Lisabob

I'm all for a sledding themed campout (in places where snow is likely). It is great fun for the older boys - not to mention adults - to act like little kids again and go sledding all day long. It offers bonding opportunities. Plus they're usually exhausted at the end. I don't count that as a do-nothing weekend. One of my son's former SM's one year talked the PLC into planning what the SM called a "lazy campout." Big mistake. First, there wasn't any planned structure to the weekend, and the boys who you'd expect to get into trouble, did. Second, it was shortly after a very large group of cross-overs joined the troop so there were little kids running around like maniacs everywhere, without focus for their energy. Third, when the adults decided to try to do some basic skill training with the young guys, and when the older guys didn't want to do it ("This is our lazy campout! You said so!") it went badly. Not to mention that the older kids weren't so sure they wanted to cook meals on time, clean up the dishes, get out of bed, etc. There was a lot of grumbling on all sides (from the boys, "we didn't get to be lazy!" and from adult leaders, "you ungrateful brats!" and from new scout parents, "is this what all your campouts are like?") So my view on this is colored by stories left over from that experience, but I guess any SM that goes along with, or promotes, a "lazy" weekend (or "slug" weekend, or whatever) is asking for problems. Also, I don't know about all of you, but when my guy plays video games for hours on end, he becomes short-tempered and snappy and sometimes (when he was younger) had to be forcefully reminded to stop to eat or sleep. I wouldn't want to deal with a whole troop of boys in that mood.

Son's former troop did these every once in a while. My thought is that they're a recipe for trouble. Cabin fever sets in quick and bored kids are bound to get into mischief. On the flip side, the annual lock in at a rec center was really a similar kind of thing - lots of games, cards, just hanging out, etc. going on. And that was probably the best-attended event of the year (and a major webelos recruiting event too). But I think there's a big difference from an event that really only lasts one night (and everybody drives home for a long nap the next day), and a whole weekend of nothing planned.

What Nike said. You do need somebody with a spine who can take the stance Nike outlined, is all.

Well twocub I don't know quite what to say because I'm pretty sure my son came home from jambo with a blue card, signed by his jambo SM, for a merit badge that he decided to start while at jambo. Since after jambo he transferred to a troop where the jambo SM is also the SM, it was a moot point. Perhaps I'm mis-remembering something, it has been known to happen once or twice.

"Now your point about scouts being dual registered for Jambo or High Adventure camps is an interesting one. I'd like to hear some other opinions on that. " When my son attended Jambo 2010, his Jambo SM signed blue cards for the boys. The reality was that there was so much happening at jambo, that most boys were not going to have a fully executable plan in place prior to leaving home. Expecting a boy to get permission from his home-troop SM would not have been reasonable, but the jambo SM was right there on site. I figure, if you don't trust the jambo SM with the minor responsibility of signing blue cards, then that fella probably should not be the jambo SM in the first place and you've got bigger worries to attend to.

First off, like Nike's, my 17 year old former SPL-son also thinks this kid should have gotten the boot for tying up & duct taping young scouts. Seems we have consensus among the ex-SPLs around our houses. Most of the things you describe would be enough to merit sending a boy home, in my book, too. The knives, duct tape, harassment of a new scout on his first trip with the troop, hitting, and ice trick could all be reasons for suspension (the ice, I think it depends on the exact circumstances). If this is typical behavior, one wonders why the troop has allowed it to continue for so long. "He needs scouting!" is a terrible cop-out and does no one (including this boy) any favors. It simply teaches this boy that he can play the pity card and get away with it (which will work very poorly for him in the adult world). And other boys in the troop shouldn't be subject to this sort of behavior. I'll be surprised if your brand-new scout on his first ever weekend away from home comes back again. Did he not also deserve a safe scouting environment, and might he not have "needed scouting" too? As for pressing charges - not sure if I'd do that over what you describe as a "pop on the chin." I might be more inclined to do so for the duct taping! But I'd probably hold off to see what the troop is going to do, first. And I'd encourage my son not to tent with this fellow, ever. How could you trust someone who ties you up or duct tapes you while you're sleeping? Creepy.

