A letter from my SE

[NJCubScouter 1389]

Fair point. I think the difference is that kids are more drawn to sports that scouting, especially as they get into their teens. Unfortunately scouting may always have to try a lot harder than sports teams to be enticing to the kids and convenient to the parents.  

 

I think part of the problem is that PARENTS are more drawn to sports than Scouting for their sons (and sometimes their daughters).  It often seems to me that one of the main drivers of this is that they think their son has the talent to play professionally (despite the long odds against it) or at least get a full athletic scholarship.  If Scouting gets in the way of sports and a choice has to be made, the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow beats character, fitness and leadership every time.  Well, not every time.  Many times.

[qwazse 4344]

For our district, it's not sports. It's theater. And a couple of grads are indeed making it big. Sometimes the combination of the two. Although the district hasn't fielded many pro athletes,

 

Fair point. I think the difference is that kids are more drawn to sports that scouting, especially as they get into their teens. Unfortunately scouting may always have to try a lot harder than sports teams to be enticing to the kids and convenient to the parents. 

That last phrase is tremendous. Any form of separate-but-equal is a non-starter. It demands a doubling of personnel when membership might only increase slightly, depending on location. When daughter became venturer, Mrs. Q became committee on paper. But she made it quite clear that I was the one who "did scouts." The reasons for this involved gifts and talents, as well as personality clashes ... but more importantly, there is a lot of work to be done for a household with three kids and as many pets. We had to divide and conquer.

 

I don't forsee the next generation of scout parents being any different.

[blw2 433]

I know of at least one flag football team with a girl (boy's team)

 

I'll have to admit in only skimming through this thread and not reading as carefully as I'd like.  Just exploded and too big.

 

As a formally extremely active scouter at the pack level, and father of two girls coming up behind my son... 

I have wished for coed pack for a long time.  My 2 cents is that ideally and assuming enough girls there would be girl dens and boy dens, but in the same pack.  Realistically though, I'd guess more often than not there won't be quite enough girls to have clean split dens at each rank so I'm sure that would fall apart quickly.

 

And personally , i think a coed troop might, just maybe, work well too.... I'd love to see it if "done well"...but the problem with that is I don't see patrol method "done well" now in many ways, and I don't see this making it better...... As much as I'd like to see it work, I do concede the previously discussed issues with finding sufficient female scouters in some cases.  My wife as an example, loves to camp sometimes but definitely has limits to how much off-grid she can go.

 

I'll get flamed for this no doubt....but I think the biggest obstruction though isn't in finding them...it's finding good ones.  Of the many female scouters I've seen at the troop level, I have seen a whole lot of mothering and "cubing down" the troop....making it into a 3rd year WEBELOS den in some ways or others.  It's a trade off...they bring tons of great energy in all sorts of areas, and really complement by filling holes that are left vacant by most males....but they tend to take things in ways that fundamentally I think are not as productive as they could be with regards to patrol method.  Now I've seen plenty of dad's doing that too...and sometimes worse on an individual basis....but collectively big picture....percentage of all dads doing it vs percentage of all moms doing it.... it's clear from my perspective.

[Eagledad 2779]

I think part of the problem is that PARENTS are more drawn to sports than Scouting for their sons (and sometimes their daughters).  It often seems to me that one of the main drivers of this is that they think their son has the talent to play professionally (despite the long odds against it) or at least get a full athletic scholarship.  If Scouting gets in the way of sports and a choice has to be made, the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow beats character, fitness and leadership every time.  Well, not every time.  Many times.

There is certainly some of that, but sports is just easier to schedule in a busy personal life schedule. The practices are routine and games only take a couple hours. While Scout meetings are generally routine, campouts and other outdoor activities usually require days, which usually get's in the way of something else in the scouts life schedule. Our troop was very lenient with sports, which is one reason why we were popular. But a strict coach or troop policy can force choices if one of the programs doesn't give a little. We had a lot of scouts in band. If the campout was far enough away, those scouts didn't show up on a campout until Saturday morning. You would be surprised at how bothersome that is for many Scoutmasters. And band directors take a dim view of only playing for half a game. When a scout is being tugged on both ends, scouting is usually the looser, so it by default has to be the more flexible.

