Interesting but you should checkout the left's double standard on military operations. NPR had an amazing report on the UN peacekeepers in the Congo this morning. Thoughts here

It always flbbergasted me that it was considered "scientific" to classify a 40 yr old man who lives with his mom and only seeks sex with teenage boys as "straight". Apparently to qualify as "gay" the man would have to live with another gay adult partner or establish bona fides in some similar fashion. Viola! Ipso Facto Most Pedophiles are STRAIGHT!

Therefore of course it's ok for gay men to scoutmaster boys but NOT for straight men to go camping with girls.

On the "transgendered" / restroom thing, if you have a weiner use the men's room. Only after you've had it filleted, you've lost your nuts and gained some breasts should you be considered a 'woman' and allowed in a woman's restroom. And for all of you straight guys out there who have ever 'picked up' a hottie who had fake breasts and vaginal dryness, you may have slept with what was once a man. Now excuse me while I go throw up again.

I agree that allowing gay men to be troop leaders creates potential for trouble. For men, horniness rules all and if an opportunity presents itself, well, what red-blooded male hasn't had to make that trip to the E.R. on New Year's Eve to have three racquetballs surgically removed from his ass and the vacuum cleaner hose carefully taken off his wang?

All I'm saying is, freaks are freaks. If you're an adult in a position of responsibility, it's up to you to do the right thing. Gay, straight, smurf, whatever.

That's why I hope the new Pope will allow marriage in the priesthood. *Ex-altar boy. Never sodomized.*

Um... Ace, check out the Girl Scout site. Note:

For more than 90 years, women and men from around the globe have partnered with Girl Scouts of the USA to help girls everywhere realize their full potential.

Then look around the site and find any mention of excluding men. Quite the contrary, they are very clear about wanting men as well as women volunteers.

Gay, gay, gay!

Am I the only one who's really tired of the left's obsession to portray all gays as terribly persecuted? It's a game they play: You disagree with me, you must be a homophobe. Give me a break. What happened to being treated just like everyone else?

This shit is getting really tiresome. Where do I cancel my gay membership card?

or whatever you call older Girl Scouts

Barely legal (in Arkansas)?

Brownies are the younger girls, girl scouts are the older ones, ace.

And no fooling, the girl scouts is a hotbed of underage, illegal and depraved lezzo action (not the spice channel kind). It's worse than the boy scouts, and yet not complained about as much (less social stigma, physical damage, and all that).

Really, though, from today forward, I will identify with my sisterhood of women and begin using the women's bathroom.

so long as my wife's not with me.

(or maybe now we can start "going together" like girl friends do)

Oh, VonKreedon, you're an idiot. You find a reference to men being part of the GSA organization -- of course they are, idiot -- and you take that as proof they're allowed to be the only escort to underage girls in the fucking woods.

Try imposing the standards of evidence you impose on others on YOURSELF for a fuckin' change, dude.

And really, ace, "I knew this guy" is about as convincing as, "Doc, I have this friend, and uh he has this rash on his balls and some sores---really, really painful ones---on his weiner. What do you think he has?"

No wonder the bitterness about european "football."

It's tricky. On the one hand, you definitely have a point, ace. Most people aren't comfortable with a heterosexual male camping alone in the woods with a troop of underage girls. So, the idea that people would be skittish about gay men running around the woods with teenaged boys doesn't offend me in the slightest. I don't think it's discrimination or there's an implicit accusation that gay men are more likely to be pedophiles. There are certainly people who believe homosexuality and pedophilia are two sides of the same coin, but on this specific issue there are too many common-sense concerns to believe it's the primary, over-riding motivation.

I just feel a little bad for a few gay friends I've had who grew up in the Boy Scouts. One of my childhoold buddies was in the scouts all his life. He made eagle scout, did the order of the arrow, etc. All that jazz. He eventually became an assistant scoutmaster. When he came out, he was booted. It crushed him.

I feel bad for the guy, but I also understand parents' concerns, as you laid out with the soccer coach. I do wish there was some kind of solution, though. Like having a female parent come along on trips or something. I don't know. I realize that sort of defeats the purpose.

