Bob White

"Except the uniform isn't required and those boys that can't afford them are singled out immediately. Major social/economic identifier in their face immediately. Maybe they can afford a shirt but not belt and pants. No Scouting Method is REQUIRED. Their use is a leadership choice. If you agreed to be a Scouter leader and do not use the methods then the unit made a bad leadership choice. Nowhere does the BSA program say that the uniform must bought new. Theree are ample ways through scouting that any scout can afford and btain a uniform if the Troop leadership understands that. Have you been to a national Jamboree? Tens of thousands opf scouts all wearing the same neckerchief. How does that establish unit identity? There are a variety of ways besides the neckerchief that allows the uniform to provide group identity. The Uniform Method has nothing to do with judging success. >>> But alas, it surely does. But as it's been pointed out in an earlier post, it isn't always all that measurable. Whether or not you know how to measure the efectiveness of the Method in the unit you serve is unreated to whether or not the Method is about unit succees. I invite you to read page 9 of the Scoutmaster Handbook, or find any BSA training that suggests the quality of uniforming is tied in anyway to the quality of scouting in the unit. No such reference exists. Do some leaders think that uniform equates program? Yes, but again that is totally unrelated to what the Uniform Method is about. There also seems to be the assumption that the Uniform Method is just about the dress uniform and it is not.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[snappy comeback not needed here] My question to Pappy, was would it not be more effective to worry less about a percieved "cultural war" that he cannot end, and focus on ways to alter a program he controls that he says is not attracting or retaining scouts? It would not appear that the cultural war is what is effecting his community, when you compare the growth of scouting in the other districts around him. Pappy himself has suggested that the cultural war was effecting his unit, yet other units are growing, even flourishing. He suggests that the merger of his council 15 years ago has effect his unit adversely, yet other districts and units that were part of that same merger are growing. He suggests that the BSA program is ineffective although he admits to never using it, yet the program he leads he says in losing youth membership. I am simple suggesting that the energies and thought he gives to the ambiguous "cultural War" might be better placed in delevering a more effective unit program. That would make an effect on both the culture and the unit membership. (This message has been edited by Bob White) (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

If the core question is "Why" use the uniform Method then what relationship does "ranking" have to "why". What relationship does being dressed snappier to the unit next door have to the uniform Method? What relationship does wearing a neckerchief have to the uniform Method. What relationship does picking apart uniform accuracy have to the uniform Method? How can you determine the importance and the use of the Method if the things you are talking about are not related to the Method? Before you can discuss the topic would it first not be beneficial to make sure there was a general understanding of what the Method is? For instance; Can the use of a uniform help reduce social barriers between scouts? Is that a good thing, If it does that, and it is a good thing, then the Uniform Method serves it's purose. Can the uniform give a youth a sense of belonging to a group or community. If so, and you see that as a good thing, then the Uniform Method serves it's purpose. Do others who see a person in uniform recognize and associate specific characteristics and values with that person? If so and you see that as a good thing, then the Uniform Method serves its purpose. Do the Scouts and Scout leaders know and understand that while in uniform others are making determinations of their abilities and values based on the uniform, if so and you see that as a way to reinforce positive traits, then the Uniform METHOD serves its purpose. The Method of using a uniform is to accomplish the Aims of Scouting, not to look better than the unit next door. And there are a huge variety of uniforms in the BSA, (not all use neckerchiefs). And their use has nothing to do with where you might rank the Method in importance. Each method of a Scouting Program (and there are three different sets of Methods), effect one or more of the AIMS of Scouting, and that is their only purpose. The Uniform Method has nothing to do with judging success.

Well done Spiney! please excuse me now while the penguin on my TV set explodes.

