Jump to content
vumbi

Transgender policy change

Recommended Posts

Do I understand correctly that 72% of CO's supported the old policy?  

 

The thing that really irks me, is that the CO's are supposed to have the bulk of the voting power in BSA.  But as you go up from each level, (from CO's to Councils to Regions to National), the CO's vote gets diminished each time by about 10%.

 

70% of CO's

60% of Councils

50% of Regions

 

...and then the CO's lose the vote at National.

 

I'm not just talking about this one issue, it happens all the time. This system is absolutely corrupt.

Edited by David CO
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again I will ask, what did BSA gain from making this change? They've lost a great deal, but what did they gain?

 

You could have just as easily asked, what did they have to gain by letting "Colored kids" go to schools with white kids?  I'd say they have the gained the moral high ground by doing the right thing. 

 

I believe now, just as then, you're on the wrong side by believing either decision is the wrong move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I believe now, just as then, you're on the wrong side by believing either decision is the wrong move.

This equates morality to nothing. It's anti God and is more destructive to the culture than any other attack because society looses all baseline of moral integrity. When man starts basing good and evil from the fickle policies of popularity of the moment, the culture can't servive because the demographic with the least voice loose faith in its leaders.

 

This really hit home for me as I read about the organizers of the women's march. The organizers drew a line that feminism is based (yes based) on the liberation that mothers can kill their preborn sons and daughters without fear of government retribution. Imagine a political party hinging its success of power of mothers killing their children as being on the "right" side. The Democratic Party accepted the feminist leaders throwing out the pro-life feminist and that was than. No debate, no "let's think this out", the party accepted the switch from pro choice to pro abortion.

 

Our culture has come to embrace the acceptable idea of moms against their children.

 

I guess to some the trans gender thing is obvious when scaling it down to a personal issue of what is best for that one youth. But to discount all other opinions on an egotistical idea that I'm right and your wrong places man against man without any consideration of an agreement. Ego against ego only forces a following of the guy with the biggest stick. As we have watched our leaders over the past 10 years, picking the stick that will beat our neighbor down in submission isn't working.

 

Barry

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a longtime leader, I am very disappointing in this decision.  BSA already has coed programs.  These programs have age restrictions though. Why not ease the age restrictions on those programs and let these individuals still get an outdoor experience without changing the Boy and Cub Scout programs.  This really has nothing to do with transgender, it is a small group of people that want t cause trouble and force a group to make a change just to make a change.  I would like to see the numbers of how membership has gone down due to the last two membership policy changes.  I know in my district alone, we were down over 2500 scouts from last year and over 4000 since the first change.  Very sad

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I believe now, just as then, you're on the wrong side by believing either decision is the wrong move."

 

I believe he refers to the gay decision and the transgender decision.

 

While I am troubled by the religious and practical implications of the decisions and whether they signal a surrender to PC over values rather than truly value-driven decisions, I do not know that they represent a surrender to PC, whatever I fear or suspect.  

 

That I disagree with someone's decision does not make me the final arbiter of all things moral, ethical, or religious.  I am only a single, imperfect being possessed of only the limit knowledge that I think I have.

 

Who made the decision?  By what process?  What consideration was given to those in Scouting as a group?  Is it true that the position of the majority was rejected?  What are the implications for future decisions? 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BSA Policy requires ALL Scouters and people attending Scouting events to have a BSA Medical form on file.  As a Den Leader and Cubmaster I required our scouts and parents to have a Medical form on file.  I would also go over each form to find out if we had anyone with an allergy or medical condition.  What happens when us Leaders find out by way of the form that the registered "Boy" is actually a biological female.  At that point, how would I be able to put that scout in a tent with male scout?  This poses major problems.  What bathroom and shower arrangements are there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't consider 38 percent substantial? I do. What it isn't is a tiny minority.

 

Yet the stats I quoted point to a majority not supporting a change. So which way should things go?

The point is the polling and summary produced contradictory results. IOW, it's inconclusive. I find it hard to believe either side of the debate using this data.

Basing major decisons on those results is reprehensible..

This just points to a larger problem with National management making decisons based on such data.

 

While National may be avoiding some uncomfortable pressure and publicity, it's the locals that feel the repercussions.

National making decisions to the detriment of the locals is going to hurt them much more in the long run. 

Without them, youth, and willing families, there is no program and organization to manage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All of the virtues mentioned in your quote (do things for themselves and other, scoutcraft, patriotism, courage, self-reliance, etc), they aren't the exclusive domain of boys. Just bolding the word boys doesn't make them things that can only be taught to boys in an all-male setting. If you changed the word to "girls", the rest of it would read just as logically and realistically as it does for boys. 

 

Yes the BSA has been a boys' organization. But the core of the program has never been dependent on gender. If someone were to hypothetically sneak through the program as a boy when in reality they were female, all of the gains they made in going through it would still benefit them the same as if they were male. The same character-building, self-reliance, bravery, all of it. 

