AltadenaCraig

... And could the GSUSA have promoted their Gold Award as effectively as they do their Thin Mints and Doe-si-Doe's to bring it on par with our Eagle (as it should be), and worked with the NYC chapter of NOW to retain their support of single-gender programs instead of badgering the BSA to open its ranks to both? Yes. They didn't. So here we are ...

No doubt there's truth in your argument, Jameson76, the BSA & GSUSA are each facing a Donner-Party crises (and we know what happened to them). Nevertheless, you can't deny the media drumbeats the BSA has heard from organizations such as NOW http://nownyc.org/press-releases/national-organization-women-calls-boy-scouts-america-end-discriminatory-policies-let-girls-join/ and from compelling individuals such as Sydney Ireland http://www.npr.org/2017/04/29/526021195/meet-the-teenage-girl-who-wants-to-be-a-boy-scout. MattR and mds3d, above, perfectly articulate the flaw with the GSUSA model relative to the outdoor program. Coupled with the GSUSA's inept marketing of their Gold Award (I have a Gold Award recipient daughter as well as an Eagle Scout son and I know she put every bit as much into her achievement as he did his), I'm surprised the clamor to join the rest of the First World in providing a co-ed program hasn't been louder. I would, however, like to see more media focus on the GSUSA and how they brought this on themselves. The BSA may be playing a numbers game, but between the media drumbeats on the one hand, and the GSUSA's indolence on the other, they would have rightly been accused of looking a gift-horse in the mouth had they not taken steps to go co-ed.

Would somebody please reference the BSA source material for "manly" or "turning boys into men"? I've read and re-read the "Aims and Methods of Scouting" and the word "man" doesn't appear and the only derivative that does is "humankind". Just as the Guide to Advancement delineates the requirement as written - no more and no less - as the standard by which a Scout's merit badge or an advancement is attained, I believe Scouters are bound to the Aims and Methods - no more and no less - as our purpose. We get ourselves into trouble when we invent our own aims & methods. We're much better off when we stick to the book.

Here's a link to a rather interesting article which "Kim" posted over on Scoutmastercg.com: http://www.scoutcollecting.co.uk/post-girls_in_scouting___when_did_it_all_begin.html This UK article is dated 2013 and chronicles Robert Baden Powell's early thoughts on girls in scouting. It features a 1908 letter (5 years before Girl Guides) from Baden Powell replying to a girl who wished to become a Scout: I am glad to hear you are taking up scouting. I think there can be girl scouts just as well as boy scouts, and hope you will form a patrol, and let us know as yours will be the first girl scout patrol. Most surprising (to me) is the picture from the 1909 "Scouting for Boys" which details uniform requirements ... for girls!

Jean Twenge is also quoted in this Time.com article from yesterday: http://time.com/4974863/kids-smartphones-depression/ Additionally the article highlights "the latest statistics on teen mental health": Between 2010 and 2016, the number of adolescents who experienced at least one major depressive episode leapt by 60%, according to a nationwide survey conducted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The 2016 survey of 17,000 kids found that about 13% of them had a major depressive episode, compared to 8% of the kids surveyed in 2010. Suicide deaths among people age 10 to 19 have also risen sharply, according to the latest data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ... All this followed a period during the late-1990s and early 2000s when rates of adolescent depression and suicide mostly held steady or declined. Elsewhere though, the article makes an observation which should be a caution to all of us (and work to avoid being "one more thing" in busy parents' lives): There are doubtless many factors contributing to teen depression. Parents say kids today are busier than ever before—their lives increasingly crammed with the extracurriculars required to gain admission to a good college.

It also gives the GSUSA some breathing space to make some decisions. The tone of the announcement suggests the BSA agrees there's value in preserving single-gender programs, which has been the GSUSA's primary objection to the BSA's forays. With this announcement the GSUSA should think seriously about the BSA's offer to partner. Their days are numbered.

