Girl Scouts letter to BSA

[Eagle1993]

@@Gwaihir ... my understanding is that Boy Scout Troops would still be all boys and they are looking at alt programs or Troops that would be all girl. I would expect there would still be single gender options for boys in the BSA even if there are more options for girls.

[Gwaihir]

@@Gwaihir ... my understanding is that Boy Scout Troops would still be all boys and they are looking at alt programs or Troops that would be all girl. I would expect there would still be single gender options for boys in the BSA even if there are more options for girls.

 

sounds good on paper, and im sure they might even try it... but logistically, it won't work, lack of leaders, lack of charter org space, convience of having the boys and girls all go to the same troop meeting, instead of going to two separate meetings during the week to further the "family convenience" approach,  and when it doesn't work, they will go full on co-ed. 

 

Also, Cub Scouts is going to fall to the axe even earlier and be co-ed, so once that happens, it'll naturally give way to Boy Scouts as well.  

[Hawkwin]

@@Gwaihir ... my understanding is that Boy Scout Troops would still be all boys and they are looking at alt programs or Troops that would be all girl. I would expect there would still be single gender options for boys in the BSA even if there are more options for girls.

 

This!

 

We have dens and patrols for a reason. My preference would be to keep the dens and patrols gender-based (within those chartering orgs that want such in the first place) and the troops (again those want coed) would then get together at a troop level to be coed.

 

Boys that want a boy-only experience could get that at either the den/patrol level or even at the troop level if they wish to belong to a chartering org that wishes to keep the existing restriction in place.

[Hawkwin]

sounds good on paper, and im sure they might even try it... but logistically, it won't work, lack of leaders, lack of charter org space, convience of having the boys and girls all go to the same troop meeting, instead of going to two separate meetings during the week to further the "family convenience" approach,  and when it doesn't work, they will go full on co-ed. 

 

Also, Cub Scouts is going to fall to the axe even earlier and be co-ed, so once that happens, it'll naturally give way to Boy Scouts as well.  

 

I don't understand your response. Are saying that it won't work due to a lack of leaders or space, yet you also state that instead of going to two separate meetings during the week it would add convenience.

 

Just what doesn't work logistically? I am really confused as to what you are trying to communicate. I currently take my daughter to GS events and my son to BS events. If they were coordinated in some manner, I would have MORE time to volunteer instead of less.

[Eagle94-A1]

When I commented how a 'separate but equal" program will not work because you would have two sets of meetings, camp outs, summer camps, etc and that I have been told by Scouters that they will integrate girls into the troop if they have "separate but equal" the feeling I got at the council's meeting was one of 'yes, we know that's going to happen and we don't care."

[Gwaihir]

I don't understand your response. Are saying that it won't work due to a lack of leaders or space, yet you also state that instead of going to two separate meetings during the week it would add convenience.

 

Just what doesn't work logistically? I am really confused as to what you are trying to communicate. I currently take my daughter to GS events and my son to BS events. If they were coordinated in some manner, I would have MORE time to volunteer instead of less.

 

See Eagle94-A1's response.  In order to have separate but equal, you need a whole second set of leaders/meetings/camping... at BEST, I believe you'll see a handful of girls want to sign up, not near the numbers of the boys.  The level of infrastructure needed to run girl only troop will be nil, and the family will have to do double duty, which isn't "convenient" to the stated goals of the BSA, so they will be folded in on each other and become full on co-ed troops.  All-boy option will be gone.  You can bet on it. 

[Gwaihir]

 convenience of having the boys and girls all go to the same troop meeting, instead of going to two separate meetings during the week to further the "family convenience" approach,  and when it doesn't work, they will go full on co-ed. 

 

 

 

This sentence didn't read well... my point being, having separate but equal, with separate meetings/leaders/camping will be inconvenient, and the BSA wants "family convenience", so having two separate units will fail, and the BSA will integrate fully to make it more convenient. 

[Hawkwin]

See Eagle94-A1's response.  In order to have separate but equal, you need a whole second set of leaders/meetings/camping... at BEST, I believe you'll see a handful of girls want to sign up, not near the numbers of the boys.  The level of infrastructure needed to run girl only troop will be nil, and the family will have to do double duty, which isn't "convenient" to the stated goals of the BSA, so they will be folded in on each other and become full on co-ed troops.  All-boy option will be gone.  You can bet on it. 

 

Thank you for the clarification.

 

If that is the case, then I would think that BSA-girls would operate in the same manner as GS - In order for their to be a troop at all, there needs to be a parent volunteer.

 

In the grander scheme of things, that may not be such a bad idea. If enough girls want to join, then there needs to be a parent willing to become a trained volunteer. Without such, then no girls troop. That means BSA-boys do not suffer a reduction in leadership based on such inclusion. I don't think that there would necessarily be separate meetings or camping as that would be unnecessary. Just have dens and patrols by gender.

 

I am not quite convinced that the all-boy option would be gone - especially if it is gender-based dens and patrols. Additionally, I would imagine that quite a few religious charting orgs will keep their troops boy-only. My impression is that full co-ed integration is not just around the corner if it is left up to the chartering orgs to approve and implement any changes. 

[Eagle94-A1]

Thank you for the clarification.

 

If that is the case, then I would think that BSA-girls would operate in the same manner as GS - In order for their to be a troop at all, there needs to be a parent volunteer.

