Membership, developing a culture of growth... Is national on the right track? Doubtful... See Philmont Training

[AwakeEnergyScouter]

1 hour ago, Eagledad said:

Yes. Each gender grows and matures differently and mixing the genders dilutes the strengths of the program for developing character and integrity.

Do you have anything at all supporting this theory? 

In my experience, groups of just or almost only girls/women are prone to Mean Girls dynamics, and groups of almost only boys/men (and so presumably also only men) are prone to Dude Bro dynamics. Enough boys breaks up the mean girl dynamic and enough girls breaks up the bros, and both genders get the opportunity to see the strengths of the other gender's default way of handling something. Whatever gender you are, you can learn something from others.

When it comes to character and integrity, I'll just share my observation that there is a very tight inverse relationship between how much time men spent around girls when they were kids - before puberty - and how much they objectify women. It's striking on the individual level and mirrors rape and other sexual assault statistics at a country level. Men who spent a lot of time around girls as children clearly have a much easier time recognizing that we are also human beings like them.

If gender segregation created people of high integrity and character, Saudi Arabia, India, and Pakistan should be paragons of integrity and character. I submit that they are not, because of the general lack of respect for women.

Or - and I want to clarify that I'm only asking because someone else actually brought this up earlier - do you think that viewing women as having the same intrinsic human value as men is also a mistake, and as such not related to character and integrity?

[Eagledad]

29 minutes ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

Do you have anything at all supporting this theory? 

I have 40 years of working with youth, some training, and a couple of mentors who are professors in child psychology and life in general as a father and husband. I've experienced enough to know.

34 minutes ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

In my experience, groups of just or almost only girls/women are prone to Mean Girls dynamics, and groups of almost only boys/men (and so presumably also only men) are prone to Dude Bro dynamics. Enough boys breaks up the mean girl dynamic and enough girls breaks up the bros, and both genders get the opportunity to see the strengths of the other gender's default way of handling something. Whatever gender you are, you can learn something from others.

Well that's a nice generality. I don't even know how to respond to such a generalization, but it is a bit condescending honestly. Just what do each gender offer that the other will learn that isn't in the Scout Oath or Law?

Before you go on with your observations, the actions and reactions of youth are generally instinctive. Someone said boys like to hang around boys. Well yes, and if you watch girls, they aren't running around trying to find private space. Until puberty, hanging groups is a primitive natural defensive response of safety from predators. While that response isn't required in the modern day, it is still there, and understanding it helps in how to work with the scouts. Mean girls? More generalization of not understanding human instinct. As girls get closer to puberty, they become INSTINCTIVELY more competitive and aggressive in a passive-aggressive sort of way. I had many discussions with my daughter at this age. 

52 minutes ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

When it comes to character and integrity, I'll just share my observation that there is a very tight inverse relationship between how much time men spent around girls when they were kids - before puberty - and how much they objectify women. It's striking on the individual level and mirrors rape and other sexual assault statistics at a country level. Men who spent a lot of time around girls as children clearly have a much easier time recognizing that we are also human beings like them.

I can assure you that I have vast experience in that whole statement and can say, your conclusion is not normal reality. And, you certainly can't use victims, or observers, of sexual assaults and abuse to generalize what a person before or after puberty will gain from the experience in the normal world. Even divorce changes how a youth approaches their perspective of relationships. You can't pick extreme examples of humanism experiences to build ONE program for 50 to 100 youth. Let's stick to scouting to put some boundaries on our opinions.

1 hour ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

If gender segregation created people of high integrity and character, Saudi Arabia, India, and Pakistan should be paragons of integrity and character. I submit that they are not, because of the general lack of respect for women.

Wow, hmm. Shesh.

Gender separation doesn't create integrity or character. Practicing the values of integrity and character develops integrity and character.  I can't find anything in the Oath and Law that has anything to do with gender. 