I'm throwing-in my $.02 here as we just completed a planning exercise that appears to work for us. Up until a few years ago our annual planning was a marathon event held on our Scoutmaster's backyard deck. The Scoutmaster reigned over the process (as he kept the planning calendar in front of himself). Enthusiastic Scouts and their parents would arrive and begin the process in earnest planning for the following January. By mid-day they'd completed planning up to Spring but energy was flagging so pizzas were ordered. With goodwill still strong and after a second wind the session continued. We eventually managed to get through the Summer planning but by then energy was completely depleted and the Scouts were out horsing around and the thing devolved into chaos. The Scoutmaster wound up planning for Sep through Dec. And every year it was the same. When I took over as Scoutmaster I was determined to make the process more Scout-lead and less grueling. As our tradition is to elect SPL's twice per year - thus two PLC administrations for 6mos, each - my plan was to give each PLC administration an equal bite at the planning "apple" by splitting the annual planning into two sessions and each PLC administration gets to plan a six-month bloc. It has since proved to be not only more equitable, but also more manageable as the Scouts only have to focus on half a year at a time instead of a twelve month marathon. For the past few years now we've set each of the planning sessions on a weekend afternoon, inviting the PLC as well as the Staff (Quartermaster, Chaplain's Aide, etc.) as well as the Scoutmaster Corps and Troop Committee Chair. We start at 3:30pm and incorporate a Bar-b-Que. I purchase a desktop calendar from an office-supply store, as well as several bright post-it colors (representing Overnighters, Service Projects, Meetings, Hikes & Outings, & District Events) and Sharpies. The other adults and I sit back while the Scouts have at-it with the Sharpies and post-its. Along with the Bar-b-que it seems to have met my goal of being more Scout-lead and less grueling. Nevertheless I'm always looking for ways to improve and finding a way to reinforce the Patrol Method is now a key focus of mine. Consequently I'm intrigued by @Stosh/@Lurking's method, above, and I'm running it through my head to try it on and see what fits. Meantime, for those of you who are planning at the Troop-level, but are frustrated by marathon annual planning sessions you might consider aligning your planning horizon with your PLC administrations and break-up the marathon accordingly. YIS - - Craig

I tell our Scouts who play varsity sports "seasonal sports are sprints ... Scouting is a marathon." I'm happy for them to focus on their sports - even those with multiple sports - so long as Scouting gets them when they're off-season. Club or year-round sports are a challenge; but that can be surmounted as well with a little foresight.

Thanks, fellows. I suspect we're all in "violent agreement; nevertheless, your points are touching on a sore spot with me ... and one where admittedly I have a bit of an agenda. In my experience selling the "exciting adventures" risks inviting a parental "smorgasbord" mentality where they get the idea Scouting is just the pre-college equivalent of the student activities center. If the item on the calendar doesn't have the "spark" forget about participation. This leads to dysfunctions which inhibit the benefits of the Patrol Method. First, planning gravitates to adult "takeover" of the calendar, as the "exciting activities" demand more and complex executive and planning functions beyond the capabilities of Scouts. The "trickling stream" overnighter envisioned by Eagledad, absolutely required for scout-to-scout training of trail-to-first-class skills, gets crowded-out for more whitewater-rafting-like trips. Second, the "cardboard box" adventures never materialize. How many times have we given a child a gift, only to be amazed when the kid spends more time playing with the box it came in? Scouts can plan effectively and execute brilliantly at the "cardboard box" level, where the Patrol Method thrives. I agree, selling the Patrol Method is a heavy lift. Much heavier than Eagledad's "trickling stream" - which by his own admission requires some parental pondering. Nevertheless, I truly believe Twenge is onto something that can be addressed directly by the Patrol Method. I hope the BSA can find a marketing partner to touch on this subtle but critical point. Rant over, carry on.

qwaze: here's a more thorough excerpt from her book: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/09/has-the-smartphone-destroyed-a-generation/534198/ I share Eagledad's opinion that Scouting is an antidote to Twenge's thesis (and should be vigorously Marketed as such). However my prescription differs somewhat in that what's needed is a healthy dose of the Patrol Method. Agreed that the Patrol Method should occur primarily outdoors - though occasionally indoors for some Service Projects - but my point is that Twenge's argument is that peer-to-peer interactive social skills are at extreme risk. Plucking boys out of their computer-coma's and plopping them in the Outdoors is definitely a step in the right direction; however the cure (in my mind) is the interaction demanded by the Patrol Method.

