KoreaScouter

Every social change that swept the nation, including this one (women in non-traditional roles), swept through the military first. When I first joined, all the women were in women-only units, and were a novelty by their numbers alone, if nothing else. That changed, but not without having to "drag along" a lot of Neanderthals who didn't want it to happen simply because it didn't fit their model of what the role of women should be. That kind of behavior is almost unheard of now. Here's how it happened. First, the "view from the top". Senior leadership telling us often and at high volume that women's roles were changing and expanding, and it was good for America. Second, training and information in our media, at meetings, formations, etc., reinforced the leadership message. Third, the agency that put out the training and information also investigated gender-related incidents. Finally, a pattern of discriminatory behavior or comments is what we call a CLF -- a "career limiting factor". If you're a caveman, you will not be entrusted to lead and influence troops. I see direct application of this to DS's issue, and it includes elements of what other posters have said. First, get the District/Council leadership out in front at Roundtables, Pow-wows, camporees, what have you, letting everybody know that women are here to stay and it ain't a bad thing -- if the DE wants my buy-in, he needs to buy-in first. Second, reinforce gender diversity in newsletters, district level training, awards, media coverage, etc -- hammers home the fact that it wasn't just an offhand comment; they're really serious about this. Third, jump right on allegations of behavior like what happened in DS's example -- let's 'em know that you'll walk the walk, not just talk the talk. And, it will also determine if this is a values issue with this guy, or just a "slip of the tongue" on a bad day. Finally, "select out" those who won't get with the program. Do we really want them influencing youngsters if their values don't sync up with ours as an organization? Yes, we need dedicated volunteers, but not if they hold beliefs contrary to the organization's. That Pack has 100 Scouts now; imagine how it could grow with someone more enlightened at the helm (and it could be the current guy, if he can get "enlightened"). Ultimately, you can't change anyone's beliefs or attitudes -- only they can do that. You can, however, change their behavior under threat of sanction/removal. If continuing in Scouting is important enough for him, he'll get with the program. KS

There are near-continuous meetings and discussions about land partnerships, consolidating training areas, moving units from old installations where urban sprawl has surrounded them, and so on. Any other discussions, like what Secretary Rumsfeld talked about (I'm not familiar with his comments), if there are any, are going on way above my level. I don't know anything, and even if I did, I'd still have to say I don't know anything. KS

Let me first issue a disclaimer. I don't know the Scout, the SM, or the Troop involved in ProudParent's thread, so I don't know what anyone's motives are here. That said, I'd like to take a stab at ProudParent's follow-on question: "Can a SM block a Scout from advancing?" I think the answer to that is an emphatic "yes". When we're talking about meeting requirements, let's not focus exclusively on counting merit badges, how many "Ts" are next to his name in the Troop Record Book, or an admin check on a project workbook. Not to be preachy here, but the mission of BSA is not to produce Eagle Scouts, but to produce adults of high character. In my mind, that makes the Scout Spirit requirement very important, and if a Scout just doesn't cut it in the character department, that's where an SM has to do his job, no matter how unpleasant. And, that's not to say that a Scout who may not be showing Scout Spirit today, couldn't pass the requirement later, with some behavior modification. The alternative is a situation in which a Scout meets all other requirements regarding attendance, POR, MBs, but has behavioral or character issues...and there's no "circuit breaker" to prevent advancement. Is there any other reason why the Scout Spirit requirement is there? I know this discussion went from a specific to a general one, and I want to make sure nobody thinks I'm taking sides in ProudParent's case. My point is that not only can a SM block advancement, there are cases in which he should. KS

I don't have a camping MB pamphlet in front of me, so I can't tell you what it says specifically. You might consider checking with your DE, District Commissioner, or District Advancement Chair. Nine nights of camping between now and June would be tough even for a troop with a very active outdoor program...the equivalent of four camporees plus another overnighter in the next three months. Camping is one of the most difficult MBs to earn, primarily because of the 20-night requirement. Took my son a year and a half, not missing a single campout, and they were all District/Troop campouts, no family camping. I think it's great your son has a goal to earn Star by June. I don't know him or his advancement status of course, but there are Eagle-required badges that don't present the problem that Camping does for him right now. Has he earned all the Citizenship badges? Communications? Family Life? Swimming? Family Life takes 12 weeks, but the others don't have time lines associated with them. KS

