Time for a REI x BSA collab? 😄

3 minutes ago, niagarafalls said:

They're also supposed to have badges on them

Been telling my scouts that exact thing in the context of the Internal Spirit Award... You can tell it's a scout shirt because it's a Western shirt with two front button pockets and a bunch of badges worn with a necker, even if you don't recognize from what country it's from. Without the badges... Fails scout shirt sniff test

2 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

(Yes, shirt is well-worn, and has seen many better days 😜 )

That's how scout shirts are meant to be! 

Now that you say that, a parent was complaining about that at our last campout.

I mean, I get it. Sewing new badges is yet another thing on the to-do list. The incredibly long, winding to-do list. Blargh. If you just asked me out of the blue, I'd say I don't like sewing on badges either.

But that doesn't mean I think that we shouldn't have patches that need sewing on. Not loving every aspect of everything I ever do for scouts isn't the same thing as wanting to change the program. Everything in life is a mix of things you like and dislike. And seeing as scouting is a spiritually based program, and as such is based in the recognition that trying to only have pleasure with no pain isn't possible, it doesn't make sense to sweat these small ordinary irritations. They are meant to be overcome.

As a Zen Master Sengcan said... The Great Way is not difficult. It merely avoids picking and choosing.

National didn't poll my scout, who hates taking the belt with all the loops on and off and therefore mostly refuses to wear it. They're not wrong - the loops end up scattering all over the floor a lot. It doesn't have the right vibe. Plus, what kind of a scout shirt isn't covered in patches? And aren't all the sewing avoidance methods already offered enough? 🤦🏼‍♀️

And then there's the ecological impact.

I thought the reason for the move to belt loops was just a consequence of that they wanted to move the awards to adventures because the awards were earned by less than 1% of scouts. Came as a surprise to me, because in our pack scouts earn awards all the time. We even provide earmarked opportunities to earn the Outdoor Activity Award, the International Spirit Award (and therefore the World Conservation Award), and the NPS Ranger Award. 

47 minutes ago, OaklandAndy said:

1 hour ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

I'm mourning the loss of the International Spirit Award more and more

I didn't realize it was no longer available. I thought it was still an earnable award for all.

Well... In this exact moment, it is. But since the awards are being replaced by belt loops, and it doesn't seem like there's any adventure called something like what's in it, I'm working under the assumption that it will be discontinued June 1 for cub scouts. I'd be happy to be told that's a misunderstanding.

That's a great idea, @OaklandAndy. I'm mourning the loss of the International Spirit Award more and more, as we go through it as a pack. I see the scouts understanding scouts in the bigger picture for every activity we do, and it makes me sad that we can't do it again. But who says? When the scout shop runs out of badges we can make our own 😄

Welcome to the forums, Kelsey!

5 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Sorry, not taking the bait 😜 Have a nice day.

Apologies, it wasn't my intention to bait. Perhaps I wasn't clear. I meant that in order to stay on the civic side of the line, we all have to self-monitor, which the GSUSA scouter may have failed to do. Political issues one is very touched by are ones one might have to consciously stay far away from the line on. For Palestinians, the Gaza situation is going to be very "hot" for natural reasons. Not a problem per se. But that means needing to figure out how to not let the fire burn when in the role of scouter.

2 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Sure they do, if the council sticks Ukrainian flag on it.

Do not get me wrong... I personally fully support Ukraine, and kicking out the Russian invaders, but this smacks of "taking sides" by the council that did this.  I know there are refugees from the conflict who are Russians as well.  They need humanitarian aid and first aid kits, too.

I think in the case cited, making a bracelet that advocated peace between the sides would have been a much better choice.

It does feel a little sides-taking. I still think it's better than 'Palestine' bracelets, but absolutely better than the 'Palestine' bracelets in the show of support to wear category is something like those peace bracelets you linked. But in both cases, I don't understand why they didn't go the support scouts in the conflict zone that are already on the ground delivering humanitarian aid route. Clean, simple, loyal.

