7-year-old transgender child closes down Girl Scout troops

[Drolefille]

Here's where I think I and others aren't agreeing with other points of view:

I don't think parents have the 'right' to have knowledge of everything that would control their child's exposure to the world. I think they have the right to try and limit their child's exposure to things, but not to the extent that it infringes on another person's privacy, safety or well being. I don't think that parents are actually successful at limiting their child's knowledge about the world and I think that ultimately they can do more damage in the name of 'protecting' a child. But you cannot exert your parental control settings on the public.

Additionally, the idea that a transgender child is somehow something inappropriate for children to be exposed to is absolutely abhorrent to me. How incredibly stigmatizing to transgendered children and adults. It's like when a YA publisher tried to get an author to change a same-sex relationship in her story to an opposite-sex relationship because it was "inappropriate." Two boys kissing is not less appropriate than a boy and a girl kissing. Similarly a girl playing tag who has a penis is no more or less appropriate than a girl playing tag who has a vagina. And if the kids are flashing each other their panties it is inappropriate no matter what is underneath. So yes, I see this sort of parental control setting as bigotry and transphobia, plain and simple.

Children's experiences and knowledge is guided by adults. When mommy is pregnant you tell the toddler that there's a baby in mommy's tummy, you tell older children more and more accurate information until you embarrass your teenager by the fact that you still have sex and OMG stop talking about it MOM!!!!! But I don't think anyone would reasonably say that a child shouldn't be exposed to a pregnant woman. (Although I've seen some say that a child shouldn't be exposed to a nursing woman which makes me :sarcastic like you wouldn't believe.)

Prejudices are rarely so blatant as to be stated outright, they're frequently coded and hidden. Typically shining a light on them is uncomfortable, but it's the only way to clean out the corners. So while I'm sorry for the discomfort, I don't think turning off the light is productive.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I don't think parents have the 'right' to have knowledge of everything that would control their child's exposure to the world. I think they have the right to try and limit their child's exposure to things, but not to the extent that it infringes on another person's privacy, safety or well being. I don't think that parents are actually successful at limiting their child's knowledge about the world and I think that ultimately they can do more damage in the name of 'protecting' a child. But you cannot exert your parental control settings on the public.

I think most parents fail to realize they cannot always shelter their children, and they will be exposed to things you don't want them to be at school. Most parents would think talking to a fifth grader about sex is inappropriate, but that doesn't stop kids from talking about it to each other. A parent should always be a parent, but when it comes to the human body and sex even at a young age it is folly to pretend you can keep them from hearing or seeing things.

Additionally, the idea that a transgender child is somehow something inappropriate for children to be exposed to is absolutely abhorrent to me. How incredibly stigmatizing to transgendered children and adults. It's like when a YA publisher tried to get an author to change a same-sex relationship in her story to an opposite-sex relationship because it was "inappropriate." Two boys kissing is not less appropriate than a boy and a girl kissing. Similarly a girl playing tag who has a penis is no more or less appropriate than a girl playing tag who has a vagina. And if the kids are flashing each other their panties it is inappropriate no matter what is underneath. So yes, I see this sort of parental control setting as bigotry and transphobia, plain and simple.

I don't think she was necessarily saying they shouldn't be exposed, but a right to know if they will be exposed. But the problem is is that when people know they get curious and start to search for information. It doesn't matter if there will be a transgendered child in the troop or not, people are curious and will often make things up and jumping to conclusions. It's possible that a cis girl could get caught up in a nasty mess because someone thought she was a boy because someone had to know. It's also that wanting to know one thing but not a list of other things is rather contradicting. No organization should have to make sure parents know of every last possible type of person their child will come into contact with that would be considered non-mainstream. If people were expecting the Girl Scouts to disclose to parents their daughter may come into contact with a Muslim, people would accuse them of being a hate group. If it were certain mental disorders, they would be considered insensitive.

 

[Drolefille]

I think most parents fail to realize they cannot always shelter their children, and they will be exposed to things you don't want them to be at school. Most parents would think talking to a fifth grader about sex is inappropriate, but that doesn't stop kids from talking about it to each other. A parent should always be a parent, but when it comes to the human body and sex even at a young age it is folly to pretend you can keep them from hearing or seeing things.

Exactly.