"why would a Scouter disapprove a boy to start an MB? " One possible reason: a boy who starts, but never seems to finish, a whole bunch of things. When a boy has 20-30 partials that he's "working on" (only there is no evidence that he really is) then maybe an SM would be doing the boy a favor to question the boy's desire to start yet another one. Might cause the boy to rethink his approach a bit.

Too many questions - I'm not in the mood to answer each one (sorry, but it is the truth tonight). Here's one that caught my eye though: QUESTION - Does your troop committee (or at least the scoutmaster) NOT review and approve the major activities the scouts plan to do? No. When committees get this deep into things, there's not a lot of point about talking about "boy led." The committee should not micromanage the troop.

JM, it depends on what training a person attends. For me, I went to WB while a cub leader. I'd taken just about every cub training out there, but would have had no reason to take boy scout leader training. Troop committee member training also teaches little about the patrol method. So, if a person doesn't attend SM/ASM training and IOLS, then no, they might not know a lot about the patrol method, even though they may be considered "fully trained" for their position. It does seem to me that we could do a better job of incorporating the patrol method into more basic trainings, particularly for Webelos leaders and for troop committee members.

Wow. Just, wow. Who knew, desire to have modern health care is a "white" thing.

Your high school teacher was not well informed. I'm with Beavah on this one.

I'm unclear on what it is that he has not done to your satisfaction. What do you mean when you say he can't explain himself? Perhaps an example? Based on what you've written thus far, it seems to me that if he has actually completed the requirements AS WRITTEN, you have no basis on which to deny him advancement. Unless, of course, there is something he actually has not done and that is a BSA requirement beyond just your gut feeling. One other thing: when I was in high school, I had a friend with cerebral palsy. She was one of the most driven people I've ever known - perhaps because she knew that her illness would progressively shrink her physical capabilities. Her internal motivation was astonishing. Could it be that this scout is similarly driven? And that your reaction to his fast-paced advancement is misapplied in this case?

What they have for me is an email address I seldom check. I dunno about others, but I'm not really inclined to join some alumni group for a volunteer organization. I know what they'll use it for and I'm not real interested in receiving more phone solicitations or more junk mail. However, I want to make clear, it did not appear to me that they were trying to sell me some kind of vanity directory a la the NESA one. At least, not in the current iteration.

Cool, pack. Send me a couple?

I got this email from myscouting.org asking me to join the BSA alumni. I find that amusing, as I was never a boy scout (something to do with being female, I think). When I tried to unsubscribe, I got an error message. What's up with this? Is it a legit thing? Are there actual benefits to joining, or do they just want more of my money? And why on earth are they sending an invite to me, since I was never a youth member? Yeah, I get that I was an adult leader - but that's like calling a kid's parents alumni of the high school the kid graduates from. Not what "alumni" typically means.

"I suspect I know the answer." Yes, I suspect you do.

Well Mike, there you go. We bobwhites know what's what. Maybe that was Kudu's problem - he wasn't a bobwhite!

Scoutfish: the uniform shirt (or necker or whatever symbol we use) by itself says the same thing. The problem is that we often use this argument about covering up or downplaying differences via the uniform as if it *does* trick the boys. It doesn't, they know it, and we should be more honest about it.

I could see it being an equalizer in some settings where people come together from a mix of locations. But in the troops I'm familiar with, nearly all the boys go to school together, live in the same area of town, have known most of their troop-mates since 1st or 2nd grade, play on the same sports teams, etc. They know who is rich and who is poor. They know who is going to swanky private college and who is headed for community college. They know who drives what car. They know who isn't going camping this weekend because he can't afford it or because he has to work to help pay rent, instead. They've slept at each other's houses, eaten in each other's kitchens, hung out in each other's basements for years. A pair of pants won't change any of that, when they've spent 10 hours a day together 5 days a week for the better part of a decade. Let's not kid ourselves about it.

I wonder how many boys actually owned the field book. I didn't know it existed when my son became a boy scout. We just bought him a handbook like everybody else. Somewhere during the time he was SPL, he told me he felt like he needed a better resource than the handbook so I got him a field book. He used it to help his PLC plan skill instruction & games & some other stuff. He still references it, but I don't think he has read it cover to cover and he doesn't usually take it on camp outs. Still, more useful than the handbook. About the only thing he uses the handbook for is to get sign offs recorded. My guess is, the field book didn't sell enough copies for national to keep producing it.

