Is "stranger danger" a myth

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

It is scary to go out alone, especially at night. Not that all men are scary, but it is a fact that there are some bad ones out there. I don't think some men realize sometimes how vulnerable we can feel. Unfortunately, some of the wrong ones know that and take advantage of it.

But isn't this mostly just another manifestation of our cultural paranoia? I mean, seriously, are 21st-century American men in general really that scary?

Gavin deBecker talked about this too (sorry I warned you I'm a fan, LOL!)

Paraphrased he said, "When I man meets a woman, at the core, his greatest fear is that she might laugh at him. When a woman meets a man, at the core, her greatest fear is that he might kill her."

Considering that a woman is killed by an ex-boyfriend/husband every 2-3 hours, this is not an irrational fear. I don't think I know a woman killed by an ex (though I can think of one suspicious death...), but I have known women who were abused. Off the top of my head, I can think of four...physical abuse.

So yeah, Vort, men can be pretty scary. Though I will conceed that the majority of men I know are good people.

P. S. Someone mentioned the stats...what I have read is 1 in 3 women are sexually abused, and 1 in 6 men..though the numbers for men could be higher since they are so reticent to talk about it.

Edited September 5, 2012 by LiterateParakeet

[annewandering]

In my area we have what the state has labled "Sexually Violent Offenders".

Sounds mighty scarey!

What does tha lable really mean? It simply means that the individual is at a high risk of commiting another crime, ANY crime, not necessarily a sexual offense.

Offenders get this lab;e based on their prior history.

Case in point:

A young man is convicted of a sexual offense. A rather "minor" offense in comparison to things such a rape, but all the same a felony.

After his release from prison he has a hard tme finding a job as required by his parole. Housing is at best difficult. He commits a misdemenor theft, is "violated" and placed back in prison. Some time later he is again released & again commits another theft. This continues until his origina;l sentance expires & the parole board no longer holds any jurisdiction.

Now, becuase he has a sexual offense & numerous crimes committed afterwards, he is given a lable to identify him as someone who is at high risk of commiting another crime ..... "Sexually Violent Offender".

With a lable like that, it makes it pretty hard to forgive this person or to give him another chance or to assume he has repented.

What makes you think he is not at high risk of reoffending? Every time he had a choice he did another crime. It seems to be his pattern in life.

I am a bit curious to know what a minor sexual offense is.

[annewandering]

P. S. Someone mentioned the stats...what I have read is 1 in 3 women are sexually abused, and 1 in 6 men..though the numbers for men could be higher since they are so reticent to talk about it.

Women are also reticent to talk about it which is one reason why I suspect the figures are higher for both.

[Wingnut]

My wife had an interesting experience this past year, one of those experiences which results in "you never know, but better safe than sorry."

She was feeding ducks with our children, when a car pulled up near our children. The moment the car pulled up my wife felt a distinct impression to place herself in front of our children and this car. This individual was on the phone with someone else, and when my wife made eye contact, she let him know, through eye contact, she had memorized his license plate and could recognize his face. She mentioned, he got really mad and then took off in his car.

Five minutes later, another car pulled up, and a distinct impression enticed her to put herself in between our children and this car. The moment she did this, the car peeled away.

Would anything have happened, we both don't know, however, when a distinct impression tells you to do something, you do it. Better to be safe than sorry, and this stands not only for strangers, but people you know quite well.

Sheesh...time to find a new duck pond!

[Backroads]

I see no valid reason for a child to be talking or being near a stranger alone or with friends. Why in the world would we accept that as ok?

The stranger won't be a stranger after the child gets to know him. Meeting people we don't know is part of community building, and I see no reason children can't learn that.

One of the best pieces of advice I've heard is to teach your children it's okay to talk to strangers, it's just not okay to leave with them.

Suppose a child, heaven forbid, is lost/in a scary situation. Is it better for the child to remain there, or ask a stranger--who according to statistics is probably a completely nice and normal person--for help?