I don't think she was necessarily saying they shouldn't be exposed, but a right to know if they will be exposed. But the problem is is that when people know they get curious and start to search for information. It doesn't matter if there will be a transgendered child in the troop or not, people are curious and will often make things up and jumping to conclusions. It's possible that a cis girl could get caught up in a nasty mess because someone thought she was a boy because someone had to know. It's also that wanting to know one thing but not a list of other things is rather contradicting. No organization should have to make sure parents know of every last possible type of person their child will come into contact with that would be considered non-mainstream. If people were expecting the Girl Scouts to disclose to parents their daughter may come into contact with a Muslim, people would accuse them of being a hate group. If it were certain mental disorders, they would be considered insensitive.

See the only reason to insist that one must know "if" a child will be exposed to something is either to a) prevent it or b) be prepared to talk about it. In this case, if a) it's bigotry and if it's b) well then it'd be nice to get a list of things to talk to your kids about in advance of them encountering them but there's no "right" to that, IMO. Additionally I'd say that ignorance isn't an excuse: Not knowing that trans girls are still girls doesn't mean that you should get a warning tag.

 

[dawny0826]

Well, three of the troops, whose leaders disagreed with the Colorado Council, disbanded.

That's unfortunate. I think it's stupid, personally. But, that's their choice. And it's far better, in my opinion, to disband, than to allow transgender children into the mix, if they're unwanted.

Tell that to Bobby Montoya and the others whose troop was disbanded. I'm betting you'd find many of them think it's an awful deal.

Bobby Montoya's mother can continue to fight for this, if it means that much to Bobby or she can find another creative outlet for Bobby. Personally, I think I'd find another extra curricular if I was Bobby's mother. As I've said before, I'm all for inclusion, but if my child identified as transgender, which, I'd have no problem with, I wouldn't expect Boy Scouts to embrace one of my daughters without issue.

Perhaps it won't. Perhaps their are other scoot leaders who would rather disband their troop rather than admit a transgendered child. But we can hope these will be few and the others will understand and embrace the inclusion.

I believe that children should be supported, nurtured and treated fairly. I raise my own to treat others kindly. And I certainly do hope the best for this kid. It's not fair for any child to feel excluded. If Girl Scouts doesn't work, I sincerely hope, that Bobby is able to find another meaningful outlet, where she feels included and is able to express herself in the way that she felt failed by the Girl Scout troops near home.

 

[Drolefille]

That's unfortunate. I think it's stupid, personally. But, that's their choice. And it's far better, in my opinion, to disband, than to allow transgender children into the mix, if they're unwanted.

Bobby Montoya's mother can continue to fight for this, if it means that much to Bobby or she can find another creative outlet for Bobby. Personally, I think I'd find another extra curricular if I was Bobby's mother. As I've said before, I'm all for inclusion, but if my child identified as transgender, which, I'd have no problem with, I wouldn't expect Boy Scouts to embrace one of my daughters without issue.

But the Girl Scout troop said they'd accept Bobby. She doesn't have to fight it. In fact last update stated that it was mom/Bobby not feeling comfortable joining the troop that initially rejected them and the CO council offering options of other troops in the area. Bobby is wanted. It was troops in another area altogether that disbanded on the very principle that they might have to have a transgendered member.

Additionally I wouldn't expect the Boy Scouts to embrace a transgendered boy because they're exclusionary.

 

[dawny0826]

But the Girl Scout troop said they'd accept Bobby. She doesn't have to fight it. In fact last update stated that it was mom/Bobby not feeling comfortable joining the troop that initially rejected them and the CO council offering options of other troops in the area. Bobby is wanted. It was troops in another area altogether that disbanded on the very principle that they might have to have a transgendered member.

Additionally I wouldn't expect the Boy Scouts to embrace a transgendered boy because they're exclusionary.

I wasn't aware of any updates. I'm glad to know that the Girl Scout troop said they would accept Bobby and that there doesn't have to be a fight. I can certainly understand reluctance to join, given the circumstances.

I know little about Boy Scouts, obviously.

 

[Drolefille]

I wasn't aware of any updates. I'm glad to know that the Girl Scout troop said they would accept Bobby and that there doesn't have to be a fight. I can certainly understand reluctance to join, given the circumstances.

