Just A Rebel

The big difference between this and the issue of gay kids in scouting is that gay kids don't have another option, while girls do. Exclude a gay kid and that's the end of the road for him in Scouting. Exclude girls and there's still the GSUSA. At a certain age there's also Venturing for girls.

 

Two' date=' I think that integrating Cub Scouts is more straightforward than Boy Scouts because of the family orientation. I think that a Tigress program would be nearly identical to the Tiger program, swap the Achievement/Elective for Go See It: Sporting with Elective: Performance and you pretty much have the Tigress program. Wolf/Bear are more complicated, I'd have the Wolfess/Bearess programs do more sewing, less whittling, and a few other things. One of the strengths of scouting is that it plays to gender stereotypes while society as a whole fights them.[/quote']

 

Because everyone knows, girls can't be interested in sports? Because we don't want to encourage them to do any "manly" things like whittling? Gender stereotypes are a GOOD thing???? One of BSA's strengths??? Really?

 

Since there are plenty of girls that want to do the current cub program, why would we have to change any of it (other than adjusting a few of the pronouns in the hand book)?

Exactly, Rick. They DON'T want to do things generally associated with a female gender stereotype to the exclusion of other things. They see the boys doing 'fun' things and want to do them too. And Alex, I hardly see continuing 1930's stereotypes as productive. I have to keep coming back to the mission and vision statement. In this modern day, don't we owe it to these girls to give them the exact same skills these boys have in order to be successful? And let's not forget that the VALUES are the real goal of Scouting, not that one can start a fire, or whittle a stick...but how to make life choices and life decisions in accordance with the Scout Oath and Law.

I think the biggest limitation would be confusion with GSUSA. That said, I think GSUSA would close up and die pretty fast of BSA went co-ed. The fact is, having dealt with both organizations, BSA is better run, more professional, and better organized. GSUSA survives mostly because BSA doesn't offer a program at the age that GSUSA really operates in.

 

However, beyond that, the goals of the organization are totally different. GSUSA is totally about girl empowerment. While they nominal accept male leaders, it isn't real, and absolutely pushed back. Looking at our local programing, other than a few hour Daisy-and-Daddy program over the summer, there really is nothing for men in the GSUSA program. While BSA-Cub Scouts is a completely family oriented programs. Siblings come to our camp outs, events, etc. On the flip side, Girl Scouts are simply not as family oriented. These things made historical sense, but at this point I think that there is demand for a BSA-quality program for girls that want family, community, and faith with some outdoors activities, and GSUSA is simply moving in the opposite direction.

The whole point of what I observed is that these girls didn't necessarily WANT a different program. They wanted to do what the boys were doing, and they were perfectly capable of doing that program. In my mind, no program changes are even necessary, because those girls WANT to do the same things the boys are doing. There is NOTHING gender-specific in the Cub program that boys and girls can't do, and looking at the Boy Scout program, nothing gender-specific there either.

I had heard that GSA had gone more 'liberal', and that AHG had started up as a reaction to that, but in my mind, I don't understand why BSA formed that partnership. National formed a partnership with an outside religious organization with very specific religious beliefs woven into their program and with no interest in BSA membership, but is very willing to use their program, and their facilities, recruiting girls that otherwise would be BSA members (if BSA allowed girls). This sounds to me like the conservative membership drove along that agreement, but I don't see any direct benefit for BSA in general from this partnership. In fact, they will likely LOSE female membership in the Venture program as these AHG girls stay in their program, instead of moving over to Venturing. Girls starting at age 6 are actually a key demographic segment for BSA, IF they allowed girls to join. Girls that join AHG more because of the program, rather than the religious aspect, are girls that should be in BSA.

My wife was talking to a Venture Crew advisor yesterday about girls in BSA, and she told my wife that all of the female Venturers she knew were there because of brothers in Boy Scouts, and because they wanted to do the same thing the boys were doing. Imagine the impact to the Venture program if we could GROW Venturers (or female Scouts), just like we grow Boy Scouts through the Cub Program.

