New controversy...Let's let girls into all levels of Scouting

[Just A Rebel]

Old controversy, but anyway.

 

Boys and girls learn differently, have different natural proclivities and strengths/weaknesses, are motivated by different methods, etc. Some girls would fit right into Boy Scouts, and some boys would fit right into a knitting circle, and somewhere there is a white crow.

 

I honestly don't see any problem with it. The USA is actually an outlyer organization (along with the God and Gays issue) compared to MOST other nations in the World Scouting Organization' date=' especially most of the European countries, to include the UK (Scoutings founding country).[/quote']

Scouting's founding country is the USA, where Ernest Thompson Seton and Daniel Carter Beard founded the Woodcraft Indians and Sons of Daniel Boone in order to channel the energies of restless urban boys with programs designed for boys to interest boys. Baden-Powell's military manual was interesting to boys because of its content, BP's Boy Scouts program only worked once he lifted Seton's method and merit system.

 

And that is why Boy Scouts is not for girls. It is designed for boys. The inclusion of girls requires changes to the program, which is all that Scouting is. In many of those European countries, and many others across the world, Scouting is not a private organization, it is an arm of government and as such it acts like one, including all comers and doing whatever needs to be done to the program to do so. Not so in America, and that is not bad.

 

Some local units here already admit girls into Cub and Boy scouts http://www.wgbhnews.org/post/cambridge-boy-scout-troop-bucks-national-trend-gay-participation

Some local units do all kinds of things, and some local units shouldn't be Boy Scouts if they don't want to do things as proscribed. Boy Scouts exists because all over the Western world at the turn of the century men took an interest in the plight of young boys who weren't even their own, and decided to invest in them uniquely. They came from every background, from rough frontiersmen to clergy to wealthy progressives to cult of body idealists, not because they were setting out to "discriminate" or segregate, but because they saw a need for a particular sympathetic creature, the boy, and picked him for the philanthropy.

I've been through the entire program, from Tiger on up, and there is NO gender-specific requirements anywhere. No program changes are needed, because girls would join because THEY WANT THE EXISTING program, not a duplicate of Girls Scouts. Girls can and will be able to do all of the requirements, to the best of their ability. 'Do Your Best'.

[Just A Rebel]

Are we talking about all BSA programs being co-ed down to and including dens and patrols? Or are we talking about allowing female-only Cub Scout packs and female-only Boy Scout troops? You can open the very desirable Boy Scout program to girls without making all units co-ed.

The problem with segregated units is that families will be separated. Means multiple weekend activities, one for the Boy unit, one for the Girl unit. Parents are so torn today due to lack of time, I just don't see it working if a family has a Boy Cub, and a Girl Cub too.

[King Ding Dong]

I guess it come down to why feel the GSUSA is failing. Is it the lack of vision in the leadership or is it a change in the desires of young girls.

 

The boys grumble slightly for a few minutes when we arrive at a camp site and electronics are off in stay in the car but then they completely forget about them after a few minutes, because we are letting them be boys. From my limited research of the issue online that does not appear to be the case with girls in general.

 

Maybe, just maybe if they started out as Tigers and were in a quality unit with a strong outdoor program their attitudes would be different. Do not underestimate the power of the smartphone.

[Just A Rebel]

Some of these comments are hilarious.

 

I was a boy. I don't remember hurting for time "being a boy." I pretty much was one all the time. How does having girls present keep boys from being boys? If the boys aren't allowed to swear, go skinny dipping in the pond, or talk about girls & sex with male leaders present, then how does adding girls change anything? The program has already neutered the boy-specific activities and boy-oriented nature of the scouts. It is essentially already primed for girl participation.

 

As for the Cub Scouts, I have no idea why that is not co-ed now. Girls already come to everything, and cub scouts is run by women. What the heck are we resisting there?

