Man forced to leave Barnes & Noble store in AZ for being in children's section alone - Page 4

jasonpatterson · 9th June 2012, 12:20 AM

Originally Posted by Sabrina

Now granted, I'm a woman, but I can't recall a single time

That's the difference. Barring bloodstained clothes or visible weaponry, women alone in a children's area are assumed to be doing something wholesome and good.

Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry

I'm a big, 6'3" man, and I've never gotten a weird eye from others. (unless I missed it) Is it the way you present yourself that sometimes worries others? and if so, do men need to be constantly concerned that if they project the wrong image, they'll be targeted as potential threats?

I'm in no way claiming that you're wrong about never having experienced this, but frankly, I'm astonished. I'm a stay at home dad with two daughters, and I get the evil eye from moms constantly, whether my kids are with me or not. I don't know if I give off some creeper vibe or something, but they watch me like a hawk. I've never been kicked out of a bookstore, but I get followed around by store employees if I go to buy something like clothing without the kids present. It used to bother me, but I've basically become resigned to the fact that I am assumed to be up to no good unless proven otherwise.

EHocking · 9th June 2012, 04:21 AM

Originally Posted by The Fallen Serpent

Over Christmas I spent about 30 to 40 minutes shopping in the children's section of Half-Priced Books. I am a tall beared man ...

You were definitely in the wrong section of the book store then.

TheGoldcountry · 9th June 2012, 05:03 AM

Originally Posted by jasonpatterson

I'm in no way claiming that you're wrong about never having experienced this, but frankly, I'm astonished. I'm a stay at home dad with two daughters, and I get the evil eye from moms constantly, whether my kids are with me or not. I don't know if I give off some creeper vibe or something, but they watch me like a hawk. I've never been kicked out of a bookstore, but I get followed around by store employees if I go to buy something like clothing without the kids present. It used to bother me, but I've basically become resigned to the fact that I am assumed to be up to no good unless proven otherwise.

That pisses me off, sincerely, and in retrospect I think I have been under scrutiny at times, but I shrugged it off because I knew I wasn't doing anything bad, so *^% 'em.

TheGoldcountry · 9th June 2012, 05:05 AM

Originally Posted by EHocking

You were definitely in the wrong section of the book store then.

You read my mind- we must be equally disturbed.

PhreePhly · 9th June 2012, 09:36 AM

Originally Posted by SezMe

I think his sarcasm tank runneth over.

If so, sorry Roger, I'll blame Poe's Law. You just never know.

Skeptical Greg · 9th June 2012, 10:25 AM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

Point learned in this thread:

Skeptical Greg, isn't.
.........

I 'm skeptical that you are a Darth or a Rotor ..

I'm not skeptical about a lot of things ..

What exactly do you feel I'm not being skeptical about, that I should be, in the context of this thread?

The Fallen Serpent · 9th June 2012, 10:43 AM

Originally Posted by EHocking

You were definitely in the wrong section of the book store then.

Hey, what is wrong with a bear man shopping for kids? Sexuality shouldn't be a bar to shopping for children, it certainly isn't a bar for having them or being an uncle to them.

(I actually meant bearded, but I'll run with it.)

TheGoldcountry · 9th June 2012, 04:35 PM

Originally Posted by The Fallen Serpent

Hey, what is wrong with a bear man shopping for kids? Sexuality shouldn't be a bar to shopping for children, it certainly isn't a bar for having them or being an uncle to them.

(I actually meant bearded, but I'll run with it.)

We all know what you meant (I hope).

SezMe · 9th June 2012, 05:07 PM

I took it to mean he's hirsute.

Darth Rotor · 9th June 2012, 06:19 PM

Originally Posted by crimresearch

Link to this rule?

Read post #10 in this thread.

Darth Rotor · 9th June 2012, 06:21 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

What exactly do you feel I'm not being skeptical about, that I should be, in the context of this thread?

I find it interesting that you have to ask.

Read this thread, from page one through 4, and pretend you are not Skeptical Greg. Pretend you are a neutral observer.

You might catch on to something.

Or not.

crimresearch · 9th June 2012, 07:17 PM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

Read post #10 in this thread.

Post #10 says nothing even close to proving your extreme assertion that there is a "rule that an adult male must be accompanied by a child to be much of anywhere in the US of A".

But of course, you knew that.

crimresearch · 9th June 2012, 07:18 PM

Originally Posted by SezMe

I took it to mean he's hirsute.

You are half right...

Skeptical Greg · 10th June 2012, 08:08 AM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

I find it interesting that you have to ask.

Read this thread, from page one through 4, and pretend you are not Skeptical Greg. Pretend you are a neutral observer.

You might catch on to something.

Or not.

In other words, you have nothing.. Just trying to be cute..

My position in this thread has consistently been, that there are times when concern may be warranted, when adult males are hanging out ( unaccompanied with one or more young children ) in areas where young children tend to congregate..