It's just hard not to feel a little sad (and a little angry) watching a friend kicked out of an organization he spent so much of his life in, and who performed exemplary service by all accounts.

I understand the reasoning, and even agree with it. But it sucks nonetheless.

Hey Log Cabin,

no, no you're not the only one (and not the only gay person who's sick of it from what I hear).

But unless you're willing to change you sexual activity (I'm assuming preference itself can't be changed), or go back in the closet, expect to be vilified by your cohorts at every possible opportunity.

It must really such to be Mehlman.

O/T though, seeing Gannon on CSPAN with Wankette and Yglesias, I was surprised that folks were "outing" him. I don't think he's gay. I really don't. He's certainly not fem or flamboyant in the least, and his mannerisms are more macho than Yglesias (yeah, not so tough a standard). But seriously, if he's never indulged in the mantang, he's got a pretty good libel/slander suit against some big players.

Also, fwiw, it was my understanding that the "transgendered" folk didn't like being lumped in with the "gay" crowd. They really see themselves as sexual Tranformers (females in disguise; Transformers, more than meets the eye; Transformers!)

Sorry cartoon flashback.

The deal with both BSA and Girl Scouts is that there is a minimum 2 adult rule for every activity - no adult is ever supposed to be left alone with a youth under any circumstances. Even when driving kids to an event, you're supposed to have 2 adults in the car or caravan with other people attending the same event. Also, adults always have separate sleeping quarters (tents/cabins/whatnot) from the youth.

When my brother-in-law became he told me that there was an old joke (tradition) at the HS he taught at: "May is Cherry blossom time and June is cherry busting time" i.e., soon after graduation the teachers, who had their eye on some student for perhaps years would seduce them. Of course they were all Liberals as he was and thought it all a great sport.

Boy the way Glenn MIller played,
Songs that made the hit parade,
Guys like us we had it made,
Those were the days,

And you knew who you were then,
Girls were girls and men were made,
Mister we could use a man like Herbert Hoover again,

Didn't need no welfare state,
Everybody pulled his weight,
Gee my old La Salle ran great,
Those were the days!

Ace - I don't know, you find a citation to match your assumption and then call me an idiot. When I was a Cub Scout we had, get this, Den Mothers who spent time with us shockingly alone! Looking at my local GSA council I find nothing barring men from any participation. Indeed, the Adult Development registration forms do not have a place for identifying the sex of the registrant!

My assumption, one without citation, is that there are no overnight trips taken with only one adult in either the BSA or the GSA. You seem to assume that the BSA/GSA are allowing groups out into the night with only one adult. That of course would be risky in many ways.

"Doc, I have this friend, and uh he has this rash on his balls and some sores---really, really painful ones---on his weiner. What do you think he has?"

Well-- what do you think he has? Don't leave me hangin'. My friend really needs to know.

Ace - The good news is that your "friends" weiner won't have to be amputated. The bad news is that amputation is irrelevant because its going to rot and fall off within 48 hours.

"When I was a Cub Scout we had, get this, Den Mothers who spent time with us shockingly alone! "?

So did I. And? There is one double-standard I definitely believe in, and it's that women are simply not the sex-freaks that men are.

Find your citation, dude. I've never heard of men being allowed to escort underage girls on camping trips. The very thought of it is fucking ridiculous.

That's my "cite," idiot-- it's fucking ridiculous and you know it. And if you can prove otherwise-- knock yourself out.

It seems to me that the citation ball is in your court as I have provided several GSA citations that either specifically mention that men as well as women are encouraged to volunteer, or make no mention of men being disallowed from volunteering. So now you have made a positive statement, show it to be true.

No, you have disputed the fucking obvious. Your obligation to disprove the fucking obvious.

And regarding your assumption that adult women are safe to be alone with boys, well let's just say Mary Kay LaTourneau and be done with that.

