list:



Remove all three of them (or just the third one) and people will start to realise there isn't a 114% chance of you being taxed, raped, forced to give birth, be burgled, stabbed, shot, mugged and then have you kid taken by a peado all in the same afternoon.

Orb the Impaler

Original Poster:

1,881 posts

197 months

Saturday 21st March 2009
quotequote all
My grandma gets the Daily Wail and I usually have a read when I visit - fair makes my blood boil. What a load of old b0llocks!

jshell

11,344 posts

212 months

Saturday 21st March 2009
quotequote all
Orb the Impaler said:
My grandma gets the Daily Wail and I usually have a read when I visit - fair makes my blood boil. What a load of old b0llocks!
Mission achieved then!

audidoody

8,597 posts

263 months

Saturday 21st March 2009
quotequote all
Worried about the kids? Here's a checklist:
Asthma
die swalund (german disease)
Candidiasis ("Thrush")
Chagas disease
Chickenpox
Croup
Cystic Fibrosis
Cytomegalovirus (the virus most frequently transmitted before birth)
Diabetes
Duchenne muscular dystrophy
Fifth disease
Influenza
Leukemia
Measles
Mumps
Rheumatic fever
Roseola
Rubella
Sever's disease
Tetanus
Whooping cough
Hepatitis A

anonymous-user

61 months

Saturday 21st March 2009
quotequote all
audidoody said:
Worried about the kids? Here's a checklist:
Asthma
die swalund (german disease)
Candidiasis ("Thrush")
Chagas disease
Chickenpox
Croup
Cystic Fibrosis
Cytomegalovirus (the virus most frequently transmitted before birth)
Diabetes
Duchenne muscular dystrophy
Fifth disease
Influenza
Leukemia
Measles
Mumps
Rheumatic fever
Roseola
Rubella
Sever's disease
Tetanus
Whooping cough
Hepatitis A
Google street view
Foreigners
Global Warming
Going outside
Boyfriends/Girlfriends
No boyfriends/girlfriends
Dangerous Dogs

hehe

kaese

727 posts

194 months

Saturday 21st March 2009
quotequote all
Anyone remember Bird-flu? hehe

bluetone

2,047 posts

226 months

Saturday 21st March 2009
quotequote all
Yes of course these papers are a wind-up but the old adage that "the public gets what the public wants" and that this paranoid/hysterical/jingoistic rubbish sells papers is maybe more a reflection of (a sizeable proportion of) the British psyche than anything else?

Ozzie Osmond

21,189 posts

253 months

Saturday 21st March 2009
quotequote all
Mr_annie_vxr said:
Vast majority of abused children are abused by relatives.

Chances of a stranger doing it are tiny.
Very, very true.

UK really needs to get to work and move away from the current state of play where kids are taught to be scared of adults and adults are increasingly frightened of kids/teenagers. Makes no sense at all.

Also the UK idea that kids shouldn't touch alcohol at 17 but can suddenly start drinking on their 18th birthday is plain crazy.

thinfourth2

32,414 posts

211 months

Saturday 21st March 2009
quotequote all
Sadly we live in a country full of morons and i would not be shocked if big cameras were made illegal as they are only used by PEADOS and TERRORISTS

Maybe we should rename the phototgraphy and video forum the perverts and nutters forum?

randomman

2,215 posts

196 months

Saturday 21st March 2009
quotequote all
thinfourth2 said:
Sadly we live in a country full of morons and i would not be shocked if big cameras were made illegal as they are only used by PEADOS and TERRORISTS

Maybe we should rename the phototgraphy and video forum the perverts and nutters forum?
Don't worry mate, the rest of us already have hehe

paulmurr

4,203 posts

219 months

Saturday 21st March 2009
quotequote all
What the Daily Mail should do is to run a campaign against paedos by banning children altogether.


Hammerwerfer

3,234 posts

247 months

Saturday 21st March 2009
quotequote all
I am involved in athletics and have been for my entire life. If you read the guidelines for coaching younger boys and girls, it is quite obvious that coaches are now viewed as dangerous deviants.

I know of one teacher who was falsely accused of molesting some lads. He went through hell.

The kids know the game now, and can absolutely terrorise their gym teachers in particular.

On the other hadn, I had just moved into my village in Germany and was working in the yard when a woman asked me to minde her 4 year old son for a few hours. Seesm there was some sort of emergency and she had to rush off.

I felt a bit uneasy at first, but then began to appreciate village life where everyone looks after everyone else.

A bit like the ski lift example mentioned earlier. It just makes sense.

collateral

7,238 posts

225 months

Monday 23rd March 2009
quotequote all
Bump.

