Banned for being single

mollie65. There are gentlemens clubs. And kids are not allowed in bars, and the over 65s cannot play in ball pools. [all as far as I know]
So there are certain barriers in certain places.

I have concluded I cant answer your last paragraph Ana, as I dont know enough about paedophiles and paedophilia to know whether you are right or wrong.

But the single are not banned from anywhere. They just have to go with someone else.
So it isnt the same thing mollie65.

I think that there is a flaw in your argument there Ana, but cant quite find it yet!

I suppose I go around thinking that we all have good and bad in us pompa.

soontobe that is not a correct comparison as men and women because they happen at this moment in time to be single (whether by choice or loss of partner) should not be stigmatised with the assumption they are 'potential' paedophiles. If any other group of people in society were banned from somewhere, or treated differently when a service is provided (for example homosexuals, ethnic minorities, certain religions, the over 65s, the under 18s) there would rightly be indignation and cries of 'human rights'
I know the DM has probably blown this up out of all proportion but it does send out a clear message that 'singles' are not welcome in some 'family' places.

Assuming people may or may not be idiots is one thing, to assume that the are criminals is another entirely.

I'm glad that I see the good in people, as that is what most people are.

Well, yes, all drivers are potential drunk drivers because they will all have the ability to drink too much alcohol, whether they actually drink or not.

Not all men and women are potential paedophiles, though, because the majority of them have never had such inclinations.

They are innocent until proven guilty.
I always think that about anything.
Cant stand the expression "there is no smoke without fire", as there definitely is sometimes.

But yes, it is best to assume that all drivers are potential drunk drivers.
I always tell my kids to assume that all drivers are idiots. That way, they always drive expecting the unexpected.

If dealing with the problem assumes that all singles (especially men) are potential paedophiles, then that is a step too far. What happened to innocent until proven guilty. By all means take precautions and supervise your children, but don't accuse the majority of harmless singles.

Do we assume all drivers are potential drunk drivers, just because they could have a drink if they wished.

But I think that the danger is more than the general public think, not less.

Singles from amusement parks.
Yes, I think ban them. There cant be many more than a handful a day there.
So for the greater good, yes.

Of course, but proportionally, not hysterically. Are you saying you think it is sensible to ban singles from amusement parks?

Just been watching the BBC news- and we are now talking about young kids having stomach reducing surgery, and are suffering in greater and greater numbers of morbid obesity, diabetes, joint and heart problems- but when schools are trying to take measures to stop this massive problem- many see them as just interferring with parental duties. It makes no sense- let's assess the proportionality of danger, and address them sensibly.

I still dont see a reason to not deal with what may be the 10th biggest reason of danger to kids. Or the 100th.

Tell that to the 1000s who are saying just that on expat Forums all over Europe - who do say that Elf and safety gone mad, and near on hysterical responses to the very rare case of 'stranger' peadophlia- and too many rules and regulations about everything- have encouraged them to leave. Not of course just about peadophilia, but in general.

As said, kids are still much more at risk from parents (and grandparents) scramble to pick up kids from school (parking on double yellows, on pedestrian crossings even, reversing, pulling off at speed, etc, etc).

When I first read the OP I thought this had happened in Saudi Arabia. My DH though now
retired encountered situations like this when he was out and about after his working day. He accepted obviously the situation. Well, what else could he do?

I still think it's a strange reason to emigrate, as your first post indicated, granjura!

No, I think.... what they are saying that the UK, following the US- have become disproportionately fearful to the point of hysteria- about peadophiles, as this thread illustrates so well.

Children are much much more likely to be hurt or sexually damaged by their parents, step parents or some other relative or friend/neighbour. So yes, you have to be vigilant, and aware- but not let it ruin your life, and more importantly, your child, and affect everything they do. The dangers of staying at home and constantly watching tv and playing with their consoles, computers games and other- is much more likely to affect them in a massive way. This thread illustrates so well how it has just gone too far.

When people are too scared too approach a lost child, or one who has fallen over, or is screaming in the supermarket- when teachers can't comfort any more, or treat a graze wihtout wearing gloves first and call an ambulance- it makes no sense at all to me.

Quite so, glamma. Several countries on the continent have looked to the UK for advice and training in order to strengthen their child protection procedures.

Do young ex-pats seriously think that paedophiles do not live any where else only Uk if they do then they are very deluded a massive ring was found on the Continent not too many years ago,it is not just a British problem.

How sad pompa- glad you agree it's gone way too far.

IMO, things are way out of proportion these days, I'm sure that things are no worse than they have ever been, The news services etc. just publicise instances so much more. Years ago unless the incident was very serious or local, you would not have heard about it. As a lad I can remember 3 instances where I was approached, I ran and never thought to say anything about it. We do tar any man that does not fit the norm as being weird and probably dangerous. Personally I am afraid to say hello to a child in case it is seen as having evil intent.

I think I agree with the extra health and safety rules. Perhaps not all of them, but I feel somewhat bruised by all the goings on that have happened in this country and are happening.
Perhaps I am slightly biased because I have done some work in the foster care area of life.
And all the cases that have come to light in the media recently.
And all the cases of women having been raped and abused.
I feel a bit jaded.
And like I have just woken up somewhat.

I saw a very small child in town recently, red in the face and screaming 'I want my Mummy!' being carried away by a man. People were staring and in fact I was just about to give chase and challenge him when a woman rushed up and called after them 'I've just got to do a bit more shopping, darling'. Turned out it was the mother, but you never know.

I think it's awful. I would prefer them to say that children can't use the park unaccompanied, and parents must keep their children within sight at all times. Both DBH & DS love birds of prey, are highly likely to want to see them if they are out and about and would be mortified!

Children can never be totally safe- if you wrap them in cottonwool and keep them indoors- they will be unsafe in other ways, as they won't be able to develop - so we need to constantly re-assess but watch out against totally non-sensical and damaging hsyteria. Soon there won't be any school trips, any scout camps- nothing- because organisers will be terrified of the responsibilities. I know, I used to organise so many of those when i taught in the UK, my younger colleagues just refuse- I can't blame them. Teachers are no longer allowed to comfort, or to treat a child for a grazed knee without wearing gloves- its so sad- and NOT good for our grandkids.

I've been to Puxton Park with the DGC; I wouldn't think it would be the kind of place where a single person would go although it is great for children, both fun and educational. The cafe is next to the play area and can get very noisy and the other restaurant will be full of noisy children as well. If I was going somewhere on my own it is not somewhere I would choose, even to watch a falconry display. I would have thought there would be falconry displays in other places nearby.

However, the rule does seem to be a bit OTT - surely children will be under the supervision of their parents or other responsible adult?
Unless, of course, they have had suspicions about some of the visitors there.