Transgender policy change

[NJCubScouter]

Not my call.  If national wishes to make such rulings and if the CO goes along with it, then national and CO can be present to deal with it on-site.  Not me, I'm planning on being sick any time that situation arises.  If that means the opportunities for the other boys are reduced, that's a result of national and CO's decisions.  Not my call, not my responsibility, not my problem.

 

I think it follows from my earlier post on the local option that the BSA is not asking you to be involved in this, nor are they likely to in the future.  "Our organization’s local councils will help find units that can provide for the best interest of the child."  I think you would agree that, given your opinions and concerns regarding this subject, your troop does not meet that description.

Edited February 3, 2017 by NJCubScouter

[Stosh]

I think it follows from my earlier post on the local option that the BSA is not asking you to be involved in this, nor are they likely to in the future.  "Our organization’s local councils will help find units that can provide for the best interest of the child."  I think you would agree that, given your opinions and concerns regarding this subject, your troop does not meet that description.

 

Oh, but there's where you are wrong.  My CO would welcome any and all boys, they made that clear when I first started working with the troop.  I am spending a lot of time training up my replacement now.  It won't be long before the torch is passed.  I have no intention of making the Sex Offender's Hall of Fame.

[numbersnerd]

Then BSA is not guided by its constituents or "core constituency."

Yes, that's the point and where a lot of disappointment comes from.

[numbersnerd]

I getting really tired of this type of argument. I heard the same thing on the gays issue. It's based on the idea that the only people who wanted the change in the membership rules around gay scouts and scouters were themselves gay or were a "tiny group of outsiders". That is very wrong. There were a lot of scouts and scouters that were in favor of the change, not because they themselves were gay, but because it was the right thing too do.

 

 

Oh, OK, so this and other similar decisions aren't contributing towards the decline in membership and particiation. Got it.

[NJCubScouter]

Oh, but there's where you are wrong.  My CO would welcome any and all boys, they made that clear when I first started working with the troop.  I am spending a lot of time training up my replacement now.  It won't be long before the torch is passed.  I have no intention of making the Sex Offender's Hall of Fame.

 

Well, if there really is disagreement on fundamental unit policy between the CO and the volunteers and it can't be resolved, we all know who wins.  Right after the Dale decision the pastor of the "welcoming" church that is our CO almost fired the entire troop, until some silver-tongued Scouters somehow managed to smooth things over.  I wasn't there, I was still a Den Leader then.

[Rick_in_CA]

Oh, OK, so this and other similar decisions aren't contributing towards the decline in membership and particiation. Got it.

Whether it is or isn't effecting membership numbers is separate from the idea that it was a change that didn't have significant support within the BSA. It did have significant support. Whether it was a good idea or not is a different argument.

[Back Pack]

Whether it is or isn't effecting membership numbers is separate from the idea that it was a change that didn't have significant support within the BSA. It did have significant support. Whether it was a good idea or not is a different argument.

Didn't the number of members decrease more since 2013? Happenstance?

 

And what's the source for the assertion there was "significant support" for this change within BSA? I recall a member survey that said no. It was Council muckety mucks that made the changes. That's not the members.

[TAHAWK]

Whether it is or isn't effecting membership numbers is separate from the idea that it was a change that didn't have significant support within the BSA. It did have significant support. Whether it was a good idea or not is a different argument.

 

How did you discover this?  Was there a vote?  Who voted?  Opinion Pole?  Inquiring minds want to know.

[numbersnerd]

Whether it is or isn't effecting membership numbers is separate from the idea that it was a change that didn't have significant support within the BSA. It did have significant support. Whether it was a good idea or not is a different argument.

You're pivoting away from the original issue I had, that being it was a bad idea as it affected membership rolls negatively. And you proved my point by saying even though you approve, it wasn't a compelling reason to leave even though they had not yet changed the policy to your preference. Yet now that it's happened, others are. Your assertion that it has significant support within the membership is unfounded and merely a reflection of your view.

[Gwaihir]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3356084/I-ve-gone-child-Husband-father-seven-52-leaves-wife-kids-live-transgender-SIX-YEAR-OLD-girl-named-Stefonknee.html

 

total side track to the current conversation, but Out of curiosity, should a hypothetically 52 year old woman, who was transgender and transage (similar to the man above) be allowed to join the scouts as a scout?  

[Rick_in_CA]

How did you discover this?  Was there a vote?  Who voted?  Opinion Pole?  Inquiring minds want to know.

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.

Edited February 4, 2017 by Rick_in_CA

[numbersnerd]

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

 

 

 

pfffft...polls also said Hillary was going to win by a landslide.

 

Statistics and polls can be bent and cherry-picked any way you want. From that same page:

• 50.5 percent of councils recommend no change.
• 38.5 percent of councils recommend a change.
• 11 percent take a neutral position.

That looks like less than substantial support.

[David CO]

As you know, I am 100% opposed to the new policies. But in some ways, I have mixed feelings about them.

 

Every time one of these weird stories hits the national news, about a half million more people vote Republican. Is it really such an awful thing if the liberals get to have BSA, and the conservatives get the Presidency, the Congress, and the Supreme Court?

Edited February 4, 2017 by David CO

[Rick_in_CA]

pfffft...polls also said Hillary was going to win by a landslide.

 

Statistics and polls can be bent and cherry-picked any way you want. From that same page:

• 50.5 percent of councils recommend no change.
• 38.5 percent of councils recommend a change.
• 11 percent take a neutral position.

That looks like less than substantial support.

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

[David CO]

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

 

I think the new policy has substantial support.  It is not a tiny minority.  Neither is the opposition.

 

Rick, I think the way you quoted the report is accurate, but I think it might also be causing some confusion.

 

When the report statistics say, the current policy, are we talking about the policy as it was before the change, or the policy as it is after the change (today's current policy)?

 

I think someone reading your post could be turning the numbers upside down.

Edited February 4, 2017 by David CO