If the BSA were to provide services to girls, whats the best way?

[DeanRx]

I think co-ed all the way. We have examples from the UK, Mexico, and other European nations that have been co-ed to build a template from. Learn what has worked and what hasn't.

 

I see co-ed scouts from Mexico all the time at scout fair and international camporees here in SD. Only thing I've heard from US scouts is, "They have girls and we don't? Why not?"

 

Developmentally - I think it would do both genders good as they would learn to work and interact with each other during their developmental years. This would likely make them more comfortable dealing with the opposite sex once they hit puberty.

 

I like the local option AND options for co-ed, male only, and female only weeks at camp.

 

The ONLY drawback would be the repurcussions for the 1st female that came home from a campout or week-long camp with a child on the way. Policies and procedures would have to be AIR-TIGHT to keep that from happening. Look to private co-ed youth camps and church summer camps for HOW they handle such issues and develop policy from there.

 

You'd just have to go into it KNOWING that at some point - a pregnancy will likely happen. Life finds a way, especially when you group together a bunch of teenaged kids. Is BSA ready or willing to face those issues? I don't know. But unless the vote is a YES - then I don't see co-ed being a reality.

 

How does it work for venture crews right now? Do they spend a WEEK together at camp? what is the incidence rate of pregnancy within Venturing? What is the rate of pregnancy within female staff at the High Adventue bases when they spend a whole summer working together co-ed? So long as it doesn't exceed the national average for teen pregnancy and BSA puts policy in place to guard against it, then it should be viewed as a manageable risk. Again, whether BSA would agree with such a stance is anybody's guess? But it IS an issue that would have to be addressed. You can have all the policy in the world, but when Jon and Jane camper decide to meet at the boathouse at midnight, there is very little you can do to stop it (aside from locking campers into their tents / cabins - which I'm guessing wouldn't go over so well).

 

Maybe YPG would have to be revised to include some sex ed for the tween / teen scouts? Not sure, but that would likely hasten LDS (and other religious CO's) departure from BSA support. Would BSA risk that? I doubt it.

 

Overall, its a good idea. I'm just not sure the policy makers would ever be at a point that they would give it serious consideration. You think the newspaper headlines about pedophile scouters are a bane to recruitment now, just wait until the 1st article that declares, "Scoutmaster knocks up 14 y/o scouter at camp !" You can go co-ed, but that is the public reality you must be ready to face if and when you do go co-ed.

 

 

[moosetracker]

The door was already opened for possible headlines like "Advisor knocks up 14 y/o scouter during event !" with the venturing program.. Same with Explorer program when that was in our program (though I dont know the title of their leaders are.) So this possibility shouldnt cause National much hesitation.

No, I think it is more the fact of fears of LDS reaction, and not wanting to impede on the Girl Scouts. But, if JHankins info about LDS having rumors of leaving Boy Scouts is true, I think we will see it happen. If her estimated time of 5 years is right. Then we all might live to see the day..

By the way was that short comment of :

NO FREAKIN WAY

.you would lose several sponsor including the LDS church.

The official LDS opinion on the matter???

So LDS church, they may loose.. Still I think it unfair of them to force their beliefs on the entire group.. Bend to them like they already do giving them Varsity, and other things so they can run their program their way.. But, if they get what they want, they should demand that everyone else follow their beliefs. Then if the rumor is right & they are leaving anyway.. They would then have no say over the program..

The comment about loosing Sponsers though . I have been told by members in our Council that the reason the Boy Scouts keep hoping for Venturing to succeed is that the co-ed programs get them more sponsers and funds for the program.. (Again other people might state Venturing is already succeeding, not here we are still just hoping) So for every sponser they lose over going co-ed, they will get 3 others because they went co-ed group.. More Sponsers still if they could relax their policy on homosexuals.. but that is a different topic, and probably harder for them to back down from once they put up their own NO FREAKIN WAY cries of protest.. That would entail them to eat humble pie..

 

[LIBob]

Basement Dweller mentioned co-ed cubbing

The only objection I'd have is that I'm afraid it would lead Boy Scouts to become co-ed which I feel would be a catastrophe.

 

I feel the eventual results is that millions of girls would join boy Scouts and eventually BSA would become as non-camping oriented as GSA.

(notice I wrote "eventual" and "eventually.)

 

If BSA wishes to address the decline of camping in GSA the best way to do is to recommend that each council have a "Girls Scout week" at its Scout camp. In such a week the program would be EXACTLY the same as it is for boys.

 

At least that could/should be the first step. BSA (or GSA) could build on that later

[Basementdweller]

I respectfully disagree.

 

 

The only way the BSA would become non camping is if the front line volunteers allow it.

 

 

 

I for one will not allow it.

