InquisitiveScouter

From  the GSUSA Charter...

§80302. Purposes

The purposes of the corporation are—

(1) to promote the qualities of truth, loyalty, helpfulness, friendliness, courtesy, purity, kindness, obedience, cheerfulness, thriftiness, and kindred virtues among girls, as a preparation for their responsibilities in the home and for service to the community;

(2) to direct and coordinate the Girl Scout movement in the United States and territories and possessions of the United States; and

(3) to fix and maintain standards for the movement that will inspire the rising generation with the highest ideals of character, patriotism, conduct, and attainment.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title36/subtitle2/partB/chapter803&edition=prelim

One could make the case that, even by marketing to girls as "scouts", the BSA is infringing on the Congressional Charter of the GSUSA.

On 12/23/2020 at 10:20 AM, ParkMan said:

I too wish that we could stop having labels define us.

“We but mirror the world. All the tendencies present in the outer world are to be found in the world of our body. If we could change ourselves, the tendencies in the world would also change. As a man changes his own nature, so does the attitude of the world change towards him. This is the divine mystery supreme. A wonderful thing it is and the source of our happiness. We need not wait to see what others do.” – Mahatma Gandhi

A good first step would be eliminating the labels.  For the most part, I endeavor not to use them.  It is a pernicious system that has taken hold in our society...this labeling.  It is in everything we do, including on our applications for Scouting.

I think I'll take my own advice (and Gandhi's), and to help reduce discrimination, I will stop answering these questions everywhere I encounter them.  Using these as metrics for demographics and to force diversity only perpetuates using them.

@yknot, thanks for letting us know of some of the consequences.

I briefed our Troop Committee tonight on this, and, although here in these forums I have fervently expressed my personal views, I did present this in a neutral and diplomatic manner to them.  There was a mixed reception, as expected, and the dialogue exchanged was exactly along some of the lines presented here...understanding a need, but not accepting the implementation.

I asked them all to reserve final judgment (as I am doing) until the MB and rank requirements are formally released, which I guess we all expect within the next nine days.  We may get a product then that is somewhat different from what we see now.  I also have not seen the rank requirements, nor the MB counselor notes.

I would ask that you all keep your ear to the ground and share any official developments as they come in.

According to my faith, I wish you all a blessed Christmas.  If I could put a vaccination in your stocking, I would!

See you after the holidays,

Inquisitive Scouter

19 minutes ago, Navybone said:

Wow. I guess civil discourse has truest gone the way of the dodo.  Please let me know what your preferred agreements are in favor of your position so I can just feed them to you.   

You also show that you do not know what "civil discourse" means.  I am trying to enhance my understanding of the requirements for this Merit Badge, the motives behind it, and it's intended purpose.

Reading for comprehension is essential to enhancing your understanding of someone's point of view.

How about another point of view?  Would you listen to Dr. Thomas Sowell?

47 minutes ago, Navybone said:

To state that this merit badge will kill of scouts is quite dramatic.  If scouts survives the child abuse, admitting homosexuals, and girls, this should not be the last chapter.

However, Jordan Peterson is only one voice in this discussion, and one with a very limited and pointed perspective.  He is the darling of of the conservatives in the media when discussing diversity.  And if we welcome his point of view, should we also then not include the opposite side of the conversation?  

It's a metaphor.

And "...a portion of what remains..." does not mean the entire organization.

Please read for comprehension.  It is vitally important in order to relate to others.

Any arguments are welcome, as long they can back up positions with facts and logic.  Otherwise they are just opinions.  And opinions are like a certain part of the anatomy...everyone has one, and they all stink.

And Dr. Jordan Peterson is a "darling" because he uses research, facts, and clinical experience to back up his arguments.  In other words, he follows the science, instead of using feelings and perceptions as valid evidence.

13 minutes ago, Cleveland Rocks said:

Our OA lodge just voted last weekend to change the totem used on our lodge flaps and other media from a side-profile Native American in full headdress to a black squirrel.

Our district (which had a Native American name) just merged with another and the contest conducted to come up with a new name had explicit instructions that Native American names or references could not be used in the new name.

You will see this happening more frequently in the future.

Just now, ParkMan said:

What is the harm in getting kids to want to think about how they relate to those who are different from them?

Everyone is different from them.

