Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, and Pedophilia

Great Debates
81

No- I am not arguing that point. If you read the posts I strongly disagree with that policy. What I do say is that we cannot trust anyone of any sexual orientaion to be alone with teens of the “opposite sex” on such things as long term camping trips. I have no problem with gay Scouts or gay Scout Leaders. I just have the exact same reservations about a gay Scout Leader off on a week long camping trip with my (hypothetical) 15 yo son, as I would with a Hetero male Leader off on a similar trip with my (again hypothetical) 15yo daughter. I wouldn’t trust either. I would insist on there being enough leaders of other sexual orientations and chaperoning so that there was no concern. if not- no trip.

Indeed- you are missing a point <g>. There are several debates here, sprung from the other. I do not think anyone is defending the policy of the BSA. If you ONLY said “Hey- I don’t trust a gay man with my 15 yo son”- you might, indeed be a homophobe. But if then you also said “However, I don’t trust a straight man with my 15yo daugther either”- you are at worst being overprotective. And- I respect the right of a parent to be overprotective.

Note that I also argue for restricting access of hetero men to teenaged girls, and etc

82

So let’s say this- I argue that dudes should not be allowed to freely carry loaded guns. You ask “Would this also apply to black men?” I say “Yes- all men, all women- no one should be allowed to freely carry loaded guns- they need to be Police, or take special training, be licensed, etc. All men, all women, all races, all creeds, no one is given specail treatment”. By your wierd sick twisted logic- I then am a “racist” as I “don’t trust black men to carry guns”. "rolleyes:

By your sick & twisted “alice in wonderland” “bizarro world” logic- you are saying that “gay men are more trustworthy than straight men”- why are you discriminating against straight men? Why are they so untrustworthy? Or- is it just men you don’t trust? Are you sexist? Do you think that women cannot seduce a young teehaged boy?

83

DrDeth, except that that’s not what you’re arguing. If it was, you’d be saying that nobody should be allowed to chaperone Boy Scouts. And that’s not what you’re arguing. You’re not arguing that “only specially trained chaperones” should be allowed to be chaperones; you’re stating that only straight men are eligible to become “specially trained chaperones”.

The twisted logic is your own. Of course, now you are tilting the balance away from “confused” and toward the other alternative.

84

So would you agree that a change in BSA policy regarding the way scouts are chaperoned would be a non-discriminatory way of solving concerns about any kind of sexual improprieties, as opposed to categorically denying scoutmasters (and scouts, for that matter) opportunities based solely on their sexual orientation?

Esprix

85

No, exactly the opposite. I am assuming that some straight men cannot be trusted around teen-age girls, and that therefore there is a rationale in excluding straight men from leadership positions in all-girl organizations. In the same way, some gay men cannot be trusted around teen-age boys, and therefore the same exclusion applies.

Same rationale applies to excluding gays from being Scouts. You have same-sex organizations, because you want to eliminate sexual tensions between members of the organization. You also exclude gay members of the same sex for the same reason.

The principle is to ensure as far as possible that no member of the organization has a sexual interest in any other member. Gay, straight, bisexual, whatever - it doesn’t matter. The purpose is to knock sex out of the equation altogether.

That’s the principle - that some relationships ought to be non-sexual as far as possible. It underlies the exclusion of straight females from leadership, the exclusion of straight females from membership, the exclusion of gay males from leadership, and the exclusion of gay males from membership.

You want an organization where all the members have the same level of sexual interest in each other - zero.

Did you have a response to my question regarding the rationale for chaperoning in general, or are you conceding the point?

If you are claiming that the BSA should not receive any special endorsement by government that is not also enjoyed by other groups, I think I already agreed.

If the BSA is allowed to recruit in the schools, so should some GLBT support group. If the BSA is allowed to use government facilities after hours, so should some GLBT support group. Etc.

And vice versa, of course.

Regards,
Shodan

86

Shodan, you continue to place absolute trust in your ability to differentiate gay men from straight men. That is your error.

