johndaigler

Robert, WELCOME!!! Don't forget to use nearby Packs, Troops and Crews as resources. There's a load of talented, trained Scouters out there looking to do one more thing for the good of the cause. They might not be able to help carry the load long term, but on individual events their presence often lends a sense of excitement, learning, and Scouting continuity. They'll have equipment to lend and experience to share - some may even be willing to serve on your Committee till you're up and running. Don't forget to say thank you! - personally, but also formally from the Pack. Pack stationery is easy to create on any word processor. It's cheap and gives your Unit a public image of professional and personal caring. KISMIF! And every once in a while take a moment to reflect on your efforts. Whether they succeed or fail, what you're attempting is nothing short of heroic for the boys of your town. Be humble as you work, but know that we're all proud to have you on the team and caring about the young men in ND. Thanks! jd

Following Madkins "team" approach a bit further . . . In the few Units I've observed, I see an emphasis on the present; an applaudeable effort to do the right thing the best way we know how - today. To be specific, we start thinking about who would make good leaders on the day we find out we're losing one of our leaders. This is an OK approach, particularly if you've got good leaders today. However, IMHO, Units would be well served to focus equally hard on the long term. If we can see ourselves not just as leaders for today but as Stewards for tomorrow's Scouts and Program, we can act in the long term interest of the Unit, the Program and the Scouts who will be here 10 years from now. Th vital importance of training, consistent structure (and rules), and Madkins' Assistants becomes obvious. If every major Adult Leadership role is supported by an "assistant" - someone learning the ropes, and ready to step in when the present leader steps away - the Unit is better prepared for the future. They're less likely to suffer the travails of poor leadership, empty leader roles, inconsistent decision-making, and reinventing wheels. This also creates opportunities for additional parents to be involved on a more organizational level without feeling like they've been thrown (however politely) into the deep end of the pool. I agree that the "caring" adult is the one I want to be around my sons, so hopefully all the people we recruit fit that description to a great extent. But for the long-term benefit of the organization, I'd welcome the others, as well. Give me a book-smart rule book reader; a rough around the edges, non-pc, outdoorsman; and even a person who disagrees with me all the time. They're not necessarily the ones I want spending the most time with my sons, but for the long-term good, I'll take and use their skills to help round out the holes in the "caring" adults resumes. When the organization focuses on it's long-term health, the value of good leaders is enhanced and the negative impact of "less good" leaders is minimized. Specifically, the boys themselves will learn to gravitate to the right adult at the right time for the right benefit. We just give the boys better, more consistent, more varied, choices; and we give the Unit a strong future will fewer hills and valleys - giving everyone more time to help the boys hike, grow and live through their hills and valleys. jd

FScouter, thanks for your approach. I appreciate the thoughtfulness and respect. From the beginning of this thread, we've all pointed out the need to first try to challenge the rule through appropriate processes. I hope we're teaching him to come to me before he breaks the rule and tells me why he thinks the rule is stupid enough to break. After he breaks the rule there might be consequences that he won't appreciate. It's not as simple as excusing the boy from the rule. If he's convinced me the rule is inappropriate, then I would effort to change the rule. Hopefully, that's not a complicated matter, because I've put myself in the position that I now have to break the rule with him or invalidate my philosophy, betray him, and lose credibility. In your scenario, I'm making the troop rule, so I'm assuming that gives me the right to change the rule. You're mostly right about the rule never having been a good rule. But, sometimes rules are good for a while then they need to change - the key is that they change based on improved thinking or differing conditions. In our example, that's brought to light by the Scout's ethical decision making and critical thinking. Would there be many moments to be prouder of the young man? I'm not sure we would want a boy to take that approach with a law in the community. Break a law, maybe get caught. If caught, argue with the judge about why the law is stupid. Seems a bit like licking a wire to see if it's "hot"!!!!! F, I think the only difference is the boy's ability to understand and accept potential consequences. The skills, process, and moral obligation to challenge wrongs are still the same. Again, let's teach him to argue his position before he breaks the rule. If he breaks the rule first, the stakes can get high - particularly in the real world. jd

