Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
It really makes you think:
ie some snooty prick came in to the nursery and started eyeballing me
first the work as a Jimmy Savile impersonator dries up and now this.
but thankfully I managed to get to her and make her spit it out. As she sat in my lap calming down, a dishevelled, twitchy man dressed in a way I suppose he would describe as 'artistic' burst in and stared at me in an accusatory manner."
These paedophiles don't half make lives hard for themselves.
And there is a dude working there also. So I can see where he is coming from, leaving your child in someone else's care is quite a worrying thing, so if there is anything you instinctively feel is wrong, best to just take them out and look elsewhere. Otherwise it will just play on your mind constantly. I don't have an issue with the guy working in my one, he seems nice, it seems the person in the article has an issue with this particular person rather than him being a man.
lead you to completely take leave of your common sense.
If there's something you instinctively feel is wrong - probably best to question your instincts and act sensibly about it, as opposed to making kneejerk decisions which affect the lives of others.
but if it is as simple a decision as changing nursery, that is fairly easy (here anyway). I would never try and complain about someone looking a bit creepy.
What do you do - ring the nursery and say that one of their staff looks a bit noncey and see what happens? Have to have some pretty big gall to do that...
and has probably only got worse in the wake of Yewtree and general awareness of paedophilia.
I have a friend who is a primary school teacher and it sounds like the most fun job in the world. When I thought about going into teaching, as all arts students inevitably do after university, I thought about my own time in secondary school and realised I would hate to be surrounded by teenagers all day. But young kids, full of enthusiasm and curiosity? That seemed really cool. And kids that age could do with more male role models, right? But I can't shake the fact that it feels like there's a stigma about it, that it's rare and unusual for a man to have that job...
are prized by schools. End up with promotions much sooner than female primary school teachers. It's like the opposite of a woman entering a male-dominated industry.
"Firstly, I have no problem with men working in nurseries. Well, I do think that women are by nature slightly better at it, but that is an aside; it would be great to live in a world where more men worked in childcare. This was simply about a particular problem that I had with one specific man."
Sounds to me awfully like he does have a general problem with men, even if he tries to backtrack over it.
It would be sad if the only reason this teacher left was because others just didn't like the look of him. This would point towards commercial reasons for letting this teacher go. The key factor seems not to be the teacher's behaviour, but whether the parent would want his child to go to the nursery if he was there. (He was an agency temp so there would be no reason to go through a disciplinary process).
Difficult to know. I've heard on 'safeguarding' training in the past that we're to rely on our instincts, but I don't know how much of my instinct is reliable and how much is conditioned by my background and existing prejudices. Without wanting to go all Godwin's, I'm wondering if you might get a similar article in the 1950s/60s about a black person working in x profession.
I don't know.
It's very clear what a black person `looks like`.
It's entirely unclear, and based usually on crude stereotyping, as to what a paedophile `looks like`.
I'm more sympathetic to the `as a parent` line of thinking than most folk on here I reckon, but seeing sensible people straining to (at least partially) see where this bloke is coming from is a bit much for me I have to say...
My point (that admittedly I didn't make very clearly) is that I can't trust my instincts.
The point about black people is not the greatest - but it's still around the way this person looks rather than about what he's done. even if the way people perceive his appearance is down to crude sterotyping rather than clear physicality.
It's a tough call as to what to do with one's instincts. And one can normally justify actions when their child's best interests are at heart. But I'd question whether or not this chap was actually acting in his child's best interests, as opposed to indulging his own whims. Either way, he's irked me and irked me good.
rather than pandering to him. If they had no reason to question the behaviour of the teacher, then really they should have backed the teacher rather than bowing to the whims of the parent.
Yeah, pretty irksome.
The perception that it would be a bit noncey was a major downside. I think there's probably a lot of very important societal change that could come from more men in roles like this.
This guy is a cunner.
I think you summed it up better.
when Chandler* takes the mick out of a male nurse and his comeback is that he served in Iraq SO IT'S OKAY BECAUSE HE'S REALLY A REAL MAN.
*Couldn't remember at first if this was Ross or Chandler, can't believe C4 don't show Friends any more :(
The fact that Ben Stiller's character is a nurse acts as a shorthand for him being an unsuitable son-in-law.