Ps. THINK OF THE CHILDREN OMGWTF

him_over_there

970 posts

213 months

Monday 23rd March 2009
quotequote all
Interesting how people can't assess risk at all isn't it.

Take a parent who drives their kid to school, one of the arguments of driving the kid to school as opposed to letting them walk will probably come down to a fear of them being abducted. However they greatly increase their risk of harm by sticking them in a fast moving metal box beside other fast moving metal boxes. An activity that kills ~3000 people a year.

They would be much safer letting them walk places. However driving them makes the parent feel better. So that begs the questions, if it's generally safer to walk than drive, are the parents doing it not to make the children safer, but to make them feel better. Even if it is a false feeling of safety ?

There was also an interesting article on Bruce Schneiers site the other week about children talking to strangers.

schneier said:
When I was growing up, children were commonly taught: "don't talk to strangers." Strangers might be bad, we were told, so it's prudent to steer clear of them.

And yet most people are honest, kind, and generous, especially when someone asks them for help. If a small child is in trouble, the smartest thing he can do is find a nice-looking stranger and talk to him.

These two pieces of advice may seem to contradict each other, but they don't. The difference is that in the second instance, the child is choosing which stranger to talk to. Given that the overwhelming majority of people will help, the child is likely to get help if he chooses a random stranger. But if a stranger comes up to a child and talks to him or her, it's not a random choice. It's more likely, although still unlikely, that the stranger is up to no good.

As a species, we tend help each other, and a surprising amount of our security and safety comes from the kindness of strangers. During disasters: floods, earthquakes, hurricanes, bridge collapses. In times of personal tragedy. And even in normal times.

...
...
Edited by him_over_there on Monday 23 March 12:34

Marf

22,907 posts

248 months

Monday 23rd March 2009
quotequote all

zcacogp

11,239 posts

251 months

Monday 23rd March 2009
quotequote all
I recall last time I was in France, in a shopping centre, watching a small scene unfold. Small child (aged 3-ish) was lost, and in tears, looking for Mama and Papa.

(Male) Stranger comes along, asks kid if he is OK, hears story, so picks up kid and hugs him. Looks around for possible parent, and spies Mama about 40 feet away looking for kid.

Stranger waves at Mama, Mama rushes over and takes kid off stranger and says 'Thank You'. Stranger says 'No Problem'. Both go on their seperate ways.

Utterly normal. Not an eyebrow raised. Kid is reunited with Mama quickly and efficiently, helped by Stranger. All is well with the world.

Until I realise that I am staring open-mouthed at this, and there is another British couple also watching, making 'Tut Tut' noises.

I was ashamed to be British.


Oli.

mouseymousey

2,641 posts

244 months

Monday 23rd March 2009
quotequote all
him_over_there said:
Interesting how people can't assess risk at all isn't it.

Take a parent who drives their kid to school, one of the arguments of driving the kid to school as opposed to letting them walk will probably come down to a fear of them being abducted. However they greatly increase their risk of harm by sticking them in a fast moving metal box beside other fast moving metal boxes. An activity that kills ~3000 people a year.

They would be much safer letting them walk places. However driving them makes the parent feel better. So that begs the questions, if it's generally safer to walk than drive, are the parents doing it not to make the children safer, but to make them feel better. Even if it is a false feeling of safety ?

There was also an interesting article on Bruce Schneiers site the other week about children talking to strangers.

schneier said:
When I was growing up, children were commonly taught: "don't talk to strangers." Strangers might be bad, we were told, so it's prudent to steer clear of them.

And yet most people are honest, kind, and generous, especially when someone asks them for help. If a small child is in trouble, the smartest thing he can do is find a nice-looking stranger and talk to him.

These two pieces of advice may seem to contradict each other, but they don't. The difference is that in the second instance, the child is choosing which stranger to talk to. Given that the overwhelming majority of people will help, the child is likely to get help if he chooses a random stranger. But if a stranger comes up to a child and talks to him or her, it's not a random choice. It's more likely, although still unlikely, that the stranger is up to no good.

As a species, we tend help each other, and a surprising amount of our security and safety comes from the kindness of strangers. During disasters: floods, earthquakes, hurricanes, bridge collapses. In times of personal tragedy. And even in normal times.

...
...
Edited by him_over_there on Monday 23 March 12:34
Very interesting, and yes you're right, it's all about assessing risk and unfortunately because people remember the news stories about abductions and pedos that influences their assessment.


Dizi

1,053 posts

196 months

Monday 23rd March 2009
quotequote all
I don't know if anyone listens to Scroobius Pip?

"thou shalt not think every man over the age of 30 is a peodaphile, some people are just nice"

Edited by Dizi on Monday 23 March 12:56