Hawkwin

Wow, Girl Scouts are losing their heads over this:

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/girl-scouts-slam-boy-scouts-decision-accept-girls-134608349--abc-news-topstories.html

"The Boy Scouts' house is on fire," Girl Scouts told ABC News in a statement today. "Instead of addressing systemic issues of continuing sexual assault, financial mismanagement and deficient programming, BSA's senior management wants to add an accelerant to the house fire by recruiting girls."

@Tampa Turtle Regarding how they announced this, I am not sure how they could have done it much differently. There is virtually no way they could have shared this news with scouts prior without it having been leaked to the media.

Any pre-announcement made to anyone other than everyone at the same time would have resulted in BSA losing the narrative. Someone else, perhaps someone opposed to the change, would have been the first to scoop the story and BSA would have lost whatever advantage they have in controlling the message.

Thank you @blw2

Please pin this, thanks!

Excerpt from an email from our DC:

On a personal note, I believe this is a change that was long overdue. The scouting program provides such an excellent opportunity to help our youth develop their Duty to God and Country, Duty to Self, and Duty to Others. While I respect the many programs that are available to girls, I am very excited to see the BSA extend these programs. I cannot wait to see the first female eagle scout in Hou Koda!!!

 

Committee decided tonight that we will not be doing a spring “flea marketâ€. Instead, something easier.

 

I’m looking for some ideas, my troop has a holiday bazaar, clothing drives, and a breakfast yearly.

I see that you are in NJ, what city? If rural, what is your nearest large city?

I live in a suburb of a large metro area and we often work various sporting events. We sell merchandise, concessions and provide clean up. We make all of our money that way. Any popcorn the scouts sell goes 100% to their scout account.

We typically do 3 major events a year. Perhaps there is an opportunity for your troop to do something similar?

 

I got the survey, but in my thinking it was a formality with the writing already drying on the wall....

 

but extending this idea....that folks weren't given a chance to voice in....

 

the announcement from our council's executive just hitting my in-box a few minutes ago...

 

His opening paragraph (bolding is mine)

On Wednesday, October 11, 2017 the National Executive Board of the Boy Scouts of America voted to expand Scouting Programs to allow Girls. The North Florida Council Executive Board, Staff and National Council Representatives were given no advance notice that this would be an agenda item for resolution at the National Executive Board meeting. In fact, I learned of the outcome of the decision just as everyone else did via news sources outside of the BSA.

.......

 

What is the rest of the announcement?!?

I've seen at least one, Middle Tennessee (on Facebook) that stated that they will not help in this change but will not oppose COs and their own decisions.

About the only slight negative I can think of is that we used to have Scouts sleep in one tent with the rest of their Patrol and with the PL in charge of the tent and looking after all their Patrol. Now we often have an extra tent or tents for girls which means the PL is not in the same tent as all of their Patrol.

 

This is really not a massive problem though and has not caused us any great issues but it does slightly reduce the role of a PL. If we really wanted to we could just have girls and boys share tents so long as they and their parents were all happy with this arrangement.

So does that mean you used to use some very large tents? 8-12 person tents? It is not uncommon for our Patrols to have double digit members so to sleep in the same tent would require a large tent - and one that would be rather difficult for new scouters to set up without adult or older scout assistance.

Our patrols today sleep in two-scout tents so in that respect, it would not be a change for us.

Unfortunately, "showrooms" might be the correct term here. There's a growing problem at my council camp with boys pulling open shower curtains and taking pictures. Unfortunately the perpetrators are seldom apprehended or punished.

 

Fortunately, recent membership policy changes will diminish this type of behavior, right?

Wow. That is like the exact example given in YPT - and the adult leaders have done nothing?!?

They are #$ lucky it was not my kid that was sexually assaulted in such a manner.

 

First - there were internal surveys done.  If they were overwhelmingly against, this decision might have been different - if they were anywhere in the 50/50 to 60/40 range, it probably wouldn't have changed anything.

