to think that Scouting should be one group now?

[Flatpackjackie]

As girls are allowed in Beavers, Cubs and Scouts, why aren't boys allowed in Rainbows, Brownies and Guides?

Or better still, just have one group for Beavers/Rainbows ages, one for Cubs/Brownies, etc?

Seems outdated and daft to separate by sex, especially as the Scouting groups include girls anyway.

(Not a TAT, not about trans issues at all.)

“budgiegirl nope, I was part of a troop that had 2 boys in it. Neither related to any leader. They've had the choice for coming up 2 decades”

I think you must be thinking about a different organization- Girls Brigade? Something else? Because Guides don’t admit boys. Or have troops.

Girls' Brigade don't have boys, either, Bertrand.

I was just trying to think of other organizations thdbposter might have meant-........

Yeah, I'm confused too.
I have heard of "Guiding" units that call themselves Guiding but basically are youth clubs with unqualified leaders who don't follow any programme or regulations.
Plus of course qualified leaders can make stuff up and fail to follow regulations.
My guess is one of those.

So are there any boys' only organisations?

Toad I tried to find this out but I don't think so.
Boys' Brigade now takes girls.
There are two Traditional Scouting organisations - Baden Powell Scouts and British Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, but both now take girls.
Some Muslim Scout groups have separate boys' and girls' units for Scouts but usually they are mixed for Beavers and Cubs.

I'd also like to hear more about the accusations of sexism in the modern movement made earlier.

I made the reference. The idea that girls and boys need different activities and different treatment is sexist. No school would allow this. You hear many proclaiming the above as justification for separate girls/ boys movements in our very modern world. Indeed I have kids in both and it rings very true. Segregating girls and boys is the worst thing you can do when dealing with alpha male behaviour. Such males need to be near girls and less inclined boys in a non school environment. Both girls and boys need opposite behaviour to model not segregation and encouragement to continue stereotypical behaviour.

Scouts are mixed. Do you understand why Guides chose not to be?

"No school would allow this"
Actually, some schools do, There are plenty of single sex schools. There are schools that have separate maths lessons for boys and girls. There are plenty of boys and girls sports teams. Some schools have boys only literacy interventions......
And it is not sexist to put in place programmes to redress historical inequalities.

So are there any boys' only organisations?

Not that I can think of, but anyone if free to start one if they wish!

The idea that girls and boys need different activities and different treatment is sexist

I don't think it's sexist to offer girls their own space to take part in activities. The activities may possibly be the same as the mixed groups are offered. For example, my friend is both a Beaver and a Brownie leader. She often runs the same activities for both groups. They all do flower arranging. They all go on hikes. They all go climbing. But some girls prefer to do that without the fear/risk of boys dominating the activity.

All boys don't dominate and many boys don't want to be dominated. By saying having boys means girls will be dominated by default you are being sexist and stereotyping.

I am still confused by your comments that both guides and scouts are sexist toomany when scouts is mixed

Ds1 school had boys and girls science lessons...they stopped it when they appeared completely and utterly unable to control the boys class

And i am not making a comment about boys in general as my boys are nothing like that..in fact i complained many times about the science class myself

