GBSA?

 

So it was like 100 years ago where some really nice person decided to form an all girls organization that would encourage among many things, female solidarity and women’s roles and virtues.

Way back then, no one seemed to care whether those private groups quote unquote discriminated against the opposite sex in such an endeavor.  In fact, for many years back then, many women didn’t even care that only men could vote.  Why? Because most men that owned land had a wife who more times than not, informed her husband’s views and balanced his ideas out.  Call it old fashioned, but the man generally voted for his family and their collective interests.  Just like the man went to war (for his family and his country) or went to work at some factory, while his wife took the harder job of staying home raising kids, running a small farm, and taking care of a busy household.

But somewhere along the way the concept of female “equality” came into the discussion.  Never mind that men and women are different.  We’ve now evolved into more sensitive and enlightened and openminded humans.  So openminded that our brains have fallen out.

We’ve broken the glass ceiling alright.  In fact we’ve broken the whole damn building.

So it should be no surprise to anyone that immediately after the Boy Scouts decided it was the right thing to do to let transgender children participate in scouting, the National Organization for Women (NOW) petitioned BSA to also allow girls into Boy Scouts.  Here’s the story for anyone who may have missed it.

The article begins with:

After many years of divisiveness, the Boy Scouts of America have opened their ranks to gay and transgender boys. Yet a different membership dispute persists: a long-shot campaign to let girls join the BSA so they have a chance to earn the prestigious status of Eagle Scout.

Just last week, after the BSA announced it would admit transgender boys, the National Organization for Women issued a statement urging the 106-year-old youth organization to allow girls to join as well. NOW said it was inspired by the efforts of a 15-year-old New York City girl to emulate her older brother, who is an Eagle Scout.

This despite the fact that girls ALREADY have their own organization!

Meanwhile the LDS Church is still pondering thoughtfully what it should do about the transgender issue.  That’s code by the way, for they’re waiting to see if there’s any huge groundswell of anger against BSA before it makes any rash decisions.

Does anyone really believe that the Church was not notified by BSA before changing such an important policy?  One they knew could affect the vital, mammoth support of its largest donor?

What’s interesting about this new twist is there is a work around for the NOW girls:  They simply need to tell their little girl applicants to say they are boys.  Kind of like a border crosser who speaks no English but somehow, when being arrested, knows how to scream and spell the word “asylum” with no hint of an accent.

“Transgender” is the new code word I suppose for these girls who feel left out.

On a serious note I’m very saddened that this little girl’s parents would allow their daughter to decide at age 9 that she’s a boy! She has not even hit puberty yet!  My gosh, how many little nine years olds would even know what any of that means!  You can’t buy cigarettes at age nine.  You can’t drink or drive or vote or have legal sex, BUT you can decide that you are a different sex than your body parts indicate, apparently.

Shame on her mom (not sure where dad is) for allowing her daughter to discuss what it means to be transgender at such a tender, innocent age.  My kids still believe in Santa Claus at that age.  Oh and by the way, cut any little girls hair and guess what! They look like a cute little boy!

Shame on Boy Scouts for supporting this mother and for now encouraging God knows how many other young, confused children to make such a serious decision so early on.

Shame on the Church for not running from BSA like a person would run from a fire.  It’s almost too late to run at this point, without the Church being criticized for having stayed in so long. Could you imagine if Planned Parenthood was the “activity arm” of Relief Society?  That’s about the equivalence of where we are with Scouting.

I assume that eventually some young man who got cut from the NBA will claim he’s now a woman and be able to be the star of the WNBA.  Why not?  I’m just waiting for that lawsuit.

Did you read the recent article about the transgender guy who went to prison with the ladies and who was “moved” because “she” was having consensual sex with all the women?  I’m not sure where they moved him/her but I’m guessing he’s meeting with ACLU lawyers as we speak.