1 hour ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

Or - and I want to clarify that I'm only asking because someone else actually brought this up earlier - do you think that viewing women as having the same intrinsic human value as men is also a mistake, and as such not related to character and integrity?

OK, I even looked up intrinsic human values and still didn't quite understand the question in reference to this discussion. But, I'm wondering if you view this discussion as males vs females. I know my part hasn't approached it that way. But, If males are different than females physically, is it so far out there to believe they instinctively and intellectually are different as well?

Barry

[Ojoman]

15 hours ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

Do you have anything at all supporting this theory? 

OK FOLKS... THE GENDER ISSUE IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT TOPIC... THE TOPIC HERE IS 'DO WE HAVE A CULTURE OF GROWTH!... CAN WE RETURN TO THE TOPIC???

[yknot]

32 minutes ago, Ojoman said:

OK FOLKS... THE GENDER ISSUE IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT TOPIC... THE TOPIC HERE IS 'DO WE HAVE A CULTURE OF GROWTH!... CAN WE RETURN TO THE TOPIC???

Well, I think a culture of growth would incorporate different attitudes and practices towards girls in scouting. Does anyone have early 2024 membership numbers yet by the way? That's probably the clearest indication of where we might be headed.  

[DannyG]

On 1/31/2024 at 11:44 AM, Eagledad said:

A few numbers that I gathered 25 years ago was that less than 25% of families who joined the BSA as Tigers joined a Troop five years later. The most devastating statistic is that 50% of Webelos crossed over to the Troop. That is a huge number. And when I researched why families dropped out after Webelos, the basic answer was the program was boring. A little more research and I found that most Webelos leaders were burned out and didn't provide a fun program. The troop program is completely different and would most likely boost scouts toward fun  again, but once a family wants out, it's hard to change their minds.

While I believe scouting can be done by everyone... If they found the program is boring after a few years, then I don't think the scouting program is for them.

Scouting at the troop level incorporates a lot of different skills: Physical Fitness, use of tools and equipment, knowledge of the outdoors and nature, First Aid, backcountry skills, etc. Today there are a lot of activities competing for kids' attention. The urge today is to excel at one singular activity. A kid interested in Physical Fitness can choose a sport. A kid whose interest is in learning can choose  to focus on academics. They aren't all interested in the outdoor program and high adventure, so they  ultimately lose interest in scouting.

Our Cub Scout Pack committee kept up a great program of fun monthly activities, spring/fall camping trips, and a winter cabin weekend to keep the Cubs engaged even if the den meetings got stale. We had a lot of Cub Scouts who came to the weekly meetings but were not interested in the extra activities. Perhaps they liked making crafts, doing service projects, learning new things or belonging to something... But they weren't as much interested in the camping trips. Most of them didn't make it to crossover. The program ultimately isn't for them.

[Eagledad]

1 hour ago, DannyG said:

While I believe scouting can be done by everyone... If they found the program is boring after a few years, then I don't think the scouting program is for them.

Scouting at the troop level incorporates a lot of different skills: Physical Fitness, use of tools and equipment, knowledge of the outdoors and nature, First Aid, backcountry skills, etc. Today there are a lot of activities competing for kids' attention. The urge today is to excel at one singular activity. A kid interested in Physical Fitness can choose a sport. A kid whose interest is in learning can choose  to focus on academics. They aren't all interested in the outdoor program and high adventure, so they  ultimately lose interest in scouting.

Our Cub Scout Pack committee kept up a great program of fun monthly activities, spring/fall camping trips, and a winter cabin weekend to keep the Cubs engaged even if the den meetings got stale. We had a lot of Cub Scouts who came to the weekly meetings but were not interested in the extra activities. Perhaps they liked making crafts, doing service projects, learning new things or belonging to something... But they weren't as much interested in the camping trips. Most of them didn't make it to crossover. The program ultimately isn't for them.