Please elaborate on where my lack of skepticism comes into play ..

I fail to see where this discussion is even about skepticism other than your skepticism about my skepticism ..

TjW · 10th June 2012, 11:28 AM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

In other words, you have nothing.. Just trying to be cute..

My position in this thread has consistently been, that there are times when concern may be warranted, when adult males are hanging out ( unaccompanied with one or more young children ) in areas where young children tend to congregate..

Please elaborate on where my lack of skepticism comes into play ..

I fail to see where this discussion is even about skepticism other than your skepticism about my skepticism ..

Could this be true of adult females, as well? If not, why not? If so, then what, exactly, does the sex of any adult in such a situation have to do with concern being warranted?

Skeptical Greg · 10th June 2012, 01:20 PM

Sounds like a whole 'nother discussion, and nothing about my skepticism in this thread..

Darth Rotor · 10th June 2012, 01:33 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

My position in this thread has consistently been, that there are times when concern may be warranted, when adult males are hanging out ( unaccompanied with one or more young children ) in areas where young children tend to congregate.

And that, right there, shows me a lack of skepticism, and a representation of your bias and prejudices, based up on your assumptions.

Note that the locale in question is a book store. Have you ever actually been in a Barnes and Noble book store?

I'll remember your attitudes in the future.

As to "Skeptical Greg" isn't ...

To be skeptical in this thread, you might have wanted to ask:

Did the man tell the truth about how he was treated in the book store? (It's sort of hard to tell, from what is presented. He may be lying through his teeth, or telling the whole truth.)

What is it about this story that we don't know that might shed some light on what looks like unusual behavior by the employee? Consider this, when you protest my pointing out your bias:

Most of the time, kids don't end up in a Barnes and Noble unless an adult has brought them there. It's not like a neighborhood playground.

DR

TjW · 10th June 2012, 01:40 PM

This is exactly on point for the discussion of your "skepticism" in this thread.
Your position has consistently been that the sex of an adult shopper in the children's book section sans accompanying child is relevant to the ejection of that shopper from the book store.

Most people seem willing to accept that there may be certain behaviors that might warrant such an ejection, but that such behaviors weren't claimed in the incident under discussion.

Do you have any evidence to support your opinion that the sex of an adult unaccompanied by a child should be relevant?

Skeptical Greg · 10th June 2012, 04:22 PM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

And that, right there, shows me a lack of skepticism, and a representation of your bias and prejudices, based up on your assumptions.
.....

DR

What bias, prejudice and assumptions are you talking about?

My first post in this thread said the behavior of the store personnel in the treatment of the man in the kiddy section was stupid ( and I will add - unwarranted ) ..

I'm still wondering what you think I should have been skeptical of ...

Originally Posted by TjW

This is exactly on point for the discussion of your "skepticism" in this thread.
Your position has consistently been that the sex of an adult shopper in the children's book section sans accompanying child is relevant to the ejection of that shopper from the book store.

Most people seem willing to accept that there may be certain behaviors that might warrant such an ejection, but that such behaviors weren't claimed in the incident under discussion.

Do you have any evidence to support your opinion that the sex of an adult unaccompanied by a child should be relevant?

I never claimed to have that opinion.. The gender of the subject in the OP happened to have been male, so subsequent posts sort of flowed from there..

I believe it is too late to go back and make all my posts gender neutral ..

Could you be more specific as to what I should have been skeptical of ?

crimresearch · 10th June 2012, 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

What bias, prejudice and assumptions are you talking about?

My first post in this thread said the behavior of the store personnel in the treatment of the man in the kiddy section was stupid ( and I will add - unwarranted ) ..

I'm still wondering what you think I should have been skeptical of ...

I never claimed to have that opinion.. The gender of the subject in the OP happened to have been male, so subsequent posts sort of flowed from there..

I believe it is too late to go back and make all my posts gender neutral ..

Could you be more specific as to what I should have been skeptical of ?

You should have been skeptical that you would be allowed to have the opinion you stated, instead of having a straw one assigned to you.

Robrob · 10th June 2012, 04:39 PM

Every reason to approach the man to politely and causally ask "can I help you?" just to remind him the staff is aware of his presence. No reason at all to eject the guy. Assuming the man's description is accurate (and remember - it's just his side of the story), it's not right.

Quote:

‘You cannot stay. This is not an area where men are allowed to be by themselves.’ ” The man, a Barnes & Noble employee, then escorted him out of the store “firmly,” Amin said.

TjW · 10th June 2012, 05:12 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

What bias, prejudice and assumptions are you talking about?

My first post in this thread said the behavior of the store personnel in the treatment of the man in the kiddy section was stupid ( and I will add - unwarranted ) ..

Which is certainly unobjectionable. And then you went on to say "... there might have been cause for concern."

I think that's probably the part of your position people are having trouble with.

