Get PJ Media on your Apple

Dr. Helen

Over 600 People Walk by Two Lost Girls: Can You Blame Them?

March 26th, 2014 - 5:33 am

In the Daily Mail, there is a story about an experiment where two little girls say they are lost and more than 600 people at a shopping mall walk by them:

Hidden cameras recorded Uma, seven, and Maya, five, who took it in turns to look lost.

Astonishingly, over the whole hour only one person, a grandmother, took a moment to find out if there was a problem. All of the 616 other passers-by completely ignored the girls.

Heartbreakingly for the mother of the sisters – who was watching from a hiding place nearby – passing couples even split apart to walk around either side of the ‘lost’ girls and people wheeling suitcases took evasive action to avoid Maya and Uma, not thinking to check if they needed help.

Who can blame them? The authorities have spent years making it clear that adults, in particular male adults, are suspect –and now they want those same adults to stand up and help kids with no regard for their own welfare:

Experts said the reluctance of the passers-by was partly explained by people being busy, and partly a fear – especially among men – of any help they offer a child being misinterpreted.

But the NSPCC said a child’s welfare was more important than worrying about being labelled a ‘stranger danger’.

A spokesman said: ‘We have got to get a message out to adults that they have a responsibility to protect children and that must supersede any concern you have for other people’s perception of why you are reaching out to help that child.’

Bullshit — responsibility is a two-way street. It’s not just a “perception by people” that men and even women are a danger to kids, it is a reality that men (and some women, but mostly men) are charged with abuse and face real jail time, job loss and separation from their families for sex abuse charges so readily that they have become immune to the cries of kids. Who can blame them? I can’t. Can you?

More from Dr. Helen: 

Men on Strike in L.A.?

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
> But the NSPCC said a child’s welfare was more important than worrying about being labelled a ‘stranger danger’.

More easily said by the person who puts people in jail for looking cross-eyed at a child, than done by the person who stands to be jailed.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
Well, this doesn't surprise me at all. But what were these people thinking useing two supposedly lost girls, with their mother watching, to find out how many adults would ignore their pleas? That's the real question.

Once, about 30 years ago, I was at the public library, looking for a book. I was standing in the ailse, and this young boy just came out of nowhere and took my hand. What was I supposed to do? I knelt down and asked him where his parents were. He didn't know. So I led him to the librarian and told her, "You've to a lost boy here." She got on the intercom, and the parents showed up. And all ended well.

I couldn't do that today, not in this culture. I'd be accused of being a child predator, a phedophile, or some other sort of deviant. And the accusation is the crime these days. I couldn't lead a lost boy, who came up to me, to the librarian so she could find his parents, without facing serious criminal charges.

This is the world we live in. This is why I say that the problem is with the culture, which revolves around the law. You want to change the culture? Change the law. There can be no meaningful men's rights movement that doeesn't focus on changing the law. Some imaginary male pill isn't going to change anything. Viagra, the male pill, has side effects, which include loss of vision. I was told when I was young that masturbation makes you blind. It's ridiculous. In my 50s, I'm supposed to take some pill that could make me blind just to I can what recover my long-lost youth sex drive? Please.

Lost girls in a mall? That's one hell of an experiment. And it's no wonder that some 600 people ignored them. They couldn't risk the exposure to a lawsuit.

The problem here is with the law. Either change the law or STF up.



16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
Any single man who approaches a lone and upset child in a public place is a fool. You WILL be accused of attempted abduction, you WILL be accused of pedophilia, you WILL be publicly denounced as a molestor, period. The truth does not matter; men are predatory monsters, and all it takes is the accusation alone (with zero evidence) to ruin your life.

I feel sorry for crying kids, but they're on their own. Too bad society punishes men who try to get involved.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (248)
All Comments   (248)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Everybody has forgotten the case of Edwin McFarlane, the 14–year-old boy arrested in 2010 for "child abduction" after trying to help a 3–year-old girl lost in a store find her mother:

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Broadcast/exclusive-teen-arrested-kidnapping-tot/story?id=10938679

But Tina Trent below would probably say this is "fact-free nonsense". Can't have anything destroying her narrative, you see.