And don't forget the left-handed!!

https://dailyillini.com/uncategorized/2020/02/27/left-handed-right-handed-world/

44 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

races, genders, sexual preferences, and gender identities are the norm. 

You forgot ability, ethnicity, faith and financial background.

And that is the crux of my point.

In listing some groups, you are showing bias against others.  Ultimately, the badge is hypocritical.

The "important" (sic) terms of "diversity", "equity", "inclusion", "bigotry" and "intersectionality" are all based on the controversy whirling around a current social agenda.

"There are real problems with this agenda, however. The first is that it’s dangerous, in exactly the manner it is hypothetically designed to fight. The argument made by those who are truly prejudiced has always been that the differences between groups are so large that discrimination, isolation, segregation and even open conflict–including war and genocide–are necessary, for the safety of whatever group they are part of and are hypothetically protecting. Why is it any less risky for the argument to be made in the reverse manner? The claim that group-based differences are so important that they must take substantive priority during hiring and promotion merely risks validating the opposite claim."

https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/blog-posts/lie-of-diversity/ 

This merit badge is a poison that will kill off a portion of what remains of the Boy Scouts of America.

2 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

A Scout can define the answers however they want to.  How is that any different?

I'm not really sure you are being serious.

If so, why bother with the MB?

And Duty to God is one of the Ideals of Scouting. 

Ideals – The ideals of Scouting are spelled out in the Scout Oath, the Scout Law, the Scout motto, and the Scout slogan. The Scout measures themselves against these ideals and continually tries to improve. The goals are high, and, as they reach for them, they have some control over what and who they become.

BSA has not changed the ideals.  This Merit Badge attempts to.  And, since earning the MB is not required of Scouts anyway, unless they wish to attain Eagle Scout, I'm more interested in the rank requirements they are talking about, which haven't been released yet.

Just now, ParkMan said:

But there is:

• In the Webelos level there is a Duty to God adventure.
• At the Bear level there is a Fellowship and Duty to God adventure
• At the Wolf level there is a Duty to God Footsteps adventure
• At the Tiger level there is Tiger Circles: Duty to Good 
• At the Arrow of Light level there is Arrow of Light Adventure: Duty to God in Action
• It's well known that at Eagle Boards candidates often are asked how they demonstrate their Duty to God.  Further, they are required to submit a letter of recommendation from a faith leader or parent that supports that.

 

Yes, but there are no wrong answers to these questions.  A Scout and her parents define her duty to God, and you cannot contradict her in any way.

5 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

Scouting is very clear to not push a particular religion, but instead to advocate for the idea that youth should be thinking of their own beliefs in God.  This seems to have a parallel.

Now there's an idea!  How about a DE&I Award.  Same requirements, and NOT REQUIRED for Eagle Scout. Also, no requirements in the early rank structure.

2 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

In Scouting we have requirements and award relating to religion. 

No, we don't.  Scouting simply recognizes awards sponsored by various faiths.

12 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Does race exist? 

Thanks, @fred8033 the best line in the first paper is "But perhaps holding onto old-world beliefs of biological race is implicitly supporting the ideas that make possible the manifestations of “societal race” "

The only way to stop the "manifestations of societal race" is to do away with the notion that such a thing exists at all.

So the true definition of racism is "any belief that race exists."

27 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

It does make we wonder though - what are the sensitive issues that people fear in the space of diversity, equality, and inclusion?

Asked and answered?

A suggested PR release from BSA:

Scouts don't care about what you look like, what your parents did, or where you're from.  We care about your CHARACTER.  That's why Scouting is impressive and why Scouts in every country have been a force for good in the world for over 100 years, because we only care about what matters, and what matters is who you are on the inside.

A to-the-point editorial today by Tucker Carlson on FoxNews.  Find and read/view The military goes woke, and the consequences could be disastrous

"Over time, identity politics will destroy our country. No nation can remain unified for long if people are encouraged to think of themselves as members of competing ethnic groups first and citizens second. Countries need a reason to hang together; unity doesn't happen by accident. The fixation on race that has seized our leadership class guarantees permanent disunity. It's terrifying if you think about it, but it could be much worse."

"The military, we have all been told since childhood, doesn't care what you look like, what your parents did, or where you're from. They care about your performance. That's why the U.S. military is impressive and why they've been able to keep us from being invaded, because they only care about what matters, and what matters is protecting the United States. Not any more."

