"Boy Scouts thrive after lifting of gay ban."

[Eagledad]

If you're so worried about girls not wanting to use a latrine, then really you have nothing to worry about. Girls would take one look at most summer camp facilities and run away, right? So problem solved, you don't have to worry about girls in Boy Scouts. ......................................................................................

 

But sure, let's maintain a national policy to keep girls out because... latrines. 

Ahhh, condescending sarcasm. Not very scout like, but ..........

 

Barry

[Eagledad]

 In all seriousness can you list which programs you refer to? The majority of WOSM affiliated scout associations around the world are coed and world wide scouting is growing. So I'd be curious to see the stats you refer to.

 

I've been doing these discussions for 20 years, so I'm not going to do the research, again! But from memory of youth scouting associations that made major membership policy changes: GSUSA, Campfire kids, Canadian Scouts, Australian Scouts and I think New Zealand. There are a couple of others that can't remember.

 

And with regard to the UK you simply can't pin the late 90s/early 2000s drop on going coed. There was simply too much else going on and the turn around that came as soon as the big changes in 2002/2003 happened suggests that girls weren't really the problem.

Yes, but my point was the boys have not come back at the numbers the program once had. I guess it's a chicken or egg question.

 

Barry

[Col. Flagg]

But sure, let's maintain a national policy to keep girls out because... latrines. 

 

You just keep missing the point. I will be clear: No girls because:

1. We need a boy-only program for the myriad of reasons folks like @@Stosh and others have articulated. Guys need at least one last bastion where they can be with other guys....just like girls have.

    

2. We already have a coed program in Scouting, so there's no need to open Boy Scouts to girls. They can do MORE in Venturing than they can in Boy Scouts...except get Eagle.

    

3. The costs involved with accommodating coed Scouting will be more than you think. Many council camps are not equipped to handle a large number of two separate genders. Just visit any coed camp to see how much more they have to spend on infrastructure to keep two different gender bathrooms and shower facilities up. Or, for those who don't have the money, the logistics involved in having "girl shower time" and then "boy shower time". Takes away from program time.

[Tampa Turtle]

I like the boys program because I think a boys-only program is different then a boys-girl program and I like that difference. But I have been at co-ed outdoor activities and have camped with a couple Troops from other countries with boys and girls. The logistical issues were NOT that a big deal and seem like the 'icky girl' defense.

[EmberMike]

 

You just keep missing the point. I will be clear: No girls because:

1. We need a boy-only program for the myriad of reasons folks like @@Stosh and others have articulated. Guys need at least one last bastion where they can be with other guys....just like girls have.

    

2. We already have a coed program in Scouting, so there's no need to open Boy Scouts to girls. They can do MORE in Venturing than they can in Boy Scouts...except get Eagle.

    

3. The costs involved with accommodating coed Scouting will be more than you think. Many council camps are not equipped to handle a large number of two separate genders. Just visit any coed camp to see how much more they have to spend on infrastructure to keep two different gender bathrooms and shower facilities up. Or, for those who don't have the money, the logistics involved in having "girl shower time" and then "boy shower time". Takes away from program time.

 

 

Thank you for the clarity. You have valid arguments against co-ed, but they get lost in your "girls don't want to use latrines" idea. Which, as I previously mentioned, is a non-issue for some camps and I don't think should be a reason for ruling out co-ed. We could make co-ed a local option for councils that have adequate camp facilities. I still don't see the reason to rule it out for every unit when it's not a universal problem. 

 

I'm all for debating this issue on real concerns that have a real impact on large numbers of units. The toilets argument, however, is a straw man. Financial burden on camps having to update facilities is an easy target, but it's nonexistent problem for many camps. This is a logistical concern that numerous scouting organizations globally handle just fine, and numerous camps throughout the US also already accommodate with current facilities. 

[Col. Flagg]

Thank you for the clarity. You have valid arguments against co-ed, but they get lost in your "girls don't want to use latrines" idea. Which, as I previously mentioned, is a non-issue for some camps and I don't think should be a reason for ruling out co-ed. We could make co-ed a local option for councils that have adequate camp facilities. I still don't see the reason to rule it out for every unit when it's not a universal problem. 

