Outside Magazine: Boy Scouts Should Allow Girls

[Col. Flagg]

I don't see how a separate all-girl Patrol, doing their own thing, would have diminished this. On the other hand, I don't see how "Family Scouting" supports Character Development. And it most certainly would subvert the Patrol Method. To be sure, "Family Scouting" scares the daylights out of me.

Because it won't stop at just girls in Scouting. It will be the INTEGRATION of girls in Scouting. Pure Coed, not sperate but equal. And the integration of girls will put more guys off Scouting than girls it will attract.

[Eagle94-A1]

I've previously stated how one volunteer will create a "paper girls unit" and fully integrate the girls into the Boy Scout troop, irregardless of what national wants.

[Chisos]

I've previously stated how one volunteer will create a "paper girls unit" and fully integrate the girls into the Boy Scout troop, irregardless of what national wants.

 

I agree 100% that this is how it will play out in practice.

Even said so when I took the survey, if anyone was listening...

[fred johnson]

I've previously stated how one volunteer will create a "paper girls unit" and fully integrate the girls into the Boy Scout troop, irregardless of what national wants.

 

I'd do the same.  It's just too hard to find enough volunteers and resources to run two separate units for the same families. 

[Eagle94-A1]

I am against allowing girls in Boy Scout troops for a variety of reasons, but in a nutshell BOYS LEARN BETTER IN AN ALL MALE ENVIRONMENT JUST AS GIRLS LEARN BETTER IN AN ALL GIRL ENVIRONMENT! (caps for emphasis). Heck Surbaugh evens mentions that in the jambo video thatis online. If it hurts the boys I'm against it.

 

I am also againt partnering with or creating a parallel program because PEOPLE WILL IGNORE THE SEGREGATION AND GO COED ANYWAY.  ( emphasis again)

 

IF IT HURTS THE BOYS, I AM AGAINST IT! ( This time I'm shouting, mostly at the national folks who are shoving this down our throats.)

 

I wish the GSUSA wold listen to their  Total Available Youth and create a program that appeals to them.

[Gwaihir]

I'd do the same.  It's just too hard to find enough volunteers and resources to run two separate units for the same families. 

 

A scout is Trustworthy, and Obedient... unless they don't want to be.  Real example you're setting there.  

 

If that'd the product the BSA is selling, that's more of a reason to quit than "family scouting". 

[Rick_in_CA]

I am against allowing girls in Boy Scout troops for a variety of reasons, but in a nutshell BOYS LEARN BETTER IN AN ALL MALE ENVIRONMENT JUST AS GIRLS LEARN BETTER IN AN ALL GIRL ENVIRONMENT! (caps for emphasis). Heck Surbaugh evens mentions that in the jambo video thatis online. If it hurts the boys I'm against it.

I can show you studies that say BOYS LEARN BETTER IN A COED ENVIRONMENT! (Does shouting make it true?) The whole single-sex education thing has become a mantra among some people, but the data doesn't actually back that up (at least not yet). The studies are all over the place. I can show you studies that say one thing, others that say the opposite and ones that say it doesn't matter. So you may believe it's true (and it might be), but it isn't a given and it isn't unreasonable for people to disagree with you on this.

[Eagle94-A1]

I can show you studies that say BOYS LEARN BETTER IN A COED ENVIRONMENT! (Does shouting make it true?) The whole single-sex education thing has become a mantra among some people, but the data doesn't actually back that up (at least not yet). The studies are all over the place. I can show you studies that say one thing, others that say the opposite and ones that say it doesn't matter. So you may believe it's true (and it might be), but it isn't a given and it isn't unreasonable for people to disagree with you on this.

 

1) As I stated, the caps are for emphasis, not shouting. I guess I could Bold or underline or even italicize for emphasis, but I admit I'm lazy and caps works easiest.

 

2) You may studies are all over the place, and yes they are. But look at the methodologies used. Some of the research uses methods that leave out factors. Heck even some of the pro single gender ones have questionable methodologies. But if you look at the studies for single gender as a whole, there are fewer problems with them overall than with coed studies.

 

3) If you want, I'll not only pull up my research from back in the day, but see what current studies show.

 

4) Considering both Surbaugh and the GSUSA both state that single gender environments are better, I would tend to believe them. Too bad Surbaugh is trying to do away with it.