You're not supposed to be sympathetic to Robert de Niro's character in Meet The Fockers, and they don't justify Ben Stiller's character by making him uber-manly in other ways. Also, Meet The Fockers is fucking shit.
Who nobody would choose to spend time with voluntarily
he's "just doing it to put [himself] through medical school".
It's only temporary, guys, he'll be a real man-doctor soon!
and at the time thought doctor and nurse were the same job but with gender specific titles, so when the female doctor came to see me and was all like "Hello, I'm a doctor" I was confused and suggested that she should surely be a nurse and she was all up in my 6 year old grill about how women were allowed to be doctors too and I still feel bad but fucking hell it was just a mistake cut me some slack!!!
[I hate women]
Probably her time of the month pal, wouldn't beat yourself up about it.
Pretty hysterical reaction.
Taking shit from so called ""feminists"" for the last 3 decades, pal. What about my rights?
to make jokes like this on DiS or not.
whose child went to nursey full time from the age of 1 until he started school, I agree that leaving your child with (in effect) strangers for the first time is very difficult. The level of trust that is involved is arguably one of the greatest we experience. So, as steinbolt says upthread, any potential issues get magnified.
That said, this guy seems like a bit of a dick.
but it's the idea of 'potential issues' just because he is a guy though....that's the issue isn't it?
but when Joanne Yeates was murdered, I REALLY thought that it was her landlord. This was based on nothing more than his appearance. I really genuinely assumed that it was him. How could someone who looks like this NOT be a killer?
He was dragged through the press and his life was likely ruined by it. All because of the way he looked. I really do feel bad about that, and it made me question how much I judge people on appearances.
BECAUSE I thought it was him.
Don't forget that he also liked POETRY as well.
It was a picture of the landlord with the single word 'Creepy' as a headline.
We were talking in the office this morning about the high proportion of serial killers that wear glasses. It seems society has an image of what a murder looks like – glasses, unkempt hear, moustache and socially awkward.
The same is true for paedophiles and there is likely a large crossover in appearance.
If he wore glasses obviously
draw a big bushy grey beard on that fella and it's not a million miles away from an elderly version of yourself.
If you've not seen it, you should.
Really amazing film.
I am currently a supply teacher in lower primary but often work in a nursery. The only thing that I disapprove of in the employee is that he had a child on his lap which I avoid in all ages (and so do female staff) though obviously we are dealing with children who are 3 and 4yo who do sometime get upset and need reassurance and comfort and this requires a degree of contact.
The guy essentially didnt like the "look" of someone...but also felt a man couldnt do the job as well as women.
His instinct is just bigotry.
even through the guys inept writing he succesfully coveys that he didn't just base his opinions on a look. specifically says "something about his expression, his demeanour as he interacted with the children, how he held himself"
all behaviour-related observations, not just a superficial reaction to Man + shady face
loads of issues around sterotyping (obviously) and in the case of sexual offenders potentially having attention drawn away from real offenders who don't fit the stereotype.
But her whites always seem whiter than mine. How can we be sure?
stuff like this doesn't help
This is hurting my brain.
I probably would have done exactly what he did. Gone back for another look, and then raised it with the manager. It's not just his child that he's looking out for, although primarily it is.
So much does come down to gut feeling and trust - we've been viewing nurseries for our little one and you come away with a feel for places even if you can't specify why.
It's for the management and authorities to investigate and to make the decision. Imagine if you let it go and something did happen.
his gut feeling was informed by the fact he's obviously a terrible person.
and you decide to act on it, just go to a different nursery. Don't get someone sacked cause you had a hunch.
He raised concerns about a member of staff. IMO the one about children sitting on his lap is a legitimate concern (supported by the fact that it'd been reported/investigated before). It's unnecessary and inappropriate contact.
Yes the gut feeling could have been informed by the fact that he's a dickhead but that's for the management to consider. Just because he comes across as a helmet doesn't mean that he was wrong in his judgement.
but if they get 10 parents saying the same thing and another member of staff saying he has been putting kids on his knee a lot and being generally a bit odd. Then he would have been right to speak up I suppose and would be lauded as some kind of paedo-hunting hero. Maybe.
is he complained about the guy and only once he was told the paperwork checked out did he mention the sitting on the lap thing.
