Pam’s Comments (group member since Dec 29, 2016)

Pam’s comments from the Our Shared Shelf group.

Emma wrote:To me, this doesn't fall in the construction-boy-scout versus housework-girl-scout categories you listed above. "

Thanks Emma. As mentioned my sample size for Gold Awards was very limited. I appreciate your update and the scope of your project.

Emma wrote: " However, if something is sexist, even if only by a little bit, I do think it should be pointed out (as many people are unconsciously sexist). This will help people be more aware of unconscious biases and hopefully change for the better

People pointing out grammar corrections are annoying. Pointing out spinach is another's teeth can be embarrassing. Calling out a taboo subject can be tricky. Counselors often recommend using I statements when discussing tricky subjects as they dont carry blame so much as expression of ones belief.

Oh. I love this thread.

What age of books are you looking for specifically?

Picture books: 2-4
The Dark by Lemony.Sniket - fear
Beautiful Oops by Barney Saltzberg - fear
What color is the wind by Ann differences
Ladybug girl by Jackie Davis - superhero girl play


Children books 3-5
The Name Jar by Yangsook Choi - differences
B by Sarah K -
Rosie Revere Engineer by Andrea Beaty -

Gerd wrote: "But, upon reflection, does that mean that "girls need a space to be girls" then, too?
And would that then be the niche that the Girl Scouts should fill? "

Yes. Completely agree.

I think, and from what we have heard from a few other girl scout dropouts is that the program does not live up to the "scouting" name. If boy scouts is a watered down version of 4H, than girl scouts is a further dilution of boy scouts. That to earn a badge doesn't necessarily mean mastery of a skill so much as familiarity with the Wikipedia page.

Though I'm not sure if this a condemnation on behalf of the agency as a whole or for individual leaders who are only teaching what they are comfortable with - which for many years did not mean actually building or getting messy.

For example: Eagle Scouts vs Gold Award.

Eagle scouts is to boy scouts as gold award is to girl scouts. They are quote unquote on par with each other as the highest recognition one can achieve in the organization. Two things though.

- one is a title the other an award. Meaning, one is a highly esteemed individual and one a badge. To me this is an active vs passive difference that helps continue to create the differences between masculine vs feminine.

- level of project. I'm not terribly certain so Girl Scout Graduates, please correct me. However in my experience the Gold Award is more for societal based projects where the Eagle Scout project is more construction based. Again stresses the skills of old school philosophy on what the genders do. Eagle Scouts build shelters, construct trash bins, make bridges, gazebos etc. Whereas the two gold awards I helped friends participate in was a church play for ages 8-13 and a long term babysitting assignment ( though if you squint that's what they play was but with costumes). Again, not a bad thing. But it reinforces the ideas that boys make and girls take care of the children happy homemaker like.

Any Girl Scout Graduates want to chime in? I can talk about the boy scout projects but woefully uninformed about the Gold Award.

I am of the mindset that calling everything sexist devalues sexism.

But I'm curious...for those who are arguing in favor of calling this sexism how does that play out? OP calls her father out on it. "Those comments are sexist"

What happens next?

And i think thats another point. Sorry for hogging all the comments right here.

Diversity is good But there are times, especially when youre a kid, when too much difference becomes burdensome. I left girl scouts bc my troop didnt go camping, or hiking, or anything physical bc the mother and her daughter were physically incapable of doing so.

And before anyone says discrimination : i am one of 6. I have 4 sisters and 1 brother, one of those sisters is handicapped. She is mute and cognitvivly challenged due to a fucktard of a doctor during her birth. She is my older sister. And i had 3 younger sibs. Because of so many siblings my parents kept us in bunkbeds and sharing rooms for my entire childhood. My sister and taking care ofher became one of my jobs growing up. Learnig to sign, Riding the disabled bus to and from school, changing diapers, and being the first responder due to proximity in case of seisure, or other attacks. All of this sort of happened. My parents only asked me to do the bus thing out of necessity. All other instances came from seeing my mother overworked and my father exhausted. They needed a hand and i gave it.

Anywho, they did notice that i was not living much of a childhood so they specifically signed me up for outside groups like girl scouts. But what i got, wheelchair bound, was pretty similar to what i had and my parents were specifically trying to get me to talk to other kids outside of the disabled community or my siblings and to run and jump like a mobility enabled kid could. So we left girl scouts.

Placing the genders together might work on paper: diversity, inclusion compassion, otherness. But there are moments when darn it you dont want otherness. That you only want your kid to be with kids like them so they dont have to hold back or censor themselves for the sake of polite society.

As to the girl not allowed to be part of the troop. I think that's more a sign to girl scouts failing than boy scouts.

