qwazse

it's allowed. But in some places, folks have to recognize burn bans. But this is nothing new. While those scouts in those old movies were being filmed in their flint and steel contest, somewhere in this country scouts were being asked to limit the starting of fires.

This is where you talk to the SM (and maybe older boys) in the troop you're visiting and describe your religious convictions and if they will support you in that. For example, our troop is sponsored by a church, but the church expects us to be welcoming to every youth regardless of religion. They expect us to request the boys say grace at meals and that's about it. Other churches have expectations for boys who call themselves Christian, and they expect leaders -- even if they themselves are not Christian -- to make sure the program allows for those expectations to be fulfilled. The only way you'll know is by asking. It's a hassle, but on the flip side, all that talking to adults you've never met before will prepare you for things like your next board of review.

Whoever taught them? Like maybe the scouter who takes his cues from Scouting? Go to the OP above, follow the link to the article, generate a word histogram, and let us know the number of synonyms of handbook, reference, literature, or reading you find. (I could tell you how many I found, but my count may be biased.) To be clear: if you have boys who are teaching other boys more efficiently than their counterparts did ten years ago, we all would benefit from hearing about it. It's just that from what I've seen, the emperor has no clothes.

Well, get your scouts who know the acronym, ask them to tell you what each letter means, in their own words. Determine what percentage of scouts mention a book, manual, or even online app. That percentage will tell you how often "reference" is understood to be part of the method. If it's not the "end all, be all," why bother requiring it?

I'm sorry you had to make this kind of decision. As an older scout with some leadership experience, you should have a say in your troop's program. At the very least, your patrol should be a set of friends who would help you generate the variety you are looking for. Sometimes adults get in the way of that. But also, sometimes, youth don't invest in training (from reading their handbook cover-to-cover to going to an extra week of program like NYLT during the year), and as a result they aren't "holding up their end of the deal" in delivering the promise of scouting to their community. So, given that you asked your question in a very good way. I'll try to respect you by giving you a little "tough talk." First, think about how much you may be part of the problem. If you could have helped your patrol plan a weekend, find a location to go, line up the adults, then maybe you need to talk to your SM about doing a better job, and give your troop another year -- this time with you doing everything you can do to really lead and generate an awesome program. If, on the other hand, you tried to do that, and adults kept shutting down your ideas. Then, maybe you should visit another unit. If that's the case, start finding out which troops are in your area and paying visits. You are also old enough to join a venturing crew, and venturers, if they have been awarded at least first class rank, may work on Eagle until they are 18. (The crew advisor takes on the role of SM, but the council still manages your paperwork just like it would for all other Eagle candidates.) A venturing crew is a lot different than a troop. So, you will have to talk to each advisor to see if they share interests you'd like to try. But, a lot of boys, in joining a venturing crew, continue being members of their troop. As a result they bring back ideas for activities that scouts enjoy. So, you have lots of options, and a lot of things to think about. Good scouting to you!

My argument has always been that EDGE reduces the process of instruction too far. Stosh's 7 points are excellent, but they, too, miss the referencing step. It could even be a step #8 in his paradigm: show where in a book or article your students can look up the material. Although, I would prefer it be towards #1 or #2 and involve actually having a student read the source material out loud. I'm not wasting this thread re-explaining why I think your teaching is incomplete if you haven't offered at least one good source that a student could call upon in your absence. I'm just reporting my observations. Obviously I have biases. Thus, in this case I'm quick to highlight the negatives, and cynical about any perceived positives. The one positive I could think of was our previous SM, who avoided public speaking until he had to give a minute at a court of honor, really became much more comfortable teaching the boys once he learned to remember those four steps -- plus my admonition to have some literature (even if it was the warning label on the box) for them to read.

The behavior in question is very rarely explained by gene expression. That's probably a good thing. With abortion on demand, well-meaning parents could attempt to "solve" this problem by a misguided application of eugenics.

So the second link says we're past the deadline. Do you have knowledge that the date's been extended?

