Instigator / Pro
28
1614
rating
17
debates
85.29%
won
Topic
#841
Girls joining the BoyScouts Of America
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
Better arguments
12
6
Better sources
8
8
Better legibility
4
4
Better conduct
4
0
After 4 votes and with 10 points ahead, the winner is...
Pinkfreud08
Tags
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- 15,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
18
1616
rating
32
debates
62.5%
won
Description
Rules:
- Keep it civil
- No semantics ( they hurt my head )
- The BOP is shared since I have to prove that it's a good idea and Con has to prove why it's a bad idea.
Round 1
Pro
#1
Well hey, Franklin it's been a while since we had a debate, anyways feelings aside let's begin.
My argument for why girls should be allowed to join is pretty simple and straight forward,
1. Girls get an opportunity to become an eagle scout which is rather useful for job applications.
2. The troops aren't coed, so this means the girls and boys get to choose whether or not they want to do events with one another
The reason why I bring this up is because one of the strongest arguments I've heard is that it's pushing girls into boy scouts,
When in reality if anything it gives troops even more freedom of choice since now boys and girls can interact in a camp/meeting setting which in turn brings unity between the sexes.
3. Girls get to learn useful skills in Boy scouts that they wouldn't otherwise learn in girl scouts.
This includes,
- Survival skills IE pocket knife safety and how to start a fire
- Leadership through planning meetings and organizing campouts and hikes.
These are arguably the bulk of why I think it would be a good idea for girls to join the BSA, or now SOA.
Con
#2
ok Hi Squekly, anyway I have to disagree here. My argument is pretty much this
1.Boy Scout programs are not set up to cater to a female audience.
2.Boys look forward to their special time spent with their buddies.They often ask their parents to sign up for scouts so they can do “boy” activities with their friends. When girls are allowed into the organization, boys do not get to experience what they signed up for.
3.Its called BOY SCOUTS
4.Many people enjoy the scouts because they are a traditional group.They offer traditional morals and activities. Gender complications have been a big deal in recent years. There has been much more focus on gay rights and gender neutral activities. The general public is expected to accept all gender types, however, these groups to not accept that traditional values are important to some people.
5.There are many benefits to being able to talk to friends of the same sex about your life. Everyone knows about things like “girl talk”.Girls are not scrutinized for having private conversations that exclude boys. Yet, boys are expected to let girls join in on their private time.
6. The last thing these kids need is bunch of girls honing in on their special time. Each Boy Scout has their own need, and a specific reason that they joined the organization. These are often best met by male peers and pack leaders.
7.Boys are easily distracted from tasks when girls are around. This is the concept behind private, all-boys schools. If schools can remain all-boy, the Boy Scouts should be able to, as well. Boys often learn better when girls are not in the picture.
to sum up, boys will be off target,less focused and for God's sake ITS CALLED BOY SCOUTS.
Round 2
Pro
#3
1.Boy Scout programs are not set up to cater to a female audience.
While this may be true for some girls, there is a good chunk of girls that are left unsatisfied with girl scouts.
Sadly there aren't any definitive statistics on the matter so I'll have to rely on anecdotes if you can provide to be a reputable source then I will take that sources statistics however until then, here' s my anecdote.
I currently live in the California Bay area in the suburbs and am in Troop 21.
Recently Troop 22 was formed to cater to girls and already just out of the founder's group alone, there are 15 girls of all ages.
This is nearly half the size of our boy troop alone.
I could imagine in other bigger areas there is even more interest in girls joining boy scouts.
Regardless of the numbers, there are girls who want to join Boy Scouts since they dislike Girl Scouts.
2.Boys look forward to their special time spent with their buddies.They often ask their parents to sign up for scouts so they can do “boy” activities
Boys still get to hang out with their friends, the only difference is now girls get to do the same.
And the " boy " activities are still the same, the only difference is now girls get to participate.
3.Its called BOY SCOUTS
That's not the best argument to make.
By this logic, I could create a country called " Neo-Nazis KKK United" which would justify discrimination against blacks, Jews, and homosexuals.
A less extreme analogy would be the white and black schools since I could simply state, Its called WHITE SCHOOL.
4.Many people enjoy the scouts because they are a traditional group.They offer traditional morals and activities. Gender complications have been a big deal in recent years. There has been much more focus on gay rights and gender neutral activities. The general public is expected to accept all gender types, however, these groups to not accept that traditional values are important to some people.
