Heyyyyyy, those IPs match, and they have the same certificate! This means that we can get all the wins of HTTP/2 server pushes without harming HTTP/1.1 users. Examples of Materials That Can Be Adapted For Therapy a collection of resources by Judith Maginnis Kuster. The following is one section of Judith Kuster's Net.

Cengage Learning has shut down our Microsoft Windows 2003 servers due to Microsoft’s discontinuation of support. As a result, the CoursePort content residing on the servers, including Online Companion sites, Learn It Online games, etc., is no longer available. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause you. If you are an instructor and have questions about how to access similar features in MindTap, SAM or CourseMate, contact your or Implementation and Training Specialist.

If you are a student and have questions, please contact your instructor. Access Code An access code lets you register online materials that may come packaged with some new Cengage textbooks, purchased on a printed card at local bookstores, or purchased online. Please follow the instructions provided with your access code to register your product. Course Key A course key is a string of numbers and letters that identifies the specific materials you will need access to for your course. Your instructor should provide this key to you. Course keys for most Cengage products can be registered here.

Those products have course keys which are a 12 or 15-digit string of numbers and letters. There are a few specific types of course keys that cannot be registered here. To register a WebAssign class key,. For CourseMate, Write Experience and others, first activate your product access code. Then login to CengageBrain, open the product and enter the course key directly into the product.

After the BSA Board of Directors’, many in the Scouting community had just one question: When can my daughter sign up? Other Scouters had more specific questions about the reasons for the move, implementation and rollout plan. 30, to submit their questions for BSA Chief Scout Executive Mike Surbaugh. By the time we recorded the video last week, we had received more than 400 questions. I read each one, organized them by topic and took a representative sample of 22 questions directly to our Chief. He spoke openly and candidly for nearly 30 minutes. For the best experience, watch the complete video of our discussion below.

But if you’re short on time, scroll for a question-by-question breakdown. I’ve included the video timestamp so you can jump directly to the answers that most interest you. Watch the complete video The questions and timestamps 1. How was the decision made?

Hear the answer at: Question from: Chris S., a committee chairman in the Atlanta Area Council 2. Was decision driven by revenue and/or membership? Hear the answer at: Question from: Willis R., camping chairman for the Longs Peak Council 3. Was decision about lining pockets of BSA executives? Hear the answer at: Question from: Greg L., a member of the district advancement committee in the Atlanta Area Council 4. Will all-boy Cub Scout packs be allowed? Hear the answer at: Question from: Sean W., an assistant Scoutmaster from the National Capital Area Council 5.

What will the organization be called? Hear the answer at: Question from: Aidan F., an Eagle Scout living in South Africa as part of the Transatlantic Council 6. Will all-boy language and imagery in handbooks change? Hear the answer at: Question from: Sam S., a Scoutmaster in the Greater New York Councils 7. Was the Girl Scouts of the USA approached?

Hear the answer at: Question from: Julie K., an assistant Scoutmaster from the Western Los Angeles County Council 8. How will packs find enough volunteers for single-gender dens? Hear the answer at: Question from: Donald K., an assistant Scoutmaster from the Hawk Mountain Council 9. Can packs have the option to make dens co-ed?

Hear the answer at: Question from: Jessica M., a den leader from the Old North State Council 10. Will Cub Scouting become fully “co-ed” in a few years? Hear the answer at: Question from: Bill K., a district chairman from the National Capital Area Council 11. Will there be a uniform styled and/or cut for women and girls?

Hear the answer at: Question from: Asiya S., a den leader from the Northeast Georgia Council 12. Will dens and packs be required to register girls? Hear the answer at: Question from: A female Scouter from Florida, who asked to remain anonymous 13. When in 2018 can packs start welcoming girls? Hear the answer at: Question from: Jenny H., a Cubmaster from the Cascade Pacific Council 14. How will the program for older girls, debuting in 2019, work?

Hear the answer at: Question from: Allie G., an advancement chairwoman in the Pathway to Adventure Council 15. Will there be a pilot of the older-girl program?

Hear the answer at: Question from: Jennifer Z., a parent from the San Diego Imperial Council 16. How will the adult-leader requirements change? Hear the answer at: Question from: Rich B., an assistant Scoutmaster in the North Florida Council 17.

What about sleeping arrangements and restrooms at camp? Hear the answer at: Question from: Michelle D. Of the Dan Beard Council 18. What about inappropriate situations at camp? Hear the answer at: Question from: Stacey G., a den leader in the Southwest Florida Council 19. Will the BSA help girls feel included and not “second-class citizens”? Hear the answer at: Question from: The 9-year-old daughter of Kathleen P., a parent from Florida 20.

Once young women can start working toward Eagle in 2019, will they use a different set of requirements? Hear the answer at: Question from: Debbie P., a committee member from the Iroquois Trail Council 21. What will happen to Venturing?

Hear the answer at: Question from: Julie P., an associate crew advisor from the Cascade Pacific Council 22. The change is happening. How can we encourage other Scouters to embrace it? Hear the answer at: Question from: Erik D., an assistant Scoutmaster from the Chief Seattle Council. Is this going to be an issue? I thought the requirements for a scout were simply to be First Class, camp at least 15 nights and be approved by your scoutmaster to be a candidate for election.

If girls can earn ranks, wouldn’t they be eligible? Although female venture scouts were ineligible because they could not earn the first class rank, there does not seem to be a specific ban on female members as female adults can be inducted.

I would think that once girls are eligible to earn ranks they would be able to be voted in. In the Live Stream video that is mentioned in this question list does address the OA. The answer was they don’t yet have an answer. Mike acknowledged the need for an honor camper program for girls but weather the OA or another organization has not been decided.

