Boy Scouts of America: who should be welcome?

[Zeta-Flux]

Originally Posted by xilman

Kids, from small babies to teenagers, have been left in my care on a number of occasions. Neither I nor their parents were in any way apprehensive about the situation.

Just to be clear, so that we are comparing apple to apples, are you saying that teenage girls not related to you have been left in your care overnight on a regular basis? And that you think it a wise national policy to put often appoint two men into positions where they monthly take teenage girls on overnight campouts while also serving as emotional counselors?

[retina]

Originally Posted by Zeta-Flux

I wouldn't trust the situation.

I'm assuming you all don't have kids, because for me this is a no-brainer. You don't put kids and adults (even kids and adults you trust) into compromising situations.

I actively seek to put Mini Me, the little bugger, is such situations. More power to him if he can manage to do a bit of . It might serve to teach him some responsibility and keep my chocolate bill down.

Perhaps I'm not such a model parent though? Anyhow, the rules of society need a bit of testing now and then just to make sure we aren't going too far off track.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by Zeta-Flux

Just to be clear, so that we are comparing apple to apples, are you saying that teenage girls not related to you have been left in your care overnight on a regular basis?

No.

Originally Posted by Zeta-Flux

And that you think it a wise national policy to put often appoint two men into positions where they monthly take teenage girls on overnight campouts while also serving as emotional counselors?

I personally have no issue with that policy.

[Spherical Cow]

Originally Posted by Zeta-Flux

I wouldn't trust the situation.

I'm assuming you all don't have kids, because for me this is a no-brainer. You don't put kids and adults (even kids and adults you trust) into compromising situations.

Bad assumption. I have two kids, one Eagle Scout, Order of the Arrow, etc. etc. I would have no problem if the two adults providing supervision for my boys were female scout leaders. Perhaps your definition of "compromising situations" is much broader than many of ours.

Norm

[Zeta-Flux]

Originally Posted by Spherical Cow

Bad assumption. I have two kids, one Eagle Scout, Order of the Arrow, etc. etc. I would have no problem if the two adults providing supervision for my boys were female scout leaders. Perhaps your definition of "compromising situations" is much broader than many of ours.

Norm

Yup, bad assumption on my part. Having two 18 year old (hence adult) female scout leaders take a group of young men on repeated campouts is compromising in my mind, but I guess I'm in the minority here. I'll let this be my last word.

[Brian-E]

Originally Posted by Spherical Cow

Bad assumption. I have two kids, one Eagle Scout, Order of the Arrow, etc. etc. I would have no problem if the two adults providing supervision for my boys were female scout leaders. Perhaps your definition of "compromising situations" is much broader than many of ours.

Norm

Presumably you would have no problem if the two scout leaders in charge of your boys were gay males either? I'm quite sure you wouldn't because I've never seen you post anything remotely homophobic, always quite the reverse, but I'm just keen to see clarification.

[kladner]

Originally Posted by Zeta-Flux

Yup, bad assumption on my part. Having two 18 year old (hence adult) female scout leaders take a group of young men on repeated campouts is compromising in my mind, but I guess I'm in the minority here. I'll let this be my last word.

That situation seems unlikely enough to qualify as a straw man argument.

[Spherical Cow]

Originally Posted by Zeta-Flux

Yup, bad assumption on my part. Having two 18 year old (hence adult) female scout leaders take a group of young men on repeated campouts is compromising in my mind, but I guess I'm in the minority here. I'll let this be my last word.

Yes, I think what constitutes "compromising situations" is different for us, and there certainly are some compromising situations with respect to adult supervision that I would not put my kids in.

Hopefully you don't mean this is your last word on the whole topic- this has been some excellent, well-thought-out discussion, and I would hate to see you drop out of it if my post was too aggressive for some reason.

Norm

[only_human]

Originally Posted by Zeta-Flux

Yup, bad assumption on my part. Having two 18 year old (hence adult) female scout leaders take a group of young men on repeated campouts is compromising in my mind, but I guess I'm in the minority here. I'll let this be my last word.

Would your concerns be alleviated if these two female scout leaders were lesbians?

[Spherical Cow]

Originally Posted by Brian-E

Presumably you would have no problem if the two scout leaders in charge of your boys were gay males either? I'm quite sure you wouldn't because I've never seen you post anything remotely homophobic, always quite the reverse, but I'm just keen to see clarification.

That’s true; you are correct- I would not have a problem if the two supervising adults on a scout camping trip, for example, were gay. I just don’t think that someone who is gay is any more likely to be suddenly overcome by sexual urges than other supervising adults. Putting the label “gay” in front of “adult”, of course, puts a sharp highlight on the person’s sexual orientation only, so one tends to think of that person in a sexual light, forgetting all the other characteristics that may apply, whether it be religious orientation, education, parental skills, training, etc. etc.

Sending your kids off for some extended period of time with other adults will always have some inherent risk, and I certainly worry about those risks, probably more than I should. I know it’s more than I should, actually. But I don’t think there are more risks associated with gay adults than straight adults, or however we group people. Adult engineers. Adult dentists. Adult lawyers. OK, maybe there are more risks with lawyers….anyway, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a study that suggests a higher risk of deviant sexual activity (such as an adult supervisor seducing an underage kid in his/her care) out of any one of these groups versus any other; gay, straight, dentists, engineers, Lutherans, whatever. Some small percentage of people are deviant; some small percentage of all those groups are deviant. In Boy Scouts, they seem to realize this, so there must always be two adult supervisors; even the scout master, or leader, cannot go on a camping trip with the scouts alone, even if it’s only a small number of scouts. There must always be a second, approved adult. Reduces the risk. Which never goes to zero, of course. Its asymptotic, I guess.

Norm

[Zeta-Flux]

Originally Posted by Spherical Cow

Yes, I think what constitutes "compromising situations" is different for us, and there certainly are some compromising situations with respect to adult supervision that I would not put my kids in.

Hopefully you don't mean this is your last word on the whole topic- this has been some excellent, well-thought-out discussion, and I would hate to see you drop out of it if my post was too aggressive for some reason.

Norm

Sorry, no I didn't mean I would drop out altogether. I just meant that we seem to have reached the point where we know where we disagree, and why.

------------------------

kladner

I do not know how often 18 year-olds serve as scoutmasters or assistant scoutmasters. They often serve at scout camps, but they aren't in close proximity with the boys at night, so it's a little different.

------------------------

only_human,

Would your concerns be alleviated if these two female scout leaders were lesbians?

On the issue of sexual attraction, yes.