 

5) Someone mentioned female SMs. I 'd say it goes back to Exploring going coed in the 1970s. At the meeting I was at on this topic, most of the ones there were Venturing folks, and were pro coed. Heck some of them even acknowledges that a partnership or parallel program would not work.

 

6) Those Same Venturers also admitted that while girls were in the minority, they were the majority in leadership.

[Rick_in_CA]

1) As I stated, the caps are for emphasis, not shouting. I guess I could Bold or underline or even italicize for emphasis, but I admit I'm lazy and caps works easiest.

 

2) You may studies are all over the place, and yes they are. But look at the methodologies used. Some of the research uses methods that leave out factors. Heck even some of the pro single gender ones have questionable methodologies. But if you look at the studies for single gender as a whole, there are fewer problems with them overall than with coed studies.

 

3) If you want, I'll not only pull up my research from back in the day, but see what current studies show.

 

4) Considering both Surbaugh and the GSUSA both state that single gender environments are better, I would tend to believe them. Too bad Surbaugh is trying to do away with it.

 

5) Someone mentioned female SMs. I 'd say it goes back to Exploring going coed in the 1970s. At the meeting I was at on this topic, most of the ones there were Venturing folks, and were pro coed. Heck some of them even acknowledges that a partnership or parallel program would not work.

 

6) Those Same Venturers also admitted that while girls were in the minority, they were the majority in leadership.

Hey, no problem on the all caps. I admit I'm not really up on the latest research, though I did spend some time today seeing what I could find before posting the above. It looks like it's still all mixed.  If you find some high quality recent studies, I would love to read them. Someone said there was a study that was being done in South Korea that should provide some good data. I don't think it's out yet though (I haven't checked).

 

I personally have mixed feeling about coed scouting. The vast majority of the world makes it work, so I don't have a problem with it in the abstract. But we don't live in an abstract world. To me, the issues that worry me have more to do with specifics of our society here in the US, then coed in general. We are a very paranoid, prudish and fear driven society right now. I'm worried the new rules created to integrate girls into boy scouts will be so draconian and/or broken that it will interfere with the ability of the unit to function (though it doesn't happen at the venturing level, so maybe I'm "borrowing trouble" as they say).

 

Europe is simply much less uptight then we are about a lot of things, and it shows in their scouting culture (Sure our older scouts drink bear at campouts. The trading post sells it to the scouts (in Germany at least). Girls and boys sleeping in the same tent? Sure, what's the problem? Coed troops skinny dipping together? Why not? (this one I don't think happens that often, but one of my coworkers told me when she was a scout in Sweden, her coed scout troop went skinny dipping all the time). Twelve year olds using paint rollers (with an extension!)? Why not?). Sure what goes in Germany might not go in France, but over all, they appear to be a lot more relaxed then we are. I think that makes being coed (and a lot of other things) easier. I think they understand better than us that you can't eliminate all risk in life, and there are good reasons why you shouldn't even try. Some risk is good and necessary. It's about balance.

 

My biggest fear around the whole "family scouting" thing is that it's going to lead to more adult hovering and less scout independence. I want to see the pendulum move in the other direction. I would love to see independent patrol camping make a come back. I'd like to see the independent journey come back as a rank requirement (it used to be required for first-class). I'd love to see the BSA recognize how important unstructured and unsupervised time is to childhood development (summer camp used to be mostly unstructured and unsupervised time for the scouts. Not any more). I want to move back to the world where 12 and 13 olds got jobs as babysitters, instead of needing them. I know, dream on...

Edited August 15, 2017 by Rick_in_CA

[qwazse]

... 6) Those Same Venturers also admitted that while girls were in the minority, they were the majority in leadership.

I think the female leadership thing is confounded by boy-scout rank advancement being open to male venturers. Their leadership need not be in the crew, so most of the boys may exercise positions of responsibility in a patrol, troop, or lodge, on top of that they are developing leadership skills in their Eagle project. That naturally frees up more venturing females (especially those disenchanted with GS/USA) to invest in crew leadership.

 

Although, in my crew, it's been pretty even: some years, all male, some years, all female, some years mixed. I think our council has been its most vibrant and active when we've had a strong lodge chief and a strong female VOA president.

