Concerns with coed rules, leadership, liability

[Gwaihir]

3 minutes ago, WisconsinMomma said:

I disagree on the interpretation of the message -- adding girl dens and troops does not equal telling the boys to get lost.  

To you, an adult woman.  (because that's what you are as we are conversing, the statement could be for any adult, man or woman, who interprets the message one way or another)

To a teenage boy, that may be different.  

Edited February 13, 2018 by Gwaihir
clarification.

[gblotter]

2 minutes ago, WisconsinMomma said:

No.

So when the boys start to abandon Scouting as a result, what will be your solution?

[Eagledad]

10 minutes ago, WisconsinMomma said:

I think the hard thing is proving that a change is a bad change.  Who decides what is good change and what is bad change and the measurement criteria?  There are a lot of opinions out there.   Since this change is just beginning, it's impossible to know yet if it will be "good" or "bad". 

You think National would have change their mind if they researched the Canadian Scouts and the Campfire Kids programs after their membership policy change? Personally, after watching how they handled this whole thing, I think this was a knew-jerk action without much consideration of failure. They wanted it, so they did it.

Barry

Edited February 13, 2018 by Eagledad

[WisconsinMomma]

1 minute ago, Gwaihir said:

To you, an adult woman.  

To a teenage boy, that may be different.  

It's going to be up to the adult troop leadership to help show boys with doubts that scouting is still great and there are great opportunities for them in Scouting. 

[cyphertext]

1 minute ago, WisconsinMomma said:

I disagree on the interpretation of the message -- adding girl dens and troops does not equal telling the boys to get lost.   

If the boys who are current members do not support that change but it is pushed upon them anyway, yes, it does equal telling them to get lost.  

Have you spoken with any boys on this matter?  Every boy I have spoken to has asked "Why don't they just fix Girl Scouts?".  The boys I have spoken with do not support this change at all. 

[Eagle1993]

These seems like speculation on speculation but heck, I’m game.  Once BSA admitted girls and stated that the program will work with them expect a loss at the Supreme Court if any attempt starts to kick them out.  I think you would see the significant loss of FOS contributions and BSA bankruptcy.  This isn’t rewriting a handbook and leadership retirement.  These are individuals our organization invited to join and kicking them out at a later date would be likened to (and have the same result as) kicking out Jewish or black members.  Like it or not, this change is permanent.

[gblotter]

1 minute ago, Eagledad said:

Personally, After watching how they handled this whole thing, I think this was a knew-jerk action without much consideration of failure. They wanted it, so they did it.

With the giant balloon payment looming for financing of The Summit, I think BSA National leadership figured they had nothing to lose if the girl program drives away boys and overall membership falls. BSA finances would be in ruin either way, so why not roll the dice? In this gamble, they assume BSA will be luckier than Scouts Canada.

[WisconsinMomma]

I haven't spoken with boys on this matter yet because --- we currently do not have any plans to add girl dens.  I am curious to see what our CO advises.  If they endorse girl dens, then I think we should explore how to organize things.   But boys will have boy dens, and that is their space.  I think we can minimize the impact to them while welcoming girls.   Pack meetings?  I'm not sure.  It will be interesting to see what people think and feel about it. 

ETA: I am also not sure if any girls or girl volunteers are going to show up, so I don't think I need to get the boys' all worked up over something that may not affect them.

Edited February 13, 2018 by WisconsinMomma

[Oldscout448]

1 hour ago, cocomax said:

As a very experienced scout/scouter that had to take training last year, I can tell you I paid very close attention to the training.  The training was a joke, we were being trained about camping by someone who has never camped (other than at wood badge),  who made it very clear that if we go camping or hiking we need special soft soled shoes so that we would not compact the ground and injure the worms, hike only in groups of 5 or less,  when making a camp fire remove the soil 6 inches deep and set it aside, line the camp fire pit with a space blanket to protect the worms and microbes from heat, add sand that you pack with you, when you break camp pack out the ashes, dirty sand and the space blanket, place the original soil back in place and leave no trace.

We had knot tying instructors that could tie a square knot, but not a double half hitch, taunt line, timber hitch, clove hitch or square lashing. . .  