At this point, how does the Church in good conscience say they have no sympathy for the Ordain Women movement?  The Church gives 10s of millions of dollars to an organization that allows “girls” (who say they are boys) to participate in what the Church considers to be the activity arm of the priesthood.

Maybe it doesn’t allow transgender children to participate in LDS troops (yet), but those same kids will be having activities in the Thomas Monson Lodge and at Church paid for campsites all over the country.

For kids not in Utah, who are wanting to get their Eagle award — They WILL likely have to more closely affiliate with these new individuals and in will be placed in these awkward situations.

I guarantee you the Church is not going to soften its emphasis on young men receiving their Eagle award.  Just like 4 years of seminary, getting your Eagle is one of the check boxes expected of a young man in the Church before entering the MTC.

I’ve said it before, but if nothing else the Church should at least eliminate the affiliation question from the temple recommend interview.  Anyone who affiliates with Boy Scouts of America in any way today, affiliates with those who oppose our teachings and beliefs.  Boy Scouts HAS become an apostate organization, unworthy of our investment and clearly an unworthy partner in rearing our young men.  Both gay, straight, or other.

Just as a side note, as someone living in Utah, I’ve noticed a lot more LDS people jumping on the LGBTQ and women’s rights bandwagons of late.  Like many of you I could not believe my eyes when I looked at the pictures on the news recently of people with huge “female parts” on their heads here in our very state in parades marching against President Trump, who they ironically say does not respect women and their parts.

As Wayne would say, “Exsueeze me?”  HE doesn’t respect women?!  HOW about you parading around with an exposed larger than life female organ on your head might not be respecting women?!

(Even I can’t bring myself to add a picture here)

And yet, somehow more and more LDS folks seem to be jumping on the bandwagon for these progressive issues.  I say go for it, it’s your God-given right and I don’t condemn you. But, Church leaders may want to take note.  Because I think it’s been since they “changed their stance” on such issues that more LDS people have started supporting these causes.  I could be wrong.

I laugh a little though because some of these Molly Mormons have no idea what door they are opening.  Maybe one of them should go to Berkeley with a Trump hat on as a social experiment to see what kinds of people they are teaming up with.

These people protesting conservatism (or Trump or whatever) wouldn’t even let a gay man, Milo Yiannopoulos, speak at Berkeley and they PEPPER SPRAYED this beautiful, intelligent young, courageous woman peacefully expressing her opinions!  Not to mention millions of dollars damage to taxpayer subsidized property.

So if you’re an open minded, progressive, LDS person, these are your contemporaries.  These are your amazing civil rights leaders.  Maybe you should spend some more time with them next time before you go buy that organ costume online.

As for me, I say it’s a sad day where evil is called good and good called evil.  Anyone who does not see this “slouch towards Gomorrah” is blind and the Church does not seem to be helping the situation by towing the PC line.

42 thoughts on “GBSA?

  1. JVH

    “We love him, because he first loved us. If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also.” (1 John 4:19-21)

    I know it’s hard. But when you learn to CHOOSE to LOVE your brother (enemy) things change very quickly. You become more like Him. I have experienced this first hand. It takes practice, deep prayer, humility. But the change in your spirit is remarkable and undeniable. You don’t have to agree with someone or approve of their lifestyle to love them. Just give it a try and ask the Lord to help you.

    Not that it means anything to you, but this is my last time reading your blog. I will pray for all of us in our desires for Zion. Heaven help us all.

    Reply
    1. JJKram

      Christ loves us all but did not and does not condone sin of any kind. Perhaps when we talk of loving everyone, we ought to remember that loving someone does not mean we will embrace their beliefs. Christ did not and if we are emulating him, neither will we.

      Reply
  2. Kayp

    Shouldn’t a 16-year-old who identifies as a 21-year-old be allowed to consume alcohol?

    Shouldn’t a 40-year-old who identifies as a 70-year-old receive social security benefits and the senior citizen discount at the movie theater?