The OA did not form on day 1 that Scouting did. It will be at least 2.5 years before the first girl is eligible to become a member (1.5 years for program to start and then another year to meet eligibility requirements. I believe Mike mentioned a task force will be formed to submit recommendations.

Some of your readers with limited hearing and with anemic computers cannot hear the oral presentations. Please provide a written transcript for us. The entire discussion commentary is interesting. Have your consulted the hierarchy of the LDS Church as they are a significant membership in the BSA? And the BSA identity is respected world-wide. You may be well-served to look at the organization of Scouts in several Latin American nations; most are co-ed and most start kids at age 5 and maintain levels until age 25.

Many use the term Rovers for different steps in program development. Baden-Powell did extensive outreach in Latin America.

Where Councils and camps are struggling there are reasons for it. Identifying those reasons is the first step to fixing whatever the problems are. The BSA programs are not inexpensive for members: uniforms, equipment, training costs, transportation etc., and camps are expensive to maintain, but they do deliver great value. If there is a case where an area is so poor that raising money and attracting volunteers is a huge challenge, then maybe the National will be able to apply some of its fundraising muscle towards some Council assistance grants? This may already be the case (I’m just not aware of what happens on the national level). The Chief’s answer to Question 13 (When in 2018 can packs start welcoming girls?) is great news.

He said: “There is an eagerness and right now there is just an enormous sense of excitement, [of] ‘when can we start’ and ‘we’re ready to go today’. We will go as soon as we’re ready. We need to make sure we do this right, and we want to make sure we have the preparation so that girls when they come in they have a spectacular experience.

I hope that’s as soon as possible. I won’t commit to a date today, sure, but I promise you that there is so much interest and enthusiasm that we are motivated to get this started quickly.” And it the references to opening up Cub Scouting in the “fall of 2018” on the follow on pieces after the October 11 announcement have been edited to remove the “fall” references, and instead say things like “Cub Scouting will be available to girls beginning in 2018”. The FAQ on the Family Scouting page also drops the “Fall” reference, and instead says “Starting in 2018 (exact start date yet to be confirmed), families can choose to sign up their sons and daughters for Cub Scouts”. Given that, hopefully girls don’t need to be relegated to “tag-along” status at summer activities like day camp, resident camp and pack summertime activities after all, kindergarten boys can join Cub Scouting and start working on Tiger right after school ends, and this year’s Tiger boys can work on Wolf then too.

Hopefully there will be no need to hold girls back from the fun and recognition at these fun summer events in the Packs that want to welcome girls. After all, the original press release / announcement from the CSE and Board said (before a later edit) “Starting in the 2018 program year, families can choose”, which lines up with the end of school. The official “Cub Scout Cycle” piece uses a June start for simplicity: /Cub/PDF/Appendix/511-807.pdf.

Thanks, Bryan. And I strongly encourage folks to watch the CSE’s “townhall” video at for more discussion on the background and decision-making process. My concern remains that inviting girls to participate in our two largest traditional programs doesn’t do anything to address the reasons why BSA membership has been declining for 45 years. I am baffled by the notion that this will hurt the Girl Scouts of the USA. This is not a zero-sum game where if BSA wins GSUSA has to lose. Just as there are vast numbers of boys not involved in Scouting (see preceding paragraph), there are vast numbers of girls out there not (yet) involved in any Scouting program — more than enough for everyone.

This is an opportunity for both BSA and GSUSA (and American Heritage Girls, and Campfire, and all the other Scouting and Scouting-like programs out there) to show how and why each is different from the other, and enhance the ability of families and youth to choose the programs best for them. How can it not hurt Girl Scouts everyone keeps look at this from some isolated, autonomous perspective. If half the girls in a Girl Scout troop leave the troop to become Cub Scouts.

Those girls are all friends. Friends want to be with each other, Scouts in general was started to put structure around gangs of friends Girl Scout troops will fold because friends will want to stay together.

The question is, after the first few years of boat rocking, will GSUSA have enough momentum to move forward, or will Cub Scout girls peter out and GSUSA pushes on stronger than ever. The “friends stay with friends” theory works both ways. If some girls want to stay in Girl Scouts rather than going over to a BSA program, their friends will stay in Girl Scouts with them. If the idea is that BSA should never try to compete with Girl Scouts, that ignores the needs and wants of millions of girls that have chosen not to be Girl Scouts because Girl Scouts doesn’t offer the type of program they want. (BSA has the same problem with boys.) Are we supposed to say, “Oh, well, girls — too bad, so sad. Even though we have a program that you _would_ enjoy and (like Girl Scouts) would help you become the kind of leaders that our country needs — you can’t have it BECAUSE YOU ARE FEMALE.” BSA has finally outgrown that view.

I was disappointed to hear the piece about possibly doing a different uniform for girls. It’s one thing to tailor the uniform to different physiques (male or female) but making a totally different styling or “powder blue” shirt for girl Cubs is not the right way to go. Don’t take us back to the days of the yellow den mother shirt where we weren’t allowed to wear khaki. Uniform is one of the Aims and Methods, I hope we don’t forget that.

I’m also concerned about the separate handbooks for boys and girls. Why is gender or sex relevant? No need for he/she when you can use the pronouns of “Scout” or “Tiger” or “Wolf” etc. Seems like wasteful duplication of efforts that could be spent elsewhere. BSA attempted to implement an Activity Uniform consisting of a polo and shorts from August 1 1989 to until some time in the late 1990s, I believe 1998 when Venturing came out was when they did away with them.

