"Boy Scouts thrive after lifting of gay ban."

[Col. Flagg]

Well, first, I expect that even once BSA goes co-ed, COs will be able to have all-male, co-ed, or all-female packs and troops, just as they can crews and posts.  A dozen like-minded families = a all-male pack.  You don't want your all-male pack exposed to the co-ed packs?  Don't go to council events.  Your PWD winners don't have to go the district PWD.  Once in the all-male troop, they don't have to go to summer camps or OA events or high-adventure bases.  Boys can go from Lion to Eagle and never once interact with a co-ed pack or troop.

 

My council struggles to accommodate women as it is now. Imagine if scouting were open to some coed troops and some all (x) troops. The logistics of who sleeps with whom or who uses which latrine is mind boggling.

 

Also, before any girl signs up for summer camp they might want to come check out what our latrines are like in the summer time. Our trap latrines may the B&Ps at Philmont look like French porcelain finery.

 

Just sayin'.

[Rick_in_CA]

Second, nobody here or at BSA has said "no god".  The BSA has always stressed faith.  Point of fact, they stress faith so much that atheists are barred, regardless of what the CO wants, and they haven't discussed budging a millimeter on that.   What they have said is that the BSA's position on faith is 100% non-denominational.

Actually they do allow some atheists, as long as they don't call themselves atheists. Also the BSA is 100% non-sectarian, not simply non-denominational.

[fred johnson]

People in the debate often look down on the concern about facilities needing to be revised and update.  But it's a real issue with cost that will need to be budgeted and planned.  

 

http://kstp.com/news/coon-rapids-high-school-transgender-student-wants-gender-inclusion-policy-for-locker-room-use-/4411683/?cat=1

[Stosh]

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.

[Eagledad]

Well, first, I expect that even once BSA goes co-ed, COs will be able to have all-male, co-ed, or all-female packs and troops,..................................................................

 

Second, nobody here or at BSA has said "no god".  The BSA has always stressed faith.  Point of fact, ................................................................................................................

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

[fred johnson]

... However, TrailLife/USA has moved most of their part-time people to full-time and are hiring new staff. ...

 

Perhaps we need to view BSA & TrailLife similar to how we view troops in our city.  We want and hope scouts will join our troop, but if they don't we encourage them to look at other troops and not give up on scouting.  Perhaps it's the same.  We encourage scouts and families to join BSA, but if not explore other opportunities such as Trail Life, 4H, etc and encourage families to not give up on the out doors.  BSA views troop vs troop competition as a good thing.  This is just another flavor of that.  And it might solve some key confusion in having BSA be a nationally chartered program versus a religious program.  It's sad in that I don't think anyone will be better off in the long run.

[Stosh]

@@fred johnson, one has to remember that these youth programs have been around for ages.  Most of them were around when I was a kid, there's nothing new here that hasn't been run up the flagpole and saluted in the past.  What is different is the tides of time that come and go and for good or bad will eventually erode the shoreline in one place and deposit a sandbar somewhere else.  The whole idea is not to intentionally become the eroding shoreline, but the receptive sandbar.  Sure there are going to be storms that do a number on the shore, but all one has to do is see the rip-rap and sea walls that are in place to prevent it.  The shore lines in the harbor are also really stable, too.  Sometimes it's location, sometimes, it storms and weather, some times it's nothing more than Mother Nature and time.  Change happens.

 

Church "Scout" groups have been around since when I was a kid.  Trail Life/USA is nothing more than an upstart that got a foothold and boost from the actions of the BSA.  I didn't hear of any major upswing in the local Pioneer program or the Trail Life/USA that popped up and disappeared as quickly as it came.  But we have 3-4 new "Y" facilities and an expansion on the original that has happened in the past year, Boy & Girls Clubs are just finishing up on a major expansion as well.  And our local BSA Council has 3 Districts - 2 full-time DE's and 2 part-time DE's and the number of local scouts is dropping.

 

I read in the local news-rag that more and more outdoor programs are being developed in the public schools.  My wife and I were invited to start a Venturing Crew in a nearby town.  I thought it was a go, but it never got beyond the exploratory level.  But what I did find out was that the school did organize an Outdoor Club with advisor at a fraction of the cost of Venturing.   The local outdoors clubs are now promoting youth opportunities as well.  Canoe/Kayak Club had a major push this winter for this coming spring.  My wife's kayak group has taken on some new younger gals as well.  There's a KAMO group that has just started in our area as well, seems to be doing fairly well.  (Kids And Mentors Outdoors) 

 

Seriously, people, it's not school sports, girls and cars that are the problem.  It's that the BSA doesn't do it's homework!  Even if it were to do some serious market research before making policy changes, it may stem the bleeding.

[EmberMike]

The logistics of who sleeps with whom or who uses which latrine is mind boggling.

 

 

Really? That's the mind-boggling part of all of this? How about, girls tent with girls, boys tent with boys. Done. 

 

Toilets and the name of the organization: how does this discussion always devolve down to these silly issues? 

 

 

Also, before any girl signs up for summer camp they might want to come check out what our latrines are like in the summer time. Our trap latrines may the B&Ps at Philmont look like French porcelain finery. 