It's probably not hard to guess based on general information about me how I feel about the full-scale invasion. But just because it's easy to guess who I'm hoping will win, and most of us here probably think the same thing, doesn't mean that I should voice that opinion in my role as a scouter. 😳 Maybe especially when that opinion is backed by a lot of emotion and a feeling of having a stake in the outcome. I know what I say won't be even remotely neutral. So I try to avoid the topic in order not to embarrass myself with a tirade I shouldn't be delivering.

2 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Except for Eagle Scout Service Projects?

Or a council selling FAKs for Ukraine?  (and keeping a slice of the pie, btw)

https://padutchbsa.org/a-scout-is-helpful-ukraine-first-aid-kit/

This is a lot closer to the line, and as such interesting to consider.

My feeling is that supporting other scouts is always ok - so fundraising for an Eagle Scout project is ok because it's generally recognized not just as a good turn but a development exercise for the scout. Compared to the bracelets, certainly Eagle projects deliberately stretch scouts' abilities in a way making bracelets doesn't.

The first aid kits seem much closer to that line - and might be over it. I don't think so but I could probably be convinced otherwise without too much trouble, particularly because the council is keeping some of the money. The mitigating circumstances for first-aid kits compared to bracelets with the name of a party in an armed conflict is that the first aid kits don't take any sides in a war the way the bracelets did. If the scheme had been to sell t-shirts that say "Ukraine" and have blue and yellow on them to raise money for first aid kits, that would be the same problem as the Palestine bracelets. It's not just that you're raising money for non-scouting, it's also what you're selling to do so.

39 minutes ago, skeptic said:

As a long story I have been reading notes, we need to stop infantilizing young teens and preteens.

This right here is also what sets scouting apart from a lot of other youth organizations. Or should, at least. We need to stick to the basics of what's made scouting successful throughout the decades, and that's the patrol method with the implied trust in the capabilities of the scouts. The last thing they need is more helicopters or snowplows.

Separate paper troops and even separate sides of the campground all just seems to add more work for... Nothing. Learning how to lead boys and how to get them to come along was one of the most valuable life lessons I got from scouts, and I want the same for my own scout of course. (No workplace consists only of your own gender.) Not going to get that surrounded by scouts of their own gender whether that's in GSUSA or BSA. 

I read the article to mean that it was outside that window, but you're right, it doesn't explicitly say so.

13 minutes ago, scoutldr said:

The name and trademarks of the BSA is not to be used in fundraising for other organizations, regardless of how righteous the cause.

Yeah, exactly. And it's for good reasons. It's not greed, actually. 

If scouts, like civil servants, weren't allowed to engage in political actions even as private citizens (not using any scouting logos, not in uniform, etc) then that would undercut the movement's goals, and the mom's frustration would make total sense. But that's not the case. The problem isn't fundraising for a cause that isn't scouts, the problem is associating the movement with political causes. Like you say, which cause doesn't really matter, but IMO it's worse when the cause is very divisive.

It does seem a little harsh to threaten immediate legal action, but I understand it better in this case than in suing the BSA over giving girls the option to scout there as well. GSUSA seemingly, if not actually, getting sucked into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as taking a side could set a whole chain of destructive reactions into motion and tarnished the reputation of the scouting movement as a whole. The same political tensions that are bouncing around politicians (can't please both pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian constituents) would follow into scouting, and promptly create a rift between troops.

In my mind, there is a very clear line between building strong civil institutions and/or providing humanitarian assistance in an emergency directly and working for a specific outcome or in support of a particular person, party, or nation in a political situation. (I e had they fundraised for Palestinian scouts doing humanitarian work in Gaza, that would be akin to the WAGGGS and WOSM troops that supported Ukrainian scouts, especially within the exception to the political activity rule.) The scouts were even told they could keep selling the bracelets to fundraise for the Palestinian charity, just not in their capacity as scouts. I think we all engage in some kind of political activity at some point, just expressing our political thoughts if nothing else, just not as scouts or scouters.