SezMe · 10th June 2012, 05:39 PM

That's the part I'm troubled by. Unless there's more to the story - and there may well be - the ejection without further cause is unwarranted.

Multivac · 11th June 2012, 02:51 AM

Originally Posted by fuelair

I think I figured that out - do the last two letters stand for "and die"? If so, I agree heartily....

What is particularly entertaining is that if the nervous are actually being assaulted they will be happy to see me approaching (they may not know that until what happens next, but). (I admire Rohrschach) (and loathe the slime that let Kitty Genovese die).*

*and I know which of the two was real.

Yes, the FO stand for "go away" and the AD means "and die".

Obviously kids need to be protected from people who wish to harm them, but the automatic assumption by some people that a man on his own is a paedophile really annoys me.

Wasn't familiar with Kitty Genovese, so read the wiki page relating to her death. How can people witness something like this and make no attempt to help? I am definitely NOT a hero or a fighter, but would like to believe that I would try to help in this kind of situation.

Sabrina · 11th June 2012, 04:48 AM

There are absolutely times when it is appropriate to eject someone from a store. This, from what little we can glean from the articles, is not one of them. The store in question has, as far as I can tell, thus far not given any information as to why they felt Mr. Amin was acting suspiciously enough to warrant ejecting him from the store, and the only excuse we are aware of for their actions is the BS "rule" that this particular store apparently made up which stated men could not be in the children's section of the store alone. Given that I have never heard of this rule in relation to a store which is there specifically to sell goods to people of all shapes and sizes (i.e., if their money is good, they can shop here), I think we can safely assume, barring further evidence being introduced, that the store was vastly in the wrong.

I offered an example up-thread where it would have been absolutely warranted to throw the guy out (I really wish we'd managed to catch that pervert; hopefully he was caught later, if there's any justice in the world); but speaking on a cell phone, in an area of the store where there apparently were no children anyway, despite it being marked as the children's area is the stupidest reason I have ever heard of to eject someone. Show me proof that this guy was doing something wrong; otherwise, my sympathies are currently firmly on his side.

Careyp74 · 11th June 2012, 06:06 AM

I think that society is a little jumpy now a days with the whole child molester thing. That is the first thing that comes to mind a lot of times when seeing men with young girls, at least that is what the jokes are about. I remember getting these free phone stickers from Malboro.

I showed my wife, and she said "Omg, what does that stand for, child porn?" I had to remind her what my initials are.

Originally Posted by jasonpatterson

That's the difference. Barring bloodstained clothes or visible weaponry, women alone in a children's area are assumed to be doing something wholesome and good.

I'm in no way claiming that you're wrong about never having experienced this, but frankly, I'm astonished. I'm a stay at home dad with two daughters, and I get the evil eye from moms constantly, whether my kids are with me or not. I don't know if I give off some creeper vibe or something, but they watch me like a hawk. I've never been kicked out of a bookstore, but I get followed around by store employees if I go to buy something like clothing without the kids present. It used to bother me, but I've basically become resigned to the fact that I am assumed to be up to no good unless proven otherwise.

You should have a shirt made up. "Don't worry, I am their father"

Originally Posted by PhreePhly

If so, sorry Roger, I'll blame Poe's Law. You just never know.

That's what the smileys are for.

Xulld · 11th June 2012, 11:18 AM

Originally Posted by Careyp74

You should have a shirt made up. "Don't worry, I am their father"

Id advise, Dad, otherwise they may think him a Priest . . .

jasonpatterson · 11th June 2012, 11:48 AM

Originally Posted by Careyp74

You should have a shirt made up. "Don't worry, I am their father"

They'd probably call the cops on me. Too suspicious. Maybe I should erase the "Free Candy!" sign that I spray painted on the side of my windowless van...

Accidental Martyr · 11th June 2012, 01:35 PM

Originally Posted by Multivac

Yes, the FO stand for "go away" and the AD means "and die".

Obviously kids need to be protected from people who wish to harm them, but the automatic assumption by some people that a man on his own is a paedophile really annoys me.

Wasn't familiar with Kitty Genovese, so read the wiki page relating to her death. How can people witness something like this and make no attempt to help? I am definitely NOT a hero or a fighter, but would like to believe that I would try to help in this kind of situation.

Very good article about the Kitty Genovese murder:
The Kitty Genovese Case: A Fascinating Intersection of True Crime, Psychology and Media Misinformation
http://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/2...isinformation/

AvalonXQ · 11th June 2012, 01:50 PM

As a parent, I will shop for children's books by myself. I will take the time to sit down and read through entire books to decide whether or not they are books I want to buy to include in storytime. (There are few things I like quite as much as reading books aloud at bedtime; it is probably my favorite part of my day.)

I am disgusted that this behavior is seen as suspicious or inappropriate.