We've got a fellow in our Lodge that really does a good job of helping our Arrowmen clean-up their ceremonies ensemble. I had no idea of the history behind the attire - and this guy's a natural storyteller, so it really interests the scouts (and keeps the cringe-worthy items (plastic tomahawks, etc.) away from our efforts. He uses "Warriors of the Plains - Native American Regalia & Crafts" as a guide (found at Crazy Crow trading post - I have no financial interest so this is a genuine reference). It contains several clever and effective items of regalia and crafts - ranging from simple to complex, that are inexpensive but respectful. Bingo. Nothing intentionally disrespectful - I certainly wouldn't know - but thankfully our guy, like you, is on the case. As you say, the key is to "help them learn".

Utterly silly; so stipulated. Now that we're agreed, will the "new program for coeds" you advocate award "Eagle Scout" to girls? If not, then this entire discussion isn't so silly.

I don't see any reference to the Chartered Organization Representative in this discussion. It might be easier and more productive to help guide and train your COR. Here's a link to the COR guidebook (it's rather short and easy reading): http://scoutingwire.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Chartered-Organization-Representative-Guidebook.pdf To be sure, working with your COR to attract and train your leaders is right in line with the COR's responsibility. Moreover, developing a good relationship with the COR will undoubtedly give you leverage with the Scoutmaster. Together, you and the COR can work with the SM to either get him on-board or work out a transition come next re-chartering time. Bottom line: it's the COR's responsibility to: approve all adult leaders and committee members, or he or she may delegate this task. This approval occurs once at the time of initial recruitment; again each year at the time of charter renewal; and whenever adult leaders change registered positions, such as from committee member to den leader (p.6) Together, you, the SM, and the COR form the "Key 3" of the unit's leadership. If you and the COR are aligned on goals and objectives, you'll have a much easier time getting the SM to come along. Let the COR know your feelings and intentions should things remain unchanged. If your COR has any intention of promoting a sustainable program, he/she will get the hint. Good luck! - - Craig

THIS. I believe the problem lies in BSA's loss of focus on its primary mission: Character development through application of the Patrol Method. Outdoors, primarily, but also via service to others (which may or may not be outdoors). But ALWAYS character development through the Patrol Method. I'm certainly proud of my Eagle Scout son's accomplishment, but I'm also proud of his former Patrol-mate and fellow Philmont trek-mate, who never made it past 1st Class, but who wore his uniform - by then 2 sizes too a small - proudly to my son's Eagle ceremony. I don't see how a separate all-girl Patrol, doing their own thing, would have diminished this. On the other hand, I don't see how "Family Scouting" supports Character Development. And it most certainly would subvert the Patrol Method. To be sure, "Family Scouting" scares the daylights out of me.

Outstanding thread. I'm really looking forward to everyone's thoughts as well as contributing my own $.02 worth. Unfortunately I'm on the West Coast, where it's a little before 9am, and for some reason my client expects me to WORK rather than do Scouting ... ya just can't satisfy some people. (Meantime I'll keep a screen open and lurk...)

I was enjoying this thread and the variety of opinions right up to the snide swipes. Nothing to learn from that.

According to Wikipedia: "In the 1920s [Joseph P. Kennedy, Sr.] made huge profits from reorganizing and refinancing several Hollywood studios". In 1929, by then presumably a titan, his son joined and would go on to become our first President who was a Boy Scout: https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2013/11/22/remembering-john-f-kennedy-the-first-president-to-have-been-a-boy-scout/

Valid points, Col. Stunning, in fact. Somehow I had the impression that Mr. Stephenson had announced things were on the upswing. Alas, after a cursory Google search ["Boy Scouts", membership, Stephenson] I found several reports and presentations for the past year, but none championing a rebound of membership or funding. Unless I missed something, I have to accept your assertion. I don't suppose you'd concede more time is needed to allow corporate stewardship to fully re-engage?

Perhaps it's neither about empowering girls nor about increasing membership; perhaps it's simply about money. Does the BSA foresee additional coffers becoming available as it embraces inclusiveness?

