Originally Posted by chinaKat
I don't think that simply keeping your child away from all men is going to provide the protection you think you are giving. You may FEEL that way, but the statistics don't (IMO) bear out the perceived threat vs. actual threat.
You seem to think that some of us are trying to protect our children from all risks and that we're somehow unaware that this is an impossible goal. That's not the point I'm making.
I don't think anyone is saying that they're keeping their child completely away from men, but, most children who are molested, are left alone with a male they know and molested by him. If you don't leave your child alone with men and boys, there are fewer opportunities and thus a reduced risk of that particular tragedy. I am perfectly aware that this choice doesn't rule out death by drowning, nor gun shot, nor choking on a peanut, nor even the possibility of sexual molestation. I can't rule out dying in a car accident, but I can reduce her risks by the kind of car I drive, the manner in which I drive, and the carseat she uses. There are no guarantees, of course. Everyone is aware of that.
I've read Freakonomics
and not only took 4 years of statistics, but have taught it, as well as Research Methods methods for the behavioral sciences. I'm still not sure why you brought up that particular example of the pool versus guns, because I actually attempt to protect my Dd from those risks, as well, and I'm teaching her to look both ways, and she's not allowed to play with razors and matches. I mean, really, she's 5. My job is to protect her and teach her how to protect herself when she's ready. She's not ready to protect herself from molestation, and while there's only a small probability that this would occur, it's something that is even smaller given the people who care for her. If her chance was 1 in 100 for molestation, now it is much closer to 0, and that's a good thing.