From National: Official Name

[desertrat77]

57 minutes ago, jamskinner said:

  Also I don't see how you can say just give it a chance it will work.   It will either work or not given real world constraints.

 

Jam, the tone we set as leaders will make the difference.  Either way.   The scouts will pick it up in an instant.

I understand it will be difficult for some folks.  And yes, I have had to take my own medicine over the decades.   Example:  the Order of the Arrow.  Sure, I'll rant here at scouter.com on how the OA bears little resemblance to the grand brotherhood of honor campers that it once was.  Nonetheless, I pay my dues, positively support those enjoy OA, and focus on other duties in the BSA that I fully support.  In public, I keep my attitudes and comments about the OA to myself.  The day I can't keep myself in check, is the day it's time to do something else in the community.

Edited May 3, 2018 by desertrat77

[JoeBob]

Here's a nice summary of how we got here:

https://www.toddstarnes.com/show/boy-scouts-announce-plans-to-drop-the-word-boy/

"The Boy Scouts used to be in the business of teaching boys how to become young men — to keep themselves physically strong and morally straight.

But somewhere along the way – Boy Scout leaders lost their moral compass and tumbled into the deep abyss of political correctness.

I don’t think there’s a merit badge for that."

 

 

 

 

[Eagle1993]

30 minutes ago, jamskinner said:

With all due respect inferring I am delusional is probably not the best way to convince me to your way of thought.

To start with I never said boys are not influenced by other boys. I said they will be able to more freely be themselves.  Do you think I am wrong? 

I believe girls will have a greater influence on how boys act then other boys regardless of differences.  As a scout are you going to pee in front of other boys?  Most likely.  Are you going to pee in front of girls.  Heck no. Are you going to play bloody knuckles with girls.  Not likely.  Are you going to horse play with girls?  Are you going to engage in the same physical activities directly with a girl?  Maybe if you want to get sued. 

Is it really that hard to see that boys and girls have basic biological differences that influence how they think and act?  If that wasn't the case there would never be any reason to separate girls from boys in any groups or activities.  But for some strange reason we do.  

You don't see these changes as a bad thing.  Fine.  You are entitled to that.  Guess what?  I am entitled to my thinking as well.

First, I’m not trying to convince you.  My experience in various forums issues/politics section is that you rarely if every make any progress changing others beliefs.  At the end of each day, our moderators judge each thread and determine who wins.  I hope today is my lucky day!😀

You stated that boys will “no longer be able to be freely be themselves...”.  I believe that the belief that boys are free to be themselves around other boys is delusional.  “A delusion is a mistaken belief that is held with strong conviction even when presented with superior evidence to the contrary.”  The language was probably a bit harsh so I apologize and given your update I think the subject is more debatable.

After a recent all girls den meeting the Webelos scouts showed up (boys).  Boys and girls were running around together.  Playing tag, screwing around, getting into trouble.... etc.  I could see little difference than just a group of boys.  

During that all boys Webelos meeting a boy hit another boy playing some stupid game (they were doing sit-ups together).  That was addressed but the boy who was hit was one of our more sensitive boys who seemed to act more “free” around girls.   

Both my son and daughter have coed friends.  When I was a youth, I had coed friends ... and a girl friend.  Yes, there are some jokes I would censor around the girls but some of the best times I had through school was with a coed group of friends with similar interests.

So, we will have to agree to disagree.  I apologize for coming on a bit strong...need some more sleep.  I certainly hope that today the moderators will pick my post as the winner... (currently batting 0-327). 😀

 

[jamskinner]

7 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

First, I’m not trying to convince you.  My experience in various forums issues/politics section is that you rarely if every make any progress changing others beliefs.  At the end of each day, our moderators judge each thread and determine who wins.  I hope today is my lucky day!😀

You stated that boys will “no longer be able to be freely be themselves...”.  I believe that the belief that boys are free to be themselves around other boys is delusional.  “A delusion is a mistaken belief that is held with strong conviction even when presented with superior evidence to the contrary.”  The language was probably a bit harsh so I apologize and given your update I think the subject is more debatable.

After a recent all girls den meeting the Webelos scouts showed up (boys).  Boys and girls were running around together.  Playing tag, screwing around, getting into trouble.... etc.  I could see little difference than just a group of boys.  

