The Instigator
Trevor_Drayton
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
32doni32nido32
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Girls Cannot be Denied Access to The Boy Scouts of America

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/21/2018 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,025 times Debate No: 115906
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (23)
Votes (0)

 

Trevor_Drayton

Con

For my opening statement and argument, I would like to start by introducing myself, stating some of the history of the Boy Scouts of America (BSA), and by giving my first argument.

My name is Trevor Drayton, I have been a lifelong scout. At the age of 16, I completed the rank of Eagle Scout and entered college through the CollegeNOW program.

The BSA was founded by Robert S. S. Baden-Powell in 1910 for youth boys as a way to strengthen their moral standards and prepare them for joining the military. This was accomplished by enforcing high moral standards (through the Scout Oath and Law) as well as teaching the youth leadership abilities, and individual and team skills, such as bushcraft, carpentry, knot tying, tracking, first aid, and many others.

Now for my opening statement and argument:
Girls should not be mandated to be accepted into the BSA.

I stand behind my statement for several reasonings. My first reason is that the BSA is a necessary part for boys to grow up in. The BSA provides a space where boys can be boys, as simple as it may seem. Allowing for boys to interact with other boys helps build the identity of one's self and personality, much as the Girl Scouts of America (GSA) provides for girls. Some argue that the BSA and GSA do contain different curricular programs that may not appease to each program, respectively. However, both the BSA and GSA have taken precautions of such. The BSA have enacted the Venturing Crew program, where youth ages 14-21 of all genders are able to participate in high adventure activities (high adventure referring to ones rarely taken by the BSA). The GSA have no restrictions against the adventurous activities that can be taken in accordance with the GSA as long as there is a majority of a sufficiently lead and accompanied group agree to do such activities.

I welcome my opponent and look forward to an educated and civilized debate.
32doni32nido32

Pro

Hello!
Before I start, I would like to say that I have been in boy scouts (as it will be mentioned continuously throughout this debate).

Now, my opinions on my experience have been very mixed. I learned useful survival techniques if I were to need them, but that doesn't have to be taught by specifically boy scouts; there are many other organizations out there that teach the same thing, along with different clubs and classes at schools.

But Boy Scouts strengthens moral standards, correct? Well, somewhat. I'm still friends with many people I met during my years at Cubs Scouts, and I can tell you none of them have applied what they learned when it comes to the teachings of morality. I consider myself a pretty in-line person, and I know for certain that compared to the rest of them I seem to be the least rebellious. And can you guess the first one of that group to leave was? Answer: me.

As for the preparation of military, this seems to have been overly applied by the group of friends. Every one of them disregards the moral teachings but fully embraces the lessons of how to act more, well, "manly". And, surprisingly, this Boy Scouts drop-out has been called the "leader" by two of the people in that specific circle of friends. I was actually never taught how to do that, it's just who I am. But, despite that, I cannot join the military; I was born with a physical condition that doesn't affect my day-to-day life but would affect me and others if I were to join it. Basically, any lessons to do with me joining the military would be fruitless. Survival lessons make sense, but not military lessons.

Now, to address the main argument.
"The BSA provides a space where boys can be boys, as simple as it may seem."
Yes, true. But boys can't be boys even when girls are around? This was one of my main reasons for leaving; having a huge group of just guys made me absolutely insane. It reinforced the fact that NORMAL boys play sports. NORMAL boys play video games. That's not me. Though I do some of both, I was far more into the arts. No one shared the same interest and I was almost forced to be the same. I didn't have any of it whatsoever and refused to change. Quite loudly, I might add. From what I've seen, Boy Scouts seems to make guys feel like they NEED to fit in with other kids and not stand out from others. If I had turned out like that, I probably wouldn't be on this Earth right now (long story).
It seems to validate the ideology that boys are far different from girls and they can't intermingle without it seeming like a boyfriend-girlfriend relationship. One mention of a girl at Boy Scouts and you would immediately be accused of "liking" them. A majority of my friends are girls and so I simply hated the fact that I couldn't share anything about my friendships without people saying "Sergio has a girlfriend". Boy Scouts made the separation of genders very, very clear.
And yes, I have been to different Boy Scouts. None of them turned out well.

If girls were to join Boy Scouts, well, it wouldn't be "Boy Scouts", would it? No. But there doesn't need to be a separation between boys and girls. Why not just break the barrier and combine them? Make the separation disappear so that people can get along and not be indoctrinated with the idea that the other gender is inferior.

