Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Girl Scouts letter to BSA


  • Please log in to reply
94 replies to this topic

#81 Col. Flagg

Col. Flagg

    Robert E. Lee - Patriot

  • Members
  • 1348 posts

Posted 07 September 2017 - 02:49 PM

Eagledad... I'm simply responding to the various posters who are claiming BSA is looking to add girls because of a "PC" claim. I tend to take the BSA at their word. Watch their video for proof starting at 5:45, they clearly state why they are looking into this ... based on millennial family dynamic changes. Sorry I missed adding that reference in my statement, but I thought most already watched the video which was linked multiple times in these threads. I don't see evidence pointing to any organized PC campaign pushing for girls to join BSA. Attempting to blame outside groups is a weak argument and unsubstantiated. This is really an internal BSA debate.


Taking someone at their word requires them to KEEP their word to develop that trust. When someone like BSA continues to BREAK their word, they lose that trust. When someone hides or manipulates surveys or ignores their results to push their agenda, they lose trust.

How is the "millennial family dynamic" any more challenging than what the Boomers or the next cohort had to deal with? Millennials have smart phones, apps, and family management options we never had. And they are more "challenged" in managing a family? Give me a break.
  • 0

#82 Eagle1993

Eagle1993

    Member

  • Members
  • 45 posts

Posted 07 September 2017 - 03:13 PM

@Eagledad. I guess I'm looking for some sort of evidence of the PC push and the purpose of pointing the debate outward vs simply debating if and/or how we add girls to the program. There is ample evidence and we all lived through the previous admission debate and that clearly came from outside pressure. I don't think we should let BSA off the hook by simply stating they are caving to PC police and there is no point in pushing back. I'm personally on the fence on this one and think the BSA would honestly consider member feedback this time around (as the outside "PC" pressure isn't really there). If the BSA thinks they have to do this due to outside PC pressure then we are in pretty bad shape.
  • 0

#83 qwazse

qwazse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 6612 posts

Posted 07 September 2017 - 03:37 PM

@Eagledad. ... some sort of evidence of the PC push ... If the BSA thinks they have to do this due to outside PC pressure then we are in pretty bad shape.

 

"Where could pressure be?" He asks NOW (http://nownyc.org/pr...let-girls-join/).


  • 0

#84 Col. Flagg

Col. Flagg

    Robert E. Lee - Patriot

  • Members
  • 1348 posts

Posted 07 September 2017 - 04:40 PM

"Where could pressure be?" He asks NOW (http://nownyc.org/pr...let-girls-join/).


Lol that another one. Add in the many op ed pieces that are out there too.

I guess those don't constitute "outside pressure"?
  • 0

#85 MattR

MattR

    Member

  • Members
  • 977 posts

Posted 07 September 2017 - 04:45 PM

"Where could pressure be?" He asks NOW (http://nownyc.org/pr...let-girls-join/).

That's rich. Apparently the people of NOW were never girl scouts. It must be awkward when the NOW folks and GSUSA folks get together.


  • 0

#86 SSScout

SSScout

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4012 posts

Posted 08 September 2017 - 08:23 AM

Not everyone understands the real dynamic:  That there are young females that want more adventure and less tea parties and crafty stuff...    Are we "poaching" on "their"  turf ?

 

https://www.washingt...m=.f7870a7de6f9


  • 0

#87 NJCubScouter

NJCubScouter

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 6082 posts

Posted 08 September 2017 - 08:27 AM

There is a difference between someone somewhere saying something and real, effective pressure that actually brings about change.  Ranman says there is some group that wants to change the name of Father's Day.  So what? Ten people want to change the name of Father's Day?  In this country, there is someone somewhere who holds every conceivable ideological viewpoint, some just silly (like changing the name of Father's Day) and some of whom would like to see certain other groups of people wiped off the face of the Earth, and everything in between.  It's when someone is gaining real political power with extremist beliefs that you have to be concerned.

 

And then there's NOW.  They were a political force in the 70's, and with largely positive results for the country, in my opinion.  They really aren't a political force now.  They can advocate for girls in the Boy Scouts all they want (and they have probably been doing so for at least 45 years, because that's how long the issue has been around), but when there are girls in the Cub Scouts and the BSA-Girl-Scouts, it's not going to be because of anything NOW has done.  It's not going to be because of four girls here and one girl there who want to make Eagle.  It's not going to be because of anyone carrying protest signs or filing lawsuits.  It's going to be because it's what National wants to happen.


  • 2

#88 ParkMan

ParkMan

    Member

  • Members
  • 193 posts

Posted 08 September 2017 - 10:31 AM

My sense is that the current leadership of the GAS is willing to embrace change. So - when the question of girls came up, I expect they were more willing to look at it.

This is why many are scratching their heads sayijng - I don't get it. They are simply used to a BSA that historically always resisted change like this.
  • 0

#89 Eagle1993

Eagle1993

    Member

  • Members
  • 45 posts

Posted 09 September 2017 - 05:59 AM

"Where could pressure be?" He asks NOW (http://nownyc.org/pr...let-girls-join/).