Beavah, No predjudice. Predjudice means pre-judging and Pappy has certainly shared ample information on his personal methods and beliefs. I have never suggested he was a lousy scouter, if you recall, I am unconvinced he is a scouter at all, [non-sequiter] But that is another topic. My point related to the topic here is that Pappy's energies and concerns in fighting a cultural war he cannot win might be better applied to improving his home unit program that he says is losing members steadily, despite the fact that he is using his own program and not the scouting program. When in fact by using the scouting program he might make headway in both the cultural war and in the battle to improve unit membership and deliver on the Aims of Scouting. It would seem to be a win win situation for him and the Souts. (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

It sounds as if the process for filing the "Application for Training Recognition/Wood Badge" may not have been followed correctly. This form is given to you ticket counseor by the course director. Here is the flow that is supposed to happen. When you attend a Wood Badge course out of Council you are supposed to get a Permanent Ticket Counselor that is in your Council. Upon satisfactory completion of the Ticket, the counselor certifies the completeon with signature and date and sends the form to your HOME council's training chair for recording in your training record. It is then signed by your HOME council SE and your home Council Training Chair and dated. It is then sent to the Scout Executive for the HOST council of the course, with the approx date for the recognition ceremony and asking the Host Council SE to release the recognition kit to the Course Director for presentation. The Host Council Executive will contact the Course Director to Recieve the certificate number and ass it to the top protion of the application. The host council then checks off and dates that the award was shipped to your Course Director. Paperwork done, My guess is that your counselor sent the ticket to the course director who sent it to the Host Council SE to have the award released, and the interim step to first send it to your home council for recording was skipped. Since your CD said to schedule the ceremony he or she probably already has your beads. I would follow their instruction and schedule the ceremony making sure you inform your CD of the date. Once you have received your Wood Badge recognition it will include a certificate#. This is your unique identifier for you completion of the course. Send that number to your council registrar and training chair and ask that they make sure your record is updated. Congrats

"Because that wasn't the question" How can the thread not be about the Uniform Method when the title is "The Uniform Method"? When scouters debate how to wear the neckerchief or when to wear the hat, or what hat you can wear or if a leader can drink alcohol in uniform, or which troop looks sharpers" those things have nothing to do with the Uniform METHOD. Those debates are about uniform POLICIES, not the METHOD (except the one about which unit looks sharper which is about adult ego. Before you can discuss whether the uniform METHOD is the most visible or easiect to measure, you need to understand what the Method is and what it isn't. It is not that I did not answer Lauwit's questions. It is that the questions he poses are largely unrelated to the Uniform METHOD.

Unfortunately nothing that has been discussed in the thread to this point has the slightest thing to do with the Uniform Method. The Method has nothing to do with wearing the uniform shirt without the uniform pants, or with wearing the neckerchief one way or the other. The Uniform Method is about removing barriers that cause us to see others as different so that we can easier see what is the same about us. A uniform removes signs of income, class separation, cultural differences. It allows us to look beyond religious differences and political differences. The Uniform Method is about equalizing members as simply being members of the same organization, and having that being enough commonality on which to build a relationship, a team, or a friendship. The uniform is about having an outward sign in inner shared values. The Uniform Method is about being reminded and recoginzing what those values are, and building personal strength in those values by not being afraid to show others what they are. The uniform shows you are one of many who can be recognized for those values by the the image of the uniform. When our Sea Scouts are together, no matter where they are, they are recognizable as being part of a group, whether or not the uniform is known by others or not. Even when they are in casual clothes while sailing they all where the same design t-shirt, and cap. Everyone at the marina knows they are part of their Ship because their clothing is recognizable. When they are in their dress uniforms not only do the scouts stand a little taller so do the members of the marina who the scouts represent. The uniform reflects their position in the Ship, their personal accomplishments in Scouting, their skills on the water, and their pride in their values. THAT is what the uniform METHOD is about, not whether or not you wear a neckerchief or if your patches are straight. Good personal uniforming comes not from the Method, but from personal integrity. It comes from an understanding of good grooming, the ability to learn and understand rules, and understanding your role as a member of a community. The Methods of the three traditional Scouting programs can be learned by attending New Leader Essentials, the first step in the Basic training continuum offered by the BSA. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

Hmmm must be that new math I heard about. If there are 9 grade levels and 200 boys that averages 22.22 boys per grade. Since Kindergarden is not eligible for scouts that leaves 8 eligible grade levels, multiplied by 22.22 gives us approx. 176 eligible youth (not 100) which is 11% penetration...not 20%. If the 6th through 8th grade is eligible for Boy Scouts that is an avearage of 67 boys of which approx. 7 of whom according to Pappy are Boy Scouts so that is about 10% penetration for Boy Scouts. He is still fighting the wrong battle it seems.

