Dazed and Confused
Published 12:00 am Wednesday, November 10, 1999
LEE DRESSELHAUS / L’Observateur / November 10, 1999
So. I see the courts have decided that the Boy Scouts were in error fordismissing an openly gay Scout leader. Their reasoning, while being a biton the alarmist side, was sound in that they were concerned that their boys were being led by a person whose lifestyle didn’t exactly reflect the values we like to associate with America, Mom, and apple pie. They feltthat there was a role model issue there and obviously some of the parents were concerned about the sexual issue. They weren’t comfortable withJunior being off in the woods on an overnight scouting jamboree with a gay man. And now the court has decided that the sexual orientation of theman should have no bearing on whether or not he can be a leader of boys.
Hoo, boy, this is gonna be fun: If the sexual orientation of a Scout leader doesn’t matter, then by default and extension of logic the sexual orientation of just about anyone else in almost any position of leadership doesn’t matter, does it? The young man who was dismissed from being a scout leader says that he was only interested in being involved with the Scouts as a leader and a developer of young unformed minds, and that he wasn’t interested in their young unformed bodies. Okay, everyone out there who believes that there wasabsolutely no interest in these young men whatsoever on the part of the openly gay Scout leader raise your hands. Let’s do a quick count. Okay, two.
Now, if I apply to be a live-in counselor at, oh say, a home for wayward 18-22 year old girls, or maybe a college cheerleader summer camp, can I be rejected for my sexual orientation? I mean, I swear I would just have the moral and mental well being of those poor darlings in mind. Honest.Really. I shouldn’t be rejected just because I’m a heterosexual male,should I? Just what has THAT got to do with anything? I’ll be good, I promise. You should hire me because the court says so.How’s that for logic? Now, everybody out there who believes that a healthy heterosexual man put in that position would never ever think of anything other than his duty to those wayward cheerleaders, raise your hands.
What? Not even two? The gay guy got two votes and I didn’t get any? Why not? Boy, am I disappointed. Can it be that we all know our own impulsesand aren’t fooled by the fox when he says that he has only the best interests of the chickens in mind? Like it or not there’s a little fox in all of us to whatever degree and we recognize it in others, and we tend not to be fooled when another fox begins to protest his innocence. And we have towonder just why Br’er Fox would want to put himself in a position to watch those chickens in the first place.
And now here’s the other side.
Sometimes the fox you know is better than the one you don’t. When weknow that the watcher of our chickens tends to be a fox, or is a self- declared fox, we watch the watcher very closely. The fox knows he’s beingwatched under a microscope and behaves himself because if he sticks one little paw across the line of decency we draw in the sand when it comes to our children, the consequences can be devastating. It’s when you don’tknow that the watcher is a fox that serious trouble arises. It seems thatthe guys who get themselves involved in the child molestation issues involving the local baseball team or the Scouts, or altar boys, or whatever tend to be the pillar-of-the-community types, coaches, teachers and sometimes even religious figureheads who are supposed to be and should be beyond reproach. And who everyone assumed were heterosexuals,probably even including themselves. We know that they’re guarding ourchickens but we don’t know that they are true blue, dyed in the wool foxes until it’s too late, and for some of the kids, sometimes tragically so.
So, back to the gay Boy Scout leader. Apart from his openly gay lifestylebeing repugnant to some people and alarming to some parents, I’m wondering if those kids weren’t as safe with him as they would be with anyone else? He came out and declared himself a fox, so how bad can he be? Well, excuse me, but I still don’t want him watching my chickens. Andfurthermore, if I had a daughter in a camp type environment I wouldn’t want a heterosexual fox watching her too closely either. Like it or not it’sthe same thing. I don’t care that this guy is gay, that’s his business aslong as it’s with other consenting adults, but why tempt the fox? It’s simple really. Br’er Fox, whether he’s Br’er Heterofox or Br’er Homofox,really shouldn’t be in charge of the chickens. It’s not that complicated. Unfortunately, if you take a look at the headlines that pound us with this sort of thing with alarming frequency these days, you have to wonder just which is the lesser of the two evils.
Boy, did I muddy up that issue, or what?
Copyright © 1998, Wick Communications, Inc.
Internet services provided by NeoSoft.
Best viewed with 3.0 or higher