Parents angry after precious Bobby and Johnny earn Birds and Bees badge in Cub Scouts hike

a reply to: boymonkey74

And see, if you were our son's scout master, you would be the last person I'd want to lead this type of excursion because of the flippant attitude you show toward the wishes and preferences of other parents.

Whatever I may or may not want my son to learn about nudity and when, I want to be the one to decide it and do it. I don't think it's the place of a near stranger to do it and certainly not one who's going to be making all kinds of assumptions about what kids may or may not be exposed to at home already.

originally posted by: Anyafaj

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon

originally posted by: Yeahkeepwatchingme
a reply to: boymonkey74

If/When you have kids please invite a bunch of naked people over to your house and give it an anatomy lesson.

I think it's disgusting but then again the planet's a moral sewer.

Why is nudity immoral and dirty?

Why should I care if my kids see naked people?

I mean, what is the actual negatives consequences that will result in my children thinking that sex and nudity are normal?

That's YOU though. That's how YOU feel. YOU don't mind your kids seeing naked people. I'm not that way, neither is my daughter. Not everyone is YOU. These parents obviously did not want their kids to see naked people on a hike, and that was THEIR right as parents to raise THEIR children as they saw fit, not as the scout master saw fit.

I really just wanted to know why that one poster implied that sex and nudity are helping to create the "moral sewer" that is our planet.

I'll never understand sexual conservatism, it's pointless. And that's not just "my feelings" that's pretty much a fact.

a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

I'm not a conservative on any topic, I just think the modern world is a cesspool of degenerates, liars, thieves, harlots and glorified animals. I'm blunt.

And the freewheeling sexual nature most are embracing is about .001% of the problem, there's much, much worse issues currently happening, I'm not getting into them however.

a reply to: Anyafaj

What there is a bunch of weirdos running the boy scouts im outraged .
When did this start happening ..................oh yeah like forever ago .

originally posted by: DuckforcoveR
To me, these parents are mad that the kids saw something during scouts that THEY don't approve. These are parents that sent their kids to a glorified babysitter and then complain about the proper way to teach things. My daughter builds fire because of me. She knows the mark in the dirt is from a deer from me. I don't know, it just seems like the same type of argument we hear with TV. Park your kid in front of it to shut him up, then blame everyone else when they see something YOU don't like. It ain't all Tom and Jerry out there anymore.

If you read the article, you would have saw, some of the parents were WITH the "glorified babysitter".

The parents were not aware of the AREA, the scoutmaster WAS and said he went there often. Even some of the nudists were shocked cub scouts were there.

"He said 'This is a naturalist beach, and my family and I go through here all the time. It's not a big deal.' And I got really angry," she recalled their exchange after confronting him on their location.

Likely feeling just as panicked, if not more so, were the dozens of people they were encountering, as one witnessing beachgoer described.

"A friend came jogging over and said, 'You won't believe what I just saw,'" a man only identified as Michael recalled the scene to 10News. "He said there's a pack of Boy Scouts walking this way."

He added of the half-a-dozen boys: "It was very uncomfortable thinking about what they were going through as well."

That "glorified babysitter" was watching Mommies and Daddies too!

According to Scouts officials, the group -- which consisted of several young children, some parents and adult volunteers -- were at the beach on Jan. 24.

Though the statement said the trip "was quickly rerouted to protect the youth," Michael tells 10News he saw something different.

"That's just not true. They could not have reached where we were without having gone a significant distance next to naked people," he said. "It was very uncomfortable thinking about what they were going through as well."

See what I did there? I did this magical thing called read the article. It was AMAZING!

They might discover that boys have a penis and girls have a vagina... O.O

No but seriously, if he did that on purpose then that's not very cool, although I do believe we are a sexually suppressed society and that it actually causes abberations to come to surface such as rape and pedophilia and hypersexualization of our popular culture. It seems like a paradox, I know, but the suppression of everything sexual actually causes people to want it even more... Kinda like how the preacher's daughter is oftentimes the most "open minded" when it comes to sex. (not in all cases obviously... just more so than average i think but that's just my own personal experience from my teenage years).

