BQZip

Thread revival I'm not seeing too much different with the new medal vs the old, but it IS now available. National, if you're reading this, changes like these without explanation are what lead to confusion and speculation. Please be up-front about what you're doing and it will reduce this.

DougJ, That is OUTSTANDING news!!! Very glad to hear it. I'll admit...it's pretty cheap for such a hefty award

Same with me. If you or anyone can find the ribbon, I'll put together a design. It will not feature the same dangle (that's a copyrighted design and I'm not going to violate it unless I have permission...I may make some designs in order to submit for approval later), but I'll come up with something appropriate...perhaps an owl FWIW, due to the help of those in this group, I was able to present my son his National Outdoor Achievement Medal at National Jamboree with the whole family and many on national staff present...perhaps this will give them a light kick in the pants to fix this sooner rather than later

@Oscar, agreed. I have looked at making a custom medal and can probably do it on the CNC machine I have available. I can make a generic dangle from the award, but the biggest issue I have is finding a ribbon that would be at least similar. If anyone can find anything comparable, I'd be happy to start making a replacement medal.

I'm fine with going back to our roots...this medal was all about that: adventure!

Recalled? That's disheartening unless they are going to replace them...

Not impressed, but it's immensely better than the previous draft

If we're talking about meting out justice and being equitable with regards to the outcome based on the evidence presented, I'm all for it. But that does not appear to be the "equity" in question here

I forgot to touch on intersectionality... https://quillette.com/2018/05/08/illiberal-logic-intersectionality/ This sums up a lot of the centrist criticism of the subject. To simply declare it "important" and ask scouts to explain why shows that BSA HQ doesn't seem to understand that even declaring this an "important" concept is an inherently leftist idea. It is about as FAR from being "not political" as possible

"Scouts should never be political in nature...we aren't looking to push any agenda whatsoever" At best, this statement is disingenuous/insincere. At worst, it is misleading. When you are actively promoting far-left ideals, it is INHERENTLY political and it IS pushing an agenda. "a Discuss with your merit badge counselor the following terms and why they are important (1) Diversity (2) Equity (3) Inclusion (4) Bigotry (5) Intersectionality ... 2. Discuss racism with your counselor including the four types of racism listed below For EACH type, give one example from personal experience or historical or current events. Tell how racism negatively affects people. Describe one action you can take in response to one of your examples (1) Individual (2) Interpersonal (3) Institutional (4) Systemic" The premise of this discussion/political indoctrination is that equity and intersectionality are important and comes straight from hyperleftist dogma. Equity is defined as equal results based on assessments across race, sex, etc. Anything that doesn't have equal results does not have "equity" and is , therefore, racist/sexist/etc. But that's ridiculous on its face. If you give a group of scouts in a predominantly minority area and another with a predominantly <insert any group you want here>, you aren't going to get equal results. "No, we mean 'on average" Fine, do it "on average". You still won't get equal results. That isn't because of any inherent flaw in "the system". That's natural order. Different cultures will respond to life in different ways (which is true diversity). That means that some cultures will be more successful than others. Basketball and football have a strong presence of black people. There are few short, white people in the NBA/NFL. Does that mean they are racist? Of course not! Boy Scouts has a predominantly white/hispanic population. While that somewhat mirrors the makeup of the US, it still leans heavily that direction and is not in proportion to the areas they serve. The question is: why not? Is it because of a lack of recruiting efforts? Is it because of racism? Is it because of differing cultural values within the communities we serve? Is it a lack of funds? A lack of interest? A lack of PR in these areas? We can address some of these, but to those on the "anti-racist"* bandwagon, they insist that the reason is irrelevant. The outcomes are unequal and, therefore, this is an example of institutional and/or systemic racism. Based solely on the outcome, BSA is racist. Intent doesn't matter. Effort doesn't matter. The personal choices of people/cultures/communities don't matter. Only the result matters. And if it isn't in perfect alignment, it's racist/sexist/etc. Moreover, many Boy Scout values are due to "whiteness" and, if you disagree, that's just more evidence of how racist the organization is (see how poor/circular this reasoning is?). Similar discrepancies toward minorities are not racist. But if it leans towards whites in the exact same way, it is racist. Equity alone is neither important nor desirable. We want equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome (which is an impossible pipe dream). UNEQUAL outcomes result in motivation for ALL; no one wants to be last. Even if you want equity, you cannot focus solely on outcomes. You HAVE to focus on getting the necessary resources to ensure equality of opportunity first or the outcomes you want will never happen. *"Anti-racism" is a philosophy promoted by Ibram X. Kendi, Nicole Hannah Jones, & others which basically states that if you aren't actively opposing any inequity, you are part of the problem and just as guilty as white supremacists. It teaches that any opposition is inherently racist "We don't want anyone to go against their religious beliefs..." That flies in the face of "Tell what more your unit can do to ensure anyone can participate regardless of their ability, ethnicity, faith, financial background, gender Identity, race, or sexual orientation. Review the plan with your counselor and then discuss with your unit's leadership how you might implement your plan" For example, with a Catholic CO (FWIW, I am NOT Catholic, but I recognize their problems with this), this basically assigns scouts the opportunity to openly question/criticize their charter organization and then the unit has to discuss how they would implement something that runs counter to their stated faith. In addition to being a waste of time, it is inviting dissent and criticism. Rather than being inclusive of all beliefs, it openly invites hostility toward the CO and leadership. This isn't a unifying effort. If they claim otherwise, it's absurd (unless you subscribe to the belief that by stamping out all dissent, you'll be unified). https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/pope-same-sex-unions-licit/2021/03/15/8c51ee80-8581-11eb-be4a-24b89f616f2c_story.html Our diversity of IDEAS and EXPERIENCES are what make us unique INDIVIDUALS. We are not defined by the color of our skin, but by the content of our character.

"Oops! That page doesn’t exist or is private."

Well, if we go this route and cite leftist dogma, we're actively countering what many mainline religious positions. I can't see them continuing this way. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/03/15/vatican-says-catholic-church-cant-bless-same-sex-unions/4698628001/ By BSA definitions, one of its COs is "discriminating" against those with certain sexual preferences. Oh, excuse me, "sexual identity". I didn't realize they changed the definition in the middle of my statement/testimony just to vilify me (despite Snopes' claim, this wasn't AFTER the testimony, but DURING it... https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/merriam-webster-barrett-sexual/)

What SHOULD they do? What additional steps should be taken? I'm not naive. Pedophiles (especially ones who are uncaught) target youth organizations like schools, scouts, churches, etc. If YPT is insufficient, what should be changed?

1. What age were you? If he "was waiting" until you were 18, as much as I dislike it/find it distasteful, it was perfectly legal 2. The legal obligations of the SE and the council and national are at least in question as it highly varies from state to state (and certainly did in the past). 3. NONE of this means I don't care you were abused. I genuinely do and I'm VERY sorry you suffered such abuse. Have the people who committed these acts been held to account? Have they been sued? To be blunt, they should be included with any such lawsuit as they are the proximate cause. The question is if BSA and associated entities are legally liable for it and, if so, to what extent. In the situation mentioned here, it was outside of scouting. If you were underage, he'd be personally legally liable, but it was definitely outside his scope as an SE.

Oh, and as long as the TCC remains in existence, they are making $$$. They have every incentive to continue this as long as possible.