Sorry, Scoutingagain, I'd rather have root canal than follow you down that trail!! Unless someone wants to help me complain about Cub uniforms!! But I believe that horse is too recently dead to go near it. Anyway, back to Eamonn . . . How do they deal with a Scout who disobeys one of these rules and when asked why? His answer is that the rule is stupid. Eamonn. IMHO, I don't think that's difficult. I think the key is "ethical decision making". I don't ignore rules or rank them or try to slow down when I see the flashing lights (well, alright I slow down, but I've learned to use cruise control so I know those lights are not for me anymore). I judge the rules. I look at the rule and ask myself if that's a good rule - is it right for me, for my boys, for whoever is affected by the rule. 99% of the time I say, "That's a good rule." Or, at least, it's close enough that I believe following it is a greater good than breaking it. But, on occasion, I DECIDE the rule is inappropriate and I make what I see is a better choice. Since that's exactly what I'd want from a Scout, a son, a President, . . . it's pretty straightforward. When he called the rule stupid, he has judged it and found it less than BEST. If he can explain that, to my cross-examining satisfaction, I let him change the rule. It's a simple standard but amazingly high since most rules are broken for reasons other than judging them inadequate. jd

Agreed - Maybe it would help to split the "rule breakers" into two groups. A)Those who don't follow rules because they are inconvenient - perhaps fashion-focused uniform non-wearers fall into this group. B)Those who have made an informed decision to challenge rules based on a right/wrong choice. I would assume these people have considered the potential consequences to their actions. This group might include (Without changing the thread's topic, please!) wearers of the "Inclusive Scouting Award" or a Pack Committee that chooses to have their Cubs wear a pack neckerchief, slide and belt buckle in lieu of the annually rotating Cub accoutrements. I think an important difference is that the B group would be able to explain their choice. You might not agree with them, but they've thought it through and judged the standing rule to be less than best for their program. I'm more comfortable with the B group, even though they may lead me to many more angst filled moments than the A group. The A group doesn't require much thought (because they haven't put much into it!). BTW, did I misread something or was FB being funny in that fuzzy, slightly mocking way I've come to read him? jd

It's the end of the old year and the beginning of the new. So your boys have a pretty (if unecessarily expensive) new neckerchief and a shiny new handbook. . . . How did you use the old handbook and how do you plan to use the new one? Do you REALLY get Akelas to sign every line or just focus on experiencing activities that you know will help the boys reach their Achievement goals? Do you REALLY ask the boys to bring the books to every Den meeting? Here I am a DL and Pack Trainer and (for a short while longer) CC. I get very different answers depending upon whom I ask in my Pack. What kind of answers do you guys have? jd

Fair enough, E., though I would counter with that section's final paragraph: Obeidance must be guided by good judgement. If someone tells you to cheat, steal or do something you know is wrong, you must say no. Trust your own beliefs and obey your conscience when you know you are right. But let's jump the grey area to get some learnin' . . . What's the process for changing "rules" within BSA? I should follow the "bad" rule while trying to get it changed? Is there a point where, after I've tried to get changes made, that I rightfully turn to "alternative methods"? How should we handle the situation when the local "rule" differs from the National "rule"? jd (This message has been edited by johndaigler)

Eamonn, "This to my mind comes back to a very simple matter of doing what is right or doing what is wrong." With gobs of respect . . . Is it possible that there are bad rules that ought to be ignored or fought? Is obedience the only Correct behavior? I'm not arguing on behalf of people who don't like to be inconvenienced by rules, or who don't think the uniform is cool enough; but I think, if we tried, we could come up with a "rule" or two that we think ought to be changed. Given the BSA organizational structure, I'm not sure many Scouters would know how to get a rule changed - or have much trust that their opinion would count for much. I'm not looking to complain about the National structure (at least not in this thread. ), but to point out that there are a few "rules" that I believe are better "not followed". I think you're saying I should swallow my judgement and just follow the rule. Isn't my judgement of the situation my truest guide for my own Best behavior? If I see a rule that, IMHO, adversely affects the boys or the program, shouldn't I act on that? It's true, if we let everyone make such judgements some are going to be wrong, and those Scouters' will probably act wrongly. There may be some who abuse the opportunity and make choices based on convenience or fashion sense rather than on good honest evaluation of the situation. But, always follow the rules? No matter what? Hmmmmmmmm . . . At the moment, I'm thinking I value thinking more than I value blind adherence to rules. We're all about teaching young men to be able to make "ethical decisions" - but if the answer is "follow the rules", I think we've just made ourselves obsolete. Not to be too glib, but I don't think we really want "follow the rules" to always be the right answer. The rules aren't always created for the right reasons - or for reasons that are right 95 years after they were originally created. I'd hate to take it all for granted. I think, as Scouters, our judgements can help to keep the program strong for the next 95 years. I'm sure there are other Powells, Setons, Wests, Beards, Hillcourts, et al, out there today. If all they do is follow the rules, will they ever be the Heroes that are needed for the next generation of Scouts? Do you really mean it's just as simple as right or wrong? If that's true, I think it would sadden me. jd

Seattle, Can you help me better understand your comment: "the ACLU is attempting to oppose real diversity in the United States by attempting to exclude the BSA from participating in important parts of American society."? jd (This message has been edited by johndaigler)

BW, sorry this apparently slipped by you. I applauded redfeather's USE of the phrase - not his invention of it. I was modeling behavior that I'd like to see more often -- modeling positive words and actions rather than the nitpicking, negative, judgemental, insulting, and in the end, detrimental and less than effective "i" dotting and "t" crossing that I too often read hereabouts. I'm kinda surprised that you didn't recognize this and felt the need to correct a comment that was positive, personal and accurate. You often suggest that our behaviors are witnessed by the boys and that we should model the behavior that we expect from them. That's a bit disappointing -- I guess I'LL have to try harder - or be more clear in my praise. Perhaps I should PM redfeather to clarify my comments. jd

Redfeather - Your thread title "Baby Sitters of America" was quite clever. Word play and such exotic literary tools as metaphor and irony can often go underappreciated. Words have powers beyond their dictionary definitions. Thank you for modeling a bit of thinking and communicating skill beyond the bare bones of verbal information sharing. Parent Involvement is a tricky problem for many of us - use that same cleverness to get your Parents intrigued about all the good stuff your boys accomplish and experience. Good Luck. jd

Redfeather - Your thread title "Baby Sitters of America" was quite clever. Word play and such exotic literary tools as metaphor and irony can often go underappreciated. Words have powers beyond their dictionary definitions. Thank you for modeling a bit of thinking and communicating skill beyond the bare bones of verbal information sharing. Parent Involvement is a tricky problem for many of us - use that same cleverness to get your Parents intrigued about all the good stuff your boys accomplish and experience. Good Luck. jd

Hand-knotted Persian rugs are some of the most beautiful in the world. The craftsmanship, attention to detail and work ethic required to create one of these artistic masterpieces requires whole families to work together following the plans and rules for months (if not years). Into every carpet a specific family member is given the responsibility of purposefully creating an error - it's often referred to as "The Persian Flaw". The flaw does nothing to injure the majesty of the art, and only enhances the rugs value. This tradition stems from the rugmakers' Faith. They believe that the pursuit of perfection is a sinful arrogance and an insult to their Creator - the only Perfection in the Universe. Maybe in future threads we can focus on all the good things we do and teach ourselves how to be even better at the Scouting Game. If we start with a focus upon the bits we do wrongly, how can we possibly be modeling behaviors that we want to teach others? If we're only 98% Good Scouters, should we welcome the verbal lash of others - or should we celebrate our "humanness" and welcome others to celebrate all the Good we do? If you want to teach me something about the 2% I don't get, or I don't do, or I don't believe, I think you'll be more successful if you model behaviors that I respect and offer me learning and usable value. Start the conversation with a verbal wrist slap and I'm not likely to give you much credence -- so, you MIGHT be right, but you're not succeeding in helping me be better, and in the end, that harms the Program rather than improves it. jd

