How Men Are Percieved

I've been very happily married for nearly 14 years. I have four children ages 11, 10, 8 & 5. I've been very active in the lives of my wife and kids. I enjoy their company and I get the feeling they feel the same. Why am I telling you this? This is not how society sees me.

Probably dresses like a freak.

I heard that. No, this is not going to be a post about how society needs to stop judging people by how they look. We've been beaten over the head with that enough.

My head's still sore.

I'm probably going to make it hurt in a different way. Years ago I was out with my oldest two kids at the park, they were probably 5 and 4 and I was out giving their mom a break so she could nap with the third (she cleaned the house instead). My kids are really friendly and when they saw other kids at the park they instantly ran off to play leaving me to watch them in amusement on a bench a little ways off.

Sounds nice.

It was. They were happy, I loved watching them and it was a nice day out. As time went on though I became increasingly aware of moms at the park watching me. A couple of them were whispering to each other looking in my direction. I looked around so see what was going on.

It's the clothes right?

Stop that. I was dressed normally. I didn't think much of it and went back to watching the kids. A homeless man wandered through the park looking through trash cans. One of the moms took this opportunity to leave. That's when it hit me: I was the only other man at the park, sitting alone, watching children with a smile on his face.

Man you're creepy.

That's what they must've thought. I decided to call each child over to inquire on their status. You know: "Are you having fun? Are you thirsty? Do you need to use the potty? Stay away from the mud." The usual questions. After that the moms seemed less disturbed with my presence.

Until that point I was a pedophile. When did the default position on a single man become a pedophile? Now when I go to a park I have a mental timer counting down the time between child check-ins. If it goes too long I can feel my status change to pedophile.

From what?

Good question. Years more of watching my own children with and without my wife has taught me that without my wife I become a "deadbeat dad." That's the next step up. The only reason a solitary man would be at the park with his children is because he must be divorced and cannot entertain the children at his apartment. This is usually aggravated by the fact that I worked during the week and would be out with my kids on a Saturday.

And thus have custody.

Yep, that's my assigned time. While I won't say that Pedophiles and Deadbeat Dads don't exist, I do take exeption to those being my default assignments. I've compiled a list of defaults for men:

• Man: Pedophile
• Man & Kids: Deadbeat Dad
• Man & Wife: Boyfriend
• Man, Wife & Kids: Cheating Husband
• Man, Kids & other women have talked to wife: Good Husband

Most single men do not hang out at parks and so they probably are not aware of this social dynamic. Once you have kids, you become painfully aware of how much the world hates you. Try taking your kids for an ice cream at McDonald's. If your wife isn't there: Deadbeat Dad trying to buy your kids affection.

It only costs $1.50/child.

Has the news really jaded us so much that we expect that anyone we do not know is, by default, bad? I grew up an only child and so I didn't have a lot of empathy for other people not like me (though I thought I did). Having children has opened me up to a new set of social graces. They have taught me how to percieve the people around me and I like what they see. Older folks are nice people who know a lot and are trying to help, people your age are potential playmates and younger kids are people who might need help.

Children are so naive.

To a point yes. We can't leave ourselves completely open to harm by others. We can find ways to see the best in others and maybe, just maybe, I'm not actually a pedophile.

Be charitable.

Chandra Avenged?

The final sentencing for Ingmar Guandique was issued today. He is was convicted of killing Chandra Levy and sentenced to 60 years in prison. Good, evil doers should be dealt with especially when they've done evil.

Which he did, right?

I dunno. The evidence was sketchy at best. He was convicted based on two main criteria:

1. He told an inmate that he killed her.
2. He raped two women in the park where Chandra's body was found.

Wait, what?

Actual testimony stated that Ingmar told another inmate that he killed Chandra while trying to rob her. He was also afraid of violence against rapists in the prison. He was in prison for raping two women in the same park where they found Chandra. There is no DNA evidence, the polygraph was inconclusive and that's it. He's in for 60 years.

But the jury...the judge...?

In civil cases plaintiffs prove their point by a "preponderance of the evidence," that is they win if it is more likely than not. This is not a civil case, it's criminal. The standard for criminal cases is "beyond a shadow of doubt" or in other words if you doubt the evidence the criminal doesn't get convicted.

Ok...

When OJ Simpson was brought to trial the preponderance of the evidence pointed toward him killing his wife which was good enough for civil court (where he lost). In his criminal trial when all the facts were submitted there was enough doubt as to his guilt that he was found not guilty.

So what?

In this case the evidence against Ingmar is so circumstantial there can be nothing but doubt. This isn't a shadow of doubt this is an entire eclipse of doubt. No fingerprints, no DNA, no witnesses, no admission of guilt, no information pointing toward the incident at all except for one inmates testimony of what Ingmar said and that he has a history of violence. How many other people fit this profile? How many of them will be getting 60 years in jail?

Ack.

Ack is right. This is a major failure in our justice system. I am rather conservative when it comes to jailing folks who have done something wrong, but if you can't prove it, they didn't do it and that's it. I'm sad she's dead. She was two years behind me at Davis High. This is a sad way to remember the girl who wanted to get into government by falsely imprisoning an immigrant.

Be just.

Shredded Logic

I made a post in my other blog that was more consumer oriented, but I thought it had some skeptical elements as well. Go and read Consumer Lesson #5.

Be discriminating.

Mormon Skeptics: Guest Post / Blog

I've had a few requests for information on Guest posts so I thought it would be a good idea to put guidelines for people to follow if they would like to create a guest post for this blog.

First I should state the purpose of this blog: To be skeptical from a Mormon viewpoint. Just because a person is religious does not mean they cannot apply critical thinking to everyday situations. So I try to find things either significant to religion, science or critical thinking in general and write about those things. Unlike a lot of skeptical blogs this one is not about tearing other people down though it might seem that way sometimes (see: Rant). It's all about clarity and information, so positive spins are appreciated.

I will review all articles before posting them. I might change the title or links to increase they're relevancy (SEO is my day job). I will add an image if you do not provide one. Feel free to submit information to guestposts ,at, mormonskeptic.com. Give me a couple of days to get back to you since I don't check my home email nearly as often as my work email.

Update 01/15/2012: I will be adding a link rel="me" pointing to your author page for guest posts. If you put a link back to the post or blog on your author site your picture will appear in Google for searches that include your post.

Be hospitable.

Skeptical Inquirer

I've got a new blog. One that I'll actually update once in a while. I guess my purpose here needs to be defined. Why am I here...at blogspot and such?

Well, being a Mormon Skeptic does not mean I'm against the LDS church. Quite the opposite really. I just apply good old fashioned Skepticism to examine the world around me. I also want to show that just because you want to use the rules of skepticism does not mean you have to be atheist (even though it often leads there). It means that I am willing to take a second look at things and change my views when I'm wrong.

Be good.