Body piercing

[NJCubScouter]

I personally hate the whole piercing and "body art" craze. I didn't even like it when my wife allowed our daughters to get their ears pierced. Now my oldest daughter (age 20) has a pierced navel. Her boyfriend has tatoos and earring, and yesterday he got his eyebrow pierced. I think he is an idiot. (Of course, I thought that already. ) He and my daughter spent about a half hour fooling with some sort of cleanser for his eyebrow to make sure it didn't get infected. I could have told them they could avoid infection much more easily by not putting extra holes in their heads, but of course nobody listens. My daughter was talking about getting more piercings herself, and I made my feelings heard in no uncertain terms.

 

But that is my right as a parent. I am not sure where a Scoutmaster's "place" is in all this. Rooster, let me ask you this, what if the Scoutmaster has tatoos and or an earring (and is a man), and thinks it's a fine idea for kids to do the same? Is it is ok for him to express his opinions too, even though it may go against what the parents believe?

 

I do agree that there is a "line" and that the swastika goes on the other side of it. I have my own Scouting "swastika story". As many of you probably know, the swastika also is a Native American symbol, although I am not sure whether the "arms" point the same way as the Nazi version -- I have heard it both ways. Well, when I was a Boy Scout, I remember going on a district camporee, and when my father (the Scoutmaster) received the patches for our troop, there was a picture of a teepee (tipi?) with various Indian (as we said then) symbols on it. Including, well you guessed it, a swastika. (Pointing the way it pointed in Nazi Germany.) My father, who is not only Jewish but also a WWII-Europe veteran (though never in combat), and knew some guys who never came home from fighting the Nazis, had an absolute fit. I don't recall him swearing, which he almost never did in front of us kids, but he said (loudly) almost every other thing one can possibly say to indicate displeasure. He protested to the district and several steps up the line, I think he was on the phone with the SE at one point threatening to call the newspapers if something wasn't done. There really wasn't anything that could be done, the patches had already been distributed. But I think the council did eventually send out a letter of apology to all the troops, mentioning that anyone with a stitch-ripper could remove the swastika from the patch. I think my father had already had my mother remove the swastikas from all the patches for our troop before distributing them. It didn't make the patch look very good, but the designer should have thought of that before he put a swastika on the patch.

[Rooster7]

If I thought it would benefit the rest of the troop, I would support a ban on such things. That being said, I think it really depends on what the boy is physically doing to himself. For example, if a boy came to a meeting with safety pins through his cheeks and/or rings through his lips, I think the adult leadership would be remiss if they did not put a stop to it. I say this, because I feel that it is not only a grotesque display of self-mutilation, but also it sends a very perverse and rebellious message. I have no doubt that those who embrace these things have disdain for themselves and society. On the other hand, I also support the thought that many of these things, such as earrings (even tongue rings, although I find them to be ridiculous) are just fads as others have noted. To address my concern, a policy would not work well because there are so many variations of these things. That is, we should not try to regulate poor taste. Nevertheless, I feel the troop leadership does have a responsibility to address those boys who are presenting a hostile and rebellious message. I am confident that there will be some on this forum who will decry that I am being unfair or "judgmental". Yet, I can't help but believe that most folks know exactly what I am saying. As in most things, one can go too far. We are the adultswe should be watchful that our tolerance for the individual is not to the determent of the groupand in some cases, to the individual himself. I think there comes a point where we should speak up and/or stop the behavior. I dont believe in being the fashion police, but I also think we have an obligation to be the adultto be vigilant and protective of those under our care.

[OldGreyEagle]

Just this past saturday our Venture Crew had its Christmas Party/Court of Honor. We had three Bronze Award recipient. One was in the Outdoors category and the other two in Youth Ministries. The two Youth Ministries recipients are in their first year of college and I must admit I wasnt too surpised to see one of them sporting a lip ring. The young lady's parents were also in attendance, her father is Scoutmaster of her brother's troop (son is so far umarked) and her mother is on the District Advancement Commitee and a Girl Scout leader, her daughter, the Bronze Awardee sports a Girl Scout Gold Award on her Venture uniform. She was quite instumental in setting up the Habitat for Humanity trip this past summer. Cant say the parents were pleased over the facial "adornment", neither was I, but sometimes you have to see the entire package, not just a single irratation.

