Boy Scouts to Admit Girls

Validuz said:
What a cuck... :rofl: I'm not sure who here can even rival this retard.

You think gender is just some social construct and that women and men don't have predilections for certain things, let alone strengths (even though they are evident in fucking newborns).

I mean, you just used fucking car driving as an example. Do you know how stupid and oblivious you are? Any clue?

Edit: Not that I give a shit what Boy Scouts do, but it is most definitely pandering to females as the known weaker sex, but parading it as they are equals.
Click to expand...

Are you fucking dense.... or do you just roll your face across the keyboard without actually reading anything before clicking reply?
 
this story made the local news here

i just heard it as background noise

i dont really care i always thought dudes who joined scouts were fags anyway

but now we just increase the amount of alleged sexual assaults against female boy scouts
 
Hellsfury said:
Are you fucking dense.... or do you just roll your face across the keyboard without actually reading anything before clicking reply?
Click to expand...
I feel like this is a total waste of time, but yes, I read your pretend-intellectual stupidity.
...

Hellsfury said:
I thought being a Scout was a measure of ones own potential against yourself, not against or compared to others. So, why can't a girl strive to be an Eagle Scout under the same requirements expected of a boy? having a female "boy" scout is awkward, hence just dropping the distinction and merely having scouts.
Click to expand...
Because if it was hard then girls/women would almost never be able to do it, which is why we have lowered standards in EVERY SINGLE INDUSTRY THAT EXISTS for women and laws that help them in EVERY SINGLE WAY POSSIBLE.

Segregating the girls and boys apart from each other for specific conditions like into troops and dorms seems logical... but why in their expectations and goals? Why distinctions like Girl Guides bake cookies and Boy Scouts tie knots? Why do we make such gender specific associations? Would it be strange to think of a boy baking cookies or a girl who can tie a knot?
Click to expand...
Maybe because that's what the kids, biologically, want and are inclined to learn? Gosh, that's definitely not it! It's because we, as a society, shove cooking mitts in the hands of little girls!

Boys and Girls are not homogeneous in every aspect. It's not a coincidence that we have two genders (and only two). Otherwise we'd just be "humans". We do differ in our development and perspectives. Our distinctive differences have not evolved to be entirely superfluous and superficial. Perhaps we are guilty of shortchanging the capacity of a genders potential by putting them into a box that under values them.
Click to expand...
:rofl: Yea, we shortchange genetics and free choice.

Like the idea that woman are incapable of driving a car. Not just the mental capacity to understand how to drive a car, but the physical capacity to operate the controls of the machinery. Obviously the mental capacity is irrelevant, woman clearly have the cognitive capacity to understand how to drive, but there was a time when society actually presumed that woman would be intimidated by the task or it just wasn't something a woman did. It was un-lady-like. Maybe in the earliest of days there was a case for the physicality of driving a car. There wasn't power steering, power brakes, electric start or other mechanical assists to reduce the physical demand of properly operating the car. However, that isn't true any more and today it's ridiculous to think that driving is beyond the capacity of a woman.
Click to expand...

The bold area is what makes you really stupid and sound like a cuck. Are you so fucking dumb to think that people today, not just men, think that women suck at driving (and most other things) because of early 1900's physical limitations of automobiles? If so, please off yourself. The less retard genes we have being passed down, the better. No one thinks driving is beyond their capacity. Mentally challenged can drive cars. It's about [intended] safety and ability to drive well across the board.
 
Last edited:
boy scouts was for raging fags

"we" haven't lowered standards in every single industry u ragin fag, economic forces don't make allowances for ur feelsie weelsies
 
Validuz said:
I feel like this is a total waste of time, but yes, I read your pretend-intellectual stupidity.
...

Because if it was hard then girls/women would almost never be able to do it, which is why we have lowered standards in EVERY SINGLE INDUSTRY THAT EXISTS for women and laws that help them in EVERY SINGLE WAY POSSIBLE.

Maybe because that's what the kids, biologically, want and are inclined to learn? Gosh, that's definitely not it! It's because we, as a society, shove cooking mitts in the hands of little girls!

:rofl: Yea, we shortchange genetics and free choice.



The bold area is what makes you really stupid and sound like a cuck. Are you so fucking dumb to think that people today, not just men, think that women suck at driving (and most other things) because of early 1900's physical limitations of automobiles?

If so, please off yourself. The less retard genes we have being passed down, the better.
Click to expand...

Ok. So you are dense.


I didn't say the genders are equal or the same. In fact I implied the opposite. I stated that "Boys and Girls are not homogeneous in every aspect". homogeneous, as in the same. I also stated "Our distinctive differences have not evolved to be entirely superfluous and superficial". As in, we are different and those differences are significant.

