Eagle1993

On 3/8/2026 at 7:41 PM, Tron said:

except for the past 10 to 20 years in the United States universally transexuals have been a fraction of a percent of the human

Perhaps you can hazard a guess why...

Anyone can sue, what are outcomes?  Show a result where a leader ended up paying when they followed BSA rules and regulations....

7 minutes ago, FireStone said:

Is that nation-wide? The decision summary reads like it's only focused on California. 

I would expect it would apply to any similar law nationwide.  The specific lawsuit is California, but now anyone can sue a state with similar laws and likely win at District, probably fairly quickly.

3 hours ago, Eagledad said:

The main issue with schools is that they are keeping the students' trans identity secret from their parents.

I never understood schools or anyone hiding something this significant from parents.  If the parents are abusive, then department of family services, police, courts can play their role.  It isn't up to the school to decide this.

I enjoyed talking with parents and sometimes surprising them with what I saw from their kid (a quiet kid became an active leader, a troubled youth giving good advice to a younger scout, etc).  It was one of the joys of the job to surprise parents by sharing what was going on, sometimes some tough conversations, .... I can't imagine hiding something from them.

35 minutes ago, PACAN said:

Does anyone have any idea how many trans and gay youth we are even talking about?

About 1.2 -3% of youth are trans, so let's go with 1.2% and assume the rate is half of that in BSA ... So 650,000 youth * 0.6% = 3,900 trans youth.  I would up guess many trans avoid scouts. 

Gay youth are 7-9%, assuming that number holds you probably have 50,000 gay youth in BSA.

1 hour ago, swilliams said:

So... we actually have a transgender scout in our Troop, sort of.  (They're still registered, but have let me know they will not be continuing with the program.)

This scout is male, biologically, but asked to be called by a female name and be referred to as she/her a couple years ago.  We met as a committee, at the request of the parent, to decide what we were going to do.  All but one of us felt that the right thing to do was to keep the scout as part of our Troop.  Since the scout had the support of the parents, that was enough for us to honor the request for name and pronouns.  One committee member felt the scout should look into the local girls' Troop.

It ended up being such a non-issue.  Our scouts made the name switch pretty much instantly and never gave it another thought.  They were all still friends.  There were no snide remarks.  There was no bullying and no asking why the scout didn't switch Troops.  They all just went on with Troop business like usual, with one exception, which was that the scout started to tent separately.  (Something many of our older scouts choose to do anyway.  Hammocking has become a 'thing' with a couple of them.)

That was a pretty good lesson for me, watching how our scouts handled it. 

The transgender scout in my unit staid in.  Earned Eagle, went to Philmont and now in College.  Parent was a leader so that helped.  The main odd thing was that the scout dressed as a 1950s housewife.... It's like they changed genders and decades.  

They were treated well overall.  I checked in frequently.  One leader from another unit told her "I don't get this gender thing, but you do you.". The scout loved that response as they know most don't understand but at least they were kind enough to let them live their life.

As you said, single tent, only gender neutral bathrooms, buddy group changes.  I was asked but didn't wear the pride knot, I think that hurt a bit. It is a bit complicated to manage, but it is manageable.

11 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

The only advice I gave to @FireStone was "I urge you to let the parents in your unit know (tactfully and discreetly) if there is a transgender child in the Troop, and allow them to decide the best course of action for their own child."  Which is what any reasonable person should do.  And you do not need a law degree to be a reasonable person.

I would just say to avoid putting yourself in legal risk, follow BSA rules and regulations.  I was told, by a lawyer, I could be sued if a kid caught COVID during a scout outing.  "I'll sue the BSA, national, council, CO, committee chair and scoutmaster and let the judge determine who is liable." Just get excess liability insurance and follow BSA policy and you will be fine.

More than everything, lack of parent volunteers will damage this program.  I took a similar step a few months ago .. it is sad seeing the change over the last several years.   Went from more than enough parents willing to camp and lead outings to crickets.