@Greeneagle5,

While the idea for the project itself is a good one, your friend may be cool on the idea for reasons already mentioned, and possibly because of the idea that "...this project could be continued in future years..."

As adult leaders, it is inappropriate for us to commit the unit to any ongoing (or possibly perpetual) projects.  Program planning is the purview of the Patrol Leaders Council.  And it is for the PLC to decide whether to undertake an ongoing project.  (That is most certainly off limits for an Eagle Scout candidate.)  I even caution our PLC during annual planning that, if they venture down that road, a future PLC may decide to end a "commitment" they make.  That is, a current PLC may not tie the hands of a future PLC.

Over 15 years ago, a long gone PLC (or leader) signed us up for an adopt-a-highway.  At the past seven PLC Annual Planning Conferences (we do planning semi-annually, actually) when they review our previous year and come up with a list of their desired activities, I always remind them that they are not committed to any specific activity (like a perceived "Troop tradition"). 

Me: "You are not obligated to do an Annual Troop Picnic, or the Annual Thanksgiving Turkey Cookout, or the two-times-a-year Adopt-a-Highway clean up.  You can pick other activities if you want."

PLC: "Really? We don't HAVE to do those??"

Me: "Nope...don't HAVE to do them.  Remember, the Committee can support almost ANYTHING you want to do, but you don't have time to do EVERYTHING you want to do."

There usually follows some discussion of past instances of the "traditional" activities (nostalgia), followed with comparing priorities on their list of "want to's."

PLC: "Well, we voted and decided we still want to do those things again this year."

Me: "I support you 100%, and I'll recommend the Troop Committee to approve."

19 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

They locked, archived, and unlisted that thread to hide it.

No way!  I just found it today.  Maybe my computer hacking skilz are getting better

35 minutes ago, TAHAWK said:

It probably will be when it is noticed.  It does not 100% support the "narrative."

Lol...then someone is asleep at their "narrative steering wheel". It's been there since June.

@MattR for gauging, that video was not removed by moderators at my.scouting.org

https://discussions.scouting.org/t/diversity-and-inclusion-mb/172457/30

1 minute ago, tnmule20 said:

It is not my place to teach or discuss any of these proposed requirements with anyone's child.  This is the responsibility of the PARENT OR GUARDIAN.  Therefore, if implemented, I will require one PARENT OR GUARDIAN of each Scout to become a MBC for this badge and teach their individual Scout.  This is such a powder keg how could anyone feel comfortable with teaching something like this to another persons child.  There are so many different political, societal, moral, etc. views that this would be impossible unless the goal is for everyone to think of things the same way, which would also be impossible.

@CynicalScouter, I begin to see a way through this... I sign up as a Merit Badge Counselor for this badge.  I ask the parents to discuss all these topics and do any items with their Scout.  When they tell me it is complete, I sign off the badge.  I think I could do that ethically.  A Scout is Trustworthy!

13 minutes ago, TAHAWK said:

OK, I see the banned video addresses, among othe thing, stereotyping of Black males.  That was a topic Dr. King addressed many times and is a classic "social justice" issue.   It is "prejudice" per se, although opinions differ on why it takes place.  omedian So the video is not all one way.

The video is a compilation of interviews and speeches by prominent actors, performers, social activists, etc., and relates the experiences of those people with regards to whether "systemic racism" (see the MB requirements) exists, whether they experienced instances of it, what some of the facts are that people use to justify stereotypes, and appropriate response to perceived wrongs.  As @fred8033 said, the video itself is respectful of these people and their views.

@BamBam gave a perfect negative example of what the MB addresses with "Tell what more your unit can do to ensure anyone can participate regardless of their ability, ethnicity, faith, financial background, gender Identity, race, or sexual orientation. " in making a judgement about the validity of someones views and experiences based on their perception of the commenters' "financial background".  @BamBam is "hoist with his own petard"

13 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

Ironically, using the term in the context of her post is also bigotry.

@EagledadBarry, thank you.

What we really need is a Merit Badge that teaches classical disciplines of Logic and Rhetoric versus emotion and persuasion.

https://www.hillsdale.edu/hillsdale-blog/writers/logic-rhetoric-intellectual-self-defense/#:~:text=Logic and rhetoric are the,things differently%2C but not defenselessly.