Controversy has been surrounding a video posted by a 14 year old Girl Scout imploring people to boycott Girl Scout Cookies. Taylor’s pleas are connected to the Girl Scouts admitting they allow transgender boys into the organization.

Taylor says she has been taught by the Girl Scouts to take action when she sees the need for change. This is compelling because she’s using the Girl Scout’s objectives against them. She outlines the problem; the Girl Scouts admitting transgender boys. Taylor uses quotes from a representative of the Girl Scouts to prove they do let in transgender boys. She reiterates that this means they let in boys “solely based on their wishes and desires.”

She then brings up her main problem with this; the fact that the Girl Scout organization is letting in transgender boys without letting the girls or their families know. This is wrong, she says, because the Girl Scouts represent themselves as an all-girl organization because the experience enriches the girls. She then abruptly brings up safety before strengthening her point on the experience girls in all-girl groups get. She says in all-girl groups, girls can relate to each other, be themselves, dress how they want and talk about things they’re uncomfortable talking about in front of boys. She explains how this is deceptive of the organization and then goes back to her previous point of safety. Taylor points out that they transgender boys would have to use the same bathrooms and sleep in the same bedrooms as the girls. She also brings up the fact that the male chaperones must sleep in separate facilities. Since Girl Scouts maybe be up to age 18, transgender males are technically adult males. She reads us an excerpt of a publication that says the Girl Scouts do not discrimination for any reason including gender.

She then brings our attention to “the real question” which is why the Girl Scouts are accommodating transgender boys despite all this. Taylor’s argument loses some credibility here. She believes the Girl Scouts are accommodating these children because the organization cares more about that than the girls in it. This particular point is the only one that doesn’t really make too much sense, it’s difficult to see the connection shes trying to make here. It seems she’s being very naive in this and doesn’t have too much proof.

She finally explains alternatives to buying cookies; alternatives which would help the individual troops with out “giving GSUSA more pocket money.” Taylor’s argument is well thought-out; her arguments are very clear. Giving alternatives was a very smart decision. Though I don’t agree with her point of view, I must say her speech was mostly convincing. Her use of publicly available writings was very helpful to her point.