I detect a hint of sarcasm there, but you really do hit the nail on the head. My wife, a uniformed leader, somewhat frequently gets asked 'Aren't you wearing the wrong uniform?' To which she replies...'I don't have girls, I have boys'. And the ever-popular 'You don't belong in Boy Scouts'. Well, if enough men would step up, she wouldn't have to. But they don't, so its better to have a female leader, than none at all.

[Just A Rebel]

Boys behave differently in the presence of girls as a matter of fact. This is simply because girls are different, and even Cub Scouts realize it. They think different, act different, and learn different.

 

A method of Scouting is Uniforming. While any boy of any background can conform to the mores and norms of a group of boys, it is a rare girl that's able to do so.

 

While I agree it can still be fun with girls, and in often cases more fun with the girls present, something is lost in the learning and development sphere when the boys are behaving in a way that conforms to a standard of mixed gender learning instead of only having to conform to the standards of "boys being boys". The best example is the silencing factor girls have on most boys. Because they realize the thoughts of girls are different, there is less blurting out of boy thoughts. Those are often pretty profound in the sense that they show where a boy's understanding of the subject matter lies.

 

If it were that reason alone, I'd continue to wholeheartedly support gender segregation in Scouting.

Took me a couple of minutes, but I finally understood your thing about 'uniforming'. Here's my point. We live in a world with male and females in it, and to be successful, one must learn to deal with the other gender. Is it not better that we start to prepare these boys for an adult world with women in it, than to shelter them in the Iron John mythos? These boys will need to both cooperate, and compete with these women in school, college, careers, and adulthood.

 

And I'm not sure I agree with your 'blurting out of boy thoughts'. How is a boy's thoughts different from a girls? Each of us has a different point of view, each of us responds differently. And remembering back to my ancient childhood, I don't remember being silenced by girls. If I knew the answer, I did my best to show it. What you are promoting is a continuation of the 'good old boys club', and I really think our society has been down that road way too far, and for too long.

[Just A Rebel]

I am an Assoc Advisor in all female crew. A few of the girls were in a co-ed crew and didn't like the fact that the boys always wanted to "help" them. They like that they can be be with a group of girls and do the things they've seen or heard their brothers do in Boy Scouts.

I suspect that a few carefully placed words to the boys would have helped that situation. Just like we do with parents, when a youth moves up to be a Boy Scout, its time to teach the parent the 'Scoutmaster Position' (hands in pockets, just making sure they don't go over a cliff'.

[Just A Rebel]

Some of these comments are hilarious. I was a boy. I don't remember hurting for time "being a boy." I pretty much was one all the time. How does having girls present keep boys from being boys? If the boys aren't allowed to swear' date=' go skinny dipping in the pond, or talk about girls & sex with male leaders present, then how does adding girls change anything? The program has already neutered the boy-specific activities and boy-oriented nature of the scouts. It is essentially already primed for girl participation. As for the Cub Scouts, I have no idea why that is not co-ed now. Girls already come to everything, and cub scouts is run by women. What the heck are we resisting there? [/quote']

 

Cub Scouts run by women? Not in my former Pack. Most of the Den Leaders were men, as were all the Cubmasters/Assistan Cubmasters

Then you are very fortunate. I look around at Roundtable, and we are probably about 70% women. Women play a very active role in our area, and to be honest, step up and volunteer to do things more often than the men do at times.

[Just A Rebel]

As I read the posts here, it seems to me one thing is missing. WHY would the BSA even want to consider this? Never mind the obstacles, boys will be boys, tears, sex, whatever. The purpose of Boy Scouting is to put boys in an outdoor environment and offer them fun activities that will lead to their becoming capable adults. Leadership, ability to care for yourself in the outdoors and elsewhere, patriotism and encourage (not teach) spirituality. How exactly would inclusion of girls promote any of these goals?

Take a look at the Mission and Vision statements...no mention whatsoever about boys...its 'Young People' and 'Youth'. No gender mentioned at all.