 

I've camped with girls at a boy scout summer camp. They're fine with latrines. It's a non-issue. 

Edited February 28, 2017 by EmberMike

[Col. Flagg]

Really? That's the mind-boggling part of all of this? How about, girls tent with girls, boys tent with boys. Done. 

 

Toilets and the name of the organization: how does this discussion always devolve down to these silly issues? 

 

I've camped with girls at a boy scout summer camp. They're fine with latrines. It's a non-issue. 

 

Have you ever been camping with a coed crew before? Do you know the training involved to teach men who don't have daughters how to handle sensitive feminine issues? Have you ever seen a council's shower or toilet set up? Many that I have seen struggle to accommodate the female Scouters as it is. Imagine what it will be like when whole troops of girls are there. Do you think a female leader will want her all girl troop to be butting up against an all boy troop's camp site? Teaching adult males to stop peeing by their tent is STILL a challenge. I bet some female SM wants to see a troop of adults and scouts doing that, right?

 

I guess @@EmberMike, you will continue to flabbergasted at my inability to see how simple it (the solution) is, just as I will continue to be amazed at your inability to see that there are a myriad of issues which will have a real cost and logistical impact on Scouting.

 

I invite you to come to Texas this summer. We have a Y camp right next to one of our council camps. We can go together and ask the leader of a group of 11 year old girls to bring them over and use this lovely dunny in the 105F heat. Then let's have them fill out a questionnaire on if they want to join Scouting. 

 

Edited February 28, 2017 by Col. Flagg

[Eagledad]

When I look back over the years of posters coming and going, I can never forget the many posters who truly believe BSA membership would climb when gays were allowed to join. That never made sense to me. Gays? Just how many gays are out there waiting to join as soon as the policy changes. Not that we didn't have gay families, I knew a gay parents in units in our district and I had several atheist parents in my own pack and troop. They were joining even without policy changes. So, where was this assumption of massive growth?

 

And maybe my problem is that I'm too pragmatic. I tend to make decisions based from facts, not theory or emotions. Theory and emotion tend to make people think the world revolves around them and if they were king, or queen, they could change the world. Facts are usually more complicated and harder to understand. They certainly don't jive with our emotions.

 

Someone here once said in a condescending tone that the debate is really more about defending tradition. He is wrong in his application of tradition to imply that those who appose girls do so simply to keep the boys club the boy's club. In reality, the traditional part of the program that is being defended puts boys in an environment where they can grow from observing same gender role models as well as the safety of learning from their independent decisions.

 

The difference between the guy who really believe that membership would grow in leaps and bounds from admitting gays and me is that I knew why membership was declining in the first place and how many families declined scouting because of the membership inclusiveness.

 

I look at the history of programs changing their membership policies over the world and there isn't any program that grew larger than before it made the change. In fact, most had a dramatic drop. Everyone keeps pointing to the England, but that took many many years for them to just catch up. Even then it can be argued whether the policy change was a success because girls had to make up  the loss for the boys. The evidence of history is there and the facts are the BSA WILL suffer with membership policy changes. It may eventually recover, but not in our adult leadership lifetime. Check Canada, Campfire Kids and even the GSUSA after their admittance of gays.

 

So, from all the data accumulated from history, the discussion should trend toward if the loss of membership is worth the change. By listening to our British counterparts, I would guess they would say yes. Of course, most of the adults today were very young at the time. I certainly remember the Canadian Scouts on the forums during their time of change and they were quite bitter. They weren't coming back.

 

Ignoring the crowd motivated by political correctness, you know who your are, it seems most of the voices for change desire a  program where all the members of the family can participate together. That certainly is not the present Troop or even Venturing program. But appears to be the common drive toward the membership change.

 

And while many folks don't see the program changing simply by admitting girls, those of us who experienced the program after women were brought in as troop level leaders know better. The program will go through massive changes. More women will become leaders, which means for the near future less adults will have a scouting and outdoor experience. Which translates into a weaker outdoor program. Which translates into a weaker patrol method program. Not all at once, but it will change a lot inside 20 years. Take a look at the Canadian program, up until the early 1990's, Canadian Scouts around the was considered the premier scouting program. It was the model everyone else said should be followed. Not anymore.

 

Much has been said in comparing the changes to the YMCA, and that is a very valid comparison. Comparing local youth sports with the YMCA today, YMCA sports are considered noncompetitive. Only families that don't want a competitive sports experience joined the Y. That is the future of the BSA as it becomes a family camping program.

 

In "my opinion" character grow from the BSA program will eventually just become a saying because nobody will know how to do it. Nor will they care. Scouting will be a time for families to camp together. It will be family bonding time.

 

So my question is: Is that what the culture really wants, really desires? Is that where scouting really needs to go because I really don't know. I am a proud alumni of the traditional program. My family has been raised with the traditional program. Does the culture need a more family style program for future youth?

 

Barry

[Col. Flagg]

Does the culture need a more family style program for future youth?

 

Barry

 

I would add: Does that program (designed for family camping) need to be Boy Scouts?

