Jump to content

    • That's not sexist. That is a different opinion based on different information. Shesh. Your supporting my point that you can't (won't) have an open mind because you risk loosing ground on your opinion. Even though you control your opinion. Are you afraid the other person jut might change you mind? Do you really think your information is the only information on the subject? Does personal experience that doesn't agree with your information count for anything.  Seems like folks today can only have a discussion if they feel they have the upper hand. Scoutlike? Even scientist differ on opinions based from personal evidence. As an engineer, I often have different opinions with other engineers even though our numbers are an exact and don't have an opinion..  Barry
    • It is sexist because empirical studies have never universally confirmed this. I have cited studies that point this out. (And here's a review article https://www.apa.org/monitor/2011/02/coed.) Yet you continue to use the same hackneyed assertions. For example, if I were in rural Africa and needed my sons to learn how to start and maintain a fire, I would not send them to the male elders of the village. Because, it is invariably the women who have that responsibility. (My Ugandan niece had formidable skills.) Here in the US, the woman deferring to the man for fire building is a 20th century, almost romantic, role. Prior to that, it was invariably something a boy learned from his mother. At WSJ I sat on Mt. Jack teaching an Indonesian scouts everything about sassafras. One girl took notes and had me draw the leaves in her notebook (with spelling in English and Arabic). I later showed her and her friends how to find blackberries and track bear. Would she have learned more about the plant faster from a woman? I doubt it, simply because there was no woman stopping, with root in hand, offering to brew them some tea while we rested. Meanwhile, the boys were more interested in video games, of which I apologetically said I knew little. We humans learn more faster when the teacher is competent. Competency does include respecting social norms -- which include sex roles.
    • You had me up to here. What is the point of the local option if some options are off the table? All the examples you gave for supporting the local option are political in nature to some degree. This is exactly why many posters (pro gays included) didn't support the local option. How can the local option give COs room to provide a program if the CO is given limited options based on perception. I thought the whole idea of the local option was to give the BSA a break on perception. Barry
    • On being able to discuss gender issues like this...  Yes, I think it is excruciatingly hard in 2020 to discuss gender issues like this.  In fact, whether it's gender, race, or another characteristic where people feel there is discrimination, it is hard to do that.  My hunch is that as we've progressed in removing discrimination in our country, we are now tackling a lot of subtle and implicit discrimination.  It's taken a lot of pushing for a lot of years to get this far.  People are just naturally on the lookout for what they perceive as discrimination and push back.   On the technical part of your comment... I'll admit - it is just my opinion.  Yes, I do believe that it is better for our scouts to have the more rounded experience of mixed gender leadership.  I suspect there is probably no fact based way to decide that question - it's just a policy choice about what kind of skills do we want the Scouts to develop.  If we were rolling back the clock to before the choice to have female leaders had been made, then yes - I would have lobbied for a unit choice option.  I would have been absolutely fine in supporting both unit models.  Today, I would not roll back the decision thought and would not off this as a unit level choice.  I recognize that this can be viewed as inconsistent.  To be transparent, I do strongly favor mixed gender leaders in units (again a bias of mine).  However, I do not believe that my personal bias is the basis for this recommendation.  The basis for my position is two fold: 1) I believe that BSA should reflect the trends in our country and, 2) should actively work to stay above divisive political issues.  Years ago when the BSA saw that the country was moving in the direction of mixed gender leadership teams, they should have gone along and said - "ok, this is a new idea that is clearly becoming part of accepted life.  As such, we will leave this choice up to you."  The would have followed the trends and stayed above politics.  However, in 2020, the country is well integrated and the time for this decision long passed.  If the BSA made all male leadership teams a unit choice today, it would be going counter to the general direction of the country.  The BSA would be opening up yet another controversial political decision.  So while they would have left this to unit choice, they would be doing so at the expense of yet another political battle.  The BSA needs to be above polticial battles - not starting them.  
    • We had a similar situation with the schedule, only opposite. The scouts wanted to spend extra time at the fishing camp, but that would put us in our campsite late. So, they set the alarm at 4:00 in the morning to get us on the trail by 4:30 am to get to Fish camp by 7:00am. AND THEY DID IT. It wasn't easy getting up that early and we were even hiking in the dark for awhile, but we adults were impressed that they looked a head and made the plan. They actually did something similar for two other days. So, I didn't get much beauty sleep. Barry
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Create New...