A few years ago, the Supreme Court decided that the Boy Scouts of America had the right to discriminate against LGBT kids.
Congratulations, Boy Scouts!!
The result, however, has been disastrous, as the organization celebrates its 100th birthday. In the wake of the ruling, it has lost membership and clout. An article in today’s New York Times by Katherine Seelye says it all:
The organization, long an icon of wholesomeness in a simpler America, has seen its membership plunge by 42 percent since its peak year of 1973, when there were 4.8 million scouts. In the last decade alone, membership has dropped by more than 16 percent, to 2.8 million.
The declines reflect the difficulties of keeping up with changing times and shifting demographics, as well as of battling a perception that the organization is exclusionary because it bars gay people and atheists, not to mention girls under 13.
And, of course, when you ban women, gays and religious diversity, you also create a flashing neon sign that reads, “PERVERTS PLEASE APPLY”:
An even bigger challenge emerged this year as a jury ordered the Scouts to pay $18.5 million in damages to a man who had been abused by a scout leader as a boy. The trial focused renewed attention on the secret files that the Scouts’ national office in Texas has kept for more than 70 years of claims of sexual abuse by troop leaders and volunteers.
Here is a typical story from July 22:
If the office voice mail recording is any indication, damage control was in full swing this week at the Gerber Boy Scout Camp near Muskegon, Mich., where the director is behind bars, charged with possessing and distributing child pornography — including locker-room videotapes of boys at the YMCA where he worked as a pool safety instructor.
So, the Boy Scouts can discriminate and humiliate young gay kids who only want to tie knots and roast marshmallows. Good for them.
It can belittle young girls and exclude atheists. Isn’t that nice?
However, by making these bigoted and backward choices, the Boy Scouts of America looks a lot like the Roman Catholic Church. The Boy Scouts are now considered uncool, they have a rapidly declining membership, and attracts psychologically unhealthy and emotionally dysfunctional people with severe sexual hangups.
As the Boy Scouts celebrate their 100th birthday, they should consider living in the current century. For the sake of its survival, it is time the Boy Scouts adjust to modern times and reality. The 1950′s ended quite some time ago. Apparently, they never got the memo.
Tags: Boy Scouts, Katherine Seelye, New York Times14 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
I used to work for the boys. I have a lot I could say, but I will leave it at this.
I really want to know the marital status of all of the creeps who have been mlesting boys. They exclude healthy gay people from being members, and prefer scoutmasters and such to be married also that they have heterosexual cred.
The probl;em is, they’ve excluded healthy gay people who have no interest in children. what they end up with are the pervs who are not healthy, who do have interest in children, but who are trying deparately to live normal heteroseuxal lives.
This was driven home to me 30 years ago in the briggs Initiative days. Big hoo-ha about a local police chief, scoutmaster, and all around married guy, caught with his hands in the proverbial cookie jar.
Married to a woman guy.
I quit the scouts because I could see where my life would be if they ever found out I was gay.
Comment by ben in oakland — July 31, 2010 @ 3:39 pm
This groups time has past. They really don’t serve any useful purpose, anymore…they sounded their own death knell when they openly exposed their own bigotry. It would be better that the LGBTQ groups which exists in many high schools be bolstered up and supported than to pay the scouts any mind anymore. The scouts no longer have any relevence.
Comment by Stephen S. — July 31, 2010 @ 4:41 pm
The bitter irony of the Boy Scouts’ official position is that the organization would be *safer* if openly gay Scout leaders were allowed permission to join.
1. As a former Eagle Scout, if I were allowed to join the BSA as an openly gay scoutmaster, I’m allowing my interaction with the boys in the troop to be under strict scrutiny, as it should be with heterosexual adult leaders, but rarely is. I have no problem with being an open book, as it will demonstrate over time that gay men are not to be feared, and that our interaction with young men can be just as professional and supportive, if not moreso. Clearly, the BSA’s blind assumption that all men who are straight are not psychosexually damaged has proven to be disastrous.
2. Those of us who are openly gay and emotionally healthy can spot creepy dangerous adults from a mile away, because we pay attention to the red flags that the average straight person never picks up. As a result, our presence *strengthens* the organization’s ability to keep boys out of harm’s way. This one is so obvious, it kills me.
3. As a scared gay teenager, I know what it was like to be the outcast, so as an openly gay adult, I’m more sensitive to the fragile nature of young men and their identity. That understanding isn’t limited to just gay boys. There is always a kid who is socially awkward, or a terribly fat kid who is desperately lonely, or a little short kid that gets picked on. A gay scoutmaster–who often is more nurturing than the average straight man–can better develop the strengths of each boy, so that they can learn the leadership and social skills to be successful in life.
Allowing gay Scouts and scoutmasters to serve is such a no-brainer, but I guess the BSA has no brains.
Comment by Christopher™ — July 31, 2010 @ 5:33 pm
The comment by Christopher, above, is so poignant it’s actually sad…..
“…..but I guess the BSA has no brains.”
Wow. Talk about hitting the nail on the head!!!