    If we are going to identify people simply based on their feelings, doesn’t anything go?

    A dark path indeed.

    Reply
    1. Anonymous

      You said: As for me, I say it’s a sad day where evil is called good and good called evil. Anyone who does not see this “slouch towards Gomorrah” is blind and the Church does not seem to be helping the situation by towing the PC line.

      Invoking Sodom and Gomorrah seems kind of irrelevant by now. Enough porn was viewed last year alone on the top porn site on the internet for every person on the planet to have viewed 13 pornographic videos. That’s an estimated 92 billion videos watched in 2016 on one site alone.

      I also question as to whether the BSA was ever a good organization in God’s eyes to begin with? Yes they draw close to him with their lips but they also engage in idol worship in the form of flag ceremonies and oath making. The church is spineless and won’t change. In my opinion this is because they are just as idolatrous.

      However, do I think God cares that we let a girl into a boys only organization? Not a bit. If God is no respecter of persons then why should we be? Why are we so accepting of artificial barriers like gender or race? If this is a gospel of inclusion then be inclusive. Let God worry about judging the sins.

      Reply
  3. Ruth

    I felt like this was a harsh post. I normally love the posts but this one had a bite with it. Loved Kayp’s comment above. That nailed it.

    Reply
    1. Dave the Disappointing

      AB, how dare you bite. Only softness, please. You know, the way John the baptist did, always speaking in sweet, nonconfrontational, ambiguous expressions, so the criticism is only implied, for the sake of decorum.

      Reply
  4. MarkinPNW

    A 15 year old girl wants to join the BSA? You mean like what my adult daughter did when she was about 15 in Young Women, and the Young Women in our ward all joined the Boy Scouts? If I remember right, they organized a Venture Crew for Scuba Diving mainly in order to get insurance through BSA for their Scuba activities (see here; http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/Venturing.aspx). BSA also has a co-ed career exploration program for the same age range; http://www.exploring.org/about-us/. Seems that NOW is already several decades behind the BSA on this.

    Oh, it’s all about that “Eagle Scout” award, seeking the “Honors of Men”.

    Reply
  5. Troy

    I’ve enjoyed much of what you’ve written in the past but it’s hard to take any of this seriously when you begin by essentially praising the days when women did nothing but stay home with the house and kids while the men went out and voted and worked. Please. It’s not 1885 anymore. You’ve lost a reader. I’m not interested in listening to voices who preferred when every woman was a June Cleaver. Did you ever stop to think that many women only played those roles because society offered them no other option? They literally knew nothing else and had nothing else that they were allowed to do. And you think they “didn’t care”? Have you ever asked a 19th century woman her opinion on the matter?

    Reply
    1. Michael

      What make you so certain that they “did care”? Have you asked a 19th century woman her opinion?

      Yep, I didn’t think so.

      Reply
      1. Troy

        Michael, you’ve heard of the suffrage movement right? Pretty sure that’s evidence that women cared that they couldn’t vote. I think it’s always safe to assume that people don’t like having their rights denied.

        Reply
    2. Dave the Disappointing

      Oh no! Troy has fallen. Troy, what could he do to get you back?

      AB, be more careful how you express yourself. Though much of what you say rang true to Troy, you have crossed the political correctness line, driving him away. He may be going to Canada until you stop publishing your blog. AB, you need a better retention plan. After all, your income depends on a loyal, tithe-paying readership.

      Reply
      1. Troy

        Actually, very little of what AB wrote rang true to me. To write a disagreement of every point in this post would require more time than I am willing to give to a blog.

        Reply
  6. Anonymous

    Either a child is capable of making choices of eternal consequence at eight years old or they aren’t. If they aren’t then the idea of a set ‘age of accountability’ is garbage. “I’m going to commit to Jesus and his church when I turn eight years old! Now what am I going to put on my wish list for Santa this year?”

    Reply
  7. J

    Is it possible BSA is the pot of boiling water in the LDS lab where they determine the water temperature as they boil the frogs?

