Pants: thought experiment

[Hunt]

Those not obsessed with the whole scout pants issue can ignore this thread.

 

Let's imagine a Scout troop that does the following (note: I'm not advocating this; in fact I'm against it):

The PLC, with the agreement of the Troop Committee, the SM, and the COR, decide that a scout or scouter who is wearing green jeans (of a specified make and color) will not be considered out of uniform by the Troop. Here's the challenge: explain precisely why this is a bad decision. Some possibilities:

1. BSA policy doesn't allow you to change the uniform.

2. The "slippery slope" argument--ignoring one method (or even part of a method) leads to lack of respect for other methods, and for Scouting as a whole.

3. There is something inherently special or better about the Scout pants.

4. Other reasons?

 

Personally, I find only the first reason to be persuasive--which is why I think the official pants should be changed.

[dan]

Show me a troop that is not uniform and I bet that they bend other methods.

[SemperParatus]

Other reason...availability. Over time (either a long time or a short time) the selected pants may become unavailable. Then you will end up with a new selection and mismatched look. I always know where I can buy BSA scout pants.

 

 

[dsteele]

Hunt:

 

I have no trouble at all with your desire to see the pants changed. I also applaud your desire to be in full uniform.

 

In answer to your question -- I think Scouts and Scouters should wear only official uniform pants to be considered in uniform. This is for one simple, undeniable reason . . . it's the right thing to do.

 

I'll admit I was a black and white Scout -- it's either right or it isn't. The pants are either official or they are not. Heck, I feel guilty if I wear black socks with my uniform pants because they should be official socks if I want to say I'm in uniform.

 

I wear the uniform because it is a uniform. I'd hesitate a bit if it were pink and involved tights, but a uniform is a uniform.

 

Unc.

[FScouter]

How about this: The PLC re-defines the BSA uniform by eliminating Scout pants and substituting greenjeans. Their action is condoned by the adult leadership, despite being clearly against BSA rules and regs.

Here's the challenge: explain precisely why this is a good decision.

[Hunt]

It's easy to explain why it's a good decision--everybody hates the official pants, and the replacement pants still provide a uniform look (although SemperP makes a good point). The issue is whether the reasons it's a bad decision outweigh that--Fscouter and UncleGuinea seem to think the fact that it's contrary to BSA's rules outweighs any other considerations; dan thinks there is a "slippery slope."

As I said in the first post, I agree that it would be a bad decision because it's against the rules--but I do think bad rules (or bad pants) tend to erode obedience, especially among people who do not have a longstanding commitment to the organization.

[dan]

Hunt

You lost your case in your first sentence when you said.

 

everybody hates the official pants.

 

This is not a true statement.

 

[FScouter]

A uniform look is not a uniform. The "uniform look" among the rogue boys and adults in your unit will clash with the uniform the rest of the unit wears. Or does your custom rule say boys are not allowed to wear BSA pants? This is good?

 

You seem to be advocating a practice of writing custom rules against parts of the program you don't like. "Everybody" hates something. Should we write a rule at the unit level to change whatever it is we don't like?

 

Explain why is it a good practice for your unit leadership to institute a custom policy against the established rules of our organization? Any organization would be in chaos if its members ignore the rules that govern them whenever they don't like those rules.

 

"Everybody" hates writing tour permits. Should we write a rule exempting ourselves from that?

"Everybody" doesn't like paying the $10 registration fee. Should we write a rule that we don't have to pay?

"Everybody" hates fundraising restrictions. Should we write a rule allowing a Las Vegas night fundraiser, complete with booze, gambling, and dancing girls?

 

Our organization would be mighty disorganized if it's members were to pick and choose what rules they want to follow, and add their own custom rules.

 

This is good?

[Torveaux]

Since this is a thought experiment and need not reflect our actual views, I'll play devil's advocate.

 

Since Boy Scouts is a boy-led (I hear this a great deal here)group, it seems that there is a conflict of ideals. If it is boy-led, how can we tell them they cannot make such a minor modification to the uniform? The hypothetical did not say that 'unit leadership' was instituting the policy, they merely allowed the boys to lead, right?

 

I think the reality falls somewhere in between. I think there are limits to 'boy-led', but in the end, the National organization may be better served to allow each Troop to choose pants among a set of choices rather than trying to dictate a one-size-fits-all solution. The concept of a uniform is a fundamental Scouting principle. The particular pants are merely an adminstrative detail.

[OldGreyEagle]

Boy Scouts is a boy led program, and part of that phrase is "program". There is a mission statment, the Aims, and the Methods and folling those attributes constitues the program. The boy lead troop can no more change the uniform than say it only takes 10 merit badges for Eagle

 

BTW, I dont hate the pants, they are pants and dosent the BSA have a satisfaction guarantee or your money back or replacement? It seems if the pants are that bad and wear that poorly, I would urge those disatisfied with the pants to return them to the scout store, get a replacment pair, maybe if enough people did that, the design would change. Of course that would require those to love to complain to actualy do something which may be asking a lot of some...

[BPwannabe@137]

I always wear my campaign hat, but I am not a real fan of pants in general. I just wear my shirts long and my stockings high. Saves money on pants, belt, and belt buckle! Sure I get complaints for other scouts and scouters, and am always being picked up by the local constabulary, but hey, I just don't like pants.

[Hunt]

If you read my first post, you will see that I am imagining a unit in which everyone really does hate the current pants. Maybe there is no such unit. That's why it's a "thought experiment."

 

Fscouter's last post also raises an issue that always troubles me--I guess it is a form of the slippery slope--the one that goes, "If a unit can ignore one rule, it can ignore any rule, and we'll have chaos!" This suggests that all rules are of equal importance. It's like saying that somebody who speeds is no better than somebody who robs banks. Surely you don't think that, say, rolling through a stop sign without coming to a complete stop will inexorably lead to a life of crime--then why should you think that deviating from complete uniforming will lead to booze and dancing girls?

 

To restate my conclusion from the thought experiment--a respect for the rules is the only strong argument against the unit decision I described in the first post. This is why I think it's important to have rules that are well thought out and defensible. As an example, I think many speed limits have been set too low around the U.S., and this has led to almost everyone violating the law. This leads to less respect for the law.

Let me give another Scouting example which I discussed in a long-ago thread. As the troop's advancement coordinator, I received a notice that all the merit badge counselors in the troop would have to file a separate BSA registration form, even if they were already registered in unit positions. I thought this was a silly requirement, and I could never get a straight answer on why this needed to be done (one poster here criticized me for even asking). Of course, I complied--but it left me with less respect for the BSA bureaucracy.

[FScouter]

I dont know what a thought experiment is, or a slippery slope. I'm not sure all rules are of equal importance. I'm not sure which rules can be safely ignored or altered. Perhaps our national organization should rank them in order of importance. They could then tell us that rules with a lower importance ranking may be ignored or altered at the discretion of the local unit. Maybe that would help?

 

If our BSA uniform policies are bad, they absolutely should be changed. Since they are written at the national level, they should be changed at the national level. Have you voiced your concerns to the chairman of the national uniform design committee?

 

Personally, I'm happy to take rules and policies as written. I'm not on the committee and just don't have time to worry about how defensible the rules are.