Leaderboard

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 bushe

My son will be a Scout, like I was in the 80s and 90s, at least in how I referred to myself, how my parents and friends referred to us, etc. We were "scouts", our leaders called us "scouts", they addressed us, instructed us, woke us up, yelled at us, got us in line, as "scouts" ("Scouts, gather 'round," "Scouts line up!" "Scouts, attention," "Scouts, rise and shine!"). I don't care if officially he'll never be a "Boy Scout". The name is the least important part of the program for me. All that matters is what he becomes as a result of going through it.

My next move is easy. When we create our linked Troop, I will step down as SM of the boy Troop and become the SM of the new girl Troop. My wife (my kids' stepmother) just finished all the SM required training, and will be our first trained female ASM. I will provide the same leadership and opportunities for my 13-yo daughter and her peers that I have for my 16-yo son and his. I am not sure why everyone has their underthings in a twist about this. The mission statement of the BSA has always said YOUTH, without mentioning gender. Our flavor of Scouting should be available to any kid who wants t

Gah, that article really chaps my backside. To quote: What a convenient mischaracterization. As long as we are on the subject of "allowing" girls, my daughter was "not allowed' to join any girl scout troop in our area because I was told they were full and not accepting any new girls - yet there were only three troops in the entire area of nine schools. If you "knew someone" or were in the right clique, you might be invited to join. I had to quite literally beg and plead to find her a group for this past year. GSUSA had better get their act together and stop blaming Scouts

This change almost happened over four decades ago. For a variety of reasons, it didn't. I remember the debate. Of course there was no internet, but around campfires and letters to Pedro at Boy's Life, there was plenty of discussion. Regardless of where one might stand, I think it's important to keep in mind that our new scouts are not werewolves. Nor meth heads. Nor supernatural evil entities who are plotting the demise of the BSA. Let's remember they are girls. Peoples' daughters. They deserve respect, and the same opportunities as the boys. PS Some declare: "The

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.

Sorry, AVTech. I have to correct you. The copy of the Scoutmasters Handbook I got when I became a Scoutmaster in 2007 (copyright 1999) had this quote in the section called "The Aims of Scouting" on page 7, "A goal of the Boy Scouts of America is to help boys develop into honorable men. Scouting's values can be incorporated into a boy's home, school, and religious community, adding to all three and, in some cases, filling in where family, school, or religious support is lacking." They started replacing the gender term "boy" with the work "youth" when they started contemplating the ch

As I'm elsewhere, I'll pick this up... UK was boys only, except for Venture Scouts. If I remember correctly (it was a while ago, and I was a Venture leader, so was not having my playpen remodelled)... HQ said (I paraphrase) "we're going co-ed, if that freaks you out, stay boy only for now" Then when "for now" ran out, they said "you're all co-ed" (more or less) What they didn't do is say "yar, you can have boy troop here, and a girl troop thar, and that's cool. Okay, that was last year, now go coed. Love and kisses, HQ" Fingers crossed your HQ aren't that crazy.

Just as you have stated and advised to let's see and hope for the best, many of us are troubled about what may come. Most of us (right or wrong) are concerned about the unforeseen consequences of the Girls into Cub Scout and Boy Scouts decision. Over time I suspect there will be more impacting than many hope. Many may find this shocking, but boys are not girls. The unknown is that the program will change in some undetermined manner. BSA National has clearly demonstrated a propensity to move with the social winds. BSA National and the Exec Board have not been good stewards

You are completely out of line with this post. Conservatives supported the right to vote for women and blacks amongst strong democratic opposition. Democrats still only pretend to care about all women and minorities just so far as to gain votes, and as long as they don't have their own opinions against the party line. This is about preserving a program dedicated to helping boys, and we have just told boys in the BSA that they are no longer a priority and that they are undeserving of their own program.

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 nearl

... physical evidence to prove that we—a rogue, high-adventure Boy Scouts of America Explorer troop of teenage girls in the 1970s—existed. As a group, we hiked the Appalachian Trail, paddled more than 1,000 miles of rivers in the Carolinas, and climbed some of the highest peaks in the Smokies on horseback. My quest was spurred by the October announcement from the BSA that it would begin accepting girls as Cub and Eagle scouts for the first time in its 107-year history. The media trumpeted that the gender barrier was falling, but I knew the Girl Rangers brought it down more than 48 years ago...

My money is on "Scout Life" not to be confused with the rank of Life Scout.

Is that a Valkyrie? It looks good.