I paid VERY close attention to my training, it was a real eye opener.     

 

I would think you must be jesting , i mean come on " worms?!"except I remember IOLS training a few years back where the wood tools instructor refused to teach us how to use an axe or Hatchet. Saying that they were too dangerous for Scouts to use and that we should restrict Scouts and scouters to saws and splitting froes.

In fact he didn't even have an axe or Hatchet at the site.  I managed to keep quiet untill stated  that a saw was always fasted than an ax.

I offered to have a contest me and my ax vs: him and his saw.  He declined. 

I later saw a Scout Troop from his district or the scouts for trying to split some small logs about 6in in diameter with an ax.

Their technique consisted of placing the acts on top of the log taking a second log and beating the back of the axe head until the disappeared then they beat on the handle.  I told him they're going to break the handle they told me they knew but it was the only way they were allowed to use the axes.

 

[EmberMike]

14 minutes ago, cyphertext said:

First question and answer on the "Family Scouting FAQ"...  https://www.scoutingnewsroom.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Family-Scouting-FAQ.pdf

Family Scouting FAQ

Q: What decision did the BSA make regarding girls’ involvement in the organization? Starting in 2018, families can choose Cub Scouts for their sons and daughters, enabling them to take advantage of the life-changing experiences provided through Scouting. A program for older girls will be announced in 2018 with projected implementation in 2019 to deliver the Boy Scout program to girls, allowing for participating girls to earn the highest rank of Eagle. 

 

 

That still doesn't say that "Family Scouting" will be applied to troops. All it says is that the older girls program is forthcoming. 

As mentioned, other documents clearly define "Family Scouting" as ages 6-10. 

Unless you can show me where it says otherise and that "Family Scouting" is all ages, I'm going with the document in front of me that defines the age. 

[Gwaihir]

Just now, WisconsinMomma said:

It's going to be up to the adult troop leadership to help show boys with doubts that scouting is still great and there are great opportunities for them in Scouting. 

This flies directly in the face of what the boy wants.  He will be made to comply.  So like I said, it's taboo to go back to what worked, we must maintain all change regardless.  15% boys don't buy into adult explanation, decide this is not what they want and walk... that's ok.  

[cyphertext]

1 minute ago, EmberMike said:

That still doesn't say that "Family Scouting" will be applied to troops. All it says is that the older girls program is forthcoming. 

As mentioned, other documents clearly define "Family Scouting" as ages 6-10. 

Unless you can show me where it says otherise and that "Family Scouting" is all ages, I'm going with the document in front of me that defines the age. 

Why would it be addressed in the "Family Scouting FAQ" if it is not part of the "Family Scouting" idea?

[Jameson76]

4 minutes ago, cyphertext said:

If the boys who are current members do not support that change but it is pushed upon them anyway, yes, it does equal telling them to get lost.  

Have you spoken with any boys on this matter?  Every boy I have spoken to has asked "Why don't they just fix Girl Scouts?".  The boys I have spoken with do not support this change at all. 

Spot on. 

Main message after the announcement from BSA National, Council pros, etc has been if you do not support the change, then maybe you were a "conditional" scout.  So yes, that is the subtext of the message included within the change.  We are doing this with you or without you

[Gwaihir]

2 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

These seems like speculation on speculation but heck, I’m game.  Once BSA admitted girls and stated that the program will work with them expect a loss at the Supreme Court if any attempt starts to kick them out.  I think you would see the significant loss of FOS contributions and BSA bankruptcy.  This isn’t rewriting a handbook and leadership retirement.  These are individuals our organization invited to join and kicking them out at a later date would be likened to (and have the same result as) kicking out Jewish or black members.  Like it or not, this change is permanent.

it's totally speculation.  this is all thought exercise since nothing is in place.  However, didn't the SCOTUS already rule BSA could create their own membership rules?  Wouldn't that ruling mean they could change back to all boy?  

[EmberMike]

Just now, cyphertext said:

Why would it be addressed in the "Family Scouting FAQ" if it is not part of the "Family Scouting" idea?

It is anecdotally mentioned in that document describing the general policy change and the decision-making behind it. That document does not define any detail of "Family Scouting", at any level.