The uniforms were not popular and other than in the BSA handbook and fieldbook of the time, you never saw anyone wearing them. Also I believe a council in Maryland tried to do something like that with Under Armour, and the way it was set up, it was more expensive to have that alternate uniform than the Field Uniform. Every rank had a different colored shirt, which added to the cost. The activity uniform (such as the red polo shirt with yellow fleur-de-lis or a camp t-shirt or troop t-shirt, combined with uniform shorts or pants) was _not_ an all-purpose substitute for the button-up tan uniform shirt plus uniform shorts or pants. When the field uniform with correct insignia was required for particular events, you couldn’t substitute the more casual activity uniform. The activity uniform was for getting sweaty and dirty, not for meetings and ceremonies where the tan field uniform shirt with badges, patches, and pins was expected. I agree that the activity uniform as shown in the handbooks was not popular, I suspect because (1) the BSA-produced polo shirts were expensive and not well designed (I had one), and (2) the shirts were supposed to be worn with the field uniform pants or shorts, which were also expensive and not well designed, and the majority of Scouts and adults didn’t own them anyway.

At the same time, unit / organization / event t-shirts, polo shirts, fleece vests, windbreakers, hats, etc. Are very popular.

But unless you are up close or the screen printing is really big, you can’t tell that the wearers are Scouts. As the Chief says, go back to square one and come up with a uniform that people like to wear, that is comfortable, and that fits well — qualities that many adults are not finding with the current field uniform. Just make sure that such a uniform is associated with BSA (a neckerchief is a good way to do that). If folks have an official, all-purpose uniform that fits, is comfortable, and that they like to wear, we’re going to get more folks wearing the uniform more often — promoting the Uniform Method of Scouting and giving Scouting some great marketing in the community. “The change is happening. How can we encourage other Scouters to embrace it?” Thos one is so simple to answer it isn’t even funny. Jump on board or you’re gone.

Process owner: the chartered organization representative. The question of whether units go coed is solely a chartered organiztation determination, not an individual unit determination. As COR, I decided our pack will be coed. Luckily, everyone on my team is onboard. However, if I had someone who isn’t, they’d be gone. The COR has the sole authority and discretion to “hire and fire” at will.

If you are in a unit belonging to a chartered organization that approved a coed program and you have a Scouter who is actively resistung change, just think of how you’d handke the same in your church or business. It’s not “mean”, it’s in the best interest of strengthening the unit and carrying the Scouting movement into the next era. Dear Keith – “it’s not mean, it’s in the best interest of strengthening the unit and carrying the Scouting movement into the next era.” Well – I suggest instead of thinking like a light switch = all or nothing, you consider the beauty of a zipper = it allows traffic to merge smoothly, and at times can prevent an otherwise very caring and positive volunteer from making an ass of themselves.

Working in a area where we seem to always be greatly under staffed, we’ve been forced to find positive ways to motivate our volunteers, rather than just inviting them to leave. Balance is a good thing. I am curious if having girls in Boy Scouting isn’t a violation of the original congressional charter that states, “The purposes of the corporation are to promote, through organization, and cooperation with other agencies, the ability of boys to do things for themselves and others, to train them in scoutcraft, and to teach them patriotism, courage, self-reliance, and kindred virtues, using the methods that were in common use by boy scouts on June 15, 1916.” I know we have had girls in BSA orgs for quite a while, but I am wondering why the Girl Scout charter doesn’t already meet the need? Seems like having two government instituted agencies performing similar tasks doesn’t imply the need to simply consolidate the charter into a single “scouting” charter. I’m not necisarilly against girls in the program, I just really don’t see the value of re-inventing the wheel instead of helping the parallel chartered org meet the need under their charter. Boy Scout Charter: Girl Scout Charter. I am disappointed to hear that BSA is not going to consider a name change.

In this same interview they said that they are not going to alienate girls. However, by keeping the word BOYS and excluding any mentions of girls in the name IS alienating girls. If they want to accept girls and not have them feel like second class citizens, then female scouts should be acknowledged in some form in the scouting organization’s name.

Or, do away with any gender refer all together and just call it Scouting of America. If they are going to commit to it they need to commit all the way and not make half-hearted gestures. My little girls and I did a year or two of Girl Scouts but they found the program to be boring and insipid compared to their brothers’ adventures in Boy Scouting, even with all of the (unsanctioned) activities I incorporated. If I go shopping at Fred Meyer’s and don’t like the name Fred, I don’t try to make the whole chain change its name. If I want to join Lion’s Club but I’m afraid of lions, I don’t try to force the whole movement to change its name to Kitty Cat Club (or whatever). If girls actually want to be Boy Scouts, it seems to be a done deal. There were apparently not enough women leaders willing to invest in beefing up the Girl Scout program into something that would interest these renegade girls.

It could have been done, and still could. Girls and women could work together to incorporate more camping, high adventure, or whatever it is the girls seem to think they have to have.

I haven’t met any boys whining about wanting to join Girl Scouts! Lots of good reasons for that! Overall good interview and very informative. I surprised however, that not once did the mention of Scouts Canada come up. Boy Scouts of Canada admitted girls in 1998, changed their name to Scouts Canada and boys and girls wear the same color uniforms so that makes girls included from the get go. My having been both a Asst. Scoutmaster and a Exploring Post Advisor with many conversations with other Post Advisors who had only girl members, I see no problems that haven;’t already been solved.

There will always be some men in Scouting who resist any change, are prejudiced against girls or women, and are even racist, but Scouting will grow and prosper and become even more valuable to our nations’s future, in spite of their grumblings and gripes. I have had more women (equally young and old and experienced and inexperienced Scouters) complain to me about this change than men. The vast majority of the men I have spoken with are okay with it. You say “there will always be some men prejudiced against girls or women, and are even racist ” but that statement is pure conjecture and it is correlating racism with this issue. Not one of the people I know to be against this change are racist. Some of them are black, others are white. I think you have a prejudice of your own that those who oppose this are intolerant jerks and this prejudice of your is neither kind or helpful.

Personally, I support the change but I can’t stand by while someone calls honest people racists just because they disagree with the change. Well I wonder if was looked at Canada and what happened when they went co ed?