 

[Rooster7]

Rooster, let me ask you this, what if the Scoutmaster has tatoos and or an earring (and is a man), and thinks it's a fine idea for kids to do the same? Is it is ok for him to express his opinions too, even though it may go against what the parents believe?

 

I suppose if that is how the troop (i.e., troop committee and chartering organization) wanted it to be, there's not much one can say. However, I submit that few troop committees and/or chartering organizations would tolerate such a Scoutmaster. Furthermore, for those that did, I doubt that the troop would attract very many families. I don't object to the Scoutmaster having a tattoo, or even an earring (although I find them to be vain, and in most cases, they make the adult appear to be pretty adolescent). I do object to the Scoutmaster who would promote these things to the boys. Even if their worthiness was not a subject of debate, a Scoutmaster should not be using his influence to promote fads or fashion. His duty is to help build character.

(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

[NJCubScouter]

Rooster says:

 

I do object to the Scoutmaster who would promote these things to the boys. Even if their worthiness was not a subject of debate, a Scoutmaster should not be using his influence to promote fads or fashion. His duty is to help build character.

 

In other words, Rooster, you think it is fine for a Scoutmaster to express his opinion, even though such expression may contradict the boy's parents, as long as it is YOUR opinion. In this case I happen to generally agree with your opinion, but I don't think that either of our opinions are the proper basis for a policy that says when it's ok to, in effect, tell a boy that his parents are wrong. If a boy's parents have approved something and you think it's in "poor taste" or is disrupting the troop, I think the issue is between you and the parents, not between you and the boy.

[Rooster7]

No, I don't think it depends on MY OPINION. To repeat myself -

 

We have an obligation to be the adultto be vigilant and protective of those under our care.

 

In other words, if the boy's appearance intimidates and/or conveys the wrong message (i.e., one that is inconsistent with BSA and/or the troop and/or the chartering organization), I believe the adult leadership can and should take a stand. While I am all for "going the extra mile" to help the kid that cries out for attention, the troop should consider the entire troop in it's decisions, not just the one, especially when it comes to issues of health, safety, and character development. If parents have a problem with the troop's stance in regard to these things, they should explore other troops. Perhaps, they'll find that special troop with the SM who promotes tattoos and safety pins through the nose. Regardless, to my knowledge, BSA does not have an official stance on tattoos or body piercing, so each troop should have some leeway as to how much they will tolerate.

 

[NJCubScouter]

Rooster, I don't completely disagree with you. If a boy's appearance is "intimidating" or if it really does cross the line into "self mutilation," I think that adults who have responsibility for the boy outside the home do have the right to say something. Maybe even the obligation, if it's that bad. (Of course, if it's that bad, I don't think you're telling the boy or his parents anything they don't already know, and I doubt the boy is in Scouting at that point anyway.

 

So the real question would be where the "grey area" begins and ends. I suspect we would probably disagree about where that is.

 

Maybe the main point is, I highly doubt that you would tolerate another adult taking the same role toward your children than you apparently want to play with other peoples' children. For example, take this statement from your first post in this thread:

 

If parents dont like that opinion being expressed, I dont think they can do much about it - unless the chartering organization doesnt share that opinion.

 

Rooster, if another adult leader took that attitude where your child were involved, I'm pretty sure you would be screaming blue bloody murder, as we used to say in the neighborhood. I can just see it now, "Well, if Rooster doesn't like what I said to his son, there's not much he can do about it." Admit it, you'd want the guy's head on a platter.

[Rooster7]

Yes, but I would be staking my opinion on what I believed to be were the values and policies of my sons' troop. So, in the end, if the troop supported the adult who's values opposed mine, I would recognize that fact and seek a different troop. I seriously doubt if I will run into that problem with my sons' current troop, and most others for that matter. Nevertheless, whether I become involved a similar situation is irrelevant. Troops do have some leeway in some of these matters. Parents should seek a troop that most reflects their attitudes. If they cannot find such a troop, perhaps they should examine their own values or consider other options for their sons.

[SR540Beaver]

Rooster: Parents should seek a troop that most reflects their attitudes.

 

KWC: Scouters keep telling us Webelos that the decision of which troop to join belongs to the boy.

[NJCubScouter]

Gee Rooster, that is a great argument for local option, not just on bodily mutilation policies, but also for... well, I won't say it, because this is not the "Issue and Politics" forum. But you know what I mean. Rhymes with "may." Heh, heh.

