A real issue with those Blacks who identify as “African-American” is the punctuation involved. The hyphen is wrong and should be used. The grammatical/logical symbol that should be separating “African” from “American” is â†® the symbol for contradiction or an XOR value choice. This is especially true because the etymological root of “contradiction” is the Latin contradico, â€œspeak against.â€
The sad fact of it is that they’re either Black/African or they’re American. At best, and that best is vanishingly rare, it’s a sliding scale between being part of their people or part ours. They can’t be both because Blacks – those acknowledged by their own people as being Black Enough and not an American, e.g., those derided as being Oreos and/or Uncle Toms/ Aunt Jemimas – hate America and her people. And, you can’t be a true member of a people and/or nation while holding it to be utterly evil, loathsome, and the existential enemy of “your people.”
So..The Boy Scouts are “removing” boys in favor of being gender neutral. They’re now calling themselves Scouts BSA and are allowing girls entrance and membership. Many Americans are worried about the Scouts making other fundamental changes.
A New Scout Oath?
On my honor I will do my best to be politically correct, to establish safe spaces, to fill all gender-diversity quotas, and to check my toxic micro-aggressive make privilege, so help me Whatever.
Well, The Old One Was “Offensive”
On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; to help other people at all times; to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.
Yeah, let’s me see. The actual Scout Oath invokes God, Country, references Morality, and uses the word “Straight.” So…Christofascist, Nationalist, Intolerant, and a dog-whistle / trigger for Homophobic.
Honestly, given how many changes in core organizations of America have been forced through political correctness and other expressions of oikophobia, misandry, and anti-White racism, I can understand the concern. I just think it’s misplaced this time.
Boy Scouts Then and Now
BSA’s Venturing, Sea Scouting, and Exploring programs – all for the problematical ages of 14-20 – have been coed for some time with no newsworthy issues. Venturing and Exploring have been coed since 1971.
Also, Cub Scout “dens” will be single-gender, with separate groups for boys and girls, allowing the organization “to maintain the integrity of the single-gender model while also meeting the needs of todayâ€™s families.” Or, as like to put it, to minimize the exposure to- and exchange of “cooties.” 😉
I just can’t see where the addition of the Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts will suddenly cause an issue for the BSA or for concerned Americans. Sure, they could suddenly go all PC but, as they haven’t really bowed to most of that so far, I’m not worried about it much at all.
No, the only ones who are having and going to have more of a problem with the Boy Scouts going coed is the Girl Scouts. They’re already incensed because they’re staunch advocates of single-gender scouting, believing that only in a male-less organization can girls be safe and thrive.
Girl Scouts is the best girl leadership organization in the world, created with and for girls. We believe strongly in the importance of the all-girl, girl-led, and girl-friendly environment that Girl Scouts provides, which creates a free space for girls to learn and thrive.
The benefit of the single-gender environment has been well-documented by educators, scholars, other girl- and youth-serving organizations, and Girl Scouts and their families. Girl Scouts offers a one-of-a-kind experience for girls with a program tailored specifically to their unique developmental needs.
So, the Girl Scout are still a She-Woman Man Haters Club, to riff on a staple of Our Gang, with boys not being allowed to join – except for case-by-case exceptions for full lifestyle T-Girls, and men only allowed in troop leadership positions with heavy restrictions, e.g., never being allowed to be in the presence of the troop’s girls with at least one non-related woman present at all times. So, just the all-to-normal anti-male prejudices and double standards once again at play in society.
And, of course, there are no great, or even noticeable, numbers of people who want the Girl Scouts to change the sexually exclusive policies…though many wanted the Boy Scouts to change theirs. Yet, I don’t believe this is political correctness winning over Boy Scouts’ traditions or anti-male ideology trumping fairness in the case of the Girl Scouts.
Pragmatism Over Ideology
Simply put, I firmly believe that both the Boy Scouts’ choosing to allow girls to join the Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts, and the Girl Scouts’ anger and strident vitriol over it are primarily rooted is pure pragmatism and the organizations’ respective existential realities.
Scouting, much like youth sports, is in sharp decline. The Boys Scouts are down to about 2.3 million scouts from a peak of more than 4 million, and the Girl Scouts have dwindled to 1.8 million members from a high of 3.8 million. So, in my opinion, this is just the Boy Scouts taking a deliberate step to increase its odds of surviving into the next generation.