8 hours ago, Tron said:

National needs to force mergers, tell councils they need to embrace remote work and tele/video conferencing. Every DE should live and work in their district, not at council HQ. Every council HQ should be a tiny hole in the wall or a cabin on the council camp used as basically a logistical hub to feed the districts

Fully agree. I understand my council knows they will merge with another council; however, that council is not in great shape financially and likely needs to close a camp or two.  My council is holding off on the merger so they aren't blamed for the camp closure.  I'm sure there are many similar stories, so national will have to step in.

During the bankruptcy a small/secret meeting was held by a fee national leaders.  Their PPT slides were reviewed in court but never added to the docket.  They included recommendations for a major reduction in councils among other ideas.  It is needed and hopefully coming. 

3 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Clearly stated "check with legal counsel in your state."

You went on a Chat GPT binge of legal advice and opinions. 

Is the expectation that a birth certificate will be attached with every application?  What about states that allow gender to be updated on a birth certificate, will we only accept the first print? 

Political winds change and lawsuits could come from the other direction in just a few years.  Let's avoid a bunch of non lawyers on this forum from giving legal advice.  

2 hours ago, TeamOutsider said:

Sounds like you're saying they need to change the stated Mission and Vision of the org:

"Scouting America will prepare every eligible youth in America **to become a responsible, participating citizen** and leader who is guided by the Scout Oath and Law."

https://www.scouting.org/legal/mission

It's fine if you think that, but understand Citizenship is a CORE part of the Vision, so it's a MAJOR suggested change. 

You can do this through means other than sitting and discussing or visiting web pages.  The issue is that as constructed, the program continues to add Eagle required MBs that are classroom style, including Citizenship in the Society.  

Just look at UK scouts, many of their requirements begin with take part in....  Compare to BSA citizenship badges.

I've been scoutmaster for over 15 Eagle Scouts, my dad is Eagle, I'm and Eagle Scout, my son is an Eagle Scout.  Overall, I believe in the program but we need more focus on aspects of the program that make unique and less on being school 2.0

2 hours ago, ShootingSports said:

Question: Don't all three pictures show them not paying to go see the game? (stealing)

While everyone paid for their seats.

Not necessarily.  I see a local team play and there are outfield grass you pay to watch from.  You watch through a chain link fence. 

1 hour ago, TeamOutsider said:

I get the sentiment of the opt-out idea, but in practice it's not a great idea.  It would be abused.

Also... if it's covered in school - it should be that much easier to knock it out for Scouts, and the refresher doesn't hurt to know that "An Eagle definitely covered this topic".  That's my $0.02.

I don't know of any kid who goes through school that sees any value add in Citz in Nation or World. Both are covered many times in 6th through 12th grade.  Citizenship in Community provides value and is often missed in school. Citizenship in home (family life) could continue.  So go from 5 (world, nation, society, community and home) to 2.  Then add in Wilderness Survival and a shooting sport as Eagle required.

I am definitely not a fan of the current administration, but I think everyone should keep these changes in prospective.

1. I find few scouts who advocate for our current list of Eagle required merit badges.  We have far too many citizenship MBs and most of them are already covered in school.  I didn't have an issue with Citz in Society, but I also found little value with the badge.  You can still guide your troop in the spirit of the badge. 

2. Transgender scouts are still allowed in the program.  I was scoutmaster of a troop with a transgender scout and there are various challenges you have to navigate.  I didn't allow them in female bathrooms, I made sure they were in a three person buddy group, I didn't let them tent with a female,  etc.  I still made sure they could participate and told them to let me know if anyone gave them crap.  The changes would essentially align to how I ran the troop which I think is appropriate.

3. I don't think anyone would argue against the military benefits.

Perhaps they would like to push further but so far, I think scouters should move on to figuring out how to keep meetings fun, how to encourage scouts to fully embrace the patrol method and the other key aspects that scouters engage in every day and week.

I wish the Pentagon held out for ending more Eagle required MBs. Family life/ combine some of the other citizenships, and then make Wilderness Survival required.  Missed opportunity....

8 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

And as a 21-24 year old district committee member, I can tell you from first hand experience some Scouters viewed me as "just a kid, " 'you do not know anything because..." no knots, no beds, no SM patch, ad nauseam.