I'm even more disgusted to learn that whether this behavior is seen as suspicious depends on my gender.

crimresearch · 11th June 2012, 02:26 PM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

As a parent, I will shop for children's books by myself. I will take the time to sit down and read through entire books to decide whether or not they are books I want to buy to include in storytime. (There are few things I like quite as much as reading books aloud at bedtime; it is probably my favorite part of my day.)

I am disgusted that this behavior is seen as suspicious or inappropriate.

I'm even more disgusted to learn that whether this behavior is seen as suspicious depends on my gender.

It is disgusting on both counts.

How do we propose that retailers avoid becoming the next place a child is taken from?

TragicMonkey · 11th June 2012, 02:41 PM

Originally Posted by crimresearch

How do we propose that retailers avoid becoming the next place a child is taken from?

Where is the parent, guardian, or other adult who brought the child to the store in the first place? It's not a store's responsibility to babysit.

AvalonXQ · 11th June 2012, 02:43 PM

Originally Posted by crimresearch

It is disgusting on both counts.

How do we propose that retailers avoid becoming the next place a child is taken from?

By not allowing young children to be left unattended.

By paying attention to who is accompanying each child as they enter, and asking a question if a different adult (of either gender and irrespective of race) attempts to leave with the child.

In fact, it's pretty much impossible for a child to be harmed if security keeps an eye on the children.

MsFortune · 11th June 2012, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by tomwaits

Apparently there was a complaint by another customer, having something to do with the guy talking on the phone:

ETA: That last part is curious. Could it be that he said something inappropriate over the phone while in the children's' section, and a customer complained?

They should have thrown him out of talking on his cell phone where people are trying to read.

Take that **** outside.

Skeptical Greg · 11th June 2012, 03:24 PM

Originally Posted by TjW

Which is certainly unobjectionable. And then you went on to say "... there might have been cause for concern."

I think that's probably the part of your position people are having trouble with.

You are leaving out the the part where I said ( ? ):

" If there were children present.... "

I didn't elaborate, because I thought the astute members here would fill in the blanks; and apparently some of them did....

For the less astute members, my definition of concern, is not mace, handcuffs, appearance before a grand jury, & etc ( or even ejection from the store )

Robrob seems to have a clue about the direction I was going ... ( 14 posts upwards... )

I apologize for the confusion that may have been caused by my failure to express my thoughts more clearly, and in a manner that justifies my claim to being a skeptical person...

AvalonXQ · 11th June 2012, 03:28 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

For the less astute members, my definition of concern, is not mace, handcuffs, appearance before a grand jury, & etc...

Nope. It's just reasserting the same unfair stereotypes that men deal with every day when it comes to being in public around kids.

The stay-at-home dads I know have it the worst; you should see the looks they get when bringing their kids to the playground.

I don't know where the "stranger danger" meme came from or why it's so prevalent, but we really need to get over it.

PhreePhly · 11th June 2012, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by Careyp74

That's what the smileys are for.

That used to be the case, but not always so clear anymore.

Dunstan · 11th June 2012, 04:10 PM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

I don't know where the "stranger danger" meme came from or why it's so prevalent, but we really need to get over it.

My guess is that it's the result of two separate impulses. Start with the strong motivation to protect children, especially one's own. Add in the desire to want to trust the people we actually know. Stir in our related tendency to overestimate our ability to spot dangerous people, and the fact that you know, like, and have to deal regularly with Father Murphy and Uncle Bob and that nice old Mrs. Smith next door, and the result is that all that protectiveness gets manifested in an obsession with guarding against strangers regardless of what the statistics say about kids knowing their abusers or the rarity of kidnappings by strangers.

PhantomWolf · 11th June 2012, 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by MsFortune

They should have thrown him out of talking on his cell phone where people are trying to read.

With all repect, it's a book store not a Library. You go there to buy books to take home and read, not to read them there. IMO the ones they'd have good cause to throw out are the ones sitting there reading through entire books.

Piscivore · 11th June 2012, 04:38 PM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

I don't know where the "stranger danger" meme came from or why it's so prevalent, but we really need to get over it.

Lifetime, and similar television programming. The "very special episodes" like Arnold and the bike store guy that we "Gen X"ers grew up with. Lazy writers trying to create cheap drama that didn't know they were harmfully altering our shared cultural narrative about who "we" are.

