Outside Magazine: Boy Scouts Should Allow Girls

[EmberMike 144]

This change isn't likely to happen until next year, and it sounds like it will start at the cub level. Anyone concerned about their sons at the troop level, your sons will be adults by the time their troops could see a girl join. I think it's worth including that in the discussion anyone has about whether to continue on in the BSA because of the co-ed changes.  

 

Personally I think it's a little sad for any kids to quit over something that likely won't affect them directly, especially kids who are aiming for Eagle and/or are close to it. Don't give that up just because this. 

[Col. Flagg 909]

This change isn't likely to happen until next year, and it sounds like it will start at the cub level. Anyone concerned about their sons at the troop level, your sons will be adults by the time their troops could see a girl join. I think it's worth including that in the discussion anyone has about whether to continue on in the BSA because of the co-ed changes.  

 

Personally I think it's a little sad for any kids to quit over something that likely won't affect them directly, especially kids who are aiming for Eagle and/or are close to it. Don't give that up just because this. 

 

In the survey questions I read there was nothing about "local option". There was nothing about Cubs going first. That's speculation.

 

They survey questions I read were about opening Cubs, Boy Scouts and OA. No timeline given. Nothing saying which was first. The questions were asked in such a way as to direct answers toward a result.

 

I have seen four such surveys. Not all ask the same questions in the same way. That's troubling.

 

Personally, I think it's a little sad that national is messing with a 100+ year old program just because the CSE thinks it's "the right thing to do" but he hasn't asked his members what THEY think the right thing to do is.

[EmberMike 144]

In the survey questions I read there was nothing about "local option". There was nothing about Cubs going first. That's speculation.

 

They survey questions I read were about opening Cubs, Boy Scouts and OA. No timeline given. Nothing saying which was first. The questions were asked in such a way as to direct answers toward a result.

 

I have seen four such surveys. Not all ask the same questions in the same way. That's troubling.

 

Personally, I think it's a little sad that national is messing with a 100+ year old program just because the CSE thinks it's "the right thing to do" but he hasn't asked his members what THEY think the right thing to do is.

 

Sure it's speculation, but based heavily on what we've heard so far. 

 

Likewise it would be speculative of me to say that it's unlikely most troops will see an influx of girls once the co-ed initiative launches, but we all know that's probably true also. There was no influx of gay scouts when that change happened. It's going to be a long time before most troops have girl members. 

 

My point was just that I hope boys aren't making hasty decisions about their future in scouting based on simply the possibility that a girl might want to join. As much as we'd all like to see a huge boost in membership, the reality is that it's not going to happen overnight, and I speculate it won't hit most troops for many years. 

[Eagle94-A1 2687]

Eagle, what do you think is the motivation behind parent #1?

 

Barry

 

His thoughts are the following and I'm paraphrasing.

 

It makes no sense to have 2 Scout aged groups meeting on separate nights and doing separate activities, especially when you are trying to promote accomodating families.If you have 2 separate groups, that means leaders will have two separate nights for meetings, and two different weekends for activities. The leaders will burn out faster, and we are already having a hard time getting new leaders.

 

I admit I personally am against going coed. I know boys do better in a single gender environment. IO also know that it seems as if there is a war on boys and they cannot do anything on their own, but there are no questions about girls only programs.

 

But I am also a realist. I know Separate but Equal will not work. GSUSA already works and it is a joke from all the complaints I'm hearing and the push to make BSA coed. I also know that the BSA creating a program just for girls will not work either. BSA did just that with Campfire Girls. They eventually went their own way and have nothing to do with us. Plus they went coed. Are they still around?

[Col. Flagg 909]

My point was just that I hope boys aren't making hasty decisions about their future in scouting based on simply the possibility that a girl might want to join. As much as we'd all like to see a huge boost in membership, the reality is that it's not going to happen overnight, and I speculate it won't hit most troops for many years. 

 

I think people are making decisions based on their values and beliefs.

 

Not only will the "boost in membership" not happen over night, it won't happen. Why? Because the NET outflow will certainly match any net inflow. I would go as far as to say you will see a very large reduction in members, with only marginal gains by girls to make up for those leaving. The "net" will be lower members totals than you see today. That's my prediction.

[Eagle94-A1 2687]

Sure it's speculation, but based heavily on what we've heard so far. 

 

Likewise it would be speculative of me to say that it's unlikely most troops will see an influx of girls once the co-ed initiative launches, but we all know that's probably true also. There was no influx of gay scouts when that change happened. It's going to be a long time before most troops have girl members. 

 

My point was just that I hope boys aren't making hasty decisions about their future in scouting based on simply the possibility that a girl might want to join. As much as we'd all like to see a huge boost in membership, the reality is that it's not going to happen overnight, and I speculate it won't hit most troops for many years. 

 

 

I see it happening, and see it happening fast. We already have 3 girls chomping at the bit. And a 4th would have done it if she would  not age out before it occurs. And I see the local Frontier Girls folding and merging.  And I see it happening with every unit in my district save 2: the LDS troop, and the baptist Church which uses  Scouting for their 'At-risk Youth" Ministry. They only want Boys b/c they are the ones they are trying to keep out of trouble.