I learned over the years with Cub Scouts, that the scouts usually do what the parents guide them to do. Now that can mean the scout wants out and the parent agrees. But, I did pretty extensive research with the Webelos and I'm convinced that adult burnout contributes to at least 70% of the Webelos non-crossovers. That is conservative. 

I even started a district program called Longbow that encouraged troops to help the Webelos den leaders provide a fun program. I killed the program because the target group of burned-out leaders wouldn't attend any of the activities to communicate with the troop leaders. The program was a great success for active Webelos leaders looking for more adventure. But, that wasn't the purpose of the program and I didn't want to add another district program to maintain if it wasn't productive. 

As for the Troop scouts, the BSA looses more scouts from the first-year scout group than any other scouting age group. I found the problem is that the sudden jump from an adult association (including parents, teachers, cub leaders, and so on) to relying on scout-age leaders is more traumatic than most people realize. At first, the 10 year olds are excited that the scouts run the show, but once they realize that their safety of surviving in the cold dark woods is dependent on the scouts, and not the adults who have protected them all their life, their perspective changes. 

I also learned that if a scout hasn't quit by the end of their first summer (summer camp), that scout will likely hang around for several years. This isn't a new issue with the BSA, I found this huge first-year scout dropouts as far back as the 60s, which was as far back as I could find records.

One idea for keeping first-year scouts is having an ASM who works as a team with the patrol leaders as a kind of PL assistant. A rarely seen assistant. The new scout and parents are instructed to call the ASM when they are unsure of what is going on. The ASM will gently guide them back to the patrol leader to help them get their information. The goal is to show the scout and family that the PL knows what they are doing and everything will work out fine. The trick is for the ASM to help the scout and family communicate with the PL to get them used to trusting the PL. It takes a little practice for the ASM and PL to work as a team, but the ASM is usually completely out of the picture within 3 or 4 months, just in time for summer camp.

Barry

[AwakeEnergyScouter]

2 hours ago, yknot said:

Well, I think a culture of growth would incorporate different attitudes and practices towards girls in scouting.

Exactly. Scouters who think that women have less intrinsic value than men are not going to be able to do a good job of growing units with girls, and if they're teaching boys that, then they are also failing to deliver good moral training. Clarifying whether we have such problems is practically important. I doubt Eagledad is trying to recruit girls, but this is not a private conversation and girls reading something in that direction here aren't going to be magnetized.

Edited February 7 by AwakeEnergyScouter
Forgot to add something

[Eagledad]

13 minutes ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

Exactly. Scouters who think that women have less intrinsic value than men are not going to be able to do a good job of growing units with girls, and if they're teaching boys that, then they are also failing to deliver good moral training. Clarifying whether we have such problems is practically important. I doubt Eagledad is trying to recruit girls, but this is not a private conversation and girls reading something in that direction here aren't going to be magnetized.

This has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of either gender. It's about providing a program that gives each the best opportunity for growth. We could just call the genders A & B, so the biases don't cloud the discussion.

Barry

[Ojoman]

4 hours ago, DannyG said:

Most of them didn't make it to crossover. The program ultimately isn't for them.

Frankly, when I was CC for a pack, we created a program that met the needs/wants/expectations of the kids and parents and virtually had ZERO dropout (except for those that moved away). We grew from a half dozen families to well over 50 and had multiple Webelos Dens that crossed over with their leaders to rebuild the troop. Dens had their own field trips appropriate for the age/ability of the kids and the pack ran a full 12 month program. If a kid and family come to the signup night, the program is for them if you meet their needs/expectations. 

 

1 hour ago, Eagledad said:

This has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of either gender. It's about providing a program that gives each the best opportunity for growth. We could just call the genders A & B, so the biases don't cloud the discussion.

Barry

 

[Eagledad]

3 hours ago, Ojoman said:

Frankly, when I was CC for a pack, we created a program that met the needs/wants/expectations of the kids and parents and virtually had ZERO dropout (except for those that moved away). We grew from a half dozen families to well over 50 and had multiple Webelos Dens that crossed over with their leaders to rebuild the troop. Dens had their own field trips appropriate for the age/ability of the kids and the pack ran a full 12 month program. If a kid and family come to the signup night, the program is for them if you meet their needs/expectations. 