    Reply
  8. Dave the Disappointing

    If the church were what it claims to be, it would have no difficulty bluntly stating its position, public opinion be damned. Why would God’s kingdom on earth have to be so fearful of how it is perceived by the world? Would the omnipotent, omniscient Maker of all that exists really have to fret about how His kingdom is perceived by American liberals? But the church, sadly, is not what it claims to be. I wish it were, but it continuously shows that it is not.

    Reply
  9. Dave the Disappointing

    One of the problems I found in leaving the church and seeking like-minded people was that most of the ex-mormons are either LGBTQ or advocates of LGBTQism. I think there are few people like me who leave the church on theological rather than genital grounds.

    Reply
    1. Michael

      Dave,

      I wish I knew you, because I’ve noticed the exact same thing.

      Although I haven’t left the church formally, I attend mostly to keep peace in my home. I checked out mentally a few years ago.

      That said, the “ex” Mormons are inundated with pro-LGBTQ viewpoints, a position I can’t tolerate. My issues with the church are, likewise, in the theological arena, rather than the region of who one chooses to have sex with.

      Reply
      1. Dave the Disappointing

        You may be better off remaining in the church. I am lucky that my family life is peaceful where the church is concerned, for they have decided to accept my apostacy and still love me. They don’t argue with me; they just discuss their concerns about me when I am not around–like a ward council meeting. Still, I have no peace of mind, for I have found nothing outside of the church but aimlessness and unsatisfied questioning. I wish I had never become so interested in the truth, for it is a lonely path. I really do miss those lovely people in the church.

        Reply
        1. Brian Zang

          Dave, you still have friends. I am out of the church, too. Props to you, a home teacher who succeeded in the sincerity department. Much love, Brian

          Reply
  10. Tom

    Hi AB:
    Thanks for the flurry of articles recently. All very good.

    For the past few years, I have studied several blogs ‘out there’ regularly, both (and for lack of better words) ‘pro and con.’ I’ve seen lots of different points, and learned a ton. Recently, I have formulated some thoughts on which I’m basing — at least for now — my go-forward in the Church. For what it’s worth, they are:
    1) the leaders today may just not be very good. As in, if you lined up all the prophets from Adam until now, who’s to say the past several would not be towards the back? I think it’s natural to think because we are alive today the current are the best. But, what if that’s not the case? They may be trying really hard, but just not doing a very good job. If that line of thinking is correct, it explains a ton re stances you have written about.

    (think of this: H. Hunter and H. Lee had a whopping 12 and 13 months respectively to lead the effort on earth of perfecting the saints. We talk in hallowed terms of Enoch, Moses, and Alma, but they had 500, 80, and 45 years respectively in their tenures with only Enoch getting the job done. What if Spencer Kimball had that amount of time — and all healthy! — to do his work? Maybe we’d be hanging with Enoch and his people right now vs. wondering why our current leaders do some of the things they do.)

    2) intertwined — completely — with the above, is God is much more hands-off than we can imagine. We know the principle of free-agency, but I believe it is about a zillion times more prevalent in His actions and dealings with us than, again, we comprehend — and, make our actions based upon (did that make sense?).
    3) again intertwined — completely — with the above, is that He expects more of today’s every-day saint than any other people in history. No other people have had access to so much scripture, and so readily. Access to Temples, local close-by congregations, and other support systems. I believe God expects me to know a whole lot more — and act upon it — including not worrying so much re why leaders struggle with what I think are straightforward issues.

    Again, my thoughts driving me in my go-forward with the Church — and, more importantly, my relationship with God :). AB, your blog and writings have helped me with my evolving stance — Tom

    Reply
  11. wallflower

    Thank you for writing this
    My boys (12-21, 7 of them) feel the parents should be charged with child abuse. I was floored, I asked them why and they said the same thing. Does that child truly understand what it means to change their sex, or is it being driven by the parent. I replied to them to still love the sinner, not the sin. I do have to agree with them. My grandma told me she thought she was going to grow up to be a boy, she had said when she was about 11 she learned other wise 🙂

    Reply
  12. Michael

    AB,

    Always appreciate your posts. This one is particularly good and as I said on a previous post, I agree 100%.