Our ability to Build(ing) a Better World hinges upon that we are able to work together amongst ourselves with all other scouts. If we can't voluntarily suspend our political expressions while representing scouting, that's going to be almost impossible. Selling bracelets that express support for a political cause as a scout is different from selling bracelets that express support for a particular political cause as a private citizen who also happens to be a scout. The whole idea of a worldwide siblinghood of scouts falls apart if politics dictates whom we're willing to work with. We don't have to love each other equally, but taking political action against each other as scouts is going to splinter the movement.

Certainly, the scouts can and should be politically active and use their voices. That's the stuff democracy and strong political institutions are built of. But such political activity can't be using scouting logos, uniforms, or anything else that suggests doing it as a scout.

I just saw this article, and because I can see this going a lot of tense and/or political directions I'm putting this in Issues & Politics.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/st-louis-mom-says-girl-scouts-warned-troop-stop-selling-bracelets-pale-rcna140257

St. Louis mom says Girl Scouts warned her troop to stop selling bracelets as Palestinian fundraiser

A St. Louis, Missouri, mother said the Girl Scouts organization threatened her with legal action after her troop sold bracelets to help Palestinian children.

Nawal Abuhamdeh said her daughter's troop decided to make bracelets and donate the money rather than participate in the annual cookie sale. Abuhamdeh, who is Palestinian, has led her troop's cookie fundraising event since 2019. But because of the Israel-Hamas war, she said they troop did not have the "energy to be able to sell cookies to a community, especially in a time of crisis." (...)

The eight-member troop, which includes girls from Indian, Pakistani, Somalin, Palestinian, Syrian and Jordanian backgrounds, led the project, Abuhamdeh said. They held meetings about what material to use and where beads should be placed.

The girls decided to sell beaded bracelets for $5 and clay designs for $10 and donate the money to Palestine Children Relief Fund. (...)

Almost immediately, Abuhamdeh said she received an email from Girl Scouts of Eastern Missouri telling her to remove anything that associated Girl Scouts with the bracelets.

"It felt very cold and just full of reprimand and demand," Abuhamdeh said. "Demanding that I remove Girl Scout's logo … disassociate ourselves from the organization and just continue this on our own personal time, deeming it as political and partisan, claiming that they have to be inclusive to all members and that they should be neutral on all sides." (...)

A spokesperson for Girl Scouts of the USA said that its policies state that Girl Scouts and volunteers are not allowed to fundraise "for purposes other than Girl Scouting."

Fundraising restrictions are lifted in rare cases, which included a brief period in late 2023 and early 2024 that allowed fundraisers related to the Israel-Hamas war, the spokesperson said in a statement.

"Girl Scouts of the USA and our local Girl Scout Councils build girls of courage, confidence and character who make the world a better place, and we encourage all members to stand up for the issues important to them," the spokesperson said. "Additionally, girls can always decide as a troop to use their cookie proceeds and donate them to charities of their choice that appear on Charity Navigator."

Abuhamdeh said she that was disappointed in the Girl Scouts' response to the troop's bracelet fundraiser, and that after meeting with the other parents, the troop decided to disband.

"It triggered emotions I felt growing up. Anytime I would express myself or tell people proudly that I was a Palestinian, I would often be met with words of, like, ‘That’s threatening.’ I would be confused growing up," she said. "That, I think, was what I was feeling. Just disappointment … and I was really sad."

The girls continued to sell bracelets, but briefly stopped after reaching 600 orders from across the country, Abuhamdeh said. They plan to begin selling them again this weekend. 

I see the line GSUSA is drawing here very clearly. I cringed when I saw the picture of the bracelet. I read about what other GSUSA troops did to support Ukrainians (not the nation-state Ukraine as a party in the conflict, and during a special dispensation time) also. It was very similar to what WOSM troops have done, also in collaboration with Scouts Ukraine.