87

I’m not sure I understand what you mean by this. I’m assuming that Shodan is referring to the application of that policy where it is reasonably known that the person in question is a gay/straight man. As far as I can tell he’s referring to minimizing a known potential sexual relationship. That applies to men known to be a gay man working with an all male teenage group as well as a straight man working with an all female teenage group. Nowhere am I seeing from Shodan an assumption that he will somehow know which men are gay and which are straight, rather just that where known it could reasonably be acted on in order to minimize the aforesaid sexual relationship potential.

Grim

88

Well, KellyM, since we are talking about self-identified gay men here, I don’t see how that is true. If someone came up to me and said, “I’m gay and I want to be a Scoutmaster”, I would tend to believe them. Wouldn’t you?

Although I am sure that if there were some reasonably reliable gaydar available, the BSA could use it. This would be in furtherance of their mission to de-sexualize the organization.

I have gone back and re-read some of your posts in this thread, and I would like some assurance from you that this is a point you really want to discuss. Is this the case, or is it going to be like what you alleged regarding chaperonage in general? There you made what seemed to me a rather ridiculous statement (two of them, in fact), and when challenged on it, dropped the argument without ever making reference to it or defending it again.

You seem, in other words, to be pulling a lot of your allegations out of thin air.

For instance, please point out where either in this thread or any other where I claimed absolute accuracy in determining who was gay and who was straight.

I suppose it is theoretically possible that the gay men who want to be Scoutmasters are lying about their sexual orientation, and that in reality they are as straight as John Wayne. But I don’t see any reason why they would not be telling the truth. For all I know, the atheist Scouts could really be closet fundamentalists. Again, I don’t see their motivation.

I’ll have to ask you, again, to back up your allegations before I address them further.

Regards,
Shodan

89

Shodan, for you to be able to guarantee that excluding gay men from being Scoutmasters protects boys from being molested by gay men requires that you have absolute trust in your ability to spot gay men. Because you can’t, your rule cuts out of a lot of thoroughly qualified and entirely trustworthy gay men while allowing through a good number of potentially untrustworthy men whose gayness you have failed to detect.

This is compounded by the fact that any gay man who is out to molest boys by becoming a Scoutmaster is motivated to conceal the fact that he is gay because of your rule, and so your rule actually makes your job (of finding qualified and trustworthy Scoutmasters) harder. It’s even possible that it increases the risk, although I have no more evidence for that than you do for the claim that it decreases it. You are also rewarding dishonesty, which seems contrary to the principles of the Boy Scouts, not to mention civilized society.

I still think you need to back your allegation that openly gay men are are more likely to molest teenage boys than men who are not openly gay. You are ignoring the fact that many gay men are not openly gay, and your rule only filters out the openly gay, leaving in the pool presumptively straight but actually gay men, who presumably pose the greatest threat. How do you propose to detect these individuals?

90

I said NOTHING OF THE SORT . You cannot find the phrase “specially trained chaperones” in any of my posts- and you know why? I did not say that or anything like that. Nor did I say that Gay men should be excluded from scouting, or that only straight men are “eligible to become specially trained chaperones”. I have no fucking idea of where you are getting these words you keeping putting into my mouth, but alleging- by inserting a phrase in quotes- that I said something I didn’t is a violation of this 's rules. However, I would like to know why you are in favor of banning black men from gun ownership. “I believe” you hold this very racist view. :rolleyes: Why do you hold this racist view? Why do you want to deny black men this basic right? :dubious:

Esprix: Let us face it- persons of any sexual orientation cannot be trusted to be alone on long camping trips, un-chaperoned- with teen children of the “opposite sex”. I have said several times here that I think that a categorial ban on gays being scouts is the wrong way to go. However, let us assume a hypothetical situation in the Girl Scouts. We have a hetero man, a volunteer scout leader. He is the only leader available to take 12 girls, age 13>16 on a week long hiking & camping trip in the mountains. Do you agree that the parents should be concerned, and not let the girls go without more leaders, so that all can be chaperoned?

91

Further to Kelly’s post:

To give Shodan credit, he’s not assuming “gaydar” but rather taking a person’s word as to whether they are gay or not.

