ParkMan

13 minutes ago, awanatech said:

You accept them for something that they are not, correct? I'm sorry, but to call yourself a boy does not actually make you a boy. 

The term is gender identity.  @shortridge describes it a few posts up.  In short - yes, if a person believes he is a boy, then his gender identity is that he is a boy.  You may not personally believe that - and that's fine.  But, in the context of Scouting - if a kid shows up and he and his parents say he is a boy - then yes, he's a boy.

Outside of Scouting, feel free to challenge that.  But, inside Scouting we support him.

55 minutes ago, Oldscout448 said:

 

 

There is this weird thing I try to hold on to, it's  called reality, and it is not dependent upon where I am be it a scout meeting, home or church.       " judge"?  where did that come into it?    I am not judging, I just don't agree.  These people have a condition ( I hope thats a non offensive term)  that I wish them all the luck in the word with, however they may wish to deal with it.   Just don't demand that I pretend that what is male is actually female or the other way around

Actually saying they have a condition is offensive. You don't pretend they are a boy - you accept that they are a boy

40 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

Support! No, I think you mean respect. A person can still be respected without supporting their behavior. Respect and support are quite different. Some believe supporting some behaviors is no less than child abuse. Encouraging volunteers of a national youth organization to support youth behavior they disagree with is encouraging an organization of child abuse. I understand and respect that many disagree, but they should respect it.

Barry

I do mean support.  I'm not suggesting that you have talks with the scout about being transgender.  In fact, if a Scout wants to talk about being transgender, you ought to suggest he talk with his parents.

We need to support the Scouts as they progress through the program.  If a transgender scout is having a tough time In the troop you help him.  If the Scout needs coaching about being a Scout or getting along with others- you help him.  In short, you show an interest in helping that Scout have a fantastic experience in Scouting.  You go out of your way to help him be successful.  If you call that something different than supporting the scout - that's fine.

8 minutes ago, Oldscout448 said:

I am supposed to suspend my belief in basic biology and go along with someones totally subjective feelings about what gender they are?    

In Scouting - yes.  We're here to support kids - not judge them because of how they or their family define gender.

At home, at church, or other places no.  

Just now, David CO said:

This is not something that scouters chose to be involved with. It has been forced upon us. There is no way that we will validate this behavior. You may want us to, but you can't force us to support it.

Welcome to 2018.  

You may not want to have to deal with it, but it's just part of contemporary society.  The BSA didn't get to decide if this would be a topic any more than you or I - they just got to decide how the group would respond.  The BSA is pretty late to the game, but they've done what just about every other group that deals with kids has.

In any issue like this - there are those out in front of it, those that follow along, and those that get dragged to it.  The BSA was absolutely not a leader here - it is just following along.  I am sympathetic that you're getting dragged in to it - but it's just the reality of today.

At this point, continuing to rally against it just hurts those kids that need our support.

BTW - shoot the messenger if you want (aka downvote this), but I'm just being honest here.

It's not our place to decide that.  It's up to a Scout and the Scouts family.  This is a significantly more complex decision than anything Scouters need to be involved in.

Whether you or I think the kid is getting good advice at home or not, the kids need our support.  If they want to be treated as a boy, treat them as a boy and move on.

It does seem like this is a place where youth really just need our support and for us to treat them as 100% normal and accepted - regardless of their gender identity.

2 hours ago, yknot said:

That is interesting but the problem is everything has become expensive. When I was a kid, we toured the northeast and southeast on fantastic family summer vacations for free except for the cost of gas and a cheap hotel room. One year we went to FLA and had to pay to get into Disney world. To do the same thing now is thousands of dollars. It's not just scouts, it's everything. Because of insurance liability, informal arrangements that are free are almost nonexistent. Things you never had to account for in a cost calculator now have a price.  Oh, we did have one expense when we drove to Florida in June. In our un-air conditioned car, my dad's beloved and (then) pricey wristwatch crystal cracked due to the heat and humidity, so we had to chalk up $40 to fix it to that vacation when we got home,  lol. 