 

I'm all for debating this issue on real concerns that have a real impact on large numbers of units. The toilets argument, however, is a straw man. Financial burden on camps having to update facilities is an easy target, but it's nonexistent problem for many camps. This is a logistical concern that numerous scouting organizations globally handle just fine, and numerous camps throughout the US also already accommodate with current facilities. 

 

@@EmberMike, a few comments:

• Why does Boy Scouting need to be coed. I don't think you've ever articulated why Boy Scouts has to go coed in your opinion, when there's a perfectly good Venturing program that's already coed. Why have two coed programs? Why wan't girls just go in to Venturing and leave Boy Scouts alone? Same program except for Eagle and a few other things.

   

• I was using the toilet and shower issue to underscore the logistics and infrastructure issues many councils would face. I was staff at several camps. I know several camp directors. They have a hard time today accommodating female Scouters. Adding in female scouts would increase their problems exponentially. It is not just the condition of many facilities -- that truthfully most Scouters wouldn't drop trousers for -- but the number of facilities per camp...most of them shared.
  • To dismiss the problem shows you may not have seen too many camps. I have visited over 20 camps in and around my state. Their infrastructure is dated and in poor condition. When you compare to coed camps in the same region -- most of which are twice the cost of a BSA summer camp -- it's night and day. These camps have a hard enough time filling boys in to these camps, and yes, most of the reasons cited are the poor shower, toilet and mess hall facilities.
  • I think you over estimate the average American youth bum. I can barely get the boys to sit over a smelly trap toidy in 105F. My daughter visited once (day camp) and forced me to drive her to Sonic 4 miles away. She's done P&Bs at Philmont but she won't do those johns at our local camp.

[Cambridgeskip]

Thank you for the clarity. You have valid arguments against co-ed, but they get lost in your "girls don't want to use latrines" idea. Which, as I previously mentioned, is a non-issue for some camps and I don't think should be a reason for ruling out co-ed. We could make co-ed a local option for councils that have adequate camp facilities. I still don't see the reason to rule it out for every unit when it's not a universal problem. 

 

I'm all for debating this issue on real concerns that have a real impact on large numbers of units. The toilets argument, however, is a straw man. Financial burden on camps having to update facilities is an easy target, but it's nonexistent problem for many camps. This is a logistical concern that numerous scouting organizations globally handle just fine, and numerous camps throughout the US also already accommodate with current facilities. 

 To be fair on the logistics argument this isn't something we ever had to face in the UK.

 

Historically The Scout Association and Girl Guiding UK have always cooperated a lot, probably more so before going coed. Girl Guides own very few campsites, they have a few but a fraction of what scouts have. So Girl Guides have historically camped at scout campsites. Similarly most sites get used by schools during term time as well. So those sites were already geared up for boys and girls toilet and shower blocks before we went coed. So there was no big bang need for change on that front.

[Stosh]

 

• 105F. My daughter visited once (day camp) and forced me to drive her to Sonic 4 miles away. She's done P&Bs at Philmont but she won't do those johns at our local camp.

My brother and I took our daughters to the BWCA and after a 10 mile drive out to the parking lot and a mile portage into the entry point, my darling daughter asked where the restroom was.  I handed her a roll of TP and said, any pink tree will do.  Never had to discuss it any further and she figured it out rather quickly.  She was, after all, valedictorian of her graduating class of 400+.  I'm thinking that once desperation sets in she'll realize there are a ton of pink trees if not privacy latrines within walking distance..

 

[NJCubScouter]

So after 8 pages we still haven't see much Thriving going on in the BSA.  However, TrailLife/USA has moved most of their part-time people to full-time and are hiring new staff.  Don't see that happening at my Council office, just more and more cutbacks.  Maybe there are others out there that are going gung-ho and are taking up the slack...... maybe not.

