[lit-ideas] Re: virtue-practical example of being taught

  • From: Eternitytime1@xxxxxxx
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2006 15:20:30 EST

 
In a message dated 1/1/2006 1:22:43 P.M. Central Standard Time,  
writeforu2@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:

What's taught to Boy Scouts in this  area is not what they claim to be 
teaching. It's what they're doing:  discriminating against a stigmatized group. 


Hi,
Yes, I understand well what you are saying.  Within BSA (this is a  problem 
with the American world of scouting--not the Worldwide Scouting  world...) 
progress comes extremely slowly.
 
(Discussion lists call them the 3 G's - G-d, Girls, Gays)  It was not  until 
1989 (I believe-it was either 89 or 86) that BSA allowed girls to be in  
scouting...The American Girl Scouts was started as girls wanted to be in BSA -  
as 
they did in the worldwide movement all over - and the heads of BSA were not  
as accommodating as those overseas. Of course, the fact that Lord 
Baden-Powell's  daughter was one of the ones who was most insistent might have 
helped 
things  over there <wry look>  Thus, he created the subset of Girl Guides  
which 
eventually became all one...  
 
Here in the USA, the girl G section took a LONG time to break. The  Venturing 
Crews began and it is really fascinating to read about it--both in  terms of 
the languaging when discussed on American sites/discussion lists and  then to 
read what Americans are saying/writing about it on both official and  
unofficial sites where the readership/members are primarily from other  
nation-states.
 
The troop with which I am involved is just now getting ready to form a  
Venturing Crew as a subset of itself. (most Venturing Crews are like separate  
troops--though many do connect with local troops in our area)  At Summer  Camp 
(which has three sections--and each section has many many troops--our troop  
took 
about 40+ boys and over 20 leaders), there were a couple of Venturing Crews  
there participating. 
 
There are still few women involved--the first year I attended summer camp,  I 
was the only female camping with our troop full-time [we did have another  
female leader who is a nurse who was there full-time but she was located in the 
 
health lodge.) There was one other female who came for about three days. Last 
 year we had about seven women who camped full-time, another nurse who also  
stayed at the health lodge, and about three others who were part-time. My son  
tells me that I started a trend for our troop. <g> (I'm going to be the  
first female to go on a high adventure trip this summer-there may be one more  
coming along ... she's working hard to meet the physical requirements right 
now.  
There were a few men having a hard time with this--I'm not really a  
'break-new-ground' type of person--this is all about my son and the fact that 
he  
likes/wants to share these experiences with me. So, the reaction to my presence 
 
has been kind of hard to take. I'd say within our troop it is still somewhat  
mix-y, though it was kind of funny to hear one of the sons of one of the  dads 
who is most adamant about not wanting women involved in scouting tell me  
[prior to summer camp when someone asked if I was coming again] that he hoped  
so--that we needed more Honored Women than just Mrs. xyz.
 
The G-d and Gay issues are hugely discussed on the forums where scouting is  
discussed. I know from my siblings in Illinois that it is a huge huge issue up 
 there.  I would say that the 'G-d' issue will be resolved more quickly than  
the 'Gay' one.
 
Several reasons for that. The Humanists who are wanting to be a part of BSA  
are extremely literate and able to articulate their positions well. In 
addition,  the Worldwide Scouting movement addressed this issue a long time 
ago--Lord 
 Baden-Powell even addressed it and set up an alternative Scout Oath. Right  
now, the biggest issue is how people define the word 'reverent'.  In our  
area, it means 'respect' and that is something that someone has/can have with 
or  
without a belief in a Higher Being of some sort.  
 
The "Gay" issue is harder because when the issue came to the forefront and  
the issue of not being a gay leader arose, it did so because of the incredible  
numbers of pedophiles that had gravitated towards scouting.  Just as they  do 
so wherever there are a lot of kids--particularly boys in this case--there  
was a lot of damage done both to the kids themselves and also to the scouting  
movement.  I, myself, was extremely hesitant to let my son become a scout  
because I know of three boys who, when boy scouts, were abused. One entered the 
 
gay lifestyle but mostly is bi-sexual--very confused about his sexual 
identity.  One married and became an alcoholic. Another married but refused to 
have  
children. Both of the married ones still are dealing with the ramifications of  
this abuse. 
 
The main problem here is that there is such an association/misunderstanding  
of the difference between a pedophile and a man who is gay. In our  area, that 
is probably the biggest stumbling block towards getting that  particular G 
removed from the protective instincts of BSA.
 
