Jump to content
Jameson76

Concerns with coed rules, leadership, liability

Recommended Posts

Some messages on the Talk About Scouting Facebook page have mentioned that the "separate but equal" girls program with their own units is now under consideration. Troops may go coed with segregated patrols. And that is being stated by some national level volunteers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Gwaihir said:

The concern should be even higher at the Cub level specifically because of this reason.   We can't keep thinking of these things in their separate bubbles, there needs to be a big picture view of how things are interconnected and play themselves out over the long haul. 

I'm also very suspect of the Troops that are not obedient that flout the policy, they won't keep patrols separate because they're either agenda driven, or they really only care about making things easy for themselves.  
 

A good point regarding Cub Scouts in that it could establish the mindset in Boy Scouts.

I’m not sure what you mean by agenda driven.  I find most of the comments in all of these forums agenda driven.  Some have agendas to keep BSA boy led.  Others have agendas to change OA.  I guess what agenda are you alluding to.

Only 11.2% of corporate officers in Fortune 500 companies are women (I assume that means 88.7% are men and 0.1% are other).       Only 4.2% have female CEOs.  Clearly there is a fall off of women leaders somewhere...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

This will extend well into the high school years...

and...

50 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

I think leadership of coed Packs and BSA4G Troop who will run like coed will have to watch for this ...

As I understand, and assuming the final product for Boy Scouts is the same as has been previously published, none of the above can happen. Boy Scouts and (Girl) Boy Scouts will be two entirely different programs. Even if they meet together and do joint activities, the boys should have their own separate leadership channel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

.

Only 11.2% of corporate officers in Fortune 500 companies are women (I assume that means 88.7% are men and 0.1% are other).       Only 4.2% have female CEOs.  Clearly there is a fall off of women leaders somewhere...

I touched on that, the idea of a "boys club" and the barring of women in positions of power is largely gone, especially in the last 15 years.  Especially in the US.  A large part of the reason, I believe, and a lot of people much much smarter than I am, also believe, is because women, educated women, in general, simply aren't interested in those positions.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Hawkwin said:

and...

As I understand, and assuming the final product for Boy Scouts is the same as has been previously published, none of the above can happen. Boy Scouts and (Girl) Boy Scouts will be two entirely different programs. Even if they meet together and do joint activities, the boys should have their own separate leadership channel.

 

Actually according to some national level volunteers, the "separate but equal" Girls' Program troops is being reconsidered. The PTB are now looking into coed troops with segregated patrols. That is what is being reported on Talk About Scouting facebook group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

 

Actually according to some national level volunteers, the "separate but equal" Girls' Program troops is being reconsidered. The PTB are now looking into coed troops with segregated patrols. That is what is being reported on Talk About Scouting facebook group.

Meaning Michael Surbaugh and the rest of National are in fact liars and sold the idea of Family Scouting on a lie.  I remember in our own family scouting meetings, the ONE thing that almost everyone was firm on, was "i dont care what happens to the cub scouts, but boy scout level must be separate" and the response from professional was "and that is exactly what is being proposed".  

Edited by Gwaihir
grammar change

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Actually according to some national level volunteers, the "separate but equal" Girls' Program troops is being reconsidered. The PTB are now looking into coed troops with segregated patrols. That is what is being reported on Talk About Scouting facebook group.

And why am I not surprised that the clueless bumblers and liars at BSA National are doing this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, your quotes just keep getting better as I type!

Just now, Eagle94-A1 said:

Actually according to some national level volunteers, the "separate but equal" Girls' Program troops is being reconsidered. The PTB are now looking into coed troops with segregated patrols. That is what is being reported on Talk About Scouting facebook group.

1. National has no way to track or control how patrols form. It might be cool if they did. Each youth would fill out an online survey on each scout in the rest of the troop and produce a "friend matrix" that would tell the SPL who would best cluster together in patrols. Or it might be just as cool if we keep 'big brother' out of this.:ph34r:

29 minutes ago, Hawkwin said:

... As I understand, and assuming the final product for Boy Scouts is the same as has been previously published, none of the above can happen. Boy Scouts and (Girl) Boy Scouts will be two entirely different programs. Even if they meet together and do joint activities, the boys should have their own separate leadership channel.

