Deterring thoughts of discrimination w/girls?

[Gwaihir 198]

7 minutes ago, WisconsinMomma said:

What I noticed in our last Pack committee discussion is a sense of fear of treating the girls "unequally", and it seems that some think that co-ed will reduce risk of being accused of being unfair.  I think that some folks on our committee (in cubs) are afraid of looking bad, and that they think that separation is inherently wrong. I would like to find ways to encourage the girls and boys to have their own space but I'm not sure it will fly at all with people who are concerned about political correctness and perceived injustice, real or imagined.  It will be interesting to see how it plays out over time. 

Speak eloquently, respectfully, bravely and passionately about your stance.  Lay out the benefits and offer your expertise to guide the girl units (whether in your CO or another) so they can get up and running as a strong pack.  Putting a personal stake in it will be beneficial and others will be assuaged knowing there's someone willing to field questions.   Those who want to keep things separate need to step up and help craft strong girl units.  Saying "we're staying all boy" and then shutting the door is going to create a problem when there doesn't necessarily need to be one. (vigilante activist trolls not withstanding)

Edited May 10, 2018 by Gwaihir

[qwazse 4342]

Two words: Title IX.

Southwest PA is a big sports culture. Some folks know the rule books (i.e., the federal, state, and even school district statues) by heart. The notion of "parallel" teams in soccer, for example, is not strange to anyone. Most are aware that boys and girls may share facilities and even scrimmage together, but the two teams have different standings in the league.

The caveat: from time to time an official waiver is given to a girl to play on a boy's team (and rarely, vice versa) in a sparse school district.

[CalicoPenn 729]

10 minutes ago, qwazse said:

Two words: Title IX.

Southwest PA is a big sports culture. Some folks know the rule books (i.e., the federal, state, and even school district statues) by heart. The notion of "parallel" teams in soccer, for example, is not strange to anyone. Most are aware that boys and girls may share facilities and even scrimmage together, but the two teams have different standings in the league.

The caveat: from time to time an official waiver is given to a girl to play on a boy's team (and rarely, vice versa) in a sparse school district.

Title IX does not apply to the membership practices of the Boy Scouts of America.  That's actually in the regulations.

It will apply ONLY to those parts of the program that received federal financial aid.  For instance, Title IX would apply to the Soccer and Scouting program in those Councils that received HUD grants for the program.  When it comes to the Cub Scout, Boy Scout or Venturing program, I do not believe that National, Councils or any local units receive any federal funding to support it so Title IX would not apply.

[qwazse 4342]

Not a problem that Title IX does not apply..

It doesn't apply to sports clubs either..

The OP's question is about folks comfort with separate packs/troops. Showing the a parallel that everyone seems to be okay with is one possible way to increase that comfort"

[David CO 1783]

11 hours ago, Oldscout448 said:

Ya think?

As little as I can. I don't advise it while posting on-line.

[Gwaihir 198]

3 hours ago, CalicoPenn said:

Title IX does not apply to the membership practices of the Boy Scouts of America.  That's actually in the regulations.

It will apply ONLY to those parts of the program that received federal financial aid.  For instance, Title IX would apply to the Soccer and Scouting program in those Councils that received HUD grants for the program.  When it comes to the Cub Scout, Boy Scout or Venturing program, I do not believe that National, Councils or any local units receive any federal funding to support it so Title IX would not apply.

You miss the point.  quazse is using title ix as an example to present to families when the concerns of keeping an all boy pack and an all girl pack.  it's to show successful precedence and how it can be applied here.  I don't believe he was saying wield title ix like a legal cudgel against people. 

and reading a little further down, that's what he said.  carry on. 

Edited May 11, 2018 by Gwaihir
second line was to be a separate post after reading further. forum auto merged my posts, which is fine.

[WAKWIB 107]

The separated troop thing will eventually be just an option. That was the intent from the start. It was just some thing National wanted to kick this off with to make it palatable. Probably within a year or two, it will be announced that you can have single gender or mixed troops. Why they just didn't put that out from the start is just puzzling to me. 

[qwazse 4342]

1 hour ago, WAKWIB said:

The separated troop thing will eventually be just an option. That was the intent from the start. It was just some thing National wanted to kick this off with to make it palatable. Probably within a year or two, it will be announced that you can have single gender or mixed troops. Why they just didn't put that out from the start is just puzzling to me. 

No puzzle at all. The folks at the top sincerely believe in some kind of division in order to maintain their programs, and they simply did not trust the folks at the bottom to hold up that same vision.

[Tampa Turtle 1011]

16 hours ago, Gwaihir said:

I wonder if we see an increase in Lone Scouts 😛 . 

No.

