Super Excited for my Daughter

Mndsm said:

Ill probably regret saying this, but I doubt theres a sexy boy scout calendar out there. 

umm... uhh... ......... Where's wally when you need him for an uncomfortable yet witty remark.

I avoided the Scouts for my Daughter because they did not offer the opportunities for bonding and outdoor adventures that other organizations did.  I wound up in the YMCA Indian Princess program, which we loved and I would recommend, but it too has some cultural sensitivity issues to overcome.  

For my son, I am taking him hiking and camping and teaching him to make fires and use a knife on my own.  That way, no one gets offended or left out or molested by priests.  Jeez, it's tough out there these days! 

I recall my Mom trying to get me to join the boy Scouts way back when. The woman sure could run, but not quite fast enough to catch me and drag me down to the BS HQ for indoctrination. To think...but for a burst of speed, I might of turned out normal...

Pete

I was a Scout Leader for 2 decades. 

I take exception to the idea that the organization is well run. Nope. 

There are some exceptionally well run troops (mine was one), but that's it.

I guess if you want your daughter selling crappy popcorn instead of cookies, it's a good idea. 

I have 2 Eagle Scouts as kids, but no desire for my younger kids to be part of it. Especially my daughters. Neither BSA nor GSA. 

Both boy scouts and girls scouts troops are only as good as the parents that run them.  if they are boring, you shouldnt blame the organization, blame the parents running it.  they are in control of what the troop does.  I know girl scout troops that were out camping as much as the boyscouts.  

I personally do not agree with allowing girls into boyscouts.  What should have happened from the start is close to what they are doing now.  they should have created a new organization that did allow both and let the market, ie the kids, decide if they wanted to be in the boy scouts, girl scouts or the third coed version.  They already sort of had this with the venture scouts which I believe was coed.  All they needed to do was allow venture scouts to achieve Eagle.  

My girls will not be joining boyscouts.  As mentioned above, i believe the boys need a organization where boys can be boys an not have their hormones driving them.  I know I would have been very different in my scouting years if there were girls at the campouts and meetings.  They will also not be joining girl scouts as I do not agree with many of the things the girl scouts is teaching the girls and I am not just talking about how to sell cookies.  My oldest is 5 and we are looking at joining the Heritage girls right now.  They are more focused on boyscout type activities like camping and nature, but again it is driven more by the local parents than the organization.   Only as much fun as the parents make it.  

Fueled by Caffeine said:

Mndsm said:

Ill probably regret saying this, but I doubt theres a sexy boy scout calendar out there. 

umm... uhh... ......... Where's wally when you need him for an uncomfortable yet witty remark.

Give it time. 

octavious said:

I just finished my one and only year as a Cub Scout Assistant Den Leader.  I won't be going back.  And not because of the girls thing.  I found the organization to be poorly run, at all levels.  Granted at the Troop and Den level it is all volunteer based, but every single aspect of the organization seems to be unorganized, timid, and lame.  You tell kids "join the Scouts, we'll be outside camping and shooting bb gun, bows and arrows, and making fires".  Yeah once a year there is a large camp out with all that, and once a year there is a Troop camp out.  But it isn't boys being boys.  It's boys sleeping in a tent and doing crafts outside.  I won't go into the Pinewood Derby cars made by parents, or the ridiculous price of popcorn sales with very little coming back to the organization or Troop, or that you can't discipline and wild child without if having some weird ramifications...

 

What ended my whole thing was when my son said he didn't want to do scouts anymore, because "it's not fun anymore".  That was all I needed to hear.  We finished out this year and we are no done.  

 

The only good thing I can see from our scouts experience is that our Troop participated in a flag remembrance ceremony at one of the camp outs.  My son still talks about that and how it made him feel.    

All of this.  I was den leader for a couple of years.  We did exactly one camp-out and spent fully half our time selling popcorn.  Pinewood derby is an utter joke, it's just a showcase for the dads to spend WAY too much time in their shops.  The kids had too much on their plates already with todays' homework assignments and daily sportsball practices.  My every-other-wednesday gatherings weren't enough to do anything useful and still too much for the parents to bring more than 75% of the kids in the den.

The single most popular day we had was walking around in the woods and looking at footprints in the mud, nests in the trees, etc.

Not a fan.

I'm also an Eagle Scout and I'm very okay with this move.

I have both a 4 year old daughter and a 16 month old son, I wasn't planning on encouraging either of them to join the BSA or GSA. I spent time at both to Philmont and the 2001 National Jamboree and took advantage of their extensive summer camp network, and I think that's really where the value lies in the organization. I spend basically every weekend hiking with the kids already and showing them weird and cool nature stuff. It would be nice for them to go to summer camps and do things independent of my wife and I but there's a not of non-affiliated programs to do that already.

