fatvegan

I think that's just totally tops. He always seemed so open and naive about everything. I never really believed that someone who happily admitted to sharing a bed with children would have that much to hide. I'm sure he is pretty nutty, but I think he just likes kids a lot. And not in way the media thought he did. It's so sad when men who aren't abusing kids, but are one of the few still willing to openly care for them, get attacked. For the sake of kids, we have to so incredibly careful about who we accuse. Which is the problem I suppose. We also have to be incredibly careful about who we give the benefit of the doubt. Probably the media is to blame, in the sense that once you've accused someone publically it's all over. People will always think that Michael Jackon abused kids, no matter what else happens.

I read this study that some child psychology folk did a while back. They said that children who were abused, but received good care after it, nearly always tended to move on. But kids who couldn't tell anyone, or who weren't believed, or weren't cared for, continued to be messed up. The differences were really distinct.

By removing all men from positions dealing with children (which is what will indirectly happen) we're removing the risk of something happening, which has the potential for short term trauma. By removing men from positions dealing with children, we're also removing some of the support that could prevent that short term trauma from becoming permanent.