The mom overreacted. However, it is wrong to jump in between a mother and a child in a case like this. I hear this excuse all the time at my job that "I can't afford it" when a kid asks for candy. It's usually to get the kid to shut up and quit begging for things they shouldn't have. That kid might have been a brat though the whole store and the mother thought she didn't deserve a treat. The kid could have already eaten sweets that day and the mother might be trying to teach her healthy eating habits. Either way, it was wrong to offer the bunny to the kid. You should have asked the mother (QUIETLY) if it was okay that you gave the mother the money to buy the bunny.

She shouldn't have slapped you however as a mom I can tell you it is really annoying when strangers try to talk to your kids or even worse offer them things, it puts the parent in a really acward situation because we honestly don't want our kids interacting with random strangers unless it's necessary. Also I think every one knows not to offer candy to kids you don't know.

You sure it didn't have anything to do with you asking for a BJ afterwards?

Actually physically assaulting you was WAY over the line no matter what her reason. After all she was right there with her kid. I would at least have alerted store security to make her think twice before hitting someone else

HOW DOES THAT MAKE YOU A PEDO? Holy shit people can't be nice anymore these days.

I want a chocolate bunny.

Op, here. I'm fifteen years old and am absolutely not a pedo. I am a boy and thought that I was doing something good for the girl. All of the comments about healthy eating habits are not true, the woman was buying a lot of candy, but wouldn't let the girl have the rabbit. Idk why, she reminded me of my little cousin and I decided to buy it for her. The mother did keep the rabbit, though, so I don't know why she lashed out at me :/

In Spanish a "pedo" means a fart. That lady just called you a fart

"politeness/kindness has become so rare that it is often mistaken for flirtation."....

I like hearing this story for many reasons. "Defending oneself" or "a human protective instinct" is always justified. If the male responded instinctively and slapped back, then he's fine. But, if substantially bigger than woman, and the slap back was "hard" with revenge driven intent (hard to judge at times), and this woman sustain a counter injury not in line with what she delivered--then he might get arrested (or both) and jurors would convict him, believing mother became protective. Hard one, but it comes down to protective vs revenge, vs physical disparity. To play it safe he should just have her arrested and not slap back. A judge would do Something to a stupid woman who hits based on a verbal offer of buying candy. She should have said "no thank you" and walked off.