 

And inclusion of girls would allow them to gain those exact same skills, and would also help boys adapt to the modern world where they will have to cooperate, and compete, with members of the opposite sex, something that wasn't necessary 50 years ago.

[Just A Rebel]

I think all you naysayers better look at some hard facts, the BSA being a "male" group which is not entirely true is NOT a valid argument to support your objections. Your idea of only male role models in scouts is an antiquated idea which is no longer valid in todays society, like it or not. The fact is most of you old time scouters are rapidly aging out of the program and the younger replacements coming on board are much more open to the idea of coed units. The other fact is that the BSA continues to lose members and community/corporate support at an ever increasing rate each year and if National has any idea of how to survive, which I seriously doubt they do, scouting will have to evolve and change to reflect the ideology and needs of the current and future crop of parents and society whether you agree or not otherwise scouting will wither away as an irrelevant and outdated organization. The future is here now, it is time to get on board or be left behind.

Wow...Spaceballs flashback...'Ludicrous Speed....NOW!"

[Just A Rebel]

As a father with one son and two younger daughters... There is a difference. If my wife has a meeting, I'll often have my younger girls with me. The boys still rough house, but it's different when the girls are there, even at this totally non sexual age. So in an ideal world, I'd say keep them separate.

 

That said, I am my Pack Committee Chair, with no real Pack Committee to speak of, and it's a ton of work. The fact that my wife is out right now at a meeting for the new GSUSA troop we're starting up for the girls is why I'd like to see it co-ed. The fact is, GSUSA is a totally different organization with a different agenda. I'd be thrilled if BSA would dump a pile of books/uniforms on us for Girl Cubs that channels girl interests (like cubs channels boy interests) into citizenship. We could see each other once/month at the Pack meeting, run separate Dens, and show off what we've done.

 

Instead, I have piles of paperwork for two organizations in my house, my wife and I both registered as leaders, and my figuring out how to handle campouts, because we can't double the number, and the GSUSA rules are atrocious.

 

Nor is my garage really big enough to double all our camping gear...

I have a 20 foot sea container, and about 80% of it is filled with Scout stuff...Now, if I could only get a tax writeoff for that

[Just A Rebel]

I think the biggest limitation would be confusion with GSUSA. That said, I think GSUSA would close up and die pretty fast of BSA went co-ed. The fact is, having dealt with both organizations, BSA is better run, more professional, and better organized. GSUSA survives mostly because BSA doesn't offer a program at the age that GSUSA really operates in.

 

However, beyond that, the goals of the organization are totally different. GSUSA is totally about girl empowerment. While they nominal accept male leaders, it isn't real, and absolutely pushed back. Looking at our local programing, other than a few hour Daisy-and-Daddy program over the summer, there really is nothing for men in the GSUSA program. While BSA-Cub Scouts is a completely family oriented programs. Siblings come to our camp outs, events, etc. On the flip side, Girl Scouts are simply not as family oriented. These things made historical sense, but at this point I think that there is demand for a BSA-quality program for girls that want family, community, and faith with some outdoors activities, and GSUSA is simply moving in the opposite direction.

King...

You're right, CS is family-oriented, BS is not. So the solution is to NOT create a donut hole and just allow the natural progression from CS to Scouting, for both male and female.

Boy Scouts is not an outdoors program. It is a VALUES program, which is taught using the outdoors as a classroom. All of these skills are nice to learn, but the point is not to learn how to tie a square knot, the point is to learn how to live and breathe the Scout Oath and Law in everyday life. The Square knot is just a tool to learning those values. The Mission and Vision statement don't say anything at all about the outdoors, but they do talk about teaching young people to make ethical decisions across their lifetime.

 

And these Brownies on our camping trip certainly didn't complain that the restroom facilities were 100 yards away, and that they were sleeping in tents. they were LOVING it. Maybe the parents have more issues than the girls about such things.