He also said he wasn't willing to take his daughter back if he the guy was still there, but makes no mention of the fact that the nursery policy said that the sitting on lap thing was fine. So y'know, another workers could behave in exactly the same way the next day.
Essentially, he had a problem with the nursery worker because he was a man who looked a bit unkempt - he'd be a better person if he just faced up to that fact rather than trying to justifying it to himself.
'That guy looks like a paedo'. Aside from how problematic that view is anyway, what is the management supposed to do with that?
and the guy making it seems like a total tosspot?
And therefore deserves to be a flea on a stray dog
I have two friends who started up a nursery last year - they're now doing very well. Both are guys. I've emailed them this and told them to be careful (I'm winding them up) but this bloke has essentially said, "I saw a nursery worker playing with some girls. I stared at him, and he looked back at me"
If he's said that he would take him out of the nursery - then it sounds like they let the temp go because of commercial reasons. Temps are easily replaceable, but kids aren't necessarily - if you boil it down to pure economics.
also - can't believe that Jimmy Saville quote is actually real.
It sounds like a load of bollocks though. None of the story rings true.
and that the result wasn't that he should stop doing that.
"Let's get one thing straight: I don't want to live in the 1950s. But I want to live in the 1950s."
is kind of irrelevant to the issue. As jontosh2001 says, it is up to the management to deal with any reported concerns as they see fit.
'I was then asked whether I would be happy to bring my daughter back to the nursery if he was there. I said that, regrettably, I would not. I was called the next day and told that for “a number of reasons”, they would not be engaging the services of this particular teacher again.'
Just wonder what the management's motives were. Is it because they have genuine safety concerns about the teacher, or is it because they're concerned that the teacher is putting parents off?
and let management sort it out
includes management themselves.
he's keeping his kid in a place that happily employed someone he a paedo
also he's a cunt for working from home but still sending his kid to be looked after by a bunch of paedo enablers
he was observing the actions of the guy and his demeanour. That is quite different to just scanning him and not liking his face. There are many ways in which someone could play with children and look awkward about it but not many of those would make you feel uneasy. You don't even need a child to be capable of that, and I don't really blame this guy for taking actions to protect his daughter - yeah, he may be wrong but he was looking out for his own so fair enough.
As other people have said, whether the author of this comes across like a twat or not is irrelevant. He didn't like what he saw and commented on it, and since the nursery guy was dismissed, it sounds like he wasn't the only one voicing concern.
Whether the guy is actually a genuine baddun is also irrelevant - in business terms, paying customers of a service were not happy with what they were getting, the company responded to feedback and dealt with it.
bit harsh, but thems the breaks.
'There are many ways in which someone could play with children and look awkward about it but not many of those would make you feel uneasy.'
It depends how much you are going looking for those signals though, isn't it? The way I read it sounds like he made up his mind almost immediately, and without an awful lot to go on.
he could be over sensitive to signals if he genuinely is that prejudiced.
If I was dropping my kids off at nursery and they were given to soemone new I would stay for a bit, to get a sense of who they were. That has happened plenty of times in the past, but the staff have always been female. Whether I would add 'potential paedo' to my checklist if they were male I don't know. I would like to think not.
nope. the fact that he's a twat has a lot to do with how he perceived the guy
Who's to say you wouldn't have had the same concerns about the guy if it had been you observing what the author did?
maybe this was because a parent was staring at him in an accusatory manner and made him feel uncomfortable. Also the guy came from an agency and the writer mentions not having seen him before, maybe he was new to the job and was slightly nervous.
I would have considered these things first before labelling him a peadophile personally.
He is questioning his actions.
He didn't have to publish that, cos it does make him potentially like a git, and he realises it might make him look bad.
He is publishing that so that his own doubts and possible weak insecurity can be shared communaly, because like it or not, we all might be susceptible to this form of unfair judgement calls (whether we attempt to overcome them or not, some of us try to be fairer etc.......he could also have written a piece where, if the teacher had not been removed and he had not brought it up, he felt that he had overcome his weak insecurities to not complain, but how he was then riddled with worry as to whether he had done the right thing.
Thing is, its like that cat in the box, YOU DONT KNOW.
You know that there is meant to be such a thing as instinct, and you also know that your instinct can be ill informed by irrational predjudice, but, although we can make an effort to fine tune it, none of us can be certain whether we have got the balance right or not......................we can't, get this balance right, because there are generalisation that are true and then there are always exceptions.
