Camp Pranks

[BrentAllen]

At the risk of being cruel and evil...(sorry, I just can't resist) :-)

 

"On a different note, we have the thread on Camp Skits open, so far I have posted 3 skits..."

 

"And as you can tell, I am quite affronted by being told I have no sense of humor and need to take myself less seriously. It's ok, I will get over it..."

 

Why am I picturing Lt. Steven Hauk, from Good Morning Vietnam?

 

Lt. Steven Hauk: "Sir, in my heart, I know I'm funny."

[Beavah]

The pranks I listed happened at church camp of all places by good kids who came from good homes and were extremely active in the youth group.... Trust me, they knew what they were doing was wrong since they always had a lookout to make sure an adult wasn't approaching. In each instance, the target was one of the kids who was not part of the in-crowd or popular. In other words, the weak and vulnerable were targeted by the cool or popular kids.

 

Symptoms of a bad program? Not really.

 

Yah, really.

 

What yeh describe is a culture where youth deliberately and with some sense o' malice targeted other kids. Da fact that the kids were from "good homes" and were otherwise "good kids" illustrates that there was a fundamental weakness in the program that was affecting kids character in a negative way.

 

That weakness is what needs to be addressed, not "prank screening". Yeh shouldn't think for a moment that because you've curtailed pranks you've changed the "cool kids vs. dorks" dynamic which is the real problem.

 

In a healthy unit, OGE's now infamous snipe hunt would have made him famous. He would have gotten so many kudos and so much positive recognition for his bravery and determination in staying out all night that he would have gone home braggin' to his parents about it. And along the way, he might have learned to laugh at himself more readily. "Yah, I might be tricked easily, but at least I'm determined" .

 

Me, I'm forgetful and I talk kinda funny, eh?

 

[OldGreyEagle]

That's Ok BrentAllen, at this point I pretty much regard you on this topic as Pvt. Leonard Lawrence

[SR540Beaver]

Beavah,

 

No, it was a great program. A program, whether it is church, school, sports or scouts can highly influence kids, but it can not ensure good behavior at all times by individuals with free will. The kids I saw do these mean pranks were good kids in a great program who all grew up to be fine upstanding, contributing members of society as well as good husbands and fathers. The problem at the time was they were kids at an age where regardless of your upbringing, you are jockeying for position among your peers. The cruelest age range are those kids in junior high around 12 to 14. Kids who were the best of friends on the elementary playground often find themselves as polar opposites a year or two into junior high. It subsides to some degree in high school, but can still exist. Every kid is at a different stage of physical, emotional and spiritual maturity and it changes back and forth constantly. This week, month or year a kid might do something good or bad that he wouldn't have done last week, last month or last year or next week, next month or next year. Heck, it can change on an hourly basis.

 

What can any program do about it? Have caring adults who have been around the block a time or two provide a consistent structure and example. As it has happened thru the ages, it will slowly have a lasting influence as the kids mature and move closer and closer to adulthood. Until then, they will occasionally make bad choices and even do malicious pranks alongside the friendly pranks they pull. Our responsibility during that growing phase is to set the limits and expectations. If that means screening pranks to make sure fun is had by all instead of some kid being humiliated for the enjoyment of another, I'm cool with that. I'd rather everyone have a good laugh than one kid with deeply hurt feelings and another kid getting sent home.

[Beavah]

Yah, SR540, I've never known a youth of any age to be deliberately cruel as you suggest. Quite the opposite, eh? Most kids are generous, kind souls. Being mean is not a function of age. It's a function of environment.

 

If we've really done our job as adults of settin' up the structure and environment, then kids finding where they fit in with a group does not involve cruelty of any sort. You have to ask yourself what about the program made it possible for being mean to be valued by these kids as a way of establishing social status? If we let that happen, it's our fault as adults. No fair hidin' behind "But it's a great program (in other ways)." Would those kids who were picked on think it was a great program?

 

Maybe the adults were too aloof, so that their example didn't speak loud enough. Maybe there weren't enough opportunities for youth leadership, where social status could be decided by contributing service rather than pecking. Maybe the adults were too weak to confront the issues, or didn't know how.

