A letter from my SE

[qwazse]

... Hypothetically, if GSUSA fixed their program and fulfilled the need for a more outdoorsy BSA-like program, I suspect National would still be making this move. Because it has nothing to do with available programs. It's a membership drive, with the aim of making scouting more "accessible" or more family-schedule-friendly. 

If it's a membership drive, it's gotta be one that will take decades to yield results.

 

It's doublespeak, pure and simple.

 

There's a special interest. You can define it on the participant level (the occasional girl who is one of the boys) or the parental level (the occasional family who claims they would sign up their girls as well as their boys) or the activist level (the occasional action committee who claims without evidence that the membership policy is a pane in some glass ceiling). But it's still a special interest.

 

Were National to speak plainly, they would say "There are a minority who we and some of our youth leadership feel deeply about. We think we know how to accommodate them. It's a huge gambit, but will you support us in trying?"

 

... We have a large population of girls that want to be a part of the BSA, primarily for the outdoor emphasis.  For once, National is trying to get ahead of the inevitable and initiate change that they can control, instead of getting behind the eight ball (like they normally do).

'Rat, besides your daughter (who posted a topic once or twice, sounds like an outstanding scout), how many other girls in your circle are chomping at the bit for this sorta thing?

[Eagle94-A1]

Here's my problem with BSA.

 

Were National to speak plainly, they would say "There are a minority who we and some of our youth leadership feel deeply about. We think we know how to accommodate them. It's a huge gambit, but will you support us in trying?"

 

Not only on this issue, but on others, when they solicit opinions, they ignore them.

 

Specifically this issue, what they are proposing, a separate program for girls, will not work. A) the girls only program has issues B) folks do not go for "Separate but Equal." I know studies from when I was an undergrad showed that single gender education programs worked better than coed programs,an apparently studies still show it as both the BSA and GSUSA have stated that much. But society want everything coed.

 

BSA would do a lot better IMHO in making hte entire program coed from the get go than make minor changes and having the issue constantly appear. It's death by a thousand cuts.

[NJCubScouter]

If it's a membership drive, it's gotta be one that will take decades to yield results.

 

It's doublespeak, pure and simple.

 

There's a special interest. You can define it on the participant level (the occasional girl who is one of the boys) or the parental level (the occasional family who claims they would sign up their girls as well as their boys) or the activist level (the occasional action committee who claims without evidence that the membership policy is a pane in some glass ceiling). But it's still a special interest.

 

Were National to speak plainly, they would say "There are a minority who we and some of our youth leadership feel deeply about. We think we know how to accommodate them. It's a huge gambit, but will you support us in trying?"

 

I disagree.  As I have said before, I think this is entirely about increasing membership.  I don't think it is because National has any particular desire to admit girls, other than for the expected impact on membership. And I don't think National believes it "will take decades to yield results."  Whether they are correct or not is a different discussion, and we won't know the answer to that until after they do it, if they do it.

[Gwaihir]

Kind of funny, I have a strong opinion on this subject because I feel that any change takes away from the growth opportunity for boys. But as I read all the responses, I forget about the boys and kind of like the ideas of providing a place for girls. But then I remember back to what I think going coed will do for the boys program and jump back to a strong opinion against coed.

 

I need to quit reading this thread for my own mental health.

 

Barry

 

Same.  at the end of the day, the boys will lose out, when they need a place more than ever.  I keep coming back to this BP quote: 

 

"There are thousands of boys being wasted daily to our country through being left to become characterless, and, therefore, useless wasters, a misery to themselves and an eyesore and a danger to the nation. They could be saved if only the right surroundings or environment were given to them at the receptive time of their lives."

 

being a boy is under attack like never before in our society and this is one more blow to their character development. 

[desertrat77]

 

'Rat, besides your daughter (who posted a topic once or twice, sounds like an outstanding scout), how many other girls in your circle are chomping at the bit for this sorta thing?

Q, thanks for the kind words for Venture Daughter.  I've done my best to stay out of her way and let her experience scouting, the highs and lows (and there have been plenty of both ).    She's at the point where she's giving back to scouting as a leader and it's a satisfying thing to observe.

 

You asked an excellent question.  One I really had to ponder.  This is vague but I'll put it this way.  If we asked all of the girls in my daughter's sphere of friendship/influence (high school sports, church youth group, classmates, etc), I'd say 30 percent would be interested, and maybe 15 percent would join right away.  Those don't seem like high numbers, based on my past usage of wording in this topic.  But I think they are still significant, when we are discussing a possible institutional change, especially one that is as emotional charged as this.

 

It seems the girls that are the most interested in what my daughter does in scouting are generally athletes, strong minded, keep their grades decent or on the upper tier, and tend to be the ones that get things done in life.