9th June 2012, 12:20 AM	#121
jasonpatterson Philanthropic Misanthrope Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Space, The Final Frontier Posts: 2,180	Originally Posted by Sabrina Now granted, I'm a woman, but I can't recall a single time That's the difference. Barring bloodstained clothes or visible weaponry, women alone in a children's area are assumed to be doing something wholesome and good. Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry I'm a big, 6'3" man, and I've never gotten a weird eye from others. (unless I missed it) Is it the way you present yourself that sometimes worries others? and if so, do men need to be constantly concerned that if they project the wrong image, they'll be targeted as potential threats? I'm in no way claiming that you're wrong about never having experienced this, but frankly, I'm astonished. I'm a stay at home dad with two daughters, and I get the evil eye from moms constantly, whether my kids are with me or not. I don't know if I give off some creeper vibe or something, but they watch me like a hawk. I've never been kicked out of a bookstore, but I get followed around by store employees if I go to buy something like clothing without the kids present. It used to bother me, but I've basically become resigned to the fact that I am assumed to be up to no good unless proven otherwise.
	__________________ Sandra's seen a leprechaun, Eddie touched a troll, Laurie danced with witches once, Charlie found some goblins' gold. Donald heard a mermaid sing, Susie spied an elf, But all the magic I have known I've had to make myself. - Shel Silverstein

9th June 2012, 04:21 AM	#122
EHocking Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 4,409	Originally Posted by The Fallen Serpent Over Christmas I spent about 30 to 40 minutes shopping in the children's section of Half-Priced Books. I am a tall beared man ... You were definitely in the wrong section of the book store then.
EHocking Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 4,409	__________________ "A closed mouth gathers no feet" "Ignorance is a renewable resource" P.J.O'Rourke Prayer: "a sophisticated way of pleading with thunderstorms." T.Pratchett "It's all god's handiwork, there's little quality control applied", Fox26 reporter on Texas granite Forum Birdwatching Webpage

9th June 2012, 05:03 AM	#123
TheGoldcountry Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: United States Posts: 1,530	Originally Posted by jasonpatterson I'm in no way claiming that you're wrong about never having experienced this, but frankly, I'm astonished. I'm a stay at home dad with two daughters, and I get the evil eye from moms constantly, whether my kids are with me or not. I don't know if I give off some creeper vibe or something, but they watch me like a hawk. I've never been kicked out of a bookstore, but I get followed around by store employees if I go to buy something like clothing without the kids present. It used to bother me, but I've basically become resigned to the fact that I am assumed to be up to no good unless proven otherwise. That pisses me off, sincerely, and in retrospect I think I have been under scrutiny at times, but I shrugged it off because I knew I wasn't doing anything bad, so *^% 'em.
	__________________ Not exactly, I'm talking about something I don't know about, if its there then it is what I am talking about and thats not nothing. -punshhh I have no idea what you're trying to say, but I'm still pretty sure that you're wrong. -Akhenaten

9th June 2012, 05:05 AM	#124
TheGoldcountry Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: United States Posts: 1,530	Originally Posted by EHocking You were definitely in the wrong section of the book store then. You read my mind- we must be equally disturbed.
	__________________ Not exactly, I'm talking about something I don't know about, if its there then it is what I am talking about and thats not nothing. -punshhh I have no idea what you're trying to say, but I'm still pretty sure that you're wrong. -Akhenaten

9th June 2012, 09:36 AM	#125
PhreePhly Thinker Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 206	Originally Posted by SezMe I think his sarcasm tank runneth over. If so, sorry Roger, I'll blame Poe's Law. You just never know.
PhreePhly Thinker Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 206

9th June 2012, 10:25 AM	#126
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	Originally Posted by Darth Rotor Point learned in this thread: Skeptical Greg, isn't. ......... I 'm skeptical that you are a Darth or a Rotor .. I'm not skeptical about a lot of things .. What exactly do you feel I'm not being skeptical about, that I should be, in the context of this thread?
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

9th June 2012, 10:43 AM	#127
The Fallen Serpent Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Not Oregon, Texas Posts: 1,922	Originally Posted by EHocking You were definitely in the wrong section of the book store then. Hey, what is wrong with a bear man shopping for kids? Sexuality shouldn't be a bar to shopping for children, it certainly isn't a bar for having them or being an uncle to them. (I actually meant bearded, but I'll run with it.)
	__________________ You don't use science to show that you are right, you use science to become right. - Randall Munroe

9th June 2012, 04:35 PM	#128
TheGoldcountry Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: United States Posts: 1,530	Originally Posted by The Fallen Serpent Hey, what is wrong with a bear man shopping for kids? Sexuality shouldn't be a bar to shopping for children, it certainly isn't a bar for having them or being an uncle to them. (I actually meant bearded, but I'll run with it.) We all know what you meant (I hope).
	__________________ Not exactly, I'm talking about something I don't know about, if its there then it is what I am talking about and thats not nothing. -punshhh I have no idea what you're trying to say, but I'm still pretty sure that you're wrong. -Akhenaten

9th June 2012, 05:07 PM	#129
SezMe post-pre-born Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 16,369	I took it to mean he's hirsute.

