Girl Scouts letter to BSA

[Eagle1993]

I am fairly close to progressive groups and I'd like to see the evidence there is any significant outside pressure from the "PC" community. There was definitely a outside campaign for gay and transgender boys to be admitted but I don't see this for girls. How many UnitedWay chapters have cut funding due to BSA not admitting girls? Change.org had over 2 million signatures gathered against the BSA and supporters of BSA (amazon smile, united way, etc.). To date I have found <9,000 signatures in change.org (and none against our financial backers) in support of adding girls. When I talk with my progressive friends about BSA adding girls ... their initial response is concern of the harm it will do to the progressive GSUSA.

 

I think this is much more of an internal discussion with a focus on millennial parent dynamics than some sort of PC play. There are a few op eds and a letter from NOW but nothing serious. If you can point to 50+ United Way chapters that dropped funding and million+ petition campaigns then I'd believe you. Otherwise, I think the PC argument is a straw man. From the progressive community, BSa's theistic requirement is a much bigger deal and probably the next area of "PC" attack. Admitting girls is an internal debate as long as the GSUSA remains vibrant and progressive.

[Eagledad]

I think this is much more of an internal discussion with a focus on millennial parent dynamics than some sort of PC play. There are a few op eds and a letter from NOW but nothing serious. If you can point to 50+ United Way chapters that dropped funding and million+ petition campaigns then I'd believe you. Otherwise, I think the PC argument is a straw man. From the progressive community, BSa's theistic requirement is a much bigger deal and probably the next area of "PC" attack. Admitting girls is an internal debate as long as the GSUSA remains vibrant and progressive.

I find it curious how you present your unsubstantiated theory as rational and acceptable, while presenting a different line of thought as a purposeful misrepresentation. Shesh.

 

Barry

[walk in the woods]

I think this is much more of an internal discussion with a focus on millennial parent dynamics than some sort of PC play. There are a few op eds and a letter from NOW but nothing serious. If you can point to 50+ United Way chapters that dropped funding and million+ petition campaigns then I'd believe you. Otherwise, I think the PC argument is a straw man. From the progressive community, BSa's theistic requirement is a much bigger deal and probably the next area of "PC" attack. Admitting girls is an internal debate as long as the GSUSA remains vibrant and progressive.

I suppose the counter argument is how many of those 50+ United Way chapters came back after the 2013/2015 membership changes?  If they were only protesting the LGBTQ+ issue, then at least some of them should have returned.  If instead they've stayed away, then we can't really say it's not related to girls or god(s).  Just because the pressure isn't public and/or active, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.  Now that PC thinking is mainstream culture, activist campaigns aren't necessary to apply pressure.  Even if there was no pressure before it became public the BSA was looking at this, there will be if National were to come back with a status quo decision.  

[Eagle1993]

Eagledad... I'm simply responding to the various posters who are claiming BSA is looking to add girls because of a "PC" claim. I tend to take the BSA at their word. Watch their video for proof starting at 5:45, they clearly state why they are looking into this ... based on millennial family dynamic changes. Sorry I missed adding that reference in my statement, but I thought most already watched the video which was linked multiple times in these threads. I don't see evidence pointing to any organized PC campaign pushing for girls to join BSA. Attempting to blame outside groups is a weak argument and unsubstantiated. This is really an internal BSA debate.

[Eagledad]

Eagledad... I'm simply responding to the various posters who are claiming BSA is looking to add girls because of a "PC" claim. I tend to take the BSA at their word. Watch their video for proof starting at 5:45, they clearly state why they are looking into this ... based on millennial family dynamic changes. Sorry I missed adding that reference in my statement, but I thought most already watched the video which was linked multiple times in these threads. I don't see evidence pointing to any organized PC campaign pushing for girls to join BSA. Attempting to blame outside groups is a weak argument and unsubstantiated. This is really an internal BSA debate.

I believe, that you believe what you post. I'm just suggesting respect for posters with other opinions.

 

Barry

[Col. Flagg]

Eagledad... I'm simply responding to the various posters who are claiming BSA is looking to add girls because of a "PC" claim. I tend to take the BSA at their word. Watch their video for proof starting at 5:45, they clearly state why they are looking into this ... based on millennial family dynamic changes. Sorry I missed adding that reference in my statement, but I thought most already watched the video which was linked multiple times in these threads. I don't see evidence pointing to any organized PC campaign pushing for girls to join BSA. Attempting to blame outside groups is a weak argument and unsubstantiated. This is really an internal BSA debate.

Taking someone at their word requires them to KEEP their word to develop that trust. When someone like BSA continues to BREAK their word, they lose that trust. When someone hides or manipulates surveys or ignores their results to push their agenda, they lose trust.

 

How is the "millennial family dynamic" any more challenging than what the Boomers or the next cohort had to deal with? Millennials have smart phones, apps, and family management options we never had. And they are more "challenged" in managing a family? Give me a break.

