Outside Magazine: Boy Scouts Should Allow Girls

[TAHAWK 1420]

One can link to and/or quote all the definitive language from Congress and the IRS that you wish (I did.).   Unread or simply dismissed out-of-hand, it does not overcome preconceptions. It's like "The Boy Scouts prohibit sheath knives."  Belief overcomes reality much of the time, and a sincere error is often more damaging than an outright lie due to the obvious sincerity of the believer.

[NJCubScouter 1389]

And I still worry about change for the sake of PC.

 

I don't think you have to worry, because if girls are allowed to become Cub Scouts and "Boy" Scouts (new name to be announced?) it will not be "for the sake of PC."  If it happens, it will be entirely because BSA National believes that it will result in a substantial increase in membership.  Or, if one is a cynic, one might say that it would be because of money (resulting from increased membership.) Either way, it is about numbers, with or without dollar signs in front of them.

 

There is some evidence that they are at least partially right.  Over the past few years there have been a number of posts in this forum about units (particularly packs but also a few troops) that seem to WANT to be coed, and they have taken steps toward this through workarounds such as registering the girls through LFL (which I don't think you're supposed to do) or using the "Frontier Girls" program or other organizations (for which the BSA receives no money.)  I am sure the BSA knows this is going on here and there, and would like to get these "unofficial" members into the system on a fee-paying basis and to count them in the official membership - along with all the other thousands of girls who (National thinks) will join once the units are officially open to them.

 

As you may be able to tell, I don't necessarily share the BSA's apparent optimism about the results of going "coed".  I think they are missing the fact that some number of boys would probably be taken out of the program by their parents, and some volunteers might be lost - even if there is a "local option."  And I still think the best thing would be for the GSUSA to prevail upon their local leaders to actually deliver the outdoor program that is already a part of the official GSUSA program.  But it sure does seem like girls are going to be admitted into the Cub Scout and Boy Scout programs in some way.

Edited June 19, 2017 by NJCubScouter

[Cambridgeskip 658]

I've been following this thread with interest. Thought it was time for a couple more observations....

 

Re the toilet and showers facility issue. If anyone is looking over at the UK and thinking "well the coped with it" don't forget that over here the Girl Guides have very few campsites compared to the scout association. This means from the earliest days scout campsites have been geared up for having girl guides camp there as well. So there was no "big bang" of having to cope with the change.

 

Lets say the change does happen... what happened here was we started with a local option and went all in 16 years later. What that meant was that the groups that chose to go coed typically developed the local reputation for being girl friendly. It's now over a decade since we went all in. And groups, such as mine, that went coed before that, still have a disproportionate number of girls. I honestly don't know how long that will take to shake of. So at the moment I am 40% girls compared to about 22% nationwide. Our neighbouring group has no girls at all.

 

ANyway carry on.... it's an interesting one to earwig in on.....

[Rick_in_CA 401]

... and some volunteers might be lost - even if there is a "local option."

This is my biggest worry with going coed. I know several scouters that said they would quit if the BSA went coed - not because they are so against having girls in scouts, but because of fear. As one said: "There is no way I'm taking girls camping in the woods, no matter the YPT rules. I won't take the risk. I've seen the damage unfounded accusations can make! If the BSA goes coed, I'm out!" (or words to that effect). Mix adult men and young girls and the paranoia flows. After all, all men are predators right? Look at how the GS/USA treat male volunteers (if they allow them at all). There is a lot of fear, whether that fear is reasonable or not.

 

And before you bring up that venturing is coed, I am still amazed at the number of scouters that have no idea there are girls in venturing, or even what venturing is.

[ianwilkins 366]

This is my biggest worry with going coed. I know several scouters that said they would quit if the BSA went coed - not because they are so against having girls in scouts, but because of fear.

 

That happened in the UK. Not every time, not everywhere, but leaders who were already fed up of HQ directives and rules, and permits, and restrictions, or were just thought that there should be a space just for boys on their own, or fear of being labelled a peado. It was a straw that broke a few backs. So the leaders resigned, and either the pack or troop shut, or new leaders were found. Statistically impossible to work out what percentage, as it happened over such a time frame before it was made mandatory.

[Gwaihir 198]

I walk away from both BSA and GSUSA and take my kids with me if Cub/Boy Scouts goes Co-ed.  It's that simple.  

[RememberSchiff 3662]

I walk away from both BSA and GSUSA and take my kids with me if Cub/Boy Scouts goes Co-ed.  It's that simple.  

 

I follow where my kids interests are. I was not keen about Venturing, but there I was. 

[Gwaihir 198]

I follow where my kids interests are. I was not keen about Venturing, but there I was. 

 

I have zero problem with Venturing.  I think it's good to have that option.  Force-feeding co-ed on non-co-ed programs, thus denying options and choice is a bridge too far for me. but to each their own.  

