FireStone

It's not all Americans, I know the BPSA-US wears large square neckers. I think the BSA screwed up the image of the necker. Just a theory, but I suspect that in the constant evolution of the BSA uniform to look more and more militaristic (the short-sleeve open-collar beige shirt with dark pants look), the necker didn't fit in with that image. So it was shrunk, to the point where it started to look ridiculous and Scouts started to reject it. I'm actually hopeful that we're seeing a resurgence of the larger necker in the BSA. Larger sizes are starting to show up, and some recent videos and materials out of the BSA show necker-without-uniform wear, in the UK style of a friendship knot tied at the bottom. I don't wear one, but I'd like to. I'm a big guy and the standard (small) BSA adult necker size looks kind of silly on me. I prefer to just go without. But I also just recently picked up a Cub Leader neckerchief, in the "new larger size: 49 1/2 x 35 x 35", and it actually fits me decently. If larger is the trend, I think there's hope for us to catch up with the rest of the world on modern necker style and usage. I think we also need to do something about the plain flat design of American neckers. So many of them don't have the edge border that UK (and similar) neckers all have, which I think adds a lot of style to the look. I have that CS Leader necker, which is just blue with a very think yellow edge. Another guy in my pack has a Jambo necker with that cool thick border on it, and it's no question his looks so much better than mine. I'm sure those are more expensive to produce, but it also makes the necker more iconic and interesting, which I think would encourage more usage and wear.

I'm wrapping up my year as a Tiger DL and I can that our year was pretty much the inverse of what you describe. I can think of maybe 2 den meetings that were heavy on arts and crafts. The rest of the year we were playing games, learning scout skills, we did 3 service projects, went camping 3 times, went on multiple fishing, hiking, and other day-trips, etc. Maybe your program is 90% arts and crafts, but if that's the case, that's a unit issue, not a Scouts issue.

I really dislike the spiral-bound books. They feel flimsy and weak compared to perfect-bound. And from the adult-who-carries-a-bag-full-of-stuff-to-every-meeting perspective, the perfect-bound books were just more compact, easier to cram into a bag with other materials. I was happy to have the option, but now it seems the option is gone. There is definitely a heavy amount of photos featuring girls, which will surely make some heads explode (I'm still floored that someone said they'd quit over any inclusion of girls in the handbooks). But I think they're all really well-done photos and are helpful in illustrating the activities and skills.

Coming from the BSA, this doesn't mean much. Wasn't it just a year or two before they lifted the ban on gay scouts that they also reaffirmed their commitment to that policy?

So a kid gets kicked out of a troop and the CC is annoyed to answer questions from the parent of the boy? That's absurd. What did they expect you to do? Just say, "Oh, thanks for kicking out my son. Have fun on the next outing!". 🙄

Like T2Eagle, I've looked at this as being open to interpretation, or at lease open to unit culture and individual preferences. Locally here, I know of one troop that has a strict policy limited electronics use on campouts, for example, and another local troop that has almost no rule about it and you'll often see the boys sitting around, noses in their screens. During downtime, mostly, thankfully. But there is stark contrast to how both troops operate in this regard. Officially, I don't think there is an official policy for the whole organization.

I saw the headline. I didn't see the data I asked about. So I'll ask again: Where is the evidence that "most" people feel a certain way about the direction of the SW films? Where is the evidence that "most" people are against what the BSA is doing? Opinion pieces that make the same generalizations are not data. Comments on social media are not data. Is ther any actual data what-so-ever that your generalizations are at all factually accurate?

You use a lot of generalizations. Is there any actual data that supports any of these ideas? That "most people" were put off by the tone of The Last Jedi? That any of this is the majority opinion? I have yet to see any data that supports the idea that the BSA decision is fueled by an "elitist minority." What (little) data we have from the BSA says the opposite. I'd feel better about my status as an "elitist minority" if I saw any real facts that prove it.

Apparently I did, but that wasn't what I had in mind. Or at least I should have phrased my response differently to clarify. Rogue units jumping the gun or going against the program policies don't make the CSE a liar, which was the implication I was replying to.

I think people are just burned out on Star Wars. My brother-in-law is a die-hard SW fan, has multiple Star Ward tattoos and always goes to opening night releases for the new films. He hasn't seen Solo yet. Disney is over-doing it, that's why Solo numbers are lower than typical for a Star Wars film. They were announcing the Boba Fett film as Solo came out. Is every character going to get their own film now? Maybe there's still hope for Jar Jar to make a comeback. I just don't think it's a fair comparison to the BSA. The film franchise and our organization have very different challenges and different factors in play when it comes to their successes and failures.

The Chartered Organization is the authority over anything else at the unit level. As it relates to who can be a member of the pack and who can't, the CO outranks the CM and committee. In my pack the CM actually comes in fairly low in terms of authority on policy and procedure. The committee has, on occasion, voted to override a CM decision. Not sure if that is standard BSA procedure or not, though.

Where are there mixed troops now? So we should call our CSE a liar because at the local unit level some people are going against the design of the program as it pertains to gender?