Evidently FireKat is angry. She wrote "That is why I am angry with BSA for adding it."

"BSA should cover dealing with bullying but to put it as an achievement makes the kid feel like if he cannot stop bullying he is a failure." I do not understand that logic. The advancement requirement is to be able to share ways to deal with bullies not to have to go out and do it in order to be successful. A scout has to be able to describe the signs of a heart attack, if someone near him has a heart attack and dies the scout has not "failed" the requirement or himself. Why be angry over a requirement? That seems very 'over the top'. I can understand simply not caring for it or not understanding its use as a requirement...but angry? Bullies do not just exist outside of scouting. A new scout coming in to a scout unit where instead of being the oldes by 3 years in a pack now finds he is younger than scouts by 6 or 7 years may likely need some information and skills to help him deal with the unwanted behavior from older scouts. The requirememts of Tenderfoot to First Class teach basic life skills. Dealing with bullies certainly is a basic skill that can be useful to kids of this age group. Now that we have read that there are adults willing to turn away and let older scouts drag a scout off for a forced bathing, I find the inclusion of these requirements very timely. Such adults are bullies themselves, they are just willing to let kids to the actual physical contact for them, but in knowingly allowing the conduct to take place they are as much the bully as the scouts committing the action.

What? 20 Boy Scouts? That is not what you said before. You wrote "I have retained on average about 20 scouts over 5 years, 2/3 always being cub, the other BS" 1/3 of twenty is only about 7 Boy Scouts. Isn't it? I think perhaps you are fighting the wrong war.

Pappy wrote "Hey Bob, How do you know how much luck I have been having with my scouting unit?" I got it from reading your posts. You said the unit was 3 years old and 5 years old in different posts, and that you had 20 youth a third of which were Boy Scouts. So that's about 7 boys after three to 5 years. And you posted that those numbers were diminishing, (and you suggested that that is partially do to the council merging 15 years ago). So maybe a cultural war is not the biggest problem the unit you serve is dealing with? Perhaps delivering the values of scouting through the prescribed Aims and Methods of Scouting could solve both your problems of membership growth and cultural change?

Best of luck Pappy, I hope you get better results changing the "cullture" to fit your vision than you have had changing the scouting program in the unit to fit your vision.

Firecat, I do not think the BSA is tryig to say they have all the answers for this problem. They are saying that they recognize that this is a serious nationwide problem that effects scout aged youth and so it effects Scouts. Because of that they are trying to help give youth tools to address the problem in hopes of keeping as many as possible from becoming victims. When the BSA develops information like this they don't have a bunch of scouting professionals sit around a table and put this info together. They go to experts on the subject and have them develop the requirements and instructions based on their knowledge and experience in the field. You seem angry that the BSA would recognize the problem and try to help, other would be angry if the BSA did not recognize the problem or did not try to address it. Given the options it would seem the BSA is trying to take responsible steps to help protect youth. This is not the first time that the BSA has used the program to address social issues that effect youth. I do not know exactly where you stand on that but personally I appreciate their efforts.

How many cultural wars is this for the U.S. now, I 've lost count. Even if every registered poster on this forum banded together (on either sides of any philosophical position, we could not stop someone from criticizing whatever the current "culture" is for some segment of the country, even the Scouting movement. But, we each have the ability to improve the quality of scouting delivered in the unit we are supposed to be serving. Perhaps our concerns would be better applied to a local battle for bettering scouting in the unit we serve, than being concerned over a "cultural war" that will never end?(This message has been edited by Bob White) (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

There is a good article in the past Scouting magazine and one that was in about a year ago I think it was, you might check it out on-line in the Scouting magazine archives. The Boy's Life magazine covers this about once a year as well. So will the next printing of the Boy Scout Handbook. You might also invite the school psychologist to come and talk to the troop about the topic.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

Why not just send everyone to the showers? How about having the patrols make manual wash machines from toilet plungers and 5-gallon buckets and teach EVERYONE how to do laundry. I cannot believe that any adult would condone that scouts be allowed to drag another one off against his will to do ANYTHING and to turn a blind eye to it, and that other adults would support such an action. That is not how you teach a scout good grooming habits or anything else.

