InquisitiveScouter

7 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

This is a list of states that allow for parents to opt in/opt out their children from sex education in public schools.

I suspect there will be a push to have a similar opt-in/opt-out for scouts.

https://siecus.org/resources/opt-in-vs-opt-out-state-sex-ed-parental-consent-policies

•34 states + DC: Opt-Out

•4 states: Opt-In

•2 states: Both Opt-In & Opt-Out

•10 states: No Opt-In or Opt-Out

Thanks, @CynicalScouter!  This crucial piece hadn't even crossed my thoughts...

Wonder if the MB writers and those who will make the final decision to promulgate will consider the wide body of state law??  Or will they push something and have it blow up in their faces?? 

24 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

Equally important is whether people perceive that they are being discriminated against.  Let the kids get the maximum benefit from the learning experience without adding in our own personal beliefs on the topic.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-power-prime/201908/perception-is-not-reality

Or...if perception is reality, then what do you do with this? https://www.npr.org/2017/10/24/559604836/majority-of-white-americans-think-theyre-discriminated-against

The last time this was visible from Earth was during the Early Middle Ages in Europe between the Fifth and Sixth Crusades, and the reign of Genghis Khan in the East.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/jupiter-and-saturns-great-conjunction-is-the-best-in-800-years-heres-how-to-see-it/

If you can view it, it should be awesome!

Just now, CynicalScouter said:

I also suspect that the MBCs involved will simply skip those items outright and go with the rest.

Can't!  Must complete the requirements "as written"

21 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

I am trying to see how this might work. Would simply defining the terms work?

"Sexual orientation": a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

"Gender identity": Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Gender identity can correlate with a person's assigned sex at birth or can differ from it.

And leave it at that? Or is even this so much that we are going to see units defer this to parents?

No, that's fine...and, oh, by the way...let's offer this one at Summer Camp, too!  Jimmy is 15, and this is zir (Jimmy's preferred pronoun) second year on staff.  Ze doesn't have the merit badge zirself, but if ze teaches it, we will sign it off for zim.

Can you imagine how the merit badge mills will go with this one??

BSA has a good amount of work to do on this draft before they cut it loose to parents and some religious CO's.

5 hours ago, Navybone said:

Which requirement includes discussing any form of sexual conduct or gender identity other than welcoming them or that generalizations or stereotypes are wrong?  

How can you discuss those topics without the Scout understanding the meaning of the terms?

1 hour ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

I have been told that 2 units in my district will NOT have a counselor doing these discussions for the very reasons you cite. Instead they will be covered by the parents.

@Eagle94-A1 Right on...they should put in a blurb like that in Home Repairs MB:

"Either a parent or the merit badge counselor may supervise the Scout’s work on any Home Repairs requirements."

And Family Life "*This conversation may take place with only one or both of your parents or guardians."

Also, how does this jive with the Scouter's Code of Conduct?

"6. I will not discuss or engage in any form of sexual conduct while engaged in Scouting activities. I will refer youth with questions regarding these topics to talk to their parents or spiritual advisor"

As a parent, I would not want anyone else talking to my kids about topics of sexual orientation and gender identity.  Our public schools don't even tread this ground... 

Furthermore, will it not undermine the authority of that CO to exercise their prerogative to select adult leaders in line with their own beliefs?

6 hours ago, mrjohns2 said:

But we can, with today's lens, choose to no longer honor the person that did even somewhat despicable things. It is a choice. 

That is a very slippery slope.  By your reasoning, through today's lens (or the lens we would have foisted upon us by certain factions), we actually should remove any honors for many of the founders of this country.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Founding-Fathers-and-Slavery-1269536

We should judge people based on their own times, not ours...

"...for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."

There is something I don't get here.  Please help me...

If a CO has the ability to not select (i.e., make a discrminating choice against) adult unit leaders based on their choice of gender identity or sexual orientation, won't this badge introduce confusion and mixed messages to the Scouts in that unit?

6 minutes ago, jr56 said:

Am curious what Hornaday did that was so outrageous that his name has to be removed from history.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Temple_Hornaday

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/06/nyregion/thecity/06zoo.html

13 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

So, rather than throwing numbers out here about "the evil S.E. makes XXXX", in the future how about "The evil S.E. makes XX% of all expenditures."

OK, using your metric, the evil SE makes 7.61% of our $2.7M expenditures.

1 minute ago, TAHAWK said:

His succesor vetoed district election results, and when the same Scouters were reeleted, eliminated the districts.

YGBKM!!!  (You gotta be kidding me!)

1 minute ago, ProScouter06 said:

UNREAL. Herein lies some of the root of the animosity we've referenced. No wonder people are turned off by FOS when the SE makes that kind of salary. I'm sure the field staff are paid under the median ... Leading to turnover, which leads to another can of worms for everyone. 

Yup... DE's start around $35K here.  (That's what current SE offered me.  I declined  )  And compounded with the COVID crisis, all our DE's have been let go.  Not furloughed, mind you, ...dismissed.

We now have one FD covering our council.

Volunteers are not happy.

1 minute ago, ProScouter06 said:

Training was and should be 100% no charge IMO.

Where have you been all my Scouting life?? 😁

8 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

When the SE makes $150k it's a bit hard to justify IMO. 

Ours gets over $210K, with the median income per family (not per capita) in our area at $88K.  Parents balk at donating to FOS when they hear those numbers...

3 minutes ago, ProScouter06 said:

Revenue is necessary to operate the council.

Agreed, but not on the backs of adult volunteers who are paying for their own training.  Program events (camporees, summer camp, etc.), I get it... training events, especially required ones (like IOLS and BALOO) should actually be given for free.  If BSA requires me to have some sort of training, then they should figure out how to offer mandatory courses for free.  This would really show volunteers that you value their time and service.

