Outside Magazine: Boy Scouts Should Allow Girls

[Gwaihir]

"What is best for my child" is often confused with "What my child needs most". At 18, childhood ends with no redo. Are you prepared if your son says "I was in scouts and wanted to earn Eagle but my father..."

 

My $0.02

 

Yep.  I'm sure it won't be the only thing lamented either.  Parenting isn't perfect, you do your best to the best of your abilities guided by your own code of ethics and principles.  Who knows, maybe by then the program will be so changed, anyone can earn eagle at any age.  If discrimination of gender is out, so too could discrimination of age.  ACA has created in-roads to establishing 26 is the age of independent adulthood.   We shall see. 

Edited June 22, 2017 by Gwaihir

[Col. Flagg]

I guess there's no principle that I can think of that would oppose coed scouting ... except that it would alienate parents looking for that unisex experience.\

 

I think that's a bit bit dismissive. Having a unisex program, whether for boys or girls, is important for development and growth...especially for teens and pre-teens.

 

But why stop there? Let's open up ALL activities in school and elsewhere to both sexes. Why just focus on Boy Scouts? I think we all know the answer to that.

[Cambridgeskip]

A few observations from a Canadian perspective...

 

Our Troop is roughly 1/3 girls, 2/3 boys.  

 

On camps, there is a strict policy of separation when it comes to sleeping arrangements and no mixed "but we're just hanging out" in tents.  When given free time they tend to self-segregate anyway.  The boys and girls are simply interested in different things.  Even with mixed patrols, given the chance they will naturally separate.  Of the four patrols, 3 are mixed and one is boys only.  It just ended up that way when they were picking and we have had girl only patrols in the past.

 

Some observations:

 

- single sex patrols bond better as they more readily agree on which activities to pursue

 

- the bathroom thing hasn't been a problem so far that I can see.  At camps that have bathrooms/outhouses they are either permanently marked or we decide that weekend which is which.  Single outhouses are mixed although if there is more than one we try to designate one for girls and one for boys. This is more to do with some boys needing better markmanship skills...

 

- at the closest big camp to us, other than separate flush toilets/showers for the adult staff there has been no specific construction of extra outhouses etc. to accommodate girls

 

- I have heard boys mention on many occasions that they wish they could have a single sex environment, especially at camp.  I haven't heard this from the girls, although there is the occasional eyeroll and "(sigh)....BOYS...."

 

- boys and girls ARE different and they enjoy different activities and/or different intensities of the same activity.  

 

- almost all the girls in our Troop have tried Girl Guides at some point and they universally agree that it "sucks".  It's too "girly girl" and "they never go camping".

 

So there is clearly a segment of girls who would rather do the Scouting as opposed to Guiding program, but I've found that in terms of programming they seem to do better when in single sex groups.

 

Interesting to hear how it's gone elsewhere! We have a twin group in Canada (who we're off to see for summer camp, exciting times!), they don't have enough girls to have single sex patrols (I think currently two girls in a total of about 25) but speaking to their leaders they say the same as you, which is girls come from girl guides but don't go back the other way, which is exactly what we see in the UK.

 

One thing we have deliberately tried to avoid though is the single sex patrol. This is from the observation of one of the major differences in the sexes at scout age (10-14 for us), girls are more likely to get something right first time, where as the boys are better at recovering and over coming once something has gone wrong. Trying to keep a balance in each patrol is something that falls out of that. I guess it helps that we are not as strict on single sex accommodation. It's seen as best practice to have it but if everyone involved is happy then boys and girls do sleep in together. Most commonly happens on things like night hikes where everyone just crashes on the floor of our HQ afterwards!

 

Another interesting difference is that for weekend camps we get a disproportionate number of boys sign up for any given event, for longer trips we get disproportionately girls. Never have figured that one out!

[qwazse]

I think that's a bit bit dismissive. Having a unisex program, whether for boys or girls, is important for development and growth...especially for teens and pre-teens.

 

But why stop there? Let's open up ALL activities in school and elsewhere to both sexes. Why just focus on Boy Scouts? I think we all know the answer to that.

