Recommend
3 
 Thumb up
 Hide
194 Posts
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [8] | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: All Men Are Potential Pedophiles rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
fightcitymayor
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
"This is a really weird game, and you’ll find that most people will not want to play this."
Avatar
mb
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2012/08/all-men-are-po...

Remind me to wear my Penn State hoodie next time I fly to Australia.

The Atlantic wrote:
Are all men potential pedophiles? If you're a passenger on a Qantas Airways or Virgin Australia flight, the answer is yes, as both airlines have policies forbidding adult men from sitting next to unaccompanied minors. Dismayed at being so negatively stereotyped, men are speaking out down under to protest this profiling. Daniel McCluskie, the second 30-something man in a week to come forward, told The Age, "It seemed I had this sign I couldn't see above my head that said 'child molester' or 'kiddie fiddler.'"

The winter (for them) media sensation started last week with Johnny McGirr, a 33-year-old firefighter, whose experience on a Virgin Australian flight sparked national outrage, The Australian reported. McGirr was sitting by two boys on a one-hour flight when a stewardess asked him whether he was in the right seat, McGirr wrote in a blog post. He explained that he had let one of the boys take the window seat. But right before the flight took off, the stewardess returned and asked McGirr to switch seats with a young woman. She explained that McGirr "wasn't allowed to sit next to children," McGirr wrote.

"I was red from embarrassment," he said. "I felt like I was being judged and found guilty of a crime I hadn’t committed."

McGirr complained. Virgin told him was a company policy, and "that they had incidents of children being interfered with before and they were all men." But bad publicity and cries of discrimination led the airline to announce that it would review the policy: "Our intention is certainly not to discriminate in any way."

Qantas' response to McCluskie's complaint has been less flexible. It's continued to defend moving men away from unaccompanied children, saying other airlines share the policy. (At least Virgin Australia, Qantas, Jetstar, and Air New Zealand do. Virgin Australia is separate from Virgin America, but the both are part of the Virgin Group.)

Unfortunately for McCluskie and other grown men flying Qantas, public outrage probably isn't enough to deter the company, which in 2005 received press for asking another 30-something man to move seats. To get anywhere, McGirr and McCluskie may just have to sue. In 2010, a man flying on British Airways said he was treated like a potential "child molester" when he was sitting by an unaccompanied boy. The 35-year-old Mirko Fischer then won £2,911 in costs and damages, or more than $4,500, and BA admitted to sex discrimination.

Of course, Australians are not the only ones who must face the messy issue of how to deal with older men. Here in the states this past summer, a 73-year-old man in an Arizona got kicked out of Barnes & Noble for being in the kid's section without a kid. His crime? Wanting to buy books for his toddler grandsons.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Snowball
Belgium
n/a
flag msg tools
badge
Gender: pot*ato. My opinion is an opinion.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Especially men like me who don't have a facebook account.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
HavocIsHere wrote:
Especially men like me who don't have a facebook account.

You freak!
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alaren
United States
flag msg tools
Turtle Power
badge
all the way down
Avatar
mb
HavocIsHere wrote:
Especially men like me who don't have a facebook account.


I'm so tired of the alarmist lies constantly being spread here in RSP. You people are shameless.

People who don't have Facebook accounts are not "potential pedophiles." They are probably just mass murderers.
22 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Rowse
New Zealand
Wellington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If all the recorded incidents of adults interfering with unaccompanied minors have been committed by men, it seems pretty sensible to have a policy that prevents men from sitting next to unaccompanied minors. It's not like it actually makes a difference to passengers if implemented with any competence - they won't know that the ticketing computer has ensured that only women are sitting next to kids.

Does it suck? Yes. But when an airline has an opportunity to implement a costless strategy that decreases in-flight child molestation by 100% (even if the risk was already tiny), I expect them to do so.

Kicking a man out of a bookstore for browsing the children's area without a child is a completely different situation.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
My wife told me about this case. I think saying, "This man isn't allowed to sit next to children" was an incredibly stupid thing to say, but I'm not sure that the policy itself is unreasonable. Like it or not, men are vastly more likely to commit sexual abuse than women are. Airlines are naturally risk averse about kids on their planes and aren't able to supervise them.