[King Ding Dong]

I think the biggest limitation would be confusion with GSUSA. That said, I think GSUSA would close up and die pretty fast of BSA went co-ed. The fact is, having dealt with both organizations, BSA is better run, more professional, and better organized. GSUSA survives mostly because BSA doesn't offer a program at the age that GSUSA really operates in.

 

However, beyond that, the goals of the organization are totally different. GSUSA is totally about girl empowerment. While they nominal accept male leaders, it isn't real, and absolutely pushed back. Looking at our local programing, other than a few hour Daisy-and-Daddy program over the summer, there really is nothing for men in the GSUSA program. While BSA-Cub Scouts is a completely family oriented programs. Siblings come to our camp outs, events, etc. On the flip side, Girl Scouts are simply not as family oriented. These things made historical sense, but at this point I think that there is demand for a BSA-quality program for girls that want family, community, and faith with some outdoors activities, and GSUSA is simply moving in the opposite direction.

Rebel If you are going to go all technical then fine. It is a values program but the outdoors is not a classroom, scouts is not school.

 

The mission and vision statement do not need to say anything about the outdoors. It's all in the name ScOUT.

 

Scouts do not have "restroom facilities" (at least at any scout camp I have been to). They have a latrine. I congratulate you for having such a well adjusted brownie troop. However, the whole camp issue is not something I pulled out of my a@@. The GSUSA leadership thinks your troop is the exception, not the rule. These are statements from GSUSA executives explaining their decisions on why they are selling "rustic" properties and consolidating, so they can build modern facilities with modern conveniences.

 

That mentality severely damaged the BSA in the 70s, there will be a fight to make sure it doesn't come back. Can you explain to me why you think the GSUSA is failing to deliver, if there are all these girls clamoring to do it just like the boys do ?

[qwazse]

Reb, I hear you.

I just know -- from camping with Jr. High co-eds outside of scouting -- that things don't always run smoothly. Sex differences get in the way, and most scouters would rather not deal with them.

 

High school youth have begun to accept those differences and work with them on their own. (Some youth make terrible decisions in this process, that's why adult association is a critical method of Venturing, but generally awesome ideas result from the different perspectives.) Thus the Explorer and Venturing programs and BSA's broad mission statement.

 

But harsh reality: making it work for High School kids is still controversial. There are plenty of scouters who resent Venturing. (About half of them might be people we'd respect.) Those numbers get very large when we start talking at the Jr. High level.

[qwazse]

Reb, I hear you.

I just know -- from camping with Jr. High co-eds outside of scouting -- that things don't always run smoothly. Sex differences get in the way, and most scouters would rather not deal with them.

 

High school youth have begun to accept those differences and work with them on their own. (Some youth make terrible decisions in this process, that's why adult association is a critical method of Venturing, but generally awesome ideas result from the different perspectives.) Thus the Explorer and Venturing programs and BSA's broad mission statement.

 

But harsh reality: making it work for High School kids is still controversial. There are plenty of scouters who resent Venturing. (About half of them might be people we'd respect.) Those numbers get very large when we start talking at the Jr. High level.

[Kahuna]

As I read the posts here, it seems to me one thing is missing. WHY would the BSA even want to consider this? Never mind the obstacles, boys will be boys, tears, sex, whatever. The purpose of Boy Scouting is to put boys in an outdoor environment and offer them fun activities that will lead to their becoming capable adults. Leadership, ability to care for yourself in the outdoors and elsewhere, patriotism and encourage (not teach) spirituality. How exactly would inclusion of girls promote any of these goals?

Yeah, well mission statements are mission statements. As far as I'm concerned, we are chartered by Congress to do these things for BOYS.

 

"The purposes of the corporation are to promote, through organization, and cooperation with other agencies, the ability of boys to do things for themselves and others, to train them in scoutcraft, and to teach them patriotism, courage, self-reliance, and kindred virtues, using the methods that were in common use by boy scouts on June 15, 1916."