I'll admit that, having met people who've grown up with co-ed scouting, I'm fairly convinced that the need for a unisex scouting program is more local than global.

 

But, I don't think that's being dismissive ... at least not any more than I think I'm being dismissive with my sincere doubts that women, having been denied access as a youth to BSA's most touted recognition, are being held back in life to the detriment of society.

 

If there is a pervasive demand for unisex scouting across the nation that is not present worldwide (except maybe in Saudi), then honoring what the lion's share of American parents are requesting is a principle all of its own.

Edited June 22, 2017 by qwazse

[Col. Flagg]

I'll admit that, having met people who've grown up with co-ed scouting, I'm fairly convinced that the need for a unisex scouting program is more local than global.

 

But, I don't think that's being dismissive ... at least not any more than I think I'm being dismissive with my sincere doubts that women, having been denied access as a youth to BSA's most touted recognition, are being held back in life to the detriment of society.

 

If there is a pervasive demand for unisex scouting across the nation that is not present worldwide (except maybe in Saudi), then honoring what the lion's share of American parents are requesting is a principle all of its own.

 

But we (BSA) has a program -- and a very good one (Venturing), at least potentially -- where women could learn and grow quite well. I am all in favor of opening up Venturing to younger ages, training up leaders and putting in resources there to really help girls learn, grow and advance. I would also be up for extending the MB program to Venturing (for girls, since guys can already work on MBs). If BSA wants to change Venturing and make it more robust in order to give girls a coed environment where they can experience all the things boys do in Boy Scouts, I say COUNT ME IN!!!

 

However, all that can be done AND preserve the unisex experience of Boy Scouting just like GSUSA does for girls today.

 

Side Note: The preliminary results from the survey BSA sent out this spring are in. The questions around coed Scouting (i.e., making Boy Scouts coed) I am told were overwhelming (above 85%) in favor of keeping Boy Scouts for boys. Should be interesting if these results are made public, or if BSA just goes coed despite the opposition...similar to the last time they conducted such a survey.

[Sentinel947]

As a mid 20s man, I'm a bit unsure of coed and being responsible for people's daughter. As I get older I more and more fit some parents idea of a predator. "Why does this young guy spend time around my son(or daughter)."

 

I know the UK tends to have younger leaders. @@Cambridgeskip, how do Parents react to younger adult volunteers (20s-30s) in the UK?

[qwazse]

But we (BSA) has a program -- and a very good one (Venturing), at least potentially -- where women could learn and grow quite well. I am all in favor of opening up Venturing to younger ages, training up leaders and putting in resources there to really help girls learn, grow and advance. I would also be up for extending the MB program to Venturing (for girls, since guys can already work on MBs). If BSA wants to change Venturing and make it more robust in order to give girls a coed environment where they can experience all the things boys do in Boy Scouts, I say COUNT ME IN!!!

 

However, all that can be done AND preserve the unisex experience of Boy Scouting just like GSUSA does for girls today.

 

Side Note: The preliminary results from the survey BSA sent out this spring are in. The questions around coed Scouting (i.e., making Boy Scouts coed) I am told were overwhelming (above 85%) in favor of keeping Boy Scouts for boys. Should be interesting if these results are made public, or if BSA just goes coed despite the opposition...similar to the last time they conducted such a survey.

Venturing scouters adhere to age segregation about as much as boy scouters adhere to sex segregation!

(Oh, that reminds me. I said that I'd ask some officers to comment on your idea this spring. Never got around to it. Too busy chanting under the stars with the N/A dance team -- among other things. Sorry about that.)

Worse, I think we will have a lot of boy scouters gripe about any successful coed program cannibalizing their units -- even if numerically that doesn't happen.

Worse yet, no matter how much spit and polish you put on Venturing awards and recognition, special interests are still gonna whine that it's not Eagle. So, you'll still have these activist editorials ripe with targeted swill.

 

At the end of the day, I don't see how Cub/Boy aged Crews will be much different than a parent looking at a list of troops/packs and seeing "Boys", "Girls", "CoEd" in the margin and choosing which one(s) are right for his/her kids.