My beef the the organizations in their current state is that every time "tradition" is threatened with change the leadership doubles down on archaic sexist stereotypes. A lot of good people also walked away because the "protect the children" thing has got out of hand. A number of people have told me that it's just endless ever changing training requirements if you want to organize or lead a troop.

I'll watch how this goes the next several years and make that decision.

Here's something I don't understand- the "need" for boys to be boys without girls around.

What in the world are they doing that they can't handle girls being around?  I was never a scout, so I don't know.

As for worrying about their hormones- that doesn't come on until later, and isn't it a good thing to make sure kids know how to deal with each other on an equal basis at an early age?  Seems like that should reduce some dumber sexual tension and perhaps reduce assaults.  

Let kids be kids, together.  Regardless (of anything).

FieroReinke said:

Both boy scouts and girls scouts troops are only as good as the parents that run them.  if they are boring, you shouldnt blame the organization, blame the parents running it.  they are in control of what the troop does.  I know girl scout troops that were out camping as much as the boyscouts. 

That is both true and not true.  We tried our best to make our GS troop active - we camped at least twice a year, took field trips, etc.  But the "modern" curriculum was terrible and GSA national forbade us from continuing the older badge system.

Under the previous badge system pre-2006 or so, we taught our girls how to knit, how to shoot a bow, how to draw, basic cooking and  camping skills - and how to change a flat tire or change the oil in a car.  I'm not kidding - we did both on my E46 in the parking lot of the church where we held our meetings.

All of that stuff was ended when they went from hands-on practical stuff to yet more endless blather about socialization, which was entirely reading- and discussion-based.  I don't know if GSA national ever wised up and reverted back away from that crap, because by that time we were long gone.  The only way we could have continued as we were would have been to drop the GSA sanctioning and do something informal and independent.

alfadriver said:

Here's something I don't understand- the "need" for boys to be boys without girls around.

What in the world are they doing that they can't handle girls being around?  I was never a scout, so I don't know.

As for worrying about their hormones- that doesn't come on until later, and isn't it a good thing to make sure kids know how to deal with each other on an equal basis at an early age?  Seems like that should reduce some dumber sexual tension and perhaps reduce assaults.  

Let kids be kids, together.  Regardless (of anything).

:golf clap:

In reply to 72Subabeetle :

I have edited your post to remove the inflammatory statement. This sort of behavior is not welcome on the forums. Please check your e-mail and if you have questions please reply to that and not in the thread. Thank you.

I was in both the Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts for a while when I was a kid, more or less because all my friends were doing it. In Cub Scouts, both "dens" I was in had "Den Mothers" who were both great. It was the late 80's/early 90's, and no one cared then if women were involved, at least in my town. In fact, our pack was pretty great! Our pack leader actually saved my life once; he happened to be driving by when my stupid Huffy mountain bike's gear shifter berked itself going up a hill and I got tossed into the street. He stopped and dragged me to safety and didn't think twice. I'll never forget that; he took "Be Prepared" to a whole new level. 

Later, I advanced to Boy Scouts. My town had 3 troops: one tiny one, one middle sized one, and one huge one where most of my friends went. I chose to follow the pack, and that was a mistake. I ended up quitting about a year into it due to repeated bullying from older kids. Getting my butt kicked by some teenager every Thursday night didn't instill quality values on me, and the troop leaders didn't care and turned a blind eye; "boys will be boys", etc. was always the excuse, even when my parents complained.  

Three other friends of mine went to the middle-sized pack and 2 of them became Eagle Scouts. They still use the skills they learned there all the time. 

Leadership in any organization like this is extremely important. And if there are kids (boy, girl or otherwise) that show interest in learning valuable life skills, hopefully there are leaders out there that can teach them beyond how to sell popcorn and cookies. 

Interesting move.

All this blabbering on and on, but noone has mentioned the truly important topic - Who gets control of the cookies? Will they still be called Girl Scout Cookies or just Scout Cookies? Will the females rain down wrath and vengeance for losing their cookie deal?

I was in scouts briefly and enjoyed it for a while. If that is what anybody's kid wants to do I say go for it. 

My only concern with the elimination of the girl scouts is in getting my seasonal fix of thin mints. 

In reply to alfadriver :

Yeah, I haven't figured out where adults get the 'where boys can be boys' mentality.  In my experience, that usually just means adults making excuses for allowing their boys to be unruly little E36 M3s, just because they're boys. 

I switched from Boy Scouts to Civil Air Patrol (think USAF version of the Scouts),which was coed. Trust me, girls or no girls, the boys will still find ample opportunities to 'be boys'.  It also did absolutely nothing to diminish any of the amazing experiences I had.  Beyond that, I'd argue we were all the better for having girls there.  If for no other reason than I believe it better conditioned us to view them as equally capable peers, rather than naturally thinking (consciously or not) that our 'boys club' that taught us 'boy things' made us better than them and their (insert childish term for inferior) 'girls club' that that taught them 'girl things'...Which is a mentality far too many boys and young men latch on to and continue to carry with them throughout adulthood.

