Re: $50,000 from Levi S.
Steve Souza (76703.633@COMPUSERVE.COM)
Sat, 29 Jan 1994 00:40:42 EST
Quoting From: Beth Allerton bethpet@nervm.nerdc.ufl.edu
Beth...
> Fourth: So why is Levi's presentation to Girl Scouts a direct result to
> their non-participation with the BSA?
More an indirect result... Levi's got hammered big time here in CA for their
stand on the gay issue and for pulling their 'voluntary' contributions to
BSA. When the various arms of the (volunteer) Boy Scout organization got
together and leaders and youth made individual decisions to NOT buy any
product mfg. my Levi's, it hit the company hard.
By making a VERY PUBLIC presentation to GSUSA for AIDs education, they are
maintaining their stand to support the gay lifestyle (and retaining their
very strong gay community support here in CA) and at the same time appearing
to support "scouting" (albiet Girl Scouting).
> We all know why there is a problem with corporate money, but the Levi
> company could have presented the grant to a number of organizations.
As I mentioned in my post... that was my point. There are a LOT of agencies
working with educating the public, many concentrated more than GSUSA in
these efforts. Many in the SF area, more than anywhere else in the US. I
_DO_ believe that the Girl Scouts can do a good job... When all is said and
done however, it still looks like a political (spelled PR) decision on the
part of Levi's.
> Last: Think before you write. Do you know how INSULTING it is to
> read:... that G Scouts only get funded to provide PR as well as a
> back-handed slap at the BSA? Check out "suspend" on your computer.
Not only did I not say what you said... I didn't imply it either <g>.
Lighten up..! What I did suggest was that GSUSA was selected for this
particular grant due to the perceived PR value in ADDITION to the Girl
Scouts being deserving.
> Re-writes are always better - this is my third draft. The first one
> exploded in flames.
Glad you were able to quench the fires... No one likes flames, and my
original post was not a flame... Remember the definition of a flame:
>> If you feel you must "Flame" someone, (a flame is when a message becomes
personal, especially an emotional attack, one-sided or otherwise, directed
TO someone, or to someones position) for whatever reason, do it VIA
Netmail, NOT in the conferance. <<
Hope we can continue to have differing opinions without the need for Flames.
-s2-
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++ Steve Souza CompuServe 73370,1464 ++
++ Exploring Division 73370.1464@compuserve.com ++
++ Public Relations Chair RBBS-Net 8:914/405 ++
++ Santa Clara County Council Busilink 10:108/1 ++
++ GlobalNet 51:1800/1 ++
++ Brotherhood member OA ++
++ Miwok Lodge 439 | >>---->> | BBS: 408-227-4865 ++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City | 