It makes no sense to decide to not be 'rude' to people by hurting their feelings by protecting our kids around them. Around anyone.

It might not be pc but kids come first. Parents being careful arent going to hurt my feelings Why should it hurt any caring persons?

And no you dont have to terrify kids by teaching them to be safe and careful.

I guess I don't understand how you are not scaring them. You are teaching children they are incapable of communicating with non-family members, you are teaching them that anyone who is not a family member is going to kill or molest them. Yes, I do think it's rude to give every stranger at the supermarket the stink eye if they happen to glance at your child. I think it's rude to call security because an old man at the children's book store happens to be looking for a present for his grandchild. I don't care if you don't know that he isn't. Unless you have a reason to fear a person, being rude is not acceptable. Anne, you say parents being careful won't hurt your feelings. What if they outright called you a potential child molester?

Edited September 5, 2012 by Backroads

[rameumptom]

While most sexual assaults are done by friends or family, it can still be a danger with strangers or slight acquaintances. The Elizabeth Smart story is an example of a stranger being welcomed into the home, made a friend, and then he kidnaps a girl later.

Those who commit sexual assaults (I'm not talking about the 18 year old boy with the 16 year old girlfriend), have a high recidivism rate, at least here in Indiana. We see about a 60% recidivism, depending on the type of sexual assault (victim type, etc).

[Sharky]

What makes you think he is not at high risk of reoffending? Every time he had a choice he did another crime. It seems to be his pattern in life.

I am a bit curious to know what a minor sexual offense is.

By law, when the "sexually violent offender" moves into a new neighbirhood they hold public meetings regarding the matter.

The sexual offense? Was "stautory". He had just turned 18 she was 16, boy friend girl friend. Was not violent any form. As a minor she could not consent to having sex with an adult male even though just a few weeks earlier they had been totally legal having sex.

When she came up pregnant the state stepped in & the state filed charges. Because it involved a minor her parents had no choice on the charges being filed. The state was in full control. He admited to the sexual relationship, both the time prior to & the time after his 18th birthday.

No sexual offenses have occurred since. Only thefts. Each theft resulted in a 6-month stent back in prison on a parole violation. In the past 10 years he had been out of prison on parole probly 7 of them with 4 or 5 stents back on volations.

I do not know what risk he is, I just know giving him that lable "Sexual Violent Offender" makes him SOUND very scarey. Is he?

The intent is simply to identify him, based on history, as someone who is at high risk of going back to prison, it has nothing to do with whether he was litterally sexually violent.

But that lable sounds like it is drectly related to sexual offenses.

If people are scared of him then he has little or no chance to show if he has changed his life. He is judged based on that title & the fear the words "Sexually Violent Offender" conjure up in ones mind.

I guess what I'm saying is giving hiim a lable such as "Sexually Violent Offender" creates a situation where people don't give him a chance. They judge him based on that title NOT on who he is or has become or done since.

Edited September 5, 2012 by Sharky

[Guest]

The stranger won't be a stranger after the child gets to know him. Meeting people we don't know is part of community building, and I see no reason children can't learn that.

One of the best pieces of advice I've heard is to teach your children it's okay to talk to strangers, it's just not okay to leave with them.

Suppose a child, heaven forbid, is lost/in a scary situation. Is it better for the child to remain there, or ask a stranger--who according to statistics is probably a completely nice and normal person--for help?

I guess I don't understand how you are not scaring them. You are teaching children they are incapable of communicating with non-family members, you are teaching them that anyone who is not a family member is going to kill or molest them. Yes, I do think it's rude to give every stranger at the supermarket the stink eye if they happen to glance at your child. I think it's rude to call security because an old man at the children's book store happens to be looking for a present for his grandchild. I don't care if you don't know that he isn't. Unless you have a reason to fear a person, being rude is not acceptable. Anne, you say parents being careful won't hurt your feelings. What if they outright called you a potential child molester?

