Navybone

Probably because LGBTQ and people of color are minorities within scouting. And having an event detonated to allow them to see that they are not alone, discuss or raises issues particulars to them, or identify opportunities that would increase their participation in scouts. You know, make it more inclusive.

unfortunately, way too many people think PJ Media is actual news and believe what it is post on it. The ability to post anything on the internet without having to ensure that it is true, based on fact or even rhymes with the truth, coupled with such sites only confirming peoples bias is really dangerous. It has become pervasive and contributed to the political discourd that exists today.

I don’t think posting a very biased attack on the MB from some very conservative website is very helpful to the conversation, especially when most of the article is based on supposition about MB could and how it could be manipulated rather than how it is actually written.

More than a little extreme of an example here, no? There is nothing to imply in anything within the CIS MB that an upstander is someone who goes out of his/her way (like miles) to get into a situation (voluntarily) that requires him/her to use a weapon (that the person brought although they were underage) on someone. Are we blowing right past the more likely situation where a scout would see/hear something that would put him/her in a position where they may have to call undesired attention to themselves in an effort to stand up for someone else? I think the discussion is less constructive if we focus on extremes or out-layers rather than reality.

This is not a BSA created term, but one that has been used for years to identify someone who steps up and takes action when they see a wrong. It draws attention to and differentiates between watching and acting. It calls out and encourages a person to step up and takes actions despite what others are doing. For a teen, it can be a challenge to step up against how their peers may be acting, be it in a group or otherwise. What is the issue with taking the time and emphasis to help the Scouts understand what "helps other people at all times"? Knowing what to do is easier for the Scouts when it is something like a medical incident where first aid is required, for example. But it is much different for a teen to stand up and counter what others are saying, especially if it among their peer group or in public. The requirement to discuss what it means to stand up for those who need it is a great discussion topic. For teens, who are looking to fit in with others, there is value in helping them understand why in a situation where no others are standing up to help someone who who is being called out or bullied, it is so important to not simply watch but important to act. It takes courage, it takes risk on their behalf, and not everyone has that. Giving a word to describe that courage, that need for intestinal fortitude, gives the Scouts a way to comprehend what they are being asked to do.

I can't speak to disabled or Indigenous persons, but I find it laughable that you think that there needs to be a white Workforce Resource Group. The efforts of the Workforce Resource Group are distinctly NOT about exclusionary or segregated groups within the workforce. In fact, they are the opposite, about providing support for minorities who may not have a resource to help them integrate into a company or corporate culture. When a majority of the workforce is white, then the structure is already supportive there integration.

I am not saying that i want CRT incorporated into BSA's DEI effort. I do not believe that DEI equals CRT. And it is very capable to have a DEI effort not corrupted by CRT> They training itself was good in that respect. My comment was in response to your "Maybe not yet. Give it some time", which implies that you think CRT will be incorporated in BSA's DEI.

So you do not think that it is worth giving BSA the opportunity to develop and implement a worthwhile DEI program not based on CRT?

The purpose of the workforce groups is to better understand the different cultures and so that BSA can understand there are bias (intentional or unintentional) in the processes or workforce management. I have not seen anything that creates or encourages a group specific paths or efforts that would isolate anyone. Have you?

Did BSA says its DEI programs would be based on CRT? DEI does not equal CRT.

I think the point is that they have the workforce groups becasue people are not treated based on character and individual merit.

Did you get that after completing the training? I would be interested in what issues you had with the training. I thought it was pretty good.

As part of Citizenship in the Community MB, Scouts are asked to attend a community meeting and then discuss an issue with the counselor. Maybe these scouts have taken the lessons of citizenship to heart and see an issue that they feel strongly about. Is the issue here that they are in uniform or the issue they have raised? To be honest, I think it is great that they are calling out the county commissioners for not following their own rules and requirements. This is exactly what the engaged citizen should do.

Yep. I would hope that the mentality is that you just don't cancel for bad weather but look at how to minimize any risk due to the weather. Sure, maybe that is move the camp out to the back of the church or what ever, but is there is process to assess and then develop mitigation efforts. And you have to be willing to cancel if you cannot mitigate the risk.

For the books, they barely survive a year, so I cannot imagine one last four years at the cub scout ages

In an effort to keep scouts involved and give them some outlet during the first 12 months of COVID (when we were locked down), we used Zoom and Google Classroom. It is OK, but since the scouts were on it all day for school, they were less than excited. I made them keep their cameras on, for sure. ask questions, don't just talk, use programs like moodle (I think that was the name) to make it fun. I would make quizzes on the knowledge they needed to show, and they would compete to see who got the answer first or right the most often. But, it does not replace in person discussions at all.

It depends on what the person doing the teasing is trying to do, what is the intent? How is it received? It is a thin line that all too often is crossed.

What I would really like to know is how he was able to get into this position. As Texan asked, was he a registered leader? Had he been vetted or checked in anyway? Completed the YP training, etc. I trust that the legal system will take care of this guy, and I hope that National would put every effort to be aggressive in ensuring that the maximum penalties are pursued - if only to show that they are serious about youth protection. But I also really want to know where the system failed. The first line of failure here has to be how he was able to get into this position to participate in the camp. Was it at the camp level or at the troop level?

A nuanced comment on your assessment on teaching leadership, based on my experience (MBA and senior military leader) - leadership is learned by doing (being in a position of leadership) and having a mentor or guide to help develop the individuals leadership skills. My concern and experience with naturally learning is that poor leadership skills that create results can be the the wrong lessons learned. What I mean by this are use of yelling, fear, intimidation, threats, etc. and learning that those type of toxic leadership methods can be successful to get objectives met.

Feedback from my Son's troop summer camp, based on scout and adult leaders comment (I could not go, unfortunately) , echo your sentiments exactly. I do find the drop in cub scouting in our area, as a results of the pandemic and dearth of adult leadership, to be a significant concern.

ear plugs? I also find the first night is rarely a good night, but the next nights are always great sleep. Really dislike one night camp outs.

Yes, one hundred time yes. And I would argue that there is no serious correlation between knots and leadership or ability. Some units nominate people, some do not.

My original comment was in response to another comment about the message that the scout sees when a uniform is or is not correct. I picked weight becasue it is an easy visual, as is looking at a uniform. And regarding first impressions, I agree, same as how some might feel about the number of knots.

I do not see anything about hair, piercings, or tattoos in the handbook. I am all about inclusion. But if the discussion is about what the message to the scouts, we have to be serious about what really see.

What message indeed. But if you step back and look at the individual wearing the uniform. If the leader is grossly overweight, but has three knots, is that any better or worse than leader who follows the Scout oath to keep himself physically strong but is wearing 15? What is the more important message that the scout should be getting from the leader? And what is the message that the is really being sent to the scout. Performance, leadership, living up to the Scout oath and law should always trump a minor uniform infraction.