I agree 100% that we cannot add to or take away from rank advancement requirements. That said, I think the "Show Scout Spirit" requirement is the one place a Scoutmaster could exert leverage in this area. For example, if someone were a class clown to the point it was disruptive, a Scoutmaster could have an out-of-cycle conference with the Scout, pointing out how his behavior was not indicative of "Obedient", or how he wasn't "...doing his best...to help other people at all times...". A stretch? Depends on the situation. Maybe this is fodder for another thread, but when I'm sitting across from a Scout at a SM conference, we discuss the "Show Scout Spirit" requirement. And by the way, if I think a Scout, particularly a more senior one, is having problems with the "Show Scout Spirit" requirement, we'll be talking about it waaaaaay before his SM conference for advancement. We'll have a clear understanding on what the requirement means in plenty of time for him to demonstrate it...or not demonstrate it -- his choice. Perhaps the problem is one of terminology. "Mature" isn't one of the points of the Scout Law. Trustworthy is...helpful is...and so on. It would probably result in a lot less drama all the way around if the SM in this case articulated what he meant by "immature" in terms of the Scout Oath and Law, which, after all, is what we measure when we determine Scout Spirit. The requirement is worded somewhat subjectively; maybe this is why. Do I think 13 is too young for an Eagle Scout? Depends on the Scout! Some 13 year olds are plenty old enough. Some 17 year olds aren't old enough. KS

ASM1; If you're going to opine as a military balance-of-power pundit, or whatever, please take a little time to get more than a mile wide and an inch deep in your topic. - Learn something about NK AOB before you attribute to them "...some of the best airpower in the world"; you'll find that the MiG-29s they have constitute a tiny number of their total airframes. The overwhelming majority of their air force flies (if you want to call it that) MiG-15s and -19s that are an airpower version of a '58 Edsel. I guess it's a matter of perspective though; it may seem to be some of the best airpower in the world if you're from Djibouti. - The NATO tag for the MiG-29 is "Fulcrum", not "Fullcrum". A minor point? Sure, maybe, but in the same way that chewing with your mouth open makes people think you're ill-mannered, misspelling military terms when you're trying to make a military point makes people think you're ill-informed...and you are trying to persuade, aren't you? KS

You know, I should have gotten the history/culture right. It's well documented among Asia-philes that Korean culture influenced Japanese culture -- flowed from the Asian mainland out to the islands. So, then, Japanese kabuki is actually a derivative of the Korean "Nong Ak", which preceded it. So, rather than saying the Koreans also do kabuki, it would probably be more accurate to say the Japanese also do "Nong Ak". Of course, we all use the term as a generic reference to a stylized, ritualistic, predetermined, imponderable, frustrating routine. It's most often used among us uniformed types when a more profane slang term that describes the same type routine shouldn't be used.

This is a "third rail" issue, like tobacco use, since many adults use one, the other, or both. We have tangible difficulty holding things like District dinners here, because every place on the military bases where we can hold such a gathering also serve alcohol. So, whoever puts the event together has to do a kabuki dance to try to get a separate room, that doesn't pass through the bar, preferably with a separate entrance, and oh by the way where we can't hear the slot machines, either. KS

I didn't catch the Leno piece...I'm still grinning. I was off the forum for a week because I was in Hawaii on business. Back now and got a few posts in yesterday. I had a chance to visit the Aloha Council Service Center in Honolulu...absolutely breathtaking! Just a few years ago, AC leadership led a community-wide effort to build this complex, and the plaque at the entrance to the main building attests to the widespread community and business support Scouting has in Hawaii. You have to see it to believe it. Everything ok here? Sure. Are tensions higher? You betcha. The only thing KJI is predictable about is that he will be unpredictable. To paraphrase the Chinese proverb, these are "...interesting times...". Thanks for thinking of us. KS