 

The BSA is a business - it may be non-profit - but it is a business.  National's interest is NOT the same as individual unit's interests - it hasn't been for decades.  Its biggest motivator is membership - that's why you see so many statistics about membership numbers.  Without members, the organization will sputter out and eventually die.  Any organization that does not change eventually suffers from entropy and withers away.  I've been repeating this every since I've been here - like all businesses, the BSA has to adapt in order to remain relevant - not to its current customers but to attract new customers.  What is happening here is very much like what happens with commercial businesses all the time.  Think of it like this - you have a favorite restaurant and you have a favorite menu item.  The restaurant never changes its menu and over time, fewer and fewer people go to the restaurant - so the restaurant changes a bunch of menu items - keeping some of the old menu items but eliminating a bunch of others.  Let's say they eliminate your favorite menu item so you decide to stop going.  You're now thinking that the restaurant is kind of stupid because they're now losing customers except the restaurant, though wishing you would stay, is also betting that for every customer that leaves because of the menu changes, they gain 2 or 3 or more new customers who like the new menu. Ummm, ask Applebee's how that worked for them. Ask Olive Garden how that worked for them. Some of the most successful restaurants (traffic and margin) operate on an unchanging and limited menu model. Tell them they need to change to keep up with the times. They'll laugh in your face.

 

The BSA is betting that they'll gain more members than they lose.  Is that a wise bet?  Only time will tell - but the BSA has to try something - the current configuration isn't sustainable in the long term for the changes that society is going through. But successful businesses also make sure to move in ways that minimizes customer defection. Business 101. Cheaper to retain than acquire. Instead of building on it's core strengths, BSA has decided to actively alienate a sizable portion of the existing customer base by chasing an undetermined population size with existing competition in that space. People get fired for less.

 

Hehe. You might want to revisit your impression of Applebees and Olive Garden.

http://www.nrn.com/sales-trends/5-chains-facing-tough-year-2017

Imagine this: You operate a bar and grill chain, and in a bid to generate customers, you convince franchisees to spend big dollars on a strategy to improve quality — and that effort fails.

This is what happened at Applebee’s, which launched an impressive strategy, with wood-fired grills and hand-cut steaks. But customers didn’t show up. Same-store sales

fell 5.2 percent in the third quarter, with traffic faring much worse.

-------------

Inside Olive Garden's incredible comeback [Olive Garden almost went bankrupt few years ago]

http://www.foodbusinessnews.net/articles/news_home/Financial-Performance/2016/04/Inside_Olive_Gardens_incredibl.aspx?ID=%7B632597FD-229F-44F5-B23C-82F1F9505381%7D

Key drivers of this performance include an improved guest experience delivered through proper staffing and the simplification of processes and procedures, culinary innovation that builds on the brand equities and flavor profiles that our loyal guests enjoy most, as seen with our successful flavor-filled pastas and create-your-own Tour of Italy promotions, and continuing to meet our guest needs for convenience with the national launch of large party catering delivery.

[in other words, Olive Garden realized that it had to CHANGE to meet the ever evolving consumer dynamics.]

More:

“At the end of the day, what we’re doing in LongHorn today is we’re removing some consumers, some guests from the guest base that we are confident that we weren’t making any money on,†Mr. Lee said. “And they were a consumer that was buying a low-end steak, coming in with a $5 coupon, and that was all happening while we had a 45-minute wait outside the restaurant, people waiting to get in to pay full price for more of a higher-end experience in casual dining steak. So, we’re transitioning the positioning slightly, and we believe this is the right place to be.â€

[So Olive Garden was willing to lose some existing customers in order to be more profitable. Do we sense a trend here?!?]

--------------

No one knows what impact this will have on membership, either for existing members that leave or new members that are recruited. No survey can really tell you that in advance. But, just like Olive Garden, BSA seems to be willing to make a change that might result in the lose of some customers in order to make the business more profitable.