"It seems to me that the citation ball is in your court as I have provided several GSA citations that either specifically mention that men as well as women are encouraged to volunteer"

Which isn't the question. Anymore than the fact that schools have both men and women teachers means that men are allowed to enter the girl's locker rooms and showers at will, as female phys ed teachers are.

vonCretin:

Let's just say "Jeffery Dahmer", then. All gays are head-severing psychos. QED. Game set and match. Done and done.

The problem with crappy logic is it often comes tumbling down onto your fool head.

Ace you have nailed it again.

It really is a double standard. I guess what I am going to say is not very nice but, I think the gay community just wants attention - they want us to make them feel better about their "situation". They want us all to say "You are gay and you are just like me and my average American family".

But they are not and it is not our fault that they are not. Heterosexuality is simply the norm. Sorry!!

They can live their lives however they choose (as far as I'm concerned), but they are not going to tell me how I live mine and how I teach my children about the world we live in. We have to protect all children and adults who demand the simple right not to feel sexually threatened.

Really really sad thing. This trend will continue imho until we have some tragic incidents of "Cross-Dresser Attacks Woman in Restroom" or "Child Raped at Boy Scout Jamboree."

This topic has me feeling very misanthropic today.

on the "den mothers" comment, cub scouts are like 7-10 years old, of course a "mother" figure is fine with that age, how many women are there that prey on little boys? seriously? it's men that do that

the Girl Scouts is for girls age 12-18, in other words one that are going through or have gone through puberty....a big difference. Just b/c they allow male volunteers doesnt mean that men are chaperoning overnight trips

Ok, look through the Totem Council's Service Team Reference Guide.

Some points of note:

Girl Scouting is open to girls between the ages of 5 and 17, and to men and women over
the age of 18, who make the Girl Scout Promise, accept the Girl Scout Law, and pay
annual or lifetime membership dues. These are the only requirements for membership.

and

Importance of adult role models
• The female role model is essential in carry out the purpose of Girl Scouting.
Interaction with women in leadership positions is of particular importance in the
development of girls.
• All Girl Scout adults, women and men, bring special talents and expertise that enrich
the programs for girls. Every volunteer and staff position in Girl Scouting is open to
men as well as women.
• Because we believe that female role models are especially important to young girls
during their developing years, men working directly with girls are asked to serve as
part of a leadership team that includes women.

and

Volunteers at all levels of the Totem Council shall be selected regardless of race,
color, religion, age, national origin, gender, veteran status, sexual orientation,
marital status, or the presence of any physical, sensory, or mental disability. This
policy extends to all areas of volunteer activities including recruitment, selection,
placement, and training.

So now who's the idiot?

Uh-huh.

Still waiting for that cite about men escorting 15-18 year-old-girls on overnighters in the woods.

To be fair, I don't think the left really has any positions other than to take the opposite stand of whatever the conservatives are saying.

Do some reading of the citations I provide.

Here:

Volunteers at all levels of the Totem Council shall be selected regardless of race, color, religion, age, national origin, gender, veteran status, sexual orientation, marital status, or the presence of any physical, sensory, or mental disability.

and

All Girl Scout adults, women and men, bring special talents and expertise that enrich the programs for girls. Every volunteer and staff position in Girl Scouting is open to men as well as women.

Is that clear enough for you?

Um, no, it's not.

I read it before, asshole. You keep saying the same thing, without proving the point you wish to make.

Men and women both work at schools, dickface. Are men allowed in the girl's locker room?

Here are your possible answers:

a) Yes

b) No

And yet all schools will say they do not "discriminate" on basis of gender, and of course men and women can apply for "any" position.

Well, I've provided positive statements that indicate that Ace, providing you pass the background check, can be a Girl Scout camping leader, but Ace insists that cannot be true.

Whatever.

It defies reason, VK.

Rubbing calamine on Britney's poison ivy rash? Telling stories around the campfire where the serial killer only kills the girls who don't put out?

We're guys. It ain't happening, though I understand the power of wishful thinking.

Sponge - You and Ace may rightfully rule yourselves out of acting as GS volunteers, but the GSA don't rule you out because you are men. It may defy your version of reason, but the GSA citations I provided speak to specifically including men in all positions because they see a value for the girls in including men.

