"God Bless the Boy Scouts of America."

Risking putting a downer on things, certain points in an article I read on the speech lead me to conclude that rather than an authentic change of heart, it was more of a tactical retreat based around loss of financial funding due to several corporations witholding funding due to the staunch stance. Now the flow will be back on, but in a way it sounds like a Boycott campaign. Doing so can force a change but possibly at a high price (fallout) in the bigger picture. The man said the previous stance was unsustainable. Does that mean they would have sustained it had the money flow been unaffected? We may never know. We shall see how things pan out with this.

Yes you saw the evidence and replied but it was edited out

What I saw, was a claim of 2000 scouts abused, and a book reference.

My further post asked if you can provide a summary of the background of that figure, such as the span of time this total of 2000 was within, whether in one single state / country etc, what era (or eras) and if the sexual orientations of the perpetrators are known / guessed at. All this because you have read the book and a brief summary from memory can provide that, without others having to purchase and read the book (by which time this thread will very likely be no longer be visited or commented on, I'm sure).

Thanks.

Yes you saw the evidence and replied but it was edited out

What I saw, was a claim of 2000 scouts abused, and a book reference.

My further post asked if you can provide a summary of the background of that figure, such as the span of time this total of 2000 was within, whether in one single state / country etc, what era (or eras) and if the sexual orientations of the perpetrators are known / guessed at. All this because you have read the book and a brief summary from memory can provide that, without others having to purchase and read the book (by which time this thread will very likely be no longer be visited or commented on, I'm sure).

Thanks.

Must have been caught in the maelstrom: I wish people banging on about Boy Scouts could have put as much enthusiasm/paranoia into the Catholic church.

This is a non-story, it's par for the course now to vet the criminal background of people who work with kids isn't it? Regardless of gender or sexual orientation.

It's highly unlikely they'll go backwards.

This is a non-story, it's par for the course now to vet the criminal background of people who work with kids isn't it? Regardless of gender or sexual orientation.

Yep (certainly in Britain). Won't stop a clean slate first offender though.

Gay and pedo are not the same thing unless you happen to be a follower of PUTIN.

Nobody is condoning pedo crimes against boys or girls.

Again, think about this.

The chances that an OUT gay man would commit such crimes are remote compared to a scout leader who appears to be straight as an arrow and is hiding behind that facade.

Now if you think gay men can't be good role models for youth, that's just bigotry.

Not me of course ... I hate camping!

Obviously with this new policy, regions that are dominated by intolerant Christian fundamentalists are not going to have out gay leaders but more civilized areas WILL.

You were doing fine until your last sentence. I would have hoped you would know that as liberal as some are, they'll still avoid having their kids around gay men and women.

A lot more detail about the scouting equality movement in this interview with Zach Wahls. I think it answers my curiosity about how the gay activists most closely involved with this issue are reacting to this major but not total move forward:

I almost didn’t believe it. When I co-founded Scouts for Equality in June 2012, the Boy Scouts very publicly doubled down on their policy just a month later, pledging that the ban would stay in place. At that point, we thought we were looking at an eight to ten year fight. So to go from where we were in July 2012 to where we are today is still difficult for me to wrap my mind around. It couldn’t have possible without the tireless work of our tens of thousands of members across the country, the incredible volunteers who stepped up to the plate and put in long hours, my phenomenal staff of Eagle Scouts (almost all of whom are heterosexual), my board of directors, and our financial supporters. It was a team effort, and it wouldn’t have been possible otherwise.

http://live.washingtonpost.com/civilities-with-steven-petrow-20150728.html

Far as I'm concerned they can have monkeys as scoutleaders if they can do the job. However, to prevent even suspicion of any improper contact they should make rules that require that no boy/ girl should be with an adult in a room with the door closed and no adult is allowed to be with a boy/ girl anywhere that they are alone. Applies to women as well, as there are plenty of female teachers having improper relationships with children.

It is also necessary to protect adults from false accusation by children or parents.

I think this is the rule (or guidance) in many fields of work / volunteering with children now. More than anything it is guidance designed to (as you say) prevent false accusations against staff of improper contact.

However, the achilles heel of it from what I can see is that it cannot stop 'pack predators' who may have infiltrated a place. What I mean is, the child is in a room with two adults (one supposedly keeping an eye on the other for improper conduct) but the two of them and operating together to abuse.

Attempting to have no such thing as interaction in private rooms seems like an answer,but difficult to implement in reality I should imagine. Institutionalised abuse is one of those phenomenons where even if the entire staff isn't directly and personally in on the abuse, there may also be a culture of fear about voicing suspicions, or even a spreading of the culture of certain kinds of abuse in an establishment if perceived as acceptable.

In Britain there were secret recordings where the entire care staff in a home for mentally challenged seem to become a pack of thugs. It was quite shocking footage of how in groups, in an isolated environment, can somehow become one unit of behaviour (applies to nations / ideo!ogy too of course).

But I drifted a bit there....

Which is why I included leaving the door open- regardless of how many adults with the child.

When I was assisting the anaesthetic staff in a UK theatre I would be left alone with female patients. I refused to have the door closed as it would make me liable in the event that some man hating female made accusations against me ( and believe me that is a big deal these days ).

Even female theatre staff are forbidden to give distressed children a cuddle now, in case they are accused by parents of molesting their child. The world has gone completely barmy!