Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ianwilkins

What do you mean by "men" and "manly"?

Recommended Posts

If BSA is oriented to helping boys become men through character building and leadership development, does that mean we are to turn girls into men too?  Or are we going to need to change the whole program from start to finish? 

 

 

 

I like what Tampa Turtle had to say about what manly should mean - and its easily tweak-able to accommodate women:

 

 

To protect the weak, stand for your beliefs, respect women  everyone, seek adventure, be self-sufficient, and take charge when needed. Respect and civility toward the other. Showing leadership when it is needed. Doing the right thing even if it is the tough thing. Knowing enough self-sufficient skills so you can help your self and others in an emergency. Being adaptable. Learning to work in a band of brothers    diverse group of people.

 

 

Do my changes weaken the proposition?  I don't think so.  

 

If this is what it means to develop the best kind of citizen - then why can't it apply equally to boys and girls?

 

Everything else is just speculation based on internal fears and innate sexism.  I haven't seen anything from the BSA suggesting that they will be tweaking advancement requirements - that is just us insisting that there must be changes coming because, well, reasons (like physical strength, stamina, etc.).

 

I challenge all of you to go through the current rank requirements and tell us one - just one - that you think will need to be changed - and be specific - none of this "girls don't have the strength so the BSA will have to change requirements" non-answer either.  Tell us specifically what advancement requirement a girl won't be able to do because of lack of strength or stamina.  I can't find a single one. 

 

Instead of fearing that the BSA will make requirements easier, why not prepare to bombard National with messages if they do try to make a requirement easier by shaming them by pointing out how sexist they are for assuming girls can;t do what boys can do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect he was referring to what those actors represent. Old west trappers and outdoorsmen who lived off land and didn’t everything for themselves. Is this what I have to look forward to when I reach ol age. A bunch of guys being overly literal and critical of each other?

 

Oh, you mean societal misfits, criminals on the run from the law, binge drinkers and buggerers (Brokeback Mountain wasn't all imagination).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I challenge all of you to go through the current rank requirements and tell us one - just one - that you think will need to be changed - and be specific - none of this "girls don't have the strength so the BSA will have to change requirements" non-answer either.  Tell us specifically what advancement requirement a girl won't be able to do because of lack of strength or stamina.  I can't find a single one. 

 

Instead of fearing that the BSA will make requirements easier, why not prepare to bombard National with messages if they do try to make a requirement easier by shaming them by pointing out how sexist they are for assuming girls can;t do what boys can do.

 

Current rank requirements are changed for boys who don't have the strength, stamina, or cognitive abilities, so if girls need flexible requirements the mechanism already exists.

https://www.scouting.org/Home/GuideToAdvancement/SpecialNeeds/AdvancementFlexibilityAllowed.aspx

 

Wish that was not the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Current rank requirements are changed for boys who don't have the strength, stamina, or cognitive abilities, so if girls need flexible requirements the mechanism already exists.

https://www.scouting.org/Home/GuideToAdvancement/SpecialNeeds/AdvancementFlexibilityAllowed.aspx

 

Wish that was not the case.

 

 

 

Isn't this just a little misleading?  There is a huge difference between a Scout with special needs and a Scout that doesn't have strength or stamina.  Special Needs is a pretty specific set of circumstances - lets not try to apply it to the non-special needs  young Scout who hasn't been able to complete more than 1 pull-up yet because they don't have the strength.   

 

I would expect that the flexibility given to special needs boys would extend to girls with special needs.

 

I would not expect these requirement adaptations to extend to the non-special needs girls who can't do more than one pull-up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but I measure the worth of an individual on other standards besides strength and endurance.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MedicineNet.com

 

When does puberty occur?

The onset of puberty varies among individuals. Puberty usually occurs in girls between the ages of 10 and 14, while in boys it generally occurs later, between the ages of 12 and 16. In some African-American girls, puberty begins earlier, at about age 9, meaning that puberty occurs from ages 9 to 14.

Adolescent girls reach puberty today at earlier ages than were ever recorded previously. Nutritional and other environmental influences may be responsible for this change. For example, the average age of the onset of menstrual periods in girls was 15 in 1900. By the 1990s, this average had dropped to 12 and a half years of age.

 

First of all women mature physically on average 2 years earlier than boys.  That is a dynamic one has to consider.

 

Adam Baxter-Jones, associate dean at the College of Kinesiology at the University of Saskatchewan in Saskatoon, explains how it goes: “Maximum growth in stature peaks in girls at 12 when the average growth is about nine to 10 centimetres [3½ to almost four inches] per year. In boys it happens two years later and at a greater speed—about 11 to 12 centimetres [about four to 4¾ inches] in a year.â€

 

Again, the age shifts 2 years earlier for girls.  This too has to be considered.

 

https://www.education.com/reference/article/similarities-differences-boys-girls/

 

This might help as well. 

 

When all is said and done, yes, the program is generic, but the people in it are not.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, certain girls can beat out certain guys in just about any arena one wishes to pick.   So your troop consists of football player guys and science lab gals.  Yep, that's fair.  Or how about Amazon women and couch potato guys.  Yep, that helps the argument.