Just not you and Ace apparently.

Dude. Directly from your own post:

Because we believe that female role models are especially important to young girls during their developing years, men working directly with girls are asked to serve as part of a leadership team that includes women.

Any man working directly with the girls has a female chaperone. Anyone who believes the only reason for this is to promote female leadership is disturbingly naive.

Mob - Yep, and thanks for reading the cite, but to quote Nordicgirl a ways up in the comments:

The deal with both BSA and Girl Scouts is that there is a minimum 2 adult rule for every activity - no adult is ever supposed to be left alone with a youth under any circumstances.

So, yes it is true that Ace can't be alone with the girls, but neither can Nordicgirl. The difference is that Ace and Sponge can't be alone with the girls, but Nordicgirl and LauraW could. Now let's look at Ace's claim in his post:

And if it's deemed perfectly safe to allow a gay man to camp in the woods with underage boys, and yet not acceptable at all to allow a straight man to do similarly with underage girls-- what other message can we take from this strange double-standard? Apparently a gay scoutmaster is to be trusted implictly, because of course no gay man has ever had sex with an underage boy.

But a straight man cannot be allowed anywhere near underage girls, because, of course, we are the true pedophiles. We just can't help ourselves.

According to the GSA straight men, and lesbian women, are allowed, even encouraged to be quite near underage girls.

Well, fact-checker that I am, I put in a call to the GSA. We'll hopefully hear back soon.

Invoke my name two more times. I will appear in spirit form and kick your ass for being willfully obtuse.

Holy crap I’m confused. Here I am pouring margaritas from my official Scout canteen, thinking I’m agreeing with Ace that the Left has been inconsistent when applying standards to the rights of gays. However, I don’t see the hypocrisy between the stated adult leadership requirements in GSA vs. BSA. Both allow adult males & adult females to hold leadership roles. Both require 2-deep leadership for all Scout activities. Both require background checks for all participating adults. At every single Camp Godhelpme I’ve attended, both BSA and GSA had separate sleeping quarters/shower facilities/bathroom for adults vs. Scouts. BSA forbids gays from joining, GSA doesn’t - I think that’s why the Left hates the BSA.

Ok, here's my over long, completely outta my ass, faux evolutionary/scientific take on why I believe gay men, from a population overview standpoint, are statistically more desirous of 'too young' partners than straight men.

First: Men (S or G) place more of a sexual emphasis on youthful sex partners than women. Cultural universal. (please, I know some of you are getting revved up already, aching to spout some study about some ancient rainforest people, where the women... Cool it. This ain't a peer reviewed journal. I'm just some guy mouthin off on the web, making caricatured, narrow minded observations. You need to learn to ignore cranks like me. ) Demi/Ashton, Desparate Housewives intrigue only because they reverse the 'natural way of the world'. - MEN horndogging young sex partners.

But nature (and again, this part is completely just armchair bullshitting) places in men an age limit floor on what we're sexually attracted to in the bodies of sex partners. In straight men, that floor is puberty. The female post puberty body is markedly different than pre-pubescent. Breasts, hips... the female post pubescent is almost a different species. Riper, fuller, etc.

Once that change happens, the 'now a sexual object switch' gets flipped on in str8 men. And it's obvious why evolution made it so. The men who wasted their sexual efforts on pre-pubescent (not fertile) sex partenrs , died off, out reproduced by those men who dug only the ripened potential child bearers.

Male homosexuals: I believe the best definition of a male homosexual is one whose brain is configued such that they get aroused by male boides. (ignoring bisexuality here). And while they share the str8 males powerful urge for sex, and emphasis on youthful partners, there isn't as strong an sexual desire/ age switch marker because the bodies of their preferred sex partners don't morph as dramatically upon attaining fertility. The boy body is just a smaller version of the man body with less naughty-bit hair. Not as much to create a signal out of, one that evolution might run with and say don't waste your efforts here. If you're attracted to men, and like youth (as straight men do to) your gonna like boys too (or more often) because the bodies of boys don't AS readily signal the change.