I suspect I'm not the only one to whom the line here is clear - but does anyone understand from personal experience why the interviewed mom doesn't see it as far as the scouting movement goes? Selling items that express personal support on behalf of the wearer for a side in an armed conflict is just so obviously not something scouts should be involved in to me that I'm a bit shocked. Is it a lack of understanding the civil nature of the movement? Is it community grief? That feeling of being viewed with suspicion obscuring the distinction between a civil and a political organization? Any Muslim and/or Palestinian scouters here who could offer their perspective?

In preparing for my first Blue & Gold as Cubmaster, another former scout committee member and I wanted to put together something more extensive about BP and the history of the scouting movement. I checked out the online museum of Swedish Scouting as part of the compilation process, and found this piece about a stained glass window of the trefoil-fleur du lis Scouterna (The Scouts, but in Swedish) logo as a metaphor for the scouting program. The picture is attached and the text translated below.

A picture of scouting

In the stained glass mosaic window, the glass pieces create a pattern. The artist has chosen pieces with the right shape and color, and put them in the right place. Then, they form a symbol for what we want to achieve: Good and proper scouting!

Adventures and experiences

For the scout, the individual glass piece is probably the most important. The things you do and experience. The Scout program. Which is exciting and qualified, where you’re always learning something new, where you have fun, where you grow by taking responsibility etc. But even for the scout the glass pieces become more important if you see how they relate to each other in the pattern. Maybe when we now and then stop in front of the scout law, that everything is aiming towards?

The big picture must be right

But if our scout program is to form the pattern, then we must select and place our pieces carefully. Otherwise, it won’t be good and proper scouting.

If the pieces in one color are missing, then the pattern doesn’t form. That can happen when we forget what the scout program is based on. For example that scouting is an outdoor activity movement, where the patrol is the important unit.

And if some pieces are too big, then the big picture isn’t right. That can happen when we let some types of program activities take up too much space, so that others won’t fit. For example spending so much time indoors that we don’t have time for enough hikes. And if some pieces have the wrong shape, then they of course won’t fit into the pattern. That can happen when we do the right things, but don’t consider how we do them.

Maybe go to camp, but let the activities there become more important than camp life itself?

As scout leaders, we need to think about both the pieces and the pattern. We need to be clear on the purpose of each thing that the scouts are doing. Each program component needs to contribute to the pattern. Otherwise, it doesn’t fit the picture. And then it doesn’t belong in the scouting program.

The Scouts’ web page 2015:

Why+How=What

Everything we do with the scouts is program. To cook your own food at camp as well as attending the troop’s annual meeting contributes to the development of the scout and is part of the program. What’s special about the scout program is that it doesn’t just consist of what we do (our activities) but also why we do it (our aims and purposes) and how we do it (the scouting method, pedagogy). By thinking through why and how we conduct an activity we ensure that the scouts are challenged at their level and according to their circumstances. This could be why a hike is structured the way it is or what symbols we use.

Why?

What is the purpose of a specific activity. It simply answers the question of how the scouts will grow as individuals.

How?

How has to do with our pedagogy, the scouting method. It includes everything from a system for working with small groups (the patrol method) to a way to work with symbols and our own law full of good values.

What?

When we have the goals (why), and how we should structure what we do, then we can create fun and developing activities based on that. In other words what we do in scouts together. The program!

I hope you get reinstated.

It's a tricky balance, but not trying to walk it and just falling to one side or the other won't do, no matter how hard that balance is to walk. We want to kick out 100% of the dangerous people and 0% of the non-dangerous people. Gotta keep trying.

35 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

Even with all the training, inexperienced adults still struggle with the idea that youth managing their program activities actually develops character and integrity. Or, they believe it works, but just don't know how. 

