Should we be accepting these behaviours?

Sparkynan, what do you think his uniform is going to do? Contaminate the children? In what way are the children unsafe? How will this seriously affect their mental health? Exactly why isn't it right? You don't have to be particularly woke to accept that your attire doesn't make you dangerous.

I don’t think anyone has said it’s perfectly acceptable.

As a GP to 4 ages 3 to 12 GC, I am horrified at the thought that the general consensus on GN seems to be it's perfectly acceptable for this man to be dressed up in female school uniform (varying uniforms from several schools) loitering outside schools. He may have MH issues but childrens MH and Physical safety comes first. I'm not bothered that he wants to dress up in a wig and female uniform but not near schools or on buses with predominately school children.

I don't care that I'm not PC,Woke or just because it not the law!!! IT IS NOT RIGHT!
Maybe someone should give him a ticket for the Rocky Horror show.. He will blend in fine there.

I agree there's only so far you can go training people. I also feel that focusing on the rights of certain sectors of the community (women, trans, etc.) takes attention away from countless other instances of very unfair and bullying behaviour. These can be incredibly damaging to a person's life but because the victim does not belong to a 'minority' group, such as LGBTQ or Black, they are not able to call on all the politically correct stuff , and get trampled. I would also point out that the group who can be abused and vilified with impunity is that of the white, heterosexual male - that's not fair either. In short, we should all just jolly well be kinder and nicer - how difficult can it be! (and now I'm completely off topic!)

undines, I agree with you that the police are often hampered by red tape and many are totally disrespectful towards them. Rather than continue arguing with you about this particular strange fellow, can I just argue about the Fire Service? Recent reports have found the Fire Service lacking and I think that there will be repercussions..
My sons work in the Fire Service on the non-uniform side and have received countless sessions of training about Equality, Diversity, etc but when it comes down to it, you can only go so far to change people's mindset unless you are prepared to use stringent disciplinary action.

I have a 25 year old autistic son who likes girls and has been known to loiter near the gates of local schools (although certainly not in uniform) We have told him he must not do this, the behaviour is inappropriate. We do not live in an area where vigilantism is likely but the idea he might be called 'creepy' or mocked by the children is horrible. I would welcome a visit from the police telling him firmly that he could not do this. The report says that the man 'stares' at the girls - that is bordering on harassment. Tolerance is obviously a wonderful thing but there comes a point where excessive tolerance impinges on the comfort of others. Understandably, some of the girls who have to walk home alone could be scared. The man's behaviour is unacceptable and frightening, and I'm sure he could be regarded as causing a breach of the peace. But please don't blame the police! My eldest son is a policeman and they are so strangled by stupid targets and endless paperwork that they find it very hard to do their job. The police get endless bad press, and while they clearly deserve some of it, there are many excellent, brave, patient policemen (like my son) who receive zilch public respect and are underpaid and overworked. Sorry to digress but now I'm going to digress further to say that the police are not the only emergency service to harbour misogynistic and abusive members. Tales could be told about our local fire service, but they are not - it's only the police who are singled out.

Yammy, the parents have had a statement from the police telling them that there is no problem so that is how parents will know. I daresay that a newsletter home would address it too. Your Michael Jackson person may well have had a criminal record which would have made the difference.

The police might say he is no threat, how are the parents and children to know that? When I worked someone dressed like Michael Jackson he was alive at the time was lingering around the playgrounds he was reported to the police and they came and took him away.

I think I would stress Dianehillybilly1957 that children are safe when in school. Well as safe as they ever can be. Even at the school gates, an undesirable person trespassing as much as one inch can be removed by school staff, though it is not really their job to police the pavements outside.

GrammyGrammy

Germanshepherdsmum

It’s unpleasant but what he’s doing doesn’t constitute criminal behaviour.

Yes it does. It is anti-social behaviour that distresses and alarms and is likely to cause a breach of the peace. It is lewd behaviour. It is behaviour that targets children and is anti-social. He needs arresting, sectioning or cancelling.

Why is it lewd behaviour? He isn't exposing himself as far as we know. Just "being and wearing an outfit you don't deem suitable" is not distressing or alarming as far as the law is concerned. I should imagine if he starts to approach people in an alarming fashion the police will take action. Believe it or not, the police can only act within the terms of the law.

Well I hope they do it soon. I have no patience anymore society is getting more and more misogynistic and I think women and girls safety is worse than it’s ever been

You couldn't make it up. And yes, attempts are being made to brainwash us into accepting such bizarre behaviour. Freedom to indulge in such activities can also infringe on other's freedoms.

I keep thinking of the reception he/she'll get when arriving in a prison full of strong angry women. One or more of them will quickly find something sharp enough to attempt the surgery necessary for this person to be relieved of his/her unwanted penis in pretty quick time!
He should be very afraid.