Someone might respond, 'well if that's true' why don't women desire youthful male sex partners at the same elevated rate as gay men? After all, they desire the same male bodies.' My guess is because womens' brains are wired up differently. While they desire male bodies, they also place an emphasis on qualities in a sexual partner that don't reach fruition til later in life. Namely social heirachy standing and it's many forms. Money, prestige.. All that stuff men don't place the same emphasis on in women, but women value highly doesn't really peak till later in a males life. And certainly after puberty hits.

Sorry for going LONG on this. Once worked in a field that required my thinking about this stuff and always looking for a forum to let out my crack pot theories. There's a lot of fighting over my unerlying hypothesis, gay men are pedophiles at an elevated rate compared to straight men. Don't trust much of anyone statistics here. Just too political. Just been my experience. Not saying this to demonize gay men in the slightest though. Frankly, it's men in general (straight or gay) that commit all the sex crimes. Our sex doesn't have much to be proud of here as a whole.

Actually, vK, you've convinced me. I'm joining tomorrow. And if the female chaperone won't have tent sex with me, or catches me watching the girls squatting over one of those stick latrines, I'll just kill her and bury her in the woods.

You might note that a guy has to have someone of the opposite sex along where the woman can be with the little vixens as long as there's another broad along. See, they recognize that women are different than guys. Two guys would work out a plan to boff the little tykes before the truck was packed.

In my last comment the line, "But a straight man cannot be allowed anywhere near underage girls, because, of course, we are the true pedophiles. We just can't help ourselves." should be in italics as it is a cut/paste of Ace's post.

Ace - What a diligent citizen journalist, I look forward to hearing what you asked them in addition to hearing their reply.

Nordicgirl--

Can men take girls into the woods on sleepaway trips?

Ace, vonCretin is moving the goalposts on you. You said that men were not allowed to take a Girl Scout troop out to the woods. vonCretin replied, "nuh uh, GSA allows all sexes!" You were implying men in charge of a Girl Scout troop in the woods. He's offering that men are allowed, so long as they're accompanied by women in a leadership position.

This is true, BTW. I knew a dad who had both Girl and Boy scouts in his family (he was a Scoutmaster himself), and he would accompany both on camping trips, but certainly not alone.

The point is, however, that men are not allowed unchaperoned with a group of Girl Scouts, even if there are two of them. vonCretin is being wiley, but he's still full of shit. This is one of them "innacurate, but true" thingamabobs.

I don't believe I'm the one moving goal posts. Again, to quote Ace in setting the posts:

I would never be allowed to be the troopmaster for a Girl Scout troop, or whatever you call older Girl Scouts. The reason is obvious-- I'm a straight male.

and

And if it's deemed perfectly safe to allow a gay man to camp in the woods with underage boys, and yet not acceptable at all to allow a straight man to do similarly with underage girls-- what other message can we take from this strange double-standard? Apparently a gay scoutmaster is to be trusted implictly, because of course no gay man has ever had sex with an underage boy.

But a straight man cannot be allowed anywhere near underage girls, because, of course, we are the true pedophiles. We just can't help ourselves.

Now to quote from the Totem GS Councils reference:

Because we believe that female role models are especially important to young girls during their developing years, men working directly with girls are asked to serve as part of a leadership team that includes women.

That simply does not say that Ace cannot be a Troopmaster or take a troop on an overnight camping trip, it just says that, since this is the Girl Scouts, there must be a woman as part of the leadership as well as Ace. Ace would like to move this to say that he really meant that he can't take the girls out by himself, but that was not the original goal posts.

I've searched some BSA sites and none of them are anywhere as clear about gender stuff as the GS sites. However, I did find this at the Mid-America Council site:

The policies that have been adopted to provide security for our members. These policies are primarily for the protection of our youth members; however, they also serve to protect our adult leaders from false accusations of abuse.

• Two-deep leadership. Two registered adult leaders or one registered leader and a parent of a participant, one of whom must be 21 years of age or older, are required on all trips and outings. The chartered organization is responsible for ensuring that sufficient leadership is provided for all activities.
  