While your statement is true, there will also be changes to the program outside of individual unit membership. Ignore that at your peril. Fundamental changes to an effective program rarely result in any degree of success. THAT is what I believe many are afraid of. And rightly so.

What changes to the program do you envision that will be so terrible? The first question I asked of the UK scouters is what they changed about the program when they allowed girls. Their response was "nothing."

Regardless, BSA is CONSTANTLY making changes to the program. Merit badges are retired, new ones are created. Number of campout nights are changed, etc. etc.

Just what do you think will change with the inclusion of girls? Please be specific.

OK UK folks, play devil's advocate for me. If you had to argue against co-ed scouting, what would be your primary argument? I am in favor of the change but would very much like to hear from those that have been through this, what is your biggest gripe?

 

 

Again, what girl wants to tell her friends she's a BOY Scout??  

Quite a few I would imagine.

I was in a co-ed fraternity in college that was 70% female. We referred to each other as "Brother [last name]."

My Girl Scout daughter has NO problem with it being called boy scouts. That is a problem parents and society would try teach her. She isn't born with such an objection and doesn't have it now.

Girls of cub scout age won't care and obviously any girl that wants to join "boy" scouts has already accept the title of the organization.

Edited by RememberSchiff, Today, 10:43 AM.

typo. Second sentence, replace all with allow

LOL! Thanks!    

Why is exclusivity so hated now?  Mentorship and education for boys from men is a good thing, not a bad thing.  I would never want to force boys into Girl Scouts, that's their thing and should stay that way.  This move goes against everything that the group was established for in the first place.  I have no problem with a coed group that teaches both boys and girls the same thing as Boy Scouts, if parents want to put their children in it, that's fine.  But don't force it upon a group that doesn't want it.  Someone earlier said that this won't "ruin" Boy Scouts.  I disagree.  It completely changes it and makes it something completely different.  It fundamentally is no longer BOY Scouts.

Again, no one is forcing your unit to accept girls. In fact, it is entirely possible that not a single existing unit would change. This change, much to your point, simply allows girls to experience a group that, "teaches both boys and girls the same thing as Boy Scouts."

No one is forcing it upon a group that doesn't want it. It is still BOY Scouts if your CO wants it to be.

This is an OPTIONAL change. Not mandatory.

I am sure one of the first questions that comes up, what changed when you added girls? Did any of the standards get eased? Are there now more girl-focused (or girl stereotyped) merit badges or activities?

What challenged did you face on recruit more moms to participate?

What impact did this have on Girl Scouts?

First I apologize for any bitchy un-scout like comments yesterday. I care a lot about this stuff and I found Nationals timing off. 

 

An issue with me, and it is a big issue, is how National rolled this out. Obviously they were going to do this...how many females suddenly started appearing in pictures of the scouting magazines, the meetings at Council were really about 'exploring an option' but seemed like a one-sided sell job. Why did they not take the time to include a FAQ of the issues confronted at the local level. We are the front lines and at my Troop things started LAST NIGHT. (One mom wanting to know if her 15 year old daughter in Venturing can join the Troop in January, our Scout Master and one of a neighboring Troop {and guys who have commanded and experienced integrating females into military and LEO units} stating they will not continue next year, several parents emailing they may quit including a Life Scout's, and both our Committee Chair and Life to Eagle Coach saying they will leave. And we are pretty mixed unit politically and socially. It was a rough night and we still have not heard from the boys. I do know my two Eagle boys have recently aged out said they now will not continue their plans as young ASM's and they love Scouting.)

 

 

This is the part of the angst that I just don't understand. If your CO doesn't want to change, if your CO doesn't want to allow girls, or gays, or trans, then don't allow them.

No one is forcing your troop to change or to admit new members.

I support this change but I also VERY STRONGLY support the freedom of COs to not change if they don't want to. If that mom wants her girl to be a boy scout and your CO says no, then it is on that mom and other like-minded parents to find a CO that will say yes. That might mean that they need to create their own. I am OK with that.

And, I would hope you and yours are OK with that as well.

