ndkbass

Ok. What if they had only amended the policy to allow transmen, instead of anyone regardless of gender identity or biological sex? This policy change largely occurred, if I understand the history correctly, because of out transmen wanting to audition and being denied. Additionally, how can anyone say that a transperson (in this case a transwomen) had not already marched the corps or is currently marching, but is/was not out (meaning they still present as a biological male/masculine gender identity? We cannot. That is one of the chief reasons I think this is a great move by the organization. It recognizes that the Madison swagger, and the superman suit, is not something just appreciated by and aspired to by heterosexual and heteronormative men, but by a wide swath of people from various gender identities, biological sexes, and sexual orientations. For example, one of Komnick's own daughters is named Madison. That is how much he loves the corps and how deeply his experience moved him. How awesome would it be for her to be able to march and experience the same camaraderie that he did?!?!?! Furthermore, the corps has come along way in its membership. I have heard plenty of (horrifying) stories from back in the day about how masculinity was portrayed by various members in quite homophobic (and violent) ways that would never have been tolerated by membership or staff when I was marching, and I am glad for that.

Thanks for the support! 😎

Yeah....no. Not at all. No one is saying that there cannot be an all-male corps, so chris7997 is just wrong in that regard. Since you are an alumnus of Madison, would you feel the same way if it was Cavies and not Scouts? Would chris7997?

Exactly all of this!

I really enjoy the book, especially the baseline's this year. Man are they clean for early season too!

Additionally, the issue is that we do not live in a matriarchal society; we live in a patriarchal society. Women have not dominated culture, politics, and society for roughly 5000 years and enforced the norms; men have. That is why there is a big difference between an all-female corps and an all-male corps (or the guard question for that matter). Not that Madison was inherently patriarchal; and not that the guard question can come down to a simple analysis of patriarchy either, it is more complicated than that, but that is certainly a major factor in the conversation and why some people's negative responses to the supposed change in tradition that comes with Madison moving to an inclusive stance (especially in regards to transgender members) can definitely be attributed to that. Just because Madison has been all-male in the past does not mean there was not a variety of sexual orientations and gender identities in the corps; what is masculine to one person is not masculine to another. I think this is what is hard for some people to get: We are all complicit in heteronormative patriarchy, white supremacy, and global capitalism because they existed before all of us who are posting on this forum were alive. Systems and structures of inequality have limited our choices even if we have free will to make whatever choice we want. This is, in part, why I am a big fan of Anthony Giddens and his work on structuration, and the terminology that he uses to describe this is "bounded agency." We may have agency, but it is limited by the confines of the social systems in which we exist.

Most definitely. Especially because there is absolutely no need to change the name.

A corps (almost) always deserves the Sanford! 😈

A couple thoughts in response to your post: I think you need to provide some statistics to back up your claim that there is a "growing lack of stable father figures in homes across America." That is a very specific claim that seems coded in many ways. As an academic who studies these things, I would argue that that is not actually the case. I also take issue with your use of equality as you define it via context. Separate is not inherently equal. It is, in fact, completely the opposite. See the landmark 1954 Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board or current equal pay issues in women's professional sports (in particular the U.S. women's national team, which sells more jersey's and performs better than the U.S. men's national team, but receives a fraction of the pay). Sure, there are physical or biological differences between the sexes, but patriarchy is a social construction, and there is a vast difference between biological sex, gender identity, and sexuality in how it is both theorized and understood. Understanding power dynamics and systems or structures of inequality is more important to this conversation than arbitrary definitions of gender or equality. We are also discussing private entities, not government or public entities. This means that they can set their own policies, and that does not prevent you or anyone else from establishing their own gender segregated activities or organizations if they so wish as long as they are not doing so with public funds. Madison going coed is not "dissolving the distinction between the two," it is simply recognizing that as a private organization they wish to be inclusive to all those who are interested in auditioning regardless of gender identity. This is not saying their cannot be all male corps or even all female corps. It is just a decision made by a private entity to update their own membership policy. Nothing more, nothing less.

What makes you think so? Both are just abbreviations of the full corps name, and both still equally apply.