 

Clinical studies have shown that the ages we are referring to 11-18 show that at the beginning gals have on average a two year advantage over boys.  In other words, girls emotionally, physically and psychologically are at 11 years old on par with a 13 year old boy.  In the NSP and S->FC the gals will have the advantage.  Is it just me or does anyone else foresee a retention problem in an area where retention is already a problem? 

 

In the race for the first girl to ever get Eagle, she'll be 13 years of age.  With only needing AOL in Cubs to join at 10 years of age, we could be seeing motivated gals getting Eagle at 12.  Nothing like joining Boy Scouts at 11 and having a 12 year old female Eagle PL   I'd be happy with that setup. Now that is cherry picking the exception, but as a whole, with the 2 year start advantage, one would see average gals in leadership positions before the average boy.

 

I'll come back to this post and eat crow if in two years this is not so.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't this just a little misleading?  There is a huge difference between a Scout with special needs and a Scout that doesn't have strength or stamina.  Special Needs is a pretty specific set of circumstances - lets not try to apply it to the non-special needs  young Scout who hasn't been able to complete more than 1 pull-up yet because they don't have the strength.   

 

I would expect that the flexibility given to special needs boys would extend to girls with special needs.

 

I would not expect these requirement adaptations to extend to the non-special needs girls who can't do more than one pull-up.

 

I would not expect requirement adaptions to extend to any non-special needs but the pc reality is all are special. Kids are not overweight, they have eating disorders. :rolleyes:

 

My prediction is that as girls join and approach Eagle, the no's will demand stricter adherence to the requirements for all. That could be a good thing for the program.

 

Edited by RememberSchiff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, you mean societal misfits, criminals on the run from the law, binge drinkers and buggerers (Brokeback Mountain wasn't all imagination).

So all mountain men, explorers and trappers were like that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Tampa Turtle, I understand the challenges of taking on girls is something most will be able to handle with a bit more effort, but chronic bed wetting, cat-hole accidents among guys isn't the same as cross sexual issues.  Putting it politely, they need a bit more finesse when handling.

 

Yes, there is going to be the requirement that there are co-ed scouters at every event and like "dads" all do, one can pass off the problem to "mom".  As a co-ed leader of other organizations, I know how the process works.  BSA in general and all of its training models will need to be changed to accommodate these issues, not that BSA has done much in the past with chronic bed wetters or cat-hole mishaps.

 

But in general, one need not look too far afield to see that dads treat daughters differently than their sons and moms do likewise with their offspring.  How does one, with enough helicopter interfering parents, make those additional changes in a co-ed environment of other people's kids? 

 

In other co-ed groups they don't need to, but with the singular purpose of Scouting, it's going to be different.  No one in 4-H cares whether or not a gal wants to raise pigs instead of learning how to sew clothes and if a boy wishes to learn to cook instead of raising rabbits, no big deal.  Yet 4-H is designed with many goals in mind from which to choose.  Sure, BSA has a broad categories, Learning for Life, Sea Scouts and Venturing, but for he most part those are older youth where the options although limited are a bit more broad.  There are no rank advancements in co-ed 4-H, co-ed church youth groups, or Boy & Girls Clubs.  The program focus varies far wider.  I use the 4-H has an example of one of the really good leadership youth programs, but it is not run like the BSA's leadership program.  The urban development of the 4-H program is very interesting, considering most people associate 4-H with just "farm" kids.

 

As it stands right now I would need to make quite a few changes in order to accommodate the gals.  I'll need more adult trained leaders and right now I have a committee that can't even recruit and train well enough for what we have. Units will need to have far more adults step up.  In Cubs, that's not a big deal, but with "Scouts" it will mean more involvement with adults when there's really too much in troops the way it is now.

 

I have worked with co-ed youth programs all my life.  I know the difference between BSA as it once stood and those other groups.  BSA will need to make changes and limp along for a while on the practical end of things while it wallows in the glory of their perceived "brave new world" of co-ed scouts.  I can, but I don't think I want to clean up the mess when there's other well-run co-ed groups already out there that have this all figured out with a different type of program, and successful programs as well.

 

To give you an idea of what I foresee?  I attended an organizational meeting for interested youth to join a Venturing Crew.  The District was going to try and set up a "super" Venturing Crew in the larger cities throughout the council.  My wife (very outdoorsy) and I offered to step up and take one on.  Others did in other cities.  Big recruiting push.  I attended a big rally in the school where I was going to be working.  20 kids showed up, it looked promising.  Well, within a month, our presentation of program gave the school the idea to start their own Outdoor Club for the students and that was the end of that.  It would seem that NONE of the other attempts in the council produced a Venturing Crew either.

 

Like I said, co-ed is not the solution to the problem.  Co-ed activities are, at this point, better organized and better run than where the BSA stands with it's consistently struggling Learning for Life, STEM, Venturing and Sea Scouts. Throwing two unique other programs into the mix doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

 

From my experiences over the past 45+ years, doesn't encourage me in this new BSA effort one bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a parent, the middle-school and high school coed outdoor clubs that I have known have had few adults involved. Two or three outdoorsy manly or amazonly advisors and none of them were student parents. Transportation via school mini-buses.  Funded by school district. There are no uniforms, advancements, or fundraisers, just a much leaner and meaner outdoor leadership and adventure experience.  That is what the BSA needs to relearn.

 

My $0.02

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×