Man alone in Dulwich park playground (Lounged)

[Jules-and-Boo]

there are certain things all men should be aware of when it comes to behaviour

1. Do not hang around children on your own as this may be perceived as a threat

2. Do not walk behind a single woman when it's late, even if you're going in the same direction - cross the road - this will most likely scare the hell out of her

and so on.

It's right the OP has raised her concerns, valid or not - it's better than something happening and then wishing she'd said something.

It would have been better to let a dad in the park with his kids know, maybe he could have spoken to him at the time.

Or called the police and taken a description.

Most likely nothing to worry about, but it may not have been innocent.

[twinhunters]

A lone man sitting in a park shouldn?t be a problem but sadly in this day and age it?s best to air on side of caution . Look what happened to young boy in burgess park .if it?s a bylaw he shouldn?t be there end of , plenty of places to rest elsewhere in park . Op only says she was uncomfortable which is right , we have to be aware of surroundings ,it?s some people?s comments that don?t help , I?m a older lady and wouldn?t sit in a child?s play area without kids , there is no need when plenty of places in park to be .

[craigyboy71]

I know East Dulwich seems to have been taken over by young families, but as a single male I can't see the problem with this guy chilling out in a public area at all. Let the man do what he wants as long as he isn't causing any harm, or breaking any laws.

[Peckhampam]

Craigyboy, empathy or commonsense is needed and a childrens' playground is not a public area

[JohnL]

Worth remembering anyone older wandering alone could have alzheimers - the wandering thing happened to an aunt and a neighbor and it's horrible for relatives.

[bsand]

jimlad48 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I am depressed at the attitude that single male =

> problem.

>

> I?m a childless male and occasionally meet my

> friends and their children, or my godchildren at

> the park. If I arrive early and have to wait a few

> minutes for them on my own, does that make me

> suspicious?

>

> I have friends who are stay at home Dads. If they

> go to the park and their kid runs off, while they

> wait for them, does that make them suspicious?

>

> I know people with learning challenges who are

> lovely people but may happily stand by the park

> minding their own business. Are they suspicious

> too?

>

> What makes me so cross here is that we assume

> single male = paedophile. We?d never say the same

> about a single woman, and I am 100% certain that a

> woman standing on their own in the park wouldn?t

> have aroused any suspicions or threads on EDF at

> all.

>

> You may not like the fact that he was there, but

> if he wasn?t breaking the law, and you weren?t

> prepared to call Police/Council or even

> appropriately challenge him, then that should have

> been a steer to not raise it here. People have

> committed suicide over false paedophile claims,

> and yet here you are describing someone who has,

> on the surface, done nothing wrong and where no

> evidence exists of wrongdoing, and effectively

> slandered them.

And increased the climate of fear and scaremongering for no useful end.

[Earl Aelfheah]

macutd Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> this is a really difficult situation and I feel

> very cautious about writing anything. But it seems

> very sad that an adult is seen as a pervert if

> they are standing near children playing.

This. Perhaps he's enjoying watching the kids play in an entirely innocent way. The assumption that there must be some sort of perverted sexual motive is just so sad.

[EDBoost]

Peckhampam Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Craigyboy, empathy or commonsense is needed and a

> children's' playground is not a public area

How is a playground in a park NOT a public area?? Anyone can go in or out. Not saying it wouldn't be weird if there was a guy going just to see kids at a playground, but it doesn't have to be for perverted reasons!

The point if this thread is to see if it was right to call out a guy on a public forum and suggest he could be a peodo, when in reality he's just sitting there minding his own business.

People shouldn't be so quick to judge. Your statement makes no sense at all and ridiculous.

[pk]

i must've missed the bit where anyone's assumed anyone was a paedophile

[JohnL]

EDBoost Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Peckhampam Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Craigyboy, empathy or commonsense is needed and

> a

> > children's' playground is not a public area

>

> How is a playground in a park NOT a public area??

