David CO

2 hours ago, Pselb said:

Isn't this the conclusion certain groups in our society wish?  All females as dominant?  

I don't think so. I haven't seen any great conspiracy by women to use false accusations to gain dominance over men. I think the vast majority of women are well intentioned and are attempting to find an adequate response to a real problem.

That said, I think most women are unaware of the number of false accusations that are made against good men. 

53 minutes ago, EmberMike said:

How many innocent men have been caught up in this? Anyone know? I have yet to hear of one.

I don't think anyone knows. They don't keep statistics on this.

I have seen several teachers dismissed unjustly. I have also seen many teachers exonerated. Regardless of the result, all false accusations have a chilling effect on the teaching/coaching staff.

It also has an affect on hiring. More than half of the Catholic schools in my diocese have no male teachers on staff. They have 20 or more teachers, but not 1 man. The pastors and principals don't want to have to deal with the all of the trouble caused by false accusations. It is much easier to just hire an all female teaching staff.

I have had several false accusations made against me. I'm pretty careful, so I was able to prove my innocence in each case. Even so, it is not a fun experience.

In Victorian times, it was the girls who needed a chaperone. Now it's the guys.

Not always. Some issues should be handled in a closed session.

1 hour ago, ItsBrian said:

Really? What about district camporees or summer camp? Or COHs?

Haven't you ever met a scout unit that opted out of uniforms? BSA doesn't require them.

What I find odd...is scout units that require a uniform shirt, but then allow it to be worn with blue jeans. They require something that BSA rules don't require and then allow something that BSA rules don't allow. 

11 minutes ago, mashmaster said:

They also require boys to be in a field uniform shirt or not attend.  

We don't require scouts to buy uniforms. If scouts do wear the uniform, we expect them to wear it correctly. 

10 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

The mission of the Boy Scouts of America is to prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law.

What difference does it make?  The scout oath and the scout law are just historical artifacts from a bygone age. BSA doesn't have moral standards anymore.

1 hour ago, Eagle1993 said:

Our long term Cubmaster is stepping down this April when his son crosses over, so we are working on a send off.  Our Pack financial status is in good shape so our new Cubmaster suggested using some of those funds for a gift card.  I’m pushing back as I don’t think it is appropriate and it feels like it would be against policy.

It might be against our policy, too. Money raised by the unit should be used only for scouting purposes. You didn't say if he is intending to volunteer for the troop. I wouldn't see anything wrong with your Cub Scout unit offering to pay for his training for a troop position or activity. 

26 minutes ago, desertrat77 said:

Okay, I'll be specific in this post.

How is the OA disrespectful when some Native American nations approve of certain OA lodges using their traditions, garb, and ceremonies? 

 

I will take you on your word that this actually happens. It is outside of my experience. I agree that it is possible for an OA group to be respectful.

11 minutes ago, desertrat77 said:

But if a specific Native American nation says "OA Lodge #X, you have our permission to use our ceremonies, dress, etc., and we'll work with you to ensure authenticity," and Lodge #X lives up to their end of the deal, how is that disrespectful?

I am finding it very difficult to carry on a conversation with you. You keep switching from general to specific and specific to general, depending on the point you want to make. In general, I think OA is disrespectful. There may be specific instances where they are not.

2 hours ago, desertrat77 said:

I was speaking to the generalized "The OA is a horrible, disrespectful organization" argument, and specifically re any OA lodge's relationship to a particular Native American nation.  Not of OA-unit relationships.

Your unit is your unit.

 

As to the generalized argument, everyone can have an opinion and nobody really has the last say. I wouldn't go so far as to say that OA is horrible, but it is disrespectful.

2 hours ago, desertrat77 said:

 If so, should disapproving outsiders have the last say?

Disapproving outsiders should have the last say on their own turf. If a unit asks OA to stay away, then OA should stay away from that unit. 

2 hours ago, Col. Flagg said:

Wow, that's a split hair. I didn't realize there were degrees to which cultural appropriation was offensive. Is wearing a Mexican hat (but not imitating the behavior of Mexicans) okay?

Sure, that's okay. 

Nobody is saying that you can't wear an item of clothing or jewelry as a fashion statement. That's not cultural appropriation. 

The fact an animal is indigenous to a particular continent doesn't make it uniquely associated to one particular culture. If that were the case, then we would have to infer that the Republican elephant is intended to indicate a strong identification between that party and persons of African descent.

1 hour ago, cocomax said:

See there, you can agree that it is unequal and unfair.

. . . and you are okay with that,  because you have reasons that justify being unfair.

 

 

 

Yes, I do. The main reason being that boys and girls are different. Their needs are different.

10 minutes ago, cocomax said:

Can everyone at least agree that:

When male Scouters are treated differently from female Scouters with regard to YPT, that is unequal. And unfair.

 

 

I can agree to that. It is unequal and unfair.

However, I think we sometimes need to be a little bit unequal and unfair to our volunteer scouters. My CO has never promised to be equal and fair in the selection of volunteer scouters. We choose our scouters based on the needs of the unit, not on the needs of the scouters.

In regard to youth protection, I think the needs of the scouts must come before the needs of the scouters.

On ‎1‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 9:21 AM, Back Pack said:

As stated above it’s impossible to trace many things back to a single source. 

I agree with that. I have no objection to OA using an arrow as its symbol. Almost all cultures have used arrows. Yes, some things are universal.

OA is not just using universal symbols, and it is not just using "something" from another culture. OA groups choose a specific tribe and mimic the dress, ceremonies, names, customs, and culture of that tribe. It is appropriating the culture. Cultural appropriation is an appropriate term for what the OA is doing.

1 hour ago, Back Pack said:

Who cares. It’s about being fair and equal. 

I find it somewhat ironic that your comment follows the same sort of attitude that prompted the changes. Fairness and gender equality.

As a matter of fact, I do care about consequences. 

Is it practical to require a male leader for every den activity. I don't think so. We don't have enough men volunteering in the cub scout program to do that.

2 hours ago, qwazse said:

I'm betting it's not what I or anyone else feels, but what skilled litigators have got from negligence cases when plaintiffs were all-male caretakers vs all-female caretakers of the opposite sex.

I think it would be better to have a female leader as a witness in my defense, should it ever come to that. A male leader is less likely to be believed.

A lot of people feel that girls and women should always be believed when they make an accusation against a man. The only good defense for a man is to have a woman leader testifying on his side.

1 hour ago, Jameson76 said:

There is no logical reason for this distinction.  Unless you feel that girls cannot be trusted with only male leaders.  

Exactly right. You hit the nail on the head. I don't trust the girls. That's why I want to have a woman leader present if a group includes girls.

I agree that there is a double standard. There always has been. It's nothing new.

The double standard exists in medicine as well. I have a cousin who is a doctor. He makes sure that there is a female nurse in the examining room whenever he is treating female patients.

8 minutes ago, Back Pack said:

So we don’t trust two men with a girls den but we trust two women with a boy den. That’s called a double standard. It’s wrong. 

Why is it wrong? 

1 hour ago, Back Pack said:

Clearly men are treated different than women and boys different than girls. That should be a problem for everyone here. 

Not for me. Boys and girls are not the same. They should be treated differently.

14 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Yep, I commented on the double standard with 2 females can lead an all male den, but a female MUST be present for an all girl den a few weeks ago when the early adapter program info came out to execs. Sad thing is that NO ONE except @Back Pack and I seem to have a problem with it.

Maybe some people consider it a moot point because they have no intention of having a girl den.