Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Ricechex
Participant[quote=Rustico]I wonder if young kids molested are not frequently parented by poor,uneducated,single and perhaps drug using mothers?Living in other less than optimal conditions? Is it not irrational to consider your own families risk factors to be lower than that of many eventual victims?
I tend think I could have lived next to Westerfield or what ever his name was with zero risk, even if I had three daughters instead of three sons.Not sure though.[/quote]
Absolutely Rustico. The more chaos people live in, the more chaos their children are exposed to.
Also, pedophiles usually “groom” the children. They choose the children that are lonely (parents not readily available for whatever reasons…work, etc), and the grooming pattern occurs over time. They have to gain the child’s trust before the actual sex offense occurs. Typically, they choose children that are more passive and less social. Kids with poor/minimal attachments and support systems.
Living closer to a school–bad idea. Where better to find your victims than a school? They can watch the child on the playground, to see if he/she would make a good victim. Does the child wander off alone? The Westerfield case was very unusual, but these are the cases that make the 6 o’clock news. Children getting snatched off streets and such. It really is not all that common. It’s that “culture of fear” stuff going on.
More often, the sex offender is a step parent, family friend, boy scout leader—someone “known” to the family and trusted. They aren’t “scary” looking.
Really, if your child got loose and was roaming the streets, it is more likely that someone steps in, calls police, police cross reports to Child Welfare Services, and then you have to answer up to them.
Participant[quote=Rustico]I wonder if young kids molested are not frequently parented by poor,uneducated,single and perhaps drug using mothers?Living in other less than optimal conditions? Is it not irrational to consider your own families risk factors to be lower than that of many eventual victims?
I tend think I could have lived next to Westerfield or what ever his name was with zero risk, even if I had three daughters instead of three sons.Not sure though.[/quote]
Absolutely Rustico. The more chaos people live in, the more chaos their children are exposed to.
Also, pedophiles usually “groom” the children. They choose the children that are lonely (parents not readily available for whatever reasons…work, etc), and the grooming pattern occurs over time. They have to gain the child’s trust before the actual sex offense occurs. Typically, they choose children that are more passive and less social. Kids with poor/minimal attachments and support systems.
Living closer to a school–bad idea. Where better to find your victims than a school? They can watch the child on the playground, to see if he/she would make a good victim. Does the child wander off alone? The Westerfield case was very unusual, but these are the cases that make the 6 o’clock news. Children getting snatched off streets and such. It really is not all that common. It’s that “culture of fear” stuff going on.
More often, the sex offender is a step parent, family friend, boy scout leader—someone “known” to the family and trusted. They aren’t “scary” looking.
Really, if your child got loose and was roaming the streets, it is more likely that someone steps in, calls police, police cross reports to Child Welfare Services, and then you have to answer up to them.
Participant[quote=Rustico]I wonder if young kids molested are not frequently parented by poor,uneducated,single and perhaps drug using mothers?Living in other less than optimal conditions? Is it not irrational to consider your own families risk factors to be lower than that of many eventual victims?
I tend think I could have lived next to Westerfield or what ever his name was with zero risk, even if I had three daughters instead of three sons.Not sure though.[/quote]
Absolutely Rustico. The more chaos people live in, the more chaos their children are exposed to.
Also, pedophiles usually “groom” the children. They choose the children that are lonely (parents not readily available for whatever reasons…work, etc), and the grooming pattern occurs over time. They have to gain the child’s trust before the actual sex offense occurs. Typically, they choose children that are more passive and less social. Kids with poor/minimal attachments and support systems.
Living closer to a school–bad idea. Where better to find your victims than a school? They can watch the child on the playground, to see if he/she would make a good victim. Does the child wander off alone? The Westerfield case was very unusual, but these are the cases that make the 6 o’clock news. Children getting snatched off streets and such. It really is not all that common. It’s that “culture of fear” stuff going on.
More often, the sex offender is a step parent, family friend, boy scout leader—someone “known” to the family and trusted. They aren’t “scary” looking.
Really, if your child got loose and was roaming the streets, it is more likely that someone steps in, calls police, police cross reports to Child Welfare Services, and then you have to answer up to them.
Participant[quote=Rustico]I wonder if young kids molested are not frequently parented by poor,uneducated,single and perhaps drug using mothers?Living in other less than optimal conditions? Is it not irrational to consider your own families risk factors to be lower than that of many eventual victims?