Yes, the two merit badges count to his 6 total, whether they are Eagle required or not, and regardless of what rank he was prior to Star when he earned them. The requirement is that before he can earn the Star rank he must have completed 6 merit badges, it requires that 4 must be from the list required for Eagle, it does not say that all six cannot be. What matters is that at each rank level of Star, Life, and Eagle, the scout has completed at least the presribed number of total merit badges and AT LEAST the prescribed number of required merit badges. As far as first aid merit badge and First Class rank. The first requirement for First Aid MB is "Satisfy your counselor that you have current knowledge of all first aid requirements for Tenderfoot, Second Class, and First Class ranks." If he has that required knowledge, and the Scoutmaster knew the Scout was applying for that merit badge, and knew that the scout met this first requirement, then why has someone not signed off on the requirements for those 3 ranks? There is no reason for a scout to have that merit badge and not have the first aid requirements for the first three ranks tested and approved. BW(This message has been edited by Bob White)

I am all for the PLC determining terms and election dates. I am not sure the unit is served in any way by altering a plan because it is inconvenient for a specific individual who has not even been elected yet. If his yearning is to be of service to others then he should either seek the office when he is in a position to serve, or alter his commitments to allow him to serve should he be elected. I do not see why the PLC should be asked to consider changing the plans just to suit his desires. Is there an underlying need for him to get some leadership time under his belt that is not being mentioned so far?

Part of being a member of a multi-cultural, nonsectarian organization, we all come with an understanding of the cultural cutoms we know through our personal experiences and sometimes we forget that these courtesies are not practiced, or even known, by others. Even something as seemingly harmless as "please remove your hat and bow your head in prayer" is based on two customs not practiced by all religions. Perhaps the best we can do is to do the best we know how to do, based on our own cultural backgounds and courtesies, and a willingenss to be be sensitive to the customs of otherws.. As OGE pointed out, he did what he felt was the way to show courtesy based on his cultural backgraound and thoise around him understood that. If he was raised in a culture where you kept you keep your head covered in church and his hat was off, I would bet that had someone explained the custom to him that he would have happily complied. The proof of his manners is not in whether he wears a hat or not but in his willingness to do the right thing for the circumstance. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

Actually, I was elevating the other two since they had not been getting included by other posters in the discussion of fitness. But as to which are more important, I will leave that decision to you. Would you rather have a leader of intelligence and character and diminished physical abilities, or a leader of great physical strength with poor ethics and low intelligence? There are aspects of fitness that go well beyond a persons physical characteristics. When you say my post sounds like a personal opinion... in comparison to whose post in this thread that is not a personal opinion?(This message has been edited by Bob White)

Packsaddle your attack on my post is uncalled for. I did not disagree that a leader should be fit I merely pointed out there is more than one type of fitness to consider and that I believe if a leader is going to be deficient in any of the three, and still be able to be a good leader, that I would rather they need improvement in physical fitness rather than mental or moral. "YOU are the one who is arranging the elements of the oath along an order of a personal priority. And, I think that is just fine...I have no problem with the 'local option' approach." Not so, I made no rearrangement, I simply pointed out there are three areas of fitness and that all should be considered in the qualities of a fit leader not just one. I was unaware that there was a local option regarding this.

And you think that the elements of the Oath go in order of importance? Whatever led you to believe that?

I agree that a leader should be fit enough to lead a quality program. But physical fitness is only one third of fitness in Scouting. Mental and moral fitness make up the other two thirds. When I think of a leader being "fit enough to deliver the program" I would rather have the physical fitness needing improvement rather than their mental or moral development lagging behind. Scouts would do better to have a leader who was strong in his or her understanding of the values of scouting than in their ability to run up a hill side.