[Cambridgeskip]

 

 

I look at the history of programs changing their membership policies over the world and there isn't any program that grew larger than before it made the change. In fact, most had a dramatic drop. Everyone keeps pointing to the England, but that took many many years for them to just catch up. Even then it can be argued whether the policy change was a success because girls had to make up  the loss for the boys. The evidence of history is there and the facts are the BSA WILL suffer with membership policy changes. It may eventually recover, but not in our adult leadership lifetime. Check Canada, Campfire Kids and even the GSUSA after their admittance of gays.

 

 

 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.

 

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.

[fred johnson]

@@fred johnson, one has to remember that these youth programs have been around for ages.  Most of them were around when I was a kid, there's nothing new here that hasn't been run up the flagpole and saluted in the past.  What is different is the tides of time that come and go and for good or bad will eventually erode the shoreline in one place and deposit a sandbar somewhere else.  The whole idea is not to intentionally become the eroding shoreline, but the receptive sandbar.  Sure there are going to be storms that do a number on the shore, but all one has to do is see the rip-rap and sea walls that are in place to prevent it.  The shore lines in the harbor are also really stable, too.  Sometimes it's location, sometimes, it storms and weather, some times it's nothing more than Mother Nature and time.  Change happens.

 

Church "Scout" groups have been around since when I was a kid.  Trail Life/USA is nothing more than an upstart that got a foothold and boost from the actions of the BSA.  I didn't hear of any major upswing in the local Pioneer program or the Trail Life/USA that popped up and disappeared as quickly as it came.  But we have 3-4 new "Y" facilities and an expansion on the original that has happened in the past year, Boy & Girls Clubs are just finishing up on a major expansion as well.  And our local BSA Council has 3 Districts - 2 full-time DE's and 2 part-time DE's and the number of local scouts is dropping.

 

I read in the local news-rag that more and more outdoor programs are being developed in the public schools.  My wife and I were invited to start a Venturing Crew in a nearby town.  I thought it was a go, but it never got beyond the exploratory level.  But what I did find out was that the school did organize an Outdoor Club with advisor at a fraction of the cost of Venturing.   The local outdoors clubs are now promoting youth opportunities as well.  Canoe/Kayak Club had a major push this winter for this coming spring.  My wife's kayak group has taken on some new younger gals as well.  There's a KAMO group that has just started in our area as well, seems to be doing fairly well.  (Kids And Mentors Outdoors) 

 

Seriously, people, it's not school sports, girls and cars that are the problem.  It's that the BSA doesn't do it's homework!  Even if it were to do some serious market research before making policy changes, it may stem the bleeding.

 

To be honest, I agree with you.  My previous comment was sort of a tongue-in-cheek, resigned type of comment.  If we can't get over these arguments about faith and orientation, then BSA will continue to be damaged.  

 

BSA has a long history of outdoors, skills, camping, etc.  BSA could easily take the lead.  But BSA is mired in painful worn out debates that continues to damage BSA.  And, many are just fine with BSA being a small niche organization and letting schools and YMCA and others take the scouts that don't fit BSA's niche.  

 

IMHO, one of the things that keeps BSA down are the leaders that keep BSA stuck in the past in a world that doesn't exist anymore.  IMHO, we do our best when we focus on getting scouts outdoors and keeping our opinions about the rest to ourselves.  

[EmberMike]

Have you ever been camping with a coed crew before? Do you know the training involved to teach men who don't have daughters how to handle sensitive feminine issues? Have you ever seen a council's shower or toilet set up? Many that I have seen struggle to accommodate the female Scouters as it is. Imagine what it will be like when whole troops of girls are there. Do you think a female leader will want her all girl troop to be butting up against an all boy troop's camp site? Teaching adult males to stop peeing by their tent is STILL a challenge. I bet some female SM wants to see a troop of adults and scouts doing that, right?

 

I guess @@EmberMike, you will continue to flabbergasted at my inability to see how simple it (the solution) is, just as I will continue to be amazed at your inability to see that there are a myriad of issues which will have a real cost and logistical impact on Scouting.

 

I invite you to come to Texas this summer. We have a Y camp right next to one of our council camps. We can go together and ask the leader of a group of 11 year old girls to bring them over and use this lovely dunny in the 105F heat. Then let's have them fill out a questionnaire on if they want to join Scouting. 

 

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. 

 

Or we could just let the girls decide for themselves. Truly let them decide if they can handle a latrine or if, like you suggest, they'd want nothing to do with it and therefore shouldn't be in Boy Scouts. We could also maybe try to not make policy based on the facilities of some camps. All 3 of the local summer camps I've spent time in here have flush toilets, one with separate male/female heated bathrooms. 

 

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

[ianwilkins]

Well, for some perspective, if you've got time on your hands, here's a thread from escouts, UK equivalent of scouter.com:

 

https://www.escouts.org.uk/forum/threads/1600-Is-the-Scout-Association-right-to-force-all-groups-to-accept-girls-from-2007

 

Sadly it doesn't go back much further but I thought it might be useful/interesting.

 

Ian