Firstly if you're valuing traditional values to the point where you're going to use this to discriminate against a group of people, this could be used to justify homophobia, racism, and antisemitism.
Secondly, the activities aren't changing, each troop still gets individual freedom of what activities they want to do. And largely the activities aren't changing at all.
5.There are many benefits to being able to talk to friends of the same sex about your life. Everyone knows about things like “girl talk”.Girls are not scrutinized for having private conversations that exclude boys. Yet, boys are expected to let girls join in on their private time.
Well again the Troops aren't coed and the Troops have the privilege to decide when or when not the girl and boy troops can participate in the same activities.
6. The last thing these kids need is bunch of girls honing in on their special time. Each Boy Scout has their own need, and a specific reason that they joined the organization. These are often best met by male peers and pack leaders.
There are woman leaders in boy scouts and it works out just fine. Not to mention the fact that the girl's troops will be largely run by women leaders while boy scouts will largely be run by male leaders.
Not to mention the fact that this is an anecdotal claim, so unless you can provide to me statistics that Males respond better to Males than I will sadly have to disregard this claim.
7.Boys are easily distracted from tasks when girls are around. This is the concept behind private, all-boys schools. If schools can remain all-boy, the Boy Scouts should be able to, as well. Boys often learn better when girls are not in the picture.
Firstly This "distraction" argument leads to absurdity.
By this logic, we should ban homosexuals from boy scouts due to them being " distracted " by their male peers.
Secondly once again this is yet another anecdotal claim.
Anyways I shall now await a response.
Con
#4
I don't need "statistics". The purpose of BOY scouts by its original founder was to create leadership, character and skills for BOYS. If your unsatisfied with girl scouts then create another program for girls. Stop trying to wage war on a organization that for over 100 years has served boys. If boys are unsatisfied with boy scouts, they shouldn't be able to budge into girl scouts, NO create a new program. Its like what is better: getting mad at a all-boy school and demanding your equality. Or setting up a all-girls school.
Boys act differently when girls are around. The reason all-boys schools exist is because it fits the need for boys.More Recess, different types of books that cater to men, male role-model's,etc. When they are girls around,this is much different. These needs are not fulfilled but rather ones that need to be fit with girl needs as well. This blurs the line between BOY scout activities.
The point I made with the Boy Scouts is that girls might feel ashamed when they say they are a in part of BOY scouts. Also your analogy is wrong because they are no inherit difference between races but they are between sexes.
Were not discriminating. Were simply stating that traditional values can be protected in boy scouts but blurs the line when SJW allows girls in.
For number 5-Yes I understand that, but this blurs the line
https://www.commonsensemedia.org/blog/10-great-role-models-for-boys-Role models for boys and they are ALL men.
Gay people make up a small percentage of the populations and YES you can get distracted.
Round 3
Pro
#5
I don't need "statistics"
You made various claims that need statistics to back themselves up such as,
Boys are easily distracted from tasks when girls are around.
And,
These are often best met by male peers and pack leaders.
These are both claims that need statistical data or various articles published by psychologists or Sociologists too back themselves up.
If you are going to use these claims to justify banning girls from boy scouts, then I want to hear your evidence to back up these claims.
The purpose of BOY scouts by its original founder was to create leadership, character and skills for BOYS.
This is another appeal to tradition which again can be used to justify,
- Racism, white fountains, and schools were made to education and quench the thirst of WHITES
- Homophobia, the military was made to be for heterosexuals and homosexuals would be distracted by their male peers
- The Holocaust, Germany was made to cater to GERMANS and CHRISTIANS, not jews.
If your unsatisfied with girl scouts then create another program for girls.
That is rather hard to do when girls simply joining boy scouts is a much simpler and inclusive solution to the problem
If your counter would be to change girl scouts, then what about the girls who actually like girl scouts and don't want to camp or learn survival skills?
This solution would satisfy both sides and be easier.
Boys act differently when girls are around.
Another anecdotal claim with no statistics to back itself up.
The reason all-boys schools exist is because it fits the need for boys.
This does not fit the situation at all, it's not as if the troops will be co-ed and have girl and boy leaders.
So this argument is invalid because of this.
Even then, each Troop still has their freedom to make decisions on leadership and there are already woman leaders in boy scouts and it's worked out fine.
The point I made with the Boy Scouts is that girls might feel ashamed when they say they are a in part of BOY scouts.
I don't see the point since the name is changing to scouts.