King:

I am 100% with you on that. My mother, bless her, had the foresight to teach each of her sons how to clean, simple sewing, do laundry, cook amazing meals, and in general take care of themselves. I agree there should be a sewing requirement at some point before Star. Maybe not a MB, but at least a requirement for a couple of simple sewing tasks.

My wife was talking to a Venture Crew advisor yesterday about girls in BSA, and she told my wife that all of the female Venturers she knew were there because of brothers in Boy Scouts, and because they wanted to do the same thing the boys were doing. Imagine the impact to the Venture program if we could GROW Venturers (or female Scouts), just like we grow Boy Scouts through the Cub Program.

I think the biggest limitation would be confusion with GSUSA. That said, I think GSUSA would close up and die pretty fast of BSA went co-ed. The fact is, having dealt with both organizations, BSA is better run, more professional, and better organized. GSUSA survives mostly because BSA doesn't offer a program at the age that GSUSA really operates in.

 

However, beyond that, the goals of the organization are totally different. GSUSA is totally about girl empowerment. While they nominal accept male leaders, it isn't real, and absolutely pushed back. Looking at our local programing, other than a few hour Daisy-and-Daddy program over the summer, there really is nothing for men in the GSUSA program. While BSA-Cub Scouts is a completely family oriented programs. Siblings come to our camp outs, events, etc. On the flip side, Girl Scouts are simply not as family oriented. These things made historical sense, but at this point I think that there is demand for a BSA-quality program for girls that want family, community, and faith with some outdoors activities, and GSUSA is simply moving in the opposite direction.

You're right, CS is family-oriented, BS is not. So the solution is to NOT create a donut hole and just allow the natural progression from CS to Scouting, for both male and female.

Boy Scouts is not an outdoors program. It is a VALUES program, which is taught using the outdoors as a classroom. All of these skills are nice to learn, but the point is not to learn how to tie a square knot, the point is to learn how to live and breathe the Scout Oath and Law in everyday life. The Square knot is just a tool to learning those values. The Mission and Vision statement don't say anything at all about the outdoors, but they do talk about teaching young people to make ethical decisions across their lifetime.

And these Brownies on our camping trip certainly didn't complain that the restroom facilities were 100 yards away, and that they were sleeping in tents. they were LOVING it. Maybe the parents have more issues than the girls about such things.

As a father with one son and two younger daughters... There is a difference. If my wife has a meeting, I'll often have my younger girls with me. The boys still rough house, but it's different when the girls are there, even at this totally non sexual age. So in an ideal world, I'd say keep them separate.

 

That said, I am my Pack Committee Chair, with no real Pack Committee to speak of, and it's a ton of work. The fact that my wife is out right now at a meeting for the new GSUSA troop we're starting up for the girls is why I'd like to see it co-ed. The fact is, GSUSA is a totally different organization with a different agenda. I'd be thrilled if BSA would dump a pile of books/uniforms on us for Girl Cubs that channels girl interests (like cubs channels boy interests) into citizenship. We could see each other once/month at the Pack meeting, run separate Dens, and show off what we've done.

 

Instead, I have piles of paperwork for two organizations in my house, my wife and I both registered as leaders, and my figuring out how to handle campouts, because we can't double the number, and the GSUSA rules are atrocious.

 

Nor is my garage really big enough to double all our camping gear...

I think all you naysayers better look at some hard facts, the BSA being a "male" group which is not entirely true is NOT a valid argument to support your objections. Your idea of only male role models in scouts is an antiquated idea which is no longer valid in todays society, like it or not. The fact is most of you old time scouters are rapidly aging out of the program and the younger replacements coming on board are much more open to the idea of coed units. The other fact is that the BSA continues to lose members and community/corporate support at an ever increasing rate each year and if National has any idea of how to survive, which I seriously doubt they do, scouting will have to evolve and change to reflect the ideology and needs of the current and future crop of parents and society whether you agree or not otherwise scouting will wither away as an irrelevant and outdated organization. The future is here now, it is time to get on board or be left behind.