I think I remember they changed the uniform for boys and girls. I know they are still losing numbers just like the BSA. So I have not studied this and I don’t know the program in Canada. But membership is down 63% since 1990 to 2013.

With membership around 60,000. But with the huge increase in fees and opening up membership. I sure wounder how much of a money issue we have going at the National level.

What is all the money being spent one? Since 1969 when the BSA’s Explorer Division began allowing young women 14 to 20 to participate. Then in 1998 the Exploring program was re-organized and split into today’s Exploring programs that are primarily career-oriented and venturing crews. In 2017 local Venturing and Explorer programs include many young women and of course adult women are involved in every aspect of scouting from Den mothers to Scoutmasters as well as local Scout council board members and professional staff. So, I’d say that the recent announcement is not about young girls and young boys sharing a tent or even neighboring tents on a campout. Rather it is about making Scouting’s tried-and-true program and high adventure activities available to girls and young women. With this change the BSA joins most every other World Federation of Scouting county that offers their country’s scouting programs to both boys and girls.

As an Eagle Scout (1966) and father to two girls I’m excited to see this gap in the BSA’s program finally about to close! They keep referring to these ‘surveys’ but never releasing them.

The BSA is not helping themselves and is creating distrust because all they release is a two videos, an oped at CNN of all places, and a 1 page glossy (essentially) You would think that if the surveys really support at the 90 plus percent level, BSA could help dispel the perception of this being membership driven by being open with these surveys-especially if the surveys were that positive. Also, I find is disconcerting that part of the support for the decision is that girls are already participating with Dens/Packs. He answered that single gendered dens are the way forward, but you can read the comments here and know that there will immediately be coed dens.

Is BSA going to take a stand or be OK with packs that make dens coed? My Council Executive’s press release specifically used an example of coed dens saying it was a great thing.

If we really want to make girls feel included, then they need to have the exact same uniform. We also need to officially change the name to Scouting of America much the same as Scouting of Canada who changed their name when they started allowing girls in 1998. It seems a bit ridiculous to label a co-ed organization with a gender specific name.

Personally, I would have voted against allowing girls were I given a vote. Not because I have anything against girls, but because I think it is okay for boys to have an organization just for boys. The vibe is different when boys are with boys and it is good for them to have that time together. The teenage years are awkward and taking away a safe retreat for boys to just be themselves and develop leadership, character, and outdoor skills without worrying about what girls are thinking of them or doing is a good thing. It has also been proven that boys and girls learn better in same gender classrooms. However, I respect that my opinion is on the losing side so i will graciously accept the decision to allow girls into Scouting. Allowing girls doesn’t mean that my son can’t still get a lot out of Scouting or that BSA isn’t a great organization.

If I want to set an example of the values of Scouting that I teach, then I must set the example for my son and two daughters to wholeheartedly embrace the decision to allow girls and still do my best to make Scouting great. To do anything less would show a lack of character, one of the values I am trying to instill in my son and two daughters. Jeff, I agree with the first part of your post.

Having taught High School for 30 years I can say with reservation that there are different dynamics with genders are mixed. Most HS Student Councils are dominated by girls. In Calfornia (not sure of others) some of the state universities are now 60% female. I would love to hear that they actually consulted with anyone with expertice in this area. As for the second part of the post, I’ll just say that one of my favorite flags is yellow and has a snake on it.

The questions proposed to our Chief Scout Exec and his answers seemed to indicate that everyone is just biting at the bit for this co-ed thing to happen. The very fact that this Q&A is here tells me that self righteous liberals in Irving know that this is going to be very unpopular. I travel quite a bit and am known for my volunteering in Scouting (which will come to and end with the advent of girls in the BSA) and that I am an Eagle Scout. If I have been asked once, I have be asked a hundred times of my opinion of all this. Before giving my opinion, I ask theirs. 100% have said (among other things) “It is the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard of”.

Much like the “Boy Power 76” program in the ’70s, this attempt to boost revenue for the BSA was a dismal failure. This crazy “merging of the sexes” will be no different. Oh, and as far as wanting to appeal to “Families”? Other than picking up additional registration fees for a couple of years before they grow weary of the “new” diluted program, I would call this TOTAL BS!!! Nice job in dismantling a great program, that has lasted for over 100 years, survived a terrible Flu epidemic and two World Wars, for shear ideology and money!

You’re spot on! This is nothing but a desperate money grab to keep the paid BSA bureaucracy awash in cash for a few more years. Scouting has had bureaucracy problem for decades which exists only to serve its own financial need. Now with the collusion of a Wall St CEO infested board, the volunteers who actually make Scouting work are being spit on. We’re already seeing accelerating membership losses with the last cave in to the homosexual lobby and this move will just kick the afterburners in.

I give the program about 5-10 years left at best. I don’t know of ONE current adult male volunteer who wants to take on the responsibility of co-ed camp outs. These changes are going to have costs. None of the summer camps we have attended over the past few years have had facilities or space in the facilities for another gender.

They will need showers and related facilities for the boys, men, women, transgendered, and girls. Construction companies are not non-profits, so there will be costs. Books are going to change; printers and distributors expect to get paid. The video talked about uniform changes; Scout uniforms are far from inexpensive.

Is National setting aside a budget to cover these expenses? The councils are already cash strapped enough. If National requires the councils to support these changes, they need to provide the funding. If National cannot pay for it, the councils should have the authority to say no, we cannot take on the expense. Tony Verreos – Eagle Scout, San Francisco, CA 1967 As one of those variously termed old timers, old guard, before the common era etc. Scouters, I have had an abundance of opportunities to criticize BSA National for policies which the Executive Board and leadership stubbornly failed to address in a timely and professional manner for decades.

