Jump to content
RememberSchiff

Mike Rowe: Death of Boy Scouts?

Recommended Posts

less to do with safe spaces, more to do with it's much easier  and far more effective to train boys in an all boy environment and train girls in an all girl environment.  They learn at different rates, they grow at different rates, they take on burdens at different rates.  

I don't think anyone has suggested we create nunnery and convents... being co-ed in a wide variety of activites and social settings is good and healthy, but in the purposes of character development within a program structure, (or even in a school setting) being able to tailor lessons to a specific gender to capitalize on the biological, psychological and emotional differences of the sexes is tantamount to success. 

It's also about options and choice. There are a plethora of co-ed options for families to choose from, but the single gender options are vanishing quickly.   

Share this post


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

less to do with safe spaces, more to do with it's much easier  and far more effective to train boys in an all boy environment and train girls in an all girl environment.  They learn at different rates, they grow at different rates, they take on burdens at different rates.  

I don't think anyone has suggested we create nunnery and convents... being co-ed in a wide variety of activites and social settings is good and healthy, but in the purposes of character development within a program structure, (or even in a school setting) being able to tailor lessons to a specific gender to capitalize on the biological, psychological and emotional differences of the sexes is tantamount to success. 

Right. But what kind of success? I view Scouts as an apprenticeship to adulthood... lots of opportunity to experiment and fail in adult tasks. My sons will be adults in a pluralistic society with bosses, peers, and subordinates who are female, gay, trans, ethnic minorities, etc, etc. Women's colleges and HBCUs have been declining since many students have taken the greater opportunities at previously male/white schools. Does anyone doubt Harvard, and probably America, benefits from taking some of Howard's best kids. Likewise Princeton and Bryn Mawr. This is how I view the Scouts transition. I want my kids to be capable leaders... not just capable leaders of men. The Service Academies made this transition way before women were allowed in combat and without it that transition might have been impossible.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, oldbuzzard said:

Right. But what kind of success? I view Scouts as an apprenticeship to adulthood... lots of opportunity to experiment and fail in adult tasks. My sons will be adults in a pluralistic society with bosses, peers, and subordinates who are female, gay, trans, ethnic minorities, etc, etc. Women's colleges and HBCUs have been declining since many students have taken the greater opportunities at previously male/white schools. Does anyone doubt Harvard, and probably America, benefits from taking some of Howard's best kids. Likewise Princeton and Bryn Mawr. This is how I view the Scouts transition. I want my kids to be capable leaders... not just capable leaders of men. The Service Academies made this transition way before women were allowed in combat and without it that transition might have been impossible.

No one disagrees with that.  But there is a difference between children, adolescences and adults.   The proof is in the pudding, boys are being forgotten, left behind, called toxic, they're failing out of school, they're not bothering with college, they're using drugs at a higher rate, they're shooting schools at a higher rate, they're killing themselves at a much higher rate and at a much younger age.  As we've done all this transitioning to gender neutrality, the statistics on failing boys has climbed ever higher.  Yes, correlation does not equal causation, but there are is an abundance of evidence that this is a large part of the problem.  Your kids might be good leaders, but their kids aren't going to be good leaders, they're going to be lucky to just survive.   This is something we need to address as a society... our boys' lives literally depend on it. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gwaihir said:

No one disagrees with that.  But there is a difference between children, adolescences and adults.   The proof is in the pudding, boys are being forgotten, left behind, called toxic, they're failing out of school, they're not bothering with college, they're using drugs at a higher rate, they're shooting schools at a higher rate, they're killing themselves at a much higher rate and at a much younger age.  As we've done all this transitioning to gender neutrality, the statistics on failing boys has climbed ever higher.  Yes, correlation does not equal causation, but there are is an abundance of evidence that this is a large part of the problem.  Your kids might be good leaders, but their kids aren't going to be good leaders, they're going to be lucky to just survive.   This is something we need to address as a society... our boys' lives literally depend on it. 

You make a good point on how society is failing boys. Though I'm not sure it's just the boys. Girls are having their problems too. And I think Mike Row's comments accurately hit on some of the reasons why. I remember when I was little, my first baby sitters were 12 and 13 year old kids (both boys and girls) from the neighborhood. Now 12 and 13 year olds (and 14 and 15 years olds even) need baby sitters? I think there is something very wrong here, and it's hurting all kids, male and female. Which I think is partly Mike Row's point.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Rick_in_CA said:

You make a good point on how society is failing boys. Though I'm not sure it's just the boys. Girls are having their problems too. And I think Mike Row's comments accurately hit on some of the reasons why. I remember when I was little, my first baby sitters were 12 and 13 year old kids (both boys and girls) from the neighborhood. Now 12 and 13 year olds (and 14 and 15 years olds even) need baby sitters? I think there is something very wrong here, and it's hurting all kids, male and female. Which I think is partly Mike Row's point.

Good point. Being that I've recently been looking for a babysitter, it's been interesting to see how potential candidates advertise themselves. They're often in college, especially this time of year looking for summer work, and they make it a point to mention that they're not just in college but if they're a junior ot senior, they make darn sure that you know it. As if a college freshman or sophmore is under-qualified. 🙄

This certainly feels like a tie-in topic around the societal issue of kids not being allowed to play outside or being escorted home from the local park by police if they are unattended minors. 

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

×