As far as the cookies go...Maybe it's just me and my wife, but it seems to us like the quality of the cookies/ingredients has gone downhill over the years, such that we are ultimately buying them for nostalgia as much as anything else.  There is that conditioned response of mental hype when 'girl scout cookie' season comes, followed by the inevitable letdown of them being nowhere near as good as we remembered. 

alfadriver said:

Here's something I don't understand- the "need" for boys to be boys without girls around.

What in the world are they doing that they can't handle girls being around?  I was never a scout, so I don't know.

As for worrying about their hormones- that doesn't come on until later, and isn't it a good thing to make sure kids know how to deal with each other on an equal basis at an early age?  Seems like that should reduce some dumber sexual tension and perhaps reduce assaults.  

Let kids be kids, together.  Regardless (of anything).

Alfa for President?  Seriously, that is right on.  Thank you.

"Boys will be Boys" is BS speak for "its ok for Boys to be complete heathens, but girls mustn't be."  Its a cop-out for bad parenting.

My daughter is nearly 2, still wearing 12-month clothes and will still give most "Boys" her age a run for their money, while also being completely empathetic and respectful.  She's also smart as a whip and has already dismantled quite a few things on her own.  I foresee a lot of Lego's and the like in her future.

As a former Scout myself, I've been watching what has been happening with the GSA and BSA orgs recently and I'm not excited about either, especially when it usually comes down to selling overpriced junkfood, which they do enough of at schools to help pay for their education and avoiding potential sexual predators or worse having their leaders removed due to their completely legal sexual preferences.  I'm not excited about having my children involved in either org at this point and will look elsewhere for after school educational activities.

In reply to Stefan :

I agree with the both of you.. My son plays Coed Flag Football.  There are some wickedly fast and skilled girls in the league.  No one looks at them any differently, Just hand them the ball and watch them go to work on the defenders.  perpetuating the "he man woman haters" club.. is not anywhere I want to be.  

I disagree with all three of you.

Acknowledging that males and females are different is a long way from the "he man woman haters" club.

I don't have much of an opinion on the scouts one way or the other, but I'm sure there are strong opinions on both sides without the need to make things worse by insinuating that anyone who doesn't like the change somehow hates women or that letting a boy do boy things is bad parenting. Wow. Maybe I am misreading your comments or something.

I'm a current Cub Scout den leader, my wife is a Girl Scout leader. Whether boys/girls have a good experience basically comes down to the local level. Some troops camp and are outdoors all the time, some do not . Some are terrific, well run groups and some are not. This applies to both organizations. It's a volunteer organization at the local level, and the volunteers organize the activities. If you are a parent who wants a better experience for your  child, get involved or stop bitching.

It's been a positive experience for both my kids, and for me as a leader. I now have a *slightly* better understanding of what makes 8 year old boys tick, I can tie several knots and identify 6 trees.

Without being cynical, I beleive the BSA's decision to be co-ed came down to survival: membership numbers are ~ 1/3 what they were in the 1960s. The Mormon Church has effectively split from the BSA - in my view that's a positive , but  also means ~250,000 less boys are entering the program. And that's a big hole to fill.

Regarding the co-ed nature of the BSA, girls and boys at this time are divided into separate dens. I'd consider my views on gender progressive, but I do think there's some benefit to having separate boy and girl activities at least some of the time.

Is there anything better than BSA, though? 

It seems like it's still one of the best organized groups to get kids outdoors, thinking critically, appreciating self reliance and learned skills. 

Aside from maybe an outdoor kids camp, I can't think of many organizations that aren't either kinda crazy militaristic or religious based. 

T.J. said:

I disagree with all three of you.

Acknowledging that males and females are different is a long way from the "he man woman haters" club.

I don't have much of an opinion on the scouts one way or the other, but I'm sure there are strong opinions on both sides without the need to make things worse by insinuating that anyone who doesn't like the change somehow hates women or that letting a boy do boy things is bad parenting. Wow. Maybe I am misreading your comments or something.

 

Men and women are different, sure.  Boys and girls, not so much.  The more they hang out together as they are young, the better they will be able to deal with the raw emotions that come later in life, IMHO.  

I'm not really bashing anyone, I just don't get what in the world boys need to do that's so bad that girls can't be around.  

And I know at young ages, interest in *stuff* is more equal than later in life- why not let the interest go and have them play together.

Seems to me, the real risk is to ALL the kids when you bring up adult predators.  Not between boys and girls.

In reply to alfadriver :

I agree with your idea, but I'm not sure why you assume boys have to be doing something bad?