5 ms·

I'm Swedish and grew up as a scout, and in Sweden scouting was made co-educational in the 1960s. I remember having my mind blown at finding out that this wasn't

by OskarS 8y ago

I'm Swedish and grew up as a scout, and in Sweden scouting was made co-educational in the 1960s. I remember having my mind blown at finding out that this wasn't the case everywhere in the modern world. It just seemed like the most ridiculous thing to me, to separate scouting by gender. Saying that girls and boys couldn't be scouts together was equally absurd to me as saying that girls and boys couldn't go to school together. Equality in this was just the most natural thing in the world. It's ridiculous that scouting isn't co-educational everywhere. The fact that Sweden didn't realize this until the 1960s is absurd, and the fact that there are people still resisting it today half a century later is downright shameful.

Freak_NL 8y ago
Same here in the Netherlands. It's always weird to read about the US BSA and the Girl Scouts being actual separate organisations. Here it was (and perhaps is) perfectly acceptable to have separate girl and boy patrols within the same age bracket in a single group, but most activities are shared (including the all-important summer camp).
ramblerman 8y ago
> Equality in this was just the most natural thing in the world. Op wasn't suggesting girls can't be scouts. You can still have unisex scouts. He was merely asking if we have gone so far that a club which allows boys to play with boys and girls just with girls (in one activity) was such a terrible thing. The fact that you dropped the equality hammer to counter him, kind of makes his point that it has.
- OskarS 8y ago
  I think there are a number of circumstances where separating by gender is perfectly fine. Sports is an obvious one: because of gender differences in physiques, girls and boys compete at different levels, so the separation makes perfect sense. I'm just saying that it makes absolutely zero sense to do it for scouting. Scouting is about teaching kids to be self-reliant, to be confident in nature, to work well with others, and to help with their physical and mental development. There's absolutely no reason to split this up by gender except antiquated and sexist beliefs about women. It makes just about as much sense as having different scouting organizations for people with blue eyes and brown eyes.
  - bluecalm 8y ago
    >>I'm just saying that it makes absolutely zero sense to do it for scouting Boys are stronger than girls so having boys only or girls only makes it easier to organize physical exercises/tests/requirements. It's also likely boys are in general interested in other things than girls so having gender separation allows more kids doing what they enjoy. One more reason could be that having genders separated removes the aspect of kids hitting puberty interacting with each other and additional burden it entails when organizing activities. I mean, there are surely reasons to have genders combined but it's very easy to imagine reasons to have it separated. >>It makes just about as much sense as having different scouting organizations for people with blue eyes and brown eyes. Oh c'mon, we can discuss how much different girls and boys are and what kind of structure is better for society but to claim relevant differences between boys and girls amount to differences between blue eyed and brown eyed people is just ignorant.
    - nailer 8y ago
      I think your post is entirely reasonable (and it worries me to see generally acknowledged facts, like gender differences - girls interested in people, boys in systems - being downmodded on HN). But there are girls with typically male interests and boys with typically female interests. If a boy wants to do contemporary dance, give him an opportunity to do contemporary dance. If a girl is into survival tests (making shelter, hunting food etc), give her the opportunity to test herself.
      - bluecalm 8y ago
        I am not opposed to having mixed groups. They have a lot of benefits in many settings. I just don't want to force it. There are people with various views about how various activities should be and how children should be raised. Let them do w/e they think is best.
  - brobdingnagians 8y ago
    I think part of the issue is that, as a private organization, it should be able to decide for itself in order to obtain it's own goals and ends (which they have, though I disagree with them and will look elsewhere for the good old experience). I see great value in separating genders for scouts and having a comraderie form among young men. Young men act very differently when they are around young women, and it is good to have both situations in structured environments. I feel it is easier to teach camping, self reliance, etc. when they aren't distracted by the cute girl. You might feel differently, and that's okay, but I think it's okay for both us to have our own opinions and our own organizations so that we can do as we see fit without attacking each other's position. I'm an Eagle Scout, and I'm very grateful for the experiences I had, I found it valuable. I had lots of other times and places to have other sorts of experiences, but scouts was special in it's own way.
lou1306 8y ago
In Italy (and other countries) we have both co-ed and inter-ed associations. "Inter-ed" meaning that there is a single association with separate troops for boys and girls, but chiefs can plan activities together as they deem fit. Would this approach be considered "ridiculous", "absurd", or "shameful"?
Dirlewanger 8y ago
You're automatically assuming because it's exclusionary that it's a negative for society. There's already been an equivalent for over a century. Just because it's been around before their lifetime and is a cultural institution doesn't mean it's a bad thing. Too many liberals get this wrong about conservatism; they think "old == bad", ergo it must be toppled/changed in some way. What is morally/ethically wrong with only young boys going away for a few weeks in the summer to a camp?
Lio 8y ago
Are Girl Guides a thing in Sweden? If Guides exist are they co-education also?
- OskarS 8y ago
  I don't think so. I mean, maybe, but not that I've heard of.
FearNotDaniel 8y ago
Yup, same in Austria and (as far as I know) the rest of the German-speaking world. In the UK I was a cub and a scout, my sister was a brownie and a guide, both offered very different experiences. Over here everybody gets to be a Pathfinder and the kids all do cool adventurous stuff together.

by OskarS 8y ago

Freak_NL 8y ago

Same here in the Netherlands. It's always weird to read about the US BSA and the Girl Scouts being actual separate organisations. Here it was (and perhaps is) perfectly acceptable to have separate girl and boy patrols within the same age bracket in a single group, but most activities are shared (including the all-important summer camp).

ramblerman 8y ago

> Equality in this was just the most natural thing in the world. Op wasn't suggesting girls can't be scouts. You can still have unisex scouts. He was merely asking if we have gone so far that a club which allows boys to play with boys and girls just with girls (in one activity) was such a terrible thing. The fact that you dropped the equality hammer to counter him, kind of makes his point that it has.

OskarS 8y ago
I think there are a number of circumstances where separating by gender is perfectly fine. Sports is an obvious one: because of gender differences in physiques, girls and boys compete at different levels, so the separation makes perfect sense. I'm just saying that it makes absolutely zero sense to do it for scouting. Scouting is about teaching kids to be self-reliant, to be confident in nature, to work well with others, and to help with their physical and mental development. There's absolutely no reason to split this up by gender except antiquated and sexist beliefs about women. It makes just about as much sense as having different scouting organizations for people with blue eyes and brown eyes.
- bluecalm 8y ago
  >>I'm just saying that it makes absolutely zero sense to do it for scouting Boys are stronger than girls so having boys only or girls only makes it easier to organize physical exercises/tests/requirements. It's also likely boys are in general interested in other things than girls so having gender separation allows more kids doing what they enjoy. One more reason could be that having genders separated removes the aspect of kids hitting puberty interacting with each other and additional burden it entails when organizing activities. I mean, there are surely reasons to have genders combined but it's very easy to imagine reasons to have it separated. >>It makes just about as much sense as having different scouting organizations for people with blue eyes and brown eyes. Oh c'mon, we can discuss how much different girls and boys are and what kind of structure is better for society but to claim relevant differences between boys and girls amount to differences between blue eyed and brown eyed people is just ignorant.
  - nailer 8y ago
    I think your post is entirely reasonable (and it worries me to see generally acknowledged facts, like gender differences - girls interested in people, boys in systems - being downmodded on HN). But there are girls with typically male interests and boys with typically female interests. If a boy wants to do contemporary dance, give him an opportunity to do contemporary dance. If a girl is into survival tests (making shelter, hunting food etc), give her the opportunity to test herself.
    - bluecalm 8y ago
      I am not opposed to having mixed groups. They have a lot of benefits in many settings. I just don't want to force it. There are people with various views about how various activities should be and how children should be raised. Let them do w/e they think is best.
- brobdingnagians 8y ago
  I think part of the issue is that, as a private organization, it should be able to decide for itself in order to obtain it's own goals and ends (which they have, though I disagree with them and will look elsewhere for the good old experience). I see great value in separating genders for scouts and having a comraderie form among young men. Young men act very differently when they are around young women, and it is good to have both situations in structured environments. I feel it is easier to teach camping, self reliance, etc. when they aren't distracted by the cute girl. You might feel differently, and that's okay, but I think it's okay for both us to have our own opinions and our own organizations so that we can do as we see fit without attacking each other's position. I'm an Eagle Scout, and I'm very grateful for the experiences I had, I found it valuable. I had lots of other times and places to have other sorts of experiences, but scouts was special in it's own way.

lou1306 8y ago

In Italy (and other countries) we have both co-ed and inter-ed associations. "Inter-ed" meaning that there is a single association with separate troops for boys and girls, but chiefs can plan activities together as they deem fit. Would this approach be considered "ridiculous", "absurd", or "shameful"?

Dirlewanger 8y ago

You're automatically assuming because it's exclusionary that it's a negative for society. There's already been an equivalent for over a century. Just because it's been around before their lifetime and is a cultural institution doesn't mean it's a bad thing. Too many liberals get this wrong about conservatism; they think "old == bad", ergo it must be toppled/changed in some way. What is morally/ethically wrong with only young boys going away for a few weeks in the summer to a camp?

Lio 8y ago

Are Girl Guides a thing in Sweden? If Guides exist are they co-education also?

OskarS 8y ago
I don't think so. I mean, maybe, but not that I've heard of.

FearNotDaniel 8y ago

Yup, same in Austria and (as far as I know) the rest of the German-speaking world. In the UK I was a cub and a scout, my sister was a brownie and a guide, both offered very different experiences. Over here everybody gets to be a Pathfinder and the kids all do cool adventurous stuff together.