Look at my other comments. It is hard not to see the writing on the wall. I believe Boy Scouts will soon be coed. It will start with cub scouts then eventually happen in scouts. National will roll over at the first sign of a lawsuit over gender segregation. Some girl will not be allowed to join because not enough girls are available and she will want to join the boys. This is exactly what happened with wrestling at several schools in Utah this year.

Yes I found the older boys were quite aware of the social media but quite muddied by the official communications. Even among the ones who agree with the changes there was some resentment that existing Scouts are not being asked just future scouts.

I believe it might be a violation of YPT for boys to pee in front of other boys, let alone in front of girls. So the proper answer to "As a Scout" would be "heck no".

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.

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.

Then maybe you should try to shame folks for not being obedient not trustworthy. Our pack was originally planning on having separate boy/girl dens who did almost all joint activities, just like our multiple boy dens. But as time has gone by, we've moved to plans for full co-ed dens. I don't know what that'll look like on paper. We aren't an early adopter pack but we are a concentrator/congregator or whatever the term is for next year, a welcoming pack that council refers girls to who can't find viable dens in other troops. Our CM and IH have discussed this with council and they know,

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."

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. Th

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", . . . And if you want to see some internal GSUSA complaints, there are some here: http://girlscoutwithacause.dawgtoons.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/gs-ceowhite_paper_2015.pdf With commentary here: http://girlscoutwithacause.dawgtoons.com/2015/10/white-paper-hub-bub/ And if the outdoors-interested old-timers cannot get GSUSA to listen, . . . .

Do not understand your reasoning. The overall name remains Boy Scouts of America, and they will still be scouts. Way too much unneeded concerns and over reacting to this whole thing. Just work the program for all the youth involved. Who cares it they are called scouts or boy scouts? Call them boy scouts if that fits them and makes you comfortable.

Correct it is not a new concept. I was advisor for a coed Explorer post in the early 80's. We were chartered as High Adventure. It was what would now be Ventures I suppose. This was before YPT etc, but we did need a female over 21 for outings if the girls wanted to attend. That was an ongoing challenge. This was before I got married (actually getting married was not a help to my camping efforts) and I burned through some girlfriends when I asked them to go camping with us.

Ugh, this is all getting absurd. They wouldn't dare force co-ed Troops here though. Nor would they insist that CO's which charter all-boy units also charter girl units as well. That would instantly alienate the entire LDS Church, which forms a HUGE part of the BSA population. My hope is that the Church can exercise enough clout to protect smaller conservative bodies who still want to run only the traditional all-male BSA model, but don't have a voice large enough to be heard. If other units want to bring in girls, FINE, but that is where the Church's line is going to be drawn, and I can't imag

There are some all boy troops that are theoretically coed but simply don't have any girls. This is partly a hangover from "local option" days. Groups that went coed became known among parents as the groups that would take girls and still have a higher proportion of girls because of that, even a decade on since everyone going coed. Hence other groups don't have as many girls an some have none. There are a few where, according to annecdote, girls are simply not made welcome so never hang around. Not acceptable. As per another thread groups have the option for running separate boy and girl t

Update: I turned down the day camp job unfortunately and will work for 2 weeks at a non-scout camp and make above minimum wage. I'll also find a part time job. Thanks everyone.

I know Councils do sponsor/charter Venture Crews, e.g. summer camp Crew 1. Maybe the same approach will be used with girl troops?

THAT IS 110% ACCURATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Starting a unit to last is extremely hard. And getting a troop Scout led is not only harder, but also more time consuming, 3-5 years IMHO. When I was a pro, I started 6 units. Within a year 3 folded due to lack of volunteers. As for Rogue Packs and Troops, some folks against girls joining will say it is because of these Rogue Packs and Troops that we are now in this situation.

And therein lies the problem. Few volunteers really have a depth of experience actually starting new units. I have done it and it is a long play. In a district of maybe 30 Cub packs and 30 Boy Scout troops you may actually start from scratch maybe 1 or 2 units per year. There will be rebuilding and reforming some existing units, but few from scratch. Now the onus will be to possibly startup 6 - 8 new units. Some districts will have resources and gumption to do that, most probably will not. Then there will be the hue can cry from girls wanting to join, but the troops will not allow a

Here's what I"m thinking -- we need to make strong girl Packs and Troops and help them get off the ground, so they can maintain their separation and independence from the Boy Packs and Troops. Does that make sense?

The problem I have is you are not respecting others opinions. You don't have to agree with them, but when you say "Instead of fearing that girls are going to ruining Boy Scouting, work with the girls to create really strong co-ed troops." you are assigning a motive of fear to people and telling people to align themselves to how you feel. As far a moving on go ahead. I am certainly unable to stop you from doing that.

