--- Jonathan Trower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > National policy is the issue here, > right?
Nope.. *The problem is when individuals confront others in a "official" capacity to enforce something un-published and un-said. Because we all are in the fog about gender issues, some assume they have the right to hunt down a Lady in Khaki and hassle them. That's plain wrong. The other perplexing thing is the twisted logic that permits obvious discrimination, for zero purpose. > > > >Women freely come to serve boys as leaders. Allways at the local > >level they are welcome, and given full respect. They often are the > >helpmates of a Commander, and have sons in the program. > > And they do a wonderful job as leaders. I don't think you would find > much > disagreement here with your statement -- and certainly not from me. I'll > > come back to this statement at the end of my comments. This is also not > the > issue here. > > > >So called "National Policy" a fabrication of upper management being > >stuck between a rock and a "Hard" place, of their own makeing. > > Not so. This may be a poor analogy, but in our denomination, we have > never > allowed boys and girls to go swimming together, right? I don't know... I remember something about that in 1960 mayby.. I also remember have girls hired as Lifesavers at NW Powwow, so the logistices or policies may be spotty!<G> Why? That's the > same > reason boys, men, and women don't go camping together in Royal Rangers. > Simply put, we have a higher standard than the world does. It may be > O.K. > for secular buckskinning groups, or Boy Scouts, but it's not O.K. for > the > Assemblies of God ministry to boys. Men and Women do go camping togather. But you are right, The Assemblies of God USA and it's prejudeces.. are more important than common sence leadership princeipals in place elsewhere even in our own and kindred fellowships. > > It's easy to say that we can easily have separate camping areas and > restroom and shower facilities for ladies on camp-outs, but that's not > always true, especially in areas that Rangers have to camp in. Having > women > on camp-outs introduces all sorts of complexities that distract from the > > main purpose of the camp . . . ministering to the boys. And THAT's what > it's all about. Well, then don't make it an Issue by forming POLICY on it! Let's say a Commander is wheel chair bound.. while it's un-likely that he can rock climb without special gear.. It's also no reason to exclude him from NTC. My Point is that Women are not a handicap but in fact a additional blessing to leadership. A *Positive and never a *Negitive. *They ADD and not subtract. > > Let the leadership of the camps focus on the boys, Sorry.. you can't have it all. The focus is on MEN ministering to whoever shows up. The point of excluding women is to promote Man/Boy relationships for hopefully good reasons.. that I think are *shallow.. and not on the > details > of where the women will be camping, or where their restroom will be, or > worse, having to deal with the occasional woman who intends to spend the > > night in the camp with the boys (I've been on staff at more than one > sectional, divisional, and district camp where that has happened, even > though it was well known that they were not to do so). > > We also have to worry about the safety of the women -- I was on staff at > > one district camp where someone did disturb the women in their camper > during the night. By putting them away from the camp for their privacy > (and > that of the men and boys) we exposed them to danger. Those are the types > of > situations that begin to expose Rangers to legal liability. What if > those > women had been harmed? The lawyers would have started circling like a > bunch > of vultures! Then don't take boys camping, as they are even more trouble. The facts are that NO-ONE should be exposed to danger. Further if the Danger comes from Men acting out.. eliminate the MEN! I'm tired of hearing that Women in RR, tempt Men to sin. Give it a rest.. > > > >As with any diplomatic solution, "official policy" is debated behind > >closed doors, and perhaps run up the "flag pole" on occasion, to test > >it's effects to draw *Fire.. > > Are you implying something with your "closed doors" statement? <G> Yes.. There is little intrest in changeing the policy. In fact it serves National staff well to bold up the exclusionary verbage. This of course has nothing to do fairness. > Obviously national policy can't be hashed out in an open forum with > everyone involved . . . you would never reach any kind of consensus. > National policy is developed by the national executive committee and > approved by Brother Trask and Brother Crabtree. Why would any of these Brothers take up the issue as important? I would think they would likely overlook it as trivia. Every region has a > representative on that committee. Thus, everyone is represented in the > discussion. If you don't like the current national policy on some issue, > > talk with your regional coordinator. He's your voice in the executive > committee, and thus your voice in the debates on national policy. That's right Rev.Jimmy Burnett filters out the issues untill a generic consencus is reached. This is typical of unified organizations that are not elected but appointed by the en-trenched leadership. Thus, when politic'n for a memorial with reguard to PFC Mitch Silvers.. the #1 question asked by my Dist. was- "If he wasn't a NW Boy why do we have any intrest?" the reuslt is a watered down note on a scrap of paper. (Used as a word picture to describe the politics in place) > > But there is nothing sinister about the fact that the executive > committee meetings are closed. Attendance has to be limited, or as I stated above it > would be impossible to reach any kind of consensus. *Forgive me if *I used the word "sinister"... I didn't. As it was, there > were > about 20 folks at the last several meetings of the exec committee. Women > at > Camporama was discussed at the last two meetings, and consensus was > reached > on all issues. Amen and Shalom! *I assume they found it made sence to exclude even international contingents