Octopus Overlords

I did a quick topic search for this so apologies and request for a redirect if this has been discussed before but I'll say after some first hand experience with this, I'm not a huge fan of the concept. I understand the idea behind it and I like to think I'm mostly forward thinking when it comes to larger social issues like this; and I agree that a lot of the arguments against it are of the very icky variety: 'separate but equal' is pretty much a show stopper. But my 3 biggest concerns are, I think anyway, valid. The first is that I simply notice a big change in how my son acts in 'mixed company' vs his behavior 'with the boys'. And yeah, honestly, i should see a change there: yay us! We've successfully taught our son to tell boys from girls, our work here is done. But I like how he plays as an 8yo boy with other 8yo boys and he doesn't do that when there are girls in the group. My son is, to a fault, not an aggressive person and when he's in a boys only group I can see him starting to learn some of that aggression that he lacks and which will benefit him in his life to come. But drop a girl in the mix and he becomes his usual hesitant self; it happens on the soccer field as well. Put a girl on the other team(we've yet to have a girl on one of our teams) and he's afraid to challenge for the ball, particularly vs the girl, but generally as well. And to counter the argument that we should teach him, as parents(I'm also his coach) to play everyone the same, I don't think that's a parental teaching point. That's a societal norm/more that children learn in groups of their peers; all my talking in the world isn't going to remodel his behavior here.
My second point goes to the idea of mixed group campouts...this isn't an issue at age 8 naturally, and I admit I haven't read BSA's guidelines on this (if they have any?) but I think the concerns there are obvious. Again, this is just a concern as opposed to anything I've observed but it's definitely on our radar.
My third issue relates to the physical side of things; as I think most people are aware, young boys are nature's version of the perpetual motion machine. They just don't stop. Until they do. And then you can't wake them up for all the candy on Halloween. But this means on hikes/activities they're going all out. We'll easily do 5 or 6mph over broken ground with the boys wearing day packs. But when we have girls we're constantly yelling at the boys to slow down/wait for the group/stay together. And yes, there is value in all of those ideas; to be fair we don't NOT yell those things when there aren't girls present. But there is a marked difference in the 2 groups and you can tell that at least some of the boys are frustrated. over the course of a mile or 2 day hike these issues aren't even really issues, but I've done Philmont before and those are 8-15 mile hikes a day for 2 weeks wearing 40lb packs over mountainous terrain. Again I haven't read BSA's guidelines on this and maybe they have this worked out.

I actually think it's pretty easy to counter everything I've said if you go point by point and I acknowledge that. I do that in my head when I'm talking to my son about some of these issues(his particular frustration is the going slow on hikes but I remind him about 'Boy X', a boy in his den the last 2 years who has autism and we make exceptions for him so we need to be more tolerant when the girls are going slow).
I feel like I could've made this post about 5x longer as there are a lot of issues raised here: when does it become the indivual's responsibility to keep up with the group vs the group's responsibility? is it a good thing to let 'boys be boys'? What does that even mean? Should girls be treated differently by boys? How far does that deference go? Yeesh...just a bunch of stuff.

But then the broader concern of young boys having a space to call their own creeps back on me. And why can't they have that?

Besides, where am I gonna get my Girl Scout cookies in the spring????

At a minimum there have got to be some interesting new merit badges.

I can't speak to your experiences, but my 8-year-old son has been part of a mixed-gender scouting group since he was 5 (Baden-Powell Service Association), and it's been great. Yes, the girls tend to spend their time with girls and the boys with boys, but that's just how it goes at this age. I've seen the older scouts on camping trips, and it looks like they start working together more at some point.

As to physical ability and energy, I haven't seen any significant difference at their current age. There's a tiny little girl my son's age who is a goddamn machine on hikes, tromping forward relentlessly in her Hello Kitty boots.

And that's part of it. "Slow down for the girls" is also a societal norm, not a physical limitation, and not a particularly healthy one. Is every boy who joins up able to keep up an adult jogging pace of broken ground from day one? To begin with you might need to tell those in better physical shape to slow down to keep the group together, but you can also push the stragglers until they're able to keep up. At some point, it will even out. And when A) the boys learn that girls can kick the same amount of ass that they can, and B) the girls learn that they don't need 'help' to keep up with the boys, both sides are going to be the better for it.

And I have a feeling that the awkwardness will decrease once the 'new' of having girls around wears off and more team oriented activities take place that will lead to them relying on each other to succeed.

The real danger, of course, being parents/leaders who try to prevent that by keeping them separate/giving them separate activities and building resentment instead of esprit de corps.

I always had sisters along with the boys in the troop. They bunked with the moms. If it were not for that, we would not have had enough leaders. Most of the dads would not get involved, but the moms would.
So change kinda sucks, but not much. Considering how many women are leaders in scouting, I think it was inevitable.