Another thing to address that I would like to bring up is the gay ban. Is it immoral to be gay? Of course not. This only further perpetuates the barrier between one group and "the others". It seems very unhealthy, doesn't it? My "friend" had to leave because of that. And he's the most moral out of the other people who have been or are still in Boy Scouts. Both of us share the same ideas and thoughts about it. He and I had wanted to leave before because even back then we had feelings for each other yet Boy Scouts never mentioned anything about the LGBTQ+ community. Because nothing about it was ever said, we felt like it was completely abnormal and that we were basically aliens. Does that seem very moral to you for an organization to make kids feel that way?

I know that I'm likely going to lose this debate because I frequently voice the unpopular opinion, but I'm okay with that. Hopefully, both of us learn something through this experience.
Debate Round No. 1
Trevor_Drayton

Con

While all of your points are very valid, and I am glad that you made these points, as they did get me to think in ways I had not initially expected to. Alas, there are solutions for all of them:

First, preparing a Boy Scout for the military was the intention for the BSA when it was first created, and since then has changed focus more to prepare boys in more current ideology and teaching them more reasonable "lifelong skills".
Second, yes, I do feel it is beneficial for boys to have "boy time" and is proven to help build their mental identity (1).
Third, the BSA National Council has already announced that there will be no change in the program to help accommodate for female participants. The BSA will keep the same principals, rank advancement, and curriculum and it will be applied to all.
Fourth, as of 2015, the BSA removed the gay ban, which I would like to mention, was for those who were openly gay, including scout leaders (2) and as of 2017, the BSA declared that the BSA program would be open to the transgender community (3) and membership could not be denied from due to sexuality or gender, with the exception for biological females who claimed to be females.
Fifth, the stereotypes that you described the BSA to be are not true. The concept that the BSA "reinforced" that there is a difference between "normal" and "abnormal" boys is false and a stereotype which only further adds to the illusion that it does. (however, I would like to apologize to you for those expirences. As someone who did not play sports or much for video games, I was welcomed into my first troop and not descriminated against for it. I would also like to add that I represent two BSA troops, along with participated in the 2017 National Jamboree (a collection of members from troops around the area) and at no times have been excluded).
And lastly, I do have a question for you. If you were not fully satisfied with the BSA program curriculum, then why did you stay with it? The reason why I ask this is that even though I live in the rural Mid-West, there are still several programs I can think of off of the top of my head that are mix-gendered, and less focused on survival skills.

I hope these answers provide some level of satisfaction for you.

Now, I would like to provide my main point for my argument of why girls should not be allowed into the BSA.
I feel this arguemt is of easy premise to understand, so it will be more brief that my first. It is the concept of sexual safety, between both youth to youth interaction and youth to adult interactions. 1 in 20 boys (male youth under the age of 18) and 1 in 5 girls (4) (female youth under the age of 18) exprience some form of sexual abuse (I figured on looking at molestations as there is a higher precentage, although I decided not to due to the fact that there were counterdictions in numbers between sites).
Yes, scouting adults (leaders and volunteers) are to take a youth safety and protection course, however by logical assertion, I know that a statement saying that an adult will not engage in sexual activities with youth, willingly or unwillingly, will not stop someone who's goal is to do so. This is something I can personally attest to as one of my teachers, (he) molested me for three years in the school setting (and yes, I have taken legal action), something that as a straight male, would definetly put me in the 1 out of 20 for sexual abuse catagory. While it may seem unrelated, this is to show that even though an adult is to protect childern (as is a teacher's primary job, with teaching coming second), it will not stop child predetors.

1. https://www.psychologytoday.com...
2. https://www.washingtonpost.com...
3. https://voiceofscouting.org...
4. http://victimsofcrime.org...
32doni32nido32

Pro

I don't know what happened. I thought I had posted my argument but it seems to have deleted. I'll have to cut it short but here you go:

Alright. I wish I had known that sexual safety was such a huge point in this debate. If I had known this first, I probably wouldn't have accepted it as I completely agree that safety is very important.

