Navybone

If you read the comments on the facebook site, the council did offer a boys-only version, but there was not enough interest. If true, then there is no issue here, huh?

Yes, let’s try to have minority in scouting try to improve its membership. This is about how to increase female membership. Do you have a role in that? If you do, I am sure they would include you.

From where we are, many kids drop travel sports (which consumes weekends) when they reach high school. They transition to high school teams which play during the week. The sports conflict is then usually limited to practices conflicting with troop meetings.

Great question. Not sure, but a good head scratcher. Retention? If you assume you have a good program, scouts stay? Otherwise they vote with their feet?

T Scouts is outdoors and the whole “Cotton Kills” thing

Haters gonna hate. It’s hard to toe a hard line as BSA risks losing those who disagree. Not meant as an excuse, just a reality. Important thing is that BSA stays on track and does not waiver. Change takes time, and it will get there. Keep advocating.

100% agree. It is inappropriate to remove the US Flag to add the flag of another county. How does he reconcile that with the citizenship aspect of scouting?

The OP provided evidence that there were affinity group meetings at NOAC (5 March) He did not specifically state why they were detrimental other than they exist. He never states exactly why. He then provided examples at a national level that had no actual connection or identified applicability to BSA. His apprehension on a white male affinity group is his perception - or did someone tell him he cannot form one?

I would disagree that it is a made up woke term. I have heard it over the last decade plus while int he military to stop/reduce Blue on Blue sexual assaults (committed on sailors by other sailors): do not be a bystander - see something, say something, do something. What is woke about that?

RIGHT - "An affinity group, while potentially helpful could perpetuate the same colorist and euro-centric bias that exists by making those problematic views a necessary status quo in the fight against white supremacy." The important part is that the article does not say all affinity groups cause these issues. I gave you an example of one where membership was voluntary, where is a view where it is not. To bring this back to scouting and not just about how all affinity groups are evil, how are they used in the BSA? Is there any actual evidence that they are operating like the article?

The OP’s question was “So, can anyone explain to me the difference between these groups and how having segregated events develops the concept of DEI among Scouts?” when he sates his opinion that a lot people see woke and DEI as not beneficial. And that special events for minority groups versus majority (white males) in scouts is counter to DEI in BSA. That is what I gave a down arrow to. My response was to ask “What do you disagree with in the Cit in Society MB? Not talking about the political BS, "woke" or rest of it. What part of the requirements of the MB do you disagree with?

That was in what 2000? Was that because of affinity groups or the recent BSA scouts DEI efforts. I seem to remember that was an entirely different issue.

I am not asking about random companies around the country, this is a forum on scouts and scouting. Let's focus on that. We should look at if BSA Scouts is excluding others, inhibiting opportunities for scouts or scouters.

I guess the question is if the affinity groups are causing others to be excluded. Is that occurring? Are the affinity groups resulting in other groups being denied advancement, opportunities, are there new standards that only the groups have to follow, but are stricter/more lenient with the group you associate with? IS that special treatment or recognition occurring?

Why do you say that? where is that happening? Are you saying that white males are being pushed out of scouting? Where?