Uniforms and Scout Spirit

[Krampus]

And there is no "uniform."  Instead there is only BSA-branded clothing, with dozens of combinations across a wide price-range.   A uniform would be - duhh! - uniform.

 

To further confuse things they have a Uniform Inspection Sheet.

 

I hear the next uniform update has cutoffs and flip flops. 

[Eagle94-A1]

I've not waded into this discussion because of mixed feelings on it. But my $.02 worth.

 

Growing up, my troop was a "full uniform" troop. We didn't expect folks to cough up the money right away, be we did expect the uniform. We did allow some non-BSA items in lieu of official stuff.  Some examples of that would be dark socks instead of official socks IF worn with long pants, and the local surplus store had pants in the exact same shade of green except without the cargo pockets. In fact, if you looked at Gen II ODL pants and the surplus pants, only the BSA snaps are different.

 

When we showed up for a BOR, you were expected to be in full uniform. Sometimes folks would borrow items from patrol members to go to their BOR.

 

Why we did this? For us it wearing the uniform WAS showing Scout Spirit. It was a way of saying, "Hey we are Scouts!" and after we became a twin city and had an exchange program between us and the Canadian Scouts, it was 'Hey we are Scouts and part of a "World Wide Program!" The uniform also told folks a little about ourselves and our Scouting adventures, especially the troop totem we wore.

 

It seems as if Scouting doesn't get the same importance as it once had. Sports seems to have taken over. Sure we had athletes it in the troop growing up, but even when they came to meetings straight from practice or games, they had the uniform in hand to change. You try telling that to an athlete nowadays. The ones in my troop seem to not care. I earned my uniform, saving money and getting uniform items as birthday and Christmas gifts. And I bought or received second hand stuff.  Nowadays all you hear about is parents complaining about the cost of the uniform they are buying for their Scout. Don't try to talk them into  buying second hand stuff, let alone having the Scout earn his uniform. Heck, is that even mentioned in the new BSHBs?

[Sentinel947]

I've not waded into this discussion because of mixed feelings on it. But my $.02 worth.

 

Growing up, my troop was a "full uniform" troop. We didn't expect folks to cough up the money right away, be we did expect the uniform. We did allow some non-BSA items in lieu of official stuff.  Some examples of that would be dark socks instead of official socks IF worn with long pants, and the local surplus store had pants in the exact same shade of green except without the cargo pockets. In fact, if you looked at Gen II ODL pants and the surplus pants, only the BSA snaps are different.

 

When we showed up for a BOR, you were expected to be in full uniform. Sometimes folks would borrow items from patrol members to go to their BOR.

 

Why we did this? For us it wearing the uniform WAS showing Scout Spirit. It was a way of saying, "Hey we are Scouts!" and after we became a twin city and had an exchange program between us and the Canadian Scouts, it was 'Hey we are Scouts and part of a "World Wide Program!" The uniform also told folks a little about ourselves and our Scouting adventures, especially the troop totem we wore.

 

It seems as if Scouting doesn't get the same importance as it once had. Sports seems to have taken over. Sure we had athletes it in the troop growing up, but even when they came to meetings straight from practice or games, they had the uniform in hand to change. You try telling that to an athlete nowadays. The ones in my troop seem to not care. I earned my uniform, saving money and getting uniform items as birthday and Christmas gifts. And I bought or received second hand stuff.  Nowadays all you hear about is parents complaining about the cost of the uniform they are buying for their Scout. Don't try to talk them into  buying second hand stuff, let alone having the Scout earn his uniform. Heck, is that even mentioned in the new BSHBs?

That was my experience as a Scout. 2005-2011. So it's not everywhere. I was an athlete and in the band and regularly came to meetings from practice.

 

Even then, there were (and are) Scouts in my troop who never wear the full uniform. A vast majority of the kids do. We let them wear knock of/close enough items (pants and socks) that are more wallet friendly. 

 

What kills me are the wanna be frat boys that wear khaki pants that are salmon colored with docksider style shoes with the uniform. The uniform already isn't one of the prettiest around, blue jeans makes it worse, but salmon colored khakis is the even more ugly. At least it's not gym shorts... 

 

To address the OP: 

 

Insist on the uniform. Your adults need to model it properly and consistently. Be firm, but don't add to the requirements. Can't deny scouts advancement based on whether they do or do not wear the complete uniform. My troop tries to blunt the blow by having a used scouting clothes swap and we also allow cheaper knock of items. Uniform is expensive. Some families can't afford it. 