Great idea in theory but how would you handle leadership? Would each troop have their own individual required leaders or would there be a single leader? With such small troops, you might consider each troop operating as their own patrol of the larger troop.

The Patrols could be named "123" or whatever is their original Troop number and the Master Troop could be the sum or some other multiple of those numbers.

Perhaps legacy patrols named after the original troops so that the history can be maintained but I think the Master Troop (as I am calling it) would have a very hard time splitting into three in the future. For example, which Patrol troop would the new recruits join? Who would decide that, the Patrol/Troops, the applicant? If everything is the same and with such small troops, one "Patrol" could quickly dominate and take over the other two based on unequal recruitment. The other patrols would effectively lose whatever they had that once made them unique. As a new applicant, why would I want to join the patrol/troop that has 5 scouts when I could join one that has 8? Assuming I have friends in both, I would likely join the one with 8.

Again, I think this is a great idea in theory and one that could help save the troops - but not an idea that will ever likely allow them to be divided again in the future.

And, in the future with a completely different set of scouts, they may not want to divide again. Boy-led and all that.

Again, I ask who is the "WE" and how are the "WE" going to bring in new members and match or increase the losses that this decision is going to generate.  I wonder if the latest fee increase is geared to have the current BSA members "ME" pay for getting this program started or is it because previous poor decisions have drove membership down so much that they can't pay for the current program? 

What is your confusion? The we are those of us that asked for this change. If you are asking me to list every single person in the country that wanted this change, then I can't help you. Per the news release, and assuming you believe it, polling indicated that many people wanted this change. I am calling on those people that wanted this to step up to the plate and own it. "We" asked for it now we should not simply sit back and put it on the shoulders of the current leaders. We should do our part to make it work by helping to recruit new volunteers.

If anything, I would think those that DON'T support this change would appreciate the fact that I am taking the initiative to make this ask of the supporters.

The fee increase was to rebuild the litigation fund. BSA has been sued for millions annually and the membership fee increase will be totally used to help rebuild that fund. I have no insight and it would be of no benefit for me to speculate on the reason for those various law suits.

There is a point when this culture of total inclusiveness becomes a conduit for outright bigotry. We are there.

What is bigoted about this decision? Your CO has the complete freedom to remain boy-only. What difference does it make to you if a girl 1000 miles away earns her Eagle but your scouts never see a girl in their troop?

Hawkwin, who is "We" that asked for this?  Me personally, I am already swamped doing my volunteer work as a Scoutmaster, Merit Badge Counselor and Unit Commissioner, I don't have any more time to spend away from my family to recruit for a decision I don't support.  Our District is already shutting down and merging Venture Crews because of lack of membership and adult volunteers.  This decision is going to further drive people away from the program. 

I would think the "we" is rather obvious - those of us that asked for this change.

Since you did not support or ask for this change, I am not asking anything more from you.

Simple enough, right?

Edit: And as far as driving people away - it certainly might and probably will drive some away, just like integration drove some away and the inclusion of gay scouts drove some away. Doing the right thing isn't always immediately popular. It also might drive more to join. It will certainly be a +1 situation in my household. My 9 year daughter was ecstatic to learn of this change. I've already heard from another scout parent in our Troop who also has a 9 year old daughter that is very excited about this change - and both of our daughters are currently Girl Scouts.

We have had girls in our dens for a couple of years now, the only change for us will be we now turn an application in to council.  We have had zero problems with "coed" dens.  There are many units nationwide for a number of years that have either been part of the some pilot program or just doing it in full sight of their prospective councils and national.

 

National nor council tracks anything related to dens or patrols for that matter.

Hey Snow, it would likely be a huge benefit to all of us if you could make a few posts on how your local org has been doing this for years. Some of the pros and cons, anything you do differently, pitfalls, successes, etc.

Those of us that really want to make this work could immensely benefit from your shared experience.

Very excited about this news and also very excited to have both a son and a daughter than will be able to earn the right to wear the Eagle.