skeptic

Let me revise this a bit. Shelter in place if you can determine a safe location that is low, dry, and less likely to carry current. Rethinking my concern for the boat house, if there are is enough space, as long as it is separated from the ground inside, that may be best. Obviously, a vehicle is better, but you still have to get to any of these things. The picnic shelter is an absolute no-no. Kind of a hard decision, and storms do catch you on occasion, no matter how well planned, especially on back packs. Away from trees, stay insolated from the ground a well as possible, do not touch metal or anything likely to carry current, stay low and as small as possible (they recommend grabbing knees in some info). Now, if there is enough time, other options may be better. Hopefully you chose a good spot for the tent, if you have to stay in it, one that is not too low or near large trees. The insolation issue still applies. You also need to stay as far from the water as possible; but that should have been part of setting up in the first place. Fortunately, in the mountains, you can be able to be the lesser transmitter of the lightning. At summer camp, we generally try to move the people inside the buildings of course. We do have some outlying campsites, and they could be an issue if getting to the buildings exposes them more. No absolutes. Low, insolated, do not touch things, and hope it blows over so you can adjust more safely.

I would be leery of the bath house unless I knew for sure it was grounded. It is on the lake and likely has lots of metal, like pipes.

You hunker down and warn them to stay in their tents and not get in the open. The shelter is just as likely to be a lightening draw as a tent, as is the boathouse, and they are on the lake which is also open. Stay away from the trees if possible. Do not touch metal of any kind. Assure they all understand and whatever you do, they need to stay separate as they are. Once the storm moves out, you can appraise the damage, if there is any. Do not need what we had at the 85 Jamboree the first night when Hurricane Bob ran a squall line through our campsite, knocking down one tent, busting tree branches, and causing some boys to panic.

I guess what I really wonder is how many "claims" are along the lines of what I describe? At the time, few thought anything was wrong with it; we were all males, and so that was all that was important. I do remember sort of hiding behind my father and brother a bit much of the time, and my dad never let us go into the shower alone. As I have collected old photos from very early scout outings, it is pretty obvious that skinny-dipping was not discouraged. Again though, that was common then. Boys and girls both did it, though not together, as that would have been frowned upon. The real issue seems the contradictive nature of measuring that period in time against today. It is not a balanced comparison. Time will tell I guess. Meanwhile, back to working within the parameters of the modern age.

So, I am 77 years old. In the early fifties, my brother and I were members of a local YMCA, along with our dad. Learned to swim there, and had wonderful summer activities, such as Disneyland the year it opened, and visits to car plants and tuna packing and museums in L.A. area. But, I had some hormonal issues early on that effected my development. It was dealt with with two years of special shots, but at the time, I was not on track with my peers physically, and was embarrassed by things easily. BUT, in order to swim at the Y, we had to use the male locker room, which included all ages and open showers. I remember being a bit intimidated by that, especially when it was crowded with full grown adults. Later, I also was forced to take open stall showers in HS after P.E. It was not an option; and the coach or sometimes an appointed older student would monitor us. Intimidating, and embarrassing? Yep, but we learned to cope. Society did not think anything odd about this, nor would they likely have entertained lawsuits for psychological trauma of a minor. So, with our new outlook on things today, do I have grounds to sue the YMCA and my old HS school district? After all; I still remember these things and how I felt once in while standing next to an old man in the Y shower with his nakedness right in front of my eyes, and him talking to me. I am not serious about doing this of course. My point is that where do we mark the lines of demarcation? What is psychological trauma to an 8 year old in with a bunch of older males in a shower? What is the trauma of having your school peers make jokes about you or others and the level of changes in your physical development? Am I really stretching things with the viewpoints we are currently seeing? Comments, or admins decide it is not a valid subject.

So did girls much of the time, sometimes faster than the boys. But, once they reached a certain age most were too demure, or simply told by parents that girls did not do that.

Yep, I believe you are right. My experiences, both at Jambo's, Philmont, and our local camps, including summer and COR is that the boys have no real issue once they get past the adult naysayers.