But still definitely not cool if he did that intentionally. It's not his duty to guide their sexual education.

originally posted by: 3n19m470
They might discover that boys have a penis and girls have a vagina... O.O

No but seriously, if he did that on purpose then that's not very cool, although I do believe we are a sexually suppressed society and that it actually causes abberations to come to surface such as rape and pedophilia and hypersexualization of our popular culture. It seems like a paradox, I know, but the suppression of everything sexual actually causes people to want it even more... Kinda like how the preacher's daughter is oftentimes the most "open minded" when it comes to sex. (not in all cases obviously... just more so than average i think but that's just my own personal experience from my teenage years).

But still definitely not cool if he did that intentionally. It's not his duty to guide their sexual education.

From the sounds of the article, the parents say he mentioned he'd been through the area "often". The parents were unfamiliar with the area. The scouts claim as soon as he noticed, he redirected them "immediately"! Witnesses on the beach said the area they were in, they had already walked a distance through the beach of the nudists to have gotten where they were and they were "stunned" to see kids there.

originally posted by: Anyafaj
The parents were unfamiliar with the area. The scouts claim as soon as he noticed, he redirected them "immediately"! Witnesses on the beach said the area they were in, they had already walked a distance through the beach of the nudists to have gotten where they were and they were "stunned" to see kids there.

If it's true that they hiked some distance through naked people, why didn't the parents and other adults say something?

I'm not crazy about your source, as they are known to sensationalize every story to create drama.

A more reliable source says:

The group of scouts, parents and adult volunteer leaders "quickly rerouted to protect the youth," Shelton said in his statement.

The Council and Pack leadership met with parents after the hike and concluded that "proper protocol had been observed and appropriate steps were taken in this matter," the statement said.

Source

Of course, the angry mother (Levkin) is going to claim that the Scout Leader knew what he was doing. She's pissed and wants retribution. She was there. Why didn't she say something when it happened???

Don't take the word of an interested party. Common sense tells me that the mother is lying. Maybe the scout leader KNEW about the beach and had been there, but I don't think he purposely led the kids there.

If he did it on purpose, throw the book at him. If it was a mistake, people make mistakes.

a reply to: Anyafaj

You seem quite upset about the "not reading the article" part. I did read it and I'm sorry we came to different conclusions.

I'll try to clarify this so I don't get jumped on again, I mean't this seems to be a similar situation to what I mentioned. Whether the parent was there or not, I feel like people are really quick to blow their tops when the world is opened up to their children, and it doesn't look exactly like an episode of Sofia the First.

Again, I did read it. We can disagree all you want but let's disagree on the substance and the opinion.

See what I did there? I agreed to disagree. It was AMAZING!

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Anyafaj
The parents were unfamiliar with the area. The scouts claim as soon as he noticed, he redirected them "immediately"! Witnesses on the beach said the area they were in, they had already walked a distance through the beach of the nudists to have gotten where they were and they were "stunned" to see kids there.

If it's true that they hiked some distance through naked people, why didn't the parents and other adults say something?

I'm not crazy about your source, as they are known to sensationalize every story to create drama.

A more reliable source says:

The group of scouts, parents and adult volunteer leaders "quickly rerouted to protect the youth," Shelton said in his statement.

The Council and Pack leadership met with parents after the hike and concluded that "proper protocol had been observed and appropriate steps were taken in this matter," the statement said.

Source

Of course, the angry mother (Levkin) is going to claim that the Scout Leader knew what he was doing. She's pissed and wants retribution. She was there. Why didn't she say something when it happened???

Don't take the word of an interested party. Common sense tells me that the mother is lying. Maybe the scout leader KNEW about the beach and had been there, but I don't think he purposely led the kids there.

If he did it on purpose, throw the book at him. If it was a mistake, people make mistakes.

Benevolent, I posted another news source, a few posts later. It was the local news station, if that's not a reliable news source, I apologize.

Local News

(Video at the site, interview with a sunbather who was there.)

"They were walking the cliffs and using tunnel vision and 'with good reason'. Black's beach is known for a lot of things. It is the largest clothing optional beach in the country."

It possible the parents there didn't kick up a fuss at the time because we are so conditioned to "not make a scene".

Though the statement said the trip "was quickly rerouted to protect the youth," Michael tells 10News he saw something different.

"That's just not true. They could not have reached where we were without having gone a significant distance next to naked people," he said. "It was very uncomfortable thinking about what they were going through as well."