[RememberSchiff 3662]

I have zero problem with Venturing.  I think it's good to have that option.  Force-feeding co-ed on non-co-ed programs, thus denying options and choice is a bridge too far for me. but to each their own.  

You missed my point. What if your kids like the program and new members, you would force your kids to leave?

 

Often with parenting, seemingly simple black and white decisions are more complicated.

 

My son enjoyed Venturing, I endured it for him.

Edited June 22, 2017 by RememberSchiff

[Gwaihir 198]

You missed my point. What if your kids like the program and new members, you would force your kids to leave?

 

Often with parenting, seemingly simple black and white decisions are more complicated.

 

My son enjoyed Venturing, I endured it for him.

 

I didn't miss your point.  Yes I would.  My kids have plenty of interests, there isn't enough time in the year to do them all, out with one, in with another.  imo, Guiding our kids and raising them with a set of principles and doing what we believe is best for them (within reason) is part of our jobs as parents.  They'll still get instruction, they'll still get camping, they'll still get an upbringing centered around having good character, moral straightness, etc... they'll also have an example of standing up for your own set of principles. If at 18, they decided I was wrong, and they wants to get involved in the new scouting, more power to them.  I don't think it's unreasonable for parents to want to do what is best for their children, especially when it's at the younger ages. to each their own.  

[Back Pack 431]

You missed my point. What if your kids like the program and new members, you would force your kids to leave?

It's called standing up for principles you believe it. If you were against Venturing I doubt you'd tolerate it for your kid if it went agants your principles.

[qwazse 4342]

It's called standing up for principles you believe it. If you were against Venturing I doubt you'd tolerate it for your kid if it went agants your principles.

I guess there's no principle that I can think of that would oppose coed scouting ... except that it would alienate parents looking for that unisex experience.

 

Certainly when I started in Venturing, some scouters felt that I was abandoning them. I was able to dispel those sentiments by personal example.

 

It's much harder for an organization to shed that image of abandoning its base.

[ParkMan 1293]

Agreed.

 

I disagree with coed scouting, but if it comes to pass, I will give it a try.

 

As much as I like Scouting as it issue, it's far from perfect. I've stuck with it so far because of the bigger picture benefits. I don't see those going away because the boys would have to interact with girls.

Edited June 22, 2017 by ParkMan

[RememberSchiff 3662]

I didn't miss your point.  Yes I would.  My kids have plenty of interests, there isn't enough time in the year to do them all, out with one, in with another.  imo, Guiding our kids and raising them with a set of principles and doing what we believe is best for them (within reason) is part of our jobs as parents.  They'll still get instruction, they'll still get camping, they'll still get an upbringing centered around having good character, moral straightness, etc... they'll also have an example of standing up for your own set of principles. If at 18, they decided I was wrong, and they wants to get involved in the new scouting, more power to them.  I don't think it's unreasonable for parents to want to do what is best for their children, especially when it's at the younger ages. to each their own.  

 

"What is best for my child" is often confused with "What my child needs most". At 18, childhood ends with no redo. Are you prepared if your son says "I was in scouts and wanted to earn Eagle but my father..."

 

My $0.02

[ScouterNorth 16]

A few observations from a Canadian perspective...

 

Our Troop is roughly 1/3 girls, 2/3 boys.  

 

On camps, there is a strict policy of separation when it comes to sleeping arrangements and no mixed "but we're just hanging out" in tents.  When given free time they tend to self-segregate anyway.  The boys and girls are simply interested in different things.  Even with mixed patrols, given the chance they will naturally separate.  Of the four patrols, 3 are mixed and one is boys only.  It just ended up that way when they were picking and we have had girl only patrols in the past.

 

Some observations:

 

- single sex patrols bond better as they more readily agree on which activities to pursue

 

- the bathroom thing hasn't been a problem so far that I can see.  At camps that have bathrooms/outhouses they are either permanently marked or we decide that weekend which is which.  Single outhouses are mixed although if there is more than one we try to designate one for girls and one for boys. This is more to do with some boys needing better markmanship skills...

 

- at the closest big camp to us, other than separate flush toilets/showers for the adult staff there has been no specific construction of extra outhouses etc. to accommodate girls

 

- I have heard boys mention on many occasions that they wish they could have a single sex environment, especially at camp.  I haven't heard this from the girls, although there is the occasional eyeroll and "(sigh)....BOYS...."

 

- boys and girls ARE different and they enjoy different activities and/or different intensities of the same activity.  

 

- almost all the girls in our Troop have tried Girl Guides at some point and they universally agree that it "sucks".  It's too "girly girl" and "they never go camping".

 

So there is clearly a segment of girls who would rather do the Scouting as opposed to Guiding program, but I've found that in terms of programming they seem to do better when in single sex groups.