Technically, in pioneering, the splices and mats (like the turkshead flattened out) fall under macramé. So we're already there. Hashtag parachord bracelet.

This is just a summary of how conservatives think the world is blowing up because the Boy Scouts are allowing girls to join. They were wrong about the world ending when women and blacks were given the right to vote. They were wrong about the world ending when gays could officially be married. They are wrong about this too.

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 Explor

I really think it's time to move on. The debate is really over - we can rehash it here, but the future of Scouting is co-ed. Yeah - maybe we weren't consulted - but it's done. The boys (and girls) will adjust just fine. The program will be just fine too. My recommendation is to move past rehashing this debate. Instead of fearing that girls are going to ruining Boy Scouting, work with the girls to create really strong co-ed troops.

Anyone who thinks boy’s act “freely” around other boys is delusional. Other boys influence boys actions. Not all boys are the same. Go Troop by Troop at a Summer Camp. I still remember the dirty Troop (they never showered), the “Ninja” Troop who would cause mischief, the military Troop who’s leaders felt BSA was pre Army... I can go on. Case by case you would see boys act within each of these Troops differently. They are influenced by the other boys and their leaders. I love my Troop and had a great time with fellow scouts. I would never claim my actions were not influenced by my

I don't think you are applying the correct analogy. This is more like a group of people begging and pleading to open their own franchise of Pizza Hut and finally being told that they can do so. You are not (insert disclaimer about "currently") being required to share your own franchise with these new owners. You are not being required to (currently) even service the same customers.

Isn't the BSA's core product a youth leadership and character-development program with an outdoor focus? Is that changing?

Not only that, but it immediately brings to mind "Scout Me Out" (which actually rhymes). This was not a well-thought out marketing slogan, but they probably spent millions on it.

I disagree - I'll support my scouts if this is what they want to do. They have been taught in school how to protest and they want to bring this issue to the public. We are a boy led troop so I am going to let them resist.

There is a beauty in the logic. If one is looking for the exit he can just say "Scout Me Out".

Since the majority of my Pack's committee is Den Leaders, the committee meetings would be pretty quiet if we weren't there.

On the other hand, one of our patrols has chosen to have a 6' closet rod staff as part of their "uniform". It is their walking stick, their stretcher rod, their patrol flag staff, etc. When they are walking on ice, they use it to test the ice and if they go through, the hook on the end can hook another and that gives a 12' reach for rescue. It can be used with a poncho for a shelter, pick up things they drop while wearing a heavy pack. I use it to measure the height and distance issues. Their neckerchief tied on makes a legitimate signal flag. On page 366 "Handbook for Boys", the 1976 re

Yea, as draconian as it may sound, we don't permit 'sticks' either. Its been my experience that when sticks appear, a spontaneous burst of a chapter in 'Lord of the Flies' breaks out. :-) I found it too hard to administer... sticks are allowed if you have xx feet clearance, point on the ground, etc... uggh. Just so much easier to say no. And yes, you can say 'no'. But I am the Scoutmaster. If you cannot get the other adults to agree, then you are probably out of luck.

In my experience, I've noticed that lads are more likely to "play" with makeshift hiking staffs found along the trail than with permanent hiking staffs. Finding a stick on the ground seems to energize a lad's imagination (the stick becomes a sword, a gun, a Bo, etc.) while a permanent hiking staff is most often given the status of "Tool" and is therefore treated with the respect one gives one's tools. Certainly, if the play fighting is getting out of hand, we adults need to step in. The trick is trying to determine when play has overstepped its bounds. Rather than keep butting heads

1.A scout safely off by himself, jousting at imaginary dragons, ninjas or whatever is not a problem to me. 2.A scout indiscriminately swinging a stick around while on a hiking trail is a big problem. 3.Two scouts doing this, play fighting, is a problem regardless of the circumstances. The latter two behaviours need to be corrected. The first, not in my mind, just a reminder to keep an eye out for others and make sure the scout is away from areas where others may pass. So I don't know if your over reacting or not. If the situation is more simlar to item 1 than items 2 & 3 maybe yo

This is one that's hard to answer without really knowing more details. You aren't the SM, and the other adult leaders don't see the same problem you do. The two extremes, then might be: 1. You are the one "kill-joy" leader who is always restricting and controlling the boys. 2. You are the one leader who is actually paying attention to safety. You have to make a judgment on where you fall in the spectrum between these two. The fact that other leaders don't see the same problem is something you should take into consideration in deciding if your position is the correct one.