This is the same Boy Scouts that hired the world's most infamous sexual predator to be the keynote at their annual main event? I can't imagine why you would be concerned.

So, the new policy that allows girls to be in the main program of the BSA will not result in mixed-gender campouts or troops. Chartering units will be able to create parallel troops for girls, or new chartering units can choose to only charter a troop for girls. Girls and boys will not be organized into the same troops. So concerns that boys won't feel free to be boys will be moot, as will concerns about, you know, sex on campouts.

Aside from the sex between young men that was already happening far more frequently than you might imagine, of course.

Why let them in at all, if it's going to be separate but equal? What's gained besides increased membership at the cost of decreased Girl Guides membership?

I don't have an opinion on what is or isn't the right approach here, I'm just confused as to how allowing girls to join the BSA makes any difference if they're never going to be doing activities with boys.

From a practical standpoint, wouldn't it make more sense to modernize the Girl Guide curriculum rather than to stand up girls only units in the BSA if you're never going to let them actually be part of a unit that has boys in it?

Really it's about the program. Girl Scouts are perceived as having a sedate, non-adventuresome program. You think of Girl Scouts, you think of craft projects and cookies.

Boy Scouts you think of camping, canoeing, backpacking, rock climbing.

Also, there's the Eagle program. The Girl Scouts have a similar reward, the Gold Award, which is just as difficult and rarified as the Eagle, but it doesn't have nearly the brand recognition as being and Eagle Scout.

hentzau wrote: ↑Mon Dec 10, 2018 6:25 pm Really it's about the program. Girl Scouts are perceived as having a sedate, non-adventuresome program. You think of Girl Scouts, you think of craft projects and cookies.

Boy Scouts you think of camping, canoeing, backpacking, rock climbing.

Also, there's the Eagle program. The Girl Scouts have a similar reward, the Gold Award, which is just as difficult and rarified as the Eagle, but it doesn't have nearly the brand recognition as being and Eagle Scout.

Scouts isn't particularly meaningful up here in Canada, so maybe that's it. "brand recognition" or prestige isn't really a thing.

In any case, it's probably time to change the name to Scouts of America and hope Girl Scouts don't have an issue with it.

GreenGoo wrote:

hentzau wrote: ↑Mon Dec 10, 2018 6:25 pm Really it's about the program. Girl Scouts are perceived as having a sedate, non-adventuresome program. You think of Girl Scouts, you think of craft projects and cookies.

Boy Scouts you think of camping, canoeing, backpacking, rock climbing.

Also, there's the Eagle program. The Girl Scouts have a similar reward, the Gold Award, which is just as difficult and rarified as the Eagle, but it doesn't have nearly the brand recognition as being and Eagle Scout.

Scouts isn't particularly meaningful up here in Canada, so maybe that's it. "brand recognition" or prestige isn't really a thing.

In any case, it's probably time to change the name to Scouts of America and hope Girl Scouts don't have an issue with it.

They have, and they do. . The general title is now “Scouts BSA” which is about as stupid a name as I can think of.

Good luck to them both.

Fireball wrote: ↑Mon Dec 10, 2018 3:52 pm So, the new policy that allows girls to be in the main program of the BSA will not result in mixed-gender campouts or troops. Chartering units will be able to create parallel troops for girls, or new chartering units can choose to only charter a troop for girls. Girls and boys will not be organized into the same troops. So concerns that boys won't feel free to be boys will be moot, as will concerns about, you know, sex on campouts.

Aside from the sex between young men that was already happening far more frequently than you might imagine, of course.

I said it before but I haven't read the guidelines and apparently I need to because this is definitely not what is happening in our cub scout den. We have full integration including on campouts.
As for the sex part yeah that's part of. Considering LGBTQ individuals are what 15% of the country, max its all about minimizing risk. I don't care if my son is gay (that's not totally true...I absolutely hope he isn't because I think life is much harder if you are and he struggles enough in his little dallas suburb with blue ribbon schools and 1/2 million $ houses..he'd be road kill in life if he had to find the strength to be gay but I'd still love him every bit as much as I do now). But my larger point being he's more likely to be straight and now you have a ready made situation for things to go sideways. And in the Era of #MeToo boys have to be extra careful. Again, for my boy, MeToo won't be a problem but it could be for some of his friends, down the line. But remember I'm a white parent in the suburbs of small children: I need to know everything in the world that could possibly go wrong so I can freak out about it and spends thousands of $ so it won't. The book they give you is in your closing documents when you get the house.

GungHo wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:01 am And in the Era of #MeToo boys have to be extra careful.

No they don't. They need to not be rapey.

The idea that boys, or men for that matter, have to be careful is ludicrous compared to what women have to deal with. When more 25% of men are falsely accused of sexual assault, then I'll admit they need to be "extra careful."

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:58 am

GungHo wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:01 am And in the Era of #MeToo boys have to be extra careful.