I've just read through this entire thread and I think my problem with this whole issue is your focus on your boyfriend being singled out. If your CM, Committee, or CO don't know about other possible felons attending activities, we don't know how they would react if they did know. But based on how this has been handled so far, I suspect those other folks would endure similar scrutiny. Regardless, I would suggest just accepting things as they are and not pushing the matter. Even when his son is a Lion, there is no guarantee of accepting him as a participant. Your CO has the right to exclude anyone, for any reason, criminal record or not. I have no criminal record, not even a speeding ticket, but if my CO decided they just didn't like me, they could send me packing tomorrow. That's the perks of the CO, they are the absolute authority on who can participate in a unit and who can't. Press the issue too hard and you could find your whole family asked to leave. Is that right? I don't think so. But again, COs can decide whatever they want. If you approach this with the attitude that "they’re going to have to swallow it all next year when his actual son is a Lion Cub," I think you might find things could actually get worse. Accept the decision of the CM, and use the time between now and his son joining to help him prove his commitment to living a better life. You can't be concerned about any other families, parents, participants, and their backgrounds. This is just about you and your boyfriend. And don't give the CM or anyone else a reason to make an even bigger issue of it.

Changing the name of a magazine doesn't change the way we teach kids, in single-gender groups or otherwise. Nor does changing the name of a program. He didn't lie. The original plan, what he spoke of, was single-gender Dens and/or single-gender Packs, and single-gender Troops. That's what we're going ahead with, still teaching kids in gender-specific groups. There was no "lying". So your implication that the Scout Law is "nonchalantly disregarded" by me or anyone else is, as you like to say, "trash."

I still can't believe there is even outrage at all over a magazine title. Then again, this forum never ceases to amaze me with what brings out the pitchforks. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the idea that someone is threatening to quit because there will be photos of girls in the handbooks.

I kind of got the same vibe, that if it's just a few months into this family's experience with this troop and already this kind of problem is arrising, more than a bit concerning about the future prospects of this unit and if it's even possible to have a positive experience at all going forward with that unit. No matter the outcome of any appeal, moving to a different unit might be the best option.

Kind of related to my original post and where I think we are going from here, in particular modeling the BSA after Scouts UK, as it relates to uniforms I think we should expect more of the UK model there as well. In the "Adding Girls to the Pack" thread (page 9) on this forum there is a video with Anthony Berger, and towards the end he talks about how the WOSM regards just the neckerchief as being "in uniform". And he's wearing his neckerchief in the UK style, with the friendship knot. I fully expect to see more of this and a reduced emphasis on Class A uniforming in the BSA. I think we'll always have Class A, but more for ceremonies, COH, Blue & Gold, formal events, etc. In fact I think this video was pretty much confirmation (unofficially of course) that this is happening already. We should expect to see more of the UK-style larger neckers in the BSA, especially going into WSJ '19.

It's astonishing how wildly out of control this kind of thing can get, over what appears to be a completely mis-heard word/phrase. Do we really need to sit our scouts down and tell them not to use the word "kill" in any way or any context, because it can be misconstrued? It's pure insanity. Next we'll probably hear about a kid kicked out of a Troop for threatening to go on a murder spree after being overheard talking to other scouts about Fortnite.

Even if that's the case and he did threaten the other boy, the severity of the response isn't justified. This is a "warning" scenario, maybe a sit-down discussion at most.

Good point. Being that I've recently been looking for a babysitter, it's been interesting to see how potential candidates advertise themselves. They're often in college, especially this time of year looking for summer work, and they make it a point to mention that they're not just in college but if they're a junior ot senior, they make darn sure that you know it. As if a college freshman or sophmore is under-qualified. 🙄 This certainly feels like a tie-in topic around the societal issue of kids not being allowed to play outside or being escorted home from the local park by police if they are unattended minors.

Chartered Organization Rep and Committee Chair

I'm not sure what the official policy is, but personally I think it's highly unusual to expel a scout from a unit over one incident. I guess depending on the severity of the alleged threat, maybe it's justified in some cases. I've heard of cases of alleged "physical violence" that didn't result in expulsion, I think most units act on a system of warning, then action if behavior is repeated. Again, there could be circumstances where first offense is grounds for immediate expulsion. But those have to be some pretty extreme threats to warrant that. This is something you're going to have to probably take up the ladder, contacting your District Executive and Council Exec. I'm curious to know what others have to say here about moving to another unit, because that would be my first choice so your son doesn't have to sit out for months, during which time he'll probably grow resentful of the organization and even if he is then reinstated he might not want to go back.

Thanks for the reply. I'm not going to do a point-by-point reply, I think we both know where we stand on this. We disagree, and that probably won't change. My point of this thread was optimism and looking forward, which I continue to do and continue to have about the BSA. It's not a popular opinion around here, but I truly believe that the best days of the BSA are ahead of us.

I'm in favor of all of the recent changes, and I'm an Eagle Scout, Den Leader, Pack Committee member, OA Brotherhood.

I don't know if there is a date, but I imagine you could just call it the "Scouts BSA Handbook" and I think most folks will know which book you're talking about. Making an assumption based on the release of the Cub books less than a month from the official start date, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Scouts BSA books show up in January.