Venturing Eligibility for OA - An Idea...

[Eagle92]

Gary,

I can also verify that Venturing was advertised in it's early days as the "Next Step in Scouting." That was how national advertised it to DEs when it was getting ready to come out in 1998, that's how I promoted it when I was starting new crews and converting posts to crews, and I can go one step further. A bunch of us DEs were told by the then Venturing Director that the Silver Award was going to replace the Eagle as BSA's top award. Lots of ticked off DEs in that class.

 

 

As for recruiting camp staff, I did 6 summers at 4 different camps. It is truly "cheerful service" working camp as you are on call when you are not working ( 1:30 AM lost camper drill for real), long hours ( I routinely worked 60+ weeks at camp), and you can make 4 times the amount working at other places ( hence why I worked at a local pool in HS).

 

 

[WAKWIB]

Part of the OA mission is to promote camping, and it would follow that they should promote camp staffing as well.

 

A little comment on this and the other active co-ed threads. If I had to make a prediction it would be co-ed scouting in ten years. OA would of course follow. The majority of current scouters seem to be slightly ok, to radically enthusiastic about this possibility. The ones that are on the fence would adapt or find greener pastures.

Now this overall positive attitude will NOT be the deal maker in National's decision to do this. It will be the perceived increase in revenue that will drive it exclusively.

[Gary_Miller]

John-in-KC "That's a crock of excrement, and you know it. We have women youth members of camp staffs because Councils cannot find enough young men. So, there's a Council-wide organization of young men in almost every one of our Councils. Why is it not doing some cheerful service and being the honor camping society it should be, and getting off its leaden fourth point of contact and helping the Camp Director find qualified and altruistic young men?"

 

"Oh, yeah, that's why: You say it's not a mission of the Order."

 

Having a son who is currently on camp staff and has been every summer since he was 14 except one, that would be the one where I talked him into holding out for more money, its all about the money. Youth can make allot more money flipping burgers at the local burger place, than at camp. Those that do work camp staff usually do so because they enjoy it and have fun so they don't care about the money.

 

 

John-in-KC, "As a collateral to this debate, you'd best not hope that Boy Scouting becomes co-educational, either at the Council level (gender-specific Troops) or at the unit level, as we are discussing in a thread in Open Discussion, Program. If that day comes the first young woman who is denied an Ordeal will have a discrimination lawsuit against the National Committee of the Order of the Arrow. Her parents will be very rich, and the Order will be under Court supervision for years to come..."

 

When that comes I'm sure that young woman will be elected into the order as scouts just like the young men. But we are not talking about young women in the Boy Scouting side of the organization, we are talking about holding elections in Venturing Crews which currently is not allowed due it being impossible to meet the current induction guidelines.

 

John-in-KC, "I've said my piece, and I shall no longer post in this thread. It's blatantly obvious there are Brothers who cannot or will not think outside the box."

 

I'm sorry you feel that way. As one who you feel does not think out side the box, I can assure you I think out of the box quite well. I understand all of what you have said and I agree with you as well as others on this subject.

 

However, I have just spent the last two years trying to work with adult advisors, Lodge, Staff and other advisors, to get our lodge back in line with the current OA guidelines. One of the most important one is that the youth are in charge and the youth make lodge policy. I have also seen a Lodge Chief frustrated with having to work with a Lodge Advisor who does not want to follow the guidelines as set forth in the handbooks. An advisor who feels that he is responsible for making lodge policy and that the youths purpose is only to carry out the program.

 

So while to me personally I don't care if Venturing Crews hold elections or if the young women on the crews get inducted. I have chosen at this time to hold the line set forth in the OA handbooks and guidelines. So until the rules are changed, I'm sorry no elections for Venturing crew.

[Gary_Miller]

emb021, "Well, I assume you're not involved in Venturing, and don't know much about it."

While I'm have not been deeply involved. I have been involved enough to understand how the program is suppose to work. I have also seen some very impressive young people come out of the program

 

emb021, "Venturing: Scoutings Next Step" is a catch phrase from the early days, as its on one of the Venturing promotional items. I know I've heard it and kind of used it for many years. I wouldn't have done so if National themselves didn't use it on their materials."

 

I had just never heard that phrase before.

 

Eagle92, "I can also verify that Venturing was advertised in it's early days as the "Next Step in Scouting." That was how national advertised it to DEs when it was getting ready to come out in 1998, that's how I promoted it when I was starting new crews and converting posts to crews, and I can go one step further. A bunch of us DEs were told by the then Venturing Director that the Silver Award was going to replace the Eagle as BSA's top award. Lots of ticked off DEs in that class."

 

I was in Korea, USAF, in 1998 so was not around for the early stages of the program. And I have only been involved with the Venturing program for the last five years.

 

shortridge, "Venturing as Scouting's Next Step: Look at the second page.

http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/25-200.pdf"

 

Thank You for the link.

[WAKWIB]

What is it that might be hindering a change in the eligibility requirements? I'm sure the topic of Venturing members in the Order of the Arrow has come up in more significant venues than this forum. I suspect that the gender issue does not weigh-in so heavily with the youth leadership in OA as it may with some of us, and is only a obstacle (and possibly a challenge worth working for) in their minds. Reconfigure a few guidelines and, presto, they are in.