4 minutes ago, ProScouter06 said:

Agreed about SE's. Those salaires need to be brought in check. Let's face it, in many areas, Scouting is a small non-profit often struggling to survive and keep the the lights on. When the SE makes $150k it's a bit hard to justify IMO. 

You have won me over with this...thank you!!

1 hour ago, ParkMan said:

it's within the volunteer ranks too.

There is a toxic WB culture in this council.

1 hour ago, ParkMan said:

Is the impact of professionals overstepping their boundaries and directing volunteers at the unit/district/council level worth the value that this direction brings? 

Heck no!  When building budgets for training events, we always had to build in extra to the fees to provide revenue to the council (at the direction of professional staff advisers to whatever event it was.)  Made me sick to my stomach...

And now, how many events are we going to cancel because we don't have a Short-Term Camp Administrator? (Yes, this was pushed from national, but councils will be the enforcers.)

1 hour ago, ParkMan said:

Unit commissioners are our ambassadors and coaches to the unit leaders.  Having DEs prop up a poorly functioning unit commissioner system reduces some of the immediacy of the problem, but it doesn't resolve the issue.

Can't even tell you who our UC is this month (or is it this week??)

1 hour ago, ParkMan said:

underpaid, and overworked

??? DE's, yes.  But SE's??  Not buying it.  I have recommended to our board on several occasions that we reduce the SE salary, and pay our DE's more...we might keep them around longer than six months 😢  Answer back was that National set salary window, and they had to pick one of National's candidates.  Again, 🤢

9 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Will this quickly follow into scouting?

Yes, you can expect that soon.  Remember when they hopped on the bandwagon after George Floyd's death back in June?

https://scoutingwire.org/bsas-commitment-to-act-against-racial-injustice/

• Reviewing every element of our programs to ensure diversity and inclusion are engrained at every level for participants and volunteers by applying a standard that promotes racial equality and denounces racism, discrimination, inequality and injustice.
• Requiring diversity and inclusion training for all BSA employees starting July 1 and taking immediate action toward introducing a version for volunteers in the coming months.
• Conducting a review of property names, events and insignia, in partnership with local councils, to build on and enhance the organization’s nearly 30-year ban on use of the Confederate flag and to ensure that symbols of oppression are not in use today or in the future.

On 12/10/2020 at 4:01 PM, Cburkhardt said:

I hope the treatment of volunteers by professionals will rapidly fade as an issue and that we can begin to envision how volunteers will more-fully run things at the District and Council levels.  The tragic "perfect storm" is providing us an opportunity to make some very significant adjustments.  Many higher-salaried people with hardened viewpoints are already choosing to move on.  We have all been part of a system that has not functioned well for an extended time.  Let's put our operating expectations and behavioral standards firmly in place fairly soon.  I want my fellow volunteers and me to be treated appropriately.  We remind the girls in our Troop that they ascribe to a higher standard of kind behavior when they swear the Scout Law.  Let's hold ourselves as well as to pros to this higher standard and assure that your concerns are not a dominant aspect of our experiences.  

When I first met our new council SE, in conversation I asked him what his biggest headache was.  He said (closely paraphrasing), "Volunteers who think that when they put on the uniform, they are equal to me."

I knew right then we were headed down the road to dysfunction...and I have not been wrong these last five years.

We did not re-register 13 out of our 51 Scouts.  So, overall ~25%, but, broken down, we are about a normal year...

Five of the 13 "aged-out"; six of the 13 were "chronic inactives"...those just not interested in Scouts anymore; one of the 13 was disciplinary (we will not re-register him due to behavior), and the last was due to COVID (family has significant health challenges).

So, I look at it as six "eligibles" lost out of 44 "eligibles", or  ~14% attrition.  We are usually around 10% per year...

We have not had any Webelos declare intent to join our Troop yet.  Those notices don't start coming until mid to late January.

41 minutes ago, yknot said:

I think BSA needs to stop relying on infrequent Bryan on Scouting blogs to kinda sorta clarify unclear YPT issues.

Our previous COR is a law professor.  When I asked him why he thought BSA policies are often ambiguous, he said they most likely WANT some ambiguity, because it protects them in court.  That is, if a case ever arises under a particular policy point, the lawyers for National will be able to argue whatever interpretation suits their interests best.

And don't bother reaching out to National for any policy clarifications.  If you use some email account not tied to your BSA profile (to try to maintain some anonymity), you will be ignored.  If you can be identified, you will be reported to your SE.  And, National will defer to your SE to interpret any policies that are ambiguous, anyway.  So, just work any policy issues through your SE.  And if you don't get a good answer from the SE, live with it...or be labeled a troublemaker of some kind, especially if you are not up on your FOS donation.

BSA is only really worried about the money.  They have gone down the YPT route because of fiscal reasons, not for some sort of altruistic desire to protect kids.  If they weren't facing massive lawsuits, they wouldn't have acted.

3 minutes ago, mrjohns2 said:

It is Stetson branded hat?

No, my original is not a Stetson...there is an ink stamp inside at the crown of the head saying "Leisure Felt 100% WOOL"

Ordered it from the BSA catalog through my local Scout store.  The catalog entry (in the 90's) was "Expedition Hat", now called the "Brimmed Hat, Adult" in online catalog

https://www.scoutshop.org/brimmed-hat-600016.html

Guide to Awards and Insignia still refers to "campaign and expedition hats", page 69, bottom right, Universal Hat Pin

https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/33066/33066_Universal_and_Nonunit_Insignia_WEB.pdf

And, yes, it is too much to ask for the merchandising nomenclature to match the G2AI nomenclature, in case you were wondering

If you look for offense, you will always find it