Okay. Thank you for clarifying. For some reason, I had interpreted your words to mean that military preparation was one of the purposes that had been created over time. Reading back to your introductory argument, I have no idea how I came to that conclusion.
As for the "boy time", I had told about my experience from that during Boy Scouts and it wasn't good in either of them. I would actually say that instead of making me, it was breaking me; I felt really insecure around all of them.
As for the third point you addressed, you say that the BSA National Council has already announced there will be no change to include females. Well, that's what this argument is about; whether or not this decision should have been different.
I had been thinking about dropping Boy Scouts and did so around 2014 due to the ideologies the place seemed to indoctrinate as well as the gay ban. I actually hadn't known anything about it being banned, but because nothing was spoken about it I thought that I was abnormal and something wasn't right. I truly wish I had been put into whichever troop you were in, as it seems much better than the ones I had been in.
But what do I mean by "put" into a troop? Well, to answer your question, my parents wanted me out of the house as much as possible due to difficult family issues.

I also wouldn't necessarily say I was discriminated against for not liking sports and/or video games; however, I couldn't find any similarities between other guys. There was nothing to talk about and I was more on the reserved side. I didn't like to talk with many people in general because of issues at home.

According to forbes.com (1), a study showed that preschool boys who played with other boys were more aggressive than those who played with girls. It also applied not only to playtime but also education; a different study showed that cross-sex interactions both in and out of school decreased aggression in both boys and girls. Wouldn't having all boys make them much more aggressive? That's likely why that group of friends I had previously mentioned are all, well, aggressive. The same article goes on to say that less stereotypical behaviors emerge when both genders are intermingled. This is essentially what I said in my round one argument.

1. https://www.forbes.com...
Debate Round No. 2
Trevor_Drayton

Con

First, I would like to apologize for the late response and start to the third round of this debate, although I am equally happy that I did wait, as I would like to address one of the comments in this debate.

This comment comes from lucasdufton and I would like to quote a few points form this user's comment.

Point 1: "the scout association clearly no longer has a strong goal or expectation toward boys to fight and even if it id [did] wouldn't it be better to have both men and women join the army"
- I would first like to correct that the Boy Scouts of America and the Girl Scouts of America are different associations that both have spent over a century creating and correcting a curriculum that is more focused on each gender. Yes, there are similarities between the programs, but overall, they are very different.

Point 2: "Any physical differences between boys and girls at that age wouldn't be as prominent as someone without one leg yet a boy with one leg would be allowed to join boy scouts. Imagine if they separated black and white people there would be roars of racism, yet it is commonly excepted into society for young girls and boys to be separated."
- The BSA is a program for boys who are between the ages of 11 and 18. Saying that there is no difference between boys and girls of those ages is nieve and assuming that there would not be consequences of combining the two genders is even more so ( see: https://www.frc.org...). As of 2015, 46% of high school students and over 60% of high school seniors have reported having sexual intercourse (see: http://www.advocatesforyouth.org...).
- Additionally, I would like to add that the BSA program does and has not segregated by race, physical ability, or mental ability so long as there is no threat of safety for the other youth.

Point 3: "As a child I was friends with both boys and girls and I saw no differences outside of social norms like how my friends who were girls would prefer to paint there [their] nails, but we shouldn't separate children based on the way society makes them, like we shouldn't separate different races simply based of [on] the cultural differences in society."
- (I am going to combine this last point with the focus of my final point as I am running low on remaining characters). I would like to start by asking you a question (along with everyone else who may be interested): In your youth (between birth and the time you turned 18), were there ever times that you only wanted to be with just boys or just girls? It is not wrong to want to spend time exclusively with others of your gender and actually healthier to do so in parts. This leads me to my final point.

Giving boys (and girls. This point applies to the Boy Scouts of America and the Girl Scouts of America) a time and place for them to associate with their gender is not a crime against humanity in any way. Studies in the school setting show that while in a single-sex classroom, both genders performed significantly better then when in a combined classroom (see: https://www.stetson.edu...). While neither the BSA or GSA programs are the same as the classroom, I would like to add two additional sources to support this, one from the GSA, which shows the benefits that girls receive in the single-sex setting of Girl Scouts (see: www.girlscoutshh.org/content/dam/girlscouts-girlscoutshh/documents/GSRIResearch/GSRI_ImpactStudy_ExecutiveSummary_2017.pdf). Additionally, I would ask that my opponent and anyone dedicated enough to this debate look through this article (https://www.deseretnews.com...). Although it is classified as an "opinionated" article, there are many claims that are supported by statistically and factually proven data that I would have covered in my final point, had there been more room to do so. The main point I would like for those reading to notice starts at the paragraph "It turns out gender segregation in education..." and ends at "Meanwhile, the BSA is hardly alone in its decision."

