Guides or Scouts

[EdithWeston]

I've been watching the news about the 100th Anniversary of the Guides.

I was wondering, for those of you with DDs in either of these movements, which did you/she choose, and why? Was the girls only aspect of Guides a factor?

When DS and DD are old enough it will be Beavers/cubs/scouts for DS and rainbows/brownies/guides for DD. I think it's important for children to have single sex activities (DS is 4, DD is 11m). It is good for children of BOTH sexes to have strong role models of their own sex. That said, I hope dd won't just be doing 'girly' stuff and DS won't be doing just 'boy' stuff iyswim.

Beavers, Cubs and Scouts are mixed, so you will need to look elsewhere for a boys only organisation.

Ds is in cubs, dd2 is a brownie, and dd1 is a pathfinder (like a ranger), so the girls are in the single sex branches. Dd1was a beaver for a year and a half, she was the only girl.

I've also been a leader for both organisations... and find it interesting that particularly with the younger sections, there are a much higher percentage of female leaders for both, as at this point it's still largely regarded as child care, rather than the more adventurous stuff that men seem to bother to get involved with on a voluntary basis later on.

I quite like that the guides have made a real effort of late to focus on women's rights etc. although I am faintly bemused that ggc (where I am at the moment) are advertising some sort of goal setting session and speech in our region with miss Canada. Who is probably lovely, and very switched on, but just gives, IMHO, completely the wrong image to pubescent girls. So I am mildly ticking over it, and may express my feelings at some point.

DD chose Brownies. She doesn't go anymore as one of her other clubs changed and clashed with the time. But she enjoyed it when she did go.

I did originally consider Cubs as that is mixed, but our local pack had no girls in it. I spoke tot he Brownie leader and signed her up for that - there was a long waiting list though.

The single sex thing wasn't an issue either way tbh. My DD goes to a single sex school anyway, and does other activities that are mixed.

FWIW DD's Brownie group were really good. They did all manner of activities including outdoor activities, climbing and bouldering, treasure hunts, campfires, PGL trips, weekend camps, archery, bowling, etc plus indoor ones too inc some fascinating ones such as when the had a go at keyhole surgery - well, using the euqipment anyway!

Single sex opportunities are important and should be nurtured.

But the guiding centenary was 2010 so you're a little behind!

Oops (but in my defence, the organisation has been on the news today and I must have misheard why!)

Today's BBC reprting here.

Both are great. I do love the girl only space that Guiding offers but both my ds and dd will most likely go to Beavers when old enough as that is what there is in my village and I'm not driving them somewhere when the village hall is all of 30 seconds walk!

I have 2 DDs and intend for both of them to do rainbows/brownies/guides. (oldest is only 3- mental note, must find out about local rainbows soon). My siblings and I all did Guides/scouts as appropriate and it was very influential in my life. I remember discussing the idea of mixed gender groups as a Guide before it all came in- my friends and I were horrified at the idea of sharing our space with boys. I hated all the boyfriend/girlfriend interaction and school and was glad to get away from it at guides.

That said, I do think you need a really strong guide group.

I was a Brownie, then a Guide, then a Venture Scout. DD is a Cub, simply for logistic reasons, and the news report did get me thinking about how her experience of the two movements is going to be different from mine.

My DD is a Cub, she loves it. At the time we were looking the local guiding branch wasn't doing the active things she likes, I hear it has improved now but she is settled.

Indith, you could always start a group yourself if you want a single sex space for girls?

Isn't single sex reinforcing the message that girls are different and can't do the same stuff as boys?

I was a Brownie, Guide then Young Leader. It taught me skills that I wouldn't have learnt in school and that are useful. Confidence, working in a team, being creative. And strangely, great presentation skills. I have never been nervous in a corp presentation as I think it comes easily from teaching 30 guides how to put up a tent or similar!

DD was a Rainbow/Brownie but the Guides didn't suit her. Activities were rather passive and very traditional/female orientated and she isn't that sort of person.
So she left, despite the fact that her two best friends remained.
No night hikes, no archery/shooting/wide games/kayaking/messy crafts/survival camping. All stuff her brother's scout group were doing when he was the same age.
It depends hugely on who was running the group and to what happened, and the leader was an Enid Blyton type who knew what she wanted her gels to be like.
Little tolerance for diversity either, especially for those on the spectrum. She liked her pack to conform. It is one small experience, and I'm sure there are better all-female groups out there.
But I always recommend the scout movement to those who ask, I couldn't fault them and we've been involved with them for over 11 years.