[Col. Flagg]

The irony with the marginalization argument is that you have to marginalize boys in order to give girls their "shot" at Eagle. 

 

Until those (SJW) voices are as vociferous about GSUSA allowing boys -- and as rabid about adult women in GS not marginalizing or denigrating men who want to be part of GSUSA -- I will continue to opine about Boy Scouts staying for boys only.

 

I am more than happy to help Venturing build a strong coed program for women. I am more than happy to volunteer at GSUSA to help them, just as I am to do the same at BSA. I just think opportunities for just-girls or just-boys should remain available.

[NJCubScouter]

Until those (SJW) voices are as vociferous about GSUSA allowing boys -- and as rabid about adult women in GS not marginalizing or denigrating men who want to be part of GSUSA -- I will continue to opine about Boy Scouts staying for boys only.

 

First of all, I'd be willing to bet $1 (my maximum bet) that no more than 30 percent of the regular members of this forum know what "SJW" means.  Unfortunately, I do.  It is just more meaningless labeling which does nothing to advance a discussion.  It is just name-calling.  Not that there is anything wrong with social justice anyway.

 

Second, you are of course free to opine as you wish, but I am kind of surprised at your statement that you would stop opining about what the BSA should do, if some undefined group of people started advocating for a different organization to change its policy as well.  What the GSUSA does, and what some people might or might not be asking the GSUSA to do, has nothing to do with what the BSA should do.  If you are against Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts becoming coed, you are against it.  Why would you be influenced by the discussions (or lack thereof) about a separate organization?  Or, stated another way, if the GSUSA did go coed, that wouldn't really change your opinion about Cub and Boy Scouts going coed, would it? 

[NJCubScouter]

All the talk in this forum is about "coed" Scouting, meaning packs and troops being open to troops as a matter of local option, but the reports from the annual meeting indicate that that is only one of the things that are being considered.  Another possibility is all-girl packs and troops, again as a local option.  That doesn't seem so bad to me.  I am not sure how many of such units would actually be created, but it seems to me that they would not raise the issues that coed units would.

Edited June 22, 2017 by NJCubScouter

[Cambridgeskip]

As a mid 20s man, I'm a bit unsure of coed and being responsible for people's daughter. As I get older I more and more fit some parents idea of a predator. "Why does this young guy spend time around my son(or daughter)."

 

I know the UK tends to have younger leaders. @@Cambridgeskip, how do Parents react to younger adult volunteers (20s-30s) in the UK?

I have some experience of this. I was an assistant cub scout leader aged 19, cub scout leader aged 24 and scout leader aged 31 and handed the cubs onto a 19 year old at that point, I'm 38 now.

 

I've personally never had any of the comments about what is a young man doing hanging around kids. If anything here things are turned on their heads. It's older men who tend to get the comments like that made about them. For younger adult leaders, if you get any comments, it's about being young, not a parent, inexperienced, how do you know how to deal with kids?etc. Late 30s is probably the easiest time. Too old to get those comments, too young to be considered a weirdo!

 

In all seriousness though it is very rare to get any sort of a hard time. Scouters are mostly held in quite high regard. When I took over cubs aged 24 all it mean was it was easier to get parents to get involved! The 19 year old I handed over too got a more difficult time at first but she soon got the hang of handling the parents.

 

I guess though that with the kids we do get a self selecting group, both boys and girls, almost by definition those that turn up are the children of parents who trust us.

 

In terms of dealing with situations where you may feel awkward being a man with a girl the trick is to be absolutely open about what you are doing and why. So for example I remember an instance of an 10 year old girl cub falling on a gravel path, her t-shirt riding up and taking all the skin off her back. It was quite unpleasant. In terms of treating that we asked her to go into the mess tent to take her t-shirt and bra off and lie down on her front (it was a real mess and quite necessary) and to shout when she was ready, I then went it with a female leader to clean her up and dress the wounds before we left and left her to get dressed again.

