BSA policies vs. membership: where's the proof?

[Bob White]

I am sure you know then Backpacker that even if you could are hitting your numbers it still requires a specific amount of time and you have to complete your training to becomje a SR. performance allows you the opportunity to stay around long enough but tenure and Professional Development completetion is what moves you to this first step up.

 

How do I learn all this stuff if I was never a professional? I'll bet you wouldn't believe me if I told you.

 

[Hourman]

I would wager that if a scientific survey on this subject existed, it would be widely circulated and frequently quoted.

 

Lacking that, I believe that there is an abundance of anecdotal evidence which shows that national discriminatory policies do in fact supress membership.

 

My own family came very close to not joining. I did not come from a childhood scouting background.

I also consider myself to be very liberal and/or progressive in my political views. So when my son came home from Kindergarten one day with a cub scout roundup flyer, I was less than enthusiastic about having him join. Several of his school friends were going though and he really wanted to try it. I had a serious discussion with my wife regarding whether we wanted to associate with BSA. At that time our impression was that they were a very conservative, reactionary, discriminatory, and possibly militaristic organization. We did not think that we could fit in with people holding those viewpoints. Moreover, we were not sure we even wanted our son exposed to those points of view. However, he really wanted to try this and we decided that in our area there was no viable alternative youth program for him. So I somewhat reluctantly became a registered Tiger Partner. That first year was a blast. I learned that at the local level, at least, scout families were much the same as my own family. They generally made their kids their first priority in life and they were not knuckle dragging Neanderthals in their political and social opinions. By the end of that first year I had been recruited to be a registered pack leader and have been forging ahead ever since. Now, 8 years down the road, I am a Scoutmaster and don't expect it to end anytime soon. My point in relating this, is that both my son and myself almost missed out on this great experience because of the very negative public image that BSA had then and still has today.

 

I have had several parents tell me that even though they know that I am not personally discriminatory, they would not let their kids belong to BSA. They feel that by turning a blind eye towards the discrimination they are in effect condoning it. I have to say that I admire their commitment to their principles much more than anyone who advocates a "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

 

To further illustrate how bad our public image is, on any given day of storefront popcorn sales we will be subjected to 25 or 30 rude and nasty comments from passersby. Are Girlscouts subjected to this while selling cookies? No! Why us then? What don't the like about us? It's simple; they don't approve of our membership policies!

 

This is not just some small handful of ACLU zealots who don't like BSA. It is lots and LOTS of people who sincerely hate our discriminatory membership policies. We will continue to have problems with both recruitment and retention as long as BSA National insists on alienating people with progressive or liberal values.

[Bob White]

So what? No one is making them join. It is a private organization for community groups and families who share values that are taught by the BSA. It was never meant for everbody, it was meant for anybody who wanted to share the same ideals.

 

There have always been people who didn't like what Scouting stood for, here and in other countries. There are people who do not like religions, there are peole who do not like a law abiding society. why do you worry about what other people like? Are scouters so fickle that they join to be popular with people who do not share their values? Or to help scouts to learn and grow stronger in them?

 

If you believe in the values of scouting then that is all that should matter, if you do not agree then who was it that forced you to join? That person did you a grave injustice.

 

Are there more people who disagree with Scouting now then there ever were? Well probably..there are more people in the world now than ever before so statistically that would almost have to be true.

 

But don't think that just because people in your community don't respect you that the entire nation is that way. This country has always been made of a variety of pockets of character and values.

 

If you are unsure of that just remember that there are millions of families involved in scouting today, and that it has outlasted other social changes and forces long before this.

 

Any idea how long the this uproar over homosexual membership has been going on? 25years. An entire generation has grown up in scouting and gone from Bobcat to to scoutmaster through it all, and yet the program goes on.

 

All this doom and gloom outlook has to affect your ability to deliver a positive, cheerful program. Why allow outside forces to dictate your values? Why should the BSA allow outside forces to dictate its values.

 

 

[Backpacker]

Bob,

 

See what happens when you tread into unknown territory, per your last post it is obvious you know very little about professional scouting and your lack of sources to support your claim just proves my point. Stick to what you know and have experienced instead of giving incorrect information on professional scouting which you have not been involved with and are so ill informed about. All you do with such posts is dishonor the efforts of those honest DE's trying to help scouting.

[Bob White]

That is a perfect example backpaqcker of a post that has no actual information. It's sole purpose is for you to take another shot at me. It shares nothing about the program. I don't understand how that benefits any poster or this forum other than the persoanl satisfaction that it obviously gives to you. With luck others will agree and we can soon see the end of such posts.