My dad actually pulled me and my sisters out of girl scouts as it was pretty abysmal. To be fair our scout leader was a mother who was leading for her daughter who was wheelchair bound, so we only did things she could participate in like basket weaving or cookie sales.

But my dad pulled the 4 of us out and taught us how to shoot an arrow/gun. How to build a fire. How to tie knots. This was all pre scout master days, so while there wasnt a troop to join, with the 4 of us it felt like a big enough crew!

Im all for 4H-great organization. And Im all for boy scouts and girl scouts but i dont want to see them joined. Though i would love the girl scouts would teach more scouting behavior and not just cookie peddlers.

My dad is a scout master and has been for a decade now. He has been able to provide a refuge for boys that has led to a squad of 15 to a squad of 60 active leaders. Done right, he guides the boys to become leaders. They lead meetings, they plot the course of the year, not him. He has almost 4 eagle scouts a year (eagle scouts are older boys who go through the entire program and accomplish a large scale community project on their own from fundraising to construction) and has received more than 10 mentor pins - chosen by an eagle scout as an honor for his personal commitment to their success. So i am pretty familiar with scout life.

Scouts go from ages 11-18. Going from the edge of childhood to adulthood. Puberty being a huge part of that.

Now. I do hear the concern over trans and gay students. My dad has only had 1 scout who identified as gay in our little town. But the child was allowed in no questions. And when i asked about trans my dad was of the same mind.

But he did feel that boys needed the space to be boys. To not have to worry about -to the majority of them- the opposite sex. To be around others who have gone through voices cracking. They will joke but not mock. And other issues pretaining to normal bodily functions. But more importantly they needed the space to figure out their own place. These kids have to deal with among other things : divorce, death in the family, how to adult, their leadership style, peer to peer management, and how to deal with adults as well as how to deal with kids younger or older than them. And again, if done right you have the scouts leading the scouts with the scout masters being guides. Showing the 11 yr olds that this is how you as an adult can act one day yourself. Seeing, mimicing, doing.

Can the genders coexist in a group? Sure. Look at 4H. But I like the option of letting an oragnization stay gendered. Let the kids grow up with others going through same but different issues if they choose to.

I second this.

I discuss this all the time with family.

- why do black people get a whole network to themselves and black awards ceremony. No one bats and eye. But if a white guy does this everyone screams racism

- why are there women's only competitions and mixed competitions (in fencing). But if we only ask about Mens only competitions people would be up in arms about sexism

Etc etc..

Your comments MeerderWorter were spot on regarding equality being mistaken for oppression.

But it is important to note, as many have said earlier, that we all have privledge in some areas and not some in others. Men have less rights than women do for custody of children in divorce cases. These are real. So wee do need to listen and understand where groups are coming from. Not all what they say is a tantrum as they learn how to share.

If I understand you correctly, Ross, yes. We all here can agree that stating a father's role in child rearing only starts when a child gets old enough to play with is sexism.

BUT if the question if this specific instance is sexism, than we disagree. We do not have all the facts. And to label something before having all the facts is a bad habit to get into.

I'm in the same camp MeerderWorter

We come to this philosophy with different passions that all related back to equality for women. We have different ways of how that is going to happen. I agree we need to police our own more extreme members. But I don't think uniting should or will ever happen.

Ross wrote: "The comment was in essence men have one role women another this is sexism "

And i would agree if that was the comment. But the comment was "And then my dad replied that it is nicer for my brother in law to wrestle and play with him now he is old

Alissa then perceived it as "but my dad said it in a way that really sounded like that 'a mom is only there in the beginning for changing diapers, feeding the child and then when he or she is old enough the men can play with it."

It's hard to say what is or wasn't in that tone without having the exact quote. I can't agree or disagree on perceptions.

Winston wrote: I just wish there was a better way to combat it "

There is... It's just takes more time.

Seeking clarity
Gaining new perspectives
Questioning your own reactions as much as the one that initiated.

Ok

To those who think the comment was sexism... Would it still be sexism if the comment was said to the daughter?

without knowing all the details and only knowing what you said regarding your dad's comment on specifically playing with the child bc of their age. No this is not sexism.

I'd argue it's regular parenting. When children are younger than a year they pretty much don't do much beyond eating, sleeping, and pooping. But after some time they can hold their head up, they can crawl, etc. It's a lot more exciting bc they are interacting more. it's a lot more exciting bc it's not all work.

But again, I don't know your family's history or your dad's tone.

Ok. So anytime people ask questions like this I always feel that either comes down to the generations. Ideas that become trends do not come out of nowhere.

Because of "Silent Spring" and other events effecting the 80's, children in the 90s grew up with Captain Planet and Earth Days that helped make the millenial generation and their parents more eco friendly than Boomer. Yes, there bell curves that show population acceptance, but in general it's easier to convince parents and children than it is to convince Congress or businesses.