 

Barry

Edited July 21, 2017 by Eagledad

[fred johnson 936]

I don't see how that is going to be tenable in practice.  On paper, sure.  But if the premise is "accessibility" then having the boys do one thing while the girls do something else isn't going to cut it.  They might be separate troops on paper, but it's going to be co-ed in practice.

 

I've had the same exact thought many times.  

 

Heck, we already skirt the rules.  Other troops do too.  We've had daughters on canoe trips, moderate-adventures and other things because they want to go on these adventures.  It's just not an issue and doesn't impact the scout's program.

[Col. Flagg 909]

Everything has gotten more time-consuming. I think we have addressed this issue before:

• Nearly all sports are year around now.
• Nearly all sports have an "indoor" season.
• School activities that were optional in the past have become more numerous and mandatory.
• Many schools have become more competitive. Not because it is hard to get in to college than it was 30 years ago, but because of the same pressure kids get in sports: BE THE BEST!!!
• Even other activities like church groups, youth groups, etc., are taking a "mandatory" approach to participation.

The number one issue though in my mind (okay, #1 and #2) are parents' unwillingness to limit the activities their kids are in, and parents' unwillingness to sacrifice THEIR interests for those of their kids.

[Eagle94-A1 2687]

Just came back from a local council office's shop. Talking to the individual behind the counter, they were extremely surprised I heard about the BSA going coed in January. Although they said it would be January at the earliest.

 

BRACE YOURSELVES, GIRLS ARE COMING.

[MattR 2659]

I'll get flamed for this no doubt....but I think the biggest obstruction though isn't in finding them...it's finding good ones.  Of the many female scouters I've seen at the troop level, I have seen a whole lot of mothering and "cubing down" the troop....making it into a 3rd year WEBELOS den in some ways or others.  It's a trade off...they bring tons of great energy in all sorts of areas, and really complement by filling holes that are left vacant by most males....but they tend to take things in ways that fundamentally I think are not as productive as they could be with regards to patrol method.  Now I've seen plenty of dad's doing that too...and sometimes worse on an individual basis....but collectively big picture....percentage of all dads doing it vs percentage of all moms doing it.... it's clear from my perspective.

I don't think you'll get flamed. In fact, this seems to be the one thing that keeps coming up. There isn't much concern with girls. Moms are another story. People bring up the idea of girl scouts being the better option for girls but at the same time there's a problem with girl scouts not doing much in the outdoors. I'm sure there are exceptions but on the whole it's a problem. Maybe it's not GSUSA per se but that dads aren't welcome and not enough moms understand the outdoors and/or the patrol method. Well, come to think of it I'm not sure GSUSA is interested in patrol method either.

 

Anyway, on the survey I wrote that if they just recreate girl scouts it will fail. I didn't explain why but it has to do with why moms tend to want to step in earlier and dads tend to be more okay with scraped knees. It's about understanding how the program works. Unfortunately there's not much that the BSA has that describes this. Maybe this will encourage the BSA to improve their training. Okay, okay, stop laughing.

[Col. Flagg 909]

Just came back from a local council office's shop. Talking to the individual behind the counter, they were extremely surprised I heard about the BSA going coed in January. Although they said it would be January at the earliest.

 

BRACE YOURSELVES, GIRLS ARE COMING.

 

Well that says it all. Why tell the membership. Just drop it on us like a ton of bricks. Don't develop the training, uniforms or anything else in advance. Just make an announcement and hope everyone is prepared for the onslaught.

 

That sound you hear is BSA dying.

[NJCubScouter 1389]

Well that says it all. Why tell the membership. Just drop it on us like a ton of bricks. Don't develop the training, uniforms or anything else in advance. Just make an announcement and hope everyone is prepared for the onslaught.

 

That sound you hear is BSA dying.