No they don't. They need to not be rapey.

The idea that boys, or men for that matter, have to be careful is ludicrous compared to what women have to deal with. When more 25% of men are falsely accused of sexual assault, then I'll admit they need to be "extra careful."

+1. I think integration is an excellent opportunity to give boys and girls the chance to grow up learning how to treat opposite-sex people like people, as equals due equal respect, which is completely counter to the way we've always done it.

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 12:31 pm +1. I think integration is an excellent opportunity to give boys and girls the chance to grow up learning how to treat opposite-sex people like people, as equals due equal respect, which is completely counter to the way we've always done it.

It might be, if it wasn't an organization that hired the most infamous sexual predator ever as a keynote speaker at their Jamboree last year.

Jeff V wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 12:40 pm

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 12:31 pm +1. I think integration is an excellent opportunity to give boys and girls the chance to grow up learning how to treat opposite-sex people like people, as equals due equal respect, which is completely counter to the way we've always done it.

It might be, if it wasn't an organization that hired the most infamous sexual predator ever as a keynote speaker at their Jamboree last year.

Yeah. You said that already.

GreenGoo wrote:

Jeff V wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 12:40 pm

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 12:31 pm +1. I think integration is an excellent opportunity to give boys and girls the chance to grow up learning how to treat opposite-sex people like people, as equals due equal respect, which is completely counter to the way we've always done it.

It might be, if it wasn't an organization that hired the most infamous sexual predator ever as a keynote speaker at their Jamboree last year.

Yeah. You said that already.

Yeah, thanks a lot for bringing that back up, Jeff.

And the scouts always invite (not hire) the President to speak at their National Jamboree. Usually, they actually say something uplifting and non-partisan. History of Presidents at Jambos


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 12:31 pm

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:58 am

GungHo wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:01 am And in the Era of #MeToo boys have to be extra careful.

No they don't. They need to not be rapey.

The idea that boys, or men for that matter, have to be careful is ludicrous compared to what women have to deal with. When more 25% of men are falsely accused of sexual assault, then I'll admit they need to be "extra careful."

+1. I think integration is an excellent opportunity to give boys and girls the chance to grow up learning how to treat opposite-sex people like people, as equals due equal respect, which is completely counter to the way we've always done it.

Definitely. Don't be rapey. That's the key part, for sure. And yeah I agree. Women have it much worse. But just because an armadillo has a much shittier chance of crossing the highway than I do, doesn't mean I don't need to look out for cars. So being careful means things like 'not going on campouts with girls you don't know'. I'm not locking my kid in a bubble but I'm not going to intentionally (at least not without a good reason) make it harder for him to succeed.


Yeah. I love that aspect of integration. It's great to have another voice that's working to instill the same beliefs in your child as you are. That's the reason we put him in scouts in the first place because scouts is about respect and tolerance and kindness. In the grand scheme that's what integration is.

GungHo wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:43 pm So being careful means things like 'not going on campouts with girls you don't know'.

I don't understand how that is being careful.

GungHo wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:43 pm Definitely. Don't be rapey. That's the key part, for sure. And yeah I agree. Women have it much worse. But just because an armadillo has a much shittier chance of crossing the highway than I do, doesn't mean I don't need to look out for cars. So being careful means things like 'not going on campouts with girls you don't know'. I'm not locking my kid in a bubble but I'm not going to intentionally (at least not without a good reason) make it harder for him to succeed.

Is there any evidence that teenage girls are falsely accusing guys they don't know of sexual assault?

stessier wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:47 pm

GungHo wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:43 pm So being careful means things like 'not going on campouts with girls you don't know'.

I don't understand how that is being careful.

Wicca, dude.

Who the hell keeps their feet flat when levitating? That takes effort and is pointless.

stessier wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:47 pm

GungHo wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:43 pm So being careful means things like 'not going on campouts with girls you don't know'.

I don't understand how that is being careful.

Well I could say 'going on campouts with kids you don't know' but the potential for 'bad things that can happen that ruin my kid's life' * 'likelihood of event happening' is sufficiently low in the case of him camping with other boys that I'm not concerned about it. Even though the number of bad things that could happen is much higher in the case of boys.


My feelings on this are definitely colored by personal experience (though not direct) and as the father of 2 young boys who will grow up in a very different world than the one I knew as a child, I'm wary. I'm wary of the internet too. And him eating at McDonald's. Or riding a bike without a helmet. It's on my radar. If it's not for (generic) you that's cool

GungHo wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:13 pm

stessier wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:47 pm

GungHo wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:43 pm So being careful means things like 'not going on campouts with girls you don't know'.

I don't understand how that is being careful.

Well I could say 'going on campouts with kids you don't know' but the potential for 'bad things that can happen that ruin my kid's life' * 'likelihood of event happening' is sufficiently low in the case of him camping with other boys that I'm not concerned about it. Even though the number of bad things that could happen is much higher in the case of boys.