Do you even know what is expected of a Boy Scout in order to be promoted to Eagle Scout? Nothing that can not be demonstrated by a girl. There is nothing gender specific about the requirements. There are no requirements that involve testosterone as a prerequisite. It revolves around character development. She does not have to fight a bear or swim an ocean. So a girl is just as capable of demonstrating the ideals of the Scout Oath and Scout Law as a boy is. Which simply asks the question, is it critical to the identity of the organization to be "Boy Scouts" and "Girl Scouts" or would not "Scouts" equate to the same thing and we just do away with the segregation. Societies concept of what defines the genders has changed over the last 105 years since the Boy Scouts of America were founded.

Straight off of the Scouts of America website:

DUTY TO GOD AND COUNTRY: Your family and religious leaders teach you to know and serve God. By following these teachings, you do your duty to God.

Men and women of the past worked to make America great, and many gave their lives for their country. By being a good family member and a good citizen, by working for your country's good and obeying its laws, you do your duty to your country. Obeying the Scout Law means living by its 12 points.

DUTY TO OTHER PEOPLE: Many people need help. A cheery smile and a helping hand make life easier for others. By doing a Good Turn daily and helping when you're needed, you prove yourself a Scout and do your part to make this a better world.

DUTY TO SELF: Keeping yourself physically strong means taking care of your body. Eat the right foods and build your strength. Staying mentally awake means learn all you can, be curious, and ask questions. Being morally straight means to live your life with honesty, to be clean in your speech and actions, and to be a person of strong character.

A Scout is:

  • Trustworthy,
    Loyal,
    Helpful,
    Friendly,
    Courteous,
    Kind,
    Obedient,
    Cheerful,
    Thrifty,
    Brave,
    Clean,
    and Reverent.
Click to expand...

There is nothing here that can not be demonstrated by either a boy or a girl. The gender of the individual is irrelevant. The ideals are not defined in such a way as to highlight any distinctions that specifically exist between genders.

The only reason a girl could not be an Eagle Scout was because she wasn't a boy. All I posited was, perhaps, that was an outdated perspective to maintain in a modern society.


Which is where the fucking car analogy comes in... because if you have ever driven an antique car from the early 1900's, they take physicality to operate and physique IS A DISTINCTIVE TRAIT THAT DEFINES THE GENDERS.
So you could be forgiven for having the opinion that the average woman can not be expected to drive in 1917 because they lack the strength to crank-start an engine, operate manual brakes or maintain control of the vehicle without the mechanical assistance afforded by the innovations of a modern car. Which is why we no longer hold the opinion that woman can not operate a modern automobile... which is what I said in the original post.

In the past, we clearly put woman in a box that under-valued their potential and contributions to society. From driving cars, to academic and scientific pursuits to voting and governance.
 
My daughters were in girl scouts and said it was boring - crafts and cooking

They wished they could have done more of what the boy scouts did

I guess now they get the chance - although a co-ed camping trip for 12 year olds sounds a little sketchy to me
 
Validuz said:
Because if it was hard then girls/women would almost never be able to do it, which is why we have lowered standards in EVERY SINGLE INDUSTRY THAT EXISTS for women and laws that help them in EVERY SINGLE WAY POSSIBLE.

.
Click to expand...

do you have any examples of this or are you just doing validuz things
 
Buk Naked said:
My daughters were in girl scouts and said it was boring - crafts and cooking

They wished they could have done more of what the boy scouts did

I guess now they get the chance - although a co-ed camping trip for 12 year olds sounds a little sketchy to me
Click to expand...

Which was the argument presented by the 5 girls who wanted the chance to be Eagle Scouts.

It wasn't a matter of making a statement about gender equality and being denied entry from the boys club. They simply thought the activities and challenges were more to their liking.

I think there are those who make those kinds of protests for the purpose of pushing an agenda. I empathize with the Boy Scouts for initially maintaining their Boys-Only policy, because it has always been a Boys-Only organization and I don't see a problem with having things that are boys or girls only. I don't agree with the idea of being forced to change your ideals to suit someone else's view of the world and society. Especially if those policies and ideals are not overtly subverting any moral or ethical standard that society holds overall. However, at the same time, is this a hill you want to die on? Is it really that important and is it the keystone that everything about being a Boy Scout rests on; that it's only for Boys?

I don't think so.


That doesn't mean, going forward, that the organization should treat boys and girls as entirely homogeneous and without differences.

Also, maybe the Boy Scouts are not the ones that should be expected to change. Perhaps the Girls Scouts should re-evaluate what it means to be a Girl Scout and adapt accordingly to how society has evolved its perspectives.
 
my sister did plenty of the camping and outdoors shit in girl scouts

maybe the problem is w/ shitty moms running shitty troops

if the girls join boy scouts, they can run into the same problem except w/ shitty chair force dads instead of their dependapotamus wives
 
Edofnor said:
my sister did plenty of the camping and outdoors shit in girl scouts

maybe the problem is w/ shitty moms running shitty troops
Click to expand...

On my honor I will try to serve God and my country and live by the girl scout law.

Shit moms who only care about that cookie money.
 
it's a business it should do what it wants to make money

or is it not a free country anymore in the united tears of conservative sjws?
 
"If a girl says 'Put it in my ass!' she's a dude. It's something I learned in the Scouts." -- Dave Attell
 
Hellsfury said:
Also, maybe the Boy Scouts are not the ones that should be expected to change. Perhaps the Girls Scouts should re-evaluate what it means to be a Girl Scout and adapt accordingly to how society has evolved its perspectives.
Click to expand...
^This.

I find it rather insulting that the boy scouts would do this. Boys need a place where they can learn about what it takes and what it means to be the 'king of the hill'. The BSOA should have had talks with the Girl Scouts about their programs and helped them to teach little girls other things.
 
blackpeople said:
do you have any examples of this or are you just doing validuz things
Click to expand...
Are you serious?

Let me get this straight first. Do you think that there aren't laws or policies in places specifically to help women and all non-white men?

You answer that first and we'll worry about the rest.
 
Hellsfury said:
Ok. So you are dense.

I didn't say the genders are equal or the same. In fact I implied the opposite. I stated that "Boys and Girls are not homogeneous in every aspect". homogeneous, as in the same. I also stated "Our distinctive differences have not evolved to be entirely superfluous and superficial". As in, we are different and those differences are significant.
Click to expand...
Yeah, dipshit. I got that part. I was making fun of your other nonsensical point about car driving.

Do you even know what is expected of a Boy Scout in order to be promoted to Eagle Scout? Nothing that can not be demonstrated by a girl. There is nothing gender specific about the requirements. There are no requirements that involve testosterone as a prerequisite. It revolves around character development. She does not have to fight a bear or swim an ocean. So a girl is just as capable of demonstrating the ideals of the Scout Oath and Scout Law as a boy is. Which simply asks the question, is it critical to the identity of the organization to be "Boy Scouts" and "Girl Scouts" or would not "Scouts" equate to the same thing and we just do away with the segregation. Societies concept of what defines the genders has changed over the last 105 years since the Boy Scouts of America were founded.
Click to expand...
They're a separate organizations. That's for obvious starters.

Furthermore, it's quite idiotic to mix young girls with young boys. Do you have any libido yourself or did your demasculinized upbringing strip you of that as well?

And finally for fuck's sake, GS have their own "Eagle Scout" variant. Just because it isn't as widely known, doesn't mean it should be nullified. "Gold Award" or something. No one cares because women and girls normally don't care about that shit, which is why GS are vastly outnumbered, just like every other fucking field that men and women completely differ on.

The only reason a girl could not be an Eagle Scout was because she wasn't a boy. All I posited was, perhaps, that was an outdated perspective to maintain in a modern society.
Click to expand...
Who gives a shit? Heaven forbid boys do anything or have anything that girls don't... all 4 of them that were brainwashed by their parents to give a shit that is.

When's the last time you heard cries for Boys in STEM™? Oh yea, you don't. It's only the other way around. Everything male has to become female or at bare minimum, not male.

Which is where the fucking car analogy comes in... because if you have ever driven an antique car from the early 1900's, they take physicality to operate and physique IS A DISTINCTIVE TRAIT THAT DEFINES THE GENDERS. So you could be forgiven for having the opinion that the average woman can not be expected to drive in 1917 because they lack the strength to crank-start an engine, operate manual brakes or maintain control of the vehicle without the mechanical assistance afforded by the innovations of a modern car. Which is why we no longer hold the opinion that woman can not operate a modern automobile... which is what I said in the original post.
Click to expand...
Yes, we know the first cars required a hand crank, had no power breaks or power steering, as well as no automatic gearbox. You clearly can't read, because that's not why people think women are shit drivers. They know they're shit drivers because it's demonstrably true.

Men drive recklessly on purpose.
Women drive recklessly on accident.

The difference is night and day important. I mean, this is such a ridiculous statement to have to make. I can't believe someone is alive in the year 2017 and thinks the reason we all know most women are shit drivers is because of hand-crank engines from the 1920's. :rofl: Jesus Christ.

In the past, we clearly put woman in a box that under-valued their potential and contributions to society. From driving cars, to academic and scientific pursuits to voting and governance.
Click to expand...
"We" didn't and don't do anything. Maybe you did, but myself and others don't give a shit what fucking genitals you have. However, we also aren't morons who ignore reality. It's more than having a dick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top