You mean the method that we ranted about 6 years ago: http://scouter.com/index.php/topic/6887-to-edge-or-not-to-edge/ http://scouter.com/index.php/topic/7204-edge-why-dictate-it/ http://scouter.com/index.php/topic/9495-if-edge-is-badwrongpoor-how-do-you-teach-youth-to-teac/ Well, our boys merged with a troop who had learned, taught, and lived by this method. My anti-EDGE disciples since graduated and have had no influence, in order to focus on my crew advisor position, I've had no skin in the game for a year. I'm not being critical. The boys are at troop meetings and activities with smiles. My point is, they are learning the EDGE method without enduring any rants of mine such as I've posted in the links above. This month the committee decided to use BoRs to test boys' ability to tie bowlines.* None of the scouts reviewed (5 I think) could tie them. One Life scout (who I mentioned in another thread), once he decided to actually master the skill, looked up the knot in a book. He read a reference, did what he just read in the handbook, then showed what he could do two days later for some adults. And, for fits and giggles, showed the crew what he could do and got a bunch of teens having fun tying knots. Now, I'm looking forward to what he'll do with some cooking references for his next merit badge, YUM! So, I continue to recommend scouters abandon EDGE and teach boys that their first step in mastering any skill must begin with a reference. *Those of you who are tempted to post about the "no testing during BoR" lecture: consider that, for all intents and purposes, these adults learned to convene BoRs via EDGE.

Well, I am indeed a wonderful scouter: introducing my youth to fire, water, ropes, tarps, magnetic fields, shrimp scampi and fettuccini Alfredo on a bed of fresh lettuce, Islamic philosophy and Christian orthodoxy, and tales of psychologists who don't like when the p-values I compute for them soar in the face their hypotheses. Yep, the kids - and no small number of parents - wind up wondering a lot about me. And I call on all of that, including conversations with folks far outside of mine or the youths' bubbles. Thus I read this forum. And thanks for posting. Nothing's off the table. I first learned, in detail, of gender dysphoria years ago from a clinical psychologist on behalf of a friend of a friend. And I moved from a place of "This guy wants to have his cake and eat it too." To "He's rolling the dice on a really costly bet, wish him luck." Through the course of everyday life I've since talked to a half a dozen young adults in similar situations, and. I've also talked to adults who perpetrated hoaxes. I'm pretty sure the two groups don't overlap much. I have also learned, from my profession, that psychopathology that was once defined for adults can, at times, also apply to children. E.g., once upon a time kids didn't get depression diagnoses, then when the symptoms and time course in kids was mapped out, it behaved exactly like the same disorder in adults (with some exceptions, like a higher risk of suicide attempt among depressed kids vs. depressed adults). Surprisingly, kids are people too. Now, with regard to an 8 year old who has a decade ahead before settling on sex transition or not, I don't have clear answers. Should an organization bend for such children, when it hasn't bent for others (i.e., girls/athiests who identify with boys/theists when it comes to hiking and camping)? Can BSA be that organization for boys, even the minority who may eventually want to become women? If so, Why can't GS/USA be the place where the minority of girls who want to be boys learn how they can be young women at the same time? On a larger scale, is our country helped or hurt by "making space" for such people? Is it helped or hurt if that space is exactly the space of the role to which they aspire?

Thanks, TT. I drew on ancient history to show that these sorts of people who defy the categories of reproductive roles are nothing new. What is new is the effort to give them the full fraternity/sorority of the role to which they aspire. @@Adamcp, if you don't want to use a bridge, feel free to shout from across the gap.

And that's even if we may think they are not worthy of the privileges of the sex they are trying to emulate.

David, sorry for any confusion. I wasn't trying to interpret "it". The italics was from the online reference that I copied. I agree with you. The entire passage was a discussion on divorce without cause. And, Jesus was suggesting that celibacy would be better than trying to take on a wife knowing you could discard her as though she were a commodity. But "eunuch" needs no interpretation. That's why He referenced them an example. These folks were present in ancient times. I'm sure they were as perplexing then as folks who want to shun their reproductive roles these days are. However, society managed to find a place for them. And Jesus was pointing out that if such ones as those could manage (some willingly some forcibly), then his disciples could do just as well in celibacy if they couldn't set aside their perceived right to toss wives aside willy-nilly. My point is, if in referencing them, Christ was treating them seriously, we would do well to do likewise.