• No one-on-one contact. One-on-one contact between adults and youth members is not permitted. In situations that require personal conferences, such as a Scoutmaster's conference, the meeting is to be conducted in view of other adults and youths.
  
• Respect of privacy. Adult leaders must respect the privacy of youth members in situations such as changing clothes and taking showers at camp, and intrude only to the extent that health and safety require. Adults must protect their own privacy in similar situations.
  
• Separate accomodations. When camping, no youth is permitted to sleep in the tent of an adult other than his own parent or guardian. Councils are strongly encouraged to have separate shower and latrine facilities for females. When separate facilities are not available, separate times for male and female use should be scheduled and posted for showers.

So it would seem that women are included at least some of the time. And, as noted by Nordicgirl, there must be at least two adults at all times. FYI

Sorry if I'm throwing a late bomb here, but there ahs been one question that has been botering me about this:

Why can't I be afraid of undressing in front of a openly gay man?

Are gay men somehow more picky then straight men, or what? If I was gay it would be "schwing" time all the time in the locker rooms.

That's it! Thank you Greg! I am applying to become a gay man!!! What a great idea!!!!!!!

Vk - you are arguing semantiucs and frankly you are just boring me to tears here. Basically, a man, or men cannot be chaperones in the GSA without an accompanying woman .... and the reason is pretty damn obvious. Would you please argue something with merit and stop boring us to death here.

The argument presented by Ace was that he could not be a GS troopmaster or accompany the troop into the woods for an overnighter. He can. Sorry to bore you with facts.

Ace then took this assumption of his to then assume that there is some "Progressive" Left's Inconsistent Standard on Questions of Sexuality, at least in this case there is not.

Well, Greg, if they're openly gay, they're going to be more self-conscious about those things. I don't know too many gay men who walk into a locker room with straight men who know they're gay, and shamelessly ogle everyone who walks through the door. The one who does is asking for trouble.

I change with straight friends at the gym. They know I'm gay. It's never an issue. Maybe it's just me, but they're my friends, so I'm careful to avert my eyes. It's for their comfort as much as my own. Sure I've seen things. But no different than straight males occasionally seeing down a female friend's shirt. They're not looking, but sometimes it happens . . .

Ok, I just realized how stupid I sound. Of course males are looking. But, if I'm in a locker room with straight men who know I'm gay, I make every effort to keep eyes at shoulder level and no lower. Seems like it's the polite thing to do.

TMI?

These policies are primarily for the protection of our youth members; however, they also serve to protect our adult leaders from false accusations of abuse.

Nearly everybody has policies like this in today's litigious environment. They have to in order to get insurance. The day care center at my church requires that there always be two staff members present with the kids (they are all female) and their must never be one-on-one contact. The kids are all pre-school age; the staff is all female. Never mind, you have to follow rules like this, you're just asking to get sued.

Sorry, forgot to sign the previous comment.

Ace then took this assumption of his to then assume that there is some "Progressive" Left's Inconsistent Standard on Questions of Sexuality, at least in this case there is not.

I believe Ace was referring to the fact that in the case of the bathrooms, transgendered men are not generally attracted to women (those who ususually visit the women's room) whereas gay men are attracted to members of their own sex - as in boyscouts. I suggest a re-read.

Anyhooooooo, vK, you must be the life of the party -- remind me to invite you on my next frolic in the woods ..

(bring your Girlscout Manual)

Von Kredow: You seem to win a rather pedantic battle at the cost of the war here. The point was, as you state, there is some "Progressive" Left's Inconsistent Standard on Questions of Sexuality goin on here.

That notion seems to be butttressed by exactly what you point to: the inconsistent standard that heterosexual men need a chaperone to be alone with girl scouts while homosexual men pose no elevated risk to the 'scouting' youth of their sexual preference.