That's why we who have youth scouting experience have to share our experiences with anyone who will listen. 

I mean, what's the alternative, keep the patrol method a guarded secret? Of course not. Nobody's saying that the patrol method needs to change. At least I haven't heard that. That would be nuts.

My purpose in reminding people of what they already know is that in order to keep up the good work, sometimes we need to refresh ourselves and raise some windhorse, create some feeling of flow, so that we don't get beaten down. Reconnecting to our purpose can help with that. 

Each moment is fresh. Each moment contains many possibilities. It is up to us to take right action.

I - and I imagine everyone else here - thinks that holding on to the patrol method and preventing Webelos 3 is essential to delivering a quality program and, therefore, creating a culture of growth. This phenomenon of less scout-led pops up a lot here.

The question is, what practices and what organizational culture will create the conditions for quality scout-led programs for not just select units but for the BSA in general?

I think other who have been in the BSA longer than me have better opinions on specific organizational practices, but we shouldn't forget that what gets measured is what gets done. Our pack easily qualifies for JTE gold, but none of us are that proud because it doesn't consider what we're the proudest of. All the stuff in there is just the basics, and that's not the bar we hold ourselves to. Scouts BSA unit's success should be evaluated in large part on how well they have implemented the patrol method.

What we can do as individuals, though, is consciously create an organizational culture where the patrol method is The Way. Talk like it is (even when it isn't... yet), explain it to everyone new to scouting. Easier said than done of course, but without engagement from a critical mass of leaders of creating such a culture organizational practices won't make a difference.

15 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

I do believe the current BSA model is neither well thought out, nor sustainable.

"Separate but equal" is a bad idea.  Chartering Organizations should have the option to have a single gender Troop( or Troops), or a blended Troop.  Both have pros and cons.  I do not believe there is "one size fits all" for what we are trying to accomplish.  Give Chartering Organizations, parents, and Scouts the options to choose what program they'd like to participate in, according to the dictates of their conscience.

And, it is not working out in reality.  Many B & G Troops under the same CO are really "blended" troops just doing all their stuff together.  And I am fine with it. 

Agree completely. And like I was saying way back, I think de facto blended troops will become more and more common, making the situation less and less tenable, as groups of cub scouts cross over. I can't know for sure, of course, but I think it's going to turn into a situation like the one-night camping for cubs where the rules are widely ignored because they don't make sense to neither the people running the program (those who want what I think of as normal scouting in this case) nor the scouts themselves. Like we were also saying before the suffering of impermanence segway, the command structure also ends up being either confusing or wasteful.

The rules strike me as the outcome of a lot of wrangling in meetings between people who wanted different things. I fully expect this to be some kind of transitional phase followed by ditching the dual command structure requirement after people digest the change a little.

On 2/19/2024 at 2:22 PM, Eagledad said:

I'm respectful and nice. But, you want me to be agreeable or quiet and that is not nice. 

Your posts above are neither. As you quote me telling you previously above. Asking you to stop attacking a fellow scout's character is frankly something that shouldn't even need to be said at all, yet here we are. Attacks are not nice. Being asked to stop attacking isn't not-nice.

Every time you say girls are ruining the program for boys, you're reducing our chances of growing membership and creating a culture of growth. You're spinning that wheel of cause and effect every time you say that here. So please stop. Let's move forward.

@Eagledad I see that this transition is hard for you. I hope you can find your way to equanimity. But girls and boys scouting together isn't new for me at all, and I personally had nothing to do with BSA changing its policy on that. I'm here because BSA is now providing the scouting experience I wanted for my scout, that's all. If somebody forced and intimidated the BSA, it wasn't me. To the generic insult of my character, and that of past generations of scouts as well as current scouts, you now add personal insults of my leadership? Not getting friendlier. I just want you to be quiet if you can't say anything nice. That's not censorship, that's manners. 