My feelings on this are definitely colored by personal experience (though not direct) and as the father of 2 young boys who will grow up in a very different world than the one I knew as a child, I'm wary. I'm wary of the internet too. And him eating at McDonald's. Or riding a bike without a helmet. It's on my radar. If it's not for (generic) you that's cool

I would submit that the potential for "bad things" happening is significantly higher with girls he knows than girls he doesn't know. Unless you are suggesting any girl that knows him would never do bad things with him - which would be kinda harsh.

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:13 pm Who the hell keeps their feet flat when levitating? That takes effort and is pointless.

who the hell, indeed.

Her feet are pressed up against the lower planes of the Bleak Eternity of Gehenna and the Gray Waste of Hades.
dur.

GungHo wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:13 pm

stessier wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:47 pm

GungHo wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:43 pm So being careful means things like 'not going on campouts with girls you don't know'.

I don't understand how that is being careful.

Well I could say 'going on campouts with kids you don't know' but the potential for 'bad things that can happen that ruin my kid's life' * 'likelihood of event happening' is sufficiently low in the case of him camping with other boys that I'm not concerned about it. Even though the number of bad things that could happen is much higher in the case of boys.


My feelings on this are definitely colored by personal experience (though not direct) and as the father of 2 young boys who will grow up in a very different world than the one I knew as a child, I'm wary. I'm wary of the internet too. And him eating at McDonald's. Or riding a bike without a helmet. It's on my radar. If it's not for (generic) you that's cool

The problem is that you are teaching him that girls are scary and out to get him.

The world hasn't changed other than to say it's way less acceptable to blame sexual assault exclusively on women.

You are pretending like it's more dangerous for boys without a shred of evidence to support you. The internet has been proven to have malicious software. Fast food has been proven to be nutritionally poor. Riding a bike without a helmet... well you got me there. I haven't found anything saying that's all that much safer, but it's way more likely there is good evidence than for blackmailing/reputation-damaging women.

Unagi wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:31 pm

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:13 pm Who the hell keeps their feet flat when levitating? That takes effort and is pointless.

who the hell, indeed.

Her feet are pressed up against the lower planes of the Bleak Eternity of Gehenna and the Gray Waste of Hades.
dur.

stessier wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:23 pm

GungHo wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:13 pm

stessier wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:47 pm

GungHo wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:43 pm So being careful means things like 'not going on campouts with girls you don't know'.

I don't understand how that is being careful.

Well I could say 'going on campouts with kids you don't know' but the potential for 'bad things that can happen that ruin my kid's life' * 'likelihood of event happening' is sufficiently low in the case of him camping with other boys that I'm not concerned about it. Even though the number of bad things that could happen is much higher in the case of boys.


My feelings on this are definitely colored by personal experience (though not direct) and as the father of 2 young boys who will grow up in a very different world than the one I knew as a child, I'm wary. I'm wary of the internet too. And him eating at McDonald's. Or riding a bike without a helmet. It's on my radar. If it's not for (generic) you that's cool

I would submit that the potential for "bad things" happening is significantly higher with girls he knows than girls he doesn't know. Unless you are suggesting any girl that knows him would never do bad things with him - which would be kinda harsh.

I thought he was saying it was more about 'girls' vs. 'boys'.

A boy will get into a certain type of trouble while out camping with a group of boys he doesn't know... the type of trouble he'd get in with a group that also included girls he doesn't know... would be more serious (potentially...)
I think it's reasonably that a parent would generally look at a co-ed camp-out with a more careful eye than a 'all boy' or 'all girl' camp-out. Just sayin.

Girls in the boy scouts
Boys in the girl scouts
You free your mind in your androgyny

I'm not seeing the androgyny here. What am I missing?

Are those lyrics?

GreenGoo wrote: ↑Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:01 pm I'm not seeing the androgyny here. What am I missing?

Are those lyrics?

Yes.

Thanks.

Looks like the attack on all things "men" takes another victim.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/boy-scouts ... 1544747082

em2nought wrote: ↑Sat Dec 15, 2018 2:20 pm Looks like the attack on all things "men" takes another victim.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/boy-scouts ... 1544747082

Did you even read the article, you doofus. The problems with Scouting has nothing to do remotely with "attacks on all things men", even if such a thing exists. Their problems are two fold - sexual abuse lawsuits and kids just not being interested in what Scouting has to offer - a mistake, I believe. Please, if you are going to post something, at least take the time to read it before assuming it supports your argument. Otherwise, you look like an idiot.

We don't let bots do random drive-by link dropping either.

At some point he's going to enter the realm of automated uselessness, if he's not there already. It's clear he has no interest in participating in the discussion of the topics he vomits into.

But then, Rip didn't either, by the end.