 

I stand by my previous statement. BSA is about character-building. Always has been, always will be regardless of gender and membership policies.

[/quote

The fact that the Scout "lied" and "misled" everyone tells me that they did not live by the Boy Scout Oath and Boy Scout Law and therefore could not have achieved any rank because they must live by the oath and law. Right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I believe now, just as then, you're on the wrong side by believing either decision is the wrong move."

 

I believe he refers to the gay decision and the transgender decision.

 

While I am troubled by the religious and practical implications of the decisions and whether they signal a surrender to PC over values rather than truly value-driven decisions, I do not know that they represent a surrender to PC, whatever I fear or suspect.  

 

That I disagree with someone's decision does not make me the final arbiter of all things moral, ethical, or religious.  I am only a single, imperfect being possessed of only the limit knowledge that I think I have.

 

Who made the decision?  By what process?  What consideration was given to those in Scouting as a group?  Is it true that the position of the majority was rejected?  What are the implications for future decisions? 

 

I don't know that they represent a surrender to PC, either.  The statements from National sound like they surrendered to marketing studies.

 

It would appear that younger members of BSA may have a different opinion than the majority.  Ten or twenty years from now, they may actually constitute a majority.  Who knows? But they don't have a majority yet.

 

When BSA disregarded the majority, and instead focused on future trends and marketing studies, they were acting like a business. 

 

If BSA wants to operate as a business, than we should be allowed to have an annual stockholders meeting, where we can get together to vote out the Board of Directors.

Edited by David CO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@@Stosh, if the Boy Scout's identified gender of male is different than what is listed on their birth certificate, I think it is required to have a female adult along on the trip.  If the gender listed is the same based on state law, no female adult is required.  First problem solved.

 

Latrines - Most latrines have doors.  The one's that don't the scouts always impose their own "one person at a time rule" and the buddy stands outside.   For public bathrooms, state law applies.  Second problem solved.

 

Showering - Typically, scouts don't shower on weekend trips.  At out summer camp, any scout under 14 might shower once and the showers are individual.  You only have issues when you have State Park like facilities where the showers are in the bathroom.  Then state law applies, whatever that may be.  Three down.

 

Tenting - Again, birth certiicate controls and then individual preferences (scouts have to be comfortable with who they tent with).  Honestly, on most weekend campouts, the Boy Scouts don't change their clothes at all during the weekend.  If they do change, they take turns being alone inside the tent or change in their sleeping bag.  Most of my Scouts want to tent by themselves anyway.  Four.

 

Our Cub Scout pack has one boy with Downs Syndrome and one confined to a motorized wheelchair.  We are looking forward to welcoming them into the Troop and willing to make any accomodations necessary.  We currently have Scouts on the autism spectrum that we make accomodations for on campouts and at summer camp.  We have kids who do sports that come late or leave early on campouts.  I don't think this would be any different - we make accomodations based on the needs of individual scouts.  My experience is that transgender youth and their parents understand that this is a difficult situation and are easy to work with when they see people treating their children as human beings and not an "issue" or "agenda."  

 

I can and do understand objections to the decision based on someone's religious, moral, political and scientific views, but I think that arguing the practicalities of implemeting the decision are red herrings.  

I think you have missed the point here.  The new BSA policy says their identity is based on what they say on their application NOT Birth Certificate.  You will never see the Birth Certificate.  When little Johnny walks through the door he/she is Johnny not Jane.  When you are assigning tents, you are not suppose to know Johnny is Jane.  If you do make tenting decisions based on Johnny being Jane, you will face a lawsuit tor treating Johnny/Jane different.  This is the problem many of us are having with this as we are not suppose to know that Johnny is really Jane. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My unit still uses a campground that has group showers.  Now, my boys aren't all geniuses, but I think they would figure out that Johnny is really Jane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you have missed the point here.  The new BSA policy says their identity is based on what they say on their application NOT Birth Certificate.  You will never see the Birth Certificate.  When little Johnny walks through the door he/she is Johnny not Jane.  When you are assigning tents, you are not suppose to know Johnny is Jane.  If you do make tenting decisions based on Johnny being Jane, you will face a lawsuit tor treating Johnny/Jane different.  This is the problem many of us are having with this as we are not suppose to know that Johnny is really Jane. 

 

 

First off, the BSA policy is for membership, not YPT or other purposes.  As stated above, unless I hear differently, I'm defering to state law definitions of gender for YPT.  Second, I don't think that someone being transgender is required to be a secret.  Even in the articles about the Scout from New Jersey, it was made clear that everyone was aware that he was transgender.  Third, I don't think there is a basis for a lawsuit for treating transgendered youth differently if their birth certificate identifies them differently than their gender identity.  Again, state law controls.  