 

It's the kind of situation that I can imagine a man feeling quite awkward dealing with any situation where a girl needs to get undressed to administer first aid and I will confess that I am quite glad that we had a female leader with us to help out. In theory we don't have to have a female adult to take girls away on camp. In practice most groups will make sure they do, even if it's just borrowing a mum to come along. From a personal point of view I would go to a staffed campsite without a female adult, ie where there would be a woman on hand if necessary. I wouldn't go somewhere more remote though without.

[Col. Flagg]

Why would you be influenced by the discussions (or lack thereof) about a separate organization?  Or, stated another way, if the GSUSA did go coed, that wouldn't really change your opinion about Cub and Boy Scouts going coed, would it? 

 

I continue to be concerned the the movements (we know who they are) that are pressing for change across society, and in particular organizations like BSA, don't apply the same pressure to other organizations (GSUSA).

 

I am concerned at the continued lack of backbone demonstrated by BSA when they poll their membership on an issue and yet make decisions contrary to what a majority of their members expressed.

 

It would change my opinion of BSA if they caved and went coed with Boy/Cub Scouts for those two reasons. But also because BSA has a viable alternative (Venturing) which they could retool to fit a coed model without marginalizing their base that drives Boy/Cub Scouts today.

[NJCubScouter]

I continue to be concerned the the movements (we know who they are) that are pressing for change across society, and in particular organizations like BSA, don't apply the same pressure to other organizations (GSUSA).

 

I am concerned at the continued lack of backbone demonstrated by BSA when they poll their membership on an issue and yet make decisions contrary to what a majority of their members expressed.

My response to that is basically the same as my response to TAHAWK when he was worried about "change for the sake of PC", so I will quote the relevant part of my response:

 

I don't think you have to worry, because if girls are allowed to become Cub Scouts and "Boy" Scouts (new name to be announced?) it will not be "for the sake of PC."  If it happens, it will be entirely because BSA National believes that it will result in a substantial increase in membership.  Or, if one is a cynic, one might say that it would be because of money (resulting from increased membership.) Either way, it is about numbers, with or without dollar signs in front of them.

 

There is some evidence that they are at least partially right.  Over the past few years there have been a number of posts in this forum about units (particularly packs but also a few troops) that seem to WANT to be coed, and they have taken steps toward this through workarounds such as registering the girls through LFL (which I don't think you're supposed to do) or using the "Frontier Girls" program or other organizations (for which the BSA receives no money.)  I am sure the BSA knows this is going on here and there, and would like to get these "unofficial" members into the system on a fee-paying basis and to count them in the official membership - along with all the other thousands of girls who (National thinks) will join once the units are officially open to them.

Or to put it another way, I don't think that the BSA's current consideration of admitting girls results from action by "movements (we know who they are) that are pressing for change across society". People have been talking about admitting girls, or merging with the Girl Scouts, for at least 45 years. I remember hearing about it when I was a Scout. And yet in all that time, it has never come anywhere near as close to actually happening as it seems to be right now. Why now? As I say above, two reasons, which are related: (1) BSA national sees a chance to add members and money (regardless of whether I think their predictions are correct), (2) there does seem to be some amount of parental demand for it, by people looking out for their own families and not part of any "movement." This seems to be happening primarily at the Cub Scout level, but not completely. These two things (and primarily the first one in my opinion) are what is driving this push for change - not "outside agitators", who may exist but are basically irrelevant to what is happening. Edited June 23, 2017 by NJCubScouter

[RememberSchiff]

 (1) BSA national sees a chance to add members and money (regardless of whether I think their predictions are correct),

 

I think National has seen that single-sex youth group memberships have declined continuously for years - Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, while coed youth groups like Boys & Girls Club, 4-H have increased.

[Col. Flagg]

 (2) there does seem to be some amount of parental demand for it, by people looking out for their own families and not part of any "movement." 

 

There's an larger amount of people who saw Bigfoot at the Portland DMV. Does not make it a large enough ground-swell of potential members to alter a 100+ year old program. 

 

Much like the much touted supporters of allowing gay members who would join BSA, this "demand" has not materialized.