 

The point is, the attitude was the problem not the notion of playing pranks. And if yeh let the attitude go on, you may well have created "fine, upstanding, contributing members of society who were good husbands and fathers". And who were also just a bit racist, or sexist, or condescending to those who worked for them. You know. All the things that can be done in "hidden" ways, like teasing or ostracizing the "out crowd."

 

If that means screening pranks to make sure fun is had by all instead of some kid being humiliated for the enjoyment of another, I'm cool with that. I'd rather everyone have a good laugh than one kid with deeply hurt feelings and another kid getting sent home.

 

Yah, I'd like to convince you, or at least convince others, that there are better ways to go. This is an "adult control" way. In Scouting, we're all about youth leadership and "self control" ways, because those also lead to good choices when no adult is watching.

 

[SWScouter]

Hey OGE, next time you have a session, why don't you tell your therapist all about this great new device, the boat stretcher.

[BrentAllen]

Well, I do have a couple of M14's in the gun safe, but neither are named "Charlene." Was there a more homorous connection there that I'm missing? Maybe some quote that relates to this thread? No, I'm not a big fan of jelly donuts.

[AntelopeDud]

We as leaders, set up a program and set up boundaries that we intend for the kids stay between. We all know that youth of Boy Scout age are going to "push the envelope" and test those boundaries from time to time. It's part of their growing and maturing process and we shouldn't be blocking that. In the process, however, they will get carried away from time to time and that's where we, as mentors, come in. We help them understand what they did was wrong and why it was wrong, and hopefully inspire them to make a better choice next time.

 

Mistakes by the boys will be made. It is not a mark of a bad program that these things happen, it's a mark of a bad program if these things aren't dealt with when they do happen. These boys need to have this freedom to make these choices and possibly make mistakes. They will learn from them. I dare say that's what Scouting is about. We put boys into these situations where they have to make decisions on thier own - it's the boy-led patrol method. As adult mentors, we help the Scout determine what went right and what could have gone better.

 

Expecting your youth charges to never make a mistake is naive at best. Allowing them a safe environment in which they can either succeed or fail is how we teach them.

 

I'd like to say more, but I have to step down the hall. I had some of SR540's brownies last night and for some reason, I can't stay off the toilet.

 

-AD

[Hunt]

There was a former poster here who used to say that we didn't really need any rules beyond the Scout Law. I never really agreed with that, but in this case it seems to me to be about right. If we're serious about the values in the Scout Law, it's obvious that Scouts don't pull pranks that betray the trust of younger, weaker scouts or that unkindly humiliate them. If you're concerned about toughening up boys, Scouting does that in a positive way by giving them opportunities to face challenges together. I think they'll have plenty of opportunities to experience unkindness and untrustworthiness in other areas of their lives.

[prairie]

"it's obvious that Scouts don't pull pranks that betray the trust of younger, weaker scouts or that unkindly humiliate them." to quote Hunt.

 

A good prank should only bend the trust a little, thats why they should be few in number and mild in effect. A prank that from an outsiders view looks lame might be too much for a poorly chosen victim.

 

On an unrelated note, I read where BrentAllen refered to camp skits, cept my goofy eyes saw "Camp Skirts" the first time, I'dd say that would be taking hazing a bit far. =)

[SR540Beaver]

Beavah: "I've never known a youth of any age to be deliberately cruel as you suggest. Quite the opposite, eh? Most kids are generous, kind souls."

 

Well, I'd have to agree with you that 99.9% of the time 99.9% of youth are indeed generous, kind souls. It is that .1% that can result in devastating cruelty between youths. With all due respect, if you have NEVER known a youth of any age to be deliberatley cruel, then you had to have lived a very sheltered life as a youth and/or you have not spent much time actually dealing with teenaged boys. As evidenced by those of us who have related personal experiences, it happens......even in the best of circumstances. It is our job to head it off at the pass and to deal with it when it does get past us.

[Beavah]

Yah, AntelopeDud, me and my fellow Beavah SR540 often see the same planet lookin' from opposite directions, eh? It's a forum feature. I think we've both got good eyes and good hearts, though, and the difference in perspectives helps us all learn.

 

I agree at times good kids can be boneheaded, and a few not-so-good kids can even be cruel. I also agree that it's necessary to treat the symptoms for the good of the group and the boy. When bad happens, respond. As firmly as is necessary. Yah, sure, that might even mean a temporary generic "ban" on pranks, or prank "supervision" eh? More likely it's sending a boy home, and having a group discussion about why.

 

My point is that yeh also have to dig deeper, and look at the causes for behaviors. One dumb prank might be boneheaded, but several mean pranks is likely the sign of a deeper disease. SR540 describes one - "cool vs. geek" cliquishness in a group which encourages nastiness. There can be others, like a boy who is really hurting inside because of some family issues or other stresses. I think it's of utmost importance to identify and respond to those causes, even more important than it is to respond to the symptoms.

 

The Scouting Way is to try to avoid "adult bans" in favor of encouraging more positive "youth choices." Where we have to treat a symptom, we do what we need to... temporarily. But then we go after after da big goal, eh? Helping the kids grow and change so that we fix the "causes," and they make better judgments.

 

That way things'll be OK even when adults aren't there, which is a big percentage of kids' lives, eh?

 

[Hunt]

While I, too, think boys can be deliberately cruel (particularly in a pack), I think more often the problem is a lack of empathy. While I don't want to add "A Scout is Empathetic" to the Scout Law, I do think that many of Scouting's ideals and program elements do help a boy develop empathy--an understanding of and concern for the feelings and needs of other people. Doing good turns, service projects, even Leave No Trace contribute to this idea, as does leadership of younger boys. I think most of us in Scouting have seen strong boys go out of their way to help smaller, weaker, or disabled Scouts--I would add that this is something that they do not learn on sports teams.

[C-BOLT]

^^

The part about sports is arguable, very.

 

But back to your point, Scouts can be cruel. In my days, I've noticed that more often than not, theres always a scout in an age group that takes everyones you know what. Why does this happen? Probably because they are different, but it happens all the time. I've tried to stop it, but it seems that if Scouts have it out for someone, they won't stop. Somewhere along the line, I'm sure they will grow out of it, but what they do leaves an impression.

 

I was part of an age group where the majority of us didn't like a certain scout. I was young at the time, first year in fact, I felt bad for him so I just left the guy alone. Eventually people stopped giving him a hard time, but I'm sure he is still mad (he has every right ot be).

[SSScout]

To: Ezekeal "Izzy" A. Shcout, Patrol Leader,

Lionaround Patrol

 

From: Franklin N. Schtein, Chair, Subcommittee for

the Approval of Prank Plans (SAPP),

Troop 6 7/8ths

Re: Your application dated 1 March 2009.

 

Mr. Shcout: Be advised we are in receipt of your application for the Prank titled "Oh So Deserving".

 

The approval of your PP is dependant on the clarification of several questions we have about your plans. Could you please elucidate on the following points:

 

1) On page 4, you mention "cans of goo" Could you please be more specific? As you are aware, the Guide to Safe Scouting (14th ed.) requires Pranks be "innoccuous and harmless to the prankee". We need to be assured that the "Goo" you refer to is not only non-toxic but also bio-degradable and washable.

2) We must remind you of the requirement that both the pranker and the prankee sign "hold harmless" agreements, relative to each other and the Troop, District and Council. A sample of such was included in your application package. Please attach same, complete, to your response to this letter. As you are aware, the membership applcation you signed already included the disclaimer as to National BSA.

3) We would like to congratulate you on the originality of your proposal. However, it should be noted that Al R. Geen, the previous SPL of your Troop, already utilized the sneeze powder. Any that you appropriate from Troop stores must be replenished.

4) On page 3 of your proposal, we note a possible typo. Did you really mean to say "XXXXXX the YYYYYYY". We question the physical possibility of such an act.

5) As to schedule, we would like you to reconsider your request for the Troop overnight to Therenback National Forest, as two other pranks are already scheduled. It is recommended that the tour to the State Memorial for the Invention of the Dry Cleaning Bag the following month might be a valid occasion.

 

Again, we thank you for your application. Please be assured that it will be given every fair consideration and applied as appropriate toward your rank advancement.

 

Very Truly yours,

Frank Schtein, Chair