The article writer is trying to make us think, to make people reflect or to at least share the common fear of deciding between instinct and ignoring it. He has done this by holding himself up for ridicule.
Its a shame that some of you have just gone for calling him an arse.
(he is an arse though, the brave human thing to do would be to go and talk to the teacher that he didn't like the look of, to mention your fears to that person, in a way that does not cause offence. That IS difficult, but that's the brave thing to do, what a complete human being would do. Very few of us are able to be complete, modern rtificial society mores demand that we not be complete human beings.
if the guy was a nonce then by talking about your fears to him, then you may just assist him in improving his camaflague
viewed with suspicion from other parents.
'Better err on the side of caution just in case every guy is a paedo'? It's really unhelpful.
I think he is trying to make us reflect on our own doubts and insecurities fuelled by us wanting to be fair but not knowing, and not knowing how good our judgement is, or how influenced it is by unreasonable predjudice................ideas which fuel all sorts of vigilantieism and predjudice, he obviously thought it was a good idea to use an example/anecdote where he doesn't cover himself with glory, to ask the reader to look inside themselves and question their certainties.
He is not saying that he did the right thing, he acknowledges that he might have caused an unfair misjustice upon an innocent.
(the Saville reference was clumsy)
By sacrificing himself looking good, he is asking the reader to look inside themselves honestly.....it appears that he has not been 100% successful with this
Christ I don't ever want to be like this twazzock.
but you have to say a lot of words first, before you can call him an arse, otherwise you havnt called him an arse in the right way (believe me its totally important to do this, the tao will cease to exist if you don't)
a very, very expensive private nursery (it's a Telegraph article ffs). I imagine that if it was a state nursery, the temp wouldn't have been let go.
The problem is that capitalism says that it is your civic duty to behave like an arse (i.e. you have a duty to make your business work.....business is good......financial responsibility is good.....there is no subtlety in the capitalist ethos which allows for tax breaks or financial leeway if you do something that decreases your revenues, 'but its for good human reasons'
It is this artificial society that causes such unpleasentness, so again it is a good thing that the article writer has publicised his shame.
the evidence is all there!
open your eyes!!!!!111
Without desire, we can plumb its depths;
filled with desire, we can only see its externals.
I feel I have to qualify it in this puddle of mud, so I remain, like the lotus blossom
Everything's so blurry
and everyone's so fake
and everybody's empty
and everything is so messed up.
You'd Imagine you'd at least strike up a conversation with the man in question rather than asumme so much based on one look.
He may have well of been bank staff so he may not have been actually sacked
Nurseries can be very strange, I understand they are in fear of being sued or lossing clients, but they can react way over the top. A few weeks ago we were called in to our little boys nursery because an 'incident' had occured, basically, a 2yr old girl had followed him in to the toilets and taken down his nappy for him. They way they approached the whole subject was so overblown, having several meetings and huge apologies. It was like, Christ, they're 2 don't sexualise their behaviour, She was interested in potty training and showing him how to go about it. If it had been the other way round and they'd labelled my 2 yr old with lacivious behaviour I would have been severally pissed off.
to talk to the man teacher
and she cried for like a week. Kept on asking where it was. And now she's a lesbian.
"I was told that this behaviour “had been raised” as a potential issue among other members of staff, but that as a group the teachers had decided that as a practice this was fine."
The nursery would have discussed hand holding, sitting on laps etc and decided that it was ok, different schools and nurseries have different policies regarding this. This doesn't mean the man in questioned had started doing it and the others went 'oh that's probably fine then'.
"So concerns had been raised – about him in particular, not about others – but nothing had been done. I presume this was because they had nothing to go on but a hunch. I was then asked whether I would be happy to bring my daughter back to the nursery if he was there. I said that, regrettably, I would not. I was called the next day and told that for “a number of reasons”, they would not be engaging the services of this particular teacher again."
This guy is just lying now, there's nothing to suggest the man disregarded rules and had kids sat on his lap anyway or that the discussion of children sitting on laps came about due to this man's behaviour.
Consider me irked by this, well done i guess to the author.
so someone can complain he looks a bit paedo-ey to his company and demand he's sacked. The fucking entitled cunt.