 

It would be nice if it was by your own choice.

[fgoodwin]

Hourman: welcome to the Forums -- and I'm glad you and your wife made the decision to join -- I hope you agree it was the right choice for your son.

 

I wish more who felt as you did would think of their child first and not let their personal politics deny their son a wonderful opportunity.

 

Getting back to the question: why do you think membership in Scouts Canada is declining even faster than BSA?

[evmori]

Does anyone have any actual data to back up why membership is down nationally? Are recruitment numbers down? Are we losing kids along the way? Both? Or is it house cleaning?

 

I looked on the BSA site & everything there is a couple years old.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Hunt]

I suspect that there are many reasons membership is down, and I suspect that it varies significantly depending on where you live. Thus for example, I know that the membership restrictions have led people to leave in my area (D.C. suburbs) but I would very surprised if it had any effect in my hometown--in fact, a change in the policy might drive people away there.

I think other kinds of bad press might also have some impact--for example, I'm wondering if bad press about safety might restrain some parents in our overprotective society.

I'm afraid, however, that a more significant cause might be that kids seem less and less interested in getting outside, but would rather spend their time playing video games and Instant Messaging. I think that, coupled with overscheduling, is probably a major factor around here as well.

While I agree that the failure to deliver a quality program will cause scouts to leave, I don't see any reason that this should have changed overall--I have no evidence that units were, on the whole, delivering the program all that well 30 years ago. Maybe the leaders were better trained then, but I doubt it.

[Bob White]

Thirty years ago the entertainment demands of a scout aged boy were very different. In today's world if you are not "the best show in town" then you cannot expect to hold the attention of a scout for very long.

 

If you are a talking-head program then the boys will go elsewhere. Theese are not machines designed for sit and listen. Scout aged boys need physical activities and adventure. You need to be more fun that a computer game or the unit will fail.

 

There seems to a growing number of scouters who would rathher be "in charge " of a scouting, rather than delivering a scouting program.

[SeattlePioneer]

Hourman,

 

Thanks for sharing your own reservations about joining Scouting with your son. I expect my sister in law in particular had similar reservations about Scouting for my two nephews.

 

This issue gets back to one of the divides in values in this society --- whether one tends to follow the latest fashions or prefers the tried and true "eternal values" by which to live their life.

 

Societies where religion plays a vital role tend to change relatively slowly. Religion changes, but tends to be conservative, questioning changes, examining them closely and then changing slowly over time.

 

By contrast, a society cut free of religion tends to be free to change rapidly, and may wind up making poor choices about how to change, causing a lot of difficulties.

 

This society in recent decades has seen the mass media and it's intelectual establishment increasingly oriented towards fads and fashions as a source of social leadership, direction and authority. This gives the news media a great deal of social power, and gives the social science types power since they are one source of "expert" authority quoted by the news media.

 

And then you have the entertainment media who promote the social theories of experts such as rap music artists as sources of political and social authority.

 

MUST we as Americans live our lives according to the fashions promoted by the news media and chattering classes? That's really the issue for me. Just as some people might reject Scouting for not embracing the fashions of the day, I have embraced Scouting because of it's willingness to confront those fads and fashions. Frankly, it would be a lot easier for Scouting simply to knuckle under. I rather admire the decision by Scouting to live by it's own values rather than those of the fashionable people of the Democratic left wing.

 

And lets not forget the failed policies advocated by the Democratic left over the decades. Many have been failures that have harmed the United States. The defense of Communist Party members such as the Rosenbergs obstructed attacks on the real Communist conspiracy that operated to subvert American society. Welfare policies created and encouraged dependence on government handouts. Creating a society where divorce was available on demand has done enormous damage to children and adults.

 

Neither the left nor the right has a monopoly on wisdom. Indeed, it is probably wise to encourage a tension between these two tendencies. In that sense, perhaps Scouting is exactly where it ought to be.

 

 

 

Seattle Pioneer

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Prairie_Scouter]

Seattle,

 

Let's not for even a second try to imply that the Democratic left is some sort of anti-American group that's damaging the country, ok? From your comments, I'd have to think that you think that the McCarthy Hearings were just dandy devices for rooting out evil in the country. Whoops! Destroy a few lives with rumor and inuendo? Okeedokee. Send out the FBI on fishing expeditions to dig up any dirt you can? Okeedokee. ABUSE of welfare programs caused problems, not welfare itself. The vast majority of people on welfare were well-meaning, down on their luck people who need short term help for a variety of reasons. The long term welfare recipients are the victims of government policy as much as anything else. Are there cheaters? Sure. But they are a tiny minority compared to those who use the program as a chance to lift themselves up. Changes in divorce laws and other social policies could be easily seen as a backlash against overly conservative policies of the past. The pendulum swings both ways.