Evolution of the program will hopefully soon realize the foolishness of no coed. As someone pointed out, if young males are to learn to function in the larger society, they need to also learn to deal with competition from their female peers. The male youth that have the desire and initiative will come to the top, just as in the real world. We continue to not give enough credit to our young people and their abilities to maneuver in a muddled world. Meanwhile, many smaller units are missing the boat with their interested female applicants, especially the ones already in the cubs where they can have their separate dens and are otherwise coed. contradictory, in my view.

So how does that reflect on the camp staff that is coed and teaches both genders? As noted, makes no sense. Absolutely no reason a male scout cannot teach female scouts, as long as the adult leadership is in effect and they are not secreted someplace.

What was the extent of the fire? We in So Cal have been holding our breath with all the wind we are having and the still drought conditions in much of the area. We have had almost no rain so far this year, and what has fallen, has passed around our particular area for the most part. Glad it was controlled quickly.

And we come back to the impossible expectations of a few that any protective program be 100% or it is not working. Catch 22, especially in our society. In many other parts of the world, you would not be likely to see the over kill that we see here. We have noted more than once that much of the issue is with our legal system, one that is reactive rather than rational.

So, will the sensationalist media grab these and run, leaving BSA in the shadows? Probably not, as the lawyers do not see the money, so they will not feed the media, and so the media would have to do what they once did, actually dig for information and the facts.

I am not a statistician, but I do see an apparent drop in reported cases in more recent decades on the offered chart. Still too high, yes. But, is the lower amount due to membership loss, or due to better YP overall? Again, nothing is perfect or foolproof. We are back to the question, should BSA or youth sports, or any other youth connected group be disbanded and run out of town due to miscreants that did not get caught and so on. How about the "Me Too" possible victims? What makes it apparently okay to look the other way in some cases, but try to ruin groups or people in others? Again, I know there is no answer, because we are all fallible and live in an often nasty or oblivious society. The charts for councils seems to indicate ours had 86 cases. In how long? I know of a half dozen since I have been in the council. But that is not normally info that is well known. At least one known perpetrator dates to the thirties or earlier. Another who died in prison i think, never focused on boys, but rather females, including his own family. Are all the abuse claims "sexual", or do they include in theory psychological or physical abuse, other than sexual? If an adult yells at a youth in frustration, and perhaps uses less than appropriate language, is that abuse also included? What if they then actually apologized? So many facets that we do not know, or cannot know.

So, let us all agree that any abuse, sexual or other, is not acceptable. Now, based on the numbers presented, what is the real world likelihood that a youth might be abused, no matter what barriers may be in place? Taking your 11,000 figure over 30 years, what is the percentage of cases based on total youth membership in that thirty years. Very, very low. Yes, even one is too many, but we live in a real world. Please explain to me how are we ever going to make that number zero? How responsible is the secondary overseer when the actual perpetrator purposely avoids the barriers? Do any of you have any answers? The just released article about youth sports makes BSA look like angels. Should they too be wiped off the map? Are the olympic teams being disbanded and nobody will ever compete again? Does USC shut down its school due to the criminal actions of employees? And, does the terrible wrong done to the victims in the McMartin fiasco just have no consideration? We are asking almost the impossible, and I have no idea how that can happen. Meanwhile, we continue to look the other way when people in power or with money do things as bad, or far worse.

"The cool kids don't join scouting." Odd comment based on bias or lack of info. There are many so called "cool" kids in Scouting. Some may not be known to be scouts, but many are. Are you suggesting that the HS valedictorian, who is an Eagle, and going to the Navel Academy is not cool? How about the all league football player that is also an academically recognize? How about the student body president and captain of the water polo team? Or the leader of the marching band? We could go on, but what is the point? Yes, some may not feel it is cool to be a Scout, yet many cool kids are and simply do not make a big deal of it. In every council, you will find some of the best athletes, class leaders, and club developers to also be in Scouting, or were. So, please do not perpetuate this nonsense.

