Jump to content
Back Pack

Pack YP equal or double standard

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Back Pack said:

Venturing has equal protection. If only guys attend an event either male or female leaders can attend, but there must be at least one male leaders. Same if all girls attend, a minimum or one female leader must attend. If boys and girls attend then one leader of each sex must attend. Boys sleep in their campsite and girls in theirs. Adults sleep in the adult site. So why have a different standard for coed cubs?

Agreed.  To me this should be the policy going forward for Cub Scouts.  I understand there may Be impacts to some dens, but we should encourage dads to volunteer.  I honestly have no problem with requiring an adult female present with girls... but the requirement of having an adult male present with boys should also apply.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it practical to require a male leader for every den activity. I don't think so. We don't have enough men volunteering in the cub scout program to do that.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, David CO said:

Is it practical to require a male leader for every den activity. I don't think so. We don't have enough men volunteering in the cub scout program to do that.

 

Who cares. It’s about being fair and equal. Maybe they should have thought about that issue before they open the program to girls. 

Edited by Back Pack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Back Pack said:

Who cares. It’s about being fair and equal. 

I find it somewhat ironic that your comment follows the same sort of attitude that prompted the changes. Fairness and gender equality.

As a matter of fact, I do care about consequences. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, David CO said:

I find it somewhat ironic that your comment follows the same sort of attitude that prompted the changes. Fairness and gender equality.

As a matter of fact, I do care about consequences. 

 

It’s ironic because bsa is allegedly making these changes to be equal and yet the pass a policy like this. I am merely pointing it out so the irony is bsa’s not mine. Also I believe in equality. The ability for girls to have their own same sex program just like boys. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/27/2018 at 8:53 PM, Back Pack said:

It’s ironic because bsa is allegedly making these changes to be equal and yet the pass a policy like this. I am merely pointing it out so the irony is bsa’s not mine. Also I believe in equality. The ability for girls to have their own same sex program just like boys. 

Where has the BSA ever said this was about equality? That's been the motivation for many advocates of co-ed scouting, but never what the BSA has stated this is all about. The documentation we've gotten on this has stated that this was done in response to declining membership, to offer a "Family Scouting" program to busy families, and to share scouting's benefits and leadership training with as many youth possible. 

Of course you can read between the lines there and say it's about equal opportunities for girls in the BSA, or likewise read between those same lines and say it's all about membership and money (an opinion I'd certainly share). But no where have I seen anything to suggest that all things would be equal throughout scouting as a result of this new policy. 

True gender equality doesn't exist, not in the BSA and not anywhere in America. There will always be differences in how male and female scouts and scouters conduct themselves and are regarded as members. I didn't expect that to change just because girls are more involved now. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, EmberMike said:

Where has the BSA ever said this was about equality? That's been the motivation for many advocates of co-ed scouting, but never what the BSA has stated this is all about. The documentation we've gotten on this has stated that this was done in response to declining membership, to offer a "Family Scouting" program to busy families, and to share scouting's benefits and leadership training with as many youth possible. 

Of course you can read between the lines there and say it's about equal opportunities for girls in the BSA, or likewise read between those same lines and say it's all about membership and money (an opinion I'd certainly share). But no where have I seen anything to suggest that all things would be equal throughout scouting as a result of this new policy. 

True gender equality doesn't exist, not in the BSA and not anywhere in America. There will always be differences in how male and female scouts and scouters conduct themselves and are regarded as members. I didn't expect that to change just because girls are more involved now. 

Read what Sarbaugh has said. He keeps saying that the changes are consistent with the oath and law. This means treating people equally. So while not specifically stating he’s doing it for equality the reference to the oath and law implies equality. There’s also a difference between how each male conducts themselves so your last argument is silly. Conduct doesn’t matter but rather how you treat people and there’s an implication from all these changes that everyone would be treated equally. To suggest otherwise is silly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the Scout Oath and Law imply equal treatment or helpful, kind and courteous treatment?

If equal treatment, I'm either not helping any more little old ladies across the street or I am helping everyone cross the street.

If helpful, kind, and courteous treatment, I will help others based on their needs and my resources.  Do I treat everyone in my troop equally?  No, all scouts are different with different needs.

IMO Surbaugh is talking about the latter,  helping families who want all their kids in the BSA program.

My $0.02

Edited by RememberSchiff
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you’re arguing that the oath and law don’t imply that scouts should treat people equally and fairly? Really? Yes a scout gives weaker people more help and stronger people less but that doesn’t mean we treat them with regard to their rights and how we trust them differently. This is a trust issue and we don’t trust people differently. I sometimes think you guys just like to poke holes and argue. Are you really saying that all this isn’t about equality in some way. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, Yes this not about equality, this is about safety, . The BSA believes their policy is statistically safer.  Will there still be violations? Yes.

Another $0.02

 

 

Edited by RememberSchiff
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/27/2018 at 7:53 PM, Back Pack said:

It’s ironic because bsa is allegedly making these changes to be equal and yet the pass a policy like this. I am merely pointing it out so the irony is bsa’s not mine. Also I believe in equality. The ability for girls to have their own same sex program just like boys. 

Today, there is no requirement for male YPT adults to be present at Cub Scout outings.  You can simply have two female den leaders and your fine.  When adding girls, I believe BSA worked with both legal and other authorities and realized that having two males leading would be an issue, so they added in the YPT female requirement.  

The question is why they didn’t go back and put in a new requirement for all Boy dens. My guess is that he BSA didn’t want to negatively impact existing Packs and Dens for something that is not needed for safety or legal reasons.  

That said, I do think they should have consistent policies with othe coed groups within the BSA.  Perhaps providing existing Packs transition timing to allow them to find additional male YPT adults may help.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well...so many scouters confuse Two Deep Leadership with One on One contact, I can only imagine how the many levels of YPT will only fuel this confusion.  Perhaps the BSA will issue a set of laminated cards that Scouters can clip to day packs for easy reference

  • If you have an All Boy Den that is option 1
  • If you have an All Girl Den that is option 2
  • If your pack has Boy and Girl Dens that is option 3
  • If your pack is single gender boys that is options 4
  • If your pack is single gender girls that is option 5
  • If your troop is boys that is option 6
  • If your troop is girls that is option 7
  • If your event/camp has Boy troops only in attendance option 8
  • If your event/camp has Girl troops only in attendance option 9
  • If your event/camp has Boy and Girl troops attending option 10
  • etc
  • etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Back Pack said:

Read what Sarbaugh has said. He keeps saying that the changes are consistent with the oath and law. This means treating people equally. So while not specifically stating he’s doing it for equality the reference to the oath and law implies equality...

 

That's a huge stretch. 

Since clearly I'm not the only one confused by your notion of equality in the oath and law, maybe you can elaborate on that. 

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

×