I would like to take a bit to acknowledge my opponent's point of boys and violence. While it is a very valid point, I would like to address the fact that this was a study done on preschool children, which are much less mentally progressed than teenagers. By the teenage years, boys are much more mature and have gained the knowledge of what is and is not socially acceptable (such as acts of aggression), which is what preschool-aged children are developmentally learning.

A large thank you for everyone participating or who has read along on this debate and a special thanks to my opponent for being so civil in this debate (as I have been physically assaulted in a public place debating it) and bringing points to the debate I hadn't expected.

Trevor Drayton
Eagle Scout- Troop 52
32doni32nido32

Pro

Mr. Dayton,
You can reply to comments in the comments section.

So I think that only the second to last paragraph is something I can really talk about

Teenagers are also going through a time in their life where they're meant to experience different things, and they're growing at a very quick pace; they don't have a full grasp of what is and isn't socially acceptable. Even if they did, in many teenage boys they can abandon that if someone (even if they truly ARE better) DARES to mess with THAT guy's ego. In fact, I'd say if you did the study on teenagers it would only show the point even better.
Girls, on the other hand, are for the most part much more mature. Guys almost backtrack and at almost any high school they will have you shaking your head every five minutes. They MUST be tough and "fit in" A.K.A. "be boring". They can't let ANY other guy disrespect them (even though an overwhelming majority deserve to be disrespected far too frequently). They MUST be the best at useless things (arm wrestling or other nonsense). THEY have to be the alpha of the group even if the others would suffer because of it (which is why in group projects, when I'm with guys, I just do all the roles without telling them just in case they didn't finish but make sure they get no credit; they never do their job even if they're the leader). Because of all this, I think it would only further prove the point of the experiment.

Thanks,
- Sergio Valadez
Debate Round No. 3
23 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by NotSoPerfectWorld 2 years ago
NotSoPerfectWorld
What does it mean, Let boys be boys?
How do you define what boys do?
Posted by 32doni32nido32 3 years ago
32doni32nido32
@mosc

Tobacco may have, But the term itself didn't.
Posted by 32doni32nido32 3 years ago
32doni32nido32
@mosc
No, My dad always warned me about blood draws and he would say the same thing.
I didn't know taking six tubes of blood is even okay. Well, I wasn't, But they seemed perfectly fine doing so.
Posted by mosc 3 years ago
mosc
@IQ32
Shmendrik, Yiddish for little runt, Did you hear about the gay security guard who got fired from his job at the sperm bank? He got caught drinking on the job. Your dad used to always warn you about anal. He would say "Now son, This may hurt a bit".
Posted by mosc 3 years ago
mosc
@IQ32
Shmendrik, Yiddish for little runt, Did you hear about the gay security guard who got fired from his job at the sperm bank? He got caught drinking on the job. Your dad used to always warn you about anal. He would say "Now son, This may hurt a bit".
Posted by mosc 3 years ago
mosc
@IQ32
Nope tobacco came from the New World. How do you know if a police officer is gay? The smell of his mustache.
Posted by 32doni32nido32 3 years ago
32doni32nido32
@mosc

Nope.
During biblical times, A "f@ggot" was a burdensome woman who gathered wood. So calling a guy a "f@g" was basically saying that he was burdensome like a woman was (like, If he couldn't do the "guy" jobs or couldn't hide his emotions).
Posted by mosc 3 years ago
mosc
@IQ32
cigarettes were called f*gs. In the days when women wore white gloves, Cigars used to make a stain upon their gloves. Cigarettes having white paper, Developed for women. Hence when a man smoked a cigarette the term f*g was developed.

Pisher, Yiddish for bed wetter, What do you call a homo police dog? A Gay-9.
Posted by 32doni32nido32 3 years ago
32doni32nido32
@mosc

Okay, I have to confess that the first one made me laugh. XD

I actually studied Yiddish a small bit purely out of curiosity. My interest was quenched (unlike any life goals you ever made). So I stopped studying it.

Do you know the meaning of the word "f@g" and the history behind it?
Posted by mosc 3 years ago
mosc
@IQ32
Faygala, Yiddish for male faggot/little bird. . . Q: What did one faggot say to the other faggot at the gay bar?
A: Can I push your stool in?

Lock in kop, Yiddish for hole in the head. . . What is the difference between a faggot and a refridgerator?
The fridge dont fart when you pull the meat out.

Meeskait, Yiddish for ugly little one. . . If a woman sleeps with 10 men she's a slut, But if a man does it" He's gay, Definitely gay.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.