[Eagle1993]

@@Eagledad. I guess I'm looking for some sort of evidence of the PC push and the purpose of pointing the debate outward vs simply debating if and/or how we add girls to the program. There is ample evidence and we all lived through the previous admission debate and that clearly came from outside pressure. I don't think we should let BSA off the hook by simply stating they are caving to PC police and there is no point in pushing back. I'm personally on the fence on this one and think the BSA would honestly consider member feedback this time around (as the outside "PC" pressure isn't really there). If the BSA thinks they have to do this due to outside PC pressure then we are in pretty bad shape.

[qwazse]

@@Eagledad. ... some sort of evidence of the PC push ... If the BSA thinks they have to do this due to outside PC pressure then we are in pretty bad shape.

 

"Where could pressure be?" He asks NOW (http://nownyc.org/press-releases/national-organization-women-calls-boy-scouts-america-end-discriminatory-policies-let-girls-join/).

[Col. Flagg]

"Where could pressure be?" He asks NOW (http://nownyc.org/press-releases/national-organization-women-calls-boy-scouts-america-end-discriminatory-policies-let-girls-join/).

Lol that another one. Add in the many op ed pieces that are out there too.

 

I guess those don't constitute "outside pressure"?

[MattR]

"Where could pressure be?" He asks NOW (http://nownyc.org/press-releases/national-organization-women-calls-boy-scouts-america-end-discriminatory-policies-let-girls-join/).

That's rich. Apparently the people of NOW were never girl scouts. It must be awkward when the NOW folks and GSUSA folks get together.

[SSScout]

Not everyone understands the real dynamic:  That there are young females that want more adventure and less tea parties and crafty stuff...    Are we "poaching" on "their"  turf ?

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dont-fall-for-it-girl-scouts-the-boys-only-want-you-to-save-their-own-hides/2017/08/24/d28c12b0-88d0-11e7-a50f-e0d4e6ec070a_story.html?utm_term=.f7870a7de6f9

[NJCubScouter]

There is a difference between someone somewhere saying something and real, effective pressure that actually brings about change.  Ranman says there is some group that wants to change the name of Father's Day.  So what? Ten people want to change the name of Father's Day?  In this country, there is someone somewhere who holds every conceivable ideological viewpoint, some just silly (like changing the name of Father's Day) and some of whom would like to see certain other groups of people wiped off the face of the Earth, and everything in between.  It's when someone is gaining real political power with extremist beliefs that you have to be concerned.

 

And then there's NOW.  They were a political force in the 70's, and with largely positive results for the country, in my opinion.  They really aren't a political force now.  They can advocate for girls in the Boy Scouts all they want (and they have probably been doing so for at least 45 years, because that's how long the issue has been around), but when there are girls in the Cub Scouts and the BSA-Girl-Scouts, it's not going to be because of anything NOW has done.  It's not going to be because of four girls here and one girl there who want to make Eagle.  It's not going to be because of anyone carrying protest signs or filing lawsuits.  It's going to be because it's what National wants to happen.

[ParkMan]

My sense is that the current leadership of the GAS is willing to embrace change. So - when the question of girls came up, I expect they were more willing to look at it.

 

This is why many are scratching their heads sayijng - I don't get it. They are simply used to a BSA that historically always resisted change like this.

[Eagle1993]

"Where could pressure be?" He asks NOW (http://nownyc.org/press-releases/national-organization-women-calls-boy-scouts-america-end-discriminatory-policies-let-girls-join/).

I completely understand questions the motives of the BSA and believing there is something else driving this possible change. I even speculated (based on one article) that the LDS leaders told them that they were leaving making the BSA need to quickly find new recruits. That is clearly wrong given the response from knowledgeable LDS scouters.

 

Calling 1 letter from NOW and a couple of opinion pieces PC pressure on the BSA is a stretch. The fact that the letter and opinion pieces referenced came out AFTER the BSA's national meeting where they made the video showing possible changes weakens the external PC evidence further. I really believe the BSA is being honest regarding their motivation. This is not something they feel they have to consider due to outside PC forces but due to changes is family dynamics.

 

Does anyone else in this forum hire people? I've been through multiple training sessions regarding recruiting and changes to our corporate benefits packages because of the significant changes to how millennial are different than previous generations. I think the BSA is wise in looking into this and I don't see that as PC pressure. I think they clearly state their motivation and it is consistent with what I've seen in my corporate training. That isn't PC, that is a recognition that parents (our customers) are looking for something else for their kids.

 

So, I'd rather see a debate regarding the actual proposal than point to possible bogeyman who are pushing a secret agenda. Yes, that happened in the past. The LGBTQ push came from outside forces, was strategic, attacked our COs and sponsors and was not driven (for the most part) by looking at actual needs of our members (though I agree with the change). I also agree the BSA isn't being straightforward by calling this "making scouting more accessible"; however, I think they are being honest with their motivation.

 

Finally a bit of a separate note. Someone asked if any of the 50+ United Way and the corporate sponsors came back after we added LGBTQ leaders and members. I couldn't find much info and wonder if anyone else knows. If not, I think it would be appropriate to ask these groups if they restarted giving and if not why they didn't.

[Eagle1993]

One correction, the NOW letter did come out before the national meeting but the Outside Magazine and Tribune op eds came out after.