So when you ask your 5 questions I look to the parents today to see how they will raise their kids. And we can see the trends of parents being more supportive of choice ( gender identification, sexuality).

Also: these thoughts are based on opinions from a white woman living in the states. To Ross point, feminism ebbs and flows across the globe with all different fights.

1) Will girls still be afraid to travel at night on the lonely streets?

Right now, the cultural Norm is everyone is a rapist. But we are teaching our children about consent. And we are teaching our sons what no is.

I'm optimistic that (if we are still walking and not teleporting or using a new disruptive technology) that the concept of danger will not be as high. Will people still fear the night with shadowed corners. Yes. Will it bc of rapists... I don't think so.

2. This really comes down to parents.

A- my brother was given the same rigamoreol as I was when it came to evening entertainment. We had a curfew.
B- following Keith's comment, I think we had a push for more friendship based parenting, which failed spectacularly. I am hoping that more structure will become the new born, but it's quite possible that friendship focused parenting will remain the norm for some time.

3.Do you think that a few years later from today we could have parents who teach their children differently from their own parents?Or will the same tradition of biased stereotypical teaching continue to take place?

Parents will always influence their children's role as a parent. children mimic their parents, learning from them. Accepting what they do is how things are done. Until they see some other way of doing things via friends, family, strangers a world away through books or internet.

Change occurs when a- the person rejects everything their parents teach them due to trauma or otherwise awful conditions creating a schism between the idea that parents know beat and the child. Or with technology and job growth. As technology advances we can see more about the other and learn that maybe our parents did or did not know best.

So yes, the same thoughts will be taught from parent to child, but as our world expands so does these lessons.

4,Do you think that 40-50 years from now ,girls could have muscles and biceps and not be judged for being strong(or manly as they call it)?

Weightlifting/ MMA/ crossfit is very supportive of women with muscels.

5.Do you think domestic violence could see a downfall soon?Or would the archetypal denotion of women as weak continue till the day humanity will cease to exist?

Here in the states: it is seeing a growth only as it's been ok to report these kind of things. Before it was the norm for a husband to teach his wife, getting a stick that was no bigger than two finger thick. This is now frowned upon.

In India, my only knowledge is based on the Pink Sari Gang in the UP. The leader... Sampat pal(?) is doing what she can to at least get men to be punished for doing these things and cleaning up the corruption. So I think there is hope that DV will end. 50 years from will put a good dent in it. Maybe not end it, but put a dent.. yes

Gerd, in part yes.

We can also take someone's status or religious symbols for similar reasons. Like. bendi used to notate marriage is exoticfied or headress that used to serve as "crowns" that were only worn by chiefs are in music videos worn by pop stars.

Regarding cultural cross over...

Yes! This does exist. We are a melting pot and there are forms that are specifically work well with the infusion of new ideas.

The difference, I think, goes back to what's accepted and respected.

Bruce Lee specifically moved to help bring eastern martial arts to Western audiences. He helped guide the transition by holding true to the tenants of his people. A Chinese man who learned under the tenants of the Ip man, did this. Not Mickey Rorke who played a stereotype of an Asian man in breakfast at Tiffany's.

Look at Avatar the last Airbender. A cartoon based on Eastern philosophy with eastern martial arts created by two white guys. Now look what Hollywood did in the live action... Whitewashing the characters so that your main heroes were white and the villian was a poc AND removing all eastern philosophy. One was done respectfully with lots of research. And the other played on old stereotypes.

So Cailee touched upon why appropriation is not always a great homage as we like to think.

"POC don't get to normalize their own cultures - and that's the issue, or at least one of them. '

Corn rows and dreads are a great example. Both of these styles were specifically created to deal with black hair. And for years the black community would get flack for it or the styles added to negative stereotypes. How do you create a cultural identity when the very things that make your people unique are ridiculed?

And to throw gas in the flames, suddenly those cultural traits are considered beautiful or in fashion bc someone uses them in a fashion magazine? That one picture suddenly makes them cool and that's supposed to fix all the painful notifications of otherness? Black people wear dreads or corn rows and they are seen as convicts but white people do it and they're edgy. Same hairstyle different connotation. That's appropriation.

Native American children were literally stolen from their families, beaten if the used their native tongue, and given Anglo names. Their culture was denied them. Their history almost forgotten as elders died and those left on the rez were faced with extreme poverty and alcoholism. We defeated them by wiping out their existence.

Calling a sports teams Indians or Braves does not help those people reclaim their heritage. Doesn't help children find their grandparents or discover their birth name. So why is it that we demonize their existence but can use the face paint, headdresses, and war chants on game day?