[NJCubScouter]

By the way, I never noticed it before, but the original post in this thread mentioned, in addition to extra holes in one's head, and tatoos, the issue of "baggy pants." I'm not sure why this would be a problem, as I was not aware that the BSA has begun making uniform pants in a "baggy" style.

 

I'm half-joking, I know that uniform pants would not necessarily be worn on an outdoor activity anyway, though if baggy pants were showing up on my camping trips, I would consider making the uniform pants a requirement at all times. Now, this comes from the ACM of a Cub pack in which nobody wears the uniform pants, not the kids and not the adults. (Don't start with me on this, it's the wrong forum anyway. ) When I was asked to write our pack's "guidebook for parents," the committee decided we would not force everybody to go buy the pants, so I wrote this: "The uniform pants are not mandatory in our pack. Any pants or jeans that are in neat condition are acceptable." If any baggy pants started showing up, I guess we would probably declare them to be "not neat." Or otherwise we would delete what I wrote and change it to (in essence): Go buy the pants.

[Rooster7]

kwc57,

 

I'm not sure what you meant by your last comment - "Scouters keep telling us Webelos that the decision of which troop to join belongs to the boy." Are these Scouters implying that the parents desires are extraneous? If so, they are placing way too much emphasis on the 'boy-run' philosophy. My house is not boy-run. Any Scouter who thinks I should acquiesce to my son because it is more inline with BSAs ideals about a boy-run troop is not in tune with reality.

 

NJ,

 

In regard to your comment - Gee Rooster, that is a great argument for local option No, I beg to differ. I was speaking to areas of the program where the troop has latitude. My comments were not meant to imply that BSAs values were up for grabs. Their principles should not be compromisedthey are not optional.

(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

[SR540Beaver]

Rooster,

 

If you'll go read the various threads concerning transition from Webelos to Boy Scouts, they all stress that the boy should choose the troop he wants to join. I've even talked with our Cub Master about this and he syas the same thing. From the threads I've read, there are a variety of concerns out there. There are packs that traditionally have fed into troops and the troops expect it to continue and make no effort at rrcruitment. The problem comes when there is a better troop down the street that recruits and welcomes new boys with open arms. Scout Masters get into arguments over another troop stealing "their" boys.

 

Also, some troops camp at least once a month while others may camp quarterly. Some are more action oriented while others are more scholarly.

 

Etc., etc!

 

While I believe that a parent should help an 11 year old boy with the pros and cons of the different troops available, ultimately the decision should belong to the boy. If your son loves a troop he visited and you tell him he has to go to another troop he thouroughly disliked because "you" thought it was better, you run the risk of your son dropping out for lack of interest.

 

Your son may like steak and potatoes and you think it would be better for him to eat broccoli and cauliflower even though it makes him gag. Both will nourish him, but one he will enjoy and eat every meal. The other he will avoid and pick at. What is wrong with letting him pick the steak and potatoes if you know he will eat it and enjoy it and stick with it.

 

A parent should have input about the troop choice, but a boy should decide.

[Rooster7]

Your son may like steak and potatoes and you think it would be better for him to eat broccoli and cauliflower even though it makes him gag. Both will nourish him, but one he will enjoy and eat every meal. The other he will avoid and pick at. What is wrong with letting him pick the steak and potatoes if you know he will eat it and enjoy it and stick with it.

 

To use your analogy - Because Steak and potatoes will eventually kill him. High cholesterol will be his fate. As the parent, it is my responsibility to train my son to eat right. He needs to understand that while the occasional steak is okay, a steady diet of it will rapidly cause ones health to deteriorate.

 

A troop with very little structure and a carefree attitude may seem very appealing to an 11 or 12 year-old. Conversely, a troop with lots of older boys who are always looking over the younger boys shoulders may seem too restrained. As the parent, I know that the latter is a much better situation. It would be an excellent environment for learning. Furthermore, it does not preclude the fun that my son would be expecting. My son may or may not be wise enough to come to the same conclusion.

 

A parent should have input about the troop choice, but a boy should decide.

 

I prefer the flip-flop of that statement. A boy should have input about the troop choice, but a parent should decide.

 

[SR540Beaver]

Rooster,

 

Let's agree that it should be a joint decision. I plan on being very active in helping my son choose a troop over the next year. I've already started scoping them out. But you will find that the current train of thought is that the boy should decide.