 

And yes, I agree, we shouldn't allow our lives to be dictated by the "news media and the chattering classes", REGARDLESS of whether they are liberal or conservative in their agenda. I wouldn't trust Michael Moore any more than I'd trust Rush Limbaugh.

 

And I agree with the "middle of the road", "equal tension" view to some extent. I wish that Scouting would get there.

[Hunt]

"There seems to a growing number of scouters who would rathher be "in charge " of a scouting, rather than delivering a scouting program."

 

I'm not sure what the evidence would be that the number of bad programs is growing. But I think your point is well-taken that even lousy programs may have done better back when they were the only game in town. So I agree that we have to improve in order to compete--but I think there may be more ways we have to adapt as well. I'm not talking about altering true timeless values here, but there may be specific program elements that should be added or altered. BSA does that, but it is sometimes too slow (look at the MBs for an example--they could really use some fresh ones.)

[Greying Beaver]

Hourman's comments remind me of a man who was very sceptical of the scouting program but because of the troop's program became an ardent supporter. He served as ASM and SM, did a Philmont trek, and completed the mile swim, all in his early and mid 60's. This was the man who was SM in the troop of my scouting (youth) days. It was not scouting that he was apprehensive about, it was the delivery of the program by the adults (our dads). As scouts, we guys had the same activities competing for our time; organized sports in particular, school activites, and later, "'fumes". But it was the FUN, and the variety of fun that we had in scouting that the other activities could not - nor were designed - to produce.

Of late scouting has gotten a lot of bad press from scribes who have no idea what we are really all about. Our stance on avowed homosexuals and athiests? We answer to a higher authority; the 12th Scout Law and the third point of the Scout Oath remind us of that. And . . . we choose to raise our sons this way, period. And we should say that whenever necessary.

Amazing isn't it? We are teaching our sons the importance of letting you-know-who be able to say the things that they say about scouting because that is part of the third point of the Scout Oath. Maybe we need to let you-know-who know that.

It seems that all of the arguments against the scouting movement can be answered using the Scout Oath and Law. Let me repeat that. It seems that all of the arguements against the scouting movement can be answered using the Scout Oath and Law. and answered comletely.

Yes, scouting went through a decline in membership in the 1970's, part of the "fallout" of the "hippie phenomenom", the war in VietNam, the women's movement, etc., when the status was no longer quo. The numbers came back, though. Scouting is again on certain organizations' "agendas". Well, scouting's "agenda" hasn't changed in 95 years in the U.S. Spread the word in your units - get trained; use the training; use the Methods of Scouting; deliver the program. The numbers will be there.

 

[Bob White]

In the last 6 years the BSA has revised or completely rewritten every merit badge handbook in the current library as well as added 6 new ones in the past 8 years.

 

That seems like a pretty huge effort to keep the information fresh wouldn't you say?

 

How many program changes the BSA initiates will not improve the local program. If the leaders in the unit you serve aren't following the program now even after the changes made in the last 8 years, why will more changes for change sake help?

 

Let me ask this. If the problem with membership is the lack of avowed homosexual members, is it the suggestion then that avowed homosexual leaders will be better than today's leaders and so be able to deliver the program better?

 

Are you saying that avowed homosexual scouts would be easier to entertain than todays scouts so better retention can be achieved without improving the local program delivery.

 

Or is the belief that the three times in scoutig when we have the most significant losses is tied not to the local program, but to three specific times when parents suddenly realize that we do not have avowed homosexuals as members?

 

How do membership changes improve leadership or program. Or, are we just looking for ways to bring in more people so that more people can quit?

 

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[packsaddle]

The families that have mentioned this to me haven't indicated a demand for gay leaders. Rather they reacted to the BSA policy which in their opinion (as they said) was intolerant.

Duh! The above anecdote and all the others are worthless to evaluate the decline.

The past cannot be changed. BSA is free to establish their policies. Families are free to make their decision on any basis they like. Whether the decline is due to BSA policy on gays and atheists, or whether it is due to competition with soccer and other sports, the market is working its magic. Any other good business in decline would re-evaluate its business practices or face the music.

 

Perhaps it is time now for BSA to answer those calls for an assessment of some objective numbers to sort out the most likely factors for this decline.

In response, BSA could make policy or program modifications designed to reverse the trend.

Alternatively, BSA could, who knows, perhaps falsify membership numbers in order to receive inflated funding based on those bogus numbers.

Anyone hear music?