Let's face it. Some here and on other forums will always find reasons to say or intimate negativity towards the BSA, or for that matter, any efforts by people to combat abuse, whether child, gun, spousal, or some other type. The concept of absolute safety is somehow bandied about as actually possible, yet we all know it is not. Human nature, or whatever you may choose to call stupidity and nastiness within the human animal will never go away, nor will we ever have foolproof protection from those that choose to do bad things to others. While striving to improve the percentages, we should also not denigrate the advances.

Something on the line of how the San Diego Mission Bay youth center is run? BSA coordinates it all, as requested by the interested youth groups and the city, or so I understand. But it is open to a broad range of use.

The wound has been ripped open and I am trying to staunch the blood with little success. And here lies one of the major issues with the dredging of stuff from the past. Many people have come to terms with various trauma, and then to have it dragged back to the light is painful. And, since the actual perpetrators are not being held accountable, is it really worth it, based on the true history of these types of tragedies?

While the responders seem to see the WSJ article as minor, I see it as the first step in bringing the hypocrisy of this whole thing to the public eye. If it also suggests that our "tort" system and so on are out of control and needs to change, they are spot on. At least it is in a periodical that has real visibility and will reach some of the right people. Meanwhile, we will continue to man the local trenches and keep our heads down.

"LCs have billions." Not sure on what you are basing this. Our council is in the red, for all intents and purposes, and the value of the camp property is certainly not in that high value country, nor the falling down office which is a historical house that needs huge repairs. I believe many councils are in similar positions, so other than the properties, which in many case were gifted in the teen, twenties, and thirties or even later, they have few resources. The original "gifters" certainly did not give that property to be sold to pay off greedy lawyers, but for the scouts and the program. Of course, another era as we know. An era where few would have thought this kind of thing might occur, or they may have not given, or made sure it was protected for its original intent.

Thanks; putting this in my file.

It is good that someone here sees the verity in my concern regarding suggestions by legal people that "nothing" has really been done and the intimation that it is getting worse. Now, if the courts might actually review the totality of the "facts", in this case YP and stats in the past two decades. I just hope someone in the legal team for National is paying attention. Better, maybe a few of the silent supporters that know this is slanted, actually might step in to balance the scale a little.

I find it interesting that there has not been even one comment yet, until me I guess, abut the inaccuracy of the statements about YP has not done anything. What am I missing. Most of these claims that they speak of are well before the YP was developed, and since it has improved, from all that I have read. Reality is that no amount of YP is going to stop abuse, sexual or other kinds. There are warped people that will find a way, especially if they really want to. On the other hand, IF YP is being administered and reviewed, they are far more likely to look somewhere other than BSA. And, even before the YP was developed, percentage wise, it seems Scouting was not the top of the list for known predators; and to day it is at or near the bottom. And no amount of money is going to "fix" bad judgment or erase bad players from the past somehow. What IS important is that the current youth are better protected. Again, though, most abuse still happens in families and in smaller youth connected groups. Again, kill off BSA, or weaken it to the point of no longer a target, and only youth and the communities will suffer. Communities will lose much of the service BSA has showered on them for decades. The tenets of Scouting will no longer graduate youth with real community care and awareness of their responsibilities as citizens. Meanwhile a few lawyers will count their pennies with smirks, and modern predators will simply find other victims with less visibility perhaps. Lose, Lose. In the meantime, I will continue to do what little I can on the local level, and encourage youth to live Scout Spirit in their daily lives.

Do not think it was arrogance as much as simply not completely understanding. It was, as we keep coming back to, a different era, and the public responses to those things were very different, and families often chose to deal on their own while authorities were too willing to believe the "known good guy". Just as society still does, though it is getting better, people tended to make the victim even a bigger victim with the approaches common then. Yet, they still have issues with female abuse, including spousal, being somehow the fault of the woman. Do not forget, in the case of the IV files, nobody else even did that, and while it did not solve the issue, it can be shown to have at times stopped some of the predators. Sadly, we really cannot know the depth of the issue due to the time span. YP is in place and that is our responsibility, to adhere to it with NO excuses, no matter how much we may feel there is a misconception or something.