No point going into what and why, as most are well aware of areas of friction. The influence of Bill Gates seems to have been pivotal. I’m so pleased to be able to view the video with our BSA Chief Scout Exec.

Mike Surbaugh dealing with all issues head on, and clarifying the roots of Scouting, its old connection with Campfire Girls (which many of us did not even know about), and the focus on family. It’s gratifying to hear the amount of research work that was done, and the outcome being crystal clear: do not dilute the product. Just like in school, the military, or the business world, there is one standard for everyone regardless or which toilet you use.

In some cases local unit leaders and parents seem to be unaware of the need for and functions of Councils and National, and that is in my opinion a PR opportunity for National. This is so spot on. You have summed up the essence of what BSA was literally chartered to do, and you have done it succinctly and clearly. If anything, this is more needed now than it ever has been, especially as we see more and more homes with single mothers. I think the Girl Scouts have it right that BSA needs to focus on those boys that are not served rather than fundamentally alter the heart of the organization. I keep asking the question “how do the boys in Boy Scouts actually benefit from this?” I honestly can’t see how.

As I have said before, this family scouting business is a Trojan horse. As HeresTheOppositeView has stated, BSA is a way for fathers and father figures to help young men become men of character (i.e., the charter). Everything else is simply window dressing. Admitting girls to the program is not going to make that any easier or better. Really.I was born and raised in Portugal where Scouting has always been co-ed just like the rest of the World, except for two countries, USA and Saudi Arabia, finally we are in the right path, forty years behind but that’s a start. Program must remain the same for boys or girls, camping is for boys and girls, one question, when you go to work, in our daily lives do male and female, eat, drive, walk, talk different, is there a boys burger king and a girls burger king or a boys side of the street and a girls side of the street.

We need to teach our children that the other sex is not taboo, we need to teach our children to live under the same roof regardless of their gender and then maybe all this sexual harassment and rape numbers will start to go down. By now most of you are thinking that I’m a mental and that this has nothing to do with Scouting. But think for a minute. And for those of you who are totally against Scouting becoming CO-ED, I personally think you are afraid that girls will do a better job at it than some of the boys. I don’t think our Mental at all. I have said in the past when I went to the World Jamboree in 1983 in Alberta Canada and that’s when I found out about other countries being co-ed but not the USA. I have a daughter in Girl Scouts and my Troop does camping trips with her Girl Scout Troop at least twice a year.

The Trips go very well and both Troops have a Good time and Fun together. Also I believe keep Program and Uniform the same for All, no need to change that. So From 1 Scoutmaster to another, Great Post. For the same reason (i.e., driving an agenda) that anyone who spouts this incomplete narrative fails to mention that (1) most of these countries (93, in fact) also maintain a separate Scouting organization open solely to girls, and (2) Europeans countries experienced a backlash following the membership changes to their main Scouting organizations, which resulted in programs that under-serve boys. For example, the UK now has at least 10 different Scouting organizations, several of which are intended to provide the boys program that others have abandoned. Unfortunately, these programs are generally not welcomed by WOSM, and thus you do not see them at World Jamborees and other international events.

Also, it’s easy for those driving the co-ed agenda to ignore the all-female programs in the UK and elsewhere by speaking specifically of WOSM-member organizations. Because nearly 100 of these large and successful all-girls Scouting programs register with the World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts and not WOSM. Bottom line: Highly successful Scouting programs designed specifically for boy and specifically for girls (i.e., not co-ed) exist in many countries, particularly those touted by some as being “more enlightened”, but it’s easy to twist the narrative to suggest otherwise. Actually, Scoutmaster, you hit it very squarely on the head. Young girls are far more mature than boys a these younger ages (cub and younger boy scout age). When combined, the girls take over handily and the boys let them, ultimately missing out on the very reason we do Scouting in the first place.

Worse, girls tend to behave better and then are held as a standard for the boys who are berated for not acting like the girls. It is common in our schools today, where boys even at kindergarten age, are being suspended and expelled at record numbers. NOT EVERYTHING IS SO ROSY DOWN HERE IN THE TRENCHES Everything is easy when the presenter “cherry-picks” his responses to defend his own positions. He did demonstrate good preparation and presentation skills. Having been a Cub Scout adult leader for 11 years and now a Boy Scout adult leader for two, I say show me that increase in volunteers and more specifically qualified leaders that will step up to make the program work. I think Chief Scout Exec skirted the real issues that real leaders face. Good Sales pitch none-the-less.

Our crew was up on the climbing mountain at Philmont’s Cimarroncito camp with a mixed gender venture crew. Yahoo Mail Mobile App Free Download on this page. The entire dynamic of the trek was absolutely different. The scout’s mind’s were immediately shifted away from scouting and focused on two gregarious young ladies holding court on the mountain. You can’t ignore that this will be a negative dynamic that will be introduced.

As for Canada Scouts. It’s difficult to find, but there are some discussions on line that say there is a looming problem with girls taking all the leadership spots in the troops- admittedly I can’t vouch for the data.

You get some awkward boys with some girls that mature more quickly that certainly have the attention of the boys and you run a real risk of no boys in leadership positions. My experience with Middle School Student Councils shows they are very heavily slanted toward girls just as demerits and suspensions are very heavily slanted toward boys. This won’t readily be apparent but we can’t put our heads in the sand that by introducing girls, we are providing less opportunity for boys in the one program in America fighting this nationwide trend of treating every boy how acts out as in need of discipline and medications. People also like to point to British Scouts. Their bylaws have such great points such as Duty to God is not a bar to membership (there is in fact a separate Scout Oath for Atheists). There is guidance on the role of the Scout leader in providing contraceptive and abortion advice. They advise that scouts forming relationships should be allowed privacy to explore those relationship on scout trips.