My dd was a Brownie- she was a sickeningly girly girl and wouldn't hqve entertained Cubs! But she moved on to Scouts, and is now an Explorer. I had a preference for her to go to a mixed group because she goes to an all girls's school. In our area too, there is a tendency for Guides to be less physically active and out doorsy. Dd's cousin is a Guide and loves it, and wouldn't enjoy the boat sailing, canoeing, yomping, mud splattered element of the Scouts in this area. Not saying that differentiating always exists- I'm sure it doesn't. But it does round here.

madwomanintheattic don't even go there! I ran a group until a couple of years ago. Combination of dh's work, PND, my own children and various other things amde me stop. Not quite ready to go back yet! Thankfully there just wouldn't be enough children in the village to support both . The leader started Beavers and Cubs because that way it would be open to all. Can't wait for Ds to be old enough this autumn!

Oh, and a significant reason for guides to remain single sex is that there are girls who would not be allowed to go for cultural or religious reasons if it was a mixed group.

My eldest DD until recently did guides, she also goes to a mixed youth group. At Guides it was run very muh by the girls making most of the decisions in quite a demoncratic manner, that just wouldn't work in a mixed setting. Also at 11-14 ish there are huge differences in maturity between girls and boys on the whole (I have both and have worked in schools) also girls often feel more confident to do more boisterous things without boys around. I think it is sad that boys don't have the same chance to be in a single sex group and maybe do quieter things, but then my DS left cubs as it was too boisterous for him (he's a geek).

I am quite conflicted on this - I went to Brownies, then Guides, and it was one of the least empowering experiences of my youth. Much of our activity defined in a negative way by what boys did in cubs or restricted by old fashioned and very sexist ideas of what girls should or shouldn't do (e.g. we had to be older to sleep over at camp, and we spent our time making camp more "homely" with washing up racks made out of doweling and string!). I think a lot of it was down to the fact our leaders were a bit useless, but there was a lot of gender reinforcement in the movement generally I thought. As a kid I did not have my best experiences or find the opportunities or friends that opened up my life in single sex groups. I tended to like things that we're generally more often engaged in by boys, so it may just be that my interests were less well catered to in such groups - but groups that were almost all male were also less good.

However it does seem like the Guiding movement had a bit of a wake up call when Scouts started admitting boys, and now Guides seem to be working hard to embody some very positive pro-female messages and cover a really wide range of activities (wider than Scouts seems to). I've really liked some of the stuff I've heard coming from the Guiding movement lately.

On the whole I would probably only encourage my daughters down that route of they seemed to be failing to thrive in mixed sex groups. But that's a big change to how I felt 20 years ago, when I would have counciled any girl away from the movement.

But being atheist I won't send my kids to Guides or Scouts, so the choice may be moot - non-religious alternatives all seem to be mixed sex.

All faiths and no faiths welcome in guiding. even the promise has been changed to remove any mention of god or gods, and suggests children remain strong to their 'beliefs', whatever they are. Well, it has here anyway. Huge inclusion projects to ensure all girls are welcomed and none excluded, whether they are Muslim, Christian, atheist or anything else.

It's so sad when people write off the entire movement because of this.

The activities thing varies hugely according to skill set of leaders. Last year we took our girls ice fishing, and they go climbing, and it gets more adventurous as they get older.

I also got my cubs to learn how to iron, vacuum, make hot drinks, cook dinner, and sew on their own badges. we also did a lot of crafts...

Oh have they taken god out of the promise Madwoman? Because, when I last looked a few years ago, that and an insistence on the existence and central importance of "spiritual life" were fairly big indicators that atheists might be allowed to take part, but they seemed to be considered somewhat lacking.

It's still faith-based, but "God" can mean any God.

Atheism is problematic and is not compatible with the movement's aims (though some packs may turn a blind eye). Agnosticism is fine.