I think the brainwashing that is even worse than this is the fact that children are taught that police officers are the people to trust if they are in need of help.
Read about policemen Carrick and Couzens, and even more recent, Chebab ,and you might agonise over what to teach a child regarding who to trust.
I've seen that one headteacher is now telling her pupils that they must look for two police officers together if they need help, not just one on their own.
Of course, there is another problem - when do we see police officers patrolling on foot these days??

He obviously has MH problems. If we knew what has caused this behaviour then perhaps you wouldn’t say that Gabrielle. There may be a very sad story behind all this. The police say he is not a danger.

Maybe if he were beaten up ? I digress......I'd say yes to the breach of the peace argument a very little used order nowadays and the first line in such a situation. I don't care if he needs "help" in my book he needs a bloody hard slap!

He isn’t committing a crime. If he was the police would take action. And nobody can be sectioned unless medical professionals consider they are a danger to themselves or someone else. What you mean by ‘cancelling’ I have no idea.

Germanshepherdsmum

It’s unpleasant but what he’s doing doesn’t constitute criminal behaviour.

Yes it does. It is anti-social behaviour that distresses and alarms and is likely to cause a breach of the peace. It is lewd behaviour. It is behaviour that targets children and is anti-social. He needs arresting, sectioning or cancelling.

Sleepygran
I doubt he has dementia. He wouldn’t be able to work out all those bus routes he’s taking.

Should we be accepting these behaviours?

Absolutely not.
This man may well have mental health issues, but the excuses dreamed up for his behaviour are incredible.
It is the children who need protection and this man should be instructed to keep a defined distance away from local schools. Wearing of particular clothes is not an offence, but cross-dressing as a schoolchild and deliberately loitering near to schools when children are about is a definite cause for alarm.
Headteachers and staff do supervise entrance and exits from school, but many schools have several exits. As far as I am aware parents are not allowed to travel on school buses, most certainly not as vigilantes. Many children are not collected from schools at the end of the day.
All these voluntary measures to be put in place to protect one disturbed, possibly vulnerable individual who could easily be prevented from loitering in the vicinity of schools.
The attitude of the police is reprehensible, but increasingly common.

The world has gone mad!! Seems to me if we're to question anything we're in the wrong! Parents should feel that their children are safe at as school, but how does anyone know this person is safe given the odd behaviour?

The police may believe he is no threat,but it’s not normal behaviour. Why is he suddenly doing this?
Does he talk to the children? Has he got dementia?
What’s his history?
So many questions need asking.
But it is said that flashers start off flashing and then progress to assaulting if not stopped,could this behaviour be the same?
I’m an adult and would feel uncomfortable to see him anywhere,so goodness knows how children must feel. I used to say to my dad if your gut feeling is you’re not happy about something you should go with that feeling, you’re not usually wrong, and this makes me feel like that.

If he is not being devious, then why did he lie? www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=643638464428630&set=a.504711688321309

The real point here is not whether we are being brain-washed to accept wrong behaviour.

Who determines what is wrong behaviour? If it is one of the elderly, this is likely to be judged as completely wrong behaviour. If it was a younger person without children, probably not so likely.

What has this man actually done wrong? He's worn clothes designated as a school uniform. That is not a criminal offence. He has stood outside a school. Once again that isn't a criminal offence. The fact that the police have deemed he is not a risk suggests that he has no criminal record for hurting children otherwise the police would have definitely acted to stop him. at the moment, I suspect they will be being rather more cautious than usual.

At Primary School most children are picked up by parents and carers so they would know their children are safe.

As a parent, I wouldn't particularly like it but I would certainly be remonstrating with my child for finding it funny, I would be explaining that there was nothing to be scared about but as usual, stay away from strangers. It is our responsibility to keep our children safe, note any vulnerabilities and act accordingly. It is not up to parents to take the law into their own hands or infringe on other's human rights because you don't like the way they look.
If this person's behaviours have escalated by taking photos of children, then I would expect the police to further investigate.

The real point here is not whether we are being brain-washed to accept wrong behaviour.

The point is that people are refusing to believe the police when they say this man constitues no danger. By which, I presume they mean that he has no criminal record and that nothing he said when interviewed made them feel he was "loitering with intent to commit a felony".

Presumably, they pointed out to him that hanging around the gates of a school, especially dressed in an approximation of a school uniform is a stupid thing to do, and will lead people to assume he is a pervert.

I really do not know what you expect the police can do in this case, or the school for that matter. Anyone may stand on a public pavement, dressed as they please, as long as their dress is not an offence against public decency.

Another point is that if people are circulating photos of this person and stating or hinting that he is a danger to children, or anyone else for that matter, they themselves are probably breaking one or two laws.

I am uncertain what English law states about circulating information and photos on the Internet . Here in Denmark you would assuredly be fined for defamation of character is you warned people against a person you could not prove was guilty of a crime.