As I read the posts here, it seems to me one thing is missing. WHY would the BSA even want to consider this? Never mind the obstacles, boys will be boys, tears, sex, whatever. The purpose of Boy Scouting is to put boys in an outdoor environment and offer them fun activities that will lead to their becoming capable adults. Leadership, ability to care for yourself in the outdoors and elsewhere, patriotism and encourage (not teach) spirituality. How exactly would inclusion of girls promote any of these goals?

And inclusion of girls would allow them to gain those exact same skills, and would also help boys adapt to the modern world where they will have to cooperate, and compete, with members of the opposite sex, something that wasn't necessary 50 years ago.

Some of these comments are hilarious. I was a boy. I don't remember hurting for time "being a boy." I pretty much was one all the time. How does having girls present keep boys from being boys? If the boys aren't allowed to swear' date=' go skinny dipping in the pond, or talk about girls & sex with male leaders present, then how does adding girls change anything? The program has already neutered the boy-specific activities and boy-oriented nature of the scouts. It is essentially already primed for girl participation. As for the Cub Scouts, I have no idea why that is not co-ed now. Girls already come to everything, and cub scouts is run by women. What the heck are we resisting there? [/quote']

 

Cub Scouts run by women? Not in my former Pack. Most of the Den Leaders were men, as were all the Cubmasters/Assistan Cubmasters

Then you are very fortunate. I look around at Roundtable, and we are probably about 70% women. Women play a very active role in our area, and to be honest, step up and volunteer to do things more often than the men do at times.

I am an Assoc Advisor in all female crew. A few of the girls were in a co-ed crew and didn't like the fact that the boys always wanted to "help" them. They like that they can be be with a group of girls and do the things they've seen or heard their brothers do in Boy Scouts.

Boys behave differently in the presence of girls as a matter of fact. This is simply because girls are different, and even Cub Scouts realize it. They think different, act different, and learn different.

 

A method of Scouting is Uniforming. While any boy of any background can conform to the mores and norms of a group of boys, it is a rare girl that's able to do so.

 

While I agree it can still be fun with girls, and in often cases more fun with the girls present, something is lost in the learning and development sphere when the boys are behaving in a way that conforms to a standard of mixed gender learning instead of only having to conform to the standards of "boys being boys". The best example is the silencing factor girls have on most boys. Because they realize the thoughts of girls are different, there is less blurting out of boy thoughts. Those are often pretty profound in the sense that they show where a boy's understanding of the subject matter lies.

 

If it were that reason alone, I'd continue to wholeheartedly support gender segregation in Scouting.

And I'm not sure I agree with your 'blurting out of boy thoughts'. How is a boy's thoughts different from a girls? Each of us has a different point of view, each of us responds differently. And remembering back to my ancient childhood, I don't remember being silenced by girls. If I knew the answer, I did my best to show it. What you are promoting is a continuation of the 'good old boys club', and I really think our society has been down that road way too far, and for too long.

Some of these comments are hilarious.

 

I was a boy. I don't remember hurting for time "being a boy." I pretty much was one all the time. How does having girls present keep boys from being boys? If the boys aren't allowed to swear, go skinny dipping in the pond, or talk about girls & sex with male leaders present, then how does adding girls change anything? The program has already neutered the boy-specific activities and boy-oriented nature of the scouts. It is essentially already primed for girl participation.

 

As for the Cub Scouts, I have no idea why that is not co-ed now. Girls already come to everything, and cub scouts is run by women. What the heck are we resisting there?

Are we talking about all BSA programs being co-ed down to and including dens and patrols? Or are we talking about allowing female-only Cub Scout packs and female-only Boy Scout troops? You can open the very desirable Boy Scout program to girls without making all units co-ed.

Old controversy, but anyway.

 

Boys and girls learn differently, have different natural proclivities and strengths/weaknesses, are motivated by different methods, etc. Some girls would fit right into Boy Scouts, and some boys would fit right into a knitting circle, and somewhere there is a white crow.