And this has been a common theme in these United States. FEAR. Fear of giving gifts because it might kill an allergic kid, fear of offering help on the roadside because it might be a trap, fear of hospitality to strangers because they might rape and molest you. Fear of just the plain and simple act of letting kids out to play and socialize and be kids. Fear of dirt, fear of knee scrapes, fear of getting bruised up in little league, fear of getting sued coaching little league. Fear of everything including getting sick, getting poor, getting old.

And so yes, America is terrorized to the point of isolation and paralysis. And you don't even need Islamic extremists to do it.

The thing about it is - this paralytic fear is not the way to stay safe. It is quite interesting that we won't let our kids talk to a stranger yet we are just fine with these kids growing up every single day in a broken home. We won't let them out to play in the neighborhood court without our hawk-eye supervision, yet we are just fine sending them to failing schools every single school day with near zero parental involvement.

We want our kids to stay safe? Prepare them for life! Give them the skills to survive. And let them live!

[Anddenex]

Sheesh...time to find a new duck pond!

Indeed... she hasn't been back there since and doesn't go and unless I can come. My wife is not easily scared or threatened, yet this impacted quite a bit.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

Women are also reticent to talk about it which is one reason why I suspect the figures are higher for both.

You are so right. Josh Weed is a friend of mine, and since his blog post went viral, I have noticed that LDS gay men have many blogs and forums to talk about their experiences and the various ways of dealing with it. Reading their conversations makes me wish there were somewhere I could talk to other LDS survivors (women or men) about healing from abuse...but I can't find anything like that anywhere. It is rare that anyone will talk about it even anonomously...the surviviors that have talked to me about my blog wrote me privately through my email.

Actually it was my desire to talk to other LDS people about this that brought me back here (this forum is more open to talk about VARIOUS topics than any other I have found)...and then I jumped on this thread.

So yes, absolutely, women are reticent to talk about it also.

Edited September 5, 2012 by LiterateParakeet
ETA the link to Josh's blog

[annewandering]

Fear is not the thing I am talking about. Common sense is. I have 8 kids and we did not instill fear into the them. What we were going for is common sense and it is not common sense to allow children to talk to strangers alone.

It is common sense to teach them who to go to in emergencies and that is not just to any stranger on the street. Give them practical knowledge so they can protect themselves when necessary.

it makes no sense to tell them that every stranger is a boogy man/woman and they should scream and run at the mere glance of one. It does make sense to tell them to not respond to strangers starting conversations with them and to move away from people who do.

[Backroads]

It does make sense to tell them to not respond to strangers starting conversations with them and to move away from people who do.

I do agree with most of your post, but this one.

What should they do if someone passing them on the street says a friendly hello?

Trust me, most strangers starting a conversation are not out to groom your child.

I find it very sad that we live in a society that encourages the separation of people.

As for a stranger on the street, what if the place to go in an emergency is unkown to them? What if it is too far to travel to? Would you rather have a child wandering the streets for hours, scared out of his wits, because he is unable to go to the designated emergency help and you told him to never ask for a stranger's help?

Yes, there is plenty of common sense to teaching a child who to speak to in an emergency, but things happen and a child needs to know what to do when the usual ain't working.

Edited September 5, 2012 by Backroads

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

I find it very sad that we live in a society that encourages the separation of people.

I think it is even sadder that we live in a time and society where such caution is NECESSARY, but so it is.

[annewandering]

I do agree with most of your post, but this one.

What should they do if someone passing them on the street says a friendly hello?

Trust me, most strangers starting a conversation are not out to groom your child.

I find it very sad that we live in a society that encourages the separation of people.

Most strangers, who care about kids, do not strike up conversations with them when they are not with adults. Do you?

Have you ever been 'groomed'? Grooming takes a lot longer than a simple conversation. This is not the issue being addressed.

We can discuss grooming if you want. Its a very unpleasant subject but it is a subject I do know a lot about, much from personal experience.

[slamjet]

By law, when the "sexually violent offender" moves into a new neighbirhood they hold public meetings regarding the matter.

Where is this?

And as a matter of curiosity some questions:

1) Do you know someone who is a registered sex offender?