9th June 2012, 06:19 PM	#130
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,257	Originally Posted by crimresearch Link to this rule? Read post #10 in this thread.
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis

9th June 2012, 06:21 PM	#131
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,257	Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg What exactly do you feel I'm not being skeptical about, that I should be, in the context of this thread? I find it interesting that you have to ask. Read this thread, from page one through 4, and pretend you are not Skeptical Greg. Pretend you are a neutral observer. You might catch on to something. Or not.
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis

9th June 2012, 07:17 PM	#132
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by Darth Rotor Read post #10 in this thread. Post #10 says nothing even close to proving your extreme assertion that there is a "rule that an adult male must be accompanied by a child to be much of anywhere in the US of A". But of course, you knew that.
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

9th June 2012, 07:18 PM	#133
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by SezMe I took it to mean he's hirsute. You are half right...
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

10th June 2012, 08:08 AM	#134
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	Originally Posted by Darth Rotor I find it interesting that you have to ask. Read this thread, from page one through 4, and pretend you are not Skeptical Greg. Pretend you are a neutral observer. You might catch on to something. Or not. In other words, you have nothing.. Just trying to be cute.. My position in this thread has consistently been, that there are times when concern may be warranted, when adult males are hanging out ( unaccompanied with one or more young children ) in areas where young children tend to congregate.. Please elaborate on where my lack of skepticism comes into play .. I fail to see where this discussion is even about skepticism other than your skepticism about my skepticism ..
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

10th June 2012, 11:28 AM	#135
TjW Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: up in the air Posts: 9,984	Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg In other words, you have nothing.. Just trying to be cute.. My position in this thread has consistently been, that there are times when concern may be warranted, when adult males are hanging out ( unaccompanied with one or more young children ) in areas where young children tend to congregate.. Please elaborate on where my lack of skepticism comes into play .. I fail to see where this discussion is even about skepticism other than your skepticism about my skepticism .. Could this be true of adult females, as well? If not, why not? If so, then what, exactly, does the sex of any adult in such a situation have to do with concern being warranted?
	__________________ TjW People like TjW -- Kelly

10th June 2012, 01:20 PM	#136
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	Sounds like a whole 'nother discussion, and nothing about my skepticism in this thread..
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

10th June 2012, 01:33 PM	#137
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,257	Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg My position in this thread has consistently been, that there are times when concern may be warranted, when adult males are hanging out ( unaccompanied with one or more young children ) in areas where young children tend to congregate. And that, right there, shows me a lack of skepticism, and a representation of your bias and prejudices, based up on your assumptions. Note that the locale in question is a book store. Have you ever actually been in a Barnes and Noble book store? I'll remember your attitudes in the future. As to "Skeptical Greg" isn't ... To be skeptical in this thread, you might have wanted to ask: Did the man tell the truth about how he was treated in the book store? (It's sort of hard to tell, from what is presented. He may be lying through his teeth, or telling the whole truth.) What is it about this story that we don't know that might shed some light on what looks like unusual behavior by the employee? Consider this, when you protest my pointing out your bias: Most of the time, kids don't end up in a Barnes and Noble unless an adult has brought them there. It's not like a neighborhood playground. DR
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis Last edited by Darth Rotor; 10th June 2012 at 01:36 PM.

10th June 2012, 01:40 PM	#138
TjW Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: up in the air Posts: 9,984	This is exactly on point for the discussion of your "skepticism" in this thread. Your position has consistently been that the sex of an adult shopper in the children's book section sans accompanying child is relevant to the ejection of that shopper from the book store. Most people seem willing to accept that there may be certain behaviors that might warrant such an ejection, but that such behaviors weren't claimed in the incident under discussion. Do you have any evidence to support your opinion that the sex of an adult unaccompanied by a child should be relevant?
	__________________ TjW People like TjW -- Kelly

10th June 2012, 04:22 PM	#139
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	Originally Posted by Darth Rotor And that, right there, shows me a lack of skepticism, and a representation of your bias and prejudices, based up on your assumptions. ..... DR What bias, prejudice and assumptions are you talking about? My first post in this thread said the behavior of the store personnel in the treatment of the man in the kiddy section was stupid ( and I will add - unwarranted ) .. I'm still wondering what you think I should have been skeptical of ... Originally Posted by TjW This is exactly on point for the discussion of your "skepticism" in this thread. Your position has consistently been that the sex of an adult shopper in the children's book section sans accompanying child is relevant to the ejection of that shopper from the book store. Most people seem willing to accept that there may be certain behaviors that might warrant such an ejection, but that such behaviors weren't claimed in the incident under discussion. Do you have any evidence to support your opinion that the sex of an adult unaccompanied by a child should be relevant? I never claimed to have that opinion.. The gender of the subject in the OP happened to have been male, so subsequent posts sort of flowed from there.. I believe it is too late to go back and make all my posts gender neutral .. Could you be more specific as to what I should have been skeptical of ?
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