There is a multiple page FAQ on the role of the leader in providing condoms on campouts. So, it is naive to think that this isn’t a negative we will have to deal with at the boy scout level. Separately, I would ask that the Scouting leadership is truly open to dissenting opinions. You see a comment from Keith Ciancio above who says “I’m the COR, I know best and you are gone if you raise any concerns.” Keith needs to go ponder the scout oath and law and see if he is living up to it. I suggest this kind of attitude isn’t. I can’t think of another time I was treated as poorly as I was by a paid scouter when I asked his help (our council didn’t do the outreach Mr Surbaugh said they were supposed to) to sell me on the program and give me ammunition to fight my chartering organization who was (one again) discussing not chartering my troop.

It’s been a month and I’m still stunned by the response I received, and very much questioning my future in scouting because of this response. While officially there will be no coed troops, unofficially there will be. I have one troop that told me the CO does not have the resources or manpower to do two separate programs. They will have a separate girls unit on paper, but they will be fully integrated in the troop. When I mentioned this at the town hall with my council key 3, every volunteer in favor of going coed agreed that will happen and was OK with it. Unlike the CSE above, the Key three ignored the comment. Even the CSE noted that some small units currently do not have the numbers to have separate all boy dens.

How will this change when girls come. The Ghost of Bill The adult staffing problem will be the driver of making the program coed, not much else. Whether National knows this and is setting up the program with an unstated outcome expected, or, is so far from the reality of what is happening at Troop sites, the end will be the same. As I learned in my Logics class back when you were alive (it was a very long time ago), with one outcome that can come from two sources, you can’t use the outcome to determine which was the cause. We will have to wait to have someone tell us.

A sad day for Scouting. These initiatives are in poor taste. They undermine the integrity of Boy Scouts and are the beginning of the end.

As an Eagle Scout, for the first time, I am embarrassed of Boy Scouts. Scouting should have had the balls to stand up and say NO. This entire concept is based on flawed logic. No one had the guts to tell these fools the truth. It is not Boy Scouts responsibility to fix girl scouts or provide a place for girls to become Boy Scouts. Focus on developing young men into great citizens.

If they wanted to do an experiment create “Family Scouts” and see how that does. If it succeeds, keep it. Don’t destroy the establishment.

I love the change to include girls in the program. However, Mike Surbaugh took a very political approach to the “co-ed” den/troop question, I.E. He didn’t answer it. I understand that there “will be an increase in volunteers” because of this change, but will there actually be enough of an increase? My daughter is already part of the Girl Scout program, if she wanted to stay in an all girl program; why not just stay over there? She already participates in her brothers’ dens activities and has been since the oldest started Scouting.

Unofficially, she has been a Scout from the beginning. I feel that the program should be able to integrate the girls into the program without singling them out with their own dens. I have traveled to parts of the world that uses a co-ed program, I.E. Australia, Mexico, and Canada, and some of their programs are fully integrated with no issues of singling out the boys vs girls. I understand that there are some that will say they should stay separate because “the boys will step back and let the girls run the program,” these are actual quotes from a Girl Scout mother, or “there are things boys do that girls shouldn’t,” “the girls will be an after thought in the program,” etc.,etc. There are boys and girls with a different level of drive at all levels.

There might be a boy that has that mentality, but the program in place already addresses those issues by forcing that child to take leadership roles to gain the next rank. Each of those “issues” will be a mute point if the unit leadership is actually involved and willing to put the effort in.

David, like you, I laud the decision, but we must understand that many of our fellow Americans dread it. Describing WOSM organizations as “fully integrated with no issues” is an overstatement. Integrated organizations have issues that you and I deem to be trivial, but others think those are central to their world view and their vision of what they want for their boys (or what some boys have told me, they would like for themselves).

The availability of volunteers will depend on local culture. To make this work for some packs I can imagine, for example, a tiger DL dual registering for both the boy’s and girl’s den, and then operating both dens in the same room at the same time. In other packs facing exactly the same situation, I can see leaders saying, “Sorry girls, we don’t have an extra leader for you, Bye.” I don’t envision current Girl Scouts like you daughter jumping to the BSA4G ship. Especially, if they are in an active troop that generates as much fun as a pack or troop. But, a girl wanting to join one of those fun GS/USA troops, if it is at capacity, cannot join that troop, but instead is offered membership in a troop that doesn’t suit her interests.

(This happened to my daughter, and I’ve repeatedly heard this from other girls. She patiently waited six years to become a venturer.) So, what we have is a necessary compromise that encourages scouters to still maintain a boys-only space, but challenges them to look at the possibility of extending scouting to girls in their community. It’s a middle ground that I think satisfies very few. Will it work? Like you mentioned, it depends on the determination of leaders how many of them think this is a real need and how many of them are up for a challenge. The main difficulty that I have in understanding BSA’s decision is that this is all based on making it easier on families. For the Cub Scout family they will now have a couple of options: Option 1: Taking their son to one Pack’s Meetings and then taking their daughter to another Pack’s Meetings: If units are to pursue this option of remaining separate, the “All-Boy” Pack and “All-Girl” Pack many units would be forced to have them meet on separate nights due to space constraints of their Chartered Organization (CO).

Additionally some CO may not be open to units needing an additional week night to run meetings for new “All-Girl” Pack – this would mean that the “All-Girl” Pack may need to find a different CO. Again negating any convenience to our families.

Having “All Boy” units and “All Girl” units really does not accomplish much in making it easier on the family. Option 2: Looking at the Co-ed, but not Co-ed option of having one pack with “All-Boy” Dens and “All-Girl” Dens: What does this do to help a single parent with two children? What if the children are twin brother and sister and they both are Tigers? That parent can’t be in two locations at once.