2) Would you go to the same ward as a registered sex offender?

3) If there is a registered sex offender in your ward, would you change wards, demand they change wards and/or talk to the Bishop about your concerns about this person? Would you tell the rest of the members that so-and-so is a registered sex offender?

4) Would you live or allow to live in your apartment or neighborhood a registered sex offender?

5) Would you hire a registered sex offender?

Edited September 5, 2012 by slamjet

[EarlJibbs]

Most strangers, who care about kids, do not strike up conversations with them when they are not with adults. Do you?

Have you ever been 'groomed'? Grooming takes a lot longer than a simple conversation. This is not the issue being addressed.

We can discuss grooming if you want. Its a very unpleasant subject but it is a subject I do know a lot about, much from personal experience.

I think you are right. Most people that pass by and say hello to me or kids, I encourage them to respond politely. I do get really creeped out when an adult starts talking to my kids like they want to have a conversation in the middle of a grocery market. And beleive me it has happened.

[Guest]

Fear is not the thing I am talking about. Common sense is. I have 8 kids and we did not instill fear into the them. What we were going for is common sense and it is not common sense to allow children to talk to strangers alone.

It is common sense to teach them who to go to in emergencies and that is not just to any stranger on the street. Give them practical knowledge so they can protect themselves when necessary.

it makes no sense to tell them that every stranger is a boogy man/woman and they should scream and run at the mere glance of one. It does make sense to tell them to not respond to strangers starting conversations with them and to move away from people who do.

We have a different view on this Anne. Okay, I'm Filipino - one of the most hospitable country in the world, so this is probably more cultural than anything. But, I have also found this hospitality in the South - Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana. It was not present in my experience in Ohio and New York and is sporadic in Texas.

In the Philippines, hospitality is a cultural norm. You can go to any province in the Philippines, rich or poor, crime-laden or relatively peaceful, and you'll see it the same everywhere. People are very open to strangers. Especially those who they recognize as foreigners. And this is even in the midst of a crime-laden society. I have to say, I like that about them. It lends to a more neighborly culture where people are more open to help and ask for help, to comfort and ask for comfort. But yes, they are fiercely loyal as well. So that, if one person gets hurt, the entire village retaliates. So that yes, it's a relatively lawless society, but you see crime controlled by the strength of the societal bond. And yes, it is not the best system - clan wars tend to crop up in this type of society, but all the same - that societal bond is strong because of the willingness of people to extend friendship to anyone that crosses their path.

The flip side is, of course, those who don't look like they're entrenched in society gets to be targeted for crimes. So yes, strangers are incented to immerse themselves in society pretty quickly.

[Backroads]

I think it is even sadder that we live in a time and society where such caution is NECESSARY, but so it is.

Is such caution really necessary?

In case of an emergency, who do we have but our community to turn to? Are you really suggesting that we should get rid of the entire concept of community?

[annewandering]

Is such caution really necessary?

In case of an emergency, who do we have but our community to turn to? Are you really suggesting that we should get rid of the entire concept of community?

Family, friends, and church.

Community as in city or town is not Mayberry. It is sad we cant automatically trust everyone but we can not.

[Backroads]

Most strangers, who care about kids, do not strike up conversations with them when they are not with adults. Do you?

Have you ever been 'groomed'? Grooming takes a lot longer than a simple conversation. This is not the issue being addressed.

We can discuss grooming if you want. Its a very unpleasant subject but it is a subject I do know a lot about, much from personal experience.

I do it all the time. I'm a former elementary teacher, I currently work in Scouting. I like kids. Why do I say hi and even strike up conversations with adultless kids I see around the community?

Because a kid who is without an adult has been considered responsible enough by his parent to act at a certain level of independence in the community and thus build relationships with the people in that community. If that child is not comfortable talking with me, he has probably been taught the correct social procedure for ending the conversation. I will not force a conversation, but I see absolutely nothing wrong with saying hi to a child or making a friendly comment toward him. I also do this if parents around. I've yet to have anyone act like I was a criminal. Every present parent so far seems to encourage the communication.