[moosetracker]

I agree with Basementdweller. Troops currently get boys who feed up through cub scouts. The first year they loose alot of those crossovers due to the fact that the boys who dont like camping figure out they cannot advance without going on events, especially camping events. Boy Scouts over history have not altered the program to discontinue camping for these boys. Why would they for the girls who come in and figure out they dont want to camp?

 

The big thing with going co-ed is that the winning formula of Boy Scouts not get changed to accomidate the girls.. (Can't currently say this for the Cub Scouts, as their formula is currently being messed with)..

 

This is a discussion of opening the doors to offer the girls who want the program as it stands to be able to join. Not altering the program to interest girls in the program.

[LIBob]

I think this deserves a repost.

 

Scouting in Canada

saw sharp membership declines in the late 1990s. They attempted to modernize the program by

- opening several new sections that did not require the Scout law and expunged all references to God.

- Making all sections (Cubs Boys Scouts etc.) 100% co-educational.

- Adopting a global warming awareness program.

 

The results? Well its hard to say. In 1998 number of scouts (tens of thousands I presume) left the program and formed a parallel program affiliated with the Baden-Powell Scouting association. Their numbers continue to free-fall but many of those scouts may have joined the BP scouts so raw numbers are kind of an apple-to-oranges comparison.

 

 

Canada Scouting membership:

1995 172,680

2005 142,200

2009 74,626

 

Now consider the UK

Scouting in the UK saw declines more severe than ours

(we have a sharp decline in cub enrollment and a tiny tiny decline in BSA enrollment.) They "fixed" it in part by giving each unit the option of becoming co-ed.

 

Now their cub packs are growing rapidly and their "boy" scout program is growing 5-6% per year. (I'm guessing nearly 100% of that growth is from girls joining.)

 

BUT is it really scouting? By 2006 UK scouting awarded more computer MB and more religion MBs than First aid or Camping MBs.

 

If the goal is to change scouting to a co-ed group of kids who learn religion and computer skills then by all means go ahead make it co-ed.

.

.

.

.

more in a moment(This message has been edited by LIBob)

[LIBob]

If BSA were to provide services for girls the best way is to encourage each council to have a "girls scout week." On those weeks GSA troops and individual campers are allowed and BSA troops and individual campers. (or even allowin GSA troops to camp at BSA campgrounds just like BSA troops are allowed.)

 

IMO

GSA used to have a strong camping and outdoor skills element and currently does not. If we open our doors for GSA members to join our ranks first only the camping oriented girls and leders will move over.

 

 

But in the long term going co-ed means the same cancerous leaders and cancerous attitudes that threaten GSA today will eventualy infect BSA as well.

 

It happened in Canada, with tragic results.

It happened in the UK with the result that UK scouting now emphasizes computers and religion more than camping and first aid.

.

.

.

.

.

I might be open to the idea of forming all-female units of BSA. But girls in a boys troop? Girls in a boys patrol? NO WAY.

The long-term outlook of such a radical solution is not good. Canada and the UK have proven this.

 

Look, what we have WORKS for these boys. It works for my son it works for my nephews it will work for my grandsons.

 

Offer the girls opportunities? Sure. but we should not put what we have at risk to solve someone else's problems.(This message has been edited by LIBob)

[Basementdweller]

Libob

 

The idea isn't to put the GS out of business. But to allow interested Girls to join the BSA before 13 or 14. Personally I would like to see it happen with Cubing.

 

The BSA troops and Packs all have different personalities. Some will welcome sibs and other young ladies to their program others will not.

 

Make it a CO decision. I mentioned it to several parents this weekend and they were excited. We may have a sib den this fall.

 

(This message has been edited by Basementdweller)

[LIBob]

Well basement, sometimes I type before I think and sometimes I think before I type. but now that I am thinking before I type:

 

Bottom line(s) with me are:

- I am 100% opposed to co-ed troops. It failed in the UK, it failed grievously in Canada. Do NOT put the future of all scouting at risk to give one generation of girls a better chance to camp. Look you don't have to solve all of society's problems in one generation and risking the entirety of scouting to solve the "GSA is insufficently cmaping oriented" problem in a single generation is just plain foolish if you ask me.

 

 

Related to the bottom line:

- the only objection I have to co-ed cub packs is that they might one day lead to co-ed troops.

- I have ZERO objection to and would even support encouraging councils to hold a "GSA Week" at their scout camps.

- I have so little objection to all-girl troops in BSA that if you buy me a donut I'll stop objecting.

- Co-Ed troops? Not this decade. I will pull my son and join up with like minded kids to form B-P scouts, or just plain pull him and form a boys camping club with local parents. NO oh, no way, no how.(This message has been edited by LIBob)

[LIBob]

Look Basement, and Pack, and the others advocating co-ed BSA,

 

 

I am reasonably certain YOUR daughter would be a asset to BSA and a asset to my son's troop or any other troop.