I can see why some people are offended by it but I wouldn't be.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Snowball
Belgium
n/a
flag msg tools
badge
Gender: pot*ato. My opinion is an opinion.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Chad_Ellis wrote:
My wife told me about this case. I think saying, "This man isn't allowed to sit next to children" was an incredibly stupid thing to say, but I'm not sure that the policy itself is unreasonable. Like it or not, men are vastly more likely to commit sexual abuse than women are. Airlines are naturally risk averse about kids on their planes and aren't able to supervise them.

I can see why some people are offended by it but I wouldn't be.


Homo homini lupus est. Men are also more likely to be terrorists than women, ergo men should not be allowed at all in airplanes. That would solve the pedophily issue too.
21 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave G
United States
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
El Chupacabratwurst
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Chad_Ellis wrote:
My wife told me about this case. I think saying, "This man isn't allowed to sit next to children" was an incredibly stupid thing to say, but I'm not sure that the policy itself is unreasonable. Like it or not, men are vastly more likely to commit sexual abuse than women are. Airlines are naturally risk averse about kids on their planes and aren't able to supervise them.

I can see why some people are offended by it but I wouldn't be.


I'm not offended by the policy per se, but I would be pretty pissed if I was the guy on the plane being shuffled off to another seat in front of the rest of the passengers like I just whipped it out and laid it on the tray table in front of someone's kids.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave G
United States
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
El Chupacabratwurst
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Alaren wrote:


Chad_Ellis wrote:
I can see why some people are offended by it but I wouldn't be.


I don't think it's offensive so much as another symptom of the way our culture ignores and tolerates blatant misandry because it is inconvenient to "male privilege" dialogue.


This, on the other hand, is utter horseshit. Sorry Ken. And we'd been getting along so well…
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damian
United States
Enfield
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
Air France used to have a policy of not seating unaccompanied minors next to any adults. They had an incident where the plane lost cabin pressure and two unaccompanied minors could not reach the oxygen masks.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I wouldn't raise a stink about it provided they upgraded me to first class. But with the way airlines(in the US) at least now price your tickets very specifically on where you sit, there is no other way I'd move without a scene. They can move the kid if they have a problem with it.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Rowse
New Zealand
Wellington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Alaren wrote:
Chad_Ellis wrote:
...men are vastly more likely to commit sexual abuse than women are.


And someone who knows the child is vastly more likely to commit sexual abuse than someone who doesn't. By this logic, children should not be allowed to sit with people they know.


Citation please. Specifically, one that compares sexual abuses committed on an aircraft - because it sounds like you're comparing apples and oranges. Abuse in the home is more prevalent than stranger abuse partly because of the vast difference in opportunity.

Quote:
Chad_Ellis wrote:
Airlines are naturally risk averse about kids on their planes and aren't able to supervise them.


But not so risk averse as to turn away unsupervised children, apparently.


Having a seating policy that prevents children sitting next to men is costless, because they can just rearrange the seating (and if they're any good at it, nobody should know it happened). Turning away passengers is not costless.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kelsey Rinella
United States
Rochester
New York
flag msg tools
I am proud to have opposed those who describe all who oppose them as "Tender Flowers" and "Special Snowflakes".
badge
Check out Stately Play for news and reviews of games worth thinking about.
Avatar
mbmb
I think I'd rather be the guy who got moved away from the kid than the woman who got stuck moving there.

That said, Ken and I are in a position which, perhaps, Dave is not well-placed to be empathetic towards. Stay-at-home dads can get some pretty creepy vibes from moms, and having the attitude that we're weird and dangerous written into policy kind of sucks.
26 
 Thumb up
1.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J
United States
Hawaii
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
KAndrw wrote:
If all the recorded incidents of adults interfering with unaccompanied minors have been committed by men, it seems pretty sensible to have a policy that prevents men from sitting next to unaccompanied minors.

False.

Or do I have to specify which logical fallacy you're using?
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Rowse
New Zealand
Wellington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jarredscott78 wrote:
KAndrw wrote:
If all the recorded incidents of adults interfering with unaccompanied minors have been committed by men, it seems pretty sensible to have a policy that prevents men from sitting next to unaccompanied minors.