[NJCubScouter 1389]

In the survey questions I read there was nothing about "local option". There was nothing about Cubs going first. That's speculation.

 

I believe "local option" was mentioned in the presentation by Mr. Surbaugh that is linked in one of these threads.  I could be wrong.  I know it was mentioned somewhere.  I think the whole structure of what is being proposed assumes that a CO gets to choose which of the new options it wishes to become involved with, if any.

 

I think the presentation made clear that it is NOT going to be "Cub Scouts first."  I am pretty sure the CSE specifically stated that the changes to Cub Scouts would not be implemented until a Boy-Scout-age program for the girls to cross over to was in place.

[Gwaihir 198]

The questions were asked in such a way as to direct answers toward a result.

 

I have seen four such surveys. Not all ask the same questions in the same way. That's troubling.

 

Personally, I think it's a little sad that national is messing with a 100+ year old program just because the CSE thinks it's "the right thing to do" but he hasn't asked his members what THEY think the right thing to do is.

 

The "When did you stop beating you wife" method of surveying is dishonest and rather reprehensible.  

[EmberMike 144]

Local option is on the table. There's also an option to make girls at the troop level a parallel program, and also to have them join a partner program if one can be found that matches up closely enough with BSA. I think finding an adequate partner is a long-shot. If one existed, there wouldn't be this discussion happening at all. 

[EmberMike 144]

I see it happening, and see it happening fast. We already have 3 girls chomping at the bit. And a 4th would have done it if she would  not age out before it occurs. And I see the local Frontier Girls folding and merging.  And I see it happening with every unit in my district save 2: the LDS troop, and the baptist Church which uses  Scouting for their 'At-risk Youth" Ministry. They only want Boys b/c they are the ones they are trying to keep out of trouble.

 

Ok, let me rephrase my previous response then... 

 

Some troops will see girls join as soon as possible, some won't. Not knowing what the structure will be (local option, partner program, seperate patrols, etc), I think it's premature for any boys to be thinking about quitting when some of them could age out of the troop before even one girl shows up. If their troop will even accomodate female scouts. 

 

I think it's crazy for a kid who is close to Eagle to be thinking about quitting over this. What a waste to throw away years of work, over something that might not even directly affect them at all. 

[walk in the woods 888]

I believe "local option" was mentioned in the presentation by Mr. Surbaugh that is linked in one of these threads.  I could be wrong.  I know it was mentioned somewhere.  I think the whole structure of what is being proposed assumes that a CO gets to choose which of the new options it wishes to become involved with, if any.

 

I think the presentation made clear that it is NOT going to be "Cub Scouts first."  I am pretty sure the CSE specifically stated that the changes to Cub Scouts would not be implemented until a Boy-Scout-age program for the girls to cross over to was in place.

The presentation I saw and the follow on discussion was about:

 

Cub Scouts: Boy-Only Pack, Girl-Only Pack, Mixed pack with gender-specific dens.

Boy Scouts: Partner with a separate organization for girls 11-14, create a parallel BSA organization for girls 11-14.  

 

That was the extent of local option offered.  The suggestion for both was they would come together for opening/closing ceremonies, then split for Dens in CS, split by gender for 11-14 year olds.  Basically the Trail Life/AHG model.

Edited August 8, 2017 by walk in the woods

[Col. Flagg 909]

Local option is on the table. There's also an option to make girls at the troop level a parallel program, and also to have them join a partner program if one can be found that matches up closely enough with BSA. I think finding an adequate partner is a long-shot. If one existed, there wouldn't be this discussion happening at all. 

 

Source? Because I didn't see that in any survey I saw.

[Gwaihir 198]

 

I think it's crazy for a kid who is close to Eagle to be thinking about quitting over this. What a waste to throw away years of work, over something that might not even directly affect them at all. 

 

“In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock.† 

 

If standing up for what you believe in matters more to you than the line item on your college application, then the mission of strong character development was successful in my book.  

[Col. Flagg 909]

I think it's crazy for a kid who is close to Eagle to be thinking about quitting over this. What a waste to throw away years of work, over something that might not even directly affect them at all. 

 

What's crazier is an organization summarily ticking off a large portion of their membership to appease people who are not yet members.

[Rick_in_CA 401]

I know boys do better in a single gender environment.

I have seen several comments like this that take it as a given that boys and girls do better in single-sex classrooms. The reality is that the evidence isn’t clear on that.

 

While you can find studies that show children do better in single gender classrooms, you can also find studies that show the opposite (In college I read a study that claimed boys do better in coed settings, but girls do better in single-sex settings). Basically the studies are all over the place, and it’s difficult to do a good study. It appears to be more about the quality of the setting, and the advantages the students have than whether it’s coed or not. But with more data, that might change.

 

This article is a good overview of the subject:

The Never-Ending Controversy Over All-Girls Education

That being said, I am sure there are individual boys (and girls) that will do better in a quality single-sex setting than a coed one, just as I am sure there are boys and girls that will do better in a quality coed setting.