On my Honor - Documentary on BSA Sex Abuse Scandal

[Eagle1970]

Just found the trailer and viewed it.  I didn't need any audio to take me back to that summer.  The camp, the lake... it was just like that for me.  It is clear that while I probably need to watch this and other programming to continue to work through my abuse, I will die with the bad memories.  And, no, there are no good memories.  Now I look at every event with question.

[ThenNow]

37 minutes ago, Eagle1970 said:

Just found the trailer and viewed it.  I didn't need any audio to take me back to that summer.  The camp, the lake... it was just like that for me.  It is clear that while I probably need to watch this and other programming to continue to work through my abuse, I will die with the bad memories. 

The first time it was posted, I couldn't watch all the way through. I felt like it was too sensationalized with the Hitchcockian score, over wrought camera angles and typical American film schmutz. Decided to watch it through 10 minutes ago. I still despise how American filmmakers and TV producers troll the bottom for easy enticement and dramatization, but was taken off guard during one snippet. It really threw me. It was when the abuser was in a dark family room with the boy. They sat side by side on the sofa. The man put his arm around the boy and it was like someone sucked the center mass out of my body. "Just like that..." I could literally feel the negative energy impact and and the air left me. Wow. The Body Keeps the Score. To state the obvious, I was abused in my SM's home, in addition to Summer Camp, camping trips, Scouting events, and other interactions at diverse locations. 

Edited April 27, 2022 by ThenNow

[MYCVAStory]

6 hours ago, Eagledad said:

if you want to keep using the 82,000 scouts sexually abused number (which I don’t believe), can you include the total number of BSA members during the same time?

Ahhhh....great idea....let's keep "giving context" to the abuse so it will make it seem much less devastating than it was to those of us abused.  Just so we're all clear, please remind us what percentage is the over/under line for when the abuse rate doesn't seem so bad.   Sarcasm mode off now.  The abuse, whether you believe the number of claimants or not, is more than a total number.  It was a number over time and the BSA knew it had a problem.  For those of us abused while files were kept, and refused payoffs to drop our suits and go away, "context" is irrelevant.  At some point a Trust may be validating claims.  Then there will be a better understanding of the abuse but there is no reason to believe it will not be significant and historic in its scope.  Then, the BSA will be able to better make its case every year that compared to the past it has improved.  Not yet though.

[MYCVAStory]

12 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

I could literally feel the negative energy impact and and the air left me.

Survivors know this well and I hope others appreciate it.  ALL those "triggers" that hit out of nowhere.  Sitting in a movie theater holding your wife's hand when the trailer for "Spotlight" comes on and she asks why you're squeezing so hard and sweating.  The room spinning when Facebook suggests you should send a friend request to your abuser.  The jokes others make when they have no idea of your past.  Every day is a new opportunity to be triggered and why so many Survivors gt to middle-age and said to themselves "I just can't do this anymore" and why we all want to scream at the top of our lungs at people who ask why we finally decided to come forward, as if it was our choice.

[Eagledad]

9 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

Ahhhh....great idea....let's keep "giving context" to the abuse so it will make it seem much less devastating than it was to those of us abused.  Just so we're all clear, please remind us what percentage is the over/under line for when the abuse rate doesn't seem so bad.   Sarcasm mode off now.  The abuse, whether you believe the number of claimants or not, is more than a total number.  It was a number over time and the BSA knew it had a problem.  For those of us abused while files were kept, and refused payoffs to drop our suits and go away, "context" is irrelevant.  At some point a Trust may be validating claims.  Then there will be a better understanding of the abuse but there is no reason to believe it will not be significant and historic in its scope.  Then, the BSA will be able to better make its case every year that compared to the past it has improved.  Not yet though.

When folks want to kill a program as a result of personal harm, context and truth is very important.

Barry

[MYCVAStory]

Just now, Eagledad said:

When folks want to kill a program as a result of personal harm, context and truth is very important.

Okay, so please provide the context that will help some people come around to supporting the BSA's continuance.  I'm not calling for its termination, or encouraging its continuance.  Being a Survivor for decades whle your abuser walks free means getting pretty good at accepting to some extent things you have no control over.  But, I'm interested in understanding better the context that will help those who don't agree with you come around to the thinking that "in context" the abuse was what, not so bad?  Acceptable?  Better than other organizations?

[ThenNow]

2 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

Survivors know this well and I hope others appreciate it.  ALL those "triggers" that hit out of nowhere. 

There are many things I wish those who have been spared child abuse of any kind could understand. I know some who do understand many of these things. How, you ask. They have come to understand because they have been intentional about listening. They have studied both written materials and survivors' realtime behavior. They have learned the uncomfortable art of "holding the space" while a survivor is spinning out of control or grieving or vacating their body for no apparent reason. As I read your post multiple such things flashed through my mind, but one in particular. I wish those who were spared could appreciate and acknowledge the loss of momentum that happens after a triggering event. I've literally lost years. I can lose my entire ability to focus or be present in a group of people. I can lose two minutes or hours of productive time. I prefer to be uninterrupted when working because a small thing can trigger a memory or, most often, a shame reaction over a seemingly innocuous comment or interaction. It's a constant battle. I never know the angle from which a punch might come or from whom or what. 

