Anonymous wrote:[/youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9--t3zl4NkY[youtube]

his name and the words to the song are disturbing

[/youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9--t3zl4NkY[youtube]

his name and the words to the song are disturbing

Anonymous wrote:You all know who 15:36 sounds like, don’t you?
He went a bit over the top claiming to have attended 50 Knick shows when his child was little. Come on, now.

Exactly. They don't want their tactics and methods revealed.

You all know who 15:36 sounds like, don’t you?
He went a bit over the top claiming to have attended 50 Knick shows when his child was little. Come on, now.

I have taken my DD to many performances of Mr Knick Knack when she was little. I have not been to his show for more than 13 years (DD is 17; last time would have been around 4). At no time did he try to separate the kids from the parents. At no time did he interact with kids without the parents present. (I had probably been to 50 of his performances).

While child porn is disgusting and illegal, there is a big difference between possessing it and molesting kids.

I should add, from memory, I never saw an instance with behavior I thought was grooming. (I am not sure if you can groom a toddler or preschooler though).

What I will say is to watch out for the person that tried to be alone (no one else of any age) with your kid. For example, when I coached softball (I am male), I always made sure there was another parent present. If I was the only one at a practice (I got there first to set up, even before my wife brought our DD), and someone else arrived with the DD, I asked them to stay until someone else arrived. Not because I was worried about me doing anything. But, because that was the league guidelines.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That pediatrician example is another one where a man chooses to work with children.

Curious, what’s the likelihood of your child’s sex abuser being a man, versus a woman?

About 98% more likely to be a man? Yikes.

more like 90% not 98% of reported cases.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. You're making no sense. in order for a performer to groom a child he would have to have constant access. In your own statement you say overtime... First, how many times is a Child going to see the performance and how many times is that child going to be alone at the performance? Furthermore, after the performance what is he grooming them for? When would he get a chance to be alone with these kids?

This isn't cognitive dissonance. This is common f****** sense

I hate irrational stupid people like you who make it seem like others like me are trying to defend a bad guy but man. Use some common sense

Exactly. I’m not sure how they think that this person can be grooming a kid, when they are never going to be alone in the future or ever with that child. Grooming happens with relative or close friend, not in this situation. Unbelievable

And I have no idea why people who have taken their kids to see these shows keep insisting that nothing could ever have happened.

You're not trying to defend him, you're trying to defend yourselves, because you feel weird that you took your kids to a performance and now you're shocked (!) that the performer was recently revealed to be a pedophile. I'm shocked that you're shocked.

Well said.

I don’t think this is true. It’s the only time we’ve heard a story in this area about a performer doing this. We hear much more about bad teachers. I don’t think people are kicking themselves over an anomaly of a situation.

You're correct; they are not. Not a single poster said, "Oh my God! I wish I'd never taken my kid to his show!" We just have a couple of drama queens in this thread who aren't satisfied with the already sordid facts as we know them so far.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. You're making no sense. in order for a performer to groom a child he would have to have constant access. In your own statement you say overtime... First, how many times is a Child going to see the performance and how many times is that child going to be alone at the performance? Furthermore, after the performance what is he grooming them for? When would he get a chance to be alone with these kids?

This isn't cognitive dissonance. This is common f****** sense

I hate irrational stupid people like you who make it seem like others like me are trying to defend a bad guy but man. Use some common sense

Exactly. I’m not sure how they think that this person can be grooming a kid, when they are never going to be alone in the future or ever with that child. Grooming happens with relative or close friend, not in this situation. Unbelievable

And I have no idea why people who have taken their kids to see these shows keep insisting that nothing could ever have happened.

You're not trying to defend him, you're trying to defend yourselves, because you feel weird that you took your kids to a performance and now you're shocked (!) that the performer was recently revealed to be a pedophile. I'm shocked that you're shocked.

Well said.

I don’t think this is true. It’s the only time we’ve heard a story in this area about a performer doing this. We hear much more about bad teachers. I don’t think people are kicking themselves over an anomaly of a situation.

I meant bad people exist in every field

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That pediatrician example is another one where a man chooses to work with children.

Curious, what’s the likelihood of your child’s sex abuser being a man, versus a woman?

About 98% more likely to be a man? Yikes.

most men don’t harm kids. Bas people exist in every field, but most men aren’t getting into fields to hurt kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. You're making no sense. in order for a performer to groom a child he would have to have constant access. In your own statement you say overtime... First, how many times is a Child going to see the performance and how many times is that child going to be alone at the performance? Furthermore, after the performance what is he grooming them for? When would he get a chance to be alone with these kids?

This isn't cognitive dissonance. This is common f****** sense

I hate irrational stupid people like you who make it seem like others like me are trying to defend a bad guy but man. Use some common sense

Exactly. I’m not sure how they think that this person can be grooming a kid, when they are never going to be alone in the future or ever with that child. Grooming happens with relative or close friend, not in this situation. Unbelievable

And I have no idea why people who have taken their kids to see these shows keep insisting that nothing could ever have happened.

You're not trying to defend him, you're trying to defend yourselves, because you feel weird that you took your kids to a performance and now you're shocked (!) that the performer was recently revealed to be a pedophile. I'm shocked that you're shocked.

Well said.

Anonymous wrote:That pediatrician example is another one where a man chooses to work with children.

Curious, what’s the likelihood of your child’s sex abuser being a man, versus a woman?

About 98% more likely to be a man? Yikes.

That pediatrician example is another one where a man chooses to work with children.

There was a pediatrician in Frederick who abused a 13 year old girl. Every industry, unfortunately has bad people in it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of misandry and broad assumptions about men being always guilty.

Imagine if you said it about (insert race here) instead of men. Would you still feel comfortable saying it?

One can point to statistics that those of a certain race are more likely to commit crime X or crime Y (just like more men than women are charged with pedophilia and related crimes), so should be treat them all with suspicion then?

You know who's actually responsible for misandry? The pedophile, molesting, rapist, child porn, abusive men. Quit blaming women - the ones responsible for the negative perception of men... are the men. Get mad at them - not the women pointing simply them out. If you're such a stand up guy, you should be PISSED OFF that there are so many sick men making you look bad. Direct your frustration and criticism to the appropriate parties.

You know who's actually responsible for violent crimes? The men of X race. Quit blaming all people. Get mad at people of X race. If you are of X race, you should be pissed off that so many people of X race are making you look bad.

Oh, you poor moron. Have you ever looked at the sex offender registry in your state?

Yes, and I've also read the violent crime reports in my county. The majority of violent crimes (that are not domestic disputes) are committed by race X. Should I now be suspicious of all people of race X?