OT: Boy Scouts of America changing name, dropping "Boy"

Submitted by crg on May 2nd, 2018 at 10:24 AM
FYI. The discussion might end up getting hopelessly polarized and, if so, the moms can do what they like about it. However, I know that there have been/are a large number of former scouts in the ranks of the greater UM family (myself included) and that membership is certainly a factor in admissions as well - so this is somewhat relevant.




May 2nd, 2018 at 10:59 AM ^

There will be strong opinions because this actually is an issue that is important to a large number of people, not the least of which are the parents with children in the Boy Scout program and/or the Girl Scouts. IMO, the better option would have been to increase cooperation/collaboration with the Girl Scouts to allow for improved access to opportunities and resources, in addition to the natural synergy that could be produced between the organizations. Unfortunately, the BSA has been positioning itself as a competitor to the Girl Scouts for the past decade or two and this latest move just reinforces it.


May 2nd, 2018 at 12:06 PM ^

There are lots of super important topics that are actually “issues that are important to a large number of people” and that are directly impactful to members of this board, that are avoided on this board because they’re deemed political. I would argue this topic goes in that category.

Hopefully I’m wrong and it just is a civil conversation.


May 2nd, 2018 at 12:17 PM ^

And that is why I suggested the mods use their discretion in whether or not to,let the thread remain. There are numerous other topics posted to thus board that are not about sports but do strongly pertain to other aspects of UM. The real question is what kind of board do the bloggers want this to be: only UM sports only or UM issues at large (heavier on sports)? It hasn't truly been the former in a very long time (if ever).


May 2nd, 2018 at 2:43 PM ^

You mean,

Ze (gender-neutral-non-singular/plural-pronoun-for-those-who-see-themselves-as-both-individuals-and-individuated) Scouts (but-not-military-colonializing-type-of-"scouts") Cookies (with-zero-gluten-sugar-salt-or-whet-for-the-celiacs-(fake or not it's a free country)-diabetic-and-those-with-high-blood-pressure)


May 2nd, 2018 at 11:14 PM ^

I think I see a pattern.   Some topics are too "political" on here and thereby necessitate handwringing and  the preliminary discussion on whether the topic is "appropriate" before it even gets off the ground.  There's the obligatory "this will go well" to start.   Then other times, other clearly political topics breeze thru with little if any of the appropriateness discussion.  It just depends on which way the topic tilts: favorably left or favorably right.  I'll let each drawn their own conclusion.  Some of the "anti-political" crowd here support some discussions but not others. 

Blue in Paradise

May 6th, 2018 at 9:56 AM ^

There are hundreds, if not thousands, of websites you can go to for political discussions. There are only a handful that discuss Michigan sports.

Why anyone would come here to discuss politics is beyond me? I honestly could not possibly care less what a board full of fellow anonymous Michigan sports fans thinks of any political issues - left, right or center.

Bando Calrissian

May 2nd, 2018 at 1:07 PM ^

On the other side of the coin, the GSA hasn't wanted to collaborate with the BSA, aside from a perfunctory interest in promoting Venturing. The GSA's continued program limitations creating a demand for an all-ages coed program drove this decision just as much as the BSA's desire to diversify their programming. If the GSA wanted to play ball, they could have. They didn't, and here we are.

In short, there are two sides to every story, and the GSA isn't an innocent victim here.

EDIT: And to borrow from a Scouting board I occasionally read, re: this decision:

"If the GSUSA had promoted their Gold Award half as effectively as they've marketed Thin Mints and Do-Si-Do's we wouldn't be having this conversation."


May 2nd, 2018 at 2:50 PM ^

I have a son in Boy Scouts and a daughter in Girl Scouts as we speak.

The Girl Scouts are lame, to use my daughter's terminology. 

They just are.  It is a weak organization.  It could be better.  She wants to drop out.

There is nothing that the Boy Scouts do that the Girl Scouts could not do themselves as well.



May 2nd, 2018 at 10:40 AM ^

A few points:

1.  There is a scouting organization for girls, it has a name....it's on the tip of the tongue.....Why can't I think of it....

2.  Both my son and daughter are in Boy and Girl Scouts respectively and I like it that way.  They both have space to go and be goofy around their friends of the same sex and not worry about all the BS that comes when you put boys and girls together when their still developing.  Watching my sons Webelos den interact together, I am more and more convinced this is a healthy thing to let them have a space where Boys can be Boys.

3.  Having Men and Women together in the same Venture Scouts group(the one for college age folks) is great.

4.  If Women feel that Girls Scouts isn't providing the same adventure opportunities that Boy Scouts do, then they can work with their troops to develop these opportunities and maybe even set up cooperating logistically with the Boy Scouts to provide more outdoor focused opportunities.  My daughters group does a ropes course and a camping event and those are incredibly popular.  I think that would be amazing, I just want the boys to have a space to be goofy around other boys and girls to have a space to be goofy around other girls.