[Eagledad]

2 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

Okay, so please provide the context that will help some people come around to supporting the BSA's continuance.  I'm not calling for its termination, or encouraging its continuance.  Being a Survivor for decades whle your abuser walks free means getting pretty good at accepting to some extent things you have no control over.  But, I'm interested in understanding better the context that will help those who don't agree with you come around to the thinking that "in context" the abuse was what, not so bad?  Acceptable?  Better than other organizations?

Some here are supporting killing the program. I believe scouting is a noble program that adds good moral decision makers to the world.

Barry

[ThenNow]

15 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

Some here are supporting killing the program. I believe scouting is a noble program that adds good moral decision makers to the world.

I'm sorry, but this is another shift of tense and subject non-answer. 

[MYCVAStory]

9 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

Some here are supporting killing the program. I believe scouting is a noble program that adds good moral decision makers to the world.

That's your opinion and I understand it.  As well, I understand the opposing opinion.  Both have their sound reasoning.  But, when you are calling for "truth and context" and asking that the abuse reported by 82,500 claimants (truth until it is not) include reminders of the total number that have been in scouting or some other context you feel is important then it is reasonable to ask for that context you believe is fair so our own opinions are informed.  I'll only add this, a single case of abuse might not seem like a big deal "in context" until it happens to you, or your child.  Finding out that was a pattern over decades, hidden by those who could have prevented it and change occuring only as a result of bankruptcy, well, for those on the fence it is logical that they are reserving judgement on the continuance of the BSA until it proves that it deserves it.

[johnsch322]

20 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

Some here are supporting killing the program. I believe scouting is a noble program that adds good moral decision makers to the world.

Yes, some posters are calling for the end to scouting, but not many. How many ruined lives are acceptable to add good moral decision makers to the world? You should answer this question as it is a question of morality and I am sure you consider yourself a morale person.

[Eagledad]

Just now, johnsch322 said:

Yes, some posters are calling for the end to scouting, but not many. How many ruined lives are acceptable to add good moral decision makers to the world? You should answer this question as it is a question of morality and I am sure you consider yourself a morale person.

How many lives are saved from the program. I’m a personal witness to many.

I wouldn’t be standing up for it if it weren’t true.

[johnsch322]

2 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

How many lives are saved from the program. I’m a personal witness to many.

I wouldn’t be standing up for it if it weren’t true.

That was not the question. Why do you find it so hard to answer a basic question? I am sure scouting has been a great program for many people but that is not the question.

[elitts]

21 hours ago, ThenNow said:

I'm gonna make a left turn to Albuquerque and address YP directly. If this needs to go elsewhere, I guess it can be moved. My concern is some won't go there and we'll lose the topic. 

I really would like to hear more from you Scouters about the YP provisions now in the plan. I think it's very important to know what those applying the in the field elements think and feel about them. Thanks for your support. (Nod to Bartles & Jaymes.) 

Since most of that document is very much in the realm of a meta-process document rather than set of ground level changes, I don't think there's much to object to.  I don't generally see a problem with information being made public, though I get a little leery about a public broadcast of someone's ouster from the program.  If someone is ousted for criminal behavior it's fine, but since there likely won't be anything that resembles typical "due process" with the BSA's procedures, I get concerned.

I have no problem at all with aggregated data being publicized and shared at whatever level.

My real worry is about the sections talking about developing changes in "sleeping, bathing and bathroom" monitoring.  One of the main things I don't think the Scouts BSA program can survive would be expansion of "Two Deep Leadership" into "Two Deep Monitoring".  Kids LIKE being able to do things on their own and they need it to develop independence and leadership skills.  Even if some few troops can actually round up enough adults to make a "Two Deep Monitoring" system work, it will have castrated the Scouts BSA program in general and replaced it with a formalization of "Webelos III". 

For example: On Reddit one user posted a document from some council establishing that at any of their camps "All trips to the bath-house by scouts must be accompanied by two adults because that's what YP requires".  That might be workable with patrol sized troop.  But with a troop like mine with 4 or maybe 5 adults and 30-35 scouts?  Even if only 1/3 the scouts want to shower on a given night that still means tying up 2 adults for HOURS when you only have 4 shower stalls for everyone on the South end of camp.   It also means that any scout wanting to shower has to weigh their desire to shower against whatever other activity is going on on any particular evening since they can't just dash over for a shower before dinner or after lunch. 

Honestly, if Summer Camp shower houses and bathrooms are really still a hotbed for abuse, (since most new facilities en-shew mass showers) it probably makes more sense to just require them all to be converted to single stalls without communal areas other than a sink.

 

 

[Eagle94-A1]

I have not seen it yet, but did see the list of folks who are in it and contributed, and know our former national Youth Protection Director, Michael Johnson, is involved. I have two questions regarding him and his info.

 

1. What raw data is he using when he state, “The truth is clear: no child is safe in Scouts BSA programs.” I want to see stats, trends,  reports, etc to prove this is the case. And I want the raw data because as Mark Twain once said, " There are three types of lies: lies, damn lies, and then there is statistics."

2. If his statement is true, then what the heck was he doing for 10 years?

I ask this not to be a smart aleck, but to get some understanding. He was the one responsible for Youth Protection, and if he failed in his job, I want to know why.