Sure, maybe you got Ace, fomally, on a broad statement that you've shown to be incorrect, but the heightened absurdity of requiring a bodyguard for the girls for stays in a man's presence (instead of just saying, 'no thanks men, we'd rather avoid a risk') strikes me as the kind of higher comic absurdity only legal minds are capable of.

Ray - There is no inconsistency; lesbians are not required to have a man or non-lesbian present at GS events. The GS reference states that:
Because we believe that female role models are especially important to young girls during their developing years, men working directly with girls are asked to serve as part of a leadership team that includes women.

No mention of bodyguarding the girls, but rather providing same sex role models at all times. I know that Ace et al think that it is all about sex, but its not.

So, if gay guys want to be scout leaders to f'ing bad, why don't they all join the Girl Scouts?

Seems like the girls would be a lot more receptive to the decorating/accessorizing/flower arranging-type activities, anyway...

(Yeah, I'm a turd. So what?)

VonK: Got no dog in this fight, and don't know anything of scouting bylaws other than what you've written, but this is what caught my eye:

Because we believe that female role models are especially important to young girls during their developing years, men working directly with girls are asked to serve as part of a leadership team that includes women.

Now, I saw that part about two deep leadership on away nights, and it seems to me that combined with the above rule makes it very clear, it can't be two men (although two women, ok).

We can argue about what is the real inspiration for this rule, 'need for role models' versus 'wariness of the male sexual predator and the following lawsuits' [can you imagine the moolah a trial lawyer could get by putting the GSA president on the stand and asking all surprisedly,'what? you mean you ALLOW men to accompany little girls overnight unchaperoned? Closing: Ladies and gentelmen of the jury, I'm a simple lawyer, but I know somethings about men that the GSA refuses to admit...]

My guess is the GSA can't exist if it doesn't allow men (and lesbians) to exist as scoutmasters. Won't get enough otherwise. Just a more male oriented thing to do. Same as shop teachers. So gotta allow in, but then set up formal rules to protect the girls from situations where the males sexual predators could take advantage. If it was about 'strong female role models' seems to me they could say it's all women and be done with it w/o any outcry.

As far as the "lesbians ok" thing, interesting. I wonder, though, (genuinely) whether the scout-self-selecting lesbain population poses the same statiscal threat as those males who decide they 'really want to help the little girls.' My guess is chicks in general, lesbian or not, just don't pose the threat males of any orientation do to young uns. Anyway.

"Are gay men somehow more picky then straight men, or what?"

You're kidding, right?

During the ‘80s I toiled for a top ten law firm in lower Manhattan. It was the salad years of arbitrage and deals, everybody was making big scratch. Which meant sharp clothes and lots of good looking Tess McGills from LI, SI, Jersey, Brooklyn & Queens.

In this mix was a lot of support staff. Outside of the McGills, the policy was to hire everybody they wouldn’t hire for Partner. This drift net approach brought in a lot of weird sea robins. Diversity first in Support Staff and maybe they won’t look at the Partners List. Well they had this dude, name of Joseph who was a proofreader or something and he was in the midst of becoming Julia. Hormone shots for man tits and electrolysis for that 5 o’clock shadow. So far, no problem.

Well Joseph takes a vacation and has massive body work done, including a brand new pair of 36C high beams. Lots of doodads added and the chasis modified, but the tackle shop remained in business. A new wardrobe of appropriate attire, the aspiring Julia trying to become a Tess McGill but still with the Bill Dance baitcaster. Now, big problem.

The Solomonic wisdom of the admin committee, with as much concern as HR could beg out of them, was assuage Joseph/Julia and let them go to the ladies loo. Now, much bigger problem.

When word of this truly Hammorabic statute ran through the Merlin, an eruption of tsunami-like proportions hit the firm. Believe me, whenever an attorney passed a McGill, not even a gum crack was heard but the evil eye was everywhere. Partners were seen crying in their corner offices when Tess took time off and HR brought in Gladys Kravitz from the temp agency. Lots of Gladys Kravitzes. That did it, time for another meeting with Julia/Joseph.