 

In the grander scheme of things, that may not be such a bad idea. If enough girls want to join, then there needs to be a parent willing to become a trained volunteer. Without such, then no girls troop. That means BSA-boys do not suffer a reduction in leadership based on such inclusion. I don't think that there would necessarily be separate meetings or camping as that would be unnecessary. Just have dens and patrols by gender.

 

I am not quite convinced that the all-boy option would be gone - especially if it is gender-based dens and patrols. Additionally, I would imagine that quite a few religious charting orgs will keep their troops boy-only. My impression is that full co-ed integration is not just around the corner if it is left up to the chartering orgs to approve and implement any changes. 

 

Hawkwin,

 

Not only was i told by Scouters in my district that they would create "paper girl troops" and  fully integrate them into the existing Boy Scout troop, when I mentioned this at the council meeting, several others agreed with me that this would indeed happen. Further, the Council President, Commissioner, and Scout Executive essentially acknowledged that paper girl units would indeed happen, and that Boy Scout troops would essentially be integrated. They did not seem tpo be bothered by this. And 12 of the 18 Scouters present didn't seem to care if it happen either. heck several agreed with me and said they would do that.

 

If we follow the UK's model, then eventually ALL units will go coed. This hill especially happen when the LDS leave the Boy Scouts IMHO.

[NJCubScouter]

Not only was i told by Scouters in my district that they would create "paper girl troops" and  fully integrate them into the existing Boy Scout troop, when I mentioned this at the council meeting, several others agreed with me that this would indeed happen. Further, the Council President, Commissioner, and Scout Executive essentially acknowledged that paper girl units would indeed happen, and that Boy Scout troops would essentially be integrated. They did not seem tpo be bothered by this. And 12 of the 18 Scouters present didn't seem to care if it happen either. heck several agreed with me and said they would do that.

 

Did any of the Scouters who said they would create "paper girl troops", and have what are really coed troops, happen to mention whether they have asked the boys and parents in their troop what they think about this?  One of the concerns expressed in these threads is that boys and their parents would leave if their troops went coed.  So it would be interesting to know what actual boys and their parents have to say about it.

[Eagle94-A1]

He did talk to 2 other parents, and they were OK with it. But they are also Scouters who camp with the troop. Now his mother, who is a committee member said heck no her granddaughter will not be in a coed troop, so it's going ot be interesting.

 

As for me, I'm with my sons. Both of them are against the BSA going coed. I don't know if they will quit, join the troop that will go all male, or go to Trail's Life. But they do not like the idea of girls in the troop.

[NJCubScouter]

It seems to me that if you have a troop where all (or almost all) of the boys and parents do not want girls in the troop, they will probably not do the maneuver that many have mentioned on here (and that some people say they are already planning to do) of having an all-boy troop and an all-girl troop "on paper" but a single "coed" unit in reality.   On the other hand if everybody (or almost everybody) is ok with having a coed troop, then that may be the result.  As I have said in the past, I do not believe a coed troop is best for the boys, but if that is what the parents and Scouts actually want...

 

In a way, I have it easy.  My son aged out from the troop 8 years ago, so I don't have to worry about the impact on him.  I am not a Scoutmaster or ASM so I will not have direct responsibility for "managing" whatever impact this change may have.  I am Advancement Coordinator.  Am I willing to do BOR's for girls?  I'd have to say yes, I am.

Edited August 29, 2017 by NJCubScouter

[Eagledad]

He did talk to 2 other parents, and they were OK with it. But they are also Scouters who camp with the troop. Now his mother, who is a committee member said heck no her granddaughter will not be in a coed troop, so it's going ot be interesting.

It will be interesting. I've said here before that we had several mothers that specifically put their sons in our troop for the exposure to male adult role models. They made it quite clear they that while it was up to the SM, they would rather not have females camping with the boys (we had no restriction). We had several female committee chairman and they were up front that male role models would dominate the program.

 

I also find it interesting that todays parents don't get that. I think the feminist have won in confusing equality with equal abilities.

 

Barry

Edited August 29, 2017 by Eagledad

[Eagledad]

It seems to me that if you have a troop where all (or almost all) of the boys and parents do not want girls in the troop, they will probably not do the maneuver that many have mentioned on here (and that some people say they are already planning to do) of having an all-boy troop and an all-girl troop "on paper" but a single "coed" unit in reality.   On the other hand if everybody (or almost everybody) is ok with having a coed troop, then that may be the result.  As I have said in the past, I do not believe a coed troop is best for the boys, but if that is what the parents and Scouts actually want...

As someone who has a lot of experience working with multiple units in a single sponsor, as well as dealing with the struggle of finding enough volunteers, I can't see two separate programs working side by side. The charter will have to either pick supporting  a single gender program or mixed. The forces of economics don't allow it any other way.

 

Barry

[walk in the woods]

As someone who has a lot of experience working with multiple units in a single sponsor, as well as dealing with the struggle of finding enough volunteers, I can't see two separate programs working side by side. The charter will have to either pick supporting  a single gender program or mixed. The forces of economics don't allow it any other way.

 

Barry

Agreed.  The premise of the separate-but-equal argument is there are enough support resources available to make a go.  It ignores small units.  One of my packs has 20 boys, spread out over 5 dens.  If Cubs went co-ed tomorrow I suspect we'd get 5-7 sisters and friends, spread out over 5 dens.  Is this pack going to recruit leaders for single-scout dens when they can't get enough leaders as is for the boy-only dens?  Not likely.  The separate-but-equal arrangement will put many COs in the position of having to choose between turning girls away or ignoring the BSA's structure for the program.