Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Alcibiades

(5,061 posts)
63. A bit of an occupational hazard
Thu May 24, 2012, 12:09 PM
May 2012

due to my wife's occupation. I agree with much of what you have to say, but I have had to become far more familiar with how the mind of a pedophile works than I would like.

My wife is a forensic psychologist at a federal prison. She got into this field because she enjoyed working with the chronically mentally ill, who do violate all sorts of federal laws as a result of their delusions. Several years ago, Congress passed a law providing for the indefinite civil committment of sex offenders, and now a good deal of her time is spent determining whether these persons are a danger.

Some of the folks she works with have become rather paranoid regarding their own children, generalizing their work experience to the population at large. It is important to keep perspective, to understand that the worst sexual predators are a very small percentage of the population.

Pedophiles and hebephiles (itself a somewhat controversial diagnosis) have certain traits, and it is possible to organize them into distinct types. I'll limit myself here to the worst sort. The worst sort preys on children to whom they are not related. They are "the worst" in the sense that they are the ones who have the greatest number of victims, but also because they have means of abusing children that are hard for parents to prevent, because of the seeming randomness of their crimes, and because they have a higher incidence of sexual sadism. Many of these sorts have tailored their entire lives around sexual abuse of children: their choice of occupation, where they travel, their family life, etc. Very often in treatment they have reported visiting places frequented by children in order to feed their fantasies, and sometimes this will lead to an opportunity to inflict themselves on another victim.

I really do wish this were a case like the myth of poisoned or booby trapped Halloween candy, but it's not. It's not the case that men who have children of their own don't do this, but they don't have to leave the house to victimize children. There are people out there who do see a pedophile around every corner, but this isn't a case of that: it's a case of a sensible precaution that does not really limit the freedom of most people. In our case, many of the offernders are being released into our own community, which is a concern.

Almost all of the people your children will interact with have no interest in abusing them, but it is sensible to understand what those who are sexual predators are like. Beware of strangers who give gifts to your children--hell, beware of anyone outside of your immediate family who gives gifts that seem a bit much or inappropriate. Obviously, beware of folks who offer your kids alcohol, drugs or pornography.

A man--and, certain middle-school teachers aside, that's who we are dealing with--who is in a place frequented by children with no appearance of having any reason to be there, who is interested in looking at the children rather than whatever else is going on, is suspicious. He will linger there, and gaze at them the way a normal man visiting a strip club might look at the strippers. And, no, I have not seen this myself, but it's basically what convicted sex offenders have described doing.

Of course this is not the only sort of pedophile, and not all of them do this. But some of them do, and are creepy enough that parents have alerted the authorities. Also, almost all of the people who become priest, youth ministers, coaches, doctors, teachers and birthday party clowns are not pedophiles, but it's a sad fact that a few of those have chosen these sorts of occupations simply because they can get access to children. I could relate dozens of anecdotes here, but won't, because we have all heard these stories already. Thankfully, it is possible for most of us to put them in the back of our minds.

I don't think I have become paranoid about this yet, but sometimes I do think my wife has. Once we were at the grocery store and she saw a fellow looking at our son for a little too long, and she said "Stop looking at him!" I don't know what she saw that I did not, or whether what she does has given her special insight or whether it's poisoned her trust.