I don't think the inverse of what you think. I don't think that there's no way that gender-segregated scouting can produce the best character. I think it can produce people of the best character. That's not my objection to gender-segregated scouting. But I don't really care if you agree with me or not as much as I care that you don't make my scouts (or anyone else's scouts) feel like they're doing something wrong for joining an organization they're allowed to join.

Not telling girls that they're ruining scouting for their male den- and troopmates isn't for my personal benefit. You're not going to be able to sway me to take the idea that my childhood scouting was all wrong and nobody in the whole country realized it, just you, seriously. I did not lower my male patrolmates' character.  Like I've already said, you're not the only one with experiences, and nothing makes yours real and mine a fantasy. My childhood really happened, just like yours. No, it is for the benefit of current BSA scouts. I will be the lightning rod for anger about this change so that my scouts don't have to receive it. May this be of benefit to all sentient beings. 🙏🏼

As for scouting not being a movement - I refer you to BSA being a National Scouting Organization of the World Organization of the Scouting Movement, and the World Organization of the Scouting Movement's history of scouting.

https://www.scout.org/who-we-are/scout-movement/scoutings-history

I've learned elsewhere on this form that a lot of BSA scouts and scouters don't quite realize that the BSA is not a stand-alone organization, so perhaps you didn't know this. But you can easily verify what I'm saying here by exploring scout.org. I didn't create WOSM as part of a secret coercive plot to ruin everything, I promise 😂

There is also the World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts, WAGGGS, which is the other international umbrella organization for the scouting movement. You can verify that they also conceptualize scouting as a transnational movement. Most scouting organizations are in both, as Scouterna (and Svenska Scoutförbundet before the creation of the single organisation) is.  Again, you can have a different conception of scouting if you like, but me holding the most common view doesn't mean that I'm out to get you somehow.

Gender equality and everyone scouting together isn't some newfangled progressive ideal, it's the faît accompli  mainstream of the scouting movement. At a movement level, it's not controversial in the slightest, it's the status quo. 95% of WOSM NSOs scout together. 95%. I'm not proposing or doing anything new at all or trying to intimidate you. BSA has been in the 5%, so I understand that in your personal experience it's new, but that's not the same thing as it being new in scouting as a whole, and both WOSM and WAGGGS embrace gender equality as a goal to strive towards and that scouting is meant to help achieve.

Some top hits off a search on "WOSM gender equality":

https://www.scout.org/iwd2020

https://www.scout.org/what-we-do/young-people-and-communities/diversity-and-0

https://www.scout.org/gender-equality-ethiopia-gambia

https://treehouse.scout.org/topic/wosm-services-equips-nsos-tools-be-champions-gender-equality

https://issuu.com/worldscouting/docs/gender_equity_guidelines_en_final_final

Same for "WAGGGS gender equality":

https://www.wagggs.org/en/our-world/europe-region/about-us/our-impact/working-men-and-boys-gender-equality/

https://www.wagggs.org/en/blog/calling-decision-makers-let-young-women-lead/

https://www.wagggs.org/en/blog/calling-decision-makers-let-young-women-lead/

Which is what makes it so striking that you're calling the vast majority of scouts out as not having the best character. That's quite a statement. This is why I made sure I wasn't reading more into your words than you actually meant, but you confirmed that you did mean that virtually all WOSM and most WAGGGS scouts don't have the best character. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but bringing it up every time something as normal as girls and boys scouting together comes up is going to get tiresome, especially if you keep angling it personally. Like I already explained, it comes off looking probably more pointed than you realize to any scouts reading this, scouts for whom this is also something relatively new. You don't have to scout with us girls, just don't keep telling us that our presence is ruining our male den and troopmates' character. Think it, don't come say it here every time someone mentions scouting together.

I'm sure not everyone remembers or has previous read this, but my own simultaneous WOSM and WAGGGS scouting experience was in Sweden, where we have scouted together since 1960. So, if no scouts that scout normally can develop the best character, than I didn't either, and neither did my dad, my uncle, my patrolmates, etc. Insulting other scouts' character really isn't a friendly move.

