New Sex Abuse Allegations Surface Against Boy Scouts Of America


From WCBS-AM, New York:

Boy Scouts of America
Photo by George Frey/Getty Images

New Sex Abuse Allegations Surface Against Boy Scouts Of America

April 23, 2019 – 10:20 am

NEW YORK (WCBS 880) — Stunning new allegations of child sex abuse have surfaced against the Boy Scouts of America.

Attorneys for alleged victims say there is a pattern of abuse involving 7,000 Boy Scout leaders nationwide dating back to the 1940s. The leaders were named in the Boy Scouts of America “Perversion Files,” lawyers said. They call it a system of denial and cover ups.

The Boy Scouts of America issued a statement saying that they “care deeply about all victims of child sex abuse and sincerely apologize to anyone who was harmed during their time scouting.”

The organization says they are “outraged” that abusers have taken advantage of scouting programs to abuse children.

Lawyers planning to file multiple lawsuits on behalf of the alleged victims will hold separate news conferences in Newark and Manhattan on Tuesday.

They plan to release the names of 50 leaders in New Jersey and 130 in New York who allegedly abused children.

WCBS 880 will be covering the press conference. Listen live for updates

Author: Renegade Scouter

Boy Scouting is for boys -- Help Renegade Patrol save BSA from itself. Do it for your sons. Do it for your daughters. America needs you. Answer the call to duty.

5 thoughts on “New Sex Abuse Allegations Surface Against Boy Scouts Of America”

  1. I get the gist of your criticism of the Boy Scouts taking on girls. I agree that it is an atrocious idea.

    However, I believe your approach on the sex abuse scandals is hardly insightful.

    Without offering your independent commentary, merely highlighting the sex abuse controversy suggests a link to a the conservative argument that including openly homosexual scout masters ruined the Boy Scouts.

    The Boy Scouts were run by men attracted to boys. In other words, the Boy Scouts were always infused with homosexuality. Boys fooling around in tents at night was always a part of the Boy Scouts. And yes, men attracted to boys were always part of the Boy Scouts. But this is a very different kind of homosexuality than what is on offer now under identity politics. Do not confuse the two. The first was “natural” to the Boy Scouts, and had to do with boys experimenting and male caregivers who were attracted to the boys. The second kind of homosexuality is ideological, about forcing boys and men to privilege sexual identity.

    And so the accusations really have little or nothing to do with the BSA accepting openly homosexual scoutmasters and boy scouts.

    It has to do with a crumbling society in which everyone is a victim, and the briefest of touches justify absolute retribution. This attitude connected to sex is a feminist trope. It is the most powerful lever which they use to destroy male society. And men have also jumped on the band wagon. It is just a fact that every child-related institution now faces innumerable complaints, not only for what actually happened, but what might have happened, and even for things that could never have happened.

    And who loses? Men and boys. Men are treated as predators for even wanting to be with boys. (And yes sexuality has a role to play in this, whether we want to admit it or not). Boys are deprived of adult male companionship apart from women and the freedom (yes, also sexual freedom) which that entails.

    Probably the principle reason why the BSA has gone full retard and admitted girls is to feminize all the upper ranks, so that boys will never have to be endangered by the companionship of a solo man. Men themselves have become a danger, a sexualized danger, from which boys must be protected, and only girls and women can protect them. But of course, as the civil lawsuits of the future will prove, even women and girls will not be able to protect boys as they will be the new wave of sexual and workplace harassment victims of the BSA, further depleting its limited reputational and financial resources.

    Jumping on the sexual abuse bandwagon without insight or commentary will never solve the problems the BSA faces. The BSA is essentially an organization designed and run by supposedly chaste pederasts. Ignoring that is delusional. Once you get your perspective right you will see that what is taking place is not a symptom of what the LGBT types and feminists are doing politically to the BSA, but their goal. Destroying men who want to spend their time with boys is the goal. They do that by leveraging at every opportunity the vast cultural capital of the victimized child.

    Conservative society was able to manage these situations in a way that controlled and contained the risk. It wasn’t perfect. But it wasn’t a witch hunt either. Men were supposed to be chaste, the boys innocent. And mostly they were, except when they weren’t. If the boys didn’t complain, people didn’t ask too many questions. If the boys did complain, then there was hell to pay. That’s the right way to manage these situations. The alternative, as we can very well see, is the destruction of the BSA, and the deterioration of all child related institutions, at least as far as men are concerned.

    The end game is that either men are not allowed, or they are allowed only under female supervision.