Black's Beach

Black's Beach in San Diego is the largest nude beach in the United States[10] and is popular with Southern Californian nudists and naturists. Originally including the current Torrey Pines State Beach, Black's Beach was the first and only public nude beach in the country for several years in the mid-1970s. Because Black's Beach was traditionally recognized as a clothing optional beach, nudity is tolerated for the portion of the beach that is managed by the state park. Until 1977, the city portion of Black's Beach was posted as "swimsuit optional"; in that year, nudity was prohibited on that part of the beach.

The clothing-optional portion of Black's Beach begins about 100 yards (91 m) south of the trail head leading to the Torrey Pines Gliderport, and runs north for approximately 1.1 miles (1.8 km) to the beached steel buoy south of Flatrock Point.

I never knew this. It's possible the parents didn't know where the nude beach began, or that there was one in the area.

originally posted by: DuckforcoveR
a reply to: Anyafaj

You seem quite upset about the "not reading the article" part. I did read it and I'm sorry we came to different conclusions.

I'll try to clarify this so I don't get jumped on again, I mean't this seems to be a similar situation to what I mentioned. Whether the parent was there or not, I feel like people are really quick to blow their tops when the world is opened up to their children, and it doesn't look exactly like an episode of Sofia the First.

Again, I did read it. We can disagree all you want but let's disagree on the substance and the opinion.

See what I did there? I agreed to disagree. It was AMAZING!

You seem to not be understanding one thing that is THE most important thing. The scout master is NOT mom and dad. It's NOT his job to open the children's eyes to nudity. It's mom and dad's. Period. End of discussion. And I agree to disagree.

a reply to: Anyafaj

These parents obviously did not want their kids to see naked people on a hike

Yeah, but those parents are probably too stupid to take seriously.

That, or mentally ill.

originally posted by: Cuervo

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon

originally posted by: Yeahkeepwatchingme
a reply to: boymonkey74

If/When you have kids please invite a bunch of naked people over to your house and give it an anatomy lesson.

I think it's disgusting but then again the planet's a moral sewer.

Why is nudity immoral and dirty?

Why should I care if my kids see naked people?

I mean, what is the actual negatives consequences that will result in my children thinking that sex and nudity are normal?

It's about parenting. It's not "bad" that they saw naked folks building sand castles. What's bad is that the parents weren't the ones who guided the encounter. I don't need to have my daughter see naked folks but, if she did, we would have that conversation with her then and there. If somebody else who we trusted to guide her group field trip took her to a nude beach, that would be quite intrusive upon my wishes as a parent.

It was a dumb move and I can understand why parents wouldn't be too thrilled about it.

This is kind of what I was getting at, though. People act like sex and nudity are the same thing as trying to carefully make their way through a mine-field.

It's silly.

My daughter and I saw some dude eating a bowl of cereal today, neither of us made a big deal out of something so blasé, though.

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon

originally posted by: Cuervo

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon

originally posted by: Yeahkeepwatchingme
a reply to: boymonkey74

If/When you have kids please invite a bunch of naked people over to your house and give it an anatomy lesson.

I think it's disgusting but then again the planet's a moral sewer.

Why is nudity immoral and dirty?

Why should I care if my kids see naked people?

I mean, what is the actual negatives consequences that will result in my children thinking that sex and nudity are normal?

It's about parenting. It's not "bad" that they saw naked folks building sand castles. What's bad is that the parents weren't the ones who guided the encounter. I don't need to have my daughter see naked folks but, if she did, we would have that conversation with her then and there. If somebody else who we trusted to guide her group field trip took her to a nude beach, that would be quite intrusive upon my wishes as a parent.

It was a dumb move and I can understand why parents wouldn't be too thrilled about it.

This is kind of what I was getting at, though. People act like sex and nudity are the same thing as trying to carefully make their way through a mine-field.

It's silly.

My daughter and I saw some dude eating a bowl of cereal today, neither of us made a big deal out of something so blasé, though.

But even though you understand that cereal and nudity are not the same as sex, there is no cultural connection between cereal and sex but there is with nudity and sex.

If eating cereal was regarded as something that made many people get sexually worked up, you probably wouldn't want a stranger taking your daughter to the Lucky Charms factory without your knowledge.

In either case, the nudity nor the Lucky Charms are the problem, it's the presentation.

Those sexy shaped marshmallows... just tempting us.

The feigned moral outrage is strong here. So kids see some naked people out on a naked beac and people are horrified. This is what happens when you have religion suppressing sex for the past 2000 years