Wow, such discriminatory nonsense just adds validity to conniving mothers - estranging fathers from access to their children.

Journalists like them who disregard statistics (and ethics) to push an agenda, are poor excuses for their fellow professionals.

Marx, I don't think I can add to your comment. It pretty much says it all.

how many men are also of this opinion? it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if this garbage was in fact written by a man. sadly, the myth of female perfectionism is something that has been around long before the advent of feminism. i'd go as far to say that the majority of men think this way...

men who are easily swayed by women are by far our biggest and most dangerous enemy - as it is them who prop up the misandrist and totalitarian regimes that govern us.

A couple of replies to my comment, from women.

Quote from sally

I used to tell my daughter if she was lost and to go to a woman with children, this was to give my daughter confidence, she had limited contact with men and was very wary of them . She did once get lost on a beach and she had gone to a woman with children. If I hadnt said this I dont know what she would have done, she certainly would not have asked a man for help. However I appreciate that is can seem sexist and wrong but it was right for my daughter .
She had no granddads or Uncles so other than her Dad there are no male influences in her life, although she is a teenager now so I hope it stays that way

Wow, this one really loves her kid so much that she *seems* to be hiding her from men.. I mean, we make up 50% of the population and here she is telling us that her girl has no male influences in her life AND she wants it to remain that way. What a hater.

Quote from Єℓℓιє

Well, no... it' "statistically" safer... that's not sexism, that's a fact. Like saying men are "on average" stronger than women.

My reply:

Look at the actual rates of child-abuse. You will see that women dominate the child-abuse statistics... so it is untrue to say that 'statistically women are safer' when the complete opposite is true.
What you women are saying is that a child should favour a woman who can be seen to be physically abusing her children in the open over a man who is enjoying a drink of pop with his children, laughing and joking... Totally wrong and your messages are quite literally not only promoting further misandry but also potentially endangering your children.

If I could post a comment.....

This is the kind of feminist mythology that does children no favour's whatsoever.

Gooogle Terri-Lynne McClintic or Karla Homolka.

Just the kind of women your lost child should run to for assistance.

Adding to what Karl has said, stats show more snatching of children is undertaken by women, in a number of western countries. Particularly in hospital, medical and caring environments.

Worst still, the disturbing rise of cases where certain women attack pregnant women and cut them open to steal their child (I've never heard of a man doing the same).

Besides, it's promulgating a modern fear-inducing myth that there's swarms of child snatchers, like the antagonist in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, inhabiting your local playground, just waiting to pounce.

Whoaaa! Wait a minute!

There is one line in the generally informative original article that says this:

a uniformed person or, perhaps, a woman with children (women with children are statistically “safer”) and tell them you are lost.

It just doesn't say that women are safer than men - nowhere! It could equally mean that (statistically) women with children are safer than lone women.. who might also be predatory. That sounds reasonable.

What's more, the safe 'uniformed person' could be male or female.

The advice given is perfectly sound.

Don't we have battles enough, without turning every little media comment into a "Feminism versus MRM" grandstand?

Quote from Yan Yan

Whoaaa! Wait a minute!

There is one line in the generally informative original article that says this:


It just doesn't say that women are safer than men - nowhere! It could equally mean that (statistically) women with children are safer than lone women.. who might also be predatory. That sounds reasonable.

What's more, the safe 'uniformed person' could be male or female.

The advice given is perfectly sound.

Don't we have battles enough, without turning every little media comment into a "Feminism versus MRM" grandstand?

The article may not say so but they certainly are implying it.

Quote from outdoors

The article may not say so but they certainly are implying it.

Inference is the medias way of avoiding law suits, but ensuring circulation continues.

Quote from outdoors

The article may not say so but they certainly are implying it.

Precisely. Which is why I pointed out this part:

Quote from Marx

a child should favour a woman who can be seen to be physically abusing her children in the open over a man who is enjoying a drink of pop with his children, laughing and joking...

Quote from Yan Yan

Whoaaa! Wait a minute!

There is one line in the generally informative original article that says this:


It just doesn't say that women are safer than men - nowhere! It could equally mean that (statistically) women with children are safer than lone women.. who might also be predatory. That sounds reasonable.

What's more, the safe 'uniformed person' could be male or female.

The advice given is perfectly sound.

Don't we have battles enough, without turning every little media comment into a "Feminism versus MRM" grandstand?

Then they should have said something more to the effect of: "an adult with children is safer than an adult without children..."

You can gang up all want, but the original article is not guilty.

There was absolutely no explicit implication of men as potential abusers in that particular article.

Soap-box paranoid rhetoric does the MRM no favours.

Blaming the media, the courts and all the slights that western men receive on a daily basis is not now the way to go.

Oooh! Now we're really afraid, but not of actual validated statements, but "IMPLICATIONS'.

Quote from Yan Yan

You can gang up all want, but the original article is not guilty.

We'll get you eventually.

Quote from Celtic Druid

Chitty Chitty Bang Bang

That was a good movie.