BTW - (From my experience 3 decades ago, but I think it still holds true.) Pubs in Britain are welcoming places ... even for the temperate. And depending on the bloke, there's almost as much to be gained in them as on these forums. I don't think we have room for denial. That a percentage of the population would shun roles based on reproductive potential is nothing new ... "For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it." Matthew 19:12 This statement of Jesus was in a cultural context that only provided tracks for fulfilling reproductive potential. He was speaking against that sense that those roles are eternally immutable. What is new is the push to accord those people the same privilege as the sex opposite their reproductive potential. So, in this youth's case, instead of challenging women to accept a female who prefers to express masculinity, and maybe "up their game" by encouraging girls to do a few "boy activities" for the youth's sake (and ultimately, the sake of equal rights), the child is being tossed "into the other court." It's the easy solution. And works in many contexts. But, BSA is quite intentional about there being a "male track", just as GS/USA is intentional about being a "female track". Both have evolved over the decades So the question also becomes: what does GS/USA lack that makes an 8 year old who shuns her reproductive potential unwelcome?

For as long as I can remember, Cubs used to be fully operational without camping. That part was gravy. And, frankly, I found Pack camping to be exhausting. Family camping was more enjoyable for me as a dad.

I think part of the compulsion to have the boys make the sign while reciting the code comes from external definitions: So, folks outside of scouting use it as a means to vouchsafe a vow or testimony. That is, in reference to some previous statement, they will say "scout's honor" while making the sign. For scouts themselves, such an action would be superfluous. They already promised to be trustworthy, etc ... So it is understood that they are expected to live up to any other claims, be it motto, code, or slogan.

Not GBB patrol. Every patrol should be that. The GB patrol, as defined by GBB, is merely the troop leader's council (youth leaders, not adults) out on training. So, to finish the story about making pizza on the Laurel Ridge with my troop's leadership corps ... next week I come back and in our patrol meeting I say, "Hey guys, the SPL had us making pizza over the campfire last weekend. How bout let's up our game for the next campout?" We wound up starting the tradition of chocolate fondue. The other patrol started making steaks. Franks and beans no more! All because some older scouts took time for one more winter campout to help some Life scout cut a trail through mountain laurel.

Well, sex is defined based on reproductive function (with some exceptions for chromosomal anomalies), so the youth is speaking against that. In doing so, of course, the child is "making it up" -- just like I can make up all kinds of things that speak against material facts (or so may atheist colleagues claim I do). There is no "gender switch", if there were, we would be having a much different conversation. Is deceit intended? No. The youth is convinced, based on perceptions of what a person of opposite sex should think, feel, and do, that s/he more like that person and not like any anatomically similar person who would concede their sex based on anatomy alone. If thoughts/feelings/actions take precedence over reproductive role, as they hear society suggesting they should, then the next logical step is to assume the identity dictated by cognitive, not biological, processes. This is a much different process than the tom-boy or effeminate male described by @@Stosh and @sentinel. Tom boys or girly men see themselves as exceptional members of the same sex, not normal members of the opposite sex. Each person who I or my wife knew who attempted to identify opposite their biological sex is so different that I couldn't find a common motivation. Some had serious cognitive impairments. Others were no less sharp than you and I. Most felt odd for a long time, but unlike the youth in this story, could not articulate it until their teens or later. Only one was abused by an adult (lay-clergy, if I recall). I can't speak to behaviors of self-mutilation or other negative associations. Those details haven't come up when talking to them or their parents. Since they have come up when talking other non-trans folks, I wonder how much such an association is by chance.