For sure. That was part of why I wanted to join, and partially why I never joined a greek organization at my undergraduate institution. However, I do not see it as an attack on my experience, and if Madison had gone coed before or during my tenure, it would not have affected my decision making process to audition, stay or leave.

Although this is a different conversation: As someone who has taught at public universities across the U.S. and now internationally for the last seven years, I would most definitely end all greek life on campuses (with the only exception being multi-cultural greek organizations, which arguably serve a different function than traditional greek orgs, although they are not without their problems, too). They are basically a blight on campuses, and have no true need anymore (originally created to solve a housing crisis way back; check the history books). The sexist reality of regulations against sororities (see Neighbors 2 for an ironic and satirical take on this) is also arbitrary and ridiculous. I did not join one during my undergraduate tenure, and as soon as I started teaching saw their extreme detriment to campus environments even more than I witnessed while an undergraduate student. Also, as some other posters have noted, there are plenty of coed (service) fraternities already. So, in many ways, I take issue with your argument here.

100% leadership. Nothing to do with gender. I had already marched coed corps before going to Madison. Going to Devs had nothing to do with gender. It was more going to a place I knew would contract people due to talent not money (Madison 2009 contracted people because of need for monies, not necessarily just because they were the talent needed), and would treat me well.

No harm in asking. Thanks for the question! I left because of many factors, but all surrounded issues with staffing and the current administration. Here are few: (1) I came in with Roger Carter and loved him as a caption head. When he was (quite obviously before the end of the 2009 tour) going to be fired, I was unsure if I would want to march under a new staff for my age-out. (2) I am an Eagle Scout, and always enjoyed Scouting in various forms. To me, marching with Madison (outside of being a childhood dream), was something that seemed a natural expansion of that activity. In Scouting, the boys/membership run the Troop (with adult supervision of course; I was everything from a Patrol Leader to Senior Patrol Leader and Junior Assistant Scoutmaster during my tenure in my Troop). During my time at Madison, this was increasingly less of a factor. That was quite off-putting to me, especially in my third year. I was quite frustrated with my inability to voice my concerns (such as we were not being fed appropriately) and actively lead any of the newer/younger members other than those I was directly responsible for in the bassline and battery. (3) Having lived with folks at my undergraduate institution who marched multiple corps, and had marched Blue Devils in prior years, I was encouraged to look elsewhere and took stock of various opportunities to do so. I almost left in 2009 (for spots at Bluecoats or Cadets), but stayed in Madison due to my loyalty to the organization and its larger ideals. I always wanted to do four years and age-out there until the politics of the organization became too hostile (in my opinion). One example would be that it was super obvious to myself and some others from 2007-2008 that 2009 was a repeat of 2007 (at least in talent and somewhat design). Many other vets seemed to be "drinking the koolaid" instead of recognizing this, and were falsely setting up a goal of finals when I thought the more appropriate goal was initiating new members into what it meant/means to be a "man of Madison," and enjoying the time we had together to make sure they could "stand on our shoulders" in the following years of their eligibility. When these ideals (I have multiple tattoos related to my drum corps experience, including the 1997 pirate king) seemed to be put to the wayside, I made a decision to go somewhere else where my talents would be respected, and I could enjoy my age-out without worrying about fiscal solvency and loyalty to the administration. (4) I marched in plenty of other organizations (both junior corps before Madison and also Rhythm X), and having seen a variety of forms of organizational dysfunction, realized that I just wanted some stability at the end of my career, and Blue Devils seemed to offer that more than anything else. Plus, all my friends who had marched there had positive experiences, and said that they were treated like adults rather than children (during my time at Madison we went from being allowed off the busses and to purchase goods at all rest stops/fuel stops to only being allowed off at specified bathroom stops and not being able to purchase goods). Probably some others, but that's the basic idea of it. Please let me know if you have any other questions. You can always DM me, too.

Just because you (and I) may not agree with the administration or general design direction of the corps in recent years does not mean that this decision is one "made out of desperation" in order to deflect "from addressing the actual problem of awful leadership." They are definitely different things that, I argue, should not be conflated. I also disagree with your final sentiment. It is not very sad, but quite wonderful to see the corps embracing a positive change in its identity and membership.