I know little about Boy Scouts, obviously.

The article posted indicated that Bobby would be allowed to join, that's why I was confused. The update I read was actually older because it was talking about the initial controversy

Timeline:
Bobby wants to join her sister's troop
Mom asks troop leader, mixes up pronouns
Troop leader's response is between "I don't think so..." and "No."
Troop leader asks supervisory person
Supervisory person and the council as a whole make the GSA position clear (it's case by case mostly focusing on identity and presentation but primarily accepting.)
Supervisory person reaches out to Bobby's mom who declines membership in that troop on her daughter's behalf
Council wants to work with mom to find another troop in area.
Meanwhile elsewhere:
Three troop leaders in another state hear about the GSA position in general and for this child in particular and quit their roles thereby disbanding the troops at least temporarily.

It's a bit confusing but I think I have it straight

And the BSA refuses membership to Atheists and non-heterosexuals. I don't know if they have a position on transgender but I'm going to guess it's a 'no'

 

[Skwim]

The article posted indicated that Bobby would be allowed to join, that's why I was confused. The update I read was actually older because it was talking about the initial controversy

Timeline:
Bobby wants to join her sister's troop
Mom asks troop leader, mixes up pronouns
Troop leader's response is between "I don't think so..." and "No."
Troop leader asks supervisory person
Supervisory person and the council as a whole make the GSA position clear (it's case by case mostly focusing on identity and presentation but primarily accepting.)
Supervisory person reaches out to Bobby's mom who declines membership in that troop on her daughter's behalf
Council wants to work with mom to find another troop in area.
Meanwhile elsewhere:
Three troop leaders in another state hear about the GSA position in general and for this child in particular and quit their roles thereby disbanding the troops at least temporarily.

It's a bit confusing but I think I have it straight

And the BSA refuses membership to Atheists and non-heterosexuals. I don't know if they have a position on transgender but I'm going to guess it's a 'no'

Thanks for clearing this up.

Way back in post #5 I was wondering how everyone fit together in this whole thing. It makes sense now. However, I found no news piece to the fact that Bobby's mother declined membership in the troop on her daughter's behalf. Got any source for this?

 

[Drolefille]

Thanks for clearing this up.

Way back in post #5 I was wondering how everyone fit together in this whole thing. It makes sense now. However, I found no news piece to the fact that Bobby's mother declined membership in the troop on her daughter's behalf. Got any source for this?

Trying to find the one article in the sea of articles that said that

Girl Scout Troops Disband Over Transgendered Boy Bobby Montoya [VIDEO] - International Business Times
This one indicates that Bobby has not joined, although isn't definitive. (And I love the reporter's note: "Reporter's Note: The pronouns in this article use "she" to describe Bobby Montoya. Other articles using the pronouns "he" and "him" to describe this young Girl Scout should be corrected. Thank you for your support."

Aha, found one:
Girl Scouts of Colorado Officially Welcomes Transgender Girls - Campus Progress

This statement is the first of its kind released from any chapter of the Girl Scouts of the United States of America, which has accepted gay people and atheists since the 1990s but had not explicitly included transgender children.

Girl Scouts of Colorado Vice President of Communications Rachelle Trujillo attributed the incident to a misunderstanding: Montoya’s parents, who still refer to her with male pronouns, did not effectively convey her gender identity to the troop leader when she requested to join.

“[The mom] did not say, ‘This is my daughter.’ She said, ‘This is my son and he wants to be in Girl Scouts,’ and we don't accept boys in Girl Scouts,” Trujillo told the LA Times.

Montoya does not share her parents’ confusion over her gender. She asked them from an early age why they hadn’t “made her a girl,” and the incident with the troop leader has prompted her to be bolder about her gender expression: Montoya now presents as a girl in every aspect of her life.

Montoya’s mother, Felisha Archuleta, said she’s relieved by the decision, but noted that her daughter does not feel comfortable joining the troop that initially rejected her.

Trujillo is awaiting a response from the family after offering another troop placement, which may fulfill Montoya’s dream of being a Girl Scout—as well as inaugurating the official acceptance of transgender children into the organization.

Also it seems that the original leader's response was HELL NO, but it appears to be a combination of misunderstandings.

 

[Skwim]

Thank you Drolefille. You're a peach.