Edited July 25, 2017 by desertrat77

[Col. Flagg]

You asked an excellent question.  One I really had to ponder.  This is vague but I'll put it this way.  If we asked all of the girls in my daughter's sphere of friendship/influence (high school sports, church youth group, classmates, etc), I'd say 30 percent would be interested, and maybe 15 percent would join right away.  Those don't seem like high numbers, based on my past usage of wording in this topic.  But I think they are still significant, when we are discussing a possible institutional change, especially one that is as emotional charged as this.

 

It seems the girls that are the most interested in what my daughter does in scouting are generally athletes, strong minded, keep their grades decent or on the upper tier, and tend to be the ones that get things done in life.

 

I am in a similar situation, except the girls around our crew are adamant that they want a Venturing-style program, just available younger. The do NOT want the Boy Scout experience (MBs, ranks, uniforms, mtgs, boards, more mtgs, more hoops). They really like the freestyle nature of Venturing. Listening to them they'd join my crew now if they could. They don't want Eagle. They don't want Gold Star. They want fun, adventure and being carefree. They see the rah-rah in Boy Scouts and roll their eyes. One even said,  "If I wanted that I'd joing Girl Scouts."

 

This might just be a representation of my area.

[fred johnson]

I am in a similar situation, except the girls around our crew are adamant that they want a Venturing-style program, just available younger. The do NOT want the Boy Scout experience (MBs, ranks, uniforms, mtgs, boards, more mtgs, more hoops). They really like the freestyle nature of Venturing. Listening to them they'd join my crew now if they could. They don't want Eagle. They don't want Gold Star. They want fun, adventure and being carefree. They see the rah-rah in Boy Scouts and roll their eyes. One even said,  "If I wanted that I'd joing Girl Scouts."

 

This might just be a representation of my area.

 

I find this interesting and very similar to our boy scout troop.  Some troops are more structured, regimented and advancement focused.  Our troop is more activity focused and more relaxed.  Our troop program is about finding things the scouts want to do.  We've had huge luck retaining scouts.  I almost see us similar to a venturing crew in may ways.  If scouts want to pursue advancement, we'll help them.  But we treat advancement (merit badges) as an individual scout choice.  Rank advancement is almost automatic by getting the scouts out and doing things.  The troop program is structured around getting the scouts out and doing things.  Often the adults are reminding the scouts that they can get things signed off for things they've done. 

Edited July 25, 2017 by fred johnson

[desertrat77]

I am in a similar situation, except the girls around our crew are adamant that they want a Venturing-style program, just available younger. The do NOT want the Boy Scout experience (MBs, ranks, uniforms, mtgs, boards, more mtgs, more hoops). They really like the freestyle nature of Venturing. Listening to them they'd join my crew now if they could. They don't want Eagle. They don't want Gold Star. They want fun, adventure and being carefree. They see the rah-rah in Boy Scouts and roll their eyes. One even said,  "If I wanted that I'd joing Girl Scouts."

 

This might just be a representation of my area.

Colonel Flagg, I'm tracking.  As I reflect, the girls in our crew are more interested in the outdoors, leadership and social aspects.  They've all stalled out on the rank advancement.

Edited July 25, 2017 by desertrat77

[desertrat77]

Same.  at the end of the day, the boys will lose out, when they need a place more than ever.  I keep coming back to this BP quote: 

 

"There are thousands of boys being wasted daily to our country through being left to become characterless, and, therefore, useless wasters, a misery to themselves and an eyesore and a danger to the nation. They could be saved if only the right surroundings or environment were given to them at the receptive time of their lives."

 

being a boy is under attack like never before in our society and this is one more blow to their character development. 

Gw, I think BP was referring to boys who grew up in slums and became dissolute ruffians.

 

I'm having trouble envisioning how little girls, racing their pinewood derby cars along the boys, are going to cause the boys to become ne'er-do-wells, ragamuffins, and wastrels.

[desertrat77]

As I type, I've made myself a crow sandwich.  No condiments or trimmings.  Just a big fat crow on two pieces of stale white bread.  And I'll eat it, feathers and all.

 

I've made several posts on this topic, some of them fall in the category of grandstanding, I'll freely admit. 

 

So I have this text exchange with my daughter, this afternoon.  You'll see why the crow sandwich was necessary.   (Posting with my daughter's blessing):

__________

Dad:  Question, why do you think girls join or opt not to join Venturing?  If the BSA goes coed, do you think more girls would join?

Daughter:  Girls that do join like the outdoors and scouting itself.  Girl scouts is indoors, dead, and unsatisfying.  Idk about more girls joining the BSA though.

Dad:  Why aren't you sure?

Daughter:  The boys in Boy Scouts are disrespectful, sexual, awkward, vulgar, and overall demeaning towards girls.  Venture boys know how to properly interact and be social with girls...cause I can't tell you how many times us girls have been catcalled and made uncomfortable when we have to walk through strictly Boy Scout camp sites.