Edited April 1, 2016 by Sentinel947

[Eagledad]

Barry,

 

I'm not looking for the Scouts to define Scout Spirit either - I'm looking for the whole Scout Spirit requirement to go away and be replaced by a much simpler metric of "How have you lived the Scout Oath and Scout Law".  If a Scout is acting hostilely to other Scouts, I think the question "How is that following the Scout Oath and/or Scout Law" is a much better question to ask that "How is that showing Scout Spirit".  I think asking "How is that Friendly" or "How is that helping other people at all times" are far more powerful questions than asking about Scout Spirit.

 

It's not the Scouts not understanding what Scout Spirit means the worries me - it's the not an insignificant number of adults that we read about on this forum that use Scout Spirit as a cudgel to hold people back for ridiculous things like not wearing a neckerchief or not attending the last meeting that I worry about.

I truly believe that what you just wrote makes complete sense to you. But it's kind of like some of these leadership threads that get started, it seems the author has the subject fully formulated and understood in their mind, but it comes out abstract to everyone else. 

 

That being said, I don't disagree with you in general, I'm an engineer and we like things nice neat and tidy. We like objective input with objective results. However, everything about Scout Spirit is subjective. As I said, objective judgement of Scout Spirit is different for every unit because every Scoutmaster has a different objective perspective of a Scouting Spirit. It is much easier to teach Scoutmasters to hold everyone in the troop accountable to their specific objective standard than to come up with a formula to force adults of all units to look at Scout Spirit the same objectively. These discussions come up because two adults in the same unit disagree, not because a adult and scout disagree. And most of the time, one adult has an agenda other than the good of the scout.

 

National gets challenges from Eagle Scout candidates all the time who feel they are being unfairly held back with the Scout Spirit requirement. I have yet to hear of one case where the scout lost simply because because it is so subjective. But the flaw of your thinking is that most adults, including you and me, think our opinions of Scout Spirit are objective, not subjective. We have to think that way because we otherwise could not guide a scout to his character growth. EVEN THOUGH we want the scout to find his character habits from his reasoning as a result of his experiences, there has to be some kind of compass for "taking care of your scout" to focus on a direction of expectation. Do you see what I mean? It's only when the adult tries to take the independent decision making away from the scout that trouble happens. 

 

Scout Spirit takes a lot of hits when an adult has issue with a scout's advancement, but if National somehow miraculously fix the scout spirit to everyone's agreement, the same adult bent on slowing the scout down will still find another obstacle. Scouts Spirit isn't the problem, the adult is typically the problem. I mean really, "uniform"? Don't blame Scout Spirit for that reach.

 

Barry

[perdidochas]

They are basically looking at ways to hold boys up until the feel a scout is "ready" to advance, but no one can explain what "ready" means as it is "different for each boy". The life bor is the "last chance" to hold a boy back. The current cc has it in his head that I'd we "let" a scout eagle too soon we will never see him again.

 

 

 

In a troop with the attitudes you describe, he's right.  The Scouts will leave as soon as they Eagle.  My oldest son has been fairly actively (unless sports interferes) involved with scouting since he got his Eagle over two years ago.  In fact, he's having much more fun in scouting because of it--no advancement to worry about. 

[Stosh]

My #2 rule for the troop is, "Look and act like a Scout."  Obviously it incorporates both the Scout Law/Oath as well as the uniform issues, BUT they are kept separate!  One can look like a Scout and yet not act like one, and vice versa.  Therefore in my troop the two are separate and held accountable separately tor advancement purposes.

 

Scout Spirit is considered only under the "act like a Scout" part of the rule.

 

The better uniformed patrol ("looks like a Scout") gets to decide on the troop wide games and who does the flags, etc.  That PL functions somewhat like an SPL for the evening because he has done the best with his patrol.  Other subtle perks are given out to the PATROL that looks the most like a Scout. 

[andysmom]

In a troop with the attitudes you describe, he's right.  The Scouts will leave as soon as they Eagle.  My oldest son has been fairly actively (unless sports interferes) involved with scouting since he got his Eagle over two years ago.  In fact, he's having much more fun in scouting because of it--no advancement to worry about.

 

 

My point is that he doesn't know. Most of our scouts do not reach eagle until they are ready to leave for college or they are 18. We have a 17 year old eagle