All my old hike and Jamboree pictures of my patrol with both girls and boys in them isn't some political statement, they're just old personal pictures of someone's patrol from 30-40 years ago. Just like your old pictures with just boys or girls in them. That's just what it was. Me talking about my scouting experience with both girls and boys isn't a political statement any more than you talking about yours with just boys or girls. That my old is your new doesn't mean that I forced the change in your world, or that it's somehow alien to scouting. I want my scout to have the experience I and my dad had many, many decades ago, and I've got a scouter crew that want the same all on their own, no convincing or intimidation required. Talking about what we do as scouters in a family den also isn't a political statement, it's what this forum is for.

I have never heard a GSUSA scout or scouter say any like what you're saying here, IRL or online, so I'm not going to go stir up that forum with my opinion that they should admit men and boys as well, and for that matter that GSUSA and BSA should merge, both of which I've previously expressed here. If I do ever hear that, I will say something, but there's a difference in impact and frankly intent to respond to something in a conversation stream and in starting a conversation to criticize how someone else is scouting. GSUSA must be doing more right than wrong, after all, and they are our sisters in scouting either way. I am always glad when a new scout mom is a former GSUSA scout. Loyalty to scouting trumps disagreements about how to deliver the best program. 

So it looks like a bunch of posts did get moderated in the end, which is probably just as well for the good name of the BSA because what was still there is the same old gender essentialist stuff I've heard since I was my scout's current age and that still doesn't ring true. It didn't ring true even before I studied emptiness and it certainly isn't going to now that I have. I have so much to say about that that I end up with nothing to say because it's all been said for decades if not generations, in books and around dinner tables. There's nothing I'm going to say here that's going to change a dyed-in-the-wool gender essentialist. I just need them to not stop me from living my life any way I please (within good morality, of course). (My female preschool teachers made me jump through all kinds of sewing hoops before they very reluctantly let me build the wooden boat I wanted to make and sail, for example. None of the boys had to sew first, it turned out later.) And they mostly can't, because enough men like yourself @yknot also see through it now. We can just get on with business, in this case scouting. I know my committee all feels the same, I and my scout are absolutely welcome in our pack. So we're just getting on with delivering the scouting program.

What hasn't already been said a million times is that, like @yknot and the moderators here have recognized, it is going to be detrimental to female scouts and therefore the BSA to keep dumping negative feelings about scouting all together into public spaces where those scouts are going to see it. Exactly as they're saying, it does say "go away, you're not welcome, secret boys club girls not allowed". (Even if that honestly wasn't what you meant, because it's hard to believe that you didn't given the volume of people who really did.) It makes the BSA look weak on its foundations - in the best case. In the expected case, it isn't just a look but an actual weakening of our standing as an ethically grounded youth organization. Given the two other major ways in which the BSA has openly struggled with its own values foundation in the same way for a long time, dumping negative feelings about scouting together creates even more drag on recruiting, vitality, and windhorse.

It is not loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, or kind to your brothers and sisters in scouting to say that they could never have the highest character because they didn't scout gender-separated, especially when that is the movement norm. This is not the spirit to bring to the campfire.

There are families in our pack that have very different political opinions than mine. (Seen political slogans at their houses.) And you know what I do in scouts? I shut up about politics. I do not bring that to the campfire. I rouse compassion and genuinely consider them my friends. I like them, they're good people. (As, of course , literally everyone is in the primordial sense.) I am very alarmed by the policies proposed by the politicians they support, but breaking scouts isn't going to make that any better. In scouts, we build community, not break it apart.

