Boy Scouts to accept transgender members

[Morphine Prince 109,654]

(CNN) - The Boy Scouts of America says it will begin accepting members based on the gender indicated on their applications, opening the door for transgender children to become scouts.

Previously, the organization deferred to an individual's birth certificate to determine eligibility for programs.

"However, that approach is no longer sufficient as communities and state laws are interpreting gender identity differently, and these laws vary widely from state to state," BSA spokeswoman Effie Delimarkos said in a statement.

"Starting today, we will accept and register youth in the Cub and Boy Scout programs based on the gender identity indicated on the application. Our organization's local councils will help find units that can provide for the best interest of the child."

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/30/us/boy-scouts-transgender-membership/index.html

 

[donutellha 13,819]

inclusivity YES

[Rebel Heart 5,142]

It's great to see something progressive taking place in America and have a break from the constant regression we've been seeing since the Cheeto became president.

[Shaney 5,515]

20 minutes ago, Rebel Heart said:

It's great to see something progressive taking place in America and have a break from the constant regression we've been seeing since the Cheeto became president.

I think the people of the US have more influence about the acceptance of gay rights than the President does, despite the government doing the most to make life hell for LGBTQ individuals. Trump can continue signing executive order after executive order, but he's going to go down as the most hated president in US history. Trump probably just likes abusing power, it seems like.

It's not so easy to just reverse the progress the Obama administration set forth in society. Now that Trump is prez all the hateful individuals rose up but that's not everybody. 

[Lion Heart 15,041]

I don't want my kids to be TRANSGENDERFIED with this Marxist propaganda! I'm leaving! 

Where's the manager!!

 

[Goosey 3,017]

Boy Scouts is a shadow of its former self, thanks to America's sue-happy culture and helicopter parents. It's more daycare than scouting these days.

I don't think many parents these days would be fond of Robert Baden-Powell's original Scouting concept...

[POP2 4,206]

1 minute ago, Goosey said:

Boy Scouts is a shadow of its former self, thanks to America's sue-happy culture and helicopter parents. It's more daycare than scouting these days.

I don't think many parents these days would be fond of Robert Baden-Powell's original Scouting concept...

Are you ever not a raging bigot? 

[Goosey 3,017]

1 minute ago, GrigioBoys said:

Are you ever not a raging bigot? 

Excuse me? What's bigoted about my post?

Reported.

[Squeeshy Keety 9,935]

1 minute ago, Goosey said:

Boy Scouts is a shadow of its former self, thanks to America's sue-happy culture and helicopter parents. It's more daycare than scouting these days.

I don't think many parents these days would be fond of Robert Baden-Powell's original Scouting concept...

Well, no organization could have been that great to ban gay members until 2014 and still continue to forbid gay leaders

 I'm actually very shocked by this news (in a good way).

[Goosey 3,017]

Just now, Squeeshy Keety said:

Well, no organization could have been that great to ban gay members until 2014 and still continue to forbid gay leaders

I don't know about gays in Scouts. 

What I do know about is ridiculous limitations: for example, boys getting their Totin' Chips... but then having their knives and hatchets confiscated for safety reasons. I hear many troops no longer even give knives at all. How are you supposed to be a Boy Scout without a Boy Scout knife?

[SychosSoChic 9,995]

Just now, GrigioBoys said:

Are you ever not a raging bigot? 

I'm not one to defend Goosey, but there's nothing offensive in his post

He's commenting on the scouts' practicality and just how effective their skills are today, rather than their social acceptance.

Whether or not he's correct in his assessment I wouldn't know.

[Squeeshy Keety 9,935]

2 minutes ago, Goosey said:

I don't know about gays in Scouts. 

What I do know about is ridiculous limitations

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

 

I think restricting it to straight-identifying members only is a ridiculous limitation, though...

I would imagine the knife restrictions are worth giving up homophobic practices, but that's just me. I know it might not seem like a problem for someone who has never and will never fear losing their rights, but believe me, it's a big deal. 

Spoiler

i also happen to think creating two different, separate programs for boys and girls is dumb too, but that's another issue.

 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

7 minutes ago, SychosSoChic said:

I'm not one to defend Goosey, but there's nothing offensive in his post

He's commenting on the scouts' practicality and just how effective their skills are today, rather than their social acceptance.

Whether or not he's correct in his assessment I wouldn't know.

You are right, but that's entirely his shtick Say something that can possibly be taken as offensive, but get away with it by making no obviously clear alignment with the position. 

In this case, he is basically saying that the Scouts are a shell of what they used to be. It is then easy for the reader to take the leap from "Trans people are allowed in the scouts!" (the OP) and "The scouts are a mere shell of what they used to be" (his comment) which makes people generally arrive at "He's saying that the OP is a symptom of "The scouts are a shell of what they used to be!" even if he didn't say so. This way, he's avoided actually commenting on the issue the OP brings up, but still given his "opinion" on the topic (whether its true or not) through the cracks.

With no alternative readings, it appears that he's just making an unrelated post about the scouts that's still sort of on topic, but not referring to Transgender members, then protects himself with some statement resolving himself of any attachment to the OP's statement. (In this case its the general "I don't know about gays in Scouts" (which is actually a lie) along with a doubling down of his seemingly unrelated position about the scouts in general being a shell of their former glory).

He knows people will conflate the two, but he also refuses to give a relevant position on the actual crux of the topic at hand (Transgender acceptance in the boy scouts, not just boy scouts in general)

OT:

Good  Some light in the darkness

[SychosSoChic 9,995]

Just now, ItsTommyBitch said:

You are right, but that's entirely his shtick Say something that can possibly be taken as offensive, but get away with it by making no obviously clear alignment with the position. 

In this case, he is basically saying that the Scouts are a shell of what they used to be. It is then easy for the reader to take the leap from "Trans people are allowed in the scouts!" (the OP) and "The scouts are a mere shell of what they used to be" (his comment) which makes people generally arrive at "He's saying that the OP is a symptom of "The scouts are a shell of what they used to be!" even if he didn't say so. This way, he's avoided actually commenting on the issue the OP brings up, but still given his "opinion" on the topic (whether its true or not) through the cracks.

With no alternative readings, it appears that he's just making an unrelated post about the scouts that's still sort of on topic, but not referring to Transgender members, then protects himself with some statement resolving himself of any attachment to the OP's statement. (In this case its the general "I don't know about gays in Scouts" (which is actually a lie) along with a doubling down of his seemingly unrelated position about the scouts in general being a shell of their former glory).

He knows people will conflate the two, but he also refuses to give a relevant position on the actual crux of the topic at hand (Transgender acceptance in the boy scouts, not just boy scouts in general)

OT:

Good  Some light in the darkness

Oh I'm well aware of the sh!t Goosey pulls.

But rather point out what what he's actually saying, than let Goosey start an off topic argument like he always does.

But I was here when his trolling started, and I will be here when his trolling ends.

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

Just now, SychosSoChic said:

Oh I'm well aware of the sh!t Goosey pulls.

But rather point out what what he's actually saying, than let Goosey start an off topic argument like he always does.

But I was here when his trolling started, and I will be here when his trolling ends.

Poetic.