 

I honestly don't see any problem with it. The USA is actually an outlyer organization (along with the God and Gays issue) compared to MOST other nations in the World Scouting Organization' date=' especially most of the European countries, to include the UK (Scoutings founding country).[/quote']

Scouting's founding country is the USA, where Ernest Thompson Seton and Daniel Carter Beard founded the Woodcraft Indians and Sons of Daniel Boone in order to channel the energies of restless urban boys with programs designed for boys to interest boys. Baden-Powell's military manual was interesting to boys because of its content, BP's Boy Scouts program only worked once he lifted Seton's method and merit system.

 

And that is why Boy Scouts is not for girls. It is designed for boys. The inclusion of girls requires changes to the program, which is all that Scouting is. In many of those European countries, and many others across the world, Scouting is not a private organization, it is an arm of government and as such it acts like one, including all comers and doing whatever needs to be done to the program to do so. Not so in America, and that is not bad.

 

Some local units here already admit girls into Cub and Boy scouts http://www.wgbhnews.org/post/cambridge-boy-scout-troop-bucks-national-trend-gay-participation

Some local units do all kinds of things, and some local units shouldn't be Boy Scouts if they don't want to do things as proscribed. Boy Scouts exists because all over the Western world at the turn of the century men took an interest in the plight of young boys who weren't even their own, and decided to invest in them uniquely. They came from every background, from rough frontiersmen to clergy to wealthy progressives to cult of body idealists, not because they were setting out to "discriminate" or segregate, but because they saw a need for a particular sympathetic creature, the boy, and picked him for the philanthropy.

I've been through the entire program, from Tiger on up, and there is NO gender-specific requirements anywhere. No program changes are needed, because girls would join because THEY WANT THE EXISTING program, not a duplicate of Girls Scouts. Girls can and will be able to do all of the requirements, to the best of their ability. 'Do Your Best'.

Some local units here already admit girls into Cub and Boy scouts

http://www.wgbhnews.org/post/cambridge-boy-scout-troop-bucks-national-trend-gay-participation

Wonderful discussion, everyone...And I never really had to truly activate the asbestos underwear...phew! I've been sitting back, just watching and listening, and there are many valid points. I'm going to start back at the beginning and start responding to some of these points, so you may have to wade back through some posts you have already read, totally your choice.But I am going to sum things up here.

Honestly, I hadn't even considered girls in Scouting until this campout where they were just as actively engaged as the boys were, doing the same activities as the boys and watching as we put on an amazing Arrow of Light and Crossover ceremony, and the same girls that were actively engaged in the activities were intensely interested in what was happening. There is an unmet need, and we have the ability to fill it for these girls. I now truly believe that the future of Scouting is coed at all levels, just like it is in so many other WOSM. I've been actively involved since my older son was a Bear, and my younger son was a Tiger, and they are Life and Star rank now. I've never seen anything in either the Cub or Boy Scout program that was gender-specific. There's nothing in the program that both boys and girls cannot do, equally as well as the other gender. Are program changes needed? Absolutely not, because the program as it exists today already would fill an unmet need in a girl's life, for those that WANT THIS PROGRAM. Its always, at all levels, 'Do Your Best'. Can a girl lead a flag ceremony? Can a girl hike and camp? Can a girl learn about knots, and fire-building, and everyday survival skills? Can a girl learn how to practice the Scout Oath and Law, every day, to the best of her ability? Can you imagine a world where more people lived the Oath and Law, and what that world would look like? I can.

Logistics changes on a unit level? Yeah, probably, would need female and male leaders in coed units...But that wheel has already been invented, it just needs to be brought down to a lower level and applied there.

If you look at the National, yes National Vision and Mission Statements, there is NOTHING about 'BOYS' in there.

Mission:

The mission of the Boy Scouts of America is to prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law.

Vision:

The Boy Scouts of America will prepare every eligible youth in America to become a responsible, participating citizen and leader who is guided by the Scout Oath and Law.