Fortunately, Edwin's charges were dropped. He was lucky.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
This isn't exactly on point - because it's more of a racial thing than a man/child thing - but read it if you want to be disgusted:

http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2014/04/04/white-man-beaten-by-mob-in-detroit-after-hitting-boy-with-truck-was-it-a-hate-crime/

A man was driving his pickup truck down the road in Detroit. A child stepped in front of him and was hit. The police didn't think it was the man's fault; the child stepped right out.

The (white) man immediately got out of his truck to see if the child was OK. A group of an estimated 11 black men suddenly surrounded him and beat him almost to death.

There was even speculation at the end of the article that it may have been a setup in some way.

Yup, that's the Motor City I know and love.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
People...or rather men...no longer white knight because there is no reason to do so.

I mean here I am as a man putting myself in danger for a complete stranger...only to get injured or killed or faced with some sort harassment charges...In return that people might..just might say thank you...

Right....

15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
You stop and help those children, with no thought to the consequences, the same way you should throw yourself in harms way if you see any children being physically attacked or threatened. If you don't, then don't call yourself a man.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
You're in everyone's face right from the get-go, "ex nypd". Any reason for that?

The problem with your type of thinking is that you likely play the White Knight. You create a lot of unwarranted misery in the world for other men. Just because you can.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Yeah right. And up walk one of your brothers or sisters in blue, throw a pair of handcuff on me, and even after the truth comes out and dust settles my life is over. Those "offender" lists are WAY to easy to get on and Just about impossible to get off of. This is not even CLOSE to an assault situation.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
Nobody is being physically attacked or threatened here. I don't know why you're building up a straw man or "hero" scenario when it doesn't exist here.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
No, if there is no immediate danger to anyone, you can use your head and figure out what is going on. Maybe point out the lost children to the security guard or store manager, or maybe figure out that the children are not credible and you are being filmed for someone else's purposes.

Your "hothead" approach has gotten a lot of men in a lot of trouble. For instance when they attack the wrong guy - who they thought was the guy having an affair with their wife.

Otherwise, I really get sick of the "real men" posting their crap and trying to belittle other men.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
I recall an incident where the wife was caught in the act of cheating by her husband. She cried out that she was being raped, the husband killed the boyfriend, thinking he was saving her. I think she got some small amount of prison time when the dust settled.

So, this experiment, predicated on a lie, is expecting men to react exactly how, after 4 or more decades of "BAD MAN!" training?
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
I would have taken them to find a police officer. In case I did not find one, I would have either called 911 or asked a security guard to call one. If I needed help, I would have asked a normal looking family - mother with children to help.

There is a pecking order on who you can trust, and I would have used it - but never would have walked on.

I have 2 kids myself and only pray someone would do the same in such a situation.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
Then as you are taking them to a cop the parents come along and accuse you of abducting them.
They say "Sure pal" when you say you were taking them to the police as you are being cuffed.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
Here's a related case: A male gym employee is being sued after he refused to risk being put on the sex offender list by entering the women's locker room to assist a woman who had a heart attack:

http://nypost.com/2013/06/24/li-woman-collapsed-and-died-in-gym-bathroom-after-male-employee-refused-to-enter-lawsuit/
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
In 2008 WKMG-TV in Orlando, Florida staged a similar study to gauge adults' reactions, though in this case it was an 8–year-old girl who was staying near one of several signs around a mall. The signs labeled her missing and included a clear picture of her matching her actual appearance. Most people walked right by her and did nothing, as with the British experiment we discuss here.

Other forums have discussed real cases in the US—emphasis, the US and not just Britain—in which men have saved unattentive mothers' children from near-certain death or serious injury only to have the mother raise cain, accuse the man of trying something nefarious, and either calling the cops or insisting a lifeguard do so. These instances typically involve saving a child from drowning in pools or at a seashore, and pulling a toddler out of traffic just before a car drove over the spot in the street where the kid had wandered. Mom is chatting on a cell phone or some such while this is going on. But the hero faces arrest and isn't always able to get a cop to believe his side of the story...

