4 ms·

So the reason of having segregated scouts is to protect their privacy? Wouldn't it be enough just to have one scout organization and separate bathrooms as well?

by jablan 14y ago

biot 14y ago
Privacy in bathrooms is accommodated through the use of private stalls. Why should you have privacy from someone with different body parts but not privacy from someone with the same body parts? What about transgendered people, or people born with a mixed gender? We all make the same body noises so if the privacy is there via private bathroom stalls, why segregate people? Regardless of that point, the question was why "Girl Scouts" but not "White Scouts". Modern society frowns upon segregated bathrooms by skin color (look to the southern US for relatively recent examples of that) but not based upon sex. So just as there are segregated bathrooms for male vs female, there are also segregated baseball and volleyball teams, segregated schools, and many other examples where the division is by sex. Maybe Scouts is one example where it should get with the times and there isn't a particularly good reason why it should be divided by sex, as could be argued for some sports where there are physiological differences justifying the segregation. However, I don't find it particularly archaic that a private organization exists which has separate groups for male vs. female. It would be archaic if only the female group has sewing, or only the male group has hunting, and if that is the case they should modernize those areas. But it is a private organization and if people don't like the way the organization is run they are free to not participate. Anyone can start up their own private organization which allows members of either sex. Call it the Adventurers or the Pioneers, and have similar achievement badges. That sounds like a good idea to me.

So the reason of having segregated scouts is to protect their privacy? Wouldn't it be enough just to have one scout organization and separate bathrooms as well?

by jablan 14y ago

So the reason of having segregated scouts is to protect their privacy? Wouldn't it be enough just to have one scout organization and separate bathrooms as well?

biot 14y ago

Privacy in bathrooms is accommodated through the use of private stalls. Why should you have privacy from someone with different body parts but not privacy from someone with the same body parts? What about transgendered people, or people born with a mixed gender? We all make the same body noises so if the privacy is there via private bathroom stalls, why segregate people? Regardless of that point, the question was why "Girl Scouts" but not "White Scouts". Modern society frowns upon segregated bathrooms by skin color (look to the southern US for relatively recent examples of that) but not based upon sex. So just as there are segregated bathrooms for male vs female, there are also segregated baseball and volleyball teams, segregated schools, and many other examples where the division is by sex. Maybe Scouts is one example where it should get with the times and there isn't a particularly good reason why it should be divided by sex, as could be argued for some sports where there are physiological differences justifying the segregation. However, I don't find it particularly archaic that a private organization exists which has separate groups for male vs. female. It would be archaic if only the female group has sewing, or only the male group has hunting, and if that is the case they should modernize those areas. But it is a private organization and if people don't like the way the organization is run they are free to not participate. Anyone can start up their own private organization which allows members of either sex. Call it the Adventurers or the Pioneers, and have similar achievement badges. That sounds like a good idea to me.