> Anyone can go in or out. Not saying it wouldn't be

> weird if there was a guy going just to see kids at

> a playground, but it doesn't have to be for

> perverted reasons!

>

> The point if this thread is to see if it was right

> to call out a guy on a public forum and suggest

> he could be a peodo, when in reality he's just

> sitting there minding his own business.

>

> People shouldn't be so quick to judge. Your

> statement makes no sense at all and ridiculous.

Because of the byelaw. I don't think the intention of the byelaw is that people who walk there maybe dangerous - it's that they make children and parents feel uncomfortable.

So many people may have many innocent reasons for being there though.

[Upwind]

craigyboy71 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I know East Dulwich seems to have been taken over

> by young families, but as a single male I can't

> see the problem with this guy chilling out in a

> public area at all. Let the man do what he wants

> as long as he isn't causing any harm, or breaking

> any laws.

But he was breaking the park byelaw by being in the playground without a child. He had the whole of the rest of the park to sit in!

[Upwind]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> macutd Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > this is a really difficult situation and I feel

> > very cautious about writing anything. But it

> seems

> > very sad that an adult is seen as a pervert if

> > they are standing near children playing.

>

> This. Perhaps he's enjoying watching the kids play

> in an entirely innocent way. The assumption that

> there must be some sort of perverted sexual motive

> is just so sad.

The OP didn't make any such assumption! It was all the numpties on here accusing her of calling the man a paedophile, when all she said was that she was a bit concerned.

Some of you need to have a really hard look at yourselves with the way you become so outraged at an innocent comment that you don't appear to have read properly!

[Upwind]

EDBoost Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Peckhampam Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Craigyboy, empathy or commonsense is needed and

> a

> > children's' playground is not a public area

>

> How is a playground in a park NOT a public area??

> Anyone can go in or out. Not saying it wouldn't be

> weird if there was a guy going just to see kids at

> a playground, but it doesn't have to be for

> perverted reasons!

>

> The point if this thread is to see if it was right

> to call out a guy on a public forum and suggest

> he could be a peodo, when in reality he's just

> sitting there minding his own business.

>

> People shouldn't be so quick to judge. Your

> statement makes no sense at all and ridiculous.

FFS! No one knows or needs to know why he was in there. The fact is that the law states he should not be in there without a child. It really is that simple!

[KidKruger]

"The OP didn't make any such assumption! It was all the numpties on here accusing her of calling the man a paedophile, when all she said was that she was a bit concerned"

'concerned' about what exactly ?

please advise:

1.

2.

3. etc..

[Ghlpc]

Upwind Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rahrahrah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > macutd Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > this is a really difficult situation and I

> feel

> > > very cautious about writing anything. But it

> > seems

> > > very sad that an adult is seen as a pervert

> if

> > > they are standing near children playing.

> >

> > This. Perhaps he's enjoying watching the kids

> play

> > in an entirely innocent way. The assumption

> that

> > there must be some sort of perverted sexual

> motive

> > is just so sad.

>

> The OP didn't make any such assumption! It was all

> the numpties on here accusing her of calling the

> man a paedophile, when all she said was that she

> was a bit concerned.

> Some of you need to have a really hard look at

> yourselves with the way you become so outraged at

> an innocent comment that you don't appear to have

> read properly!

Agree.

This forum continues to go downhill.

[Upwind]

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "The OP didn't make any such assumption! It was

> all the numpties on here accusing her of calling

> the man a paedophile, when all she said was that

> she was a bit concerned"

>

> 'concerned' about what exactly ?

> please advise:

> 1.

> 2.

> 3. etc..

1.An

2.Adult

3.Alone

4.In

5.The

6.Playground

7.Which

8.She

9.Thought

10.Might

11.Be

12.Suspicious

Not sure why you specified the numbering system, but happy to oblige if it makes things easier to understand.

[malumbu]

We walked home as kids, and got talking to a man in our street. He used to invite us in to look at the house he was building for himself.