That said, I must add that a high school teacher in my Freshman year was a bit “creepy,” and I FINALLY coerced my parents and the social worker to let me drop the class and take it the following summer. Apparently, being a coach and teacher, he had done some things that were “questionable,” at best, and he was not there the following year. Thank God I sensed he was predatory. I would MUCH rather have had an honest man who could have talked to me about my feelings, which were nearly “overwhelming,” and sometimes succeeded in doing so.
Sad to see, BSA, that your days are probably numbered, however – like other institutions, namely “the church” – it ought to have come MUCH sooner, and it could have protected thousands of young men who find they are attracted to other guys and needed a healthy male to give some practical and proper “mentoring.”
Comment by CAfurrball — July 31, 2010 @ 8:13 pm
This article doesn’t mention the Mormon involvement in scouting. Mormon families complain about how scouting is almost a requirement of the religion and the guff they get if their kids aren’t adequately involved in scouting.
Comment by John — August 1, 2010 @ 12:04 am
Good point John. Thanks for bringing it up. It is worth noting.
Comment by Wayne Besen — August 1, 2010 @ 12:31 am
Christopher brings up such an obvious point its almost embarrassing. You would think that the homophobes would see putting homosexuals in a position of authority would actually end up VALIDATING their position when the homosexual person screws up and starts preying on innocent children, as they suspect they would (or maybe their scared to death that they might be proven WRONG as a result….heavens to BETSY!!!……morally, upstanding gay people?!?!!) I guess THAT would blow their theory right straight to hell, huh? lol!
Comment by Stephen S. — August 1, 2010 @ 1:54 am
I grew up a terrified atheist, bisexual “boy” scout. Even though I’m a young woman now, and still bisexual and atheist, it was none of these that drove me from the scouts. It was the nature certain boys were better than others through their merits. Sure it’s good to recognize achievements, but most of the time the BSA did so in a way that discredited those that could not do certain things. Basically, I left the scouts because I was not a jock!
Certainly the fear that the other 3 damning features would be discovered helped that feeling of unbelonging cement itself, but the ridicule I faced for spending 3 years and only making it to 2nd Class was the worst for my self-esteem. On my 4th year anniversary, I accepted my First Class promotion, and quit the same day.
This was not just my own troop, this was the universal feeling I got at multi-regional camps over the course of several years. I felt it in Denver, in Chicago, in Omaha, and in my home of St. Louis, I felt it in Springfield MO.
Comment by Taelyn — August 1, 2010 @ 11:34 pm
I always wondered what they were scouting for?
I have a really cool friend who used to work for the girl scouts and even though their reputation isn’t as bad as the boy scouts, she still said they were a bunch of nazis and she hated it. When they ‘let her go’ they told her ‘she just wasn’t girl scout material’, her response was, “Oh, thank God!” hahaha
This happened back in the 80s and we still laugh about it. How does 4H compare to the scouts? Does one of those Hs stand for homosex? My cousin lived in a rural area and belonged to 4H when we were kids. I thought most of the stuff she had to do was a crock of shit; but, being a gay child, I was generally anti-establishment in just about anything and everything.
Comment by Gary (NJ) — August 2, 2010 @ 1:52 pm
All very good comments. Learned a lot about the Scouts and some things that I hadn’t given any thought to. Thanks.
Comment by Maurice Lacunza — August 6, 2010 @ 6:45 pm
I am currently a boy scout and I’m also gay. Of course I haven’t exactly “come out” the whole way yet. To be honest scouting is the only thing that is keeping me from being my true self because I am so close to making the rank of Eagle. The more I look into scouting the more I realize how much they truly don’t understand the way things are in the real world. I am actually quite miserable having to pretend to be straight. Is getting the rank of eagle actually worth all the pain it’s causing me?
Comment by Jared — October 16, 2010 @ 8:31 pm
The groups time has past? They don’t serve any useful purpose? Please. My sons are in scouts and it has been a great experience for them. Also, they are learning to care about the people and the world around them. They do service projects and are involved in the community. We are not anti-gay or particularly religious, bur we value much of what is taught and both my husband and I are very involved. I think if one of our boys turned out to be gay, our Pack would have no problem with it. Now they aren’t Boy Scouts yet, so I can’t be certain, but I know we wouldn’t have a problem with it and would fight against any perceived homophobia within our troop. I don’t agree with every leadership decision, but you don’t have to to gain from the scouting experience.
Comment by Christine — February 10, 2011 @ 8:03 pm
Christine, as long as the Boy Scouts have these policies they will be anti-gay. I say this as an Eagle Scout. I don’t like what the organization has become.
Comment by Daniel — February 11, 2011 @ 2:38 am
Long gone are the days of Baden Powell’s philosophy of building character and values through outdoor/nature activities. I feel the influence of the Morman church requiring their young men to be Scouts as part of their religious upbringing and prep for their mission has a tremendous influence,say, and application towards the anti gay and atheist rulings. The Mormon church has great finacial influence in the Scouting program and I feel the reason by which these policies are inforced.
I come from a Scouting family. Issues of sex and religion were never a thought. Scouts was not a religious organization.
I have been involved in Scouts close to 15 years as an Adult leader. I am experienced and very knowlegeable in high adventure activities. But my knowlege of the outdoors is no longer welcomed by the now majority of Morman troops because I am a…….woman.
Comment by Shea — April 21, 2011 @ 5:52 pm