Anyone articulate why I don't like this?

It sounds like it's in the land of the so called free where more people believe that man is 5000 years old only than don't and they are happy to shoot to kill abroad without trial.

Thanks for the link. I'll have a peek later. Can I be even more nosy and ask roughly where in the country (or world) you are OP? Thanks! :)

Girls need pwotecting because they are so fwuffy.

Reminds me of the Simpsons episode where they introduce separate maths lessons for boys and girls, and Lisa finds herself in a lesson where the girls are all expected to sit around talkng about which numbers evoke particular feelings in them.

All very sexist.

Also should it not be "girls' circle" not girls circle in terms of grammar - possessive apostrophes etc.

Also their site says deductable. I thought it was deductible.

They do not sound too intelligent although I realise they are American

FAQs should not be written FAQ's - as not possessive and no missing word

"FAQs On Creating a Girls Circle or Council for Boys and Young Men" - so girls have just a circle and are called girls whereas boys get elevated to young men at some stage.

"...How many youth should I have in my Circle or Council and what should the age range be?"

Perhaps we should offer then English lessons.

It all sounds very odd and rather cringeworthy tbh. Do you have to pay for it?

I've looked at the website quickly and I can't find anything which explicitly says that the organisation is about breaking down gender stereotypes - maybe I missed this.

Looking at the website, it seems to me that it reinforces gender stereotypes. Girls get relationships, body image, my family - myself, self-care and so on. Boys get leading discussions, teambuilding, survival skills, and creative activities etc. The girls blurb talks about relationships, the boys blurb talks about power.

I'd be really uneasy about this being introduced in DD's school, in fact, knowing me, I'd probably complain. On one hand, I think it is important to recognise that girls and boys face different challenges and social expectations and discuss these, but this course seems to reinforce those differences, rather than look at ways both boys and girls can overcome them.

I totally get the argument about a separate space for girls, but I'm not sure this is the way to do it.

It's difficult madwoman, lots of otherwise worthy non-profit programs in the US seem to suffer from this - I suspect what's needed is to integrate Intersectionality into progressive thinking. But as with everything and despite some visible exceptions, the progressive movement is still generally white, middleclass male lead.

KRITIQ it's in the OP, but easy to miss - One Circle Foundation

Is there a link to their website somewhere apologies if it's already been posted but having stayed up too late last night following US election results, my eyes aren't focussing too well.

I'm aware there are lots of different programmes that are supposed to encourage things like self-esteem, teamwork, self respect and respect for others, leadership, etc., but they're not all the same. Some are great, address privilege and oppression pretty clearly in an age and stage appropriate way, have the evidence to show they make a difference. Others are a bit weedy and ineffectual. Some are downright dodgy and worrisome. I'm a bit of a "watchdog" on these, so curious to know more.

So often messages that are sexist, racist, disablist, homophobic, etc. can be quite subtle, because these are pretty institutionalised. That doesn't mean they don't have an impact, or don't at least reinforce the bias that's already there. Things like calling the boy's group "The Council," and the girls group "A Circle," might just sound like unimportant linguistic contortions, but they DO percolate through on some level, can reinforce beliefs that might already be there about the relative importance of males over females. Stuff like this actually is quite important.

It's also telling that it's Girls circle but The council. More male as the norm thinking.

Looking at the website they don't seem to say what the programs are based on, but from the wording I would guess they are based on Native American cultures which tended to have quite stronly gendered roles but power distribution that was not entirely one sided and included a lot of respect for traditionally female work.

The Tides Foundation which the group came out of is a very progressive organization and I couldn't see them supporting something that was intentionally trying to promote boys as inherently more suited to leadership and decision making than girls. But that doesn't mean they don't make mistakes.

I do agree that some single gender space can very valuable in a very sexist society. It can be difficult to know if the language they are choosing to use on the website is an indication of their actual practice or chosen to make them appear less alien and more appealing to their target groups. It sounds like they started of as Girls circle, added in Boys circles and then changed the Boys circle name because it ddn't sit well with their target (marginalized boys), it could be that Council won't sit well with marginalized girls too.

Oh Fuck, thats a lesson I'd have spent in the corridor for giggling.

Seriously DD1 say's they have done some body image stuff and she says all it's done is harm.

If you make girls think about their body image they focus on the negative, regardless of what is being taught.

Just had a look at their mission statement.

The Council recognizes boys' strengths and capacities, challenges myths and stereotypes, questions unsafe attitudes about masculinity, and encourages solidarity through personal and collective responsibility.

Our goal is to create safe, culturally competent and trauma-informed environments to honor girls? development and to enhance girls' abilities so they are able to take full advantage of their talents, academic interests, career pursuits, and potential for healthy relationships

So boys have stregnths, girls need development.

I found their explanation buried at the bottom of the FAQ page. In the last paragraph they address your exact concerns.

^Why the name "Council" instead of "Circle" for boys?
We surveyed groups of adolescent boys about different names for this model. They responded with a clear preference for the word "Council", and we went with that preference.

In both Girls Circle and in The Council we use the "Council Format" during an important Check In step each session, a practice traditionally utilized by indigenous groups to express themselves, listen to one another and relate in a social group.
In both models, the participants sit in circle together, and hold activities often in or around the circle.

Both words are sacred and central to the purpose of both models, and often used interchangeably. Having said that, we recognize and respect the view and concern that using "The Council" could connote decision-making, while "circle" does not, and thus we could be reinforcing the unhealthy masculinity belief that decision-making is a role for men and boys, not women and girls. Respectfully, we understand that view point and certainly intend to challenge any such detrimental beliefs. Our experience has shown that boys who participate in The Council broaden their definitions about gender roles for males and females and are supported or learn to step back from the need to take control over others, and instead to give respect to other voices different from their own.^

I see your issue, I totally get it, but I would try to let it go. I strongly feel that both boys and girls need some gender-specific spaces - if done right, this program might be A Good Thing.