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

[WAKWIB]

Perhaps it's just me, but it seems that while on one-hand many forum members seem fine with holding the door wide open to allow homosexual boys and adults into Scouting, going totally co-ed seems to produce a bit more hesitation. As the original poster pointed out there is a lot of things in place that would make the transition to co-ed pretty easy. The general public would likely give us a standing ovation for this instead of all the negativity we have been getting from both sides of the "gay issue." I truly believed that GIRLS would be the first of the 3-G's Scouting would tackle. It would have been the easiest and most acceptable to the most people; adding members without worrying about more running away than joining. In this situation the highly-touted "local option" that everyone thought was the wonderful solution to the admittance of gay folks would actually work without a lot of push-back. It works already with Venturing.

It looks like some of us are saying, "Come and be welcome all gay men and boys, but you girls, please stay home." A cheesy comedy writer for SNL or MadTV could have a field day with that...

Yep, AZ. Pretty much. Typically the three G's were Girls, Gays, and God and been a part of Scouting's in-house hot-button discussions over the last 40+ years I have been involved. Well, the girls have been more at the top of the list for that duration. Gays and atheists have become the more heavily contested topics in the last 20 or so.

[Peregrinator]

Two' date=' I think that integrating Cub Scouts is more straightforward than Boy Scouts because of the family orientation. I think that a Tigress program would be nearly identical to the Tiger program, swap the Achievement/Elective for Go See It: Sporting with Elective: Performance and you pretty much have the Tigress program. Wolf/Bear are more complicated, I'd have the Wolfess/Bearess programs do more sewing, less whittling, and a few other things. One of the strengths of scouting is that it plays to gender stereotypes while society as a whole fights them.[/quote']

 

Because everyone knows, girls can't be interested in sports? Because we don't want to encourage them to do any "manly" things like whittling? Gender stereotypes are a GOOD thing???? One of BSA's strengths??? Really?

 

Since there are plenty of girls that want to do the current cub program, why would we have to change any of it (other than adjusting a few of the pronouns in the hand book)?

Here's a question - to what extent do we do what the kids want to do instead of what they should do?

[Basementdweller]

You guys should but as much effort into your local program as you do virtual scouting and debating here.......

 

Your program would be stellar.

 

[Pack18Alex]

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.

The girls want the BSA Cub program because it's a stellar program. The GSUSA program is simply not the outdoors and activity oriented program that cubs is. If you compare the Daisy/Brownie Program to the Tiger/Wolf/Bear programs (same age range), the GSUSA program is adorable and girly, but way more talking and less doing. In the BSA program, built around young boys, we're there to teach values, we do it with action, while the GSUSA is teaching their values, but in a more classroom style program. Both programs are heavy on crafts and light on scout craft, which changes as they get older. I'd be okay with leaving the program as is, I just think you could easily make a more feminine program with minor changes that would focus on how girls learn and operate like cubs focuses on how boys learn and operate.

 

I'd do a Cub program with parallel instruction for girls, and part of the reason to make the programs slightly different is that we like the fact that boys get to be boys in the pack, and different handbooks (less junglebook, more girly) would reinforce that the girl dens and boy dens need to be distinct. The identical program would mean fully coed dens, which I think would be detrimental. I think two Scout Handbooks, Scout Handbook for Boys and Scout Handbook for Girls would encourage separate Patrols, with more Patrol time and less Troop time, with them ready to go coed when they get older and more mature for it.

 

I think that many girls would prefer the GSUSA program, hence their move towards a more upper middle class orientation with the modern campsites... Let's face it, going into the inner cities makes everyone feel good, but GSUSA's cookie sales (and therefore revenue) come from their white upper middle class troops, and that's their interest, small cohesive groups of girls that do activities and sell a ton of cookies.

 

If BSA decided to go coed with no changes, I'd make my Pack coed. I'd just prefer if it was kept "mixed" to give boys boy time and girls girl time while giving us an outdoor and value oriented program for both boys and girls.

[Pack18Alex]

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...

Well, if my family needs to have tents and cooking gear for both our Girls site and our Boys site, that's not Pack gear, that's just my family. If they are all on separate weekends, well Cubs weekend is family camping, and GSUSA weekend is just the girls.