 

 

Well done! You certainly have the right to brag. 

However, your program is rare. Typically only one or two packs and troops in a district are that successful.

Most Scout Leaders enjoy volunteering. But only 5% are passionate enough to build a top tier program. Most of who you see here on this Forum are in the 5%. Oh, some of them will even announce they are done with scouting are leaving the forum. But they still hang around bringing experience to our campfire. We couldn't get rid of Fred even if we wanted to. Which we don't. Man he's good.

Barry

[Ojoman]

2 hours ago, Eagledad said:

your program is rare. Typically only one or two packs and troops in a district are that successful.

This is where training comes into play. If you lay out how to do a quality program so they already have a track to run on then it is more likely to happen. Train the unit commissioners to sit in on the pack committee meeting and train them. Perhaps bring a member of the cub leader training committee to assist. I complemented the leadership of one pack I worked with on their program and membership growth and they responded with, we just did what you told us to do! Without direction their program might never have grown. The CM and his wife (mostly the wife) ran two council pow wows a year or two later and they were great. Share the vision, show the way! 

[AwakeEnergyScouter]

I want

On 2/6/2024 at 8:09 PM, Eagledad said:

Gender separation doesn't create integrity or character. Practicing the values of integrity and character develops integrity and character.  I can't find anything in the Oath and Law that has anything to do with gender. 

Thank you for saying this. This is exactly right - scouting isn't gendered. Its raîson d'être is not gender identity exploration. Like someone said above, we can't be doing every good thing there is to do, we should stick to our core activities which is outdoor adventure. Up until you said this - spontaneously without my prompting, even - it seemed quite possible that you were in the camp of people who do think gender-segregated gender identity exploration is in fact a core part of scouting. So now it's clear that you're not, thank you.

 

7 hours ago, Eagledad said:

This has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of either gender. It's about providing a program that gives each the best opportunity for growth. We could just call the genders A & B, so the biases don't cloud the discussion.

Barry

Well, my friend, you entered this discussion waving a lot of flags that seem to be red, as did Qwazse in his post earlier. (Bringing up that gender integration is a mistake in response to someone saying that it was the best thing the BSA has done in 50 years, saying and confirming that you do not think that I or any of the other former scouts in my family have the best character or integrity, counting your life experience but not mine as evidence, declaring your experience as normal reality but mine as not normal, dismissing a classic movie based on a bestseller written by a counselor about girls' behavior as generalization without offering any specifics of your own.) 

Maybe others' past behavior has made me so weary that I'm seeing light pink flags as red, or perhaps they're actually white but the sun is setting.. So before jumping to conclusions, I'm asking you both to tell us what hex color your flags are. In response, you throw up more red-looking flags and refuse to answer. So... if I am mistaken, it shouldn't be hard to clear the misunderstanding up, right?

 

On 2/6/2024 at 8:09 PM, Eagledad said:

OK, I even looked up intrinsic human values and still didn't quite understand the question in reference to this discussion. But, I'm wondering if you view this discussion as males vs females. I know my part hasn't approached it that way. But, If males are different than females physically, is it so far out there to believe they instinctively and intellectually are different as well?

I view this conversation as a time to step in as a protector to see what this situation needs. My loyalty to the scouting movement may require that I protect scouts, mine and those in other units, from confused beliefs. Many people who say similar things to what you're saying here - and 100% what @qwazse said about patriarchy - do not believe that women have equal intrinsic value to men (and sometimes no intrinsic value at all, only extrinsic value), and this causes them to harm girls and women both mentally and physically, and like I said earlier scouters who believe that aren't going to be able to help the BSA grow. So clarification of whether you and Qwazse believe that both men and women have equal intrinsic value or not is very important. 

