Girls in Cub Scouts - Actions taken to date

[Eagle94-A1 2687]

If you run co-ed dens and the program specifies separate dens, then you're not running a BSA Cub Scout program. That's in addition to not being trustworthy or obedient.

 

Some may consider that harsh, but if you're going to skirt around a rule, it leads people to ask what else are you not doing correctly? YPT? Advancement?

 

This topic came up at my town hall as I was the one who brought it up. I was told by several units who are struggling to get Adult volunteers that the proposed method is NOT feasible and they will fully integrate. Everyone for girls in BSA agreed this will happen with smaller units, and the council key 3' body language express a 'yeah we know this will happen" outlook.

 

The Pros know and don't care.

[numbersnerd 138]

What a load of garbage. Look, in our pack we had a year where we had only one wolf. So his spent most of his time with the bear den so he wouldn't be lonely, but did the wolf requirements (technically he was in a den of one, with his dad as the wolf den leader, and he did do some of the activities on his own). So, were we not being trustworthy or obedient? Of course not, we were dealing with the issue the best we could. And it worked out, he and the bears had lots of fun. The next year we had three new bears, so he was with them in their own den (again with his father as den leader).

 

I don't think anyone would condemn having the lone wolf attend bear den meetings, but if it's a girl? Suddenly we are morally bankrupt?

 

There are lots of legitimate concerns with going coed, but throwing moral aspersions like this is not helpful, nor scout like.

 

Evidently Courteous is edging closer to the discard pile as well.

 

So let me get this right, someone intimates that on paper they will  be compliant but not in practice. So in pointing out the disconnect *I'm* un-Scoutlike? That's rich. I would think it it is helpful to point out the incongruity between the obligation and the action.

 

It's not a new concept that if you don't adhere to the BSA program, you're not really running a BSA program. If it's inconvenient or unpalatable to actually do that and you're called on it, don't get angry with others, look in the mirror.

Again, what else is not "worth it" to do it the way it is designed? YPT? Safe Swim Defense? Properly trained range masters? BALOO trained leaders at camp outs?

 

This all reminds me of the old adage, "The guilty dog barks loudest"

[Cubmaster Pete 71]

Evidently Courteous is edging closer to the discard pile as well.

The thread was about what actions have been taken to date, so let's all move on.....

 

My parents have all known for the last year this may happen. I have been very honest with them. They are not fazed or running off, at least not yet. We have set no meetings about it, and it's business as usual.

 

This month we will have a q and a about it, and I have discussed this with the troop we feed into. CC and we agreed that we need to meet with our CO. We don't expect much dissent from them.

Edited October 15, 2017 by RememberSchiff
typo

[RememberSchiff 3655]

The thread was about what actions have been taken to date, so let's all move on.....

 

My parents have all known for the last year this may happen. I have been very honest with them. They are not fazed or running off, at least not yet. We have set no meetings about it, and it's business as usual.

 

This month we will have a q and a about it, and I have discussed this with the troop we feed into. CC and we agreed that we need to meet with our CO. We don't expect much dissent from them.

 

Does your CO host a Girl Scout unit?

[qwazse 4342]

.... 7, 8, 9, 10. Log out of my eye. ... Let's have a go at that splinter.

...

*I'm* un-Scoutlike? That's rich. I would think it it is helpful to point out the incongruity between the obligation and the action.

 ... Again, what else is not "worth it" to do it the way it is designed? YPT? Safe Swim Defense? Properly trained range masters? BALOO trained leaders at camp outs? ...

This all reminds me of the old adage, "The guilty dog barks loudest"

Blind accusations of negligence for the sake of an argument will garner comments like "load of garbage". That doesn't make @@Rick_in_CA rude, that just means he's not British (who favor "rubbish"). I'm sure both RCA and NN are precious, and scout-like most days. So, assuming that they both are today, let me offer a civil retort to the question twice asked:

It is perfectly reasonable to assume that most folks who would open the door wide for young ladies are as diligent with YPT, Safe Swim, Shooting Sports, BALOO, etc ... as those who would shield our boys from the depredations of said young ladies.

 

Regarding adages, the three dogs we've owned, when guilty do not bark. The one who stole my sandwich from the counter (big dogs) will make the worst attemp at a poker face. The first one was, acquired as a stray, was best at it. The others ... never as quiet as when they had something to hide. What that may have to do with incorporating girls into packs, I have no idea. Just putting it out there.

[swilliams 157]

This next year will be an interesting one for us, not only because of (potentially) having girls join.  I say potentially because we have not yet had anyone approach us.  What has happened in the last two years was that the two other packs in town have seen their numbers diminish to the point that both packs have been folded into ours.  Just last week, one of the pack masters who had lost boys, but still had their charter, posted that they were hosting an open house to try and recruit and get their pack functioning again.  Talk about being spread thin!

 

Our former pack was based in Manhattan near Columbia College.  It was tiny, and was pretty effectively run by only two people.  They were the pack master, and the assistant pack master.  The assistant pack master had a son who would sometimes come in and help with meetings.  While, of course, this is far from the ideal, it worked.  Rather than have pack meetings and den meetings, they held a general meeting every Tuesday.  They would start off with an activity - usually a game of some sort in the gym.  (Meetings were held in a church basement.)  Then we'd have "den" meetings, which consisted of sitting the various dens at folding tables to work on a requirement.  One adult took two tables, and they relied on a parent to fill in (usually my husband or I).  In the three years we were there, we only had a single official den leader.  Because of the small number of boys, it was actually possible to direct two groups of boys at a time.  The pack master did her best to have the dens work on requirements where, if one needed more hands-on, the other could work more independently.