Hang on, we've got an Eagle BOR coming up. I want to make sure I've got this straight. Bob, you said the letters are required. The Eagle Scout Application only asks for names, addresses, and phone numbers. Now, I've always made sure the letters are included with the application that goes before the BOR. I thought that was mainly to avoid the "It was great to meet you; we think you're a great candidate. Now, give us a week to contact the people you listed in requirement #2..." situation. Which is it? If the letters aren't required at the BOR, just names and contact information as the application form says, then it would appear the BOR members opted not to contact the religious leader in this case, if his name/address/phone were on the application. Doesn't seem cricket to ask for the letter after the fact... KS

Dark shoes, whether loafers, boots, or even athletic shoes, are preferred with the uniform (please don't ask me where, it's in one of the references). I don't think it's a "no sneakers" conspiracy, because dark sneaks are okay. I do think it's because the color combination of the uniform items matches dark shoes better than white...unless you've got a white neckerchief. Or, if you have a white backpack, or in some other way, the shoes match other accessories. C'mon, this stuff is serious. In addition to building men of high character, we can also aspire to build men of high sartorial awareness. KS

One of my WB classmates (another patrol) came to the course with his ticket already completed (or so he thought), and had done considerable research in an effort to "rig" or "game" the system...calling this guy Type "A" makes Type "A" people everywhere look like sloths. At any rate, he was very frustrated throughout, had a miserable time, and by extension, so did the people in his patrol (and, for that matter, the rest of us when we played "The Game of Life"). Not to be obtuse or zen-like, but relax and let it roll over you like ocean waves... KS

I've looked at those things for family camping, in my cabin tent, and only to warm the inside a little for my daughter before bed, and after wakeup for a short time. I haven't gotten one only because I haven't figured out how to tip-proof it or keep it from scorching any of the material it may come in contact with. Also, I don't know anyone who has them, since most of my outdoorsman "buds" are Scouters who don't use 'em. In a Scouting environment, if your Scouts are in smaller troop tents, those things are unthinkable in my view. First, even if they don't have a flame, they do give off heat. Scouts flopping around in the night, a sleeping bag gets too close to one of those, and there you have it. Second, it's a big confidence builder to show a Scout how to stay warm without artificial heat sources. It can be done, has been done, and teaches them more in the long run than firing up a heater does. KS

The intent of the 20 night requirement, as my DE explained it to me, was to get the Scout not only camping, but PLANNING to go camping, with menus, equipment, site selection, application of LNT principles, patrol duty rosters, and so on. That's why they only allow one summer camp to count toward the 20 nights. In that vein, family camping would not qualify toward the 20 nights. If you look at the Camping MB pamphlet and the skills BSA wants a Scout to get proficient at when working on Camping, you'll surely see that the objectives are met in troop/patrol camps... KS

Fella; I think you may have missed the point of my last post. By pointing out September 11th, I wasn't asserting that SH or KJI were involved in planning, supporting, or carrying out the attacks...they may or may not have been, I just don't know. My point was that September 11th was really two events. One, the attack itself and the human tragedy that we're still collectively recovering from. Two, and this is more to the point of this discussion I think, September 11th removed forever the American notion that our oceans protect us from harm. That notion, when it was true, enabled us to stay out of WWI and WWII as long as we did because our enemies could not project power to our shores. UBL's communiques are psyops; don't get hypnotized by them. I'd be careful attempting to speak for 280 million Americans. Our diversity makes it near impossible to lump us all together as having the same feelings, motivations, and values. Your characterization of a "military/industrial/energy complex" as a monolithic group of identically-thinking warmongers ignores the fact that there are countless people who don't feel that way. I have many friends in southwest Asia right now, and we pray every day for a peaceful resolution to this when we think of them. As I check my family's gas masks and make sure our evacuation kit is complete if needed, I repeat that prayer. And, we're not the exception...we're the rule. KS

September 11th changed everything.