False.

Or do I have to specify which logical fallacy you're using?


Yes, you have to specify which logical fallacy you think I'm using.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
"that's a smith and wesson, and you've had your six"
Avatar
mbmbmb
Apparently, it's a highly profitable policy. If they use it against you, you sue them for discrimination. Make money.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls

Eugene
Oregon
msg tools
Avatar
mb
Money to buy kiddie porn!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damian
United States
Enfield
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
KAndrw wrote:
jarredscott78 wrote:
KAndrw wrote:
If all the recorded incidents of adults interfering with unaccompanied minors have been committed by men, it seems pretty sensible to have a policy that prevents men from sitting next to unaccompanied minors.

False.

Or do I have to specify which logical fallacy you're using?


Yes, you have to specify which logical fallacy you think I'm using.

Inductive generalization (biased sample). You are assuming that "recorded incidents" form either the majority of incidents or at least a statistically valid sample of incidents. You have no way of knowing either of those things.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Alaren wrote:
Chad_Ellis wrote:
...men are vastly more likely to commit sexual abuse than women are.


And someone who knows the child is vastly more likely to commit sexual abuse than someone who doesn't. By this logic, children should not be allowed to sit with people they know.


I don't think either the facts or the logic support your post.

Let's start with the "knows the child" claim. For kids, about 70% of abuse cases are from someone known to them or to their family. When you adjust for opportunity, however, this doesn't translate to "more likely" let alone "vastly" more likely. The "known" stat includes family, friends, teachers, babysitters, childcare providers, etc.

Essentially, the campaign to alert people that child abuse most commonly happens with a non-stranger is useful because it makes parents realize that they may be assuming abuse is impossible in situations where it isn't. Unfortunately, people frequently misunderstand the implications of the data to conclude that leaving their child in the care of a random adult is safer than someone known to them.

Then there's the logic. To conclude that "let's only seat women next to unaccompanied minors since women are less likely to abuse children than men are" implies "let's always sit children next to whatever person is statistically less likely to abuse them" is flawed. You're essentially saying that because a rule is applied in one case it must be applied in all possible cases with no other factors being considered. An obvious factor is that if a child is accompanied by an adult that the parents have selected then parental decision rights are in play. I certainly place those rights over a the statistical difference of "very unlikely" vs. "very, very unlikely".


Quote:
Chad_Ellis wrote:
Airlines are naturally risk averse about kids on their planes and aren't able to supervise them.


But not so risk averse as to turn away unsupervised children, apparently.


Correct. So?

Quote:
Chad_Ellis wrote:
I can see why some people are offended by it but I wouldn't be.


I don't think it's offensive so much as another symptom of the way our culture ignores and tolerates blatant misandry because it is inconvenient to "male privilege" dialogue.


I don't see it as either misandry or anything to do with "male privilege". I'm probably biased in this discussion because my wife's job used to involve working with children who had been sexually abused. She is very cautious about who our kids are alone with and the rules are absolutely different for men and for women. She doesn't have anything against men; she's just aware that while the risk is very small that any given person would abuse a child the risk is much smaller with a woman than a man.
5 
 Thumb up
0.06
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Rowse
New Zealand
Wellington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
damiangerous wrote:
KAndrw wrote:
jarredscott78 wrote:
KAndrw wrote:
If all the recorded incidents of adults interfering with unaccompanied minors have been committed by men, it seems pretty sensible to have a policy that prevents men from sitting next to unaccompanied minors.

False.

Or do I have to specify which logical fallacy you're using?


Yes, you have to specify which logical fallacy you think I'm using.

Inductive generalization (biased sample). You are assuming that "recorded incidents" form either the majority of incidents or at least a statistically valid sample of incidents. You have no way of knowing either of those things.


I am assuming that the incidents that cause people to get upset are the ones that reported, and that the rep wass telling the truth when they said "that they had incidents of children being interfered with before and they were all men."