I have no particular desire to discuss grooming. I brought it up because most parents who encourage anti-community behavior do so out of fear of grooming.

[Backroads]

Family, friends, and church.

Community as in city or town is not Mayberry. It is sad we cant automatically trust everyone but we can not.

You don't have to automatically trust everyone, but there is no logical reason to avoid strangers if you have no reason to fear them.

If my future child in an emergency situation and I or its father was not around nor any known person, I hope my child would have the sense to approach a stranger for help.

[Guest]

Most strangers, who care about kids, do not strike up conversations with them when they are not with adults. Do you?

I do. A lot. Especially very little kids without an adult - for some reason, they crop up once in a while at Wal-mart and Agricultural Fairs. More than likely they are lost and need help. I used to go sit at all kinds of playgrounds all over town getting the kids playing when they were little - I usually strike up a conversation with a kid or two, but yes, usually their parents are out there somewhere. Soccer fields are another one of those. Food courts at the mall are another one. Justice - the one place my kids refuse to enter - is another one. The girls there usually know what are good gifts for my nieces. Movie theaters are another one - when you're in line for the Midnight Showing of Star Wars or Batman or whatever, you tend to have conversations with kids - even tweens - whose parents just dropped them off to be picked up later.

My kids get it a lot - when they're with their dad. My kids look very Filipino and their dad is blue-eyed blonde. It is quite common for people to approach my kids asking if they're ok. My husband used to take offense, now he just accepts it as caring people wanting to make sure his kids have not been abducted. It's become a subject for teasing between us.

Anyway, my kids are very open to strangers. Especially my eldest. He can strike up conversation with random people at the food court... and even talk about Church stuff. He is especially popular with the elderly - he's this type of kid that will hold the door to the mall for 10 minutes waiting for every single person to go through the door while I'm waiting tapping my foot on the floor, conflicted whether I should tell him to stop it already or just let him exercise charity. The elderly always stop to thank him and comment on his hair (yeah, his super-straight-that-it-spikes hair is instant conversation starter). When he got a little older, I would leave him at the door while I go order the food because I just couldn't stand there waiting. But yeah, we've taught them the "stranger danger" thing.

Edited September 5, 2012 by anatess

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

Is such caution really necessary?

In case of an emergency, who do we have but our community to turn to? Are you really suggesting that we should get rid of the entire concept of community?

I never suggested getting rid of the entire concept of community. I supported the ideas of caution that have been suggested in this thread. And I endorsed a couple books that I feel will help be more appropriately cautious and less fearful. So I don't know how you came to the conclusion that you did.

Further, is such caution really necessary? Yes, yes, one thousand times, yes. Sexual assault effects your life forever. If a little extra caution can make certain that my children never have to suffer the pain that I am/have, it is absolutely worth it.

And no my children are not sheltered, they do have friends, activities and a sense of community...you can have both.

[Backroads]

I'm not against sensible caution, but I am against the type of over-caution that actually causes tragedy. I've heard more stories about those than any other. Kids put in horrible situations because they are unable to communicate with a stranger. Last week a woman told me of a neighbor of hers who assumed her baby had been kidnapped by a stranger at the park--instead of observing that her stroller had rolled away. It had rolled into a pond and the baby drowned while the mother was hunting for child molestors. Child molestation by strangers in a park is an extremely rare event, but other accidents are more common. "Stranger Danger" as it is often presented teaches people to jump to the least logical conclusions first.

Children do need a healthy sense of community in order to be safe. They need to know how to reach out to others--including people they don't know. Unnecessary fear creates victims, it does not protect them from it.

Forgive me if I misinterpreted you--but it did sound like your talk on total stranger danger was banning any communication with anyone in the community.

Edited September 5, 2012 by Backroads

[Backroads]

Family, friends, and church.

Community as in city or town is not Mayberry. It is sad we cant automatically trust everyone but we can not.

And if Family, Friends, and Church aren't available?