 

Here is the statement Trail Life posted yesterday, which seems to confirm (but also provides some more perspective on) the information in Stosh's post:

 

http://www.traillifeusa.com/blog/214-Boy-Scouts-Christian-Alternative-Sees-Tremendous-Response-After-Transgender-Decision

 

It says they moved "a few" part-timers to full-time to accommodate the increase in interest since the BSA announced its transgender policy change.  It also says they have 12 employees and 26,000 members.  Maybe as a result of this they will have more, but I hardly think they are in any danger of overtaking the BSA.  And if they did, well that's the magic of the marketplace.  They are kind of irrelevant to me anyway since I do not meet their adult membership criteria, one of which is that you have to be a Christian (and specifically a Trinitarian Christian.)  But if that's where your interest lies, well, there they are.

 

(And yes, part of the reason for this post was that I thought there should be some mention of something other than latrines.)

Edited February 28, 2017 by NJCubScouter

[Back Pack]

Seems to me a tree in the woods and a 105F outhouse are two totally different scenic and olfactory experiences. Hardly a decent comparison.

[jrush]

Jrush, nobody has said anything official. We are all just blathering through our fears, hopes and desires. Your theory doesn't have anymore relevance than mine. You completely missed what I said in my post because I imagine you really want girls in the program. Badly.

 

Barry

 

No, I was just addressing points made/implied that allowing COs to approve homosexual leaders was the BSA turning away from God.  Heck, my theory as to the BSA's reasoning isn't even a theory...it's a hypothesis.  I have no way to design an experiment and test it to see if I can upgrade it to "theory".  As to girls in the program, what I want is irrelevant.  Girls are already in the program, including packs and troops.  They are attending meetings.  They are attending outdoor activities.  We just make them wait until age 14 to let them buy a uniform and earn recognition.  In practice, units can do the same thing now they will be able to do when the BSA goes co-ed across the board.  The Charter Org says "all male", the unit policy can prohibit female siblings from attending events, the CO can stipulate all-male adult leadership.  As I said, these units can take boys all the way through the program without ever interacting with a co-ed unit.   

 

All that said, it's not a hope or fear that the BSA will go 100% co-ed option across all units for Charter Orgs.  It's going to happen. The BSA can't pitch itself as a community organization in the 21st century if it doesn't. 

[Col. Flagg]

In practice, units can do the same thing now they will be able to do when the BSA goes co-ed across the board.  The Charter Org says "all male", the unit policy can prohibit female siblings from attending events, the CO can stipulate all-male adult leadership.  As I said, these units can take boys all the way through the program without ever interacting with a co-ed unit.   

 

Just wait until that thought is first put to the test and someone sues. You can time how fast that CO capitulates or drops the BSA unit with an egg timer. We had that protection previously and look how fast BSA caved and placed the burden on the CO.

 

Old argument, same result.

[Eagledad]

All that said, it's not a hope or fear that the BSA will go 100% co-ed option across all units for Charter Orgs.  It's going to happen. The BSA can't pitch itself as a community organization in the 21st century if it doesn't. 

Hypothesis or theory?

 

All that dancing around of words just to say you want a national policy change for girls memberships in cubs and troops.

 

We just have agree to disagree.

 

Barry

[David CO]

I, for one, never meant to imply that the recent membership policy changes was BSA turning away from God. I thought I outright said it.  At least I meant to.  Sorry if I wasn't clear enough.

Edited March 7, 2017 by David CO

[jrush]

Hypothesis or theory?

 

All that dancing around of words just to say you want a national policy change for girls memberships in cubs and troops.

 

We just have agree to disagree.

 

Barry

 

Again, what I want is irrelevant, regardless if we agree or not.  The BSA finally had to choose which fork in the road to take over homosexual/lesbian adult leaders.  That path led invariably to allowing transgender youth, and it leads invariably to a co-ed program.  Given that we've passed the transgender mile marker, co-ed is right around the corner.  The BSA gave a thumbs up to youth with female plumbing and XX chromosomes who want to be boys.   Personally, I thought co-ed and transgender would have happened simultaneously, but apparently the BSA is allowing to units and leaders time to emotionally adapt.

 

So, co-ed is going to happen.  If you're committed to the program itself, you might as well reconcile yourself and look for some of the benefits for the organization as a whole.   I'm not sure it helps to sit around and disagree with a decision that has essentially already been made, and since I'm on board, I'll tout the upside whether I privately agree or not.