qwazse

If I'm a Commisioner wondering who might be willing to help the folks who've been talking to me about their daughters, newly minted Eagles would be my first ask. Your frank answer to such a question would be welcome.Rest assured, in one way or another, you will be asked how you expect to contribute to scouting in the future. But relax, there are no wrong answers. Let me be very clear. The wrong answer is the one you say because you think that's what people want to hear. Any scouter would welcome a reply like "Respectfully, sirs/madams, I would rather put my support behind an all-boys program if time allows." Yes, the BoR will ask some opinions. Scouter's need to know what their youth are thinking. They often have opportunities for specific youth ... if they know who those youth are. Asking how a scout would like to contribute is one way to find out.

I think trying to keep existing troops stable is BSA's aim. They clearly want units who hold to a traditional membership model to continue doing so without disruption.Units who have unofficially been incorporating girls in their programs must decide if they want to adjust to BSA's proposed model. I suspect most of those will shell out the extra $40 for the chartering fee, pay the registration fee for each girl, and multiple register each leader. The hard work will be for COs who want to incorporate a unit for girls, but their traditional unit does not want to contribute any leadership to making it happen. Regarding software, there's plenty of room for pessimism.

I wouldn't ask what he thinks. I'd ask how he'd help.

@@gblotter, thanks for all you've done for the boys. If you wind up landing in a boys club that suits your aspirations, drop a line here and let us know how it's going.

I tell my crew that we play a Skyrim-like video game. Our senses are the console. Our hiking boots are the game controller which we work with our feet.

Met with our COR tonight. Ran by the possibilities. She (a former explorer scout) made clear that the CO will support whatever we think should be done. Stay all boy? No problem. Add a pack (and, later, a troop) for girls? No problem. Meet separately? No problem. Meet at same place and time? No problem. This CO's basic need is to serve their community as broadly as possible. They themselves are losing members. So, for them, it's "go big, or go home."

Thanks all! You reminded that I had misplaced my usual necker, so I dug deep and grabbed one from my old lodge that I'll cinch with a slide from the '81 Jambo. Just in time for the meeting!

I've been assuming these are trail to first class skills (e.g., two half-hitches). Although 11 is the ideal age for instruction of such things, there is a WIDE bell curve in terms of mastery. Son #2 could light fires at age 4. Catch a ball? Maybe by grade 12? (He still blames me for that last one.) Although we want all boys to master 1st class skills, the fact is there will be a cluster for whom those skills will elude them into adulthood. For some, it's lack of attempts/practice; others it's poor spatial coordination; others poor memory; others lack of confidence. Some years, you have a variety of boys who face these challenges. The next year's boys are so quick on the uptake it makes your head spin. Yes volition is a factor, but it can be more than that. So, you will need to be a persistent but patient coach. Although I learned to be dead on with archery (with a 20 lb wooden recurve at 50') with backyard practice the spring before I took the badge at camp, sighting in a rifle with tight scatter eluded me until I was 40. Something in my brain took that long to gel before it just clicked. I remember one summer church camp, the priest who drove me there spent a lot of time at the pool because the director was an Olympian, and he wanted her to help him finally master diving. It was my first object-lesson in "you can teach an old dog new tricks." All that is to say, don't give up on these scouts. Expect more. Challenge them to use the handbook as a reference. If that's not working for them, find them a knot guide, draw a diagram on their arm, or find them different color rope to practice with. And if they are still having trouble, keep challenging them to try, and try, and try ... and let them know that even if the don't master it by the time they turn 18, this nation needs them to keep trying!

Per Webster rhetorical questions are "asked in order to make a statement rather than to get an answer". So, you weren't trying to say that scouters who allow girls to scout in the same place and the same time as the boys in their packs couldn't be trusted to ensure YPT, BALOO, and Safety Sweet Sixteen? I apologize in advance if I misunderstood.

@@KYScouter, (welcome to the forums,btw) are you really expecting that level of demand?

Good for you trying to round out your counselor list. Call around to neighboring council HQs to see who they have on their list for that MB. They would be your most reliable resource. Good luck in your search.

So, does that tell us something about the utility of EDGE?People forget skills, no matter how much they were enabled to do then months or years ago. Whole civilizations may be lost (c.f. Dark Ages). Fundamental to mastering skills is a reference. Like a handbook, that scouts are encouraged to read first before attempting to receive any explaination. And that they can follow while being guided, until told "Next week, come do it with the book closed." Then there are the right carrots ... "Yo, two half hitch masters, with me to the trading post. The rest of you, to your books. Show me your skills when I get back."