(It does not help to have that Man Loving Boys group so vocal--there is a  
university professor in our area who is a part of that--he's very public and  
very vocal and to not have the gay community work a bit harder to separate  
itself from them has not helped the confusion amongst folk who don't comprehend 
 
the difference...)
 
When BSA finally came to terms with the fact that there was so much abuse  
occurring, they developed their Youth Protection Program--which now requires  
that there be what they call 'two deep leadership' [always two adults together  
when around boys who are not their own], the tents of adults are separated 
from  that of the boys, etc. It has helped ALOT in terms of cutting down the 
abuse.  Within the framework of developing the protection for boys, though, the 
issue of  confusion arose as to what/who is the abuser. It is interesting, 
though, that  within the training one goes through for Youth Protection, there 
is 
no  mention of someone being gay at all. 
 
It's a little like what is happening within the Catholic Church because of  
the PR about the whole priests who are pedophiles. (The little brother of a  
friend of mine in college confessed to me, once, that his priest had told him  
that sex with men was okay in G-d's eyes because it was not really 'sex'...the  
kid was another who was so confused about sexuality...He made me promise not 
to  tell anyone and I concurred...still wonder if I should have told his 
sister or  someone else, though...)
 
and notice how they have decided to focus on the 'gayness' of priests--not  
the qualities of a pedophile. Much confusion, I think.
 
Though--I grant you. There is also the issue of money--unfortunately. My  
understanding is that the Mormon Church, which is a huge supporter of  BSA on a 
national level, has stated that they would completely remove themselves  from 
that supporting role if accommodation for gay leaders was set  up.  On a local 
level, I'm not sure that would actually happen--there  are too many people in 
all different faiths who see the value of  scouting for their kids. Most of 
the troops that I am aware of have more of  a 'don't ask, don't tell' 
policy--which, while less than ideal, is a  start.  Not sure if the Mormon 
Church is who 
is keeping the whole G-d issue  from being resolved the way that it has been 
in other parts of the World  Scouting movement, but one of the issues on the 
local level has been to wonder  (sometimes) what the National people are 
doing...<wry look>.
 
I primarily see this as an issue of education. It was one that the gay  
community here in Missouri (and elsewhere) needs to understand--much of the  
irrationality comes from a desire to protect--kind of the discussion about  
whether 
or not one person's virtue is another's or not.  There needs  to be 
explanation that a pedophile is different from someone who is gay.  Especially 
amongst 
the male population...This issue, in an indirect way, came  up during a talk at 
a Young Adult Workshop that was for librarians. The  speaker was part of the 
Missouri Internet Crimes division--focusing on the  predators of children. As 
he stated--the majority of them who prey on kids/teens  are men...though they 
go after boys and girls alike. He was extremely  careful to explain that the 
issue was one of pedophiles-and not gay folk  when he talked about the 
different aspects of this.
 
If the law enforcement community has come to this understanding,  eventually 
[I think] the rest of the parts of the community will come to  understand 
this, too.
 
It took me a while to understand the difference between pedophiles and gay  
men, to be honest, because of the friends that I have mentioned above--I met  
them all while in college and it was extremely troubling to me. None of the  
young men I met in college who entered the 'gay lifestyle' did so because they  
had always felt that they were gay from birth. They were all ones who had been 
 seduced or abused.  This was not true for the girls that I met who were gay  
in college--it may have been [so I have concluded] that the troubled ones 
were  the ones who needed to confide in someone and the others were okay. I 
have 
since  met men who are gay and they have shared that they felt that their 
sexual  orientation was that direction from when they were little.  
 
But, I imagine that if you had had less contact than I did with alternative  
lifestyles and then you were confronted with a slew of young men and their  
parents who were suing BSA for not protecting their kids--and I looked into the 
 
descriptions of the actions which were abuse--I also might have erred on the  
side of caution as BSA did. Especially when the whole issue came to a point  
whereby the national level folk felt that they needed to do something major... 
 
I apologize for rambling about this a bit much.  
 
I agree, it IS a problem--but one which a lot of people are working to  
solve. We have a lot of discussions in our house as some of the boys in the  
troop 
we are in are definitely not in the same traditional 'g-d'  spot which the 
other boys are.  The discussions on the scout forums/lists  are interesting as 
there are so many who are of so many different faiths--and  they do balance the 
'traditional values' people to grow into a greater awareness  of acceptance of 
others (the concept of being friendly and kind)
 
There are lots of people in BSA who are troubled by these issues...and who,  
actually, are showing that, by virtue [<g> note the word] of living by the  
Scout Oath and Law, BSA ought not discriminate...
 
Best,
Marlena in Missouri
   
 
 

Other related posts: