To think boys should be able to do Brownies?

[PrinceCharming7]

I'm a bit confused why they don't? Girls are allowed to do Scouts/Cubs/Beavers, so why can't boys do brownies?

They should imo either both be mixed or both be single sex.
Boys need boy only space as much as girls need girls only. Different reasons maybe but still valid. Similarly most men and women enjoy time without the opposite sex. Men's nights out. Women's weekends away.
Either we want equality or we don't.

When my DC were young between them they had activities every damned night and Saturday / Sunday mornings too. It was a juggling nightmare so we dropped activities bit by bit over a few years. Friends came over pre activity.

echt

Far more likely that the BB agreed, don't you think?

Having been involved at the time threats and pressure is far more accurate, going to higher levels of the organisation, threats of going to the press, protests outside the church hall, threatening to go to the church so that we lost our base.

So yes, threats and pushing their way in.

The ardent feminists aren't after equality.

And yes, I agree the Boys Brigade girls invasion was equally unfair.

Oh, hang on a minute. I'm all in favour of mixed groups. But I'm also a dyed-in-the-wool feminist. What do you mean by "stopping the ridiculous way to over the top feminists from takin over"?

What Trulyyou said.

Adulting. I'm pretty sure Rainbows is 1 hour a week and Brownies 1.5 hours.

Even if an extra curricular activity is half an hour (as with one of my DDs dance class).. it still dominates that evening, and still means that while she's doing that one evening, I won't be signing her up to may other classes/activites.. because for most, one or two structured evening activities is quite enough

So, YES, of course if their extra curricular activity is rainbows/brownies, they ARE less likely to go and do other stuff as well - it's just too much, you have to chose, they can't do everything

Well, feminists claim that they wanted equality for women but yet men/boys are slowly going to become to be in a disadvantage, but in different ways.

It shows by Lilacs post

So yes, threats and pushing their way in.

While I can see your point, if the protests were properly conducted then not unfair. Possibly this is the way forward for the OP to ensure that boys get into Brownies.

"But what about the boys that get shy and withdrawn in environments with boys only? Where do they get to go?"

Cubs, beavers, youth groups, chess club, wood craft, st John's, church groups, drama, dance, music, choirs, swimming, art clubs... Hundreds of activities

I don't understand how a shy boy who finds it difficult to be around other boys would benefit if Brownies opened up to boys. If they did that, it would be another space in which lots of boys were present, as presumably lots of boys who are on waiting lists for other clubs like Scouts would join.

How would you make it so your boy was one of the only boys at Brownies?

No it hasn't been explained at all
just lots of "safe space" and "to be themselves" but nobody has explained why they don't think this would happen if boys joined

There are many posters missing one of the main points. That some girls will not be allowed to join Rainbows/Brownies/Guides, etc, by their parents if there are any boys around, often for cultural reasons.

Boys already have a number of groups they can choose to attend, but opening up the Guiding movement would mean some girls have no choice at all.

And that's very much more unfair than whinging about letting boys in.

The whole mixed or single sex groups is sort-of irrelevant anyway in this case surely? It's not the case that the Brownies is a group where they do crafty activities every week and the Scouts is a group where they do no crafts. The activities at the group depends entirely on the volunteer leaders. DS2 goes to the same cubs pack that DS1 went too, but it's a completely different experience because the leaders are different now. "The Browies" are not a group where every pack does the same thing each week. The Brownies locally may be no more suitable than the Cubs.

If you want a volunteer led group that does a specific thing your child wants to do then the only way to guarantee that is to be the volunteer that sets it all up.

Having been part of the organisation for 33 years I can most definitely say I am not an over the top feminist in anyway shape or form.

I enjoy the activities, the experiences I have had, and opportunities I have had. I 100% stand behind the girl only space, as I have said above I have seen the same group of girls change dramatically in terms of their willingness to try things.

I don't necessarily agree with Scouts being co-ed but its not the organisation I am part of - they are separate so as others have said just because one does it doesn't mean the other has to follow.

They are similar due to the fact they originate from the same fundamental ideas however different units offer different things, for some girls they are more than happy to share their space with males, for others they prefer not to.

I know of a number of young people who go to both.

Well, feminists claim that they wanted equality for women but yet men/boys are slowly going to become to be in a disadvantage, but in different ways.

In what universe are boys and men disadvantaged?

maybe they shouldn't join a group as generally shy introverts aren't really into big groups - it's not compulsory.

Yes, because parents of shy boys would rather they spent their entire life in their bedroom than learn to socialise in a "safe" environment for them. .

Anyone suggesting the same about shy girls would quite rightly be shot down in flames.

If play dates are being refused because all the invited children are socially depleted after a single weekly Rainbows/Brownie meeting, it's just an excuse, Adult.
Just saying…

oh, "just saying" hmm
No, my imagined DS (I don't have one, I have DDs) is not being avoided by his friends for a reason other than Rainbows. Because 1. He doesn't exist, but thanks for trying to insult him if he did exist to try to win an arguement, and 2. because I wasn't even refering to playdates, I was replying to posters who said that boys can just get their Rainbow going friends to also go to other classes/activities with them, when in reality, one or two extra curriculars is most kids limit, be it because of tiredness, homework, cost, logistics etc

The stereotypes that they have attached to them? The fact that male leaders don't like to volunteer because of all the claims? Lots.

I really can't see how a shy boy would fair better in brownies, the OP originally stated it was because of more crafts now it's shyness.

Cubs is great for making shy boys come out of their shells.

I can't see how being in brownies would make an ounce of difference

Lilac showed all her thoughts on it, you'd never get someone saying that about a woman. They are in a disadvantage too.

In what universe are boys and men disadvantaged?

One example - my son is shy, socially anxious and selectively mute. School are unable to help with this as although they run a group to help with this - they've decided it's just for girls and is their "safe" place. Apparently boys don't need this type of group.

Let me offer your non existent boy my non existent apologies, Adult

My sons would like brownies. They hate football, building stuff, camping and outdoorsy stuff.

DS's school has a girls lunchtime club for girls who feel intimidated by boys on the playground. What about the boys that feel intimidated? It's a piss take.