I tend think I could have lived next to Westerfield or what ever his name was with zero risk, even if I had three daughters instead of three sons.Not sure though.[/quote]
Absolutely Rustico. The more chaos people live in, the more chaos their children are exposed to.
Also, pedophiles usually “groom” the children. They choose the children that are lonely (parents not readily available for whatever reasons…work, etc), and the grooming pattern occurs over time. They have to gain the child’s trust before the actual sex offense occurs. Typically, they choose children that are more passive and less social. Kids with poor/minimal attachments and support systems.
Living closer to a school–bad idea. Where better to find your victims than a school? They can watch the child on the playground, to see if he/she would make a good victim. Does the child wander off alone? The Westerfield case was very unusual, but these are the cases that make the 6 o’clock news. Children getting snatched off streets and such. It really is not all that common. It’s that “culture of fear” stuff going on.
More often, the sex offender is a step parent, family friend, boy scout leader—someone “known” to the family and trusted. They aren’t “scary” looking.
Really, if your child got loose and was roaming the streets, it is more likely that someone steps in, calls police, police cross reports to Child Welfare Services, and then you have to answer up to them.
Participant[quote=Rustico]I wonder if young kids molested are not frequently parented by poor,uneducated,single and perhaps drug using mothers?Living in other less than optimal conditions? Is it not irrational to consider your own families risk factors to be lower than that of many eventual victims?
I tend think I could have lived next to Westerfield or what ever his name was with zero risk, even if I had three daughters instead of three sons.Not sure though.[/quote]
Absolutely Rustico. The more chaos people live in, the more chaos their children are exposed to.
Also, pedophiles usually “groom” the children. They choose the children that are lonely (parents not readily available for whatever reasons…work, etc), and the grooming pattern occurs over time. They have to gain the child’s trust before the actual sex offense occurs. Typically, they choose children that are more passive and less social. Kids with poor/minimal attachments and support systems.
Living closer to a school–bad idea. Where better to find your victims than a school? They can watch the child on the playground, to see if he/she would make a good victim. Does the child wander off alone? The Westerfield case was very unusual, but these are the cases that make the 6 o’clock news. Children getting snatched off streets and such. It really is not all that common. It’s that “culture of fear” stuff going on.
More often, the sex offender is a step parent, family friend, boy scout leader—someone “known” to the family and trusted. They aren’t “scary” looking.
Really, if your child got loose and was roaming the streets, it is more likely that someone steps in, calls police, police cross reports to Child Welfare Services, and then you have to answer up to them.
ParticipantBearishgurl, I really like your posts. Very informative and clearly you write from experience. Thanks.
ParticipantBearishgurl, I really like your posts. Very informative and clearly you write from experience. Thanks.
ParticipantBearishgurl, I really like your posts. Very informative and clearly you write from experience. Thanks.
ParticipantBearishgurl, I really like your posts. Very informative and clearly you write from experience. Thanks.
ParticipantBearishgurl, I really like your posts. Very informative and clearly you write from experience. Thanks.
ParticipantInteresting post. I work with the Navy and we are mandated to add “Respectfully” “Very Respectfully” or in short, R/name and V/R name, at the end of emails. We have a scripted email tag line with a V/R. However, some of the emails I receive are NOT respectful at all. Missing the point…if you send an email that is not respectful, but throw a V/R in, does it make it respectful? It is about context, and the “please” is merely a formality without substance.
ParticipantInteresting post. I work with the Navy and we are mandated to add “Respectfully” “Very Respectfully” or in short, R/name and V/R name, at the end of emails. We have a scripted email tag line with a V/R. However, some of the emails I receive are NOT respectful at all. Missing the point…if you send an email that is not respectful, but throw a V/R in, does it make it respectful? It is about context, and the “please” is merely a formality without substance.
ParticipantInteresting post. I work with the Navy and we are mandated to add “Respectfully” “Very Respectfully” or in short, R/name and V/R name, at the end of emails. We have a scripted email tag line with a V/R. However, some of the emails I receive are NOT respectful at all. Missing the point…if you send an email that is not respectful, but throw a V/R in, does it make it respectful? It is about context, and the “please” is merely a formality without substance.
ParticipantInteresting post. I work with the Navy and we are mandated to add “Respectfully” “Very Respectfully” or in short, R/name and V/R name, at the end of emails. We have a scripted email tag line with a V/R. However, some of the emails I receive are NOT respectful at all. Missing the point…if you send an email that is not respectful, but throw a V/R in, does it make it respectful? It is about context, and the “please” is merely a formality without substance.
-
AuthorPosts