[HashTagScouts 435]

23 hours ago, Jameson76 said:

My thought is not so much the discrimination standpoint, as honestly the majority of CO's primary provision of material support is in the way of meeting space, access to the grounds, etc.  Not too many of them (though some do) write a check each year.  If they do that is easily balanced.  Your point on equipment is more easily handled / explained as troops with longer tenure will have more stuff accumulated

The point of contention will likely be (as you note) the opportunity available in Old School Boy Scout troop with it's 13 outings per year, 50 Boy Scouts, institutional knowledge, 30+ year traditions, and actual field knowledge VERSUS the newly formed Girls troop with 6 members and trying to figure out how to organize a trip and more importantly.. (wait for it) how to HAVE FUN on a weekend outing.  The girls will want to join (be enabled that opportunity) but the Boy Scout troop will be able to indicate, not an option.  The girls will then likely file suit against BSA for equal access and National will update and allow a coed option

Challenge and real rub will come when National allows the coed option but it is not mandated.  Girls want to join Old School troop for all the opportunities they offer, but the troop desires to stay single gender.  That will trigger the discrimination claims and then hilarity will ensue and most likely in the not to distant future coed will not be an option but will be part of the program.  Units will have to deal with it, also the families that will come with it.

Right or wrong, love it or hate it, want it or not...in 3 to 5 years the program of the Boy Scouts of America for 11 -17 year old boys formerly known as the Boy Scouts of America will be greatly altered in appearance and operation.  Yes the mission and goals will hopefully remain, but it will have much different vibe.

There will be a survey.....

 

Agreed.  And the unit that stays single gender now (and, as much, the leaders involved that made that decision) will be open to accusations of being discriminatory for "segregation".  It's already the discussion that I have seen in motion- do we want to be known for that? or have the legacy of Troop XX be that they were once part of that?

[Gwaihir 198]

6 minutes ago, HashTagScouts said:

Agreed.  And the unit that stays single gender now (and, as much, the leaders involved that made that decision) will be open to accusations of being discriminatory for "segregation".  It's already the discussion that I have seen in motion- do we want to be known for that? or have the legacy of Troop XX be that they were once part of that?

A scout is brave. 

[Eagle1993 2160]

6 minutes ago, HashTagScouts said:

Agreed.  And the unit that stays single gender now (and, as much, the leaders involved that made that decision) will be open to accusations of being discriminatory for "segregation".  It's already the discussion that I have seen in motion- do we want to be known for that? or have the legacy of Troop XX be that they were once part of that?

Part of me thinks commissioners and executives should work with units to help coordinate this more.  For example, in my town my Pack and Troop are adding girls. That means the other three Packs and Two Troops shouldn’t have any pressure to go coed if they don’t want to.  Let all of the girls interested join the one Pack and Troop.  I think it will help those units build up critical mass of girls while allowing other units remain Boy only without the negative comments.  Over time, if there are a lot of girls those units may decide to go coed as well... but that may be years down the road (if ever).  The other benefit is that any scouts in my Pack or Troop who want a boy only unit would have access to one.

*I know it’s  not coed but I hate the term Family Pack.

 

[Gwaihir 198]

1 minute ago, Eagle1993 said:

Part of me thinks commissioners and executives should work with units to help coordinate this more.  For example, in my town my Pack and Troop are adding girls. That means the other three Packs and Two Troops shouldn’t have any pressure to go coed if they don’t want to.  Let all of the girls interested join the one Pack and Troop.  I think it will help those units build up critical mass of girls while allowing other units remain Boy only without the negative comments.  Over time, if there are a lot of girls those units may decide to go coed as well... but that may be years down the road (if ever).  The other benefit is that any scouts in my Pack or Troop who want a boy only unit would have access to one.

*I know it’s  not coed but I hate the term Family Pack.

 

exactly this, I had mentioned this to @WisconsinMomma earlier,  there needs to be added effort put into facilitating the creation of both co-ed and single gender units from unit volunteers as well as commissioners and executives, and helping families find the unit that's right for them.  

[an_old_DC 122]

@Eagle1993 @Gwaihir yeah, I get what you mean. The problem is parents are seeing this drip,, drip, drip steady stream from National about how “Scouting is for the whole family.” What happens when their son wants to join Troop 123 out of their Catholic Church but it is a boys-only troop so the daughter can’t join? So she can join a small, girls only troop out of the Lutheran Church, but it’s program isn’t as good. They will end up feeling BSA, or whatever it will be called by then, lied to them. Then the complaining will really begin

[Tampa Turtle 1011]

12 minutes ago, Gwaihir said:

exactly this, I had mentioned this to @WisconsinMomma earlier,  there needs to be added effort put into facilitating the creation of both co-ed and single gender units from unit volunteers as well as commissioners and executives, and helping families find the unit that's right for them.  

This seems too logical to happen. Yes this would be good. A reluctant unit might send away an occasional girl with a helpful suggestion. Another unit might change their mind when they start seeing more and they need the bodies.