Boy, am I glad you're here! Many of our topics would really benefit from the perspective of a long-time professional...hope you've got a thick skin; some of these guys can really lay it on! KS

First of all, I think OGE's last post was done with tongue planted firmly in cheek. At any rate, I've mostly stayed out of this one, since I don't use tobacco. I do drink a beer now and then, though, so now I'm interested. I think I'm modeling responsible alcohol use for my son every day; he doesn't need to see more of it at campouts. Mainly, though, I'll drink a beer in the evening, while I'm relaxing, all errands/chores done, in my favorite chair, the mutt curled up underneath me, completely "off the clock". I have trouble thinking of when I might be able to do that at a campout, even if it were allowed. I don't see myself as ever off the clock on a campout, and just wouldn't enjoy it. Another issue here, is that nobody ever thinks they're impaired. Many years ago as a young patrolman, I went to Breathalyzer school. Part of that week-long course was lab work, where you were buddied up with another cop, and on alternating days, one buddy drank and the other one tested him repeatedly. This was a clinical thing, so we also took performance and self-perception tests as we went. To a person, even after the point we were legally intoxicated (.10 in Indiana in those days), nobody thought they were too impaired to drive, handle weapons, and so on. Frightening, and we're generally more cautious about this than the population as a whole. KS

Every day, a Gerber 3" lock blade with a rubberized grip (seat belt cutter; old habits die hard). Also have a Gerber multi-plier and a super Leatherman. I actually like the Gerber better, but the Leatherman has locking blades, so I'm more at ease using it. I've also got a Dutch-army knife (just like the Swiss model, but cheaper -- okay, bad joke) that I really like 'cuz it has the best left-handed operating can opener of any knife I own. For non-Scouting applications, a USAF survival knife (next to the gas mask), and an M9 Probis bayonet. My recommendation would be the Gerber multi-plier for all-around usefulness...get the model that slides open, not the one that you have to do that unnatural twisty thing to open it. KS

Some of our troop equipment is still stenciled with "Flaming Hawaiian Monkeys". Nobody here now was here when it was an active patrol name, and I can only imagine what their patch looked like! KS

Check in any large bookstore, or you can go to www.backpacker.com for subscription info. They always throw in freebies for a subscription, too. I used Backpacker's article on wilderness survival as a reference for my Scouts to put their WS kits together for the merit badge...much better list of stuff than the MB pamphlet. KS

Those things are great! And, one day in a desert, and you know why they have them. I've fabricated field expedient versions of those things with a wet hanky stuck up in the back of my cap, and hanging down on the back of my head in blissful coolness. KS

I don't think I agree the uniform resembles the FFL; their dress uniform is a dark/khaki trouser, white shirt, necktie (tucked in), rank on sleeves/collar, huge fringed epaulets (although they are red), and those pillbox hats. The FFL field uniform is typical DPM. I suppose with all the countries in the world, and all their military forces, with all their various dress/ceremonial uniform combinations, we could probably find one, somewhere, that matches the current BSA uniform exactly, and shout "A-HA!". But, I don't think that's the point. Essentially, BSA National knows what the Congressional charter says, and the current uniform, as far as they're concerned, meets the spirit and intent of the charter language. As long as a Scout/Scouter is wearing "it" and not accessorizing/substituting with surplus military junk, the Jedi Knights in Irving can determine whether or not the uniform too closely resembles the "Enlisted Summer Garrison Dress Uniform Combination (minus tunic) of the Reserve Dragoon Battalion, Armadillo Regiment, Bolivian Army".

I just went to CVC's web site, and they have a 2003 summer camp program scheduled for Camp Chick...maybe the real estate development is a down-the-road thing. There's a lot of development around W'burg, and it was only a matter of time! KS

The recruiting is important, but I wouldn't limit it to just graduating 5th graders -- I'd go to the sixth graders, too. There are certainly extra challenges with all young inexperienced Scouts. They'll fill leadership roles in the troop, but without experience and maturity, they'll need lots more help from the adults than they would if they were 15-year old Life Scouts. One human dynamic that may make it easier on the other hand is that without the older teenage Scouts and the Venture-age activities that go along with them, your program planning will be less complicated. Good luck, KS