During that all boys Webelos meeting a boy hit another boy playing some stupid game (they were doing sit-ups together).  That was addressed but the boy who was hit was one of our more sensitive boys who seemed to act more “free” around girls.   

Both my son and daughter have coed friends.  When I was a youth, I had coed friends ... and a girl friend.  Yes, there are some jokes I would censor around the girls but some of the best times I had through school was with a coed group of friends with similar interests.

So, we will have to agree to disagree.  I apologize for coming on a bit strong...need some more sleep.  I certainly hope that today the moderators will pick my post as the winner... (currently batting 0-327). 😀

 

So if they are not free to be themselves around boys then when are they free to be themselves?  In an average situation is a boy going to feel more free around another boy or another girl?  How about is a girl going to feel more free around another girl or a boy?

i believe they are more comfortable with their own gender. Is this always the case?  No. I do believe it is the case the majority of the time.  I must admit though that I don’t have any research data on the subject though. I will try to see if any is available and if so supports or contradicts my view. 

[jamskinner]

41 minutes ago, desertrat77 said:

Jam, the tone we set as leaders will make the difference.  Either way.   The scouts will pick it up in an instant.

I understand it will be difficult for some folks.  And yes, I have had to take my own medicine over the decades.   Example:  the Order of the Arrow.  Sure, I'll rant here at scouter.com on how the OA bears little resemblance to the grand brotherhood of honor campers that it once was.  Nonetheless, I pay my dues, positively support those enjoy OA, and focus on other duties in the BSA that I fully support.  In public, I keep my attitudes and comments about the OA to myself.  The day I can't keep myself in check, is the day it's time to do something else in the community.

Hopefully things continue to work for you. 

[Eagle1993]

Just now, jamskinner said:

So if they are not free to be themselves around boys then when are they free to be themselves?  In an average situation is a boy going to feel more free around another boy or another girl?  

How about is a girl going to feel more free around another girl or a boy. 

Depends on the boy and the girl involved and the situation.  My guess is that boys and girls will figure out who they want to hang with at various points in time.

[cocomax]

Well, I can tell you one thing after reading the news today and polls and comment sections and twitter, facebook, minds, youtube and gab . . .

The Boy Scouts was a really well loved group by most of America,  I read so many wonderful things about the Boy Scouts, many men that were glad they were Boy Scouts as boys. Many moms that had nice things to say about the Boy Scouts as well as the Girl Scouts.

The general public is taking the end of Boy Scouts pretty hard, as they say you do not realize how much something meant to you until it is gone.

The Boy Scouts will be missed, they had a good run, 108 years.

 

[ParkMan]

1 hour ago, jamskinner said:

Take a look at your post.  Does it seem a bit condescending? Show a little respect for others opinions even if you disagree.

  As for as moving on, yeah you are probably right.

I do respect your opinions.  For months, I've read thread after thread about how girls don't belong in troops, about how the BSA lied to us.  I've listened for months as people has defamed the BSA, denigrated girls, and the GSUSA.  I think I've been beyond respectful of folks who want to vent.

But, for the sake of the movement we all hold so dear, there comes a point where we need to start saying - can we please move on.

[ParkMan]

25 minutes ago, cocomax said:

Well, I can tell you one thing after reading the news today and polls and comment sections and twitter, facebook, minds, youtube and gab . . .

The Boy Scouts was a really well loved group by most of America,  I read so many wonderful things about the Boy Scouts, many men that were glad they were Boy Scouts as boys. Many moms that had nice things to say about the Boy Scouts as well as the Girl Scouts.

The general public is taking the end of Boy Scouts pretty hard, as they say you do not realize how much something meant to you until it is gone.

The Boy Scouts will be missed, they had a good run, 108 years.

 

Funny - I was at a Scout meeting today.  We got to talking about this topic.

For as much as it sounds like the world is against it, we realized that just about every major pack in our area is planning to offer this.  These are not paid employees of the BSA and no-one is twisting their arms.    These are parents who have kids in the program.  They've just looked at it and said "sounds good to us."

The word from the troops so far is that they're likely to follow the pack's lead.  The three biggest troops in the district have all said their open to it.

I don't think folks are nearly as upset about this as some think.

[ParkMan]

2 hours ago, Treflienne said:

What ideas do y'all have for co-ed/linked troops, to keep things as good as possible for the boys while still letting the girls in? 