Its 'Young people' and 'youth', not 'Boys' and 'Young Men'. We are all passionate about this program, or we wouldn't be here. Why would we NOT want to give those girls that want what Scouting is about, the opportunity to find out for themselves the values of the Scout Oath and Law. So many units, especially Cub units, already allow siblings to participate in some activities. Why should we deny those siblings the opportunity to receive REAL RECOGNITION for what they accomplish alongside their brothers.

Was talking to a coed Venture Crew advisor tonight, and do you know where many of the girl Venturers come from? They are siblings to Boy Scouts, that want to do what their brothers do, but we won't let them until they are 14. How many of these would-be Venturers just give up before they even have a chance to get started?

And finally, Woodbadge preaches diversity, and yet, we are held back from applying the spirit of that diversity in a real and fundamental way. BSA is primed to make the move, everything is in place to allow coed units at all levels, all they, and we, need to do is take that scary step into the unknown to open up a world to these girls that they can only glimpse at, not really become part of.

/

So now that the one issue is apparently coming to a vote, let’s look at a new issue.

Let’s allow girls in all levels of Scouting, not just Venturing.

Stay with me, and you’ll see why I am even considering this.

A few weeks ago, my Cub Scout Pack, my Boy Scout Troop, and a local Girl Scout Troop did a joint Family campout. We had boys from Tiger through 15 years of age, and the Girl Scouts were Brownies (6-8 year olds I think). During this entire weekend, at least ½ of the girls wanted to do everything our Cub Scouts were doing, and having a blast at doing it. So I thinks ta myself, I said ‘Self, why are we waiting until these girls are 14 years old to allow them in the program. Is there really any valid reason, other than tradition?’. And I couldn’t come up with a good reason.

What I came up with was this list:

• Its BOY Scouts
  
  • Here’s the traditional position
    

  [*]Boys and girls mature at different rates

  • Happens in the schools like this already, but it doesn’t seem to be unmanageable
    

  [*]Boys need male role models

  • Yes they do, and we’re not talking about cutting out all of the males from the program. But there are things that can be learned from what some people would call a traditional female model, that would benefit boys also.
    
  • Girls need role models too, and need to see the masculine side of things. Can’t help but help them growing up knowing what male values they should value the most.
    

So I asked the parents in my unit if they could come up with any reasons, or if they would have any issues with allowing girls, and none of them had an issue.

Based on how the campout turned out, I started from the standpoint that there is an unmet need for girls that could be met by including them at all levels, not just at Venturing/Exploring age. Further evidence of this unmet need is the American Heritage Girls, which is growing their enrollment using a program that is somewhat based more on the Cub and Boy Scout model, and less on the Girl Scout program model.

• We already allow girls/sisters to participate in Cub Scout Family Camps, both at a unit, and at a Council level. They do the exact same program as their brothers. Same holds true for Council-led daycamps as well, where they allow family members to participate.
  
• Many non-USA WOSM entities allow girls to join at all levels of program.
  
• My local Council Cub Family Camp allowed AHG girls to directly participate, not just because they had brothers attending.
  
• We already have coed venturing YPT, so those guidelines already exist.
  
• Female leaders have been allowed for years.
  
• Capturing girls in the Cub Scout program starting at age 6, promoting them through Boy Scouts, would lead them naturally into the Venturing/Explorer program which ultimately increases membership for BSA at all levels of program.
  
• Updated or modernized Council camps already have shower and restroom facilities as a single, private room. Going or gone are the days of the ‘gang’ showers.
  
• Cub Scouts is gender-neutral. Boy Scouts could easily be referred to as ‘Scouts’, which they frequently are anyway, and under that concept, girls would simply be ‘Scouts’. BSA would still maintain all of its rights and charters.
  

So, to summarize, BSA already allows girls age 14 and above to join. Why don’t we capture girls at a younger age and ‘grow’ them into Venturers, like we grow boys from Cub Scouts into Boy Scouts, and then into Venturing.

Let the flames begin!