vferrera

Madison Scouts now officially co-ed

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Rylan said:

As someone who was in the Cavaliers over two decades ago, I was thinking that letting women in would be wonderful! 

I don't care if women join in the the ranks, so long as they're physically fit, mentally sharp, and just as dedicated to music/drum corps as the other corps members around them.

Great comment!  I totally agree, but primarily in regards to Madison!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, tesmusic said:

Interesting-I never heard any of these stories during my time with the corps, nor from the countless staff/alums I know from the era you’re referring to. 

Cant say I buy it at all. 

On the contrary, I’ve heard many stories about members coming to the aide/rescue of members that were treated in the way you’re describing.

The alumnus who told me this also told me positive stories such as you are describing.  The biggest difference was sexual orientation versus race.  The positive stories all had to do with racial solidarity.  The negative stories all had to do with homophobia.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, crest99 said:

 

  • I'm generally skeptical of all-___ anything (guards, corps, whatever), but I'd push back against the idea that all-male is necessarily equivalent to all-female, etc.  For me the difference is the historical connection between single-sex male organizations and power.  My guess is that this is the comment people will jump all over, but I don't think you need to be buried deep in academia to understand that relationship.  That said, I'd reiterate that I'm still not pleased by the reappearance of all-female guards.

 

As a guard guy who grew up in the 80s and 90s, it was FAR more often that I couldn't be a part of a colorguard because it was all-female (starting with my high school).  

I know that things changed rapidly, but please don't forget that it wasn't always easy for males to participate in guard...other than an all-male corps (which is why I marched in one of them after auditioning for a coed guard).

I would argue that young men still don't get as good a training on guard as young women, simply because there were (still are...at least in the south) programs that frown upon males in the guard.  

Not trying to combat, just want to add a little perspective.

Edited by NewToPosting
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, xandandl said:

what about the CMCC (Minisink) Warriors or Brooklyn Hilltoppers or New Jersey Gay Blades (all 3 took great pride in being units of only Blacks)?

Or Nisei Ambassadors (only Japanese Americans) or early years of Mandarins (only Chinese)?  How about Aimaichi today?

There are inherent differences between the exclusion of minorities and those who have been historically disadvantaged in society and the exclusion of those who have historically held power in society.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, ndkbass said:

The medium for Madison is music whereas the medium for Marines is the propensity for killing.  Funding aside, there is no other real difference.  Like you said that women who are capable of killing can increase the effectiveness of the Marines, members of all backgrounds can increase the effectiveness of Madison without altering the bonds formed.  Having been in multiple organizations, coed and not, the bond I had with other members was always the same.  We all sweated and sacrificed for the same thing.  Those ideals are higher than any sort of identifier like gender.  At least that is my opinion.  One of the biggest things I learned in my time in this activity as a whole was mutual respect for those individuals who sacrificed for the good of the whole.  That had and has nothing to do with their gender, orientation, or race/ethnicity.  Rather, it has to do with commitment.  I think we (and most people) would agree on that.  

Don't disagree with you on your last bit there at all.

I mentioned public vs private because if a private club wants to be exclusively available to men for the purposes of forming fraternal bonds and whatnot through (insert activity), they can and should be able to do so. The military serves to fight wars, not for social or character-building reasons, so discriminating based on sex rather than ability is stupid and wrong. If you are to see the Scouts solely as a competitive musical performance group, and not also a fraternity, then discriminating based on sex rather than ability is also detrimental to the organization. My sticking point is that, at least in my opinion, brotherhood was a fundamental aspect of the Scouts ethos.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Rylan said:

As someone who was in the Cavaliers over two decades ago, I was thinking that letting women in would be wonderful! The "fraternity" and "brotherhood" that others cite tend to also create an echo chamber of toxic masculinity and homophobia. I did not enjoy that part as a gay man myself. 

Take it for what it's worth, but a friend's son (also gay) has been marching with Cavaliers for a couple of years, and has nothing but good things to say about the culture and how comfortable he feels there. Things change.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, dbc03 said:

There are inherent differences between the exclusion of minorities and those who have been historically disadvantaged in society and the exclusion of those who have historically held power in society.

Not to the individual who is excluded.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jofus said:

In my opinion, yes. It once was a fraternal order, championing the bonds formed between men. This was one of the major differentiators between the Scouts/Cavaliers and the rest of the corps out there.

You're comparing apples and oranges. The Scouts are a private group, the Marines are publicly-funded. The Marine Corps doesn't exist solely as a character-building brotherhood (using music as the medium) for young adults, either.  It's a warfighting organization whose high standards exist to increase their ability to kill people. I don't care if women serve in the combat arms, so long as they're physically fit, mentally sharp, and just as lethal as the other Marines around them. If the Marine Corps allowed fat people, slobs, and conscientious objectors, that would change the espirit de corps. 

Great post.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Jofus said:

Don't disagree with you on your last bit there at all.

I mentioned public vs private because if a private club wants to be exclusively available to men for the purposes of forming fraternal bonds and whatnot through (insert activity), they can and should be able to do so. The military serves to fight wars, not for social or character-building reasons, so discriminating based on sex rather than ability is stupid and wrong. If you are to see the Scouts solely as a competitive musical performance group, and not also a fraternity, then discriminating based on sex rather than ability is also detrimental to the organization. My sticking point is that, at least in my opinion, brotherhood was a fundamental aspect of the Scouts ethos.

 

 

Ok.  Thank you for clarifying your point.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, dbc03 said:

There are inherent differences between the exclusion of minorities and those who have been historically disadvantaged in society and the exclusion of those who have historically held power in society.

Exactly.  That is why there is a big difference between a pride parade and a straight pride parade.  Or a regular greek organization and a multicultural greek organization.  Among many other examples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.