It may have just been a membership application. Or there may have been no membership application. And, I'm certain she wasn't the first young American female with this ambition. ... But, for some, her story is a metaphor of missed opportunity.

@@Peter1919, I think your perception is correct. But, one could say National could have handled things better the day Katrina Yeaw's application for Eagle Scout came acros their desk 25 years ago. A strong-willed executive would have his name in the history books for saying "This is cool. Our nation needs this. How can we make it work similarly for other families with ambitious siblings? Let's get a five year plan to promote it on my desk tomorrow." So Mike Sarbaugh is making up for lost time. That's okay, rough rides are par for the course around here.

.... 7, 8, 9, 10. Log out of my eye. ... Let's have a go at that splinter. Blind accusations of negligence for the sake of an argument will garner comments like "load of garbage". That doesn't make @@Rick_in_CA rude, that just means he's not British (who favor "rubbish"). I'm sure both RCA and NN are precious, and scout-like most days. So, assuming that they both are today, let me offer a civil retort to the question twice asked:It is perfectly reasonable to assume that most folks who would open the door wide for young ladies are as diligent with YPT, Safe Swim, Shooting Sports, BALOO, etc ... as those who would shield our boys from the depredations of said young ladies. Regarding adages, the three dogs we've owned, when guilty do not bark. The one who stole my sandwich from the counter (big dogs) will make the worst attemp at a poker face. The first one was, acquired as a stray, was best at it. The others ... never as quiet as when they had something to hide. What that may have to do with incorporating girls into packs, I have no idea. Just putting it out there.

Well, you most not have taught them using the EDGE method.

Not "higher", but maybe "broader" activities. And for some of my boys venturing is attractive because they don't have to endure the grind of advancement. So, instead of "next step" think "side step" and all the pros and cons that come with such a notion. But, I think you describe the motivation of Exploring at its inception.

E93, I haven't called our COR or our IH or the pastor. Currently all three are women. My guess is that thier stance will be if adults can step up, bring in the girls. But, don't sacrifice the boys in the process. Nobody will like the extra paperwork. My church declined to charter a pack last year. I asked the pastor and the education director if this shift changes things. I'll let you know if it does.

@@numbersnerd, allow me to reply with a folk song while my coffee brews ... Momma don't allow no girls cub scouting 'round here. Momma don't allow no two dens playing 'round here. We don't care what momma don't allow, We'll scout together anyhow. No, momma don't allow no first class women 'round here.

Welcome 5GT! Hope you enjoy your time scouting with your son!

Oh yes, the thin veneer of free will! Actually, I hadn't thought about female adult venturing leaders being drawn from a crew at the request of a troop. My whole career as an advisor has been asking help from female adults leaders in packs, troops, and other crews!

Our Pack has done it both on the same night in different rooms of a facility, and on different nights. Now that I think of it, a CO could simply "ghost" the second pack, with exactly the same leadership dual-registered in the for-girls unit.

In one sense, that happens thanks to returnees from World Jamboree and other WOSM events. Our nation's culture is also very strongly influenced by its recent immigrants (has noted quite loudly by dissenting earlier immigrants), many of whom take what BSA and GS/USA (and others) offer and cobble together co-ed scouting because that is what they grew up with. In another sense both BSA and GS/USA (and others) face litigation in a way that folks in other countries simply cannot comprehend, to declare openly that they are following anyone else's model but their own would draw derision from multiple sides. I do believe that BSA National is looking at what I've described as a post-modern nomadic generation. They sincerely believe that welcoming sisters will open a market of brothers in families who are feeling the grind of shuffling kids everywhere. They are willing to bet that boys who can't stand the company of sisters will turn out to be few. But they are arrogant enough to believe that the extra paperwork to certify "separate programs" will placate disgruntled scouters and parents. Those of us "boots on the ground" have no such scruples. We'd prefer to call spades spades and either work with co-eds or work with unisex with as little meddling as possible from anyone besides our charter sponsors. That's why we want to hear from scouters around the world who've "been there done that."

The only action that I see national doing differently as a result of those family scouting polls: the press-releases use "welcome girls" instead of that abominable "Family Scouting" doublespeak. Really, the best most of us can do, in whatever organization we're in, is demand plain spoken executives.