__________

 

So my crow sandwich was/is well deserved.  Nonetheless, I don't think her comments reflect a positive aspect of boys-only troops ("boys need a place to be boys").  I still think that being around girls at an earlier age in scouting would help the boys learn how to properly interact with girls.

Edited July 25, 2017 by desertrat77

[Col. Flagg]

@@desertrat77, take your daughter out for a Sonic or Whataburger shake (people in the northeast jealous right now) for being such a sensible young woman. She echoed by my own daughter said about the same subject, though she noted most of the guys over 15 weren't so silly/stupid. It was the younger guys she couldn't stand.

 

If you ever want to hook crews up let me know. We can meet at the Red River. 

[perdidochas]

I received an interesting email today from my council.  Presumably it was sent to every Scouter in the council who they have an email address for.

 

The subject line of the email was:  Making Scouting Accessible for Families  

 

What followed was a letter, on council letterhead, that read as follows, with all names and locations removed, and bolding from the original:

 

 

Now, if I were not a member of this forum, I would probably have no idea what the SE is really talking about here.  If I saw the word “accessible†and took it literally, I might think that maybe he was talking about expanding opportunities for disabled families… but that doesn’t seem quite right.  So let’s be a little less literal; maybe they are going to make Scouting “more accessible to today’s families†by reducing the cost of Scouting… cutting the price of uniforms, handbooks, etc. etc.  Well, I have been around long enough to know THAT is not happening.  

 

And I AM a member of this forum, and therefore I am aware of discussions taking place within the BSA, and therefore I am pretty sure that what the SE will be discussing at this meeting is the admission of girls to Cub and Boy Scouting.  But it’s not like the letter actually says that or anything.  I think many of my fellow nearby Scouters are going to look at this and decide they do not wish to spend a couple of hours in the middle of the summer (when they might be on vacation and/or at summer camp and unable to attend anyway) discussing “how to make Scouting more accessible to today's families.† But if it said we going to be discussing changing the gender requirement for youth membership, there might very well be a different reaction (but again, that doesn’t help those who will be on vacation or at camp.)  It doesn’t seem to me that they have gone out of their way to maximize attendance at this meeting, either in the timing of the meeting or the description of what is going to be discussed.

 

Another thing that comes to mind, are they really interested in “gaining my perspective†(on a topic that they are not actually identifying before the meeting), or is this really part of a nationwide rollout of a decision that they’ve made already?  Do they really want my opinion, or are they just going to try to sell me on what they’re going to do anyway?  (These are mainly rhetorical questions.)

 

Has anyone else heard of anything like this happening in your own councils?

Our SE sent out a notice about a meeting to talk about girls in Boy Scouting, and the actual subject on the email line was "Girls as members of Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts."   The meeting was last week. Not sure what happened, as I didn't attend and don't know anybody that did.  Strange that he held the meeting when our Jamboree contingent was out of town.

[desertrat77]

@@desertrat77, take your daughter out for a Sonic or Whataburger shake (people in the northeast jealous right now) for being such a sensible young woman. She echoed by my own daughter said about the same subject, though she noted most of the guys over 15 weren't so silly/stupid. It was the younger guys she couldn't stand.

 

If you ever want to hook crews up let me know. We can meet at the Red River. 

Thanks Colonel Flag, we will take you up on your offer...the Red is close, very close. 

 

A Whataburger shake is definitely on the agenda, excellent suggestion!  We have one Whataburger in town, it's 60 seconds from the house.  And they knock it out the park each and every time. 

[AltadenaCraig]

If it's a membership drive, it's gotta be one that will take decades to yield results.

 

It's doublespeak, pure and simple.

 

There's a special interest. You can define it on the participant level (the occasional girl who is one of the boys) or the parental level (the occasional family who claims they would sign up their girls as well as their boys) or the activist level (the occasional action committee who claims without evidence that the membership policy is a pane in some glass ceiling). But it's still a special interest.

 

Were National to speak plainly, they would say "There are a minority who we and some of our youth leadership feel deeply about. We think we know how to accommodate them. It's a huge gambit, but will you support us in trying?"

 

'Rat, besides your daughter (who posted a topic once or twice, sounds like an outstanding scout), how many other girls in your circle are chomping at the bit for this sorta thing?

 

I disagree.  As I have said before, I think this is entirely about increasing membership.  I don't think it is because National has any particular desire to admit girls, other than for the expected impact on membership. And I don't think National believes it "will take decades to yield results."  Whether they are correct or not is a different discussion, and we won't know the answer to that until after they do it, if they do it.

 

 

Perhaps it's neither about empowering girls nor about increasing membership; perhaps it's simply about money.  Does the BSA foresee additional coffers becoming available as it embraces inclusiveness?

[Stosh]

A young boy is standing at the foot of a very tall tree.  He says he's going to climb it.

 

Mom says, "Be careful".

 

Dad says, "How high can you go?"

 

Kinda makes one wonder about the dynamics of the BSA program and what it will become.