Not only this but I haven't heard of women complaining about this sort of ashamed attitude at all if you can provide to me statistics or articles I'd love to read them however once again this is an anecdotal claim.
Also your analogy is wrong because they are no inherit difference between races but they are between sexes.
First of all, you didn't provide a quotation mark so I can't exactly determine what point I was making.
However, even then there are inherent differences.
Economic status, culture, and genetics to name a few.
Please name me differences between female scouts and Male scouts because they act fairly the same.
Were not discriminating. Were simply stating that traditional values can be protected in boy scouts but blurs the line when SJW allows girls in.
Well, this is another appeal to tradition which can be used to justify,
- Slavery
- The Holocaust
- Homophobia
- Racism
Gay people make up a small percentage of the populations and YES you can get distracted.
Ok so if gay people made up a larger percentage of the population you'd ban them from scouts simply because I'd be too " distracting "
And once again the troops aren't co-ed so this wouldn't be a problem at all.
Believe it or not, men/women don't get so distracted by the opposite sex to the point you're describing.
Even if this was the case, you are going to value performance in boy scouts which is pretty irrelevant due to the fact that 90 percent of the activities done in boy scouts are mostly fun activities that benefit from a better sociable setting such as canoeing, swimming, hiking camping, and creating a fire which doesn't require such a high level of concentration and is mostly casual activities.
Unless of course, you are going to bite the bullet and try to make an argument that performance means everything in scouts and sociable settings don't matter.
To conclude my opponent is relying on anecdotes has ignored my rebuttal from the last round, and is making appeals to tradition.
Round 4
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:
For pro, the benefit of his proposal are clear: making the benefits of the BSA available to the entire population of children.
Importantly, pro points out that troops are not coed, but the meetings can be. This appears to be an important distinction, as it means the BSA remains largely the same.
Cons response seems as if he didn’t read this second point, as 2,4,5,6,7 appears to be predicated on the idea that troops will be coed, an issue that pro corrects.
Cons issues 1&3 as pro points out are appeals to tradition. Con does not offers a key impact or harm for changing these cases, so does not provide a compelling reason to treat these as substantial.
Cons second round basically asserts his position is valid and denies the necessity for him to provide any evidence: he focuses on issues that have already been dealt with by pros coed troop examples. And then forfeits the remaining rounds.
As a result, the bulk of cons claims are either erroneously assuming that troops are coed in pros plan, or are appeals to tradition with no justification. At no point are the benefits outlined by pro negated - and as such arguments go to pro.
Conduct to pro for cons forfeits.
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:
More than half the rounds were forfeited
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:
The entire pro case dropped without challenge (or even being read, as his #2 and #7 was already contradicted by pro's #2), and forfeiture.
Pretty straight forward, a benefit made available to twice the current population, at the expense of a negative effect applied to precisely zero people... The traditional values issue for example, is done without showing any way even one traditional value would be harmed... The distracted angle was not shown to be meaningful and was countered with basic logic.
Note on the distracted clause: Pro technically if there were so many more gay people in the scouts, they would not be the ones banned, you would be for being so distracting to them; that is the standard pro's logic proposes. AND since boy scouts are about teaching discipline, learning to deal with distractions (which I know, your number 2 prevents anyway) would lead to greater self improvement for them.
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:
Con forfeited the minimum of 50% of Rounds. This enables Conduct vote alone.
As a former Boy Scout, and the father of an Eagle Scout, it's sad to see the program changing.
Does (did) the Boy Scouts offer a great benefit to boys? Absolutely! It's not just the "title" of Eagle Scout that one can put on resumes, but it's the life lessons one learns while on the journey to Eagle.
So, then. what about girls? Aren't girls "missing out"? Shouldn't they also learn these same "life lessons" as boys? Absolutely! Doe sthat mean they should automatically do the exact same things and participate in the exact same programs as boys? Absolutely not.
there should be programs tailored to girls that teach them life lessons, life skills similar to BSA. If Girl Scouts can't do that, then that's a failure on Girl Scouts. That doesn't mean girls should automatically be allowed in Boy Scouts.
I have twice as many daughters as I do sons. I (we) teach our girls
(a) life skills
(b) boys and girls, men and women, males and females are different. They just are. It's at the core of who they are-- their biology. As a result, there are just some things that are different among boys and girls. There are just some things boys can't do that girls/women can ("Sorry son....you can't get pregnant.). There are just some things girls can't do that boys can ("Sorry, daughter...you can't father a child").