 

We were a pretty rag-tag bunch.  Many boys either didn't own, or didn't wear the uniform (despite trying to pass down uniforms).  They didn't have, or didn't bring their books.  They mostly managed to show up on time.  We did very few camping trips because parents couldn't afford them, though we did manage to get enough parent help to camp Fire Island once.  The big exception was Blue and Gold, which was pot-luck.  For whatever reason, they were happy to cook.

[ItsBrian 284]

Our former pack was based in Manhattan near Columbia College.  It was tiny, and was pretty effectively run by only two people.  They were the pack master, and the assistant pack master.  The assistant pack master had a son who would sometimes come in and help with meetings.  While, of course, this is far from the ideal, it worked.  Rather than have pack meetings and den meetings, they held a general meeting every Tuesday.  They would start off with an activity - usually a game of some sort in the gym.  (Meetings were held in a church basement.)  Then we'd have "den" meetings, which consisted of sitting the various dens at folding tables to work on a requirement.  One adult took two tables, and they relied on a parent to fill in (usually my husband or I).  In the three years we were there, we only had a single official den leader. 

I would say that’s dedication to scouting.

[Cubmaster Pete 71]

Does your CO host a Girl Scout unit?

 

No they do not. There are 3 packs and 3 troops that draw from an area of about 10,000 ppl. I have only heard of one GS troop in the same area. There is also 4H (surrounding area around town is pretty rural)

[Eagle1993 2160]

I had a conversation with another pack in our town and they are thinking about staying boys only. Both of our packs are closely tied to two separate public grade schools in our town. One option we just started considering was keeping one of our packs (theirs) as boys only and the other as coed. Then, any family that would want a boys only pack could go to theirs. Any girl in their grade school could join our pack. That way, we may have critical mass to actually implement some girls only dens. Not sure if this is how we will actually go but it may be a good option for the first few years as we transition to adding girls.

[KYScouter 13]

Here's the problem that I see, as I'm not opposed to letting girls into Cub Scout, it's a problem of logistics.  Our CO is a civic club and we meet in their building.  We have 45 boys and we are bursting at the seams of what our building can accommodate. So, where do we put the girls who join?  We physically don't have the space to add more kids.  Okay, so we're a civic club, if we don't admit girls, we're going to get sued into oblivion.  I guess I have two  choices, find another local CO for a girls pack or recommend to my club that we no longer sponsor scouts period.  This, on top of national "kindly" deciding to effectively steal 1/4 of my pack budget with their fee increase after recruitment has led to this whole thing being more stressful than I care to think about right now.  I'm not at burn out yet, but I can see it from here.

[numbersnerd 138]

.... 7, 8, 9, 10. Log out of my eye. ... Let's have a go at that splinter.

Blind accusations of negligence for the sake of an argument will garner comments like "load of garbage".

Ah, so rhetorical questions = accusations. Got it. Seems some people are overly sensitive around here.

[qwazse 4342]

@@KYScouter, (welcome to the forums,btw) are you really expecting that level of demand?

[qwazse 4342]

Ah, so rhetorical questions = accusations. Got it. Seems some people are overly sensitive around here.

Per Webster rhetorical questions are "asked in order to make a statement rather than to get an answer".

So, you weren't trying to say that scouters who allow girls to scout in the same place and the same time as the boys in their packs couldn't be trusted to ensure YPT, BALOO, and Safety Sweet Sixteen? I apologize in advance if I misunderstood.

[numbersnerd 138]

Per Webster rhetorical questions are "asked in order to make a statement rather than to get an answer".[/size]

So, you weren't trying to say that scouters who allow girls to scout in the same place and the same time as the boys in their packs couldn't be trusted to ensure YPT, BALOO, and Safety Sweet Sixteen? I apologize in advance if I misunderstood.[/size]

Correct. It was posed to point out that we don't get to pick and choose what parts of the program we are obligated to follow and comply with.

[Cubmaster Pete 71]

I had a conversation with another pack in our town and they are thinking about staying boys only. Both of our packs are closely tied to two separate public grade schools in our town. One option we just started considering was keeping one of our packs (theirs) as boys only and the other as coed. Then, any family that would want a boys only pack could go to theirs. Any girl in their grade school could join our pack. That way, we may have critical mass to actually implement some girls only dens. Not sure if this is how we will actually go but it may be a good option for the first few years as we transition to adding girls.

 

What does everyone else say about discussing with other packs? As mentioned earlier, there are 3 packs in our town. Long story short we are smaller because of school redistricting, and the former school we drew from closed 10 years ago or so, but we are building back and I have decent parent involvement. All my parents knew this was coming. So we have some room to grow and already have interest from some girls. So if one of them stayed boy only, I would take girls. Permitted that I would have parent involvement to run the dens. 

 

I think a lot the negative comments have been from the mistrust from National, rather than the girls being admitted. Not 100%, but some of it.