Edited August 15, 2017 by qwazse

[Eagle94-A1]

Europe is simply much less uptight then we are about a lot of things, and it shows in their scouting culture (Sure our older scouts drink bear at campouts. The trading post sells it to the scouts (in Germany at least). Girls and boys sleeping in the same tent? Sure, what's the problem? Coed troops skinny dipping together? Why not? (this one I don't think happens that often, but one of my coworkers told me when she was a scout in Sweden, her coed scout troop went skinny dipping all the time). Twelve year olds using paint rollers (with an extension!)? Why not?). Sure what goes in Germany might not go in France, but over all, they appear to be a lot more relaxed then we are. I think that makes being coed (and a lot of other things) easier. I think they understand better than us that you can't eliminate all risk in life, and there are good reasons why you shouldn't even try. Some risk is good and necessary. It's about balance.

 

Oh yes it was an eye opening experience when I did the European Camp Staff Program.  I Dutch Scouters smoking "green" cigarettes, beer in the trading post, boys and girls in the same tent. I know the Finish Scouters working the camp brought  video promoting one of their camps. In the video it shows the coed group running from the sauna to a cold river nude. They are definitely different.

 

My biggest fear around the whole "family scouting" thing is that it's going to lead to more adult hovering and less scout independence. I want to see the pendulum move in the other direction. I would love to see independent patrol camping make a come back. I'd like to see the independent journey come back as a rank requirement (it used to be required for first-class). I'd love to see the BSA recognize how important unstructured and unsupervised time is to childhood development (summer camp used to be mostly unstructured and unsupervised time for the scouts. Not any more). I want to move back to the world where 12 and 13 olds got jobs as babysitters, instead of needing them. I know, dream on...

 

I agree. i already see it happening when the Cub parents come up to the troop. Heck it was so bad this weekend, my son was frustrated and I would not blame him if he transferred or quit. And this was even after  telling the adults they need to back off.

[Ankylus]

I am also againt partnering with or creating a parallel program because PEOPLE WILL IGNORE THE SEGREGATION AND GO COED ANYWAY.  ( emphasis again)

 

 

"Parallel program"....excuse me if I am mistaken, but I thought we had already decided in this country that "separate but equal" is "inherently unequal". I believe that. I do not think you can successfully have a "parallel program". Which means they won't have any choice but to abandon the decision to admit girls or to fully integrate. And many units will go straight to full integration for the reasons set forth above...not enough volunteers, not enough resources, easier to plan program, etc. "Parallel program" is just proponents trying to have their cake and eat it too.

[Ankylus]

I can show you studies that say BOYS LEARN BETTER IN A COED ENVIRONMENT! (Does shouting make it true?) The whole single-sex education thing has become a mantra among some people, but the data doesn't actually back that up (at least not yet). The studies are all over the place. I can show you studies that say one thing, others that say the opposite and ones that say it doesn't matter. So you may believe it's true (and it might be), but it isn't a given and it isn't unreasonable for people to disagree with you on this.

 

I am an attorney, and I will tell you that it is an article of faith in the legal profession that one can find an "expert" to testify in support of almost any proposition. There are studies, and then there are studies. 

[Stosh]

Back in the '60's the movement was to desegregate the nation.  We accomplished that.  Separate but equal was banned as well, it was just lip service to those who wanted to keep the programs/social structures but not desegregate.

 

Now the new code word for this resegregational movement is to have safe spaces for just certain individuals.  The more we forget history, the more we are forced to relive it.

 

When my daughters were young, I offered my services to the GS/USA, they said, "No".  Not a problem.  I don't need to butt in where I don't belong.  It made no never mind to me or my daughters.  One put in one year and the other went to Silver.  I wasn't really all that fired up about yet another volunteering spot, but for my daughters, I offered.

 

I couldn't handle the new GS/USA program.  During their week of summer camp, there is a day set aside to go to the local mall, shop and get their hair and nails done.  Not my cup of tea. 

 

The world has changed and will continue to change.  What BP envisioned 100+ years ago is gone and will not come back until needed once more.  I can wait.

[NJCubScouter]

"Parallel program"....excuse me if I am mistaken, but I thought we had already decided in this country that "separate but equal" is "inherently unequal". I believe that. I do not think you can successfully have a "parallel program". Which means they won't have any choice but to abandon the decision to admit girls or to fully integrate. And many units will go straight to full integration for the reasons set forth above...not enough volunteers, not enough resources, easier to plan program, etc. "Parallel program" is just proponents trying to have their cake and eat it too.

 

And yet there have been boys-only and girls-only private schools all along.  There aren't as many now as there used to be, but they still exist.