 

What training do you think is necessary?  Presumably, all leaders know what a girl looks like.  Seriously though, there will have to be a change to the YP guidelines so that the same rules for coed outings that apply to Venturing are also applied to coed outings at any other level where coed outings will exist.  Maybe everybody needs to get a refresher in YP Training to make sure everyone understands this.  Okay, so that's 30 minutes, and some people would be renewing the course anyway because of the 2-year cycle.  (And this training is already "developed" - they would just have to add one or two sentences that already exist in the Venturing version.) This does not seem like a huge burden, either on the BSA side, or the local volunteer side.

 

What other training do you have in mind?

Edited July 21, 2017 by NJCubScouter

[Eagle94-A1 2687]

What training do you think is necessary?  Presumably, all leaders know what a girl looks like.  Seriously though, there will have to be a change to the YP guidelines so that the same rules for coed outings that apply to Venturing are also applied to coed outings at any other level where coed outings will exist.  Maybe everybody needs to get a refresher in YP Training to make sure everyone understands this.  Okay, so that's 30 minutes, and some people would be renewing the course anyway because of the 2-year cycle.  (And this training is already "developed" - they would just have to add one or two sentences that already exist in the Venturing version.) This does not seem like a huge burden, either on the BSA side, or the local volunteer side.

 

What other training do you have in mind?

 

Actually someone on one of the Facebook Groups about Scouting mentioned they heard, and another person confirmed it, that National is working on an updated YPT that will require re-certification EVERY (emphasis) year. It is suppose to be out in the near future.

[NJCubScouter 1389]

Actually someone on one of the Facebook Groups about Scouting mentioned they heard, and another person confirmed it, that National is working on an updated YPT that will require re-certification EVERY (emphasis) year. It is suppose to be out in the near future.

 

Wonderful.  Getting our CR's and some other people to take YPT every OTHER year hasn't been difficult enough.

[Col. Flagg 909]

What training do you think is necessary?

Well, ALL leaders will need to take something similar to the Venturing coed YPT. Since the BSA tracking system won't know which units are coed, single sex or otherwise, national will need to find some way to track that so that they know who is trained for their position. That would require an update to the system and likely some changes to the back end registration system to record "unit type" regarding coed status.

 

Presumably, all leaders know what a girl looks like.  Seriously though, there will have to be a change to the YP guidelines so that the same rules for coed outings that apply to Venturing are also applied to coed outings at any other level where coed outings will exist.  Maybe everybody needs to get a refresher in YP Training to make sure everyone understands this.  Okay, so that's 30 minutes, and some people would be renewing the course anyway because of the 2-year cycle.  (And this training is already "developed" - they would just have to add one or two sentences that already exist in the Venturing version.) This does not seem like a huge burden, either on the BSA side, or the local volunteer side.

 

What other training do you have in mind?

 

You are over simplifying this issue. BSA will either need to make coed YPT mandatory OR they will have to find a way to track the permutations of YPT they currently have.

 

Oh, and the current Venturing YPT is focused on 14-20 year olds. I suspect there are additional issues dealing with younger girls they will want to integrate in to the new coed training.

 

Oh, and then they have to re-brand the current coed training so that it is not just Venturing based.

 

Oh, and now rather than just having two "adults" around you have to have at least one trained male and one trained female adult around. So now you need to recruit these folks to cover your program.

 

This is much, much more than slapping a label on the current YPT and popping it up on their website.

[Tampa Turtle 1011]

I agree the writing is on the wall and it will happen. If for no other reason than for the optics ("You go girl!") and because some more corporate dollars to National. It may be good or bad but it will be different. And some girls will push hard to get into Boy's Troops (we are ALREADY getting inquiries) and will be let in by National CO or not. The first ones will probably be high quality outdoor types.

 

The reaction from GSUSA will be interesting.

 

I do not think that National has its act together to keep the core of the traditional outdoor program intact enough to overcome their mismanagement. Who needs knots when they all can be STEM Scouts?

 

I also think the third "G" will drop in less than 5 years as well. 

[Col. Flagg 909]

On the other side of the issue, I am already fielding emails from parents saying that if Boy Scouts goes coed, they are leaving the troop. I am getting no interest from girls for the troop. 

 

I am getting interest in Venturing. The girls there simply don't want the baggage Boy Scouts comes with.