National seems to be interested in "giving the youth what they want." I think that this might be something they really want.

[sherminator505]

"So while to me personally I don't care if Venturing Crews hold elections or if the young women on the crews get inducted. I have chosen at this time to hold the line set forth in the OA handbooks and guidelines. So until the rules are changed, I'm sorry no elections for Venturing crew."

 

This is an interesting statement, considering that your previous posts indicate a strong personal opinion on the issue. Not to mention that you are pointing to the rule book as if someone actually suggested holding an OA election at their local Venturing crew next Tuesday. I don't think anyone suggested that.

 

What some of us are suggesting is that the rules as they currently stand do not reflect the realities of Scouting today, and while you clearly disagree with that proposition, you have not offered anything substantial to tell us why we're wrong, save for flawed semantics.

[BadenP]

sherm

 

You have to understand that Gary is an LDS scouter and their scouting program is still stuck a little in the past, in other words NO GIRLS.

[sherminator505]

BadenP,

 

Thanks for the info, but I for one would like to hear Gary's substantive argument on the issue. Hopefully it's not as superficial as you're thinking.

 

Also, I should remind everyone that this is not about making OA coed, although that would be one result. It is about recognizing Venturing youth who have committed themselves to service, the promotion of Scout camping, and the ideals of Scouting, in keeping with the promotion of the Order as "Scouting's National Honor Society."(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

[emb021]

Here is some historical info I gleamed from my collection of OA Handbooks regarding Explorers joining the OA:

 

1948 OAHB Requirements- 14 years old, First Class or first Senior Scout rank [note we had an age requirement in addition to rank. Also, in 1949, 14 was the minimum age for joining Explorers, and ALL boys were automatically Explorers at that age, even in a troop]

 

1959 OAHB. Any Explorer, regardless of rank [this made sense, as in 1959, they dropped any ranks for Explorers. Air Explorers and Sea Explorers still had ranks.]

 

1975 OAHB. Only male Explorers, regardless of rank. Now OA part of BS division [prior, National OA Committee under Nat Camping Committee, so OA has been part of the Boy Scout Program for only 35 years. BTW, Explorers went fully co-ed in 1971, yet AFAIK, they didn't change the policy until then]

 

1980 OAHB. Explorers must hold First Class rank, only male members of Post can vote.

 

1989 OAHB. Explorers must hold First Class rank, but all Explorers vote.

 

The 1991 Operations Update announces the ending of Explorer elections, but I recall it happened earlier.

 

[Eagle_23]

One thing that I keep seeing in these qoutes from old OA Manuels is about how OA has been the Honor Scocioty of the Boy Scouts Of America then reads off either a date or however many years indicating a tradition.

 

One question that arises with me at lease is at what point does a tradition a enhance scouting overall or does it get in the way or the future?

 

To me. A scout is a scout no matter what part of scouting they are in. Venturing is up to 21. Well so is the OA. With the exception of ceremonies and inductions, everything that would need to be updates to include youth females has already been layed out, either in the ventureing YP book or somwhere else. it just has to be incorperated into the OA.

 

Venturing and Sea Scouts both being " Senior Scout Programs" it seems to me. that if we cant let them into the program then varsity teams shouldnt have elections either. since they fall into the same catagory.(This message has been edited by Eagle_23)

[sherminator505]

Welcome to the campfire, Eagle_23!

 

You noticed all of these quotes about traditions and history, and how they can be used on either side of the argument. One thing you might notice in the quotes from OA handbooks in the post immediately preceeding yours is the gradual distancing of OA (and by inference the Boy Scout program) from Exploring. This gradual separation was ever widened until finally, the career exploration components of Exploring were cast off into Learning for Life, and Venturing was formed.

 

What you are now seeing is much the same process happening with Venturing. If we do not recognize the separation tactics we are applying to Venturing (such as the OA election issue), we are consigned to seeing Venturing follow the same path, to the detriment of the BSA as a whole. I sincerely hope I'm wrong, but we appear to be witnessing history repeat itself.

[BadenP]

 

As the old saying goes, "Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it."

 

I agree, there seems to be a movement afoot to regulate Venturing to an almost second class status within the BSA. It seems to based on a ridiculous fear that venturing girls will somehow contaminate the sanctity of the OA and scouting itself. This simplistic notion IMHO, comes mainly from the adult and not the youth members of the lodge. There are already female adult members of the OA and the foundations have not crumbled, yet. It is time for the old time scouters, like myself, to realize we are now living in the 21st century and the times are changing, like it or not. So it becomes a matter of getting on the bandwagon or being left alone stuck in the past, not a difficult choice when you think about it.

[Eagle_23]

It just seems to be that the restriction on venturing units getting elections seems more to keep a tradition more for the sake of tradition rather than a tradition to maintain values. which to me is the wrong reason to have a tradition. thats simply my 2 cents

[sherminator505]

I really think this is less about traditions and more about comfort zones. Again, somebody please tell me why I'm wrong (that means you, Gary).

[nldscout]

This is all about traditions, thats what the BSA program is, unchanged in how many years??

 

So if we start taking females just to be PC, where do we stop?? Gays? Athiest? Crossdressers?

 

Its a slippery slope and we should not go there.

 

Again I say, if venturing wants an Honor Program, make one. Its just that simple.