They told them no ladies loo for you, bud, as long as your sportin’ that Ugly Stick, it’s the gents pissoir for you. Oh, boo hoo! A sex discrimination lawsuit for you! Uh, oh STOP this heap big problem STOP must go away pront FULL STOP.

$50K later and now our beloved old white-shoe law firm had three types of water closets.

Is pedophilia considered a GSA protected Sexual orientation?

A good majority of the Catholic Church sexual abuse scandal victims were adolescent boys (11 yr olds and older and not less than 10 yr old kids). Most of the abuse happened with *no* physical violence involved. Several environments of abuse included overnight stays, trips. The media reported the scandal as the Church *pedophilia* scandal, as if it were straight pedophiles going after little kids, insinuating little girls, not as homo priests abusing adolescent boys.

For scholars, a distinction is usually made between pre-pubscent children (less than 10 yrs old) and teenagers. Adults who abuse adolescents do not necessarily abuse pre-pubescent children and vice-versa. Adults who are attracted to adolescents (11 yr olds and up) are called ephebophiles. The distinction is important. Not that a person can't be both, but there are some important differences.

Another double standard, Ace, regards how much abuse male homos or bisexuals perpetrate. When a homosexual (two males) abuse case is reported, obsessed pro-homos will say, "but just because it was an adult male and a male child/adolescent, it doesn't mean the adult is homosexual. Straight adults abuse boys, because pedophiles have no adult sexuality. In fact, the majority of child abusers are straight men." while all of this can be true in certain cases, for all the gazillions of homos who abuse, it is false.

Now you take the same situation, an adult male and a female child/adolescent, and immediately, in a frothing at the mouth response, pro-homos will say, "See! He is straight !" And not " this guy isn't straight because he does not have a straight adult sexuality. So he is neither straight, nor bi, nor homo in the adult sense - just pedo"

Adults can simultaneously have an adult, an adolescent, and a pre-pubescent focus of sexual feelings and actions. Or any combination of the previous. You can have a homo that has sex with men and boys, little or adolescents. Or you can have an adult male that has not developed adult sexuality (towards any sex), and is geared towards children only.

The other imbecility regarding modern mass sexuality concepts is the "identity" question. Moronic sexuality dogmas go like this, "if a person identifies as a heterosexual, then they *are* heterosexual."

Identification here means what this person thinks they are. The reason this is very stupid (and part of the double standard issue you are addressing) is that a person can have the most unrealistic and loony self conceptions, including ones about their own sexuality. For example, we have millions of bisexuals who "identify" as heterosexual. In reality, they are bisexual, in their stupid minds, they are straight.

What happens if you do a study about how many people abuse children or adolescents and you ask your study population what they identify with, and you do not verify what they are in reality? The result is a really slanted version of the type of perpetrators. Slanted in which way? It obliterates how many non-straights are abusers, and inflates the "straight" category.

Which is one reason why pro-homo researchers adore to employ this biased form of identification for tabulating research results regarding perpetrators. And the masses of pro-homo morons in society go on repeating, like a mantra, "99% of all abusers are straight males."

Another thing that caught my eye in this discussion is the obliteration of the bisexual category. People rightfully talk about homos not being allowed to be scout masters, but not homos and bisexuals. Which regarding the abuse problem, is an equivalent danger.

Also, the erasure of lesbian abuse, as if, a) it didn't happen, or, b) because it seems it happens in less raw number of cases, it is a less important issue than if the abuse is perpetrated by a male. Really senseless and a horrendous double standard.

I am a gym teacher at a public grade school in Florida, and one of my jobs is to make sure that all of the girls, ranging between 5 and 12 years old shower after gym class. I will offten shower at the same time as the girls do, and we have never had any complaints from any of the girls or their parents about the nudity issue as far as mine or the girls is concerned! I will admit that the first time or two that I shower with the girls that I get some stares from them, but after a couple of days it is no-longer a big deal to anyone. With that said, I do not think that it is a good idea for men to be showering with boys! I don't mean that in a sexist way! However I feel that it is a much safer thing for girls with a woman teacher/coach/den mother. Plus group female nudity is a much more natural thing without it being sexual.