Another thing that hasn't been said a million times is the overlap of religion and therefore reverent with rejection of gender essentialism. I imagine most here aren't familiar with the story of Noble Tara Bodhisattva's human birth Yeshe Dawa, so here the pith of it is:

Princess Yeshe Dawa developed genuine, impartial love and compassion for each and every living being. She was not enchanted by the luxuries of palace life; instead, she vowed to show the way to liberation to millions of beings each day before eating breakfast, to millions more before eating lunch, and to even more before going to sleep at night. Because of this, she was called Arya Tara, meaning “The Noble Liberator.” “Arya” indicates that she has directly realized the nature of reality and “Tara” shows her liberating activity. When religious authorities suggested that she pray to be born a man in future lives, Tara refused, pointing out that many Buddhas had already manifested in male bodies and vowing to attain full awakening in a woman’s body and continuously return in female form in order to benefit others.

https://thubtenchodron.org/2005/03/practice-of-tara/

Not denigrating women is one of the traditional vajrayana vows. There is no equivalent for men - sexist on the surface, but let's be honest, we all know why. It didn't need to be explicitly called out because it wasn't much of a problem.

The reason for both Noble Tara's lesson and the vow inclusion is that gender essentialism is a mistaken view not just according to many modern Western feminists of all genders but also according to core traditional Buddhist teachings. Gender is empty of independent essence, as per noble Avalokiteshvara in the Sutra of the Heart of Transcendent Knowledge:

"O Shariputra, a son or daughter of noble family who wishes to practice the profound prajñaparamita should see in this way: seeing the five skandhas to be empty of nature. Form is emptiness; emptiness also is form. Emptiness is no other than form; form is no other than emptiness. In the same way, feeling, perception, formation, and consciousness are emptiness. This, Shariputra, all dharma are emptiness. There are no characteristics. There is no birth and no cessation. There is no impurity and no purity. There is no increase and no decrease. Therefore, Shariputra, in emptiness, there is no form, no feeling, no perception, no formation, no consciousness; no eye, no ear, no nose, no tongue, no body, no mind; no appearance, no sound, no smell, no taste, no touch, no dharmas; no eye dhatu up to no mind dhatu, no dhatu of dharma, no mind consciousness dhatu; no ignorance, no end of ignorance up to no old age and death, no end of old age and death; no suffering, no origin of suffering, no cessation of suffering, no path, no wisdom, no attainment, and no nonattainment. Therefore, Shariputra, since the bodhisattvas have no attainment, they abide by means of prajñaparamita."

This isn't comprehensible without knowing some terms, foundational teachings, and the two truths view, and I don't this anyone really cares here so I will just make the note that if this makes no sense to you, it's because hearing this without knowing that background is like hearing that all matter is both a wave and a particle at the same time without knowing the background and sequence of both theory and experiments to understand how to understand it. I still wrote out that whole segment because it's the most well-known sutra that makes it very clear that gender is absolutely one of the "things" that doesn't really exist at the ultimate truth level. It exists at the relative, everyday level, but such existence is a little random and comes together and falls apart, so we shouldn't take it too seriously. It's just a concept. Reifying concepts into some sort of Eternal Absolute Truth Beyond Impermanence is grasping and solidifying something that is only there temporarily and is a form of ignorance (mental dullness, refusing to look properly, and/or just not knowing how things work), one of the Three Poisons, which are the roots of Samsara and therefore suffering.

Just like it's not helpful to scouts, scouters, the BSA, nor the scouting movement to go around telling people they're going to go to hell if they don't repent, even if you honestly think that, going around telling people it's a grave mistake to scout with anyone who's interested is unhelpful. As a movement, we logically have to hold such different opinions - no way millions of people with different spiritual views happen to hold the same opinions to the extent that they don't think others in the movement are making spiritual mistakes, logically speaking. But we're here to build community, not tear it apart, so we agree to disagree and focus on building friendship instead.

I don't lose any sleep over that the Jehovah's Witnesses think I'm going to hell, they can think whatever they like, but I still don't want them ringing my doorbell again and again to tell me so. That's just annoying. Think it, but don't come interrupt me living my life to tell me.