 

In terms of your question:

 

Problem One: we have a few dedicated families, they're slowly stepping up, my focus has been on recruiting and motivating active families. Some of the problem is a legacy problem that will take time to fix. But I committed this year and wanted my son to have a stellar program. I've been very open with my active families that I'm not sure I'm staying vs switching to a more established pack... that has a bunch of them willing to step up.

 

Problem two/three: I don't know, I think that my daughters love doing the cub stuff, they were less interested in working with tools than the crafts. I don't think it would stretch BSA to bring in a few consultants on childhood development for girls, plus review the GSUSA material from 40+ years ago and put it together. I mean, they've got a decent amount of experience with the 13+ girls from Venture/Sea Scouts, so we're not dealing with cloistered men that have done nothing. I think that the investment is small, and might be able to be fundraised for. A merger would have the added benefit of being able to create Knots for the Girls Silver/Gold Awards so that Girls Scouts turned into BSA/GSUSA Scouters would get recognition like AOL/Eagle Knots are for Boy Scouts turned BSA Scouters. I think at least 60% of the program would be identical, 20% minor adaptations for girls, and 20% ripping off ideas from old GSUSA back when they were Scouting and not the liberal political movement wit

 

Problem four, never had a car in my garage, don't see that changing. That said, my parents kept two cars in their garage my whole life.

 

Problem five, we're a Jewish Pack, to AHG isn't an option for us for the Girls, and Jewish dietary requirements require us to have more Pack gear than most Packs need. I mean, each person in my family has two mess kits to separate meat and dairy, and a bunch of other restrictions. That also complicates joining another Pack for me.

[AZMike]

One of the arguments that is commonly advanced by the LGBT advocates is "well, the boys are okay with including gays, so we should do what they want." Leaving aside the argument that "all boys" or even a majority favor that, I'd be curious to know what the boys in scouting want, as opposed to their moms and dads who want to include their daughters, or hold an ideal of female inclusion in all activities. Some (possibly older) boys might favor it, but maybe not. Even if you are at the age where all you can think about is girls, there's a lot to be said for carving out a place in your life where you can just be with your (male) buddies and be yourself. (I could see that it could create some tensions for a Scout with a girlfriend who is not in scouting, but doesn't want her BF going on a campout with other girls.) A lot of the younger scouts may also not be keen on the idea. If the boys would not favor it, why should it be pushed upon them? There are certainly plenty of other co-ed youth organizations available to them. Certainly, older scouts can join a co-ed Venturing Crew if that is what they want, instead of the adult leaders remaking Scouting to conform with their own ideas.

 

It would also probably create a lot of antagonism with the GSA, who would be (rightfully) concerned that we are poaching members from them.

 

I think if you were to conduct an informal poll of your troops, you would find this a pretty unpopular idea.

 

 

 

[qwazse]

One of the arguments that is commonly advanced by the LGBT advocates is "well, the boys are okay with including gays, so we should do what they want." Leaving aside the argument that "all boys" or even a majority favor that, I'd be curious to know what the boys in scouting want, as opposed to their moms and dads who want to include their daughters, or hold an ideal of female inclusion in all activities. Some (possibly older) boys might favor it, but maybe not. Even if you are at the age where all you can think about is girls, there's a lot to be said for carving out a place in your life where you can just be with your (male) buddies and be yourself. (I could see that it could create some tensions for a Scout with a girlfriend who is not in scouting, but doesn't want her BF going on a campout with other girls.) A lot of the younger scouts may also not be keen on the idea. If the boys would not favor it, why should it be pushed upon them? There are certainly plenty of other co-ed youth organizations available to them. Certainly, older scouts can join a co-ed Venturing Crew if that is what they want, instead of the adult leaders remaking Scouting to conform with their own ideas.

 

It would also probably create a lot of antagonism with the GSA, who would be (rightfully) concerned that we are poaching members from them.

 

I think if you were to conduct an informal poll of your troops, you would find this a pretty unpopular idea.

 

 

In terms of what boys want, I can offer a sample of 1. About half the boys in our troop who could join our crew don't. That could be for a lot of reasons, but one is certainly that they have enough women in their lives already.