Boys need "safe" places where boys can be boys and just be themselves.
Likewise, so do girls.
You put a group of 10 boys together and you will see them do things...crazy things..."boy" things. You put a few girls in the mix and the whole dynamic changes. I've seen it. We've gone on troop outings with just the boy scouts and they do all sorts of things....they smell...they fart...they belch....they help each other out...they tease each other...they fight, they play....they wear they same clothes for days on end. You add some girls (which we've done in the past when we let the Venture crew join us), and things change.
No need to bother admin, especially on an FF... However for clarity:
Con decided to drop the entire pro case without challenge (or even being read, as his #2 and #7 was already contradicted by pro's #2), and forfeiture.
Pretty straight forward, a benefit made available to twice the current population, at the expense of a negative effect applied to precisely zero people... Con's traditional values issue for example, is done without showing any way even one traditional value would be harmed (appeals to tradition need an actual appeal, like what would be harmed if girls learned how to tie knots?) ... The distracted angle was not shown to be meaningful and was countered with basic logic.
Note on the distracted clause: Pro technically if there were so many more gay people in the scouts, they would not be the ones banned, you would be for being so distracting to them; that is the standard con's logic proposes if taken to the conclusion. An additional point you could have done (not that it was needed), is since boy scouts are about teaching discipline, learning to deal with distractions (which I know, your number 2 prevents anyway, as the proposal specifically did not include the troops being mixed) would lead to greater self improvement for boys (which then goes back to traditional values being harmed by not doing it!).
Call this is a Mandela effect, but I swear, I remember being able to change RFDS a while back.
I believe you can ask one of the mods to delete your vote so that you may change it, I did it once.
Just re-read it, and at one point yeah. I do wish we could edit our RFDs.
Did you misspell which opponent you were referring to?
I never considered in terms of job applications. I know that the Silver Award is indicative of similar qualities of an Eagle Scout. At some point I heard that an Eagle Scout award could start you one pay grade higher if you joined the military. They both present opportunities for kids who would otherwise grow up more boxed in, and are both good for college and scholarship applications. One of the reasons the BSA has made the recent switch I think is so that its more convenient for some parents to bring their kids into the cub scout program, though I have not thought too much as to the possibility of better implementations.
Don't get me wrong, some people do enjoy venture crews and there's nothing wrong with that however many would rather join the scout's organization due to them doing different activities, being able to earn ranks, and being more accessible at an early age.
Even if Venture Crews were the same concept I'd still state that girls should be allowed to join scouts since there isn't a good enough reason not to allow them to join.
They may enjoy the ranks, however stating you're a silver rank on a venture crew really isn't going to help too much on job applications.
Stating your an eagle scout however from what I've heard can definitely get you hired above other people.
Camp programs are mostly learning experiences and the earning of merit badges.
I didn't think you'd focus on what you perceive as good or lacking in the program since you are already interested in changes to the BSA. So yes, there aren't "ranks", like tenderfoot, life, and eagle, but you still earned your way up and are presented the highest award at a court of honor in recognition of your achievement. I have spoken to people who proudly earned their silver and loved it. They had meetings, and went on what many would consider to be some hardcore trips. I'm not sure what kind of camp programs were available specifically for venturing. The BSA caters other organizations that make use of its land and staffing too, and you used to be able to go along to boy scout events upon request on an individual basis. The relatively low numbers are an issue I've heard of as well, not sure how to start one if you don't have it in your area. It could have been promoted better I suppose.
While this is true however there are a few solid reasons why this is inconvenient for girls
1. Venture Crews can't earn ranks.
2. Venture Crews can't go to the various summer camps.
3. Venture Crews ( correct me if I'm wrong ) can't have meetings.
4. Venture Crews aren't exactly easy to find nor to join. At least in my area.
ok cool, BUT this is about the boy scouts.
I have a suggestion for you. Before the BSA allowed girls into the regular program, they still had a program called Venturing that girls and boys could join, go on adventures, and earn rank in a similar fashion. While girls were excluded from earning the traditional boy scout ranks like the famous Eagle Scout, they could still go to events with the regular boy lead troops. In this way, the traditional experience was preserved, girls could still attend boy lead programs, and girls and boys could still opt for a unique experience in the Venturing program. Now, if I understand correctly, according to recent changes girls can join the regular program and I suppose technically that means boy lead troops are no longer an official part of the Boy Scouts of America.