Boy Scouts’ Coed Recruiting Touched Off ‘Ground War’ With Girl Scouts The Girl Scouts perceived a grave threat from the Boy Scouts and tried to steer parents away from coed programs, documents show

[CynicalScouter]

In short, BSA was telling GSUSA it was NOT going to go coed...while running focus groups and preparing to do just that.

I mean, wow.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/boy-scouts-coed-recruiting-touched-off-ground-war-with-girl-scouts-11612094400

Quote

 

In May 2017, ahead of a meeting of the Boy Scouts of America’s top leaders, a Girl Scouts of the USA employee emailed a counterpart at the Boy Scouts to ask about speculation it was considering admitting girls into the historically boys-only programs.

For worried Girl Scouts executives, the reply was heartening. The Boy Scouts were discussing how to make their programs more accessible to families, but the organization still valued single-gender programs and wanted to “avoid any confusion that there may be consideration of coed scouting,” a Boy Scouts executive said in reply to the inquiry. The chief executives of both youth groups also spoke by phone, and the Girl Scouts came away reassured, according to internal emails released through litigation last month.

Even before these exchanges, the Boy Scouts were running focus groups on how to appeal to girls, reviewing market analytics and forming a team to consider possible retaliation from the Girl Scouts in the event the organizations turned against each other, according to internal emails filed in federal court. At the time, Boy Scouts executives were debating the merits of raiding the Girl Scouts’ youngest members for recruits, court filings show.

“Be aggressive, move faster and give a lot of serious thought to Girl Scout actions and be prepared to take them out,” one unnamed Boy Scouts executive wrote in a May 2017 message. The Girl Scouts would be upset, the executive wrote, but added, “We will prevail!”

 

 

[MattR]

In short? That is the longest title I've ever seen. As for the content I hate to admit it but Machiavellian comes to mind. There's a lot of that going on these days. The irony hurts.

[Treflienne]

3 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

In short, BSA was telling GSUSA it was NOT going to go coed...while running focus groups and preparing to do just that.

I mean, wow.

 

3 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

For worried Girl Scouts executives, the reply was heartening. The Boy Scouts were discussing how to make their programs more accessible to families, but the organization still valued single-gender programs and wanted to “avoid any confusion that there may be consideration of coed scouting,”

And the Scouts BSA program isn't supposed to be coed, even now.  It's supposed to have girl troops and separate boy troops, not coed troops. 

On the otherhand, the Girl Scouts might have found the prospect of BSA running all-girl troops even more threatening.

[CynicalScouter]

3 hours ago, MattR said:

In short? That is the longest title I've ever seen.

That was my fault: I cut and pasted the headline and subhead as well. Oops.

[qwazse]

This is pretty old news. As in 60 years old. West had a chip on his shoulder over Gordon Low’s refusal the rebrand as Girl Guides. That bitter root has only grown fat.

There’s no secret about executive animus between the two organizations. Many boots-on-the-ground work around executives who try to keep members of the two organizations from any collaboration.

[fred8033]

From the article .... BSA info to GSA ... sounds like public-vs-proprietary info tap dancing.  BSA was pretty much saying the same thing to all the public at that time.   And it was generally accurate.  We're not going co-ed.  We're single gender programs.  But single at den level and single at troop level.  Just a troop can be single gender of either gender type.  ... lots of tap dancing ...

Internally ... Sounds like a training issue.  First, you don't do things like that.  Second, you definitely don't put things in writing like that.   Situations that are borderline and subject to interpretation can be pushed over the edge with sloppy internal communication.   Effectively, these internal emails become a mea-culpa.  Sounds like a training issue.

[qwazse]

1 hour ago, fred8033 said:

From the article .... BSA info to GSA ... sounds like public-vs-proprietary info tap dancing.  ... Sounds like a training issue.  ...

It was an issue of, "What can we use by way of marketing doublespeak to avoid speaking plainly?"

The plain-spoken answer would have been, "We now have girls and their parents by the thousands begging us to work our program. Either start insisting that a quality GS/USA troop inculcate a vision of the pinnacle scouting experience of hiking and camping independently with one's mates or we will have no choice but to step in and fill that void. Oh, and by the way, how would you all like to join us hosting World Scout Jamboree? Your cookie sales could launch through the roof!"

But, we all were subject to decades of double-speak, and there were precious few execs who would get anywhere by speaking plainly. (Consider the convoluted excuses made for female venturers being kept from O/A or Eagle Scout or recognition by NESA for earning Silver.)

[SSScout]

Requirements for Membership:  

1) Be a breathing young human.

2) Be willing to make the Scout Promise and live by/ abide by the Scout Law.

3) Along the way: go hiking, camping, swimming, canoeing, rock climbing, plant trees, pick up other peoples trash, learn first aid, set an example of "doing unto others what you would have done to you", become self-sufficient and "prepared" for life,  keep an open mind, and help your buddies over that rock you just tripped on.