But I completely agree with the last paragraph. I fail to see why an openly gay man, interested in adult males (or even with a sexual interest in adolescent males and the moral ability to restrain himself!), would be any more a risk than a given adult heterosexual man, interested in adult females, dealing with a class of adolescent girls (or an adult heterosexual woman with a class of adolescent boys). I haven’t noted any campaigns to restrict the teaching of adolescents to people who could never conceivably desire sex with them (where you find such people is your problem).

Rather, the entire BSA attitude smacks of complete judgmentalism on the part of a few self-righteous men constituting the national council and backed by people with no understanding of homosexuality. And I feel that men of good faith like Shodan only mire themselves in attempting to defend it.

92

This is the sort of thing I objected to. You are pulling things out of thin air.

Please point out where I guaranteed anything. And where do you get “absolute trust” from phrases like “playing the percentages”?

As I pointed out, we are talking about self-identified gay men. Why do I need any more surety than taking them at their word?

I can’t see how it makes it any harder.

Suppose you have a gay male who wants to molest Scouts. Under my system, he has to go to the difficulty of living a lifestyle that conceals his true orientation. Then he can plausibly lie about his orientation, become a Scoutmaster, and have at the boys.

Under yours, he need take no trouble at all to conceal that he is gay. In fact, the opportunity cost of molesting Scouts is far lower under your system than under mine.

On what do you base your presumption that secretly gay males are a greater threat than heterosexual males where Scouts are concerned?

And where exactly did I make this allegation?

My allegation, if you want to call it that, is that heterosexual males are less likely than homosexual males to find teen-age boys sexually interesting. Do you dispute that?

The basis for my allegation is that I, as a heterosexual male, assume that many gay males feel towards teen-age boys as I occasionally do towards teen-age girls, an experience I referred to in the “Brittany Spears Owes Me Ten Bucks - and A Blank Morality Check” thread. On this thread, there were several posts like this one from Fern Forest -

Most of the first three pages were heterosexual males chiming in. There was even discussion on how it wasn’t necessary to lay a finger on the teen-agers - ogling was enough to send out creepy vibes. And I see how an organization for the benefit of teen-agers would want to avoid creepy vibes.

Thus I understand the reluctance of some to accept me as a leader in an all-girls organization. And since I assume that gay males may share my experience, I also assume that they would understand why they might not be welcomed as leaders in an all-boys organization.

If you want to dispute either of those assumptions, I refer you to Scott Dickerson’s and Esprix’s posts, where they make it clear that such feelings are not exactly unheard of in the gay community. Anecdotal, I grant you, but far be it from me to question the author of the Ask the Gay Guy, Parts I - MCMLXII.

Regards,
Shodan

93

They would not be any more of a risk. The risk is about the same. But teaching a class, during daylight hours, and with no privacy- is different than a week long camping trip with no other adults. Note that I also feel that a hetero woman shouldn’t take a group of teenaged boys into the woods alone for a week either.

94

Of course I agree - this camping trip should not be allowed to happen by the rules of the scouting organization, as there are inadequate safeguards in place (i.e., a second or more chaperone[s]). But I would rather cancel a trip for lack of leaders than kick out that heterosexual male scout leader just because he’s straight.

I believe this has been the point all along.

Esprix

95

Thank you- and that has been exactly MY point all along. I have said over & over that Scout Leaders should not be discriminated against on the basis of sexual orientation- but that concerns of parents do not equal homophobia. Now just to be sure- let us take that exact same trip, and subsitute “gay man” and “12 boys”. You have the same concern- the trip needs to be canceled?

96

I do have the same concerns, and that trip should be cancelled as well. I don’t believe that a single scoutmaster (gay, straight, male, female, or aquatic intelligent lifeform) should be in charge of any group of scouts (gay, straight, male, female, or aquatic intelligent lifeforms).

Now please explain to me what this has to do with “playing the percentages” by the wholesale exclusion of gay scoutmasters and scouts.

Esprix

97

My point, Shodan, is that you are not “playing the percentages” when you exclude apparently gay men from chaperoning teenage men. There is some chance (exactly what that chance is I don’t know, but neither do you and it’s not “playing the percentages” when you don’t know what they are) that a purportedly straight man is actually a gay ephebophile just raring to get him some teen ass. You are convinced that this chance is lower than the chance of an openly gay man being the same, but you have no evidence to support that claim. (I don’t need evidence: you’re the one making the positive claim; either you support the claim or you abandon it.)