Western PA, mix rural/suburban. Nothing particularly unusual about them.As far as getting attention, moves like this ain't getting these kids in the papers. They are pretty much ignored. Maybe that's part of the problem! We consider ourselves close to two of these kids, and couldn't tell you if isolation is a cause or a symptom. The medical treatments are impoverishing the ones who can't be talked out of it by the time they're old enough to medicate for it.

My strong suspicion is that the "local option" was divided. Locally, some parent didn't like how their neighbor was parenting their girl-by-biology in front of their boy. (Full disclosure: My suspicion is based on my experience getting a phone call from my director of field service. Not a good day. But there's my bias.) The mom certainly checked "male" in the youth application. Unless someone punched "female" on internet rechartering, there is no way a BSA would have a clue about this female-by-biology. More likely, someone didn't like how the local option was exercised and made a stink. Or worse, nobody made a stink. But some activist decided to promote this kid as a utopian example of how trans kids are just like any other kid of the identified sex. Then, someone in council saw the news-clipping and poured gasoline on the fire. @@NJCubScouter, each one of my kids had at least one classmate (and one other in a grade above/below) looking toward reassignment surgery. If that is the pattern and our our tiny school district is representative, the rate is >.5%.

The truth? We don't know what leads to an identification or orientation under the premise of a permissive sexual ethic. If your anatomy does not constrain your future sexual expression, color or pattern preferences may be a step along the cascade towards a long term (possibly life-long) identification.

Question: why aren't we talking about a Green Bar Patrol? I mean, if the boy's a "veteran" scout, then he should have a PoR or implementing a service project through which he may continue to develop leadership. That puts him in the Green Bar Patrol. Green Bar patrol wants some special training: to be better at teaching aquatics? Give them a plan for achieving BSA Guard. to master canoeing? Plan that challenging trip. to backpack better? Line up an extra week of hiking someplace rugged. Possibilities are endless. The boy can be doing the Green Bar activity one week and his patrol activity the next. Yes, leaders on a development track are perfectly capable of being in two patrols at once. I remember sitting in a back room planning stuff (like the yearly calendar) with the ASPL maybe once. The rest of the time, we were by a camp-fire baking pizza with the leadership corps, thinking up the current life-scouts' next crazy location for an Eagle project, or what we could do for an additional week besides troop leader training with those slow-on-the-uptake city boys. One of my goals as an advisor to a general interest crew is to give youth something to take back to their (boy or girl scout) troops.

Not speaking for @@blw2 ... however, I've crossed paths with a wide spectrum of such adults and youth. Moreover, their numbers seem to be burgeoning. And many of them do vacillate between their biological sex and the opposite (or novel alternative). The vision of any 8 year old's counter-biological desire (or teen's "self discovery") being fixed is it's own stereotype. @@NJCubScouter, this field in particular is finding unknowns faster than resolutions. So, we have policy wonks choosing their experts, and the very choice is laden with bias.

That would require letting any female-by-biology join the BSA. Maybe girls who want to be boy scouts should just come out as 1% trans. I'm sure there would be some way to work that into the birth certificate. We presume the unit is welcoming. But who is the unit? How did any professional get wind of this "misplaced" cub? Somebody's Akela started howling. @@tyke, have you been in a position of standing by a youth who other parents didn't want to be in the unit?

@@Beavah, mergers are never pleasant. I think the new troop did not really rely on the brain trust of the older troop's more seasoned adults. Son #2 had aged out of the old troop, so I had no "skin" in the game. I sat on a couple of BoRs to provide an example, but after that I directed my attention to outdoor program. @@TAHAWK, we can recite rules ad nauseum, but when adults think the rules are stupid, they won't be followed. At some point, I hope to be around a fire with these committee members, and then be in a position to warn them that they are skating on thin ice with their boys. @@Stosh, Mea culpa for not being on the troop committee and extracting an apology. But I have a crew that is barely holding itself together. Being litigious takes more time than I'm prepared to spend. So, there's nothing for it but to delegate it to the ASM, pinch my nose at the stink, and play a long game. At least, the boy knows he's in the right, he knows that he can choose another unit to advance under. Knowledge is power.