What about a strong emphasis on doing as much as possible by patrol, with each patrol having its own identity and camaraderie.  Let the patrols camp some distance apart.  Encourage the patrols to go on occasional patrol outings and overnights.  The linked girls troop would essentially be a girls' patrol.  And the boys would have their boy-only space within their patrols.

Our troop is not pulling the trigger on this yet.  Not out of philosophical reasons, but because we have parents who so believe in Scouting that they all have daughters in the GSUSA and are telling us they don't see any reason to change that.  We just don't have the interest yet.

What we did reason is that a quasi-linked troop structure makes sense.  We'll share equipment, merit badge counsellors, planning help, etc.  We'd offer joint signups for things like Merit Badge colleges.

When we think about week to week program, we felt we'd need a core group of leaders who focus just on the girls.  We'd want a SM, a few ASMs, and a couple of committee members. The charge of the SM & ASMs is to make sure the girls are not a "me too" part of the troop.  They need to have focused attention such that they have every bit as stong support.

Meeting wise - we're not there yet.  My gut says you open & close together.  Depending on hte activities, some are joint, but some are seperate.  Patrols seem like a good split for this.

 

Edited May 3, 2018 by ParkMan
missed a sentence - added for clarity

[Cambridgeskip]

4 hours ago, jamskinner said:

With all due respect inferring I am delusional is probably not the best way to convince me to your way of thought.

To start with I never said boys are not influenced by other boys. I said they will be able to more freely be themselves.  Do you think I am wrong? 

I believe girls will have a greater influence on how boys act then other boys regardless of differences.  As a scout are you going to pee in front of other boys?  Most likely.  Are you going to pee in front of girls.  Heck no. Are you going to play bloody knuckles with girls.  Not likely.  Are you going to horse play with girls?  Are you going to engage in the same physical activities directly with a girl?  Maybe if you want to get sued. 

Is it really that hard to see that boys and girls have basic biological differences that influence how they think and act?  If that wasn't the case there would never be any reason to separate girls from boys in any groups or activities.  But for some strange reason we do.  

You don't see these changes as a bad thing.  Fine.  You are entitled to that.  Guess what?  I am entitled to my thinking as well.

You raise some interesting points that I'd like to address from many years running coed scouts in the UK

Will girls being around influence how boys behave?

Sort of. And by that I mean in a good way! It doesn't stop boys being boys. The noise and the fart jokes and the banter are still there. It does though take the edge of certain things. You made specific reference to taking a pee. I actually think that is a fantastic example. Whether there are girls around or not I think it would be polite if, while on a hike or a camp, when a scout needs a pee they slip behind a tree or some bushes and do it out of site (and of course downhill from camp and well away from any water supply etc) of other people! Having girls around encourages that kind of polite behaviour.

Does it stop the horse play? Certainly not. This is one of the videos on our troop youtube channel. I've always loved it. They didn't realise I was filming till the last few seconds. Shows what the kids are really like with the boys and girls mixed up together. They're just a gang, as patrols and troops were always meant to be. We typically have separate boy and girl tents on camp but half the time they end up mixing up when it actually comes to it.

Are boys and girls different? Yes of course they are. They have physical differences they hit pubity at different times, there are some character differences. Is there are an argument for having single sex activities? Yes there is and I fully respect many of those arguments. I think it's particularly strong, for examples, in sport. While I don't think there's a moral reason as such for coed scouting I do actually see it as better that way. Why? Scouts is not an end in itself. We are not taking them camping for the sake of learning to camp, fun though it may be. The outdoors, patrols, hiking, community service, they are just the method by which we are preparing young people for life. And life is coed. The last bastions of male only professions have tumbled with only some specific religious leadership roles remaining. Wherever today's scouts end up working, whatever profession or vocation they go into, it will almost certainly be coed. When they go to work they won't be separated, when they go to university they won't be separated. So why separate them now? Learn how to manage or be managed by someone of the opposite sex when they 12 and it becomes less of a problem when they are 22.

[Cambridgeskip]

3 hours ago, cocomax said:

Well, I can tell you one thing after reading the news today and polls and comment sections and twitter, facebook, minds, youtube and gab . . .