One day we passed with my mother who thanked him for entertaining two 9 year olds

And the shocking thing is that all he was doing was telling us about the house he was building and nicely engaging with two curious kids.

Of course years later he wouldn't have dared talk to us at all. Things were no different to now in terms of the dangers, we were warned not to take sweets from strangers or get into stranger's cars but it is a shame that everyone gets excited without knowing the facts.

But if you see this gent do run

[Upwind]

On a more serious note, back in the summer, an eight year old boy was abducted from the Burgess Park tennis centre changing rooms, before being subjected to a sustained serious sexual assault. Maybe if someone had noticed the man going in there without a tennis racket, sports kit, or perhaps a child, this boy could have been spared a lifetime of trauma.

Fleothecat noticed something that concerned her and thought it would be helpful to notify members of this forum so they would be aware if the man was in the playground again. It was a shame then that the content of her post, was dissected, exaggerated, then mutated out of all recognition by a braying mob of EDF morons, all fighting to be the most morally outraged/wittiest poster, when a simple "Thanks for the heads up" would have sufficed. Some of the replies amounted to nothing more than ill-informed bullying. Shameful.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Sometimes you just have an instinct that something isn't quite right. So I'm not judging the OP and my comment wasn't directly addressed to them. I just find the climate of suspicion generally, a bit sad.

[JohnL]

I was thinking about the warnings we used to get as youngsters over strangers - it was the 1970s yet they were concerned (I remember when I said I talked to a man on the beach and didn't understand why my parents worried about it).

It's just that the prevailing thoughts at the time were children should be allowed to wander freely wherever we wanted without saying where we were going except "out".

[pk]

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> It's just that the prevailing thoughts at the time

> were children should be allowed to wander freely

> wherever we wanted without saying where we were

> going except "out".

maybe in hindsight that was a bit na?ve?

[savvygirl]

How long was the OP in the area? Was she there long enough to conclude this man did not have a child of his own playing in the playground? What made her think he was a loner and up to no good?

This sort of thinking reminds me of my Mum who would quickly make a judgment on a potential boyfriend saying something like "his eyes are too close together"! The OP's reasoning and logic is as daft as my Mum's was!

[JohnL]

pk Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> JohnL Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> >

> > It's just that the prevailing thoughts at the

> time

> > were children should be allowed to wander

> freely

> > wherever we wanted without saying where we were

> > going except "out".

>

> maybe in hindsight that was a bit na?ve?

It wasn't just people either - My sister ended up having a really nasty accident on a rope swing in what I can only describe as a sink hole nobody knew about. We all got a safety lecture off the police at the age of 10.

[KidKruger]

Upwind:

? KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "The OP didn't make any such assumption! It was

> all the numpties on here accusing her of calling

> the man a paedophile, when all she said was that

> she was a bit concerned"

>

> 'concerned' about what exactly ?

> please advise:

> 1.

> 2.

> 3. etc..

1.An

2.Adult

3.Alone

4.In

5.The

6.Playground

7.Which

8.She

9.Thought

10.Might

11.Be

12.Suspicious

Not sure why you specified the numbering system, but happy to oblige if it makes things easier to understand.

?

Suspicious of what ?

Suspected of what ?

[EDguy89]

I get that it's a public area and people have the right to be where they want to be......but if you're a 20 something man without a kid, WHY would you want to be in the playground? Furthermore, if you're only interested in watching the kids have fun and play, there is a bench directly outside the gated playground area. It attracts suspicion. Regardless of whether you're innocently there or not. You're inviting this sort of attention.

As a very recently former 20 something childless guy...what reason do I have to be there? It solely being a public park is pretty weak at best.

On the other hand. The original poster doesn't give enough for me to be convinced that this person may not have had a child somewhere in the playground. My biggest fear as a father is the inevitable day when someone assumes I'm not the parent of my child because of the way I look.