 

But going co-ed is not (only) about allowing in daughters like yours.

- A. It is about enrolling girls who have no interest in camping who enroll only because their parents want them to develop such an interest.

- B. It is about enrolling girls who want to learn camping and "how to catch, gut and eat a snapping turtle" and other outdoor skills BUT accepting along the way, parent-leaders who do not share their daughters views.

 

 

There are so many things that can go wrong along the way, (UK scouting and Canada scouting both show such failures) that I cannot support putting the future of BSA at risk over what is apparently a long-shot experiment.

 

If you can find some way to methodically and permanently exclude girls like A. and leaders like B. above then I'll listen to your case. Until then, I'm not even truly listening.(This message has been edited by LIBob)

[rickmac]

This is a question better asked by BSA to the Girl Scouts of America. They have surveys that have already been answered by their various units. Our family is both active with BSA and also at the service unit level for GSA. Go straight for the need. Go direct to GSA or their individual districts which suffer from the same merger and financial issues as BSA councils.

[Moggie]

To LIBob,

 

"Now their cub packs are growing rapidly and their "boy" scout program is growing 5-6% per year. (I'm guessing nearly 100% of that growth is from girls joining.)

 

BUT is it really scouting? By 2006 UK scouting awarded more computer MB and more religion MBs than First aid or Camping MBs.

 

 

The UK scouting programme runs differently to the BSA version.

 

"If the goal is to change scouting to a co-ed group of kids who learn religion and computer skills then by all means go ahead make it co-ed."

 

You can find out how the UK programme runs by visiting:

 

http://www.scouts.org.uk

or

http://www.scoutbase.org.uk

 

Programme Zones split the whole programme into manageable areas. Each Zone represents a different development area in a young person's life. There are six Programme Zones in the Scout Section. They are:

 

* Beliefs and Attitudes

* Community

* Fit for Life

* Creative Expression

* Global

* Outdoor and Adventure

 

It is recommended that a troop spend roughly 50% of its programme time working within the Outdoor and Adventure Zone.

These Zones are delivered using 10 methods, which give the programme variety and range. Sometimes one method will be more suitable than another. On occasions you may use a number of methods within the same activity. The Methods are:

 

* Activities outdoors

* Games

* Design and creativity

* Visits and visitors

* Service

* Technology and new skills

* Team-building activities

* Activities with others

* Themes

* Prayer, worship and reflection

 

In addition to the Programme Zones and Methods, there is a also a third element to the Balanced Programme. Put simply it identifies what people might expect to see if they walked into a Troop meeting. We need to be aware of it as it very much reflects the experience of being a Scout.

 

* Activity

* Fun

* Teamwork

* Leadership and Responsibility

* Relationships

* Commitment

* Personal Development

 

This link will take you to the current edition of Scouting Magazine, there is an article on the growth of scouting in the UK. The biggest growth has been in the 14-18 yr old section (Explorer Scouts) and 18 -15yrs (Network Scouts). Girls make up approximately 15% of scouting in the UK

 

http://www.scouts.org.uk/cms.php?pageid=2965

 

My own scout group didn't go fully co-ed until 2007 (explorers have always been mixed), so has it made any significant difference? in short, No. We did have to make some changes, but in the great scheme of things they haven't proved to be particularly onerous. It hasn't had any significant impact on Guiding locally either.

Personally, its great that my daughter can fully participate in scouting with me.

 

Cheers

 

Gareth

 

[Thomas54]

 

Packs are Co-ed now; to a degree. It's always family camping as a pack. Those were some of the best campouts we went on. Yea at the webelos level they start camping with troops. They do all the same games at cub world. The girls in a BSA family get plenty of the camping experience.

 

I agree with Beavah on the GSUSA just squandering the opportunities they have. Lost in a befuddled world of chasing demographics and trying to be all things to all people. It could have been the opposite. But I think as much as we may grumble and grouse about it, the Charter Organization approach has worked for BSA. The centralized / national charter system has left GSUSA rudder less.

 

Here's why I wouldn't want girls in the Boy Scouts. The boys are already losing to girls in colleges attendance, and in leadership positions at the high school level. The boys get labeled more time then girls with ADHD. Boys more than girls need an environment to craft the personal, group and leadership skills that will support their life's ambitions.

 

 

[packsaddle]

Thanks for that perspective, Moggie, I was completely unaware of most of that.

LIBob, (yes, I understand you're not really listening) the local option would allow you (or your CO) to continue as is, excluding whoever. And it would allow, say, this unit to throw the doors open. We would have little or no effect on you and yours. In both cases the unit, through a variety of mechanisms, would more closely reflect the community it serves. I am having some trouble in finding the bad aspects of this. Help me out.

