Mr. Boyce

My old scoutmaster used to wear his Eagle medal every now and then. . . and as a kid, it was pretty neat to view the thing. Created a little personal ambition to get one of my own. . .

The loops don't do much information-wise, but only give a general notion. Plus, so what? Does it really matter to know at a distance?

I massively prefer the uncluttered look and I admire the Canadian uniform. . . it looks great! The term "Christmas tree" look is a pretty good expression of how I view the US scout uniform. It's just too much. My preference is for a clean and uncluttered look. I can recall that when I was 15 or 16, I suddenly very self-conscious of all the crap on my uniform. . . little generalissimo stuff. . . so I pared it way down. I'd suppose current youth at a certain age might also feel they're wearing lots of trinkets---especially so as one gets to be an older scout and earned various stuff.

". . . Donald, where's your trousers!"

eeeewhh! You guys in kilts stick together and let me know when you're out and about so I can avoid the ugly scene. Nasty. Not pleasant.

re: original post. Sad story, truly sad, sexualizing youth in such a fashion. And again, the propaganda pressure to redefine homosexuality away from being a harmful, pedophile-friendly psychological disorder.

I don't know much about Perry, other than he privatized some state highways in Texas (which resulted in a greater long-term loss for the state). Scouting and politics are oil and water; they don't mix. I say that and Perry doesn't look too disagreeable to me, other than this botched privatization.

. . . this said, I think some councils should be sure to include plenty of conservation programming. It's easy to overlook, but it really helps speak volumes for the organization.

I camped out recently at a large park; I was stunned at the sheer amounts of trash "average" campers left there. Really blew the place out; ridiculous. Think: everyone wants to enjoy nature, so don't mess it up. Needless to say, I did a good patrol of my campsite when we were done and left it cleaner and nicer than when we arrived.

Those look great. It would be nice if towns were to feel pride in "their" troop.

I just finished reading Michael Gurian's book on the Mind of Boys. It's important to point out, as above, that, generally speaking girls can blow away the boys at this age in any test of personal responsibility and social skill. So the boys have a disadvantage; why not hire boys so that their summer camp experience benefits their maturation process? Nothing against girls, at all; but just some discernment about the value of it all.

Teaching the origins of the constellation names is a very good idea. Helps it stick.

Stick with the hula skirt. Yeah, I'm disparaging it.

Late 70s: shirts were made of fabric like iron. Dries quickly, holds shape; cool v-neck collar, good olive green color, no shoulder froo froo; plain and simple, honest and good.

That's interesting, particularly the point about it being okay to just wear the waistcoat. I was looking last winter for something like that, perhaps less obvious collar to it, plain tweed.

re: knickers term Above poster correct: knickers were the first "long pants" for boys, but one then could move on to plus fours and long pants.

re: collarless shirts "Back in the day" one really nice thing about the collarless uniform shirt was this. . . when it got REALLY HOT out there, say being out under the sun all day on a hike, you'd just wear it without a neckerchief and it'd be cooler on you. A nice feature.

As a group, teen girls tend to be better organized and more motivated to act like adults than teen boys. The results are pretty easy to see. It takes boys a while to catch up, to get their act together. In terms of summer camp, I'd say why not hire boys rather than girls; find a space for them to learn to become more adult?

The viewpoint not being represented here is the social perspective, the value to society of marriage as a social institution uniting families. Taking it simply at the individual level means the discussion is lacking completeness. Or else it's an intentional rhetorical tactic.

Just like the issue of homosexuality, the God issue is a tough one simply because young adolescents are in a state of flux. It's clear to them that Santa Claus doesn't exist. Most of the way the Bible has been presented to them was appropriate for a children's level of comprehension. . . but they're at an age with a bit more intellectual acumen. They don't necessarily get a more sophisticated treatment of religion from people around them. So it's easy to just jump on the "science explains everything" bandwagon. I'd just reserve judgment on all this and stick it on the backburner.

Let's not forget the Scout lederhosen, the scout cowboy chaps and the Scout grass skirt!

I agree with the above. It's all superfluous.

I like neckerchiefs a LOT. Get a collarless shirt; that's the way to go.

In the context of the OP's first post, I ask him, "if 100 people say that Hitler was a good man, does that make him a good man?" If something's right, it's right, regardless of the vote. So concern about the BSA being "out of step" is problematic. . . and what happens if a poll next year shows different results? Do you change BSA policies each poll?

America is a fat, rich country, and a democracy, and it's very hard to say "no" to anything, even bad things. We can sweep up the problems, etc. I see homosexuality as a psychological disorder. There is no scientific consensus about its causes. I disagree with "gay" marriage because marriage is a social concern, a serious social concern, and not the right of one individual. It's an intergenerational thing as well. I'll be mean. I'm against it.