Sniktaw

So were they conducting mid-week covid tests? I'm confused about the timing.

Glad mine were able to attend camp (two separate ones) with no testing, no masks, and no problems. . . Not to say that there wasn't any covid, but in a population that largely has no symptoms,  you probably wouldn't know it unless you're looking for it.

Two choices: Vaccinate, or don't participate in society. It assumes there is one way to not die, and the vaccine is it.

My personal experience, as well as years and years of data, tell me that this is not true, but does that matter to the do-gooders and virtue signalers? 

I'm so tired of the two choices narrative. I'm so tired of other people telling me what my risk tolerance should be. Would Scouting be happy if I masked my kids and never let them leave the house, so they could be completely, totally safe? 

Let's vaccinate all the adults. Then let's follow the example of the teachers' unions and demand that kids be vaccinated too. You know what we don't have a vaccine for? Car accidents, lightning strikes, snake bites, drowning. Covid has taught us that NO RISK is acceptable, so let's shut it all down. No more high adventure, no more meetings that you have to drive to, no more poptarts for breakfast on the last day of camp. 

Remember, everyone is the same,  everyone wants the same things, and the people who decide what those things are, are the only ones who are right.

15 hours ago, T2Eagle said:

Social distance, flatten the curve.

This is no joke. This spring, during the pine siskin irruption and concurrent salmonella outbreak, online birding groups sounded just like online corona discussions. One I'm in had to ban "feeder shaming" when people who'd never seen a sick bird did not go above and beyond recommendations and remove all their feeders for a month. People posting old pictures of birds at feeders felt the need to qualify their descriptions by explaining that the photos were not recent. Lots of ugliness.

3 hours ago, SSScout said:

Sounds like a chance for friendly competition AND inter Troop cooperation.  Come normal activities,  could be a opportunity.   

How do they get along otherwise?  

 

They get along okay. . . They tend to expect the worst of each other. One wants to turn everything into a competition, but not the kind that makes you better. I find myself saying, "It's not a competition" way more than I should. I know he will insist that his troop is better. They enjoy different aspects of Scouting and I think they pretty much ignore each other at events. They've never seemed to mind going together. I want the days back when they were best friends.

Anyone have two kids in different troops? We moved and my boys have zeroed in on two separate troops. We can do it but I worry about brotherly harmony.  Would love some advice from someone who's been there.

Do people really think that it's not okay for a Scout to tent with his parent?

I mean, I get the separation if you are running a regular program. 

But when there are suddenly rules that say that the Scouts themselves are not allowed to be near one another, and the solution is to invite more people on a campout, the problem is that people who live in the same house can't sleep in the same tent??

Please tell me I misunderstood the original question.

"Most questions were 70% to 90% in favor of adding girls. "

This is true. The QUESTIONS were in favor of adding girls.  We don't bother with BSA surveys any more. They're already sure of our answers.

I wouldn't worry about this at all. There are no uniform police. 

So jealous of all these experiences. We are allowed groups of no more than five, so no camping and very little in the way of get togethers until, I guess, there's a vaccine. It's Zoom meetings for the foreseeable future. 

7 hours ago, xj-boonie said:

Well that makes no sense - it could take years to make a vaccine, and there is no evidence that a vaccine will ever be effective.

I wish someone would tell our governor that. But then, practicality has never been her strong suit.

1 hour ago, 69RoadRunner said:

That's a good question. Philmont is a different animal and BSA has some political pull.  They MIGHT get an exception.

In NM we are on stay at home orders until there is a vaccine.

Restaurants are still not allowed sit down service, and masks in public are mandatory.

I cannot imagine our governor welcoming visitors from out of state.

Also, all big announcements are made at the last minute. Church services were cancelled the day before Easter. Restaurants were under the impression that they might be able to open on Friday, until the governor's news conference at 4:00 on Wednesday.

Forget planning and preparation.

2 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

I agree, but I'm also thinking about the leadership in the state.  New Mexico's Governor is very aggressive. She is setting up roadblock around Gallup https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gallup-new-mexico-lockdown-sunday-governor-lujan-grisham/.  I would not be surprised if she shuts down Philmont.

 

Yeah, I would expect Philmont to be closed. Our governor has declared that our whole state is in this together. More than half our cases and deaths are concentrated in two counties (northwest part of the state--lots of reservation land) but she is not willing to consider different regions.

Also, while eyeing a reopening that will be based on "our behavior," this week she has already chastised us for not doing what we are supposed to do, based on "data and personal observations." We are still limited to gatherings of five. If your family has more than 5 people, you can be at home together, but not in public together.

Even before the spike in northwest NM I was not hopeful that Philmont would open. It would be a long trip too if you flew here, because the executive order says you have to quarantine for 14 days if you arrive in a plane. 

I don't see any of this changing enough, in time, for this summer.

On 4/29/2020 at 4:17 PM, Jameson76 said:

Just saying that we need to remember WHY we as Scouters really are involved.  No family or Scout/Youth is going to join an organization who has as their main stated mission that they protect youth.  In no way am I underscoring the importance of YPT.  We just cannot (IMHO) let this DEFINE the BSA, this needs to be PART of what we do.

I was just talking to my kids about this, but in the context of school. If a school's primary goal is safety, why would I send them there? If that's my priority, I can do a much better job of that at home. I send them to school for an education, and to interact with and learn from lots of other kids and teachers, etc., not to be "safe."

This is a joke, right?

As a family we're using the time off from school to work at the food bank--lots of volunteers not showing up but folks need the food now. We're around other people but what the heck else are they gonna do? Before this my son had been looking for a conservation-type service he could do for rank, but they're shutting down the outdoors here so that'll have to wait.