    The other week in church, the Friends of Scouting program was brought up and volunteers were asked for to go out and collect the annual donation from any number of people. I turned to my wife and indicated that if they came by the house this year I would be vocally announcing why I wasn’t donating. She was fine with that and the two of us agree that the scouts are no longer worth supporting.

    The past couple of years, I’ve kept my mouth shut, but haven’t donated. I’m done staying quiet about this kind of stuff.

    Reply
  13. Lily

    “In fact, for many years back then, many women didn’t even care that only men could vote. Why? Because most men that owned land had a wife who more times than not, informed her husband’s views and balanced his ideas out. Call it old fashioned, but the man generally voted for his family and their collective interests. ”

    This is such B*ll Sh**t its laugh-out-loud funny.

    Reply
    1. Bishop Anon Post author

      Uh actually Lily, there were plenty of women who felt this way. This was a pamphlet during the suffrage push as one example. I’m not saying I don’t think women should vote. My point is that Gender Equality is just another term the progressives use to undermine gospel principles. I think there should be more unity among men and women but not this false idea of equality that gets my daughters drafted into some future war. But thanks for simply laughing out loud.

      https://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/hua_hsu/barkhorn_womenvoters1.jpg

      Reply
      1. Karen

        AB,

        Just to let you know there are some women out here who ABSOLUTELY DO AGREE with you and the underlying intent of what you have tried to say! I don’t want the voices that oppose you to ring out louder than those who agree.

        There are smart, highly-educated, very capable women that have deliberately chosen the “June Cleaver” life. And we are capable of understanding your need to speak against the political correctness of the day and the destructive downward course it is taking us; including the utter destruction of the intended and healthy differentiation between the sexes and their divinely appointed “main” roles.

        I do not consider motherhood, devotion to my husband and children, and not working to be a statement against my worth, my intelligence or my capabilities. I also do not appreciate the ultimate end of the feminist movement. While people may like to tout certain elements of the feminist movement that they laud (like voting), there are many more consequences that have evolved from and will yet result from this movement as it continues to steam-roll unchecked in an our of control politically correct world. What began as possibly a positive, has quickly been used by the adversary to advance his agenda of destruction. To name a few negative outcomes of the feminist movement: Abortion, the declining birth rates that are destroying the ability to maintain population, a two-income family with latch-key children and all the ramifications resulting from unsupervised children, an emphasis on self-centeredness rather than sacrifice in society as a whole, women in combat, and the very-near mandatory requirement of female draft. And there are more.

        I’m not here to argue those points. They are facts, regardless of whether one thinks they are positive or negative. What kind of society really thinks it noble to put its’ women in combat? How depraved can we get? I guess once a society condones women killing there own flesh and blood children, do we think it wouldn’t be long before they would be asking them to kill other humans?

        I understood the intent of your comments and agree with your premise. And in response to the person that suggested there be no “separate” organizations for the sexes because God is no respecter of persons: The Lord had Joseph establish a women’s organization, run by women. I take that to mean He is okay with such a separation existing and that has no relation whatever to Him being a “respecter of persons.”

        Reply
        1. Lily

          Wow! I didn’t say anything about abortion, women in combat (where the heck did that come from), or your the overall post, which I happen to agree with. As an educator by profession, the studies are in: both boys and girls do better when separated by gender.

          My comment was simply to your suggestion that 19th century men took care of their wives and looked out for their interests. No, they didn’t. Women and children were property. There were no enforced domestic or child abuse laws. A man’s home was his castle and he could, and did, do anything he wanted to those inside, without the law stopping him. “Its the sad nature and disposition of almost ALL men, as soon as they get a little authority, they immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.” Yes, it is.