 

In my limited dealings with parents of transgendered youth, they are only looking for reasonable accommodations.  They recognize that their child is different -- they aren't in a state of denial.  They realize that their child's gender identity makes their child's life so much more difficult and sets their child up for a host of potential problems.  But they are like any other parent, they love their child and they want to protect them from life's cruelties as best they can.  If they know that you understand their situation and are living the Scout Law in respect to their child ("Trustworthy"  "Friendly" "Courteous" and especially "Kind") they will understand your situation and work with you to make sure that there is a Middle Way (reflecting the Buddhist concept of a path that takes neither extreme but focuses and values our shared humanity).  

 

In our Crew, the transgender members tent with other scouts that have the same gender identified on their birth certificate as opposed to the scouts having the same gender identity (with the scouts and their parents fully aware and comfortable with this situation).  This isn't because of some adult rule, it is what the Scouts figured out on their own.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@@Stosh, if the Boy Scout's identified gender of male is different than what is listed on their birth certificate, I think it is required to have a female adult along on the trip.  If the gender listed is the same based on state law, no female adult is required.  First problem solved.

 

........

 

I can and do understand objections to the decision based on someone's religious, moral, political and scientific views, but I think that arguing the practicalities of implemeting the decision are red herrings.  

 

First, the birth certificate no longer matters. That is the crux of the policy change. BSA will regard the youth's gender as the gender the parent marks on the application. 

 

Second, arguing the "practicalities of implementing the decisions" is not a red herring. There are potential and real legal impacts to every decision. It is prudent to discuss and understand those implications, regardless of where one's stance on the issue falls. "Be Prepared" is not just as motto, it is how we should conduct ourselves. Understanding how this and other decisions impact BSA, our councils, troops and CO's is important, not completely understood at this point and frankly the only way to come close to "Being Prepared."

 

Hopefully leaving Helpful Tracks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just look at the BSA's own polling on the issue:

 http://web.archive.org/web/20160415130812/http://www.scouting.org/sitecore/content/MembershipStandards/Resolution/Summary.aspx

 

It includes data like:

 

  • A majority of Boy Scouts and Venturers oppose allowing chartered organizations to follow their own beliefs if that means there will be different standards from one organization to the next.
  • According to a majority of current Boy Scouts and Venturers, the current policy does not represent a core value of Scouting.
and for scout parents:

  • The research finds a significant shift in attitudes regarding the BSA policy on homosexuality.
  • Three years ago, parents supported the current BSA policy by a wide margin—58 percent to 29 percent. Today, parents oppose the policy by a 45 percent to 42 percent margin.
  • Three years ago, 57 percent of parents of current Scouts supported the policy. Today, only 48 percent of parents of current Scouts support the policy.
and for adult scouters:

  • Respondents support the current policy by a 61 percent to 34 percent margin.
  • Support for the current policy is higher at different program and volunteer levels in the organization:

  • 50 percent of Cub Scout parents support it; 45 percent of Cub Scout parents oppose.
  • 61 percent of Boy Scout parents support it.
  • 62 percent of unit leaders support it.
  • 64 percent of council and district volunteers support it.
  • 72 percent of chartered organizations support it.

All of which adds up to "substantial support" for both sides.

What you quoted were the focus groups. Those are small groups of selected people. What you failed to quote was the much LARGER membership survey where MEMBERS actually overwhelmingly were AGAINST the change.

 

Always convenient to post the stats that support you position withou noting the very small group of people invoked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I getting really tired of this type of argument.......

 

Please understand that the BSA is not "owned" by the conservatives. That it has to make room for all. 

 

And I think that was the trigger for all this. By telling this particular youth "no" on membership, National had suddenly created a de-facto policy on TG youth. And National responded by having an actual, thought out (well one hopes it was thought out - but this is National) policy instead of an accidental one. Which I think was the right thing to do.

 And they are people who are tired of the argument that BSA "has to make room for all." It presumes that others perspectives are somehow invalid. 

 

Think about that statement for a minute. Is there no group that you would be opposed to BSA granting a charter or a commission?

 

Some, perhaps many, there is the concern that goal for total inclusiveness means there is NO line in the sand for standards.

 

I am certain there is some scenario that everyone will draw a line and say, no, that is not acceptable. Thus that line varies from individual to individual. 

 

But when a group continually hears their perspective (where they draw the line) is invalid, bigoted, mean spirited, wrong etc. is that inclusive? Is there room for them?

 

That is particularly true when the organization they joined has a long standing history matching their value system, such as BSA. Changes in that value system can cause them to have concerns, and dismissing those concerns certainly does not feel inclusive to them. 

 

BSA did not suddenly create a "de facto policy. There policy has always been Boy Scout membership for youth has always been for boys only. The change has come with the flexible, and historically very recent, perception of of what defines a boy. That is not on BSA, their policy is unchanged, society, or at least a portion of it has changed that definition, and not everyone agrees with that change. To tell them their perception is invalid hardly feels inclusive.  

 

Hopefully leaving Helpful Tracks

Edited by HelpfulTracks
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×