Can one rent a child there?? Angry Dragon May 2012 #1
I doubt it, but you can always offer to take someone else's child or volunteer to accompany a group JDPriestly May 2012 #14
That sounds like the precise reason why the policy was introduced. Nihil May 2012 #23
I'm OK with this Alcibiades May 2012 #2
You know what's pathetic? 2ndAmForComputers May 2012 #8
I had such a hard time putting away my toys. I just could not stop playing. JDPriestly May 2012 #15
That's great Alcibiades May 2012 #35
I'm okay with it, too. I wish the San Diego one would adopt the same policy. It was really creepy IndyJones May 2012 #11
what is wrong with adult men watching children play? uncle ray May 2012 #13
Why "adult men"? Some of us women like to play with LEGOs too. JDPriestly May 2012 #16
I don't think they were talking about women playing with Lego Alcibiades May 2012 #36
Exactly. IndyJones May 2012 #66
Ohhh! JDPriestly May 2012 #69
I wasn't talking about playing with Legos. Knock yourself out and play with Legos all you want. IndyJones May 2012 #67
I would like to believe that there's nothing wrong with this Alcibiades May 2012 #29
I'm glad you know what people are thinking neohippie May 2012 #44
What about when an alcoholic walks into a bar Alcibiades May 2012 #60
I don't claim to know what they are thinking neohippie May 2012 #62
A bit of an occupational hazard Alcibiades May 2012 #63
it is always better to err on the side of caution neohippie May 2012 #64
Yes, most of the "worst of the worst" Alcibiades May 2012 #65
99% of the time nothing 4th law of robotics May 2012 #42
Wonderful quote Kurska May 2012 #18
That's certainly true Alcibiades May 2012 #30
+100 sinkingfeeling May 2012 #31
Really? An adult playing with LEGO is pathetic? eggplant May 2012 #22
I play with Lego all the time Alcibiades May 2012 #32
You're very intolerant Ter May 2012 #53
What's pathetic is the boorishness of adults Alcibiades May 2012 #61
By implication... eggplant May 2012 #58
Actually, I specifically said something very different Alcibiades May 2012 #59
On one had I can see that they are trying to protect children from perhaps persons that might lookingfortruth May 2012 #3
Let's call this what it t-i-is. It's age discrimination, dammit! TheDebbieDee May 2012 #7
LEGO is hurting itself. Lots of adults would buy lots of LEGOs for themselves if they would change JDPriestly May 2012 #17
Adults can and do buy lots of lego for themselves Alcibiades May 2012 #37
come to think of it, if they wanted to play the odds protect the kids from molestation MisterP May 2012 #43
I never what to go back to that hellish place with my kid, let alone by myself! SunSeeker May 2012 #4
Soon they won't let unaccompanied adults into G rated movies pstokely May 2012 #6
There's a reason for that, too Alcibiades May 2012 #38
Spot on! I can't imagine any normal adult going there unless their kid really wanted to go. IndyJones May 2012 #12
Agree - we have 2 kids under 10 TBF May 2012 #28
I have to speak up... MountainMama May 2012 #48
Not sure why you're jumping on me when SEVERAL threads TBF May 2012 #49
I was a bit upset MountainMama May 2012 #50
I see - TBF May 2012 #51
I hope MountainMama May 2012 #52
Not at all - TBF May 2012 #54
What? MountainMama May 2012 #55
It was crazy - it was sort of a partitioned area off to the side TBF May 2012 #56
I wasn't taken to a separate area... MountainMama May 2012 #57
Liability, Liability, Liability Sen. Walter Sobchak May 2012 #5
Nine year olds, dude. Nine year olds. callous taoboy May 2012 #46
Utterly idiotic - but it'll change. Daemonaquila May 2012 #9
Free babysitting by Lego Fans? I see a business model albeit not for profit. Monk06 May 2012 #10
It's the Disney Store all over again... AmyDeLune May 2012 #19
But did they ban adults with kids from the stores? pstokely May 2012 #21
That has never happened with the Disney Store. Where are you getting that info from? IndyJones May 2012 #68
craigslist n/t rucky May 2012 #20
I think they are worried about pedos. Odin2005 May 2012 #24
Yet another wonderful storm in a teacup. Nihil May 2012 #25
Children's Fairyland in Oakland has had that policy since it opened in the 50's. mulsh May 2012 #26
This is what the flip-side of no-child policies at restaurants and airlines looks like... LanternWaste May 2012 #27
If Disney did that, their parks business would fold in a couple of months Roland99 May 2012 #33
Some Chucky Cheese resaurants won't allow adults without children Freddie Stubbs May 2012 #34
There is an adults only night KurtNYC May 2012 #39
College fund opportunity for teenagers. yellowcanine May 2012 #40
I'm guessing it's to keep out the perverts? 4th law of robotics May 2012 #41
I have seen it all now, adults on DU bitching about not being able to play with legos snooper2 May 2012 #45
This is likely about creating a safe space for kids as much as anything . . . markpkessinger May 2012 #47
While I understand the motivation for the policy, all I can think about Butterbean May 2012 #70
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Legoland policy has some ...»Reply #63