I ran a cub pack. The leaders from other units felt free to walk by and yell at the boys ‘oi What are you doing that women’s work for?’ and make disparaging comments. My unit was actually all boys (because the village also had a thriving brownie unit). The unit they ran (beavers) was mixed. Nice to know the kids were being inculcated early into what constitutes appropriate gender roles though... (this is fairly recently - I left scouting and now am only involved in guiding. I won’t be going back.)
I find it mildly amusing that someone without daughters (and therefore without any idea of the pressures on girls and young women to conform to gender stereotypes) makes facile comments like ‘if I had daughters I wouldn’t send them to guides.’ The chances are that if you did have daughters, you might change your mind. Given the waiting lists to get into a single-sex organization, there are an awful lot of parents of female children who recognize the value of a single sex organization.
I volunteer with teenagers. We provide a safe sex space where no one is under pressure to look sexy, behave coyly, flirt, or assume a submissive position so that their social value increases. My girls come from three different schools. We regularly deconstruct peer group values by gender in each setting. And challenge unwritten ‘rules’ about gendered behaviour. I’ve had girls confess to deliberately failing maths tests because they want to be popular with boys.
I’m afraid I don’t particularly care what people who don’t have daughters think about guiding. I fully believe in the value of a sex segregated space for girls and young women.
As I’ve said on other threads - there is also a very valuable opportunity for girls and young women to join scouts and wipe the floor with the boys who think they are superior. I did it myself. This a great option for confident ballsy young women, and a great lesson for young men who occasionally need a reminder about women’s capabilities. I don’t hold with the ‘girls do crafts and boys camp and climb’ nonsense. Both organizations do essentially the same activities. But guiding offers a place for girls to try this stuff in an atmosphere free from stereotypes, which frees them to be who they want to be, and released them from gendered constraints. Guiding is an important stepping stone to giving many young women the confidence in their own abilities to allow them to take their place in society as equals.

I can’t even get my local scouts to run a joint thinking day event with the guides. The idea of trying to merge at national level is hilarious. It’s Crystal Palace all over again.

Having the assumption that girls/ boys need to be treated differently and need different activities is sexist. This is the argument put forward over and again for no boys at guides. Pretty often

Activities are indeed very different( I have kids in both and ours definitely are). It's sexist. Not hard to understand.

Such views illustrate predudice and stereotyping against boys. It disadvantages both girls and boys( both alpha male and non alpha male boys).

Activities are indeed very different( I have kids in both and ours definitely are). It's sexist. Not hard to understand

Guiding is supposed to be girl-led. I lead a Brownie unit, and the Brownies choose which badges they want to do, what trips they want to go on, what games they want to try, etc. Obviously there is leader input ("no, we can't go to Florida for the day!") and we try to create a balanced programme, but as far as possible we do what the Brownies want to do.

If the majority of girls in your daughter's unit say they don't want to do rock climbing, for example, should they be told "you have to, because the Scouts do it"?

All boys don't dominate

Of course not. But it is a fact that some girls do better in a single gender setting. This has been proven by the fact that some girls do significantly better in a single gender school. The effect on boys is less significant.

Having the assumption that girls/ boys need to be treated differently and need different activities is sexist. This is the argument put forward over and again for no boys at guides. Pretty often

Maybe by some people. But not by the Guides.

Activities are indeed very different( I have kids in both and ours definitely are). It's sexist. Not hard to understand

Ok, now I’m confused! Are you saying you have a child at Guides and a child at Scouts? Why, if you are so sure the organisations are sexist? If they are doing different styles of activities, then that is down to the individual leaders, very often their likes and dlikes influence the programme. Also, are Guides/Brownies not supposed to be girl led - ie they choose their own activities (within reason )

One massive point about Scouts/Guides/'Brigades' is that they are NOT school. Yes they learn things, some even useful but it is not school and most of the time they are not 'tested' in a formal way. Winning a 'trophy' of some sort, usually as a team.
I have seen girls who would prefer to be out each week tracking and shooting or trapping animals, playing football, chopping things with axes and knives and setting fire to things. Other boys who wanted to go out shooting crows (no we didn't). The point is to give them an experience with a bit of danger that they wouldn't normally have.
We usually tire the little darlings out so come 'bedtime' they are grateful for anywhere dry (ish) and horizontal (ish).

"Activities are indeed very different( I have kids in both and ours definitely are). It's sexist. Not hard to understand"

Have you asked about how they choose the activities? Because every group is different and a lot of the activities are child-led.

I think it is wrong that some of these groups are allowed to discriminate tbh. A bit like our local gymnastic club that only takes girls too.

But I think it is seen as a lot more acceptable to discriminate against boys in general tbh.