I Design a Uniform

[hendrickms24]

"Shoulder epaulets came to military uniforms sometime around WWI to provide a place for smaller size commissioned officer rank, vice a host of rank insignia systems. They also gave a place for the trooper to identify his regiment. There is no need for them in Scouting at all. Period. They are decor, not utility. They should go away. "

 

John-in-KC not that it matters but Epaulets have been on uniforms since the War of 1812 if not earlier. Their original purpose was to keep Accouterments that soldier wear in the proper place.

[Mr. Boyce]

I would hazard that epaulets are vestigial bits of medieval shoulder armor, on the evolutionary downslide. It's interesting that Oscar de la Renta put them on the Girl Scout uniform he designed. . . making me imagine him being just a jetsetter whose only contact with uniforms were chauffeurs and airline workers.

 

I think a good argument can be made for collared shirts for adults, but at the same time, the neckerchief is such a distinctive element of the public notion of "scout" that it's tough to drop. The implication that the neckerchief is there to be used in the case of imminent emergency---and the use of First Aid---adds to the argument for its retention.

 

At this point, I'm mixed up about what good colors would be for the thing. And it's extremely tough to come up with a good scout hat---something that doesn't look silly. God knows, the baseball cap is so ubiquitous that that in itself gets to be a reason for using it. I like the historical associations with the campaign hat---but all I ever hear about it is difficulty with its upkeep, and its expense. The garrison cap is for show, and it's tough to wear a beret in 21st century America. Hats generally are hard for men to wear well, but to tell the truth, given the situation, a hat seems necessary: something that puts off the sun and heat; something utilitarian.

[Stosh]

The military epaulets that are being referred to were metal and had become a symbol for officers. The metal epaulets were for protection from sword blows caused by mounted cavalry. Once the saber went by the wayside in WWI so did the metal epaulets for officers. The loop on the shirt/coat for keeping gear on the shoulder dates back well into the 1700's. The colored epaulets in BSA, like the military ones are used to indicate "branch of service", i.e. Cubs, Boys, Venturing, District level positions, etc., just like the military ones marked infantry, cavalry, artillery, etc. This is why at a glance one can tell if the leaders/scouts are with which program, while wearing the same colored uniform. Cub adults and Webelos boys wear the dark blue and Boys wear the red, etc.

 

For all the hassle of being anti-military, the BSA simply can't get over it's roots and vestiges of the military will always be there. Once that's gone, then the uniform will not be a uniform. If BSA would quit denying it's military parallels, they just might come up with something worthwhile.

 

Most of this uniform confusion came about after the early 1970's anti-war/anti-military sentiment and has been bantered around ever since. Why in the world would we call them troops with patrols or even scouts, which are all military terms. The hypocrisy runs rampant. B-P was a military man and he patterned the program after the military. If we don't want to be "military" then we had better abandon the principles and precepts originated by him and come up with an entirely different approach.

 

Stosh

 

 

[Mr. Boyce]

Key parts of everyday clothing came originally from uniform use: trench coats, of course, wristwatches and a lot of other outer gear.

 

I think the current use of the epaulets doesn't add up to it being a very credible way to identify people, as has been pointed above, so they seem superfluos. If you keep the epaulets, you might as well drop the position patch on the shoulder, since both strive to do the same thing.

 

I'm now a bit hesitant about the cargo pant style---I'm wondering just how often I really USE the pockets. . . versus the constant weight that's added the pants. And there's a lot to be said for a more tailored, less baggy look.

 

I don't like any pants with elastic in the back. Reminds me of Geranimals.

[Hal_Crawford]

What I have noticed in this thread is a lack of any mention of what the scouts like and dislike. I was out with the scouts this morning collecting for Scouting for Foos so I asked the three scouts in my car what they thought of some of the uniform elements discussed here. The scouts were all Star or Life, two tenth graders and one ninth. All three are serious outdoors scouts who have done high adventure and/or summer camp staff.

 

The consensus of this impromptu and unscientific survey were as follows:

 

Epaulets: Didn't really care one way or another but liked that the shoulder loops distinguished Boy Scouts from Cubs. Preferred red to the green loops.

