When I was a boy, the only politics in scouting were the petty ones carried in by some of the adult leaders, centered more around who was a better Scoutmaster than anything else. National politics were, thankfully, not on our radar as youth.
Today that is no longer true. In a world constantly bombarded by the 24/7 in-your-face news cycle, social media, and instant information, we're helpless against the onslaught of agendas coming our way from every direction.
Today, I got in my email a letter concerning the contentious issue of Gays and Scouting. I'll begin by saying I don't know what the right answer is. I support my friends who have other orientations and experiences than mine, and I will defend their right to be who they are, whether that conforms to someone else's idea of what's "right" or not. I also see, how in an all-male organization, there are some questions that are driven mostly by fear, but still remain unanswered because the BSA is not willing to use the youth of the program as guinea pigs in the experiment of finding out whether a pro-LGBT stance is appropriate or not.
The letter says:
As many of you are aware, a youth member and Eagle Scout in our council has been publicly advocating for further change to the current BSA adult leader standards. This young man, who is openly gay, has stated his intentions to attempt to register as an adult leader when he turns 18, in early August.
It goes on...
NCAC has, and will follow the policies and procedures set by the National Council. As such, it is anticipated that the scout’s application for adult membership will ultimately be denied, after a full review like any other application that is submitted, and he will
voluntary adult leader after he reaches 18 years of age.
What I want to say is this - the BSA made a choice last year to allow Gay youth, but prohibit Gay leaders. I think this was the worst possible choice they could have made, for two reasons. First, it was an act of appeasement. Had they held their ground and stuck with tradition, they'd have been called a bigoted organization, but as a private organization that is their right. It may not be for everyone, and I find that tragic, but it remains a legitimate option. Second, it creates the worst possible environment for a gay young man... membership in an organization that tolerates him because it feels it has to, but sends a clear message that his natural mentors, the gay men who've lived in silence or shame, are not worthy to lead other young men as adults. It puts the young man in a position of being surrounded by people who accept him by policy, and not in true fellowship.
I think if BSA were genuinely interested in helping young men today, it would find a way to accommodate the young men of yesterday, and display the kind of character we try to teach boys... that all are worth of our positive attention, that there are good lessons to be learned in the outdoor experience, and that sexual behavior, regardless of orientation, doesn't belong at camp. The fear that a gay leader might be acting inappropriately with gay boys should be lumped in with the same youth protection we follow now, in defending against any other form of pedophelia. Abuse is abuse, and that should be where policy stops. Further marginalization and judgement doesn't achieve the high moral standard BSA claims to be carrying the torch for. Rather, demonstrating the quality of character to dive in and tackle difficult problems at the adult level, so they don't turn into problems at the youth level, is what BSA really ought to be doing, if it weren't living in fear.
I'll not discount those fears, either, because the other truth of today is that our society is more litigious than it used to be, and trials are far more public than they were in my youth. The BSA has a lot of money coming in from people who think there should be no compromise, and their fear of being sued, de-funded, abandoned by their base, or pilloried any other way for taking a stand for equality is something its board of directors has to deal with.
But I think men like Green Bar Bill, Ernest Seaton, or even Lord Baden-Powell might have risen to the challenge if they were here today.
No comments:
Post a Comment