I completely understand questions the motives of the BSA and believing there is something else driving this possible change. I even speculated (based on one article) that the LDS leaders told them that they were leaving making the BSA need to quickly find new recruits. That is clearly wrong given the response from knowledgeable LDS scouters.

Calling 1 letter from NOW and a couple of opinion pieces PC pressure on the BSA is a stretch. The fact that the letter and opinion pieces referenced came out AFTER the BSA's national meeting where they made the video showing possible changes weakens the external PC evidence further. I really believe the BSA is being honest regarding their motivation. This is not something they feel they have to consider due to outside PC forces but due to changes is family dynamics.

Does anyone else in this forum hire people? I've been through multiple training sessions regarding recruiting and changes to our corporate benefits packages because of the significant changes to how millennial are different than previous generations. I think the BSA is wise in looking into this and I don't see that as PC pressure. I think they clearly state their motivation and it is consistent with what I've seen in my corporate training. That isn't PC, that is a recognition that parents (our customers) are looking for something else for their kids.

So, I'd rather see a debate regarding the actual proposal than point to possible bogeyman who are pushing a secret agenda. Yes, that happened in the past. The LGBTQ push came from outside forces, was strategic, attacked our COs and sponsors and was not driven (for the most part) by looking at actual needs of our members (though I agree with the change). I also agree the BSA isn't being straightforward by calling this "making scouting more accessible"; however, I think they are being honest with their motivation.

Finally a bit of a separate note. Someone asked if any of the 50+ United Way and the corporate sponsors came back after we added LGBTQ leaders and members. I couldn't find much info and wonder if anyone else knows. If not, I think it would be appropriate to ask these groups if they restarted giving and if not why they didn't.
  • 0

#90 Eagle1993

Eagle1993

    Member

  • Members
  • 45 posts

Posted 09 September 2017 - 07:18 AM

One correction, the NOW letter did come out before the national meeting but the Outside Magazine and Tribune op eds came out after.
  • 0

#91 Eagle94-A1

Eagle94-A1

    Been there. Done that.

  • Members
  • 1903 posts

Posted 09 September 2017 - 12:43 PM

Finally a bit of a separate note. Someone asked if any of the 50+ United Way and the corporate sponsors came back after we added LGBTQ leaders and members. I couldn't find much info and wonder if anyone else knows. If not, I think it would be appropriate to ask these groups if they restarted giving and if not why they didn't.

 

 

My local UW still only does designations to the local council. Been that way since the SCOTUS decision.


  • 0

"Train 'em. Trust 'em. LET THEM LEAD!" William "Green Bar Bill" Hillcourt


#92 Merlyn_LeRoy

Merlyn_LeRoy

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4285 posts

Posted 10 September 2017 - 05:15 PM

Finally a bit of a separate note. Someone asked if any of the 50+ United Way and the corporate sponsors came back after we added LGBTQ leaders and members. I couldn't find much info and wonder if anyone else knows. If not, I think it would be appropriate to ask these groups if they restarted giving and if not why they didn't.

 

 

As far as the UW (and probably most of the corporate sponsors), they still have a policy against giving to organizations that discriminate on the basis of religion and/or creed.


  • 0

#93 ghjim

ghjim

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 83 posts

Posted 11 September 2017 - 01:45 PM

I do know that Boeing continues to gift match employee contributions to any BSA council.  I don't think they ever stopped contributing to the BSA.


  • 0

#94 SSScout

SSScout

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4012 posts

Posted 12 September 2017 - 08:32 AM

Most of the Scout world is Gender Neutral.    Most of the modern world is gender neutral.   When I was on the Camino de Santiago, I was gently surprised by how much was gender neutral.  Banos/servicios in public areas (restaurants?)  were very often not labeled by gender. The facilities in the albergues might be labeled, if they were "BIG " multiple use  showers and toilets, but often they were individual use types.  Bunk rooms were more often than not not separated by gender (!).  In the morning, all you see are multi colored caterpillar-like sleeping bags. 

About the only example of gender separate facilities was the gymnasia municipale we stayed in , which was a "albergue especiale"  because the regular hostels were full (a not unusual at all situation).

Most on the Camino were/are adults, and the respect for one's privacy was impressive.  It was seen as a need and was done.  If there was a young couple traveling together, well, they were urged to find other accommodations.


  • 0

#95 Gwaihir

Gwaihir

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 224 posts

Posted 15 September 2017 - 11:23 AM

Most of the Scout world is Gender Neutral.    Most of the modern world is gender neutral.   When I was on the Camino de Santiago, I was gently surprised by how much was gender neutral.  Banos/servicios in public areas (restaurants?)  were very often not labeled by gender. The facilities in the albergues might be labeled, if they were "BIG " multiple use  showers and toilets, but often they were individual use types.  Bunk rooms were more often than not not separated by gender (!).  In the morning, all you see are multi colored caterpillar-like sleeping bags. 

About the only example of gender separate facilities was the gymnasia municipale we stayed in , which was a "albergue especiale"  because the regular hostels were full (a not unusual at all situation).

Most on the Camino were/are adults, and the respect for one's privacy was impressive.  It was seen as a need and was done.  If there was a young couple traveling together, well, they were urged to find other accommodations.

 

Ironically, the language is not gender neutral. 


  • 0




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


IPB Skin By Virteq