 

Collars: They preferred collars. To be truthful, none had ever seen the collarless shirt so they had trouble visualizing it.

 

Neckers: Don't like them. This was no surprise as our troop has consistently voted against neckers.

 

What if the neckers were larger and more useful, say for first aid? "I'd carry it in my pocket" answered one of the scouts.

 

Shirt pockets: Flat.

 

That was as many questions as I was able to ask before we got to our collection area and had to start picking up bags. Next time I get a chance I want to poll a larger number with a longer list. In the past scouts have expressed a loathing for the ODL pants and shorts. I have heard several scouts praise the new pants as an improvement but most would prefer to wear non-scout pants so I guess BSA hasn't gotten there yet.

 

Several people here have suggested a re-turn to the smoky bear hat. I don't know if the scouts would wear them (I doubt it) but at $95 a pop I think the parents would rise up in revolt.

 

Hal

[Mr. Boyce]

Good input Hal. I doubt the Smokey Bear hat's going to ever pull back and recover to being something most folks would consider wearing: it's on the long decline out.

[Mr. Boyce]

re: neckerchiefs. As a scout I liked them. You got them when you went to events just as you might get patches. After a while plenty to chose from. I think this made them more acceptable than just the basic issue neckerchief.

 

And yes, on a hot, hot summer day at scout camp, the collarless shirts were nice to have: no neck chafing with sweat and grime.

[DancesWithSpreadsheets]

I know when I was a youth we... disliked the necker (hate is such a strong word) but it was mandatory with the collarless shirts, so we did the obedient thing and wore them, at least until collared short-sleeve shirts came out.

 

But what if neckerchiefs were to become a restricted item, say that only scouts who were First Class or above and had 15 days of camping experience, basically OA eligible, in order to wear the necker. Do you think that would increase its cachet any?

 

Regards,

 

DWS

 

[hendrickms24]

Do you think that would increase its cachet any?

 

 

Short answer! NO!

[boomerscout]

for hats I like the Tilley or the Indiana Jones style, maybe the Eddie Bauer. I really like the Australian hat with one side turned up, but we probably want something more American

for uniform I like the fringed buckskin -- fringes keep the rain off -- with embroidered porcupine quills

[BklynEagle]

"Eureka! Simple solution Class A's are boxers and Class B's are briefs.... Both would have fleur-de-lis on the bands. See how simple that is!"

 

Wouldn't that be a violation of Youth Protection?

 

I'd say that epaulets ARE useful, particularly if we keep on dressing Webelos in the Boy Scout uniform rather than the Cub uniform.

 

Overall, I never had a problem with the De La Renta shirt, or even the De La Renta pants (though those were far from ideal) - It was the De La Renta shorts that I hated. The new uniform bugs me - I don't like the design of the shirt, I don't like the pants, and I don't like the color scheme. Frankly, if the BSA really tried, they would be able to find a happy medium between style, quality, and usefulness. There's a company out of the Great Lakes region that has done some terrific stuff with fire hose material that is durable, outdoors-approved, and good looking; But, it doesn't cost $0.05 to make (to then be sold at $20), so Supply will never go for it.

[Lisabob]

My son's troop does a restricted thing with neckers. You get a troop necker when you make tenderfoot. Til then, you have a "joining necker."

 

Most of the boys can't stand either necker and would prefer to go without. I don't think making them larger would improve their appeal. I think the boys just don't like wearing a "scarf."

 

Unfortunately for our guys (maybe), the necker is "troop tradition" which means the PLC can't get rid of it even if they want to.

[Hal_Crawford]

Lisa:

"Unfortunately for our guys (maybe), the necker is "troop tradition" which means the PLC can't get rid of it even if they want to."

 

I take this to mean that your troop is adult led. Is the PLC told that "This a boy run troop unless you want to change 'troop tradition' as defined by the adults"?

 

Hal

 

 

[Lisabob]

Well yes Hal, in some regards it is adult-led and this is one of those.

 

 

[Mr. Boyce]

Interesting to how the boys' take on the neckerchief. When I wore mine in the day, I considered it kind of like a junior necktie. And since they were given out at various events, you felt you had earned them. And I always liked the slides and made a bunch of different ones.