As a "millennial" "PC generation" alumnus who is an academic, I love the decision. If I could, I would vote to end all sororities and fraternities. They are a blight on college campuses, and are no longer needed. Fraternities only arose to solve the housing crisis colleges and universities faced way back when (check the history). The sexist double standard that applies to sororities today (as is ironically and satirically portrayed in Neighbors 2) is ridiculous. Also, there are plenty of coed service fraternities that already exist. And, besides already commenting on the other thread, the last thing I will say here is that Scouts was/and or are a Venture Crew for insurance purposes. So, before BSA went coed, Venturing was always (or at least has been for quite a long time) coed. That being said, this decision makes plenty of sense, and, regardless of one's take on the current administration (which I am not a fan of), this decision is a good one, and the right one for the organization as a whole. Especially in light of recent years conversations regarding transgender membership. I am just annoyed it took this long to decide and hope the implementation of it is swift and effortless.

So glad this is happening. As an alumnus, I have been annoyed that it has taken this long, especially in regards to the conversation surrounding transgender members in recent seasons. This is such a good day for the organization as a whole, and I am excited to see what happens in the future even though I am not really a fan of the current administration.

Perhaps. Either way, I would love a charismatic leader like him, I just do not think it is the current admin. Totally hear you on the tin-foil levels. I wonder how much of that was a precursor to or symptoms of his illness? I do not want to speculate though, and totally respect individual/family privacy around medical history.

Good on Prosperie. One of the best percussion field judges who always tells it like it is. I loved listening to his tapes.

I love kato-town! Jakes Stadium Pizza for the win! But yes, those rehearsals were beyond brutal!!! Also, about purchasing things: 2008/2009 scouts was the only time that was the rule in my experience. Would love to get more data from other corps/people/time periods to see how much that was the case or not though.

Yah. That is basically my whole point. I do not get how older brothers from that era who now run the corps could not treat their younger brothers with the same level of respect. And when, in 2009 specifically, we called that out because most of us were now 3 year vets or leadership and the staff basically told us to take a hike a lot of us knew what that meant and where we were gonna age-out--and it was not in Scouts. That basically broke my heart because it was my dream to age-out there and I had no intentions of leaving even if drum staff changed until the admin basically laid down the law. It was no surprise to me that everyone who bailed ended up making basically a top 6 or top 3 corps. P.S. I am an eagle scout, and Madison, to me, felt like it was an extension of my time in scouting. This made it extremely hard to not "run the troop" as "boys" since that is how scouting operates. I totally understand that a troop is not a corps, but that was definitely something that shaped how I viewed leadership roles when I marched there. I also never joined a greek organization or had any interest in doing so when I was in undergraduate because I had found that camaraderie in Scouts and corps in general. P.P.S. What you said about Stewart is what Devs say: "You are adults and professionals, but remember that there is always a camera on somewhere, so represent the organization with class." That's basically it. Nothing else. It was way different than what Petersen told us.

We were literally learning drill from Allen Joanis (sp?) in all-days and he said "Battery, why do you not have your drums on?" and we were like "because we are learning drill for the first time?" and he was like "No. Get your drums, we need to make sure this lines up with the beats/counts." As in this dude did not even know if he had the right amount of counts for his drill. WOW. And yah, the second visual package was soooooooo much better. We definitely had a great musical run and decent visual run on semis. I would agree, hesitantly, that we would have had a much different and probably better season score wise if we had had the second visual program first.

My personal favorite is 1997. But 2005 definitely is one of the better shows of all time for the Scouts. 1999 and 95/96 fill out the top five for me in no guaranteed order.

You just made my morning! I would say it could be, depending on the person.

Ohh. Ok. I would bet the dissent comes from particular eras. But I could be wrong, and probably am. The current administration is the exact same as the 2007-2009 administration. The board make-up is almost identical, and the top two admins are the same. 2007-2009 was the beginning of their era. I do not believe there were any issues getting back on the bus in 2007 or 2008. I believe it was solely a power play from the administration trying to tell us what to do and how to behave (like they did with a lot of other things those years). If there were issues getting people back to the busses that was never communicated to the general membership like you think it would have been (i.e., at a full corps meeting you would expect leadership or staff to tell members not to dilly-dally at rest stops or fuel stops).