That road leads to anything being possible (awarding Eagle to someone over 18yrs old, etc.). Girls (or their advocates) aren't going to stop until they can be officially recognized as Eagle Scouts (on college applications, for example). Consequently I don't see Venturing as the solution to any of this. An aside: While I'm not surprised that this issue is getting a lot of attention, I have to admit I never saw the BSA's "making scouting accessible" rationale coming. On one had I'm impressed (BSA agreeing to the girl advocate's objectives not only without having to accede to their overall point, but instead appear to be championing "family values"), on the other hand wrapping a legitimate and critical issue as "we're doing it for families!" appears cynical and hiding from the real discussion. C'mon, Dallas, a Scout is Brave.

"Co-ed" doesn't ruffle my feathers, as long as they have their own Troop - or at least their own Patrol(s). I don't see how any of the aims or methods of Scouting are threatened. "Family Scouting", on the other hand, really gets me irritated. That's a direct assault on the Patrol Method and, as HashTagScouts points out, above, subverts Leadership Development.

I follow a couple of other forums, both powered by another provider [simple machines forum - SMF]. The SMF follows the 'facebook' protocol: - "Thumbs up" (Like) is the only voting option (no thumbs-down option and no "arrows" of any color) - Similar to this forum, each post provides a "Report to Moderator" link (similar to our "Report"). I like the "Report to Moderator" terminology as it's a little clearer to me. Perhaps I've become brainwashed by facebook and SMF, but as was pointed out by MattR yesterday, facebook (& SMF) allow only "thumbs-up" for good reason. FWIW, that's my preference, too: replace the arrows with a "thumbs-up" option and rename "report" as "report to moderator". My $.02 - - Craig

Thanks for the clarification, Sentinel. Since you have kindly opened the door, I'll add that on most boards I have used I've never been limited to the number of "up-votes" or "likes" I could assign. I was certainly surprised when I slammed into an apparent daily limit on my upvotes. I'll risk going too far when i say that I bristle at such restrictions - it smacks of the kind of paternalism that makes me feel like some kind of lesser minion that needs to be micro-managed by a big-brother system. Free the restriction! ... Free Tibet! ... Free Willy! Rant over. Carry on.

Hi, Col.: you're quite right that I forced an answer with the way I structured the question. However, I wasn't getting at "whether" to incorporate girls into the BSA, but rather "how". I'm assuming that decision is a fait accompli, as girls like Sydney - and their supporters - won't rest until girls are able to wear an Eagle Scout badge. My expectation is that Dallas sees only upside as current registration numbers suggest the exodus predicted during the earlier contretemps hasn't materialized. I'm pleased that sst3rd and you have taken the time to reply to my comment - and I respect and admire how those with long scouting coattails have carried the water for all of us through recent dark days - but unless the GSUSA immediately steps-up their program to promote high-adventure and their marketing to bring the Gold Award on more or less equal footing with Eagle Scout, I think we all will be better-off discussing "how" rather than "whether". In addition to the method behind my madness, I'll offer that the Scouts in my troop aren't wallflowers - and I was certainly surprised that they didn't push-back on the way I structured the question - but none of them even hinted at "no girls". Additionally I fully expected that any scouts who appeared resigned to the issue would then promote the Separate Charter option. Again, however, the scouts in my troop appeared to look forward to showing the girls "how Scouting is done" - and they didn't feel they could do that unless they were part of our troop. They stopped short, though, of including them in their patrol. BTW, your Venturing option is intriguing; however, my admittedly slight understanding of Venturing tells me Eagle Scout can't be earned without having sometime been a Boy Scout - - Craig

I just returned from a week of backpacking in the Sierras which included several younger (~13-yr-old) scouts. During a layover day we discussed the issue and I posited three "models" of co-ed Scouting: 1) girls sprinkled in all patrols throughout the Troop, call that "full integration"; 2) girls in the Troop but contained in their own patrol(s), call that "girl patrol"; and 3) girls in their own troop, call that "separate charter". I'm curious, sst3rd, if either the "girl patrol" or "separate charter" options would fly with you or the volunteers in your area (as I assume "full integration" would be DOA in your world). FWIW I was surprised my Scouts were strongly supportive of option #2, girl patrols.