    The conservative “no homosexuals allowed” is naive about what motivates men to spend an inordinate amount of time with young boys. We already see the consequence as the BSA has had to open scout master role to females because men no longer feel welcome. The men who might want to become scout masters are the very ones the feminists and far right Christians are purging. So no more homosexuality means the BSA is destined to be a smattering of hardline Christian straight manly dads (the few who really give a shit), surrounded by busy body females who are watching at all times for the slightest indication of sexual abuse.

    Without a more sophisticated attitude toward homosexuality and how it actually functioned, the boys-first conservative point of view has no way of recuperating the BSA. I strongly suggest you consider the following possibility: pederasty is not antithetical to conservativism within the BSA. The fact that the pro gay agenda aligns with an anti-pederastic witch hunt ought to tell you that these two kinds of homosexuality are entirely different. One is functional and aligns with traditional relations between men and boys, and the other is destructive of institutions like the BSA.

    If you doubt all I’ve said, take a look at the following youtube channel, which is not only a wonderful document of scouting in Russia, but of the pederastic perspective which generated and sustained the institutional structures of organized scouting. These are incredible and important documents.

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXdTZwLdutHa-2NqCos4dcg/videos

    The about page is in Russian. Here is a google translation:

    > Today in Russia, children are losing language – the basis of the cultural code.
    > Human intonation was lost even earlier, at the turn of the 2000s. The reasons
    > are simple: each next “vertical of power” needs fanatic warriors, not reflective
    > intellectuals. He is interested in the spaces of the conquered territories, and
    > not the depths of thoughts and feelings. Humanity has long been engaged in
    > permanent suicide and always starts with children. The very attempt to change
    > this strange inheritance was destroyed in the very first years of the rule of the
    > power structures in Russia. I’m talking about the youth community “Path” by
    > Yuri Ustinov (1966 – 2005). See what we lost. All my videos are the archives of
    > the Pathway, on which my husband grew up He also made “clips” for Ustinov’s
    > songs. The “Paths” archives can be of interest to professionals (educators,
    > psychologists, sociologists, social therapists, tourism instructors working with
    > children). Sincerely, Marina.

    Here is a clip someone selected from among the au_tor videos. It shows two boys who are very close. This is the kind of homosexuality we need in the boy scouts. It is not ideological. It emerges from physical closeness and love that scouting creates, and it is beautiful and should be supported by anyone who supports boys and men being together.

    Like

    1. P.S. In case it is not clear, my working notion of homosexuality is much broader than mere sexuality, mere genital gratification. It is about homo sociality, love and touch between males. Homo-intimacy which is natural to all males. That is all. That is why I say the video above is about homosexuality. The intimacy of these two boys, in the privacy of their tent, could and in many cases did enter into mutually pleasurable experiences. And not because they were forced or abused, but because when left to themselves boys respond that way. It is the false ideology of institutionalized LGBT homosexuality and feminist sexual abuse ideology that forces us to deny what is directly staring us in the face.

      Peace.

      Like

    2. I guess this is the last one.

      There’s no silver bullet, but I firmly believe that boys like Nikolas Cruz would not become school shooters if they had the love and companionship of a well functioning Boy Scout troop. And why is that? Because of the companionship, love, intimacy the BSA can create.

      Watch how Cruz collapses by the words “I love you.” That’s what many young men need, and they doni’t get it from feminist empowered young women who judge them and exclude them from physical intimacy. Imagine if his step brother had told him this 5 minutes before the shooting? Imagine if Cruz had a man in his life who was paying attention to him, cared about him, someone who could call and talk to? Cruz was surrounded by institutional figures, all of whom failed Cruz, and failed the students of the Parkland school.

      The picture of Scouting offered above shows what real intimacy looks like. You doin’t get it out of a bottle. And you certainly don’t get it out of an institution distorted by paranoid, totalitarian matriarchal man hating. The feminized BSA will not only fail to attract boys; not only will it fail girls and women (the victims of the future); it will fail to provide the kinds of intimacy and companionship which boys like Nikolas Cruz need. They need LOVE not institutional processes. They need TOUCH not paperwork.

      It’s great to fantasize about a world in which every boy has a mother and father and three square meals.

      In the real world, institutions like the BSA offered a great deal to society, to help boys just like Nikolas Cruz.

      If intimacy is risky, if it goes wrong at times, I nevertheless place the image of boy-boy intimacy shown above against the atrocities of boys like Nikolas Cruz. We have to choose wisely. And we have to have the courage to tolerate LOVE and TOUCH that boys need.

      Like

  2. I want to leave another comment.

    The general perspective of this site is conservative, both in a gender essentialist sense (boys and girls are fundamentally different, which I agree with), but also Christian.