I'm not sure I agree.  Yes, many things are more expensive - yes.  But, many are not.  

I think it's a fundamental part of the law for a Scout to be thrifty.  It's important for the Scouts to learn how to spend efficiently.  I 100% agree.  

But, I find that as a whole, we offer a pretty cost effective offering for youth.  Our summer camps are some of the least expensive.  Monthly events are pretty reasonable.  Dues at $100 a year are not that much.  My cable bill is $100 a month.  My cell phone $200.  Scouts is pretty reasonable by comparison.

I'm not pushing back on your point.  It's just I've watched the troop committee be paralyzed over an $8 dollar a year dues increase.  I've watched kids camp with old ratty equipment because folks were afraid to spend to replace it.

I just think as Scouting units, we need to be thrifty and respectful, but we need to spend what we need to spend to run great programs.

Respectfully, I think we're over thinking this.  Girls will not like uniforms because they feel the need to be sexy? Girls won't like advancement because it's too militaristic?  I don't think so.

I've got a 9 year old and a 14 year old daughter.  They are not too concerned with dressing sexy - actually it feel kinda odd even thinking about it.  Both daughters are in Girl Scout troops.  My older daughter's troop sets a high standard for uniforming.  All 12 girls in that troop do a great job of uniforming and I've never heard more than grumbles from my daughter.  My 9 year old's troop is much more lax and looks like a bunch of rag a muffins. If anything, I detect a sense of pride from the older girls that they look quite professional.

I think they'll do just fine with all eight methods.  

We talk about the cost a lot on our troop. 

I was a scout in 1985.  Campouts were $20. I put $20 into a inflation calculator and today it's the equivalent of $46. Our average troop monthly camping trip is about $30.

I thought that was interesting.

41 minutes ago, shortridge said:

... and girls aren’t going to join if there are no troops in their area. Chicken, meet egg. 🐓 🥚 

1 hour ago, Treflienne said:

That's my concern.

So far my daughter doesn't know of any other girls in our town wanting to join Scouts BSA.   Maybe some will appear before February.   Or maybe we'll need to join with nearby towns.

It's just a matter of time. 

Most of the girls who have been waiting to become Scouts are already in Girl Scouts.  It's going to take a few years for girls to get comfortable with the notion that BSA scouting is a valid choice and that they ought to check it out.  That will move more quickly if there are great troops to join, but it's going to take some time regardless.

In the short term, I think you find the best "boy" troop you can and see if you can steer the interest to establish a girl troop there - whether linked or separate.  Odds are that there is something about the "boy" troop's philosophy that will spill over to the "girl" troop.  As the CC of a troop, we're kinda just waiting for some adults to come along and show interest in a linked girl troop.  Since most of our volunteers are parents - there is not interest within that group to start a Girl Troop, but there is willingness to partner with people who are interested. 

Yes.  Assuming time and family were not a factor.

How would I do it?  Something like.... 

Initial Goal
I'd start by establishing my initial goal.  It would look something like:
- a great CO & place to meet
- 12 scouts at least.  My max goal would be 24 scouts.
- SM & 2 ASMs
- A Troop Committee of 3 people (Chair, Treasurer, & Activities)
Stretch goal: Have a feeder pack

How I'd reach goal #1.  
1) I'd call my DE.  I'd let him know that I'm doing this.  I'd leverage his/her skills to help get this started.
2) Start looking for a Scoutmaster
3) I'd try to find the combination of a CO and a few interested scouts/adults.  Perhaps a pack with girls.  This will be a lot easier if I have a core group to start from.
4) If I cannot find a core group of scouts, I'd find a great CO.  Probably one I already have a relationship with or is known as a good home to Scouting.
5) I'd market like crazy and spread the word about it.  Make it well known that I'm starting this troop.
6) Set a date for an interest meeting - probably 4-6 weeks out.  The goal of this meeting is to get my core 5 scouts and some adults to register.
7) Get the word out about the meeting.  Emails & fliers would go to every Cub Scout pack & Boy Scout troop.
8) Hopefully by now I have a Scoutmaster, but if not I keep looking....
9) Once I have the five scouts & 3 adults, I register the troop.
10) We get the program going.  Establish a meeting night, come up with an annual calendar.  Start Troop Committee meetings
11) Get adults trained. 
12) Keep marketing & recruiting.  Make sure everyone knows we're doing this.