10th June 2012, 04:25 PM	#140
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg What bias, prejudice and assumptions are you talking about? My first post in this thread said the behavior of the store personnel in the treatment of the man in the kiddy section was stupid ( and I will add - unwarranted ) .. I'm still wondering what you think I should have been skeptical of ... I never claimed to have that opinion.. The gender of the subject in the OP happened to have been male, so subsequent posts sort of flowed from there.. I believe it is too late to go back and make all my posts gender neutral .. Could you be more specific as to what I should have been skeptical of ? You should have been skeptical that you would be allowed to have the opinion you stated, instead of having a straw one assigned to you.
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

10th June 2012, 04:39 PM	#141
Robrob Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 3,660	Every reason to approach the man to politely and causally ask "can I help you?" just to remind him the staff is aware of his presence. No reason at all to eject the guy. Assuming the man's description is accurate (and remember - it's just his side of the story), it's not right. Quote: ‘You cannot stay. This is not an area where men are allowed to be by themselves.’ ” The man, a Barnes & Noble employee, then escorted him out of the store “firmly,” Amin said.
Robrob Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 3,660

10th June 2012, 05:12 PM	#142
TjW Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: up in the air Posts: 9,984	Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg What bias, prejudice and assumptions are you talking about? My first post in this thread said the behavior of the store personnel in the treatment of the man in the kiddy section was stupid ( and I will add - unwarranted ) .. Which is certainly unobjectionable. And then you went on to say "... there might have been cause for concern." I think that's probably the part of your position people are having trouble with.
	__________________ TjW People like TjW -- Kelly

10th June 2012, 05:39 PM	#143
SezMe post-pre-born Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 16,369	That's the part I'm troubled by. Unless there's more to the story - and there may well be - the ejection without further cause is unwarranted.

11th June 2012, 02:51 AM	#144
Multivac Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 1,927	Originally Posted by fuelair I think I figured that out - do the last two letters stand for "and die"? If so, I agree heartily.... What is particularly entertaining is that if the nervous are actually being assaulted they will be happy to see me approaching (they may not know that until what happens next, but). (I admire Rohrschach) (and loathe the slime that let Kitty Genovese die).* and I know which of the two was real. Yes, the FO stand for "go away" and the AD means "and die". Obviously kids need to be protected from people who wish to harm them, but the automatic assumption by some people that a man on his own is a paedophile really annoys me. Wasn't familiar with Kitty Genovese, so read the wiki page relating to her death. How can people witness something like this and make no attempt to help? I am definitely NOT* a hero or a fighter, but would like to believe that I would try to help in this kind of situation.

11th June 2012, 04:48 AM	#145
Sabrina Wicked Lovely Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spinning through space Posts: 6,871	There are absolutely times when it is appropriate to eject someone from a store. This, from what little we can glean from the articles, is not one of them. The store in question has, as far as I can tell, thus far not given any information as to why they felt Mr. Amin was acting suspiciously enough to warrant ejecting him from the store, and the only excuse we are aware of for their actions is the BS "rule" that this particular store apparently made up which stated men could not be in the children's section of the store alone. Given that I have never heard of this rule in relation to a store which is there specifically to sell goods to people of all shapes and sizes (i.e., if their money is good, they can shop here), I think we can safely assume, barring further evidence being introduced, that the store was vastly in the wrong. I offered an example up-thread where it would have been absolutely warranted to throw the guy out (I really wish we'd managed to catch that pervert; hopefully he was caught later, if there's any justice in the world); but speaking on a cell phone, in an area of the store where there apparently were no children anyway, despite it being marked as the children's area is the stupidest reason I have ever heard of to eject someone. Show me proof that this guy was doing something wrong; otherwise, my sympathies are currently firmly on his side.
	__________________ "Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have a right to do and what is the right thing to do."-Justice Potter Stewart, US Supreme Court Justice 1915-1985 *Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons... for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.* *Sins are very desirable... as long as no one judges you for them.*

11th June 2012, 06:06 AM	#146
Careyp74 Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Trevose, PA Posts: 3,407	I think that society is a little jumpy now a days with the whole child molester thing. That is the first thing that comes to mind a lot of times when seeing men with young girls, at least that is what the jokes are about. I remember getting these free phone stickers from Malboro. I showed my wife, and she said "Omg, what does that stand for, child porn?" I had to remind her what my initials are. Originally Posted by jasonpatterson That's the difference. Barring bloodstained clothes or visible weaponry, women alone in a children's area are assumed to be doing something wholesome and good. I'm in no way claiming that you're wrong about never having experienced this, but frankly, I'm astonished. I'm a stay at home dad with two daughters, and I get the evil eye from moms constantly, whether my kids are with me or not. I don't know if I give off some creeper vibe or something, but they watch me like a hawk. I've never been kicked out of a bookstore, but I get followed around by store employees if I go to buy something like clothing without the kids present. It used to bother me, but I've basically become resigned to the fact that I am assumed to be up to no good unless proven otherwise. You should have a shirt made up. "Don't worry, I am their father" Originally Posted by PhreePhly If so, sorry Roger, I'll blame Poe's Law. You just never know. That's what the smileys are for.