What about using a bedsheet, as though the Scout had to wrap up in it when they took his clothes? Or a bathrobe if you can bring in props ahead of time. . . might not be funny enough though. . .

Outdoor Code and Leave No Trace are Webelos requirements.

I was thinking about this too, as I make the program for our Crossover celebration. I'll list all my Webelos IIs as earning AoL, but how do I word it for the Scouts crossing to a troop? Congratulations, Scouts, now you are Scouts?

I think I will just call them Boy Scouts. They are boys, they are Scouts, in an organization called BSA (Boy Scouts of America). If the people getting paid couldn't come up with something better, how can anyone expect a lowly volunteer to?

1 hour ago, Hawkwin said:

As a DL for a female den, I try to never use gender terms. My girls are "scouts." If I start to say, "hey girls" I quickly correct myself and call them "scouts." Using gender terms is a crutch I, as an adult leader, need to learn to overcome. No reason for either boys or girls to think of themselves - or to hear others refer them - as anything other than a scout.

What's wrong with a boy thinking of himself as a boy, or a girl thinking of herself as a girl? They don't become genderless when the Scout meeting begins. 

Change is hard. Whether it's school or Scouts or a job, making a jump is hard. But after you do it, you'll wonder what took you so long.

There is a movement now, a big movement, to accept statements of identity from kids at face value, without question. This movement expects ALL to comply--parents, doctors, teachers, anyone in contact with the kid. We are told that to not accept these statements, and to not encourage them along this path, is harmful.

However, this is not "settled science." This movement is social in nature, and the evidence that accepting as fact a new self-identity is helpful, is not there. There is a call for more research.

As Scouters, are we helping or harming these kids by encouraging them along this path, as this new social movement demands? 

Some feel that doing something is better than doing nothing--the child can always change back later, if he was wrong. Unless he goes too far, and biological changes are made before full maturity, self-realization, and the capacity to make huge, life-altering decisions are reached. Unless the social implications turn out to be too much for a child to deal with.

As a person of responsibility in a child's life, I do not want to be complicit in encouraging a such a decision before maturity.

So what, as Scouters, are we to do with these kids? How do we accept them for who they are, when they can't yet know, with certainty, who they are at this stage? 

How do we stand up for them, and their need for space and time to mature, when the social tide is pushing them to make decisions they are not ready for?

15 minutes ago, fred johnson said:

I'm scared that adult leaders mock this topic and don't take it seriously.  This is not a light switch where we either free range or baby sit every moment.  Abusers look for programs in which they can abuse.  Kids will sneak in alcohol, tobacco, pot, drugs, fireworks and more.  Kids get hurt, drown, fall in fires, break bones and more. 

We can be effective as leaders while at the same time minimizing our presence and impact.  It's about keeping kids safe.  

"It's about keeping kids safe."

What is about keeping kids safe? The Scouting program?

The concept of free range kids is exactly not that--it's not about keeping kids safe. It's about giving kids the freedom to grow.

Now, you can add some safety in there. But that's not what free range is about. Free range accepts risk as an inherent and necessary  part of life.

When safety becomes the foremost concern, you've lost free range.

Diagnosis of "gender dysphoria." Looking at a bunch of self-reported psychological symptoms and proclaiming a medical? biological? diagnosis seems pretty unscientific.

"Suffering from a condition"--the example I gave was of gluten intolerance. Many people claim to have this condition without ever having been diagnosed by a doctor. For many people, it is a fad, and their self-diagnosis is brought on by lots of media attention. 

The comparison I made is to people claiming to be gay, bi, transgender, etc, when they actually are not--for many, it's a fad, as evidenced by their later turning out to be heterosexual. I think a lot of that is brought on by media attention, social media interaction, the coolness factor (and believe me, for teenagers and 20-somethings, it's very cool right now), and their need to seek attention or turn attention from some other aspect of their lives.

I mean, for years we've been told that being gay is not a choice and it's the way you're born--but it has turned into something that can just strike people temporarily, usually when they're young? That doesn't make any sense.

And so it seems very possible that a lot of these cases are another example of kids doing the cool thing, or doing something that will get them the attention they seek. I don't think they're often fully cognizant of WHY they're doing it, just as the little kid who acts out for negative attention doesn't say, "I'm going to hit my sister so my mom yells at me, because yelling is better than her ignoring me." 

I don't think it's the internet causing this. It's the peer relationships, which for today's youth are largely held on and heightened by internet/social media sites. 

Times change. When I was in high school and college, it was not cool to be gay, but it was starting to be more accepted. When my brother's kids were in high school, "bi" was the thing to be. Eight years later, we've got a mother posting photos of her baby boy with bows on his head, proclaiming her wish that he grows up to be gay. Haven't heard from her in a while, so don't know if she's grown up or moved on to a more extreme vision for her son's future.

Sure, some gay-to-straight people have been genuinely confused about their sexuality. But many of the temporarily gay, bi, dysphoric, etc are just seeking attention. The proliferation of "genders" and constant ramming-down-our-throats of unscientific diagnoses has made a wide array of socially acceptable, no, socially desirable, attention-seeking behaviors common among youth.

In general, I think people who jump on the bandwagon of a diagnosis tend to hurt the cause for people actually suffering from a condition. But maybe this is good for the non-straight movement. Kind of like how soooo many people are gluten-free--they've created a market for food that is good for people with an actual diagnosis.

Not sure that this is best for the merely temporary pioneers of these identities, though.

Have you asked the parents of the boys if they will want mixed dens? National has said that dens will be separate. I think you at least owe it to the boys' families to let them know that you are not following the guidelines they were told about. 

As a troop parent and Webelos leader myself, I understand that none of the decision makers wanted my input, but I would at least appreciate a heads up when changes are put into place.

Please don't be one of those leaders that refuses to communicate with parents.