          Karen’s comments did provide another source of humor for me: “The Lord had Joseph establish a women’s organization, run by women.” No, its not run by women.

          Reply
          1. Troy

            The Relief Society was run by women initially. They wrote their own manuals and curriculum (though in the 1800s they probably didn’t call it that). They collected dues. They were pretty much completely autonomous. Then comes the mid-20th century and the church becomes a behemoth institution. Correlation is the name of the game. All things must be centralized. It stuns me that for a church of mostly conservative individuals (at least in the United States) we are a-okay with a heavy, top-down organization. Well, most LDS are. I suspect that most readers of this blog (me included) are not okay with that organization.

          2. Robin Hood

            Lily,
            As a serving bishop I can assure you that, at ward level at least (in other words, where it really counts), the Relief Society is definitely run by women.
            No doubt about it.

          3. Karen

            To clarify, I did NOT say the relief society it is STILL run by women. I said that Lord had JOSEPH establish a women’s organization, run by women. And that was in response to the person who said that it would basically be improper for God to ever condone separate organizations because He’s no respecter of persons. That point didn’t work for me and I used Joseph’s inspiration from God as evidence of that point.

            Also, Lily, I didn’t infer that YOU said something about women in combat, abortion, etc. My comments were posted directly under AB’s comments and pertained to reading the entire thread of comments. AB was getting attacked in general for his stance, and I was merely saying there are women out there that get what he’s saying and agree, and then went on to share some of my own thoughts pertaining to the feminist movement and other matters of mass popular confusion these days and the negative impact they have on society. Not allI said was directed at your specific comment, in fact, very little, other than to let AB know not all women are going to attack him for his comments.

        2. Robin Hood

          Thank you Karen.
          A sane voice resonating amid all the politically correct indoctrinated voices of the modern world and church.

          Reply
  14. Dave the Disappointing

    Even when I was a member of the church, I had never fully accepted the infusion of BSA into the church’s program. I lived the church’s youth program without scouting, and I prefer it that way. Though my ward when I was an Aaronic Priesthood youth (in Baltimore in the 70s) had no active scouting program, I did receive some guidance about both temporal and spiritual aspects of manhood and priesthood from some of the men in the ward. So, in my experience, scouting had no bearing on my understanding of the Gospel, the church and my life as a Mormon male. In my late teens–influenced by prayer but no scout oath, scripture study but no scout handbook, priesthood responsibility but no scout rank, service to the community but no Eagle Scout project, and guidance from priesthood leaders and Sunday school and seminary teachers but no scout leaders–I experienced what I thought were spiritual manifestions from God as I took the religion very seriously; thereafter, I followed the typical path in the church. Not until I served in a YM presidency and then a bishopric in wards more controlled and molded by the LDS brand did I begin to see the excessive involvement of the BSA program. I was a mild dissenter against the undue pressure of the scouting program, for I failed to see its spiritual value in a church that was supposed to be reaching young people on a spiritual level. I once stirred a hornets nest by trying to get the ward to cease its tradition of honoring Eagle Scouts and returned missionaries with plaques displayed in the meetinghouse. The reaction from the PEC was as though I had burned an American flag and spit on a portrait of the prophet. Suffice it to say that I began to think of the BSA as a materialistic, ego-inflating impediment to a thriving program for youth, especially when some were inactive kids we were trying to bring back or were converted sometime during their mid-to-late teens when it would be difficult to catch up in the pursuit of the sacred Eagle Scout Award that forever validates the valiant young men. Scouting, though an enjoyable, fulfilling adventure and an edifying temporal enrichment program for those who want to pursue it, is an artificial adornment and unnecessary obstacle in what purports to be a spiritual kingdom, the Church of the Lamb of God, the restoration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The church would do well to replace it with something uniquely Mormon.