This just feels like an attempt to please those who will never be pleased when there are better ways to handle it within the existing structure.


May 2nd, 2018 at 10:58 AM ^

I think you're reading too much into this announcement.  I think enrollment in Boy Scouts has been declining and this is their solution to try and boost those numbers.  Unfortunately, it will come at the expense of the Girl Scouts, who have come out in opposition to this initiative.


May 2nd, 2018 at 11:09 AM ^

Entirely possible.  I am likely not seeing the full picture as I live in Tennessee where it's doing really well, and from what I understand in my hometown in Nevada, it's doing really well there, too.  I just wish there were ways to approach it that didn't involve putting a fundamental aspect of the organization itself at risk.  

Bando Calrissian

May 2nd, 2018 at 12:18 PM ^

Here's the thing, though: This is a local option implementation. If you still want to have an all-male troop, YOU CAN!  No one is forcing you to go coed in your chartered unit (which, by policy, belong not to National, but the chartering organization). If you're bothered by what other units are deciding to do, well, that's on you. And you, or anyone else, are welcome to find troops that more reflect your needs if your unit decides to make a change.


May 2nd, 2018 at 12:30 PM ^

Oh, I get it, but let's be real here.  There's no way that structure would be maintained, there'd be way to much pushback.  

At the end of the day, it's probably going to be like most things like this, made of mostly boys with a few girls here and there and without any huge changes and the organization itself will still do what it does.  I don't have a huge problem with that and I'll adjust and probably end up enrolling my daughter in it if thats what she wants to do(she's already a better Webelos than half the boys in my sons Webelos group).  BUT I still think something valuable is being lost and handwaving it away is going to cause more problems than it solves.

Bando Calrissian

May 2nd, 2018 at 12:40 PM ^

Well, here's the thing: As someone involved in the program, you can move beyond worrying about what you think might happen, and instead mold what actually will happen. Facilitate the program your kids demand, utilizing the opportunities the SBSA or GSA (or both) provide. Eliminate the noise and the conjecture, and have fun. The rest will sort itself out.


May 2nd, 2018 at 2:02 PM ^

As someone involved in the program, you can move beyond worrying about what you think might happen, and instead mold what actually will happen. Facilitate the program your kids demand, utilizing the opportunities the SBSA or GSA (or both) provide.

I'm not sure if you get what I was saying. It's not youth led, the council makes the decisions, and one parent has very little input if you aren't the troop leader, or don't sit on the council. This move is entirely top down, from what I can tell, though I will admit that I just heard about this today so haven't done any reading outside of this thread. 

Bando Calrissian

May 2nd, 2018 at 2:29 PM ^

I'd recommend doing more reading on what the coed policy actually is, and how it's being implemented. Anything else is a hot take.

And, again, as a parent, you can be a part of the problem, or a part of the solution. The successful implementation of this policy isn't going to be a problem on the youth end--it already is a problem from adults who don't understand what's going on, feel threatened by coed programming, and are inclined to take their ball and go home. The kids just want to be scouts--let them.


May 2nd, 2018 at 7:02 PM ^

No need to get snarky with me. I was trying to discuss this, and said nothing disrespectful at all.  Definitely didn't get snarky with you. I asked a simple question, that certainly has bearing on our (up til your comment) conversation. Also, I freely said I hadn't read anything else about this. Clearly I responded here first, so your last two sentences there were a bit out of line. I saw it here first, and commented on it. Nothing I've seen here, or since would cause me to change anything I have said. 


May 2nd, 2018 at 10:59 AM ^

My daughter enjoys her "girl" time a lot with girl scouts. She's not afraid of boys at school, and interacts with them like any other slightly above average young girl. However, she really does appreciate the exclusiveness of girls scouts being, only girls. She would be very timid or uncomfortable in a boy scout setting. 

Integration is a great thing, but this confuses me. 

yossarians tree

May 2nd, 2018 at 1:44 PM ^

The fact that our country is polarized by what TV channel people get their news from is just the height of stupidity by everyone who even enters the debate. And I don't watch the fucking news at all.


May 2nd, 2018 at 2:12 PM ^

The notion that Fox News is any more biased/untrustworthy than any of the other major networks is so weird. 100% of them are agenda driven shit shows. Just because you think CNN or NBC is correct doesn't make them any less biased or valid.


May 2nd, 2018 at 2:37 PM ^

You've bought into the false dichotomy BS that Fox is propagating.

They want their audience to believe that if something isn't overtly conservative it must be liberal which is, of course, ridiculous.

I used to work in broadcast media. There is certainly bias there, but it's toward sensationalism and speed of delivery to the consumer.

Outside of Fox and, to a lesser extent, MSNBC, the political bias you're talking about simply doesn't exist.


May 2nd, 2018 at 2:58 PM ^

That could not be more wrong.

There would not be a Fox news if CBS, ABC, NBC, et al were less biased from the start.

Fox News is their fault.  They needlessly created it.  Now they are stuck with it.