[BadenP]

qwase

 

I think your idea about the crew is really outdated in todays world. Parents dont want to shuffle their kids to different meetings if they could all belong to one group. The GSUSA is losing members even faster then the BSA, no outdoor activities is the main reason my Venturing girls tell me, who were former girl scouts. The BSA is also losing membership at an alarming rate especially in troops and crews. If the current trend continues both BSA and GSUSA will be gone in another decade. It is time the BSA does what its European and South American counterparts have done and make the programs coed otherwise we will see the final demise of the BSA in our lifetimes.

[King Ding Dong]

One of the arguments that is commonly advanced by the LGBT advocates is "well, the boys are okay with including gays, so we should do what they want." Leaving aside the argument that "all boys" or even a majority favor that, I'd be curious to know what the boys in scouting want, as opposed to their moms and dads who want to include their daughters, or hold an ideal of female inclusion in all activities. Some (possibly older) boys might favor it, but maybe not. Even if you are at the age where all you can think about is girls, there's a lot to be said for carving out a place in your life where you can just be with your (male) buddies and be yourself. (I could see that it could create some tensions for a Scout with a girlfriend who is not in scouting, but doesn't want her BF going on a campout with other girls.) A lot of the younger scouts may also not be keen on the idea. If the boys would not favor it, why should it be pushed upon them? There are certainly plenty of other co-ed youth organizations available to them. Certainly, older scouts can join a co-ed Venturing Crew if that is what they want, instead of the adult leaders remaking Scouting to conform with their own ideas.

 

It would also probably create a lot of antagonism with the GSA, who would be (rightfully) concerned that we are poaching members from them.

 

I think if you were to conduct an informal poll of your troops, you would find this a pretty unpopular idea.

 

 

I agree GSUSA would throw a fit if BSA opened up to girls. It would be viewed as a very hostile act. The fallout would be huge.

 

The only way this could happen is with the GSUSA blessing or a merger, and last I checked pigs don't fly.

[walk in the woods]

On this Friday before Mother's Day all the talk about scouting in the world community reminds me of something my mother used to say to me. "If all your friends jumped off a bridge would you jump too?" .

 

One of the things not discussed here is differentiation. Yeah, it's an MBA kind of term but applicable none the less. The BSA is in competition for kid's and parent's free-time investment. I suspect we all lose kids to sports. In my neck of the woods I lose kids to 4H and FFA (good programs as well) because those programs more closely match their interests. I've had parents tell me they wouldn't let their kids sign up for scouts unless they gave up something else. I've heard other scoutmasters say they lose kids because they already camp, hike, hunt, fish, boat, canoe, ride ATVs and snowmobiles with their dads. They don't need scouts. The reason I bring it up is I also do some work with my son's youth group at church. The YG is co-ed, basically 7th - 12th graders. We camp, we do service projects, we play laser tag (gasp!), hold lock-ins, go to amusement parks, go on mission trips, etc. If the BSA went co-ed, how would we differentiate ourselves from my son's youth group in the values-based youth program competition for the scarce resource of time? I gotta say I don't see anything in the BSA program that I couldn't also do with the youth group and frankly with a lot fewer rules in the way.

[EmberMike]

On this Friday before Mother's Day all the talk about scouting in the world community reminds me of something my mother used to say to me. "If all your friends jumped off a bridge would you jump too?" .

 

One of the things not discussed here is differentiation. Yeah, it's an MBA kind of term but applicable none the less. The BSA is in competition for kid's and parent's free-time investment. I suspect we all lose kids to sports. In my neck of the woods I lose kids to 4H and FFA (good programs as well) because those programs more closely match their interests. I've had parents tell me they wouldn't let their kids sign up for scouts unless they gave up something else. I've heard other scoutmasters say they lose kids because they already camp, hike, hunt, fish, boat, canoe, ride ATVs and snowmobiles with their dads. They don't need scouts. The reason I bring it up is I also do some work with my son's youth group at church. The YG is co-ed, basically 7th - 12th graders. We camp, we do service projects, we play laser tag (gasp!), hold lock-ins, go to amusement parks, go on mission trips, etc. If the BSA went co-ed, how would we differentiate ourselves from my son's youth group in the values-based youth program competition for the scarce resource of time? I gotta say I don't see anything in the BSA program that I couldn't also do with the youth group and frankly with a lot fewer rules in the way.