You are willing to exclude all gay men from being chaperones, even though you lack any evidence at all to support the claim that doing so actually decreases risk. Making decisions solely on the basis of on unfounded categorical stereotypes is an example of bigotry. Bigotry against homosexuals is homophobia. As such, your recommendation can validly be labeled as the result of homophobia.

DrDeth, how do you feel about the common practice of (presumably heterosexual) women, often acting on their own, being the chaperones of groups of Cub Scouts, sometimes for extended periods of time?

98

Well, personally, I think that if there is a scout leader who is not of a sexual orientation to find his/her charges tempting, then there is a smaller concern. Thus, I am not AS concerned with a hetero female out with the teen girls on that same trip.

And, like I have now said nearly a half-dozen times- I do not agree with the “wholesale exclusion of gays from scouting”. The term “playing the percentages” was used by Shodan, not me.

But now here is a problem. I am going to use some of the posters names here in my hypothetical- please do not be offended. We have two scout troops. One is composed of girls aged 13>17, another of boys- same ages. Esprix here is a scout leader in the boys troop. Shodan is a leader in the girls troop. (Note, I find both are acceptable, with the caveats noted). A camping trip is planned of about a week. Only one Leader steps forth to volunteer in each troop- Shodan & Esprix. The parents in both troops object- citing possible temptation on the part of the “lone leader”. In the case of the girls- most everyone understands & accepts. In the case of the boys- we have Kelly here, screaming “HOMOPHOBES” at the top of her lungs and pointing a shaking outraged finger at the parents in the boys troop. But does she scream “Heterophobes” at the other parents? Not from what has been posted so far.

Kelly? Congratulations. You just called Esprix a “homophobe” & a “bigot” as he also has agreed that a gay man should not be the lone chaperone/leader in a long camping trip with teen aged boys. Just like I said- and on this basis you called me a “homophobe”. Or- are you somehow saying only straight men can be “bigoted”? :rolleyes:

Oh sure- Esprix made it clear that he is equally concerned with a straight man & a troop of teenaged girls, etc. BUT SO DID I.

A “bigot”, since you clearly have problems with reading comprehension & word definitions- is one who discriminates against a particular group. Not against everyone . Thus, since Shodan, Esprix & I agree that parents have a legit concern if their kids are out on a trip with a lone scout leader (who may be sexually tempted by them)- no matter the sexual orientation of that leader then we are NOT “bigoted”. We treat ALL equally with suspicion- gays & straights.

The only “bigoted” opinions here are yours, Kelly.

Oh, and since you also are lacking in education- “cub scouts” are by & large pre-pubescent children - as opposed to sexually mature but still underaged teens. Thus, they (and their opposite numbers, the Brownies) are not the subjects of desire by more-or-less normal homo/heterosexual adults, but by pedophiles. Nearly all pedophiles are male. (Has anyone studied why this is?)

99

I don’t think that’s what Shodan is saying. If we were to categorize potential scoutmasters in a way that’s relevant to this topic we might do it like this:

Group 1: Straight males
Group 2: Openly gay males
Group 3: Apparently straight, but in reality gay, males

Groups 2 and 3 have the potential of being sexually attracted to their teenage male charges. While it’s unclear if Group 3 is more, less, or equally likely to act on that attraction then Group 2 it seems reasonable to state that both Groups 2 and 3 are more likely to have a sexual encounter with a teenage male than any member of Group 1 (which, presumably, being straight, would have no attraction whatsoever to a teenage boy). The elimination of Group 2, while not affecting Group 3, necessarily reduces the overrall risk by restricting the number of potential inappropriate sexual relationships.

You asked DrDeth this question but in the interest of completeness I’m going to throw in an answer. The hypothetical situation you describe is not analogous to the one being discussed. Cub scouts are, at most, 9 years old. If a woman chaperoning a group of cub scouts was sexually attracted to her charges she would be a pedophile and hence dissimilar from the subject of attraction to post pubescent teens.