Nathan Brindle (NBRINDLE@INDYCMS.BITNET)
Wed, 13 Jul 1994 15:34:41 EST
It's a lose-lose, lose-lose proposition no matter how you look at it.
You lose if you go into the shower area with the boys--you open yourself
up to allegations of abuse.
You lose if you don't go into the shower area with the boys--there is
no supervision and you open yourself up to liability if someone gets
hurt on your watch.
Your council loses if it doesn't have the money to provide separate
shower facilities for both groups (and for females) but has to spend
it anyway to calm the storm.
Your council loses if it does have the money to provide separate facilities
but then an accident happens that could have been prevented with on-the-
And what are we teaching the boys with all of this? Back before we were
prohibited from showering with the boys, we had no problems that I'm
aware of, because we insisted (as did council and camp staff) that
two-deep leadership be observed in the showers at all times. In fact,
the boys could <not> shower unless there were adults present to maintain
order. Durn few of the boys had a problem with shucking their dirty
clothes and getting wet, especially on those hot and muggy days. It's
a sick world out there that assumes that just because men and boys are
showering together that hanky-panky is likely to occur. Sheesh.
The above is primarily commentary regarding the state of things in this
"enlightened" day and age...not particularly hoping to find an answer,
considering that there is no satisfactory solution.
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City