I thought that all Westerners were familiar with the philosophical concept of intrinsic human value. If you had to look it up, then perhaps I should clarify for all what I'm talking about.

Kant wasn't the first, but is in the West perhaps the best known proponent of the moral philosophy of intrinsic moral value, something he considered a moral categorical imperative.

“What is related to general human inclinations and needs has a market price; that which, even without presupposing such a need, conforms with a certain taste has a fancy price; but that which constitutes the condition under which alone something can be an end in itself has not merely a relative value, that is, a price, but an inner value, that is, dignity … Morality, and humanity insofar as it is capable of morality, is that which alone has dignity.” (Kant's Groundwork to the Metaphysics of Morals)

So, intrinsic as opposed to extrinsic value is for its own sake; in this case, that women are not valuable for their usefulness to men, but rather we have value for our own sake. It shows up as EU value number one:  Human dignity is inviolable. It must be respected, protected and constitutes the real basis of fundamental rights. It shows up in a number of Mahayana sutras, such as (of course) the Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra, in these cases in a somewhat different philosophical system than Kant's. So - could you please confirm whether you do or do not believe that men and women have equal inherent human value?

Edited February 8 by AwakeEnergyScouter
Forgot to add a link

[AwakeEnergyScouter]

Also forgot to add the Declaration of Independence to the list of places where inherent equal human value shows up. Probably the most famous line of the whole thing.

[Eagledad]

12 hours ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

So - could you please confirm whether you do or do not believe that men and women have equal inherent human value?

No, I won't. I'm confident that I didn't say anything where one gender is lesser than the other because that is not in my heart.  You will find that I'm very much a proponent of growing by practicing the Oath and Law. 

That being said, each gender is born with different instinctive behaviors specific to their gender that aid them in maturing mentally and physically to adulthood. It's not just humans, All animals have these instincts. Once we understand these instinctive desires, we learn how to use them to their best advantage.

I know from life experiences and education that mixing genders does not provide the best environment for the BSA Mission of developing moral and ethical decision-makers using the Scout Oath and Law. At least up to puberty. After puberty, the instincts are more beneficial for behavior growth in mixed-gender environments.

I also don't believe that most scouts gain, in the Troop patrol method experience, some growth simply by being exposed to the other gender. The Oath and Law are values that demand respect of everyone.  And not just in the scouting area. But, the scouting arena is one of the few safe places where youth can make wrong decisions without being judged disparagingly for it. Simply, the more wrong decisions a youth makes during scouting activities, the more they grow in wisdom from the experience, IF the adults encourage that kind of atmosphere. I like to say that the Troop is the youth-size real life. I come to this forum to pass along lessons I learned to encourage that kind of atmosphere.

Now, I never thought I would have to speak for qwazse, but he is one of the most experienced Scouters you will ever meet and his wisdom on any scouting subject speaks loudly. He is also one of the most profound speakers for girls in scouting on this forum. In fact, it is one of the very few areas that we disagree. He has a daughter who was a very active Scout in the BSA long before girls were brought in the Packs and Troops. For some reason, she doesn't care for boys from Oklahoma, but that is another story. There are a few Scouters on this forum that when they say something, you just have to take it as fact because they have been there and done that. Qwazse is one of them.

I think you will enjoy this forum for the vast knowledge you can gain, and also the vast knowledge you can provide to those looking (desperate) to improve their program. Many of us have A LOT of experience in all parts of scouting from Cub Scouts to Council positions. Now maybe we don't always agree, but we have a lot of respect for each other's advice and opinions because the opinions and advice come from humble wisdom gained from years of experience.  Sounds like you fit there as well.

Barry

Edited February 8 by Eagledad

[AwakeEnergyScouter]

Thanks, @Eagledad, I appreciate the response. It seems we've had very different life experiences, so I doubt we're going to convince each other of the value or lack thereof in gender segregated scouting, but that doesn't mean we can't be civil.