Similarly, the Girl Scouts’ complaints, while couched in the terms of special privileges, special “needs,” and misandry, are more than likely fueled by the fear of their organizations’ demise due to no longer seeming to have a monopoly on girls’ scouting.
The American people have been excoriated for decades by Liberals and Progressives over our love of our country and culture. But finally, in the wake of Donald Trump’s rise to political power, our domestic enemies have shown their true colors and their core problem with Americans they’re allowed to live alongside. That problem, as the New York Times so gloatingly states, is our “atavistic nationalism.”
As language, idiom, and rhetoric have a certain importance – admittedly, one vastly overstated by certain sorts – allow me to dissect this.
Of or relating to the return of a trait or recurrence of previous behavior after a period of absence.
Relating to or characterized by reversion to something ancient or ancestral
loyalty and devotion to a nation; especially: a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups
So we have our domestic enemies ranting and raving in fear of- and in hate for something that they feel is part of our past that has been left behind; that something being the love of- devotion to our country, the United States of America.
Think about that. Digest it. Understand what the root cause of the Left’s issue with we, the American people is.
Coca-Cola sadly chose division over confluence in their 2014 Super Bowd, “It’s Beautiful.” showcasing as they did the differences between our population groups instead of our similarities.
They could have, perhaps should have, chosen a theme that showcased the diverse beauty of America and based it upon something that we can all come together in appreciation thereof…
America – It’s Beautiful
This would have been so much the better presentation of the beauty of America’s melting pot culture and the diverse vectors that such beauty comes from, all the while reaching a similar endpoint of American culture.
When hotness comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a … a coke?.
Such a commercial might not have generated as much buzz as the one Coca-Cola chose to go with but it also would have generated less rancor.
The Cola Wars have been raging since the 1980s, with Coca-Cola and Pepsi targeting each other in advertisement after advertisement. Given that there were billions of dollars on the line it wasn’t too surprising how vicious the Cola War became for a while. Even so, some of us were surprised and a little concerned about the war over cold drinks “going hot” when, in 1989, PepsiCo purchased: 17 submarines, a cruiser, a frigate, and a destroyer from the Soviets.
NOTE: The fleet’s purchase, along with PepsiCo being the US distributor for Stolichnaya was part of a countertrade arrangement that allowed Pepsi to be sold in the Soviet Union.
The fleet was nearly immediately sold for scrap. Interestingly, however, for a short period of time PepsiCo had the 7th largest submarine fleet in the world. 😯
Shortly after that the Cola Wars calmed down a bit. Now, however, Coca-Cola has changed the war by politicizing it and bringing America as whole into the conflict. They did this with their 2014 Super Bowl commercial, “It’s Beautiful.”
Coca-Cola’s “America” The Beautiful
Some love it, others loath it. Few have no opinion about it. Coca-Cola’s “It’s Beautiful” almost seems more battle anthem than marketing. Perhaps never before has a simple television commercial so divided a population.
Americans v. Liberals
Whether they intended to do or not, Coca-Cola’s Super Bowl commercial directly pit Americans and Liberals against each other. Americans have, at least, some discomfort with- and qualms about the message “It’s Beautiful” promulgates and/or reinforces and normalizes, while Liberals absolute love that message.
It boils down to whether the viewer loves America and her culture or loathes it in favor of foreign cultures. If the viewer believes that immigrants should strive to become Americans, bringing with them those parts of their birth culture that will add to America, they will likely find fault with the commercial’s underlying message. If, however, the viewer desires for immigrants to keep all or most of their birth culture after relocating to America. they will likely love it.
This is simply because Americans love their country, their culture and language, and convergence. Liberals, contrariwise, loath American culture but love diversity and plurality.
Naturally, the Atheists had to chime in because the song, “America The Beautiful” contains the refrain, “America! America! | God shed His grace on thee,” and any mention of the God(s) anywhere outside of the home or a church that isn’t a denial of the Divinity’s existence sets their teeth on edge. What was interesting about their interjections into the conversations were their acrobatic apologetics.
Reading the various displays of the Godless’ passive-aggression was actually amusing since they had to contort their comments to show support for the various oikophobes that fetishize diversity while still maintaining their Atheist “cred” by bemoaning the Godly reference.