Additionally many units may run into spacing issues. Separating the dens by sex means that potentially units will have twice as many dens. How many COs have the facilities to accommodate this? For Troops, National doesn’t even allow for a Co-ed Troop with “All-Boy” Patrols and “All-Girl” Patrols.

Boy and Girls shall not meet as part of the same Troop. What is this doing for the families that BSA is serving? Unless the “All-Boy” Troop and “All-Girl” Troop meet on the same night and at the same location, what benefit is there to families? Unless the “All-Boy” Troop and “All-Girl” conduct the same outings then you are pulling parents in two different directions or even creating more calendar conflict.

While the premise for allowing girls was so that BSA could better serve its’ families, it appears that National has seriously missed the mark. It’s a pretty rash assumption that two packs or troops can’t meet at the same time. Some CO’s (e.g. Mosques) are inherently set up for sexes to meet separately at the same time for the same purpose.

Others won’t have a problem with pack 1 and pack 1-4G having the same cubmaster and assistant and occupying the same open space. Other’s will demand separate leaders and separate time-slots for separate units — maybe even telling the new unit to pick a different CO. Our CO has never had a problem with troop, crew, pack, den sharing the facility at the same time (as long as fire safety standards are maintained).

Our COR has already made it clear that they will support us in whatever BSA4G program we wish to provide whenever we wish to provide it, or not. Bottom line: it’s on the scouters who have been pressing BSA for years to legitimize their efforts to demonstrate how they will make it work. I agree that this may serve some families well, and others not much differently than now. IMHO, the real game-changer is that girls will have access to a program with no cap on unit size, with strong links to a chartered sponsor to encourage longevity, and desirable quality benchmarks.

So, because some COs don’t have space for expansion, capacious CO’s shouldn’t sponsor BSA4G packs on top of their existing scouting program? By that logic, because some COs only have space for 30, no troop in the nation should have more than 3 patrols. At the end of our troop meetings, we circle up, cross arms and hold hands for the SM minute.

All of us except for two boys “form a break” by leaving hands unlinked. Because there’s always room for one more. That’s the problem with some scouters, they sincerely believe they can make it work and want the chance to try. I can understand that there are issues with Girl Scouts being available, or the local program not being what some girls desire, however, I agree with the position that this organization’s focus needs to remain on the development of boys in a boy centric environment. If that means the program is not for everyone, then so be it. There are many local BSA programs that bend rules to allow effective participation of girl siblings to a degree (typically under the direct involvement of the parents). An effective organization and program can’t be all things to all people.

The current / traditional BSA program is not necessarily a program that fits all boys either, just as Girl Scouts is not a program that fits all girls. I’d rather see BSA/GSA work together to promote co-sponsored portions of programs that can allow for some co-ed components. I believe the political / ideological forces and desires to force fundamental change is what is at the heart of this. I just simply believe that no one is owed a program that meets their individual personality and desires, nor is BSA any kind of guarantee of future life success. With the internet making social outreach and gathering so easy, its increasingly easy to find groups that girls (and boys) can find fulfilling and rewarding.

My opinion is not because I am afraid girls will do better (I would expect to see that), or that I am against the advancement of women, or whatever other negative sterotype is peddled. I have two daughters whom I am equally committed to helping to achieve whatever they want to achieve in life, and will have them engaged in GSA and/or other programs and activities that help in that. Q First – my comment are nothing against girls joining the BSA. My comment was just a statement to the fact the National has made this decision under the guise of “making it easier for families” when is some cases it will not.

Your logic that that because some units only have space for 30 would somehow translates to no troop in the nation should have more than 3 patrols is an extreme reach. Nothing is set in stone, there are small Troops, large Troops, and even medium size Troops. You can’t assume every unit’s situation is the same Not all units can be large units. In my district there are many small churches. There aren’t any large mega-churches that you would find in the big cities.

Meeting spaces are limited. Around here, units tend to run to the capacity of their Charter Organization. When you begin to exceed the capacity of your meeting space, you have to look for creative ways to use your space, you may have to look for a new CO with a greater capacity (which my Troop had to do 6 years ago), or you and your District Executive may even look towards forming new units to serve the Scouts. Furthermore, just because a CO charters a Cub Scout Pack, a Boy Scout Troop, and a Venturing Crew this does not mean that they will be willing to potentially charter an “all-girl” Pack and an “all-girl” Troop. We can’t assume that they have to, or will charter additional units. (again I am not against having girls join – trying to figure a way to make it work under the premise that National is making it easier for families) This is something that each set of leaders needs to discuss with their Chartered Organization before assuming that they will. There is an agreement that needs to be made (your Annual Unit Charter Agreement).

Part of this agreement is that the Charter Organization agrees to ensure appropriate facilities for the unit for its regular meetings. If the CO does not have the facilities to adequately support additional units, they are not obligated to do so. We can’t we assume that they will.

I’ll agree that “family accessible scouting” was an abysmal piece of marketing doublespeak. I’m glad more recent announcements (this post included) stripped the term from the headline.

Some units will implement program that helps certain families and impedes other families in participating in BSA. If this takes off in communities with limited facilities, I envision it doing so with a little teamwork on the part of multiple CO’s.

How that looks will vary. It’s a big country, and scouters are pretty clever. I applaud the move to make Scouting a more family inclusive program. Society has changed with so many single parent, blended parent and two working parent families that this makes a lot of sense to provide a strong family values program to the whole family. Over the past few years many changes have occurred including lowered ages and new programs for membership, allowing openly homosexual youth and adults full membership, allowing transgender members, pretty much the whole LBGTQ group and of course now girls some changes were imposed or forced by some degree and various means and some to avoid potential court losses and the most recent seems to be by choice. The last group banned from membership are youth and adults in agnostic/atheist families.