 

Edited part: Beavah, my curiosity has finally taken over (and since I'm not a cat, I think I'm out of danger), but I keep asking myself, "What, exactly, does 'jumped da shark' mean?"

 

Also, Thomas54, you wrote, "Here's why I wouldn't want girls in the Boy Scouts. The boys are already losing to girls in colleges attendance, and in leadership positions at the high school level. The boys get labeled more time then girls with ADHD. Boys more than girls need an environment to craft the personal, group and leadership skills that will support their life's ambitions."

 

See, the thing is...the boys are not competing well with the girls, getting labeled, and generally in need of those things that you mention in the current situation in which we are not coed.

Using the same basis, I could argue with equal validity that the sad situation you describe is BECAUSE we are not coed. At the very least, the program as is obviously does NOT help support the boys' "life's ambitions."

 

I could argue that it would do the boys some benefit to interact more with other youth of either gender who take studies and work more seriously, who are eager to take on responsibilities and work hard to see things to completion, who HAVE found the personal skills to remain focused on tasks and ideas...

rather than isolate these failing youth as a group to themselves. Now I'll pinch myself, for a moment it was almost as if LIBob was really listening.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[moosetracker]

LiBob I one might think you have a strong opinion on this subject..

 

My husband sounded just like you 3 or 4 years ago whenever the subject arose.. Girls would be the ruination of the Boy Scout program for sure. I mentioned this thread just to get a rise out of him and was shocked. His comment was Co-ed all the way! It will happen, theres no stopping it, and if they do it, do it right, dont do it half a**ed.. I think I am still in shock.

 

No one will change your mind with discussion LiBob, but who knows something in your own life might. I still would love to know what changed my husbands mind, but I am not going to press a good thing. I will just except it as a gift.

 

The one thing I know about the Boy Scout group is that they are very protective of their winning formula. It is the whole tension between the Venturing Program and the Boy Scout Program, the fear that Venturing will try to tamper with the Boy Scout program in either trying to make the BS program its feeder group which would lose the older boys who are the central ingredient as the Leaders of the Boy Lead program. Or the fear that the BS program will try to change its formula itself in trying to compete with Venturing. They want neither. They are fine with Venturing programs that stand on their own, and offer no threat. I dont see this same group lie down and playing dead for a flock of incoming girls. These are the people who will make sure these girls accept the program as it comes.

 

For sure BSA will make changes with or without the change of the addition of girls. For sure any change they make with or without girls will be viewed as a bad move by many..

 

As for these two comments

- A. It is about enrolling girls who have no interest in camping who enroll only because their parents want them to develop such an interest. You mean like we currently do with boys who are there only due to their parents pushing them to be there, or boys who did well inLiBob I one might think you have a strong opinion on this subject  ..

My husband sounded just like you 3 or 4 years ago whenever the subject arose.. Girls would be the ruination of the Boy Scout program for sure. I mentioned this thread just to get a rise out of him and was shocked. His comment was Co-ed all the way! It will happen, theres no stopping it, and if they do it, do it right, dont do it half a**ed.. I think I am still in shock.

The one thing I know about the Boy Scout group is that they are very protective of their winning formula. It is the whole tension between the Venturing Program and the Boy Scout Program, the fear that Venturing will try to tamper with the Boy Scout program in either trying to make the BS program its feeder group which would lose the older boys who are the central ingredient as the Leaders of the Boy Lead program. Or the fear that the BS program will try to change its formula itself in trying to compete with Venturing. They want neither. They are fine with Venturing programs that stand on their own, and offer no threat. I dont see this same group lie down and playing dead for a flock of incoming girls. These are the people who will make sure these girls accept the program as it comes.

For sure BSA will make changes with or without the change of the addition of girls.

As for these two comments

But going co-ed is not (only) about allowing in daughters like yours.

- A. It is about enrolling girls who have no interest in camping who enroll only because their parents want them to develop such an interest. You mean like we currently do with boys who are there only due to their parents pushing them to be there, or boys who did well in cub scouts but don't enjoy the bs program Basically we are dealing with this issue now with the boys who come in

 

- B. It is about enrolling girls who want to learn camping and "how to catch, gut and eat a snapping turtle" and other outdoor skills BUT accepting along the way, parent-leaders who do not share their daughters views . You mean like we currently do now with the parents who are lovingly term helecopeter parents? Those new parents who come in and try to tell you how to change the whole program in order to benefit thier son..

 

With each crossover your troop will get a new group of boys and parents with the very issues you are describing the girls will bring in. I have no doubt they will. The girls will not come in picture perfect. Your expectation that they must be more perfect then the boys or they are not welcomed is not really fair. Like the boys, it will be the troops responsibility to whip these new recruites and their parents into shape or release them.