I did not read where anyone condoned his obscene behavior toward the young woman. But what if what he did was illegal the law he broke was not sexual harrassmemnt, which is a specific legal term with specific conditions that did not exist in this situation. To say that he sexually harrassed her is not legally correct. BW and everyone else, The fact that "sexual harassment" has a legal definition does not keep it from having colloquial denotations and/or connotations. Every time we use a word we do not necessarily use it the way legislators, lawyers and judges interpret it. I have never suggested that the boy's behavior sunk to the criminal level. However, unchecked and uncorrected, this Scout's behavior is short steps from legally meeting the definition. Let's get past the semantics. My point is merely to urge all of us to be aware of the harm being done verbally. Sure, no one has condoned the Scouts' behavior, but neither did anyone (suggest that someone should have) check on the girl, offer her an apology, or check in with her parents. I don't mean to hammer CA because I believe his Unit's response would be fairly typical -- and that's the problem! We blow a fuse because the Scout physically injured another boy, but how many times do our Scout's injure in unseen ways? How many times to we softsell the damage done to the victims because we can't see it? How does falling back on legal definitions help the Scout, the girl, the Unit, the Scout's future personal relationships, etc. jd

Sorry if my post seemed more of a rant than a contribution to discussion. I wasn't trying to throw the situation into a legal setting, nor suggest that this was a case for criminal prosecution. However, other than age, I see little difference between adults and children who use power (sex, money, position, physical strength) to manipulate the actions/emotions of others. Given what we know about the situation, I think there's little doubt that the boys' comment used sex as a weapon to de-humanize and "victimize" the girl - whether he intended that, or was merely having a "teen moment". When we adults react "softly" to this behavior it leads to the sense that it's really OK (at least on some level). That's too close to the kind of "looking the other way" that leads teen athletes to think they rule their school setting and can abuse others at little risk to themselves. I just think we need to be careful; we react strongly to physical harm, but less so to emotional harm -- when it's clear emotional harm is every bit as dramatic and often more painful and long-lasting because of its insidiously invisible nature. No blood, no foul? It's not a simple question - who is more harmed: the boy who was poked, or the girl who was verbally abused? Are we disciplining the Scout for all of his behavior or really just focusing on the physical safety issue, and whistling as we walk past the girl? I know, . . . I'm well past my $.02! Like that surprises anyone, anymore. . . jd

Thank you for the "legal" definitions of "sexual harassment". Silly me, I just combined the sexual nature of the comment and the harassment of the girl in the residential setting of a campout and came up with "sexual harassment". My apologies to all you lawyers and judges (armchair, and otherwise!). Let's assume the comment was unasked for, and unappreciated. I'd guess the comment helped the girl feel uncomfortable about camping in a setting where BOY SCOUTS can comfortably make threatening sexual comments. If one scout made this comment to another scout, I don't think we'd be searching for legal definitions to lessen the perceived severity of the behavior. But, then again, maybe she was asking for it . . . In case I wasn't clear --- IMHO, this was a classic case of teen sexual harassment. I've seen it dozens of times, and seen the impact on the victim -- and the sense of victory by the harasser and celebration by his peer group. Just my angry $.02 . . . jd

CA - good luck with this. I have questions more than answers about all this. As a Cub Scouter, I'm underexperienced in situations like this; as a teacher and School Administrator, I'm over experienced -- sadly, sadly, over experienced. Anyway, . . . Was there any discussion of compensation for the Scout whose equipment was damaged? Were the parents of the injured Scout involved in the decision-making? Is there a clear plan for the boy to work his way back to respectibility. Often, we're good at punishment and less focused on corrective details. You mentioned probation, etc. Does everyone understand (the same thing when it comes to) what it will take for the boy to successfully complete his probation? Were the parents of the harassed girl informed and/or involved in the decision-making? What kind of answers did you get from the Scout when you asked, "Why?" Does he recognize that hs anger spirals his behavior downward and the severity of the consequences upward? Even though the Committee said and did the wrong things in your eyes, given what you said they said, doesn't a parent have to attend meetings with the Scout? Is this enough? I suggest to you, and all CCs and SMs, that decisions made by Committees should be shared with SMs and other Leaders before they become public knowledge. It serves as a built-in check and balance. Not that it's not the Committee's right to make the decision, but we're all volunteers, the human impact is much more important than if the situation included the Committee issuing pay checks. BTW, the girl WAS sexually harassed. I'm surprised there were several posters who thought it was "less than that". What was it, flirting? Ask the mother of a teenage girl if it was sexual harassment; ask a lawyer or a judge. Ask a working woman who still gets called, "babe" or "honey" by men compared to whom she is over-educated, over-talented, over-experienced, under-paid, under-titled, etc, etc. jd