I'd keep this up until I got my initial goal's met - 12 scouts, core adults, and a CO. If possible, we have a feeder pack too.

Stage 2:
Build the core troop

- Reach 30 scouts in 3 years.   
- Add ASMs as neccessary to fill core functions.
- Build out the committee - Chair, Treasurer, Activities, Membership, Advancement, & Equipment
- Recruit Merit Badge Counselors.
- Have a feeder pack

How I'd reach goal #2:
1) Program, program, program.  Invest in having a great program.  A great program sells itself.
2) Focus on girl led.  Get the tone right from the beginning.
3) Adult training.  Get those volunteer's trained.
4) Focus some more on program.  
5) Marketing & membership.  Make sure the troop is known in the Scouting community.  This is the place for girls who want to be Scouts.
6) Make sure there is a feeder pack or two.
 

When I get here, then we start thinking about what kind of troop we want longer term.

29 minutes ago, TMSM said:

Not sure you got my point. It really doesn't matter because none of our 6 feeder packs are adding girls to their packs and our CO has no interest in adding a girl troop. I hope this works out for the girls wanting to join Scouts but when I look at the local Venture crew numbers crumble I just dont see the interest from them.

I think this is ultimately the much bigger question.  All our talk about structure of troops is for nothing if there are no girls to join.

I do though think the Venture crew issue is different.  We, as a larger Scouting community, just don't really have a clear value proposition for a Venture crew.  So, as a results teens - be they boys or girls - are just not that interested in the amorphous Crew concept.

Thanks a lot for taking this on guys!  I can imagine it's a lot of work and time to keep tabs on this bunch

Welcome to the forum @Scoutinglife

I agree 100% with @Chris1.  I've both taken Wood Badge and staffed it.  I think taking it in August is a great time.

On your position.  I'd suggest two things:

1) talk with the course registrar and explain the IOLS status.  They may just waive it.

2) If they don't waive IOLS, consider registering as a Commttee Member.  The training for that is all online and you'll be done in a couple of hours.  What you'll find is that they want you to write your ticket for your primary role.  I'm sure some courses are more lax about this than others - but a Committee Member focused on membership will have a lot of similarities with your ASM of membership role.

4 hours ago, Jenn said:

Thanks for all the helpful replies.

It's my impression that scouts are encouraged to earn First Class within their first year in the troop.  If Rank badges are only awarded at COH, and our troop only holds 2 COH per year, some scouts will never get a chance to wear each of these!  I know it doesn't prevent them from continuing to work on advancement, but there are some scouts who really look forward to actually wearing the rank badge.

Maybe they will hold more frequent (4x/year) COH if their are more boys advancing.  I suppose I'll wait and see how it goes. 

Thanks for the insight.  It's nice to hear how other troops operate.

Hi Jenn,

Our troop used to be a First Class first year troop.  But, then the BSA made the requirements a bit tougher and it's stretched out to 18 months.  We never pushed the boys- we simply had enough opportunities for boys to work on skills and camp that they just got it done.  At an 18 month pace, they earn a rank ever 4-6 months which works out to about one per COH.

As I mentioned before, I'm a big fan on handing out all recognition and POR patches immediately.  The COH is the vehicle by which we recognize scouts.  But, it should not be the gate by which Scouts feel a sense of accomplishment.  In other words - when the scout earns something - get it to him then.  When the next COH occurs make a big deal out of it.

Congrats!  Have a fun time!