    As for the gender question, I believe that a religion has a right to make whatever discriminatory rules it desires. If someone does not like those rules, he or she or s/he or they or whoever or whatever has the right to go elsewhere and even to criticize and protest the religion. If the religion chooses to excommunicate that critic, it should do so, and take the heat. If a religion is worth its salt, if it has any courage of its convictions, any claim of credibility, any integrity whatsoever, it will frankly state its position and accept the consequences. Some, perhaps many, will abandon that religion; so be it. Others, seeing its strength, will join it. Mormonism today wants to be liked by everyone, but that has never been possible and never will be.

    Though I stopped believing in Mormonism for doctrinal reasons, I still appreciate the people of the church, including the leaders, for being such sweet, earnest, wholesome, kind people, and I had been holding some respect for the church’s willingness to be peculiarly true to its teachings about moral cleanliness, traditional gender roles, and fidelity within traditional marriage. In the past few years I have been seeing it drift a bit, trying to accommodate the social changes in the world. It is sad to see it considering moves that would spoil an honorable reputation that took about a century to build.

    Reply
  15. Meg

    Hey, Bishop Anon! First of all, I have really enjoyed reading your blog. Although I don’t agree with all of the things you write, I actually really enjoy getting to hear things from a different perspective. Unfortunately, we may have to disagree on this. I say unfortunately because this is a topic that I’m extremely passionate about, and as such, often he fired up about it. I promise, however, to do my best to be polite and respectful in my reply.

    This is a topic that I’m passionate about because I’m a member of the LGBTQIA+ community. So are several of my friends, some who even used to be LDS. As a side note, I identify as pansexual, and actually have since I was 13. I also enjoy presenting as stereotypically masculine sometimes. However, I didn’t actually leave the LDS church until I was 21. Those were very dark days for me, and it’s very freeing to be who I am.

    Okay, getting off the tangent now: it’s a little bit confusing to me that people genuinely believe that girls will suddenly say that they identify as guys just to get an Eagle scout award. On the surface, I guess I can see that it kind of makes sense (I want to be an Eagle scout so bad that I’ll become a dude!). However, if you analyze that, it doesn’t make sense. These girls want to be female-identifying Eagle scouts. They want to be able to say they are girls AND Eagle scouts. They want to defy the norm. And I completely get that.

    As for my friends who are non-binary/trans*, a lot of them struggled/are currently struggling, ESPECIALLY those who currently/formerly identified as LDS. It’s not an easy thing to say that you’re not contender. People often say that they’re attention-seeking, confused, or just trying to rebel. One of my friends still hasn’t told his parents because he’s afraid that they’ll send him to conversion therapy.

    I also want to address Milo Yiannopoulos. He is gay, yes, but he thinks that he’s an exception and that members of the LGBTQIA+ community are vile and sinners. I haven’t heard about the pepper spray incident, but I’m going to research it (on reputable sites, not Fox News or NBC or any obviously biased media sites) and if she truly was attacked without provocation, I will openly denounce and condemn such an attack.

    Lastly, I want to address the Women’s March. I won’t use the terms, because it’s clear you’re uncomfortable with them and I want to respect that. I want to share a brief story about a book I found in Denver. So I was walking around a bookstore in Denver, and I found this book that my immature brain initially was like, “Heh. They’re prominently displaying this book. Snapchat time.” The title was the same name as the name of the hats. But then I noticed the subtitle: A Reclamation. That’s what wearing those hats was about. It was about reclaiming the word, about turning a negative into a positive, and yes, a little bit about making people uncomfortable because then conversations would be had, and that’s really the first step to solving a problem. Side note, I flipped through the book, liked it, and ended up Snapchatting it with a caption that said “Grab this book!” I don’t know why I was allowed to become an adult.

    At the end of the day, even if we vehemently disagree, I’m going to keep reading this blog. I really like it when I’m forced to think. Just remember that I’ll always be right 😉

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *