Is today's scouting too prissy?

[bwest64098]

Incident Information Report

http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/680-016_fillable.pdf

I love the "Near Miss Incident Information Report" http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/680-017_fillable.pdf

 

If it was a "miss" then nothing happened. So... is this to be a form of "What ifs?" I was on a roller coaster where I came within about 1 foot of the wall as I went by at 30 - 40 mph. Is that a "Near Miss"?

 

This shit cracks me up!

[bwest64098]

June 11, 2008 LSSR, IA we loose 4 scouts to a tornado. BSA response: spend hundreds of thousands to build storm shelters within 15 minutes of all areas of the camp to house 1000 in case another tornado rolls through that exact same valley. What does BSA do for Camp Cedars, Camp Eagle, Camp Wa-Kon-Da ? Nothing until a tornado rolls through them. Unfortunatly an argument can be made that the less Texas knows about what is happening in the program all the better.

Heart of America Council, Kansas City area, has 2 long term camping facilities. 1 facility had a FEMA approved storm shelter at every camp-site last year. The other camp had their shelters finished this last off season. As far as I know none of the money came from National for these projects.

[le Voyageur]

Per the OP's question... a strong yes. I see the softness, and lack of outdoor skills everytime I take a crew out on the river.... I've had crews in the past loaded with Eagles who's outdoor's skill sets were no better then Tenderfoots! Would have to spend the week just covering the basics....

[BadenP]

It isn't that scouting has become too prissy but that the lazy, fat , scout leaders whose idea of the outdoor experience is driving to a local beach or park and sitting on their padded camping lounge chairs guzzling down soda chips coffee while the boys run wild with no agenda to follow. This was the case at a district camporee our crew was asked to help out with, all but two SM's sat around and did NOTHING, all of them 300 lbs or more while the crew and the two SM's created an activities schedule for them while I talked to the SM's sitting around about their responsibilities to the boys and giving them heck for their laziness and sloth. It is the quality of the current troop leaders, their lack of useful training, and that the outdoors to most of them is to go find a place to hang out and plan or do nothing . Online training for the most part a joke when it comes to preparing a new leader to lead a unit of boys down the scouting trail. That's why the BSA membership will continue to shrink, units will fold, and the demise of scouting will be imminent . Time for a radical change of direction for scouting starting with National. The BSA needs to develop high quality leaders and programs if they hope to compete with all the other youth organizations available today.

[perdidochas]

It isn't that scouting has become too prissy but that the lazy, fat , scout leaders whose idea of the outdoor experience is driving to a local beach or park and sitting on their padded camping lounge chairs guzzling down soda chips coffee while the boys run wild with no agenda to follow. This was the case at a district camporee our crew was asked to help out with, all but two SM's sat around and did NOTHING, all of them 300 lbs or more while the crew and the two SM's created an activities schedule for them while I talked to the SM's sitting around about their responsibilities to the boys and giving them heck for their laziness and sloth. It is the quality of the current troop leaders, their lack of useful training, and that the outdoors to most of them is to go find a place to hang out and plan or do nothing . Online training for the most part a joke when it comes to preparing a new leader to lead a unit of boys down the scouting trail. That's why the BSA membership will continue to shrink, units will fold, and the demise of scouting will be imminent . Time for a radical change of direction for scouting starting with National. The BSA needs to develop high quality leaders and programs if they hope to compete with all the other youth organizations available today.

Camporee activities should be set weeks before the Camporee. Sounds like the problem was the planning committee.

 

Online training would have been better than the 'live" training I had for IOLS. The "highlight" was when they showed us that we should use matchlite charcoal in chimney charcoal starters. Did learn a bit about LNT and backpacking, but most was a waster of time for this former Tenderfoot. I've had Safe Swim both online and offline, and I've learned more from the online version. It was complete. Took about the same amount of time. I do agree training should be better. I wish all but IOLS was online, and that AOLS (Advanced Outdoor Skills) was a requirement.

[Brewmeister]

http://www.scoutmastercg.com/nostalg...e-of-scouting/

 

Some think we've diminished the ideals of ’manliness’ , traditional patriotism, bootstrap initiative, competitiveness and rigor in achievement but have they really examined what those ideas actually mean? Scouting does not consider that these things are scarce, unobtainable qualities, but that each individual Scout has vast potential to develop them .

 

We wrangle and argue over measurements; what is ‘true’ manliness, patriotism, achievement? Instead of a system of measurement Scouting sets a star to travel by: the full realization of each individual Scout’s potential. Our principal aim is that individual ideal; interdependent, useful human beings who become active citizens and make the world a better place.

 

Detractors invoke creeping ‘political correctness’ and suggest that we have watered down our decisiveness and morality. This old chestnut of an argument was used to condemn innovation and change since the dawn of civilization; “Romans are so trendy and effete – what ever happened to good old Etruscans?†In their opinion all we have to do is reprint the original edition of the Scout handbook and return to our imagined ideal past that, of course, never existed. Nostalgia is pleasant, but it is not history. Our forebears had to muddle through the same sorts of flaws and pressures we encounter. They did there best and so can we.

 

Scouting has always been, and will always remain, something that principally happens when we are out-of-doors camping and trekking our way through the natural world. This is our tradition, but we don’t do follow tradition blindly.

 

We don’t go camping as a romantic, aesthetic, throwback to the good old days. We go camping because it is the most useful way to achieve the aims of Scouting. We use patrols and engage youth in leadership not because it’s a quaint, anachronistic, tradition but because that’s how we achieve the aims of Scouting.

 

Most importantly we do these things because that is what our Scouts want to do! Despite a century of societal and cultural changes there’s not much difference between present day Scouts and those few that camped out on Brownsea island at the dawn of the Scouting movement.

That’s our past, present and future all rolled into one.

 

Our Scouts neither need, nor do they particularly want, big flashy programs and entertainments. We aren't trying to entertain, we want to engage our Scouts.

 

Scouting is relevant, and it will always be, so long as we don’t make it into a historic re-enactment, blindly follow tradition, and resist the temptation to misdirect it’s simple intentions.

 

Scouting is not about recreating the past, we are looking toward the future.

[fred johnson]

http://www.scoutmastercg.com/nostalg...e-of-scouting/

 

Some think we've diminished the ideals of ’manliness’ , traditional patriotism, bootstrap initiative, competitiveness and rigor in achievement but have they really examined what those ideas actually mean? Scouting does not consider that these things are scarce, unobtainable qualities, but that each individual Scout has vast potential to develop them .

 

We wrangle and argue over measurements; what is ‘true’ manliness, patriotism, achievement? Instead of a system of measurement Scouting sets a star to travel by: the full realization of each individual Scout’s potential. Our principal aim is that individual ideal; interdependent, useful human beings who become active citizens and make the world a better place.

 

Detractors invoke creeping ‘political correctness’ and suggest that we have watered down our decisiveness and morality. This old chestnut of an argument was used to condemn innovation and change since the dawn of civilization; “Romans are so trendy and effete – what ever happened to good old Etruscans?†In their opinion all we have to do is reprint the original edition of the Scout handbook and return to our imagined ideal past that, of course, never existed. Nostalgia is pleasant, but it is not history. Our forebears had to muddle through the same sorts of flaws and pressures we encounter. They did there best and so can we.

 

Scouting has always been, and will always remain, something that principally happens when we are out-of-doors camping and trekking our way through the natural world. This is our tradition, but we don’t do follow tradition blindly.

 

We don’t go camping as a romantic, aesthetic, throwback to the good old days. We go camping because it is the most useful way to achieve the aims of Scouting. We use patrols and engage youth in leadership not because it’s a quaint, anachronistic, tradition but because that’s how we achieve the aims of Scouting.

 

Most importantly we do these things because that is what our Scouts want to do! Despite a century of societal and cultural changes there’s not much difference between present day Scouts and those few that camped out on Brownsea island at the dawn of the Scouting movement.

That’s our past, present and future all rolled into one.

 

Our Scouts neither need, nor do they particularly want, big flashy programs and entertainments. We aren't trying to entertain, we want to engage our Scouts.

 

Scouting is relevant, and it will always be, so long as we don’t make it into a historic re-enactment, blindly follow tradition, and resist the temptation to misdirect it’s simple intentions.

 

Scouting is not about recreating the past, we are looking toward the future.

Great article ... Fully agree.

 

Please note that I am not an advocate for re-creating the past. My original post was about having a strong character and to know the jobs such that you can say it as it is. (John Wayne scouter). Likewise, there is a value in being laid back and letting things work out (letting the scouts solve the issue) and not getting overly uptight. (Peter Fonda scouter).

 

I was frustrated at the time with the "Felix Unger" scouters and the "Donald Trump" scouters that I was dealing with.

[Kudu]

Per the OP's question... a strong yes. I see the softness' date=' and lack of outdoor skills everytime I take a crew out on the river.... I've had crews in the past loaded with Eagles who's outdoor's skill sets were no better then Tenderfoots! [/quote']

 

Tenderfoot is about right.

 

In what Baden-Powell called Scouting, every rank is tested by a backwoods Journey of increasing difficulty.

 

In some countries, the test of Second Class is an eight mile backwoods map work Journey without adults or older Scouts to guide you. How many Eagle Scouts have followed a map & compass for eight miles without two-deep helicopters? One in ten thousand?

 

According to Baden-Powell, the test of a First Class Scout is a fourteen mile overnight by backpack or boat, solo or with another Second Class Scout.

 

Likewise after First Class, most Journey tests are either land or boat:

 

http://inquiry.net/advancement/traditional/journey_requirements.htm

 

However, the whole point of Camping Merit Badge requirement 9b is to get indoor prissy boys to Eagle without a single night of what Baden-Powell called "camping."

 

Correct me if I'm wrong: Camping is the ONLY Merit Badge that lets you do something else if you don't like the subject matter (walk into the woods with a pack on your back)!

 

Imagine how popular the BSA would be if we offered a "requirement 9b" for EVERY Merit Badge!

 

"Oh, so you don't like Personal Management because you are a normal boy? That's OK! Here, instead you can ride your bike around for four hours and then eat cup cakes while floating downstream on an inner tube, just like you did for 'Camping' Merit Badge requirement 9b!"

 

 

 

[NJCubScouter]

Per the OP's question... a strong yes. I see the softness' date=' and lack of outdoor skills everytime I take a crew out on the river.... I've had crews in the past loaded with Eagles who's outdoor's skill sets were no better then Tenderfoots! [/quote']

 

Tenderfoot is about right.

 

In what Baden-Powell called Scouting, every rank is tested by a backwoods Journey of increasing difficulty.

 

In some countries, the test of Second Class is an eight mile backwoods map work Journey without adults or older Scouts to guide you. How many Eagle Scouts have followed a map & compass for eight miles without two-deep helicopters? One in ten thousand?

 

According to Baden-Powell, the test of a First Class Scout is a fourteen mile overnight by backpack or boat, solo or with another Second Class Scout.

 

Likewise after First Class, most Journey tests are either land or boat:

 

http://inquiry.net/advancement/traditional/journey_requirements.htm

 

However, the whole point of Camping Merit Badge requirement 9b is to get indoor prissy boys to Eagle without a single night of what Baden-Powell called "camping."

 

Correct me if I'm wrong: Camping is the ONLY Merit Badge that lets you do something else if you don't like the subject matter (walk into the woods with a pack on your back)!

 

Imagine how popular the BSA would be if we offered a "requirement 9b" for EVERY Merit Badge!

 

"Oh, so you don't like Personal Management because you are a normal boy? That's OK! Here, instead you can ride your bike around for four hours and then eat cup cakes while floating downstream on an inner tube, just like you did for 'Camping' Merit Badge requirement 9b!"

 

 

I don't why I even bother, but...

 

 

 

Kudu, isn't the "subject matter" of Camping Merit Badge, um, camping? Requirement 9a requires the Scouts to go camping. Requirement 9b makes backpacking (i.e. "walking into the woods with a pack on your back") an optional additional activity to do on one of the camping trips. But that does not make backpacking "the" subject manner of the merit badge. Backpacking is the subject matter of the Backpacking Merit Badge. Hiking is the subject matter of the Hiking Merit Badge. Was backpacking ever REQUIRED to earn the Camping Merit Badge? If I recall correctly from 40 years ago (which I might not), when I earned Camping MB I don't think I had ever been backpacking. I did later, at Philmont and many times on the Appalachian Trail, and as a result I earned the Hiking MB (the Backpacking MB did not exist when I was a Boy Scout.) But the point is, you do have to go camping to earn the Camping MB.

[Kudu]

Per the OP's question... a strong yes. I see the softness' date=' and lack of outdoor skills everytime I take a crew out on the river.... I've had crews in the past loaded with Eagles who's outdoor's skill sets were no better then Tenderfoots! [/quote']

 

Tenderfoot is about right.

 

In what Baden-Powell called Scouting, every rank is tested by a backwoods Journey of increasing difficulty.

 

In some countries, the test of Second Class is an eight mile backwoods map work Journey without adults or older Scouts to guide you. How many Eagle Scouts have followed a map & compass for eight miles without two-deep helicopters? One in ten thousand?

 

According to Baden-Powell, the test of a First Class Scout is a fourteen mile overnight by backpack or boat, solo or with another Second Class Scout.

 

Likewise after First Class, most Journey tests are either land or boat:

 

http://inquiry.net/advancement/traditional/journey_requirements.htm

 

However, the whole point of Camping Merit Badge requirement 9b is to get indoor prissy boys to Eagle without a single night of what Baden-Powell called "camping."

 

Correct me if I'm wrong: Camping is the ONLY Merit Badge that lets you do something else if you don't like the subject matter (walk into the woods with a pack on your back)!

 

Imagine how popular the BSA would be if we offered a "requirement 9b" for EVERY Merit Badge!

 

"Oh, so you don't like Personal Management because you are a normal boy? That's OK! Here, instead you can ride your bike around for four hours and then eat cup cakes while floating downstream on an inner tube, just like you did for 'Camping' Merit Badge requirement 9b!"

 

 

My post was clear: In what Baden-Powell called Scouting, sleeping in a canvas town did not get you much past Tenderfoot.

 

Le Voyageur's assessment is literally the same as that of Baden-Powell.

 

Camping Merit Badge requirement 9b dumbs down the previous requirement 8b: "On one of these camping trips, hike 1.5 miles or more each way to and from your campsite. Pack your own gear plus your share of patrol gear and food."

 

The international standard for First Class (including the Scoutcraft program specified in our Congressional Charter) is 14 or 15 miles without adult supervision.

 

To walk three (3) miles in the woods with a pack on your back was too high a standard for Eagle Scouts.

 

Prissy much?

[Eagledad]

Well, ok, I'm enjoying the context of the discussion very much. It's rare to get in deep philosophical and intelectual discussions on this forum because emotions tend to take over. Brewmeister's post is profound to me because it says the issue isn't about tradition and trying to get back to the old ways, it's about understanding why some of the old ways worked. At the root, boys of today are the same of boys of yesterday and we need to understand what makes them tick to understand why the program is more prissy (sissy) or not. I do appreciate Kudus part of the discussion, but sometimes quotes without reasoning just aren't enough. Because of the challenges of WWII, my dad was not only an Eagle, but also a teenage Scoutmaster of his troop back in the early 40's. Through him I can learn what actual scouting was like at least that far back. When I ask him about hiking 14 miles for 1st class, well he laughed. Mind you my dad's troop rarely used vehicles to go camping because of the cost of fuel, they met at the church and hike out of town to their camp site. So it's not like they didn't hike. They were literly a back packing troop. I have a lot of respect for Kudu's vision of scouting and mean no disrepect, but how far back do we have to go to not be prissy or sissy? How far do our sons have to hike alone in the woods over night to prove themselves? As Brewmeister says "We go camping because it is the most useful way of achieving the aims of Scouting". Everything else is just clutter that slows down or even stops that process. I really think that is what Kudu is also trying to say. I would love to ask more questions, but my pragmatic nature sometimes pushes discussions off the edge. So I will just watch and enjoy. Barry

[NJCubScouter]

Per the OP's question... a strong yes. I see the softness' date=' and lack of outdoor skills everytime I take a crew out on the river.... I've had crews in the past loaded with Eagles who's outdoor's skill sets were no better then Tenderfoots! [/quote']

 

Tenderfoot is about right.

 

In what Baden-Powell called Scouting, every rank is tested by a backwoods Journey of increasing difficulty.

 

In some countries, the test of Second Class is an eight mile backwoods map work Journey without adults or older Scouts to guide you. How many Eagle Scouts have followed a map & compass for eight miles without two-deep helicopters? One in ten thousand?

 

According to Baden-Powell, the test of a First Class Scout is a fourteen mile overnight by backpack or boat, solo or with another Second Class Scout.

 

Likewise after First Class, most Journey tests are either land or boat:

 

http://inquiry.net/advancement/traditional/journey_requirements.htm

 

However, the whole point of Camping Merit Badge requirement 9b is to get indoor prissy boys to Eagle without a single night of what Baden-Powell called "camping."

 

Correct me if I'm wrong: Camping is the ONLY Merit Badge that lets you do something else if you don't like the subject matter (walk into the woods with a pack on your back)!

 

Imagine how popular the BSA would be if we offered a "requirement 9b" for EVERY Merit Badge!

 

"Oh, so you don't like Personal Management because you are a normal boy? That's OK! Here, instead you can ride your bike around for four hours and then eat cup cakes while floating downstream on an inner tube, just like you did for 'Camping' Merit Badge requirement 9b!"

 

 

Kudu, I agree with you that the three-mile backpacking requirement for Camping MB should have been kept, rather than being replaced by an "optional" version. I was not aware that it had been there, since (after some digging through the Internet) that change seems to have been made in 2000, when I was still a Cub Scout leader and not yet re-involved in the Boy Scout program. And although I don't really remember from 40 years ago, I suspect that when I earned the Camping MB way back when, there was a requirement to hike with a pack to a campsite. I wasn't even considering that "backpacking."

 

The thing is, I don't understand why we can't have discussions like this without someone(s) using words like prissy, sissy, or (though I haven't seen it lately) cupcake. If we think some of the old requirements should be brought back, we can just say so, and tell National, without needing to "label" the program, or the kids.

[Brewmeister]

Well, ok, I'm enjoying the context of the discussion very much. It's rare to get in deep philosophical and intelectual discussions on this forum because emotions tend to take over. Brewmeister's post is profound to me because it says the issue isn't about tradition and trying to get back to the old ways, it's about understanding why some of the old ways worked. At the root, boys of today are the same of boys of yesterday and we need to understand what makes them tick to understand why the program is more prissy (sissy) or not. I do appreciate Kudus part of the discussion, but sometimes quotes without reasoning just aren't enough. Because of the challenges of WWII, my dad was not only an Eagle, but also a teenage Scoutmaster of his troop back in the early 40's. Through him I can learn what actual scouting was like at least that far back. When I ask him about hiking 14 miles for 1st class, well he laughed. Mind you my dad's troop rarely used vehicles to go camping because of the cost of fuel, they met at the church and hike out of town to their camp site. So it's not like they didn't hike. They were literly a back packing troop. I have a lot of respect for Kudu's vision of scouting and mean no disrepect, but how far back do we have to go to not be prissy or sissy? How far do our sons have to hike alone in the woods over night to prove themselves? As Brewmeister says "We go camping because it is the most useful way of achieving the aims of Scouting". Everything else is just clutter that slows down or even stops that process. I really think that is what Kudu is also trying to say. I would love to ask more questions, but my pragmatic nature sometimes pushes discussions off the edge. So I will just watch and enjoy. Barry

Just to clarify, I am quoting in full an article by Clarke Greene, from scoutmastercg.com, who I think has a great vision for implementing traditional, boy-led, patrol-based scouting in a modern era.

[Eagledad]

Well, ok, I'm enjoying the context of the discussion very much. It's rare to get in deep philosophical and intelectual discussions on this forum because emotions tend to take over. Brewmeister's post is profound to me because it says the issue isn't about tradition and trying to get back to the old ways, it's about understanding why some of the old ways worked. At the root, boys of today are the same of boys of yesterday and we need to understand what makes them tick to understand why the program is more prissy (sissy) or not. I do appreciate Kudus part of the discussion, but sometimes quotes without reasoning just aren't enough. Because of the challenges of WWII, my dad was not only an Eagle, but also a teenage Scoutmaster of his troop back in the early 40's. Through him I can learn what actual scouting was like at least that far back. When I ask him about hiking 14 miles for 1st class, well he laughed. Mind you my dad's troop rarely used vehicles to go camping because of the cost of fuel, they met at the church and hike out of town to their camp site. So it's not like they didn't hike. They were literly a back packing troop. I have a lot of respect for Kudu's vision of scouting and mean no disrepect, but how far back do we have to go to not be prissy or sissy? How far do our sons have to hike alone in the woods over night to prove themselves? As Brewmeister says "We go camping because it is the most useful way of achieving the aims of Scouting". Everything else is just clutter that slows down or even stops that process. I really think that is what Kudu is also trying to say. I would love to ask more questions, but my pragmatic nature sometimes pushes discussions off the edge. So I will just watch and enjoy. Barry

I was pretty sure you were quoting the article, but without quotation marks, it was safer to quote your post. Thanks for the clarification. Barry

[Kudu]

Well, ok, I'm enjoying the context of the discussion very much. It's rare to get in deep philosophical and intelectual discussions on this forum because emotions tend to take over. Brewmeister's post is profound to me because it says the issue isn't about tradition and trying to get back to the old ways, it's about understanding why some of the old ways worked. At the root, boys of today are the same of boys of yesterday and we need to understand what makes them tick to understand why the program is more prissy (sissy) or not. I do appreciate Kudus part of the discussion, but sometimes quotes without reasoning just aren't enough. Because of the challenges of WWII, my dad was not only an Eagle, but also a teenage Scoutmaster of his troop back in the early 40's. Through him I can learn what actual scouting was like at least that far back. When I ask him about hiking 14 miles for 1st class, well he laughed. Mind you my dad's troop rarely used vehicles to go camping because of the cost of fuel, they met at the church and hike out of town to their camp site. So it's not like they didn't hike. They were literly a back packing troop. I have a lot of respect for Kudu's vision of scouting and mean no disrepect, but how far back do we have to go to not be prissy or sissy? How far do our sons have to hike alone in the woods over night to prove themselves? As Brewmeister says "We go camping because it is the most useful way of achieving the aims of Scouting". Everything else is just clutter that slows down or even stops that process. I really think that is what Kudu is also trying to say. I would love to ask more questions, but my pragmatic nature sometimes pushes discussions off the edge. So I will just watch and enjoy. Barry

Moved To