You are missing the point. It isn't that they're unflattering (they are, but ok). It isn't that I prefer a different cuff or boot cut vs. ankle cut or something like that (I don't care, really). It is that they simply do not fit properly. To get a pair that is long enough in the rise, I need to buy them ridiculously large everywhere else. I won't waste money on clothing that doesn't fit well. Telling most women "well go get them tailored" is a) adding to the cost and b) ignoring the fact that the BSA makes a product that doesn't work for most women customers. As for a skirt or culotte - yeah, maybe some people like them and that's ok, but those lack functionality, too. When's the last time you went camping or canoeing in a skirt? I do own an old pair of the ODL pants that I drag out when I need a uniform. They're ugly as can be and not especially functional (heavy, hot in the summers, take a long time to dry when they get wet, etc.). The switchbacks are a big improvement, both in style and performance. I would have gladly bought a new pair of switchbacks...if they were cut in a way that is wearable. But because the BSA makes clothing that doesn't fit women, they lost out on my $40. A scout(er) is thrifty.

"Honestly, if I had some that didn't fit right, just like for any uniform I had to wear, I would get them altered to fit for me. This is something I wear several times a week, so I expect it to fit right. If what you have doesn't fit, why are you complaining about it rather than fixing it so they wear correctly for you." How about we start with: because, contrary to what you wrote, I do NOT have to wear them. Try to make me, I dare you. (How badly do you want volunteers?) About this, we agree: If I wear them several times a week, I expect them to fit ok, too. So when I can walk into almost any clothing store in America and buy pants off the rack that fit tolerably well, I expect the same to be true for BSA uniforms - or at least, come moderately close, I'm not that picky. But I've got other things to spend my money on than pants that just don't fit and your views don't trump my budget. The style and material of the zip offs don't necessarily lend themselves well to tailoring, and even if that weren't the case, that's yet another barrier to many women wanting to wear the things. If BSA wants more women in full uniform, then BSA might want to pay better attention to creating clothing that fits women's body types. Kind of like those "bellows" pockets on a previous iteration of the uniform shirt - not exactly flattering for most women! But I think this is getting somewhat off topic of what JoeBob was asking about, so I'll hold off on further thoughts about this tangent.

JB: You beat me back to the I&P forum. So, sure, Palin didn't actually say that she could see Russia from her front porch (and she didn't ask about the talent portion of the debates, either). But what made Tina Fey so funny is that what she did was so close to believable, that you had to ask "wait, was that...real?" And that's the point about Palin. If you have to ask, it isn't good. At any rate, I grew up in a place where you can see Canada across the lake. While I will lay claim to some special hockey knowledge (thank you, Hockey Night in Canada!) and we thought little of going across the border for dinner, I can't claim to be an expert on Canadian politics on that basis alone.

My son likes the current boy scout uniform pants a LOT, too. He wears them all the time and just got a pair of the venturing ones. The newer styles are an improvement (in my view and his) over the old ones. I see young men wearing them around the college campus where I work, all the time. But I agree with momof2cubs - the fit for women is horrendous. "Trussed chicken" is right, and that is not my favorite look. I wanted to like them and wear them, really I did. But I can't find any sort of size that fits me properly and I'm an odd build, nor am I particularly fussy about things like that. Honestly, I don't mind (too much) plunking down the money for my son's pants because I know he'll wear and wear and wear them. But I will not waste $40 on pants that won't fit me.

~rolls eyes~ Look, you're asking rhetorical questions to which you cannot expect cut and dried answers. And it seems to me that you are unlikely to be satisfied with any answer that doesn't support your deeply held, emotional, position. What good do you really expect to come of continuing this? Since I do not know you or any of the people involved, I have no idea who is right or wrong or sideways on this. And there is really no point in you continuing to ask these sorts of questions of anonymous people on some internet forum. The best advice you're likely to get here (indeed, you've already gotten) is that: a) it is very easy to figure out exactly what troop you are talking about, which your son may not appreciate very much (I certainly wouldn't if I were him) so if you are serious about wanting to mend fences then you ought to start by stopping this sort of nonsense, and b) you might want to seek counseling for your whole family since this has obviously and understandably affected you deeply. To be blunt: get off the internet and go seek real help for the underlying issues. And don't bother responding to me, because I won't be answering any further.