That is sad to hear, but not surprised.

2 minutes ago, ramanous said:

I may have proposed the question wrong. If the units are complaining about lack of district support, yet all of the district committee members are from the units. In other words, they are complaining about the lack of support that is of their own doing. 

Thanks for the tips. That's all well understood. I am a volunteer, and I also have decades of organizational management experience in a business context. I see the problem, but I don't have any control over fixing it.  All I can do is ask them to show-up. 

 

 

I always wondered why we wouldn't look to either 20-30 year old ex scouts or 55+ year old aging scouters to fill District roles (basically avoiding parents of scout aged kids).  In my area, most District roles are filled by unit volunteers, burning them out or having them choose between helping their unit or helping the District.

21 minutes ago, scoutldr said:

So it seems Moderators can say what they want?  Quis custodiet, ipso custodes?

It was a joke, but I updated it so no one's feelings are hurt...

Unless BSA has trained professionals leading every Troop you will see a wide variety of quality.  Make sure YPT and G2SS is followed, there should be no exceptions there.   Many Troops could improve on the Patrol method, most on uniform.  Provide some guidance to the leaders and let them run the show. 

If there is a really strong, well run Troop in the area, perhaps try and schedule a visit.  There has always been quality differences between Troops, it is a tough decision to determine what is good enough.

We should just start selling Eagle scout ranks.  Two birds, one stone. We raise a lot of money and take the kids who only care about a patch (especially their parents) out of the program. 

Heck, for enough money, we can throw a kid in a river, setup your kid in a harness system, have him "save" the other kid and he could earn the heroism award.

Hopefully the family can be redirected, otherwise, these are the worst parent(s) to have in the program.  

5 hours ago, johnsch322 said:

Correct the majority of claimants voted yes but only because $2.4 Billion seemed like such a large number and the witness for the BSA said based on his analysis claimants would be paid 100%. The sad truth is that if claimants get 25% of their determined claims (the dollar amount the trust values a claim) it will be a miracle. The outcome will be much favored towards the BSA/SA vs the Child Sexual Abuse Claimants.  With a little bit of math this was very evident before any votes were cast and was one of the reasons I voted NO twice. 

Certain claimants would have been better off if the plan failed.  Even assuming National was maxed out (I think there is an argument that the HA base debts were questionable), they could have sued their council, CO and various individuals.  Some CO and councils would have had significant assets to take, others almost nothing.  So, while some would be better off, others would have been much worse off.

The other source is from reinsurers.  That was/is expected to provide the backstop if money is out.. but we will see if it works.

Im not surprised the settlement is being used up faster than planned, but that could slow over time.

BSA financial health is also questionable.  Debt is still high, membership is now under their business plan and I'm not sure their raised the capital they thought.  I wouldn't be surprised if they are back in bankruptcy in a few years.

10 hours ago, Tron said:

34 Billion? If all of scouting in the world were liquidated there wouldn't be that much. You can't squeeze blood from a turnip; there is no way people are reading these payout matrix correctly, there is no way the court or parties involved could have been 31.6 billion off (when accounting for the 2.4 billion approved for funding at the end of the trail). 

The only reason the judge allowed non consenting non debtors (councils, individuals, charter orgs) to be part of the bankruptcy was that the analysis showed all creditors would be paid in full.  If that analysis was incorrect, then councils and charter orgs wouldn't have been covered.  

I think most BSA members and most plaintiffs agreed the deal made was the best possible outcome, but there were plaintiffs that objected.

On 8/5/2025 at 8:59 AM, clbkbx said:

August 1 update: average $580,794 per TDP claim. [Still going up slightly and at this point definitely holding steady.]

• For the TDP, 64% claims determined and 38% paid (22,103 paid)
• For the IRO, 40% claims determined and 16% paid (32 paid) 

Without factoring in non-Matrix IRO payments, it's ticked up to around $34B needed to be fully funded. 

There was a slight drop off in claims processed this month; my guess is the claims processors are taking vacation time.

I wonder if the expert who claimed it was fully funded is financially culpable if he was this far off.  The entire trail was decided based on his analysis.