The BSA is a secular organization that does not require a monotheistic faith but rather allows for a very broad interpretation of ‘God’. It would seem that in light of all the other changes that it is time to open the door to this final segment of society. Certainly, many agnostic/atheist youth might actually come to embrace a belief in a higher power by virtue of their Scouting experience. At the least, they will be able to participate in a strong character, citizenship and leadership values program.

As an Eagle Scout of 30 years, I do not like the move to let girls join Boy Scouts. Why you might ask?

It’s called BOY SCOUTS!! We all know the percentage of girls joining Boy Scouts will be low. You’re probably going to have ONE girl per troop. Keep in mind, the parents of that girl won’t be able to just send her off to camp. One of them will have to attend a week of camping during the summer and once a month when the Troop goes camping. Reason being, girls wont be allowed to bunk with the other boys and she won’t be able to bunk alone.

That lone girl will feel like a 5th wheel amongst a troop full of boys that razz each other. Just wait, it will come, when the first “sexual harassment” lawsuit is filed by some triggered female because she’s around a bunch of rowdy boys.

Will the Girl Scouts be opening their doors to transgender boys or boys that “self-identify” as a girl? The main reason why I dislike this move, it now dilutes the prestige of the Eagle rank. Currently the Eagle Scout rank is earned by 4% of registered scouts annually.

Now, adding girls to the mix, it will be a RACE to be “the first girl Eagle Scout”. In addition, girls that are 16 or older with aspirations of Eagle for their college application, you may as well inform them, “if Eagle is your goal, you won’t have enough time.” You have to earn Eagle before your 18th birthday. It would take at least a solid 2-3yrs to earn all your merit badges within the rank requirements. There are 6mos time constraints between ranks. Not to mention holding leadership positions, along with annual community service and fulfilling the service project.

And Troops hold 2-3 court of honors per year. So, you may have fulfilled your requirements, but you haven’t received your badges or rank advancement yet.

And finally, you can’t say it’s NOT a money grab!! We all know that membership is down for both Cubs and Boy Scouts. Girl Scouting numbers are down too, and we know that pissed off the GSA. Good way to keep relationships stable. In my opinion, this will be yesterday’s news once girls join, realize it’s “not easy” and will drop.

Just like the whole permitting “openly gay” boys to joining. I never heard of one joining the ranks. #BadMoveBSA My 2 cents. Anthony – The first part that you take issue with potentially have a lone girl in a troop or the girls feeling like a fifth wheel – not being able to camp with the Troop.

The info put out about Troops is that there won’t be co-ed troops. If there are girls that wish to join the Boy Scouts, there will need to be all girl troops. To date, troops won’t be co-ed. Personally I don’t see a major issue with co-ed troops. We have co-ed Venturing Crews. I also believe not having co-ed Troops fails to deliver on making things easier for the families. The whole premise in which this change was based upon was an effort to make it easier for families.

Having only all-girl and all-boy troops does not make it easier for families with both a boy and a girl in the program. A family with both a girl and a boy in scouts may find themselves supporting Troop meetings on night a week for their son and another night for their daughter. Then campouts may be on different weekends or even conflicting weekends. Then you have summer camp.

A family may end up supporting two different weeks of summer camp for their children. Yes there will be a race to Eagle. Some young lady will get her name in the record book as being the first female Eagle. I do hope that National makes sure that that person actually earns Eagle – not getting credit for things that may have been done before they are actually registered. Lastly in life all things are a matter of time. Yes some girls who may want to join may be too old to meet the time constraints to earn Eagle. (Courts of Honor don’t play a part in your argument.

Time constraints are based upon the date an award is earned not awarded). We have Boys that join that may not have enough time to earn Eagle. We also have boys that are more focused on camping and having fun that they put themselves in a position where they don’t earn the necessary rank in time to make Eagle. As adult leaders we try to guide them so this doesn’t happen, but ultimately it is up to the Scout to do the work. This is why Eagle is such a prestigious award.

Only 4% earning Eagle. What makes you think that by a girl earning Eagle the award will be any less prestigious? Given the circumstances do you believe that more than 4% of girls that join will earn Eagle?

Although I agree with your bottom line that this is only opens the door for a minority of girls, I disagree that the issues you pose are insurmountable. The lone girl is not unlike Lone Scouts similar problems, similar solutions. Our troop (which isn’t clamoring to welcome girls but willing to help anyone learning to hike and camp) is an example. We don’t always require buddies in tents. We don’t always require tents.

According to the guide to safe scouting, a shelter is made coed by hanging a tarp vertically to allow for female’s private sleeping quarters. It’s sad to say, but the harassment suits are already there be it unisex or mixed sex environments. Regarding GS/USA and transgenders, they have had a very public permissive policy towards young biological males who identify female. Sorry you missed the memo. Last year, BSA adopted a similar policy. Regarding Eagle rank being diluted, there are issues of concern (e.g.

Insta-palms, camping and physical fitness definitions, ageism, parental involvement, etc ), but I don’t think welcoming girls exacerbates this. What devalues our rank IMHO is when the award is not conferred on a first class scout (the concept, not the patch) who acquired all of the same achievements as other Eagles past and present. Others are welcome to disagree.

But, in an age where women are sought out for careers in the military, it would be good advertising if the most skilled among them at boot camp could say they gained their competencies on the trail to Eagle. Also, you seem confused about the timing of ranks. A scout’s rank is conferred on the day of his board of review. Troops may actually have the SPL award the patch at the next meeting. A two year time frame is reasonable for a mature and focused scout. From time to time we have a 16 year old drop in and they get up to speed fairly quickly.

In fact one scout who did just that 5 decades ago motivated me to get serious about rank advancement. If this is a “money grab” I can’t imagine a worse way of doing it. Waiting 5 fiscal quarters to collect fees from customers who are already using the product would enrage most boards.