    Following upon my previous comments, from a conservative Christian point of view it may seem obvious that one of the problems with the BSA is homosexuality, a topic that came to the fore when the BSA permitted homosexual scout leaders and boy scouts a number of years ago (a decade now?). Another way homosexuality appears is through the accusations of child sexual abuse which this site is eager to point to. And so, not only are homosexuals introducing bad ideas, bad ideology, but they are molesting the boys.

    I won’t explain again my point of view on this, except to say that I believe these forms of homosexuality not the same, and it is a mistake to conflate them.

    What I want to talk about here is the fact that conservative Christian critics of homosexuality in BSA cannot point to a Christian version of BSA as the solution. Why not? Because child sexual abuse scandals are rife in all Christian organizations. Every major denomination is facing serious financial and moral crises arising from adult sexual contact with young people. We’re talking not only about the Catholic Church, which protestant evangelicals might like to characterize as a corrupt organization. It touches all major evangelical churches as well.

    For example, the Morman version of BSA may be praised by conservative Christians. But we all know that the Morman church is undergoing their own seemingly never-ending scandals involving adults and minors. Do the conservative Christian critics perusing this website really believe that the Morman version of the BSA is not going to experience the same things the BSA is experiencing, just because they are overtly Christian? I believe that is naive.

    It is much more realistic to recognize that the men who involve themselves with boys will, with some probability, be a certain way. It is better, in my opinion, to recognize that “boys will be boys” was a way of reducing the social and moral noise surrounding the very things we are talking about.

    Yes, boys are different from girls. One important difference is that boys like to jerk off. And when they jerk off together, as they many times do as a rite of passage, particularly when alone in tents, we should not give it much thought or importance. Tolerance around this topic, not celebration or ideology is what I am calling for.

    Tolerance also creates a space in which we can talk about what is happening. If we tolerate certain things, we can check into those practices. We can ask about what is happening, without bringing the total weight of police state authorities upon all our heads. We can check into the tent to make sure that everyone is happy, and nobody is being hurt.

    Today we are getting the worst of all possible worlds: no pleasure, no intimacy, no relationships between men and boys, the destruction of institutions of male child rearing, ever increasing surveillance and suspicion… all to stop sex.

    Is sex crazy, or is the anti sex culture crazy? You know where I stand.

    Like

  3. Finally, for the sake of completeness, I want to talk about the accusations themselves.

    First, it is important to recognize that sexual abuse actually happens. Bad or simply careless men infiltrate good organizations and they can hurt boys they are supposed to love. Young people need a space in which they can talk about bad things happening to them, and institutions need to be accountable for tolerating bad behavior.

    But for a site that is deeply invested in an anti-#metoo perspective, the authors remarkably lack skepticism about the accusations the BSA is facing, presenting the accusations as facts. Partly I believe this is because they paint homosexuals as the enemy of the BSA. This fits into a general conservative Christian perspective that places homosexuals and feminists at the center of a cultural conspiracy against all that is good and right with the traditional BSA experience, an experience I might explain differently.

    I believe that this approach does the BSA no favors. It doesn’t help any organization involving men and boys. It does not get at the root of the problem. By leveraging the heavily ideological victimized child which feminists have constructed, conservative Christian criticism fails to provide any solutions. The BSA and its Christian counterparts remain fully trapped within the boundaries of a paranoid, totalitarian matriarchal order whose primary consequence is to keep men and boys apart and make their lives miserable.

    Let me close with two observations.

    1. If you believe the #MeToo movement involves a great deal of exaggerated claims that destroy men’s lives unnecessarily (in and amongst the true and just claims), and if you think this perpetuates a certain kind of injustice, then you should have no difficulty in accepting the possibility that men involved closely with boys in the BSA can face the same kind of injustice. A cursory glance at the way historical child sexual abuse cases are run, the kinds of mass hysteria they give rise to, and the compensatory systems put in place paint a very complex picture in which victims are very often privileged above and beyond justice, at the expense of men and important institutions like the BSA.

    2. It’s a question of risk and reward. If you want to live in a world where it’s impossible for a man to put his arm around a boy, just in case he fondles the boy, just in case fondling involves some kind of metaphysical evil as we are led to believe by feminists and Pizzagaters, then you will live in a world where the BSA can no longer exist.

    Anyone who really cares about the BSA has to square a lot of circles.

    They have to be realistic about the anthropological/erotic connection between men and boys.

    They have to resist the ideological domination of the victimized child.

    They have to defend institutions against the moral and financial vampirism of the #Metoo movement.

    They have to ideologically resist the insane paranoid conspiracy theories of Pizzagaters.

    If you don’t want to do that, you don’t really want to defend the BSA, because this (and much more) is what the BSA is facing.

    I wish you the best.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s