11th June 2012, 11:18 AM	#147
Xulld Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 1,113	Originally Posted by Careyp74 You should have a shirt made up. "Don't worry, I am their father" Id advise, Dad, otherwise they may think him a Priest . . .
	__________________ "Natural justice is a symbol or expression of usefullness, to prevent one person from harming or being harmed by another." -Epicurus

11th June 2012, 11:48 AM	#148
jasonpatterson Philanthropic Misanthrope Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Space, The Final Frontier Posts: 2,180	Originally Posted by Careyp74 You should have a shirt made up. "Don't worry, I am their father" They'd probably call the cops on me. Too suspicious. Maybe I should erase the "Free Candy!" sign that I spray painted on the side of my windowless van...
	__________________ Sandra's seen a leprechaun, Eddie touched a troll, Laurie danced with witches once, Charlie found some goblins' gold. Donald heard a mermaid sing, Susie spied an elf, But all the magic I have known I've had to make myself. - Shel Silverstein

11th June 2012, 01:35 PM	#149
Accidental Martyr Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Treading water in a sea of retarded sexuality and bad poetry. Posts: 1,852	Originally Posted by Multivac Yes, the FO stand for "go away" and the AD means "and die". Obviously kids need to be protected from people who wish to harm them, but the automatic assumption by some people that a man on his own is a paedophile really annoys me. Wasn't familiar with Kitty Genovese, so read the wiki page relating to her death. How can people witness something like this and make no attempt to help? I am definitely NOT a hero or a fighter, but would like to believe that I would try to help in this kind of situation. Very good article about the Kitty Genovese murder: The Kitty Genovese Case: A Fascinating Intersection of True Crime, Psychology and Media Misinformation http://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/2...isinformation/
	__________________ "Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith, I consider a capacity for it terrifying and absolutely vile!" Kurt Vonnegut

11th June 2012, 01:50 PM	#150
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	As a parent, I will shop for children's books by myself. I will take the time to sit down and read through entire books to decide whether or not they are books I want to buy to include in storytime. (There are few things I like quite as much as reading books aloud at bedtime; it is probably my favorite part of my day.) I am disgusted that this behavior is seen as suspicious or inappropriate. I'm even more disgusted to learn that whether this behavior is seen as suspicious depends on my gender.
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	Last edited by AvalonXQ; 11th June 2012 at 01:51 PM.

11th June 2012, 02:26 PM	#151
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by AvalonXQ As a parent, I will shop for children's books by myself. I will take the time to sit down and read through entire books to decide whether or not they are books I want to buy to include in storytime. (There are few things I like quite as much as reading books aloud at bedtime; it is probably my favorite part of my day.) I am disgusted that this behavior is seen as suspicious or inappropriate. I'm even more disgusted to learn that whether this behavior is seen as suspicious depends on my gender. It is disgusting on both counts. How do we propose that retailers avoid becoming the next place a child is taken from?
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

11th June 2012, 02:41 PM	#152
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Pither Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 30,073	Originally Posted by crimresearch How do we propose that retailers avoid becoming the next place a child is taken from? Where is the parent, guardian, or other adult who brought the child to the store in the first place? It's not a store's responsibility to babysit.
	__________________ One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.

11th June 2012, 02:43 PM	#153
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	Originally Posted by crimresearch It is disgusting on both counts. How do we propose that retailers avoid becoming the next place a child is taken from? By not allowing young children to be left unattended. By paying attention to who is accompanying each child as they enter, and asking a question if a different adult (of either gender and irrespective of race) attempts to leave with the child. In fact, it's pretty much impossible for a child to be harmed if security keeps an eye on the children.
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853

11th June 2012, 03:20 PM	#154
MsFortune Scholar Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 58	Originally Posted by tomwaits Apparently there was a complaint by another customer, having something to do with the guy talking on the phone: ETA: That last part is curious. Could it be that he said something inappropriate over the phone while in the children's' section, and a customer complained? They should have thrown him out of talking on his cell phone where people are trying to read. Take that **** outside.
MsFortune Scholar Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 58

11th June 2012, 03:24 PM	#155
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	Originally Posted by TjW Which is certainly unobjectionable. And then you went on to say "... there might have been cause for concern." I think that's probably the part of your position people are having trouble with. You are leaving out the the part where I said ( ? ): " If there were children present.... " I didn't elaborate, because I thought the astute members here would fill in the blanks; and apparently some of them did.... For the less astute members, my definition of concern, is not mace, handcuffs, appearance before a grand jury, & etc ( or even ejection from the store ) Robrob seems to have a clue about the direction I was going ... ( 14 posts upwards... ) I apologize for the confusion that may have been caused by my failure to express my thoughts more clearly, and in a manner that justifies my claim to being a skeptical person...
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 Last edited by Skeptical Greg; 11th June 2012 at 03:31 PM.