I have also been set up for robbery while being a good Samaritan and trying to help others, so this further colors my views. But with the odds of being gravely punished for trying to help a child, my feeling today is this: Your kid's in danger? Not my problem. Sucks to be you. And this is what you get for demonizing men as predators. Too bad.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
" Most people walked right by her and did nothing"


Most people spend 90% of their time, or more, mostly unaware of their surroundings. They simply don't look around and SEE what is near them.

I don't think these "studies" tell us as much about peoples' willingness to help, as it tells us about their awareness of their surroundings. OR rather, their LACK of awareness.

Just pay attention (for a change) to other drivers sometime if you doubt me.

16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
The robbery/ scam angle is another serious consideration. People have hijacked well intentioned people, and either robbed them, or put them in an apparent compromising position for extortion.

The men-are-rapists-and-child-molesters feminists have given our legal system the same revenue stream. As Mr. Reynolds frequently points out, our legal system isn't well trusted to easily and cheaply look at the facts and make objective decisions - its designed to secure convictions the most efficient way it can, by overwhelming it's targets with the resources and force of the state, usually completely at the discretion of the prosecutor without the impartial oversight of a jury, and with no more than a quick signature from a judge.

Better to just avoid the risk.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
Copy left....I appreciate that a single male is under extra suspicion and I agree that he must protect himself....but you said the child is left on his own....THERE IS ANOTHER ANSWER....the man should ask a woman to approach the child....also if there is no woman nearby the man should keep a safe distance and call 9/11 to protect himself and child...and that way if attempted harm does come nearby he could PROTECT THE CHILD....SURELY you would want that kind of help for your family too..NEVER EVER LEAVE A CHILD ALONE AND ABANDONED...NEVER....call 911 and wait..you will never have to wonder what happened to that child if you set yourself as a " cautious for your own protection" protector
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
Men shouldn't have to pretend that they should find an obvious non-child molester. Men shouldn't have to tolerate the blatant prejudice. Either I can approach the child (not likely in today's legal climate), or someone else can bear the responsibility for ostracizing men.

First, it's insulting that women commit any less child abuse or child sexual abuse than men do. Second, it buys into the presumption that men are dishonorable, incapable of self control, and validates it.

I'm all for letting women pick up the slack and bear the extra risk. If I can point it out to her for her to take action, she can be expected to be aware of the situation as well. I'm sick of picking up the slack for women - they've vilified me and my gender long enough, and they can deal with the mess they've made on their own. Fish, bicycle, all that.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
"First, it's insulting that women commit any less child abuse or child sexual abuse than men do. "

If it's insulting, blame Mr. Reality for the insult.

Men and women are not the same.



16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
Women commit *more* child abuse than men do, even when controlled for the number of hours that children are in their respective custody.

Yes, men and women are not the same. Men are vilified unjustly.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
If you call 911 the police have your caller ID and your cell phone location data. If something subsequently happens to the child, you are the prime suspect.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
I am extremely aware of lost children .....as soon as I see they are in care of parent...fine....but I have stopped little ones from running into mall parking lot in dark at night...helped others in malls..and very careful that person taking them is their parent...they have to pass the is this your parent test...Yes it is my Dad or Mom....when in doubt.....ASK IF THEY NEED HELP......I regret not asking two teens in a car that question when the driver unexpectedly pulled in front of me...GET LICENSE NUMBERS....LOOK OUT FOR CHILDREN.....TREAT OTHERS AS YOU WOULD WANT THEM TO TREAT YOU OR YOUR FAMILY...but I would be extra cautious as a man...Don't touch child..even women...best to tell child you will get them help and stay with them while you ask another person to get security
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
Let them try the experiment with two boys acting lost instead of girls. 6000 people would walk by, none would help and it wouldn't even make the news.

Instead, women would say "well, the oldest is seven and I didn't feel safe". Then we'd have articles about how scary seven year-old boys are.

You can best believe feminists will be dead silent over this. They never want to admit that they helped shoot children in the foot.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 3 4 5 Next View All