I think the one big difference is rank and advancement. There's no Eagle equivalent for a youth group. That's the end-goal for most kids, and although few make it and still get a lot out of the program, having a goal to shoot for is a huge incentive, and a huge reason to opt for something like Scouting over a similar group, even when all things seem equal between the two.

[EmberMike]

 

The big difference between this and the issue of gay kids in scouting is that gay kids don't have another option, while girls do. Exclude a gay kid and that's the end of the road for him in Scouting. Exclude girls and there's still the GSUSA. At a certain age there's also Venturing for girls.

 

 

[King Ding Dong]

You guys should but as much effort into your local program as you do virtual scouting and debating here.......

 

Your program would be stellar.

I like you BD, I really do, but sometimes I just don't understand you. You have 4356 posts and you criticize others for virtual scouting. ???

[King Ding Dong]

The big difference between this and the issue of gay kids in scouting is that gay kids don't have another option, while girls do. Exclude a gay kid and that's the end of the road for him in Scouting. Exclude girls and there's still the GSUSA. At a certain age there's also Venturing for girls.

 

We could always let in girls, just not if they are "avowed" girls.

[AZMike]

The big difference between this and the issue of gay kids in scouting is that gay kids don't have another option, while girls do. Exclude a gay kid and that's the end of the road for him in Scouting. Exclude girls and there's still the GSUSA. At a certain age there's also Venturing for girls.

 

A boy with a SSA could still join any number of outdoors-based, co-ed scouting-type organizations:

 

1) The Spiral Scouts - coed pagan scout group that accepts all religions and atheists. Doesn't exclude lesbians, or gay, bisexual, or transgendered boys. Has offered to grant its highest rank to any Eagle Scout who is willing to leave the BSA over its membership policies. Their oath runs: "A SpiralScout shall: Respect all living things; be kind and courteous; be honorable; be mindful of his/her words; seek out knowledge in all forms; recognize the beauty in all of creation; offer assistance to others; value honesty and truth; honor personal commitments; and respect the Divine in all things." Probably have more interesting campfire ceremonies, I would guess.

 

2) Camp Fire - formerly Camp Fire Girls of America, went co-ed in 1975. Doesn't exclude lesbians, gay, bisexual, or transgender boys.

 

3) Navigators - Unitarian-led breakaway from BSA that doesn't exclude lesbians or gay, bisexual, or transgender boys. Focuses on outdoors and service projects, lets in atheists. Their version on the Scout Law runs: "As a Navigator I promise to do my best To create a world free of prejudice and ignorance. To treat people of every race, creed, Lifestyle and ability with dignity and respect. To strengthen my body and improve My mind to reach my full potential. To protect our planet and Preserve our freedom." Awww.

 

4) Baden-Powell Service Organization - BSA copy that doesn't exclude lesbians or gay, bisexual, or transgender boys. Merit badges, etc.

 

5) Girl Scouts of America - will admit the "T" in "LGBT" if a boy self-identifies as a girl.

 

6) The Junior Forest Wardens - this is unfortunately currently only in Canada, but I wish they were down here as they actually own a gaming license and funds its scouting activities partly through gaming. Imagine the merit badges (Keno! Blackjack! Video Poker!) Inclusive.

 

7) The Junior Woodchucks - policy on LGBT inclusion is currently unknown. Will accept other talking animal species than ducks, so who knows?

 

8) The Young Pioneers - Admits atheists (in fact, mandatory to be an atheist). The LGBT thing is iffy, Cuba seems to have changed its policy recently from forced gender re-identification camps to benign tolerance. One color of kerchief, red. Membership may be compulsory in some countries. May have a Lone Scout program for those scouts who do not live in an officially atheist country. Their version of the Scout Law: I, (last name, first name), joining the ranks of the All-Union Pioneer Organization, in the presence of my comrades solemnly promise: to passionately love and cherish my Motherland, to live as the great [insert name of atheist dictator here] bade us to, as the Communist Party teaches us to, as required by the laws of the Pioneers of the Soviet Union (or: Cuba, Vietnam, North Korea, Peoples Republic of China, Dingbatistan, etc.)"