Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Can’t call it a brotherhood anymore. Can’t say Arrowmen.

 

The concept of inducting braves into the ranks of the warriors is also gone.

I am forced to differ with you on one point BP.  Allowat names them Arrowmen in the Brotherhood ceremony.  If it is good enough for the mighty chief, 'tis good enough for me.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious what you mean by mixed.  I've only been to a few actual pow wows, but in each one the drums were entirely male.  There were women present but they didn't participate in the drumming, rather sitting in an outer circle around the drummers.  As for the dancing, the specialties were separated by gender. Male fancy dancers wearing the bustles, bells, and head gear; female dancers wearing and participating in shawl and jingle dress dances.  Is your experience different?

My observation as well. There are different roles for men and women. This is why youth should be encouraged to study their local tribes. Sex roles should be honored, together.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stupid system gave you a neg rep instead of positive. Meant +1. :)

Wish I could fix software; you should be able to change your own vote.   :(   Anyway used my vote to help correct. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am forced to differ with you on one point BP.  Allowat names them Arrowmen in the Brotherhood ceremony.  If it is good enough for the mighty chief, 'tis good enough for me.

I’m not saying I want the name changes. I’m betting that folks cave in and make the name changes to be more inclusive. I think the next five years is going to test even the most patient person. We watched a speech from PGB1 the other day in class. I was stunned at how valid it was to stuff going on today.

 

https://youtu.be/Y3IFbJQzDxo

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wish I could fix software; you should be able to change your own vote.   :(   Anyway used my vote to help correct.

 

Thanks. I tried to change it but when I click on the rep box it only tells me who has voted. Doesn’t allow me to change it. Thanks for having my back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 I really don't know how many of "my" team would sadly walk away but the team dynamic would most certainly be profoundly altered.

The change in dynamic is what has me concerned. Not just for ceremonies, but for the group overall.

 

It has been many years since I was involved in OA, so things may have changed already without my knowing it.

 

But in my day, it was a boy run organization. We pretty much had the run of the camp. When I chaired the ceremonial team, we camped apart from the rest of the group (usually occupying an old cabin). At any time, a few of us might be working on the ceremonial grounds. Others might be at the cabin working on their lines. Still others might be working in the main building with logistics or ceremonial supplies. Often, our ceremonial advisor would stay in the main area or not show up until ceremony time. It didn't matter. We knew what we needed to do and were trusted to do it. Through this were learned to work as a team and to accept responsibility.

 

What would change if half the ceremonial team was female?

Well, not sharing the same cabin is obvious.

But what about everything else? Would we need a team of advisors to follow the smaller groups around as they completed various tasks? If so, how would that affect the boy's feeling of trust and responsibility? On the other hand, would it be responsible, as an organization, to have mixed groups in the woods without a chaperone?

 

My musings, for what they may be worth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, we're a long way from half the ceremony team being female. But ...

...

What would change if half the ceremonial team was female?

Well, not sharing the same cabin is obvious.

But what about everything else? Would we need a team of advisors to follow the smaller groups around as they completed various tasks? If so, how would that affect the boy's feeling of trust and responsibility? On the other hand, would it be responsible, as an organization, to have mixed groups in the woods without a chaperone?

 

My musings, for what they may be worth.

A cabin properly divided with a tarp would suffice.

Yes, it is responsible to have mixed groups during day activities without a chaperon.

BUT training on personal safety awareness would be imperative.

AND it's a big country, so I can see some places where this would go over better than others.

 

This is the crux of the problem with BSA4G as currently proposed. Arrowmen will be nominated from troops of boys and girls who may not have had dealings with the opposite sex. That will be perfectly natural and accepted in some lodges (maybe even separate lodges for boys and girls). But, other lodges might expect more mixed-sex operations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My observation as well. There are different roles for men and women. This is why youth should be encouraged to study their local tribes. Sex roles should be honored, together.

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously, the names of the Principals may need reconsideration - 'Guide' would still be okay for either male or female, all other "positions" though were typically male. You could, of course, have a female Medicine Woman, but you couldn't keep the Lenape name as it refers strictly to a male.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking that OA will need a complete overhaul.  The Native Indian culture would in no way fit into today's PC world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Stosh said:

I'm thinking that OA will need a complete overhaul.  The Native Indian culture would in no way fit into today's PC world.

The culture fits in fine. It’s how non natives would get called out for cultural appropriation that seems to be the problem. It’s sad because that’s one of the last thing that keeps guys in OA. Take away the ceremony and it just another group doing more lame stuff. I’d rather spend my weekends camping with my buddies on my own then. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only solution to the ever changing political agendas of "us" and "them" is total silence.  Good luck with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stosh said:

I'm thinking that OA will need a complete overhaul.  The Native Indian culture would in no way fit into today's PC world.

Maybe this would be a convenient occasion to consider leaving the Native American ceremonies and nomenclature to the people who invented them, and come up with something of our own.  We might even consider reducing the ceremonial aspect, regardless of what "theme" is chosen.  Full disclosure, I have not been involved with the OA other than doing the ordeal when I was a Scout.  I never really participated after that.  I think I've seen it called "sash and dash" in this forum.  But that's my opinion, anyway.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Indian influence once held a positive allure in our culture.  It was considered a good thing to be doing, even honorable in many aspects to be associated with the Indian culture.  It was a good thing to be white with a "Pocahontas" background.  But as the PC world evolved into what it is today, it has become demonized and reserved only for those who have been segregated out to be able to continue honoring it.  In many unspoken respects, the Indian culture belongs back on the reservation.  It is not a shared culture, it belongs only to those of that descent.   We play the extremes today.  Everyone has to be one way or the other otherwise we can't play the "us" and "them" game.  Even our former president played the game.  No, he was not the first black president, he was the first mulatto president.  He was as much white as he was black.  

In 1924, Congress finally started granting citizenship to Indians.  In 1936 they finally got the right to vote.  This stands in contrast to Blacks getting citizenship in 1868.  All these people were born in the US, but "us" and "them" retained a strong foot hold on our culture.

When BSA first started out, the Indian culture was truly a sub-culture in America.  Eventually they became citizens and eventually held the right to vote.  The struggle is over and they can have their culture back and no one else can share it.  That's a long, cruel history that we have tried to honor throughout the years of Scouting.

I'm afraid in order to toe-the-line with PC, we will need to dump the OA completely as we know it.  It's unfortunate.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×