Boys into Ladies Toilets

indiegirl_2

withabix wrote:

At what age do I stop taking my daughters into the gents toilets with me for fear of them being accosted in the ladies toilets by paedophile women or lesbians????

Sorry to pull this off thread for a second, but Withabix I think you really need to edit that comment. I for one am very upset by your assumptions.

As a homosexual woman (yes, lesbian) I am appalled that you think that I would accost young girls in toilets. Paedophilia and Homosexuality are two entirely separate entities - some people may 'fit' into both categories, but it is unfair to 'lump' all lesbians or gay men in with paedophiles. You risk a backlash by assuming that they are one and the same.

I might like women, but underage girls is something I'll leave to the perverts, thank you very much. Whatever you might think about my lifestyle, it isn't as perverted as paedophilia, and I think you need to remember that when commenting on these threads.

Nicki

In fairness to Withabix I don't think he meant this in the way you think, though you need to read the whole thread to understand this.

The OP was about a woman taking her boys into the ladies because she was worried they would be molested in the gents (ie male paedophiles targetting boys). Withabix is, I think, a man, and is saying should he take his older girls into the mens at a similar age in case they are molested in the ladies on their own (the point being that only ladies use the ladies) I don't think, though again I may be wrong that he was implying that lesbians are more likely to be paedophiles than heterosexual women.

It is however an excellent point, and one which a few of us (gay and straight) on this thread have made that homosexuality and paedophilia are two completely different things and should not be assumed to go hand in hand.

dianadors

My daughter (aged 12) came out of the ladies loos in Asda (harrogate) in a real tiz recently. She had been hassled for money by 2 girls that were injecting drugs. I will never let my kids use public toilets on their own again - and I'm sorry if it inconveniences anyone disabled or otherwise, but my childrens safety and wellbeing is my no.1 priority. And as for the lady who objected to little boys piddling on the seat (which they do do) If I had a £1 for every ladies toilet that Ive been in which has been "sprayed" by a lady "hovering" and then not wiped, I wouldnt need to frequent a money saving website. And yes perverts do exist, and they are not so rare as you might think (best friend is a policewoman). And they are not usually gay - they are just perverts and often difficult to spot.

looby75

Nicki wrote:

I didn't miss any bits out of my post though If you read again, I said I asked the mums standing outside about why they were doing it. If the mum is inside with the child, then I assume there is a good reason for this - maybe a child with a non-visible disability or an adult with a non-visible disability and a young child.

As I said, my DDs disability isn't instantly visible, and if I were stopped and questioned leaving the loo with her, I'd have no problems answering the question calmly and politely. Mind you, I always have her DLA letter on me, so would have no problems proving the issue.

Why are you so upset by what I've posted Looby? I genuinely don't understand why it has got people in general so hot under the collar, but you in particular, as nothing I've said, implied or suggested in any way casts aspersions on you using the facilities - in fact the opposite, I've said leave them free for people like you with a genuine need!

what you said the first post I replied to and what you said in your reply to me were 2 different things, but I'm not going to argue over that

The reason I responded to your comments is because I have been accosted by a woman waiting to take her dd into the disabled toilets, I was in a lot of pain and because of this it did take me a bit longer than normal to use the toilet and by the time I came out this woman and her dd were waiting. When she saw me walk out she started ranting and raving about how disgusting it was that I had taken my ds in the disabled loos where there was obviously nothing wrong with either of us. It was very embarressing and I simply told her she knew nothing about me or my health and walked away. A couple of weeks later I need to use the same toilet again and was told by a security guard that I couldn't use the disabled loos as they had had a lot of complaints about none disabled people hogging the loo. I ended up struggling in a normal toilet cubicle and ended up aggravating my sciatica so much I had to spend the next 2 days in bed.

So now if anyone asks why I am using the disabled loos (which btw I only ever use if my sciatica is bad, I use the normal ones when I'm not in pain) they are told "because I need to" tbh, it's not very often I have to wait to use a disabled loo, and I've never seen the problem with them doubling up as a "family" loo.

indiegirl_2

Nicki wrote:

In fairness to Withabix I don't think he meant this in the way you think, though you need to read the whole thread to understand this.

The OP was about a woman taking her boys into the ladies because she was worried they would be molested in the gents (ie male paedophiles targetting boys). Withabix is, I think, a man, and is saying should he take his older girls into the mens at a similar age in case they are molested in the ladies on their own (the point being that only ladies use the ladies) I don't think, though again I may be wrong that he was implying that lesbians are more likely to be paedophiles than heterosexual women.

It is however an excellent point, and one which a few of us (gay and straight) on this thread have made that homosexuality and paedophilia are two completely different things and should not be assumed to go hand in hand.

I'd read through the whole thread and wanted my point to be taken by all as a reminder (as dianadors above me says) that the two 'categories' are separate. Withabix, I'm afraid, got the brunt of my anger due to his assumption that he needs to protect his daughter from lesbians. It was an irrelevant comment to make in light of the original topic. We lesbians are no more dangerous to a young girl than a straight woman is. That's my point.

I apologise for taking the topic off thread, but I feel that it's important not to assume that gay people are paedophiles and vice versa - anyone can be either, and sometimes (but not always) both.

inkie

I am so glad that I have daughters that I can go in with to keep an eye on!

DazedByTheLight

inkie wrote:

I am so glad that I have daughters that I can go in with to keep an eye on!

Is gender selection the answer?! :rolleyes:

Oldernotwiser

I think that most people here are clear about the differences between paedophiles and gay men. On the other hand, the number of people who are worried about their sons being molested in gents' toilets indicates that many people think it likely that they'll be attacked by strange men in there. As about 50% of sexual abuse of children is committed by fathers and stepfathers, it's ironic that so many people consider that having their partner take the children into the toilet with them to be a safety judgement!

nickyhutch

I think Withabix was being ironic. He meant why are we only bleating on about protecting children from mens' toilets, and assuming that they're not in danger from womens' toilets.

There are all sorts of dangers in all sorts of places which we must, as parents, of course protect our children against, but I will say again that there is such as thing as being over cautious and creating a generation of molly-coddled, shy, scared, paranoid children.

withabix

Indiegirl - I meant no offence to lesbians!!!

My reason for including lesbians and female paedophiles in my post is that a number of earlier posts in this thread suggest that gents toilets are full of gay men and male paedophiles and gay male paedophiles.

I felt that a large number of posts in this thread were imbalanced and my post should be taked as it has been by most readers - as tongue in cheek!!!

I can only assume that most women have never set foot in a gents toilet.