2. National has no way to prevent any two troops from working in lock-step. Any two PLC's could decide they want to camp, hike, and  meet together. That's how a spin-off of a spin-off troop and ours eventually merged. The boys looked at their friends meeting just down the road and told us that being two troops was just plain stupid. We shuffled back and forth between CO's, and ultimately settled on the one who wasn't going to charge us rent, but we let the boys wear either of the two unit numbers on their sleeve.

3. My observations of other co-ed scouting groups (including venturing) does not show that boys would be "muscled out" of leadership positions. This is because there are more youth to care for, the outdoors is big, and everybody has to step into a PoR for their patrol (and later, their troop) to succeed. My observation of co-ed contingents on backpacking trips indicate that it is completely random as to who takes the lead.

4. In our culture, girls only look like they have more organizational skills than boys. That's because they haven't been challenged to get their patrol geared up to hike 5 miles to someplace where they will need to set up their own shelter and provide their own food, and all the rosters in the world won't make up for personality conflicts. So, they stay at home and get out their tablet and plan sleepovers, or trips to the mall that require heavy coordination of parent pick-up/drop-off time.

2 minutes ago, Gwaihir said:

I touched on that, the idea of a "boys club" and the barring of women in positions of power is largely gone, especially in the last 15 years.  Especially in the US.  A large part of the reason, I believe, and a lot of people much much smarter than I am, also believe, is because women, educated women, in general, simply aren't interested in those positions.   

5. Thanks to GS/USA's sequestering of the best troops into isolated clusters of no more than 15, American girls have next to no experience with tour plans like: "Insert Friday, extract Sunday, we've got everything in between, adults Mrs. ___ and Miss __ will supervise from a distance". That development is arrested until they go to college or the military. They start adulthood trained to manage detail: good preparation for corporals, not so good for generals.

So, my larger concern for BSA4G -- at least in early years -- is not girls "outleading" boys. It is adults willing to provide girls the controlled chaos that our boys have grown comfortable with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gwaihir said:

Meaning Michael Surbaugh and the rest of National are in fact a liar and sold the idea of Family Scouting on a lie. 

Let's not jump to conclusions by calling people liars.

Their intent may indeed be and have been to keep them completely separate but upon further examination of the plans for implementation, they may end up determining that the final result has to be different. That doesn't make them liars. I often tell my kids we are going to do this or the other but sometimes life happens and we have to change our plans.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, qwazse said:

So, my larger concern for BSA4G -- at least in early years -- is not girls "outleading" boys. It is adults willing to provide girls the controlled chaos that our boys have grown comfortable with.

Which is a problem all boy troops struggle with today with the helicopter gunship parents & leaders.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hawkwin said:

Let's not jump to conclusions by calling people liars.

Their intent may indeed be and have been to keep them completely separate but upon further examination of the plans for implementation, they may end up determining that the final result has to be different. That doesn't make them liars. I often tell my kids we are going to do this or the other but sometimes life happens and we have to change our plans.

He was unequivocally firm on that point, at every step of the way.  The lack of subsequent transparency with regards to that backpedal in ANY other avenue of life, would result in the valid claim of lie.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hawkwin said:

Let's not jump to conclusions by calling people liars.

Their intent may indeed be and have been to keep them completely separate but upon further examination of the plans for implementation, they may end up determining that the final result has to be different. That doesn't make them liars. I often tell my kids we are going to do this or the other but sometimes life happens and we have to change our plans.

Right. I makes them poor planners and leaders, but not liars.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, qwazse said:

2. National has no way to prevent any two troops from working in lock-step. Any two PLC's could decide they want to camp, hike, and  meet together

That isn't my contention. They can do as much as they like together, and probably will, but per the graphic put out by Nationals, they will be a separate program. For example, the boys will elect their own SPL and the girls will elect their own SPL.

Now Nationals may indeed change from what was initially put out but until they do, it doesn't benefit any of us to operate on rumor or assumption.

Share this post


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

 I remember in our own family scouting meetings, the ONE thing that almost everyone was firm on, was "i dont care what happens to the cub scouts, but boy scout level must be separate" and the response from professional was "and that is exactly what is being proposed".  

This was exactly the opposite of what I have heard at our meetings.  Most have voiced support of fully coed and rejected this proposal as there were not enough volunteers to implement.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Col. Flagg said:

Right. I makes them poor planners and leaders, but not liars.

I can agree with 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

×