I would agree that the statistical significance has probably not been established, so a policy that removed men from flights with unaccompanied minors would be unacceptable. You'd need conclusive proof for something like that. OTOH, a seating policy that people should never notice happening is a minor thing. The potential gain (as suggested by the claimed data trend) justifies the (practically zero) cost.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Schaeffer
United States
Unspecified
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
KAndrw wrote:
Alaren wrote:
Chad_Ellis wrote:
...men are vastly more likely to commit sexual abuse than women are.


And someone who knows the child is vastly more likely to commit sexual abuse than someone who doesn't. By this logic, children should not be allowed to sit with people they know.


Citation please. Specifically, one that compares sexual abuses committed on an aircraft - because it sounds like you're comparing apples and oranges. Abuse in the home is more prevalent than stranger abuse partly because of the vast difference in opportunity.


Really? That's the universe from which you want to draw samples? Because from a quick Google search, I can't find any instances of reported sexual abuse of a minor on an airplane. The only stories I can find about sexual abuse at all on an airplane were about a guy who sexually assaulted a female passenger sleeping with a blanket over her next to him. So I guess with a sample size of 1, we can say definitively that 100% of sexual abuse on planes is perpetrated by men.

The good news is that we can also say that 100% of airplane sexual abuse is perpetrated by men from New Jersey named Ramesh Advani, that it only happens on Continental Airlines (now, technically, United Airlines), and only on the Hong Kong-Newark route.
25 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave G
United States
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
El Chupacabratwurst
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rinelk wrote:
I think I'd rather be the guy who got moved away from the kid than the woman who got stuck moving there.

That said, Ken and I are in a position which, perhaps, Dave is not well-placed to be empathetic towards. Stay-at-home dads can get some pretty creepy vibes from moms, and having the attitude that we're weird and dangerous written into policy kind of sucks.


It was the leap in logic to "misandry and male privilege" that I took issue with. I do sympathize with your plight on being a stay-at-home dad. I helped some friends out by taking their kids to their karate lesson because one of the parents was out of town on business, and I got some seriously weird looks from the other parents. I don't think it was misandry, though. That's just silly.
1 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
damiangerous wrote:
KAndrw wrote:
jarredscott78 wrote:
KAndrw wrote:
If all the recorded incidents of adults interfering with unaccompanied minors have been committed by men, it seems pretty sensible to have a policy that prevents men from sitting next to unaccompanied minors.

False.

Or do I have to specify which logical fallacy you're using?


Yes, you have to specify which logical fallacy you think I'm using.

Inductive generalization (biased sample). You are assuming that "recorded incidents" form either the majority of incidents or at least a statistically valid sample of incidents. You have no way of knowing either of those things.


Horeshit.

OK, maybe a more detailed answer is necessary. When a survey of 2,420 kids from 26 different schools and ranging in age from 9 to 16 report that 88% of the (161) stranger-based sexual abuse* incidents were by males and 12% were by females, and when this study's results are similar to other studies done in other countries by other researchers, the likelihood that it's all sample bias gets pretty remote.

Put another way, what is the likely cause of sample bias in this survey? If a comparable survey of kids showed that 88% of them preferred one soda formula over another, would you advise the company that it would be fallacious of them to choose the preferred formula for their new product?




* Abuse in this case ranging from exposing to attempted abduction
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rinelk wrote:
That said, Ken and I are in a position which, perhaps, Dave is not well-placed to be empathetic towards. Stay-at-home dads can get some pretty creepy vibes from moms, and having the attitude that we're weird and dangerous written into policy kind of sucks.


I totally get that. I love kids and I like to say hi to them, play peek-a-boo with them, etc. I'm very careful about how I do it, though, because I know it can creep Moms out. It sucks, but there it is.
3 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Rowse
New Zealand
Wellington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Golux13 wrote:
KAndrw wrote:
Citation please. Specifically, one that compares sexual abuses committed on an aircraft - because it sounds like you're comparing apples and oranges. Abuse in the home is more prevalent than stranger abuse partly because of the vast difference in opportunity.


Really? That's the universe from which you want to draw samples? Because from a quick Google search, I can't find any instances of reported sexual abuse of a minor on an airplane.


Fair enough - that's way too specific. It should be fairly straightforward to collect data on sexual abuse by strangers on public transport instead. The point was that bringing up the known-vs-stranger argument was an exercise in statistical mis-comparison.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [8] | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.