21 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

I understand what they are getting at. Some pedophile adult leader says the 1 on 1 contact with a scout youth was at a non scouting event so it doesn’t count as a YPT violation.  The problem I have is that when they expand G2SS so much and add so many rules it makes it very difficult to run a unit (especially smaller ones).  You will have two scenarios.  

One... leaders start ignoring G2SS completely as it has become the equivalent of the 4 pages of warnings in your lawnmower engine manual.  They may refer to a few sections for guidance but don’t take the book to heart.

Two...leaders follow it to the letter of the law.  Trips and meetings are cancelled due to insufficient leadership.   Leaders drop out as they feel their life outside of scouting is now being monitored.  Etc.

Neither makes scouting safer but it does help give Nationals an out in any possible mishap that could occur.   

I'm wondering if the newer leadership is trying to take a more aggressive stance here.  The new, very somber YPT.  Increased rules in the G2SS.  This new clause on following the G2SS outside of scouting. 

It's tough for me to tell if we're at a tipping point.  My GSUSA friends tell me their rules and requirements are tougher.  It doesn't seem to hurt them much.  

21 hours ago, The Latin Scot said:

I have seen variations of those on many sites - boyscoutstore.com, classb.com, et cetera. I know you can get custom numerals with the veteran unit bar incorporated into the patch itself. The one above is nice too, but are they technically acceptable since they aren't standard issue? 

I think councils can approve them

Welcome to the forum @tpolly!

40 minutes ago, DuctTape said:

For many many troops the change you lament has been here for decades. The loss of patrol method adventure was replaced with a trailer and plop camping for a long time in most troops. The new g2ss sadly codifies it as the new normal for everyone.

I'll admit - I had the wind taken out of my sails when I realized why the new rules.

I'm still very optimistic that we can find a way to work with the new adult requirement.  Just because adults are there doesn't mean that patrols can't work.  Adults close by, but not part of the conersations - that kind of thing.

10 minutes ago, NJCubScouter said:

That might be true in some situations, but not others.  If the patrol is going on a day hike, for the adults to be "nearby" also means thrat they are "involved."  In other words they are on the hike along with the patrol.  I was trying to come up with a way to avoid this, but all I get are jokes.  The two adults flying overhead in a helicopter?  The patrol is hiking a trail along a riverbank and the two leaders happen to be rowing down the river at the same speed and direction?  Nothing serious suggests itself.

I think we may need to figure out what supervision means.  If I think about all kinds of common sense activites, scouts are not watched 100% of the time.  But, now that I see this bit where they've added meetings to this - that too might be changing.  

I'm not sure if they are trying to fix the case of Scouts getting in over their heads on a camping trips or if it's an abuse prevention measure.  I'm starting to think it's the latter. If that's what it is - then yes, they don't want us to leave scouts unattended.  I hope it's not that.

21 minutes ago, walk in the woods said:

According to the G2SS, (Effective October 1, 2018) Two registered adult leaders 21 years of age or over are required at all Scouting activities, including meetings.  So in a couple of months it is effectively against scouting rules for a patrol to get together to plan anything unless 2 adults are present.  Adding the registered adult supervision absolutely changes the value proposition of the PM.  

For example, when #1 son was working on the FC cooking requirement (maybe 6 years ago) he went over to another scout's house after school to plan menus and equipment and such.  There were zero registered leaders present and likely only one adult.  Doing the planning on their own was the entire point.  By the letter of the new law, that meeting would be prohibited.  So, not even close to 100%.

 

Per the other line of conversation.  Adult leadership doesn't mean adult involvement.  It just means you be got adults nearby to make sure there are no health and safety issues.

It doesn't have to prevent a patrol from being a patrol or doing what they would normally.

I think it's a great idea. Sets a good example of responsible environmental stewardship and helps strengthen ties to local universities.

My only reservation would be if the partnership began to cause undue impact on the staff or programs of the camp.  In the BSA we're always short on people & money - so as long as this doesn't become a sink hole for these two things - I think it's great.