J, My Pack would use advancement to mean "earned their rank badge", but it sounds like you mean the evening that we call graduation. Tomorrow night we'll hand each Cub a new handbook and neckerchief for the coming year. Are you awarding rank badges? Or are the boys "moving up"? jd

Ceaux, WELCOME! Adults wear a silver knot on purple background to represent any/all religious emblems earned as a youth. The knot can be purchased at the local Council Scout store. Some councils may expect you to show proof that you earned the medals - most will not. If you are awarded a Religious Emblem (St. George) as an adult, then you may additionally wear the Purple knot on silver background patch. jd

There's no age/rank requirement. Whittlin Chip is often a part of Day Camp attended by Wolves, as well as Bears and Webelos. Yes, it's a Bear Achievement, but that doesn't preclude the Wolves. We never allow Cubs to carry knives. If there is going to be an activity where they can be used, and the Cub has earned his WC card, then the knives are carried by parents or leaders before and after the activity. It's like tools in your locked tool box - they stay stored when not in use. Few Cubs, of any rank or age, with or without the WC card, have the strength, coordination, experience and skill to use knives safely. You cannot be too careful. jd

. . . attend one adult training class . . . jd

dtown, WELCOME! Sounds like a local custom. I'm a Cub Scouter, so I'm sure there are others better prepared to answer your question. As I understand it, there're times for the uniforms and times for personal choice. There are probably great reasons for this - just ask. jd

Frogger, WELCOME! Why do you tweak Family-based Achievements to fit the Den? jd

Champ, WELCOME! The above posts are all good answers, but I think it's important to get local answers to many of your questions, as well. Different Packs interpret grey areas differently and they may have long-standing customs that they hold more dear than Program guidelines and rule books. For example, the Program is built for the boys to complete their WOLF badge by the time they end second grade, and much of the Achievement work is meant to be done with the family, not the Den. However, my Pack, as an example, awards the WOLF badge in February at the Blue and Gold Banquet. Thus, you really only have 6 months to do the work, and the Achievement responsibility falls much more upon the shoulders of the DL. Our Cub families, through long-standing local customs, have been taught that Cub Scouts is more of a drop-off program than would be true for many other Packs. Get trained, definitely. And, with fewer parents around, you should be more aware of Youth Protection guidelines. Good Luck. And come on back with more questions and to share your experiences with other Scouters. jd (This message has been edited by johndaigler)

We'll be GGRROOOOWWWLLIINNGGG in a week! We're going to cut back to 1 Den meeting a month, but extend the length of the meeting. I figure if the Den is going to bother interupting family summer plans, we would make it worth the effort. So, the July and August Den meetings will go from 1 till 4 pm. Warm, but a good chunk of time for outdoor skills like tents up and down, nature walks, service walks, etc. Plus, we'll schedule some out of the sun time to cool off and construct a new Den Doodle and Den Flag. We'll also do 1 Den trip each month. Once to a hiking/camping/climbing equipment/guide store; and once either to the zoo(animal park), to the library for storytelling, or to the county fair. Our county fair has a nice openening flag ceremony and an oudoor non-denominational service for a closing. Along with the Den schedule, the Pack will: march in a Memorial Day Parade, do a campfire/cookout in June, a AA baseball game in July along with Day Camp, an overnighter at the end of August, and march in a Labor Day parade. Just as busy - just different! Along with hitting a few achievements and Electives, we'll make big strides toward Leave No Trace, CS Outdoor Activity Award, World Conservation Award, and the Summertime Award. jd(This message has been edited by johndaigler)