The Boy Scouts was a really well loved group by most of America,  I read so many wonderful things about the Boy Scouts, many men that were glad they were Boy Scouts as boys. Many moms that had nice things to say about the Boy Scouts as well as the Girl Scouts.

The general public is taking the end of Boy Scouts pretty hard, as they say you do not realize how much something meant to you until it is gone.

The Boy Scouts will be missed, they had a good run, 108 years.

 

Comment sections are a pretty poor guide to how the public is reacting. They inevitably attract the negative. Take a look at trip adviser for your favourite restaurant, you'll find a surprising number of people giving it terrible reviews. That's because people are more inclined to post something when they have a bad experience than a good one.

Boy Scouts is not over, it's just changing. In twenty years time most people will be surprised it was ever single sex.

[WAKWIB]

3 hours ago, cocomax said:

Well, I can tell you one thing after reading the news today and polls and comment sections and twitter, facebook, minds, youtube and gab . . .

The Boy Scouts was a really well loved group by most of America,  I read so many wonderful things about the Boy Scouts, many men that were glad they were Boy Scouts as boys. Many moms that had nice things to say about the Boy Scouts as well as the Girl Scouts.

The general public is taking the end of Boy Scouts pretty hard, as they say you do not realize how much something meant to you until it is gone.

The Boy Scouts will be missed, they had a good run, 108 years.

 

 

10 minutes ago, Cambridgeskip said:

Comment sections are a pretty poor guide to how the public is reacting. They inevitably attract the negative. Take a look at trip adviser for your favourite restaurant, you'll find a surprising number of people giving it terrible reviews. That's because people are more inclined to post something when they have a bad experience than a good one.

Boy Scouts is not over, it's just changing. In twenty years time most people will be surprised it was ever single sex.

I think a good deal of the reaction is the general public is driven a bit by how the media presented the story.  A lot of the headlines came across to me as being hyped. Of course, that is not unusual and Wednesday was sort of a slow news day,  so this was a hot topic starting very early in the morning.

Perhaps the general public is just not as immune to this subject as me and were shocked.  The topic of coed Scouting has been in play since I first started Scouts 47 years ago.  When Exploring went coed there was a lot of speculation that Boy Scouts would soon follow.  There were Explorer girls working staff or trekking  all over the place at Philmont when I went in 1977.  We had a coed Troop from Germany stay a session at the camp I worked at every summer.  It's been cussed and discussed amongst Scouters on the Internet since the Internet arrived.  Honestly,  it is very old news to me and many of my peers in my Council.  I'm not saying we all embrace the notion, but nothing that happens going forward will be a surprise. Most of us are curious as to how it will play out, and will participate with the goal of helping boys and girls on the Scouting Trail.  Many non-scouts and folks who were in it years ago and didn't keep in touch are going to be surprised and that group will be the real active commenters on social media.

My thoughts of late have been along the lines of, "What if Scouts would have gone full coed back in the 70's?"  I even find myself thinking it would have worked out just fine. It would have just happened without all the social media blather.  I think the membership numbers by 2018, would be pretty close to what the membership numbers of 2018 are anyway.  Sure, there would be a reactionary backlash , but over time things would have recovered.  

[Tampa Turtle]

15 hours ago, ham_solo said:

> "new, separate girl's program" that was initially promised is frankly an affront

Or it could actually be that national has actually heard from all those people who were actually planning on doing the girls program which kept saying, that

a) they will never find enough leaders to staff an entire other girls troop,

b) most of us forming it will be leaders from the boys troop anyway with a few additional female leaders added

and c) it will just be a separate troop only on paper to begin with because we can't be in two places at once

So slowly national will probably have to admit that it is going to be really one program, with separate patrols about as far as it will most likely go, pretty much like the cubs.  It was pretty obvious the original separate program scheme national had was sorta half-baked, especially when they came out with that whole 'linked-committees' stuff.

 

Man, my wife said this was EXACTLY what was going to happen when I first mentioned it. She is right again.

I hate that.

She also said BSA was stupid to think any name change is not going to result in some sort of retaliation from GSUSA since we are definitely on their turf. 

[Hawkwin]

11 hours ago, Treflienne said:

But not all of them.  Especially not all of the old-timers.   Some of the vocal groups have been "GSUSA are you listening?",  "The Outdoor Journey Project", . . .

 

 

Fascinating read, thanks for sharing.