of female Royal Rangers, allowing only Male counterparts<G> > > Keep in mind that each district also sends up to six members of your > executive district staff to National Council each year. This year, the > issue of women in leadership positions above the local level came up for > > discussion on the Council floor. Two people spoke to the issue from the > floor. . . just two. If people in the field feel strongly about this > issue, > you should also discuss your feelings with your district commander. At > this > point in time, there was 700-800 people at national council last month > who > nothing about the current policy. That was an open forum, and an > opportunity for folks to speak up. They didn't. I agree that when it's important, things will change. That also has nothing to do with whats right,fair and just when showing respect for all Adults and their rights as citizens in America. That no one spoke to the concerns, only shows that there isn't much intrest in asking hard questions. The Captian of the Titanic was responsible for avoiding the iceberg he could not see.. While he had every right to proclaim ignorance or lack of reporting from the lookouts, the resultant crash was more than regretible.. it was *Preventible. If he had used "Leadership Larger than needed" he may have slowed down in Ice Berg Country, and made up the time in the open.. Thus- the issue of gender is larger than my voice or concern, and is likely to come to a critical point under less than comfortable situations than the open mike at the NRRC. > > > >I don't beleve this has anything to do with effective Leadership, > >and has everything to do with man made *Domination, as it just seems > >contrived. > > Domination? I don't see it. Agreed. > > > >The test for effective leadership is the resultant High "Morale" that > >follows success and freedom, as in Victory over obsticals.. > >since "morale" is the emotional force that gives drive to group action. > > > >You can convince yourself that the sticking point is the uniform or > >some other consideration, but the real issue is justice/ fairness > >and respect to all, by includeing every "Adult leader" in all training > >and positions of service to the Lord, and the boys. > > Since national policy is that women do not camp in Royal Rangers (for > reasons stated above), it would be contrary to national policy to > include > them in training that involves camping. No.. Offering National Training to all builds a reserve of Leadership and awareness from start to finnish of the TOTAL MISSION! *It is usefull for your pastor to attend NTC, your Youth workers should and also *any RR leader reguardless of gender. They are welcome to any training > > Royal Rangers have to offer that is not camping-based. > > > >*If there are reasons for gender policies, I sincerly hope they are > >clearly published and each individual given resources to have them > >explained to their full satisfaction. > > They have been published, and explained. They have also been hashed over > and over here on RangerNet. > > There is no way that the national office staff is going to be able to > convince everyone that the standards are just and fair, so you may never > have things explained to your full satisfaction. Yea.. So say so...upfront. Don't wait untill a lady in Khaki flys into NTC to be told to go home. Be sure to have someone chase down every Lady in Khaki at National Camp. "The following policy is what we desire and will enforce period" But the current > national > Royal Rangers policies regarding women in Rangers were developed and > endorsed by our own national executive committee, with, as I understand > it, > the full agreement of Brothers Crabtree and Trask. Makes you wonder if they have read the "position paper" by the General Council. Good Chat Jonathan<G> Duane > > I agree with Duane that women are valuable assets in Royal Rangers. I > had a > lady on my sectional staff as SA/B coordinator the whole time I was > sectional commander (five years) -- she did a great job. For a while, > she > was even my senior commander (I know, I know, totally contrary to > national > policy <G> but she was the person who held that outpost together before, > > during, and after the time my family was involved in that church). I was > > senior commander when Straight Arrows was brand new, and I actively > recruited one of the young ladies in our church to be the leader of that > > group . . . she ended up as my sister-in-law. She did a great job. My > first > exposure to leadership in Rangers was as a junior commander in the > Buckaroos group. I worked under a husband/wife team. Both of them did a > great job. I've seen many women over the years doing a great job > ministering to the boys. But I support the current national policy on > women > in Rangers . . . I feel that it's the right policy for this day and age > in > which we live. > > Jonathan > > > > > > > > > "Jose F. Rodriguez" wrote: > > > > > > > > Yesterday I went to the Official RR website and saw a glimps of > the > > > uniform > > > > that the female (and probably the male) Ranger Kids commanders are > > > going to > > > > wear. For those of you who don't know what I'm talking about go > to > > > this page: > > > > http://www.royalrangers.ag.org/royal-rangers/applications.cfm and > > > click on > > > > "Page 1: General Information" (you of course need an Acrobat > Reader to > > > view > > > > them). Once your one the first page of the All New Transition > > > Brochure look > > > > closely at the picture on the lower left which should show a group > of > === message truncated === ===== *High MORALE is the Index of effective Leadership. --------------********+********-------------------- Morale raises belief of the Leader in the follower, of the follower in the Leader, of each in themself, and both in the .....cause! __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/ _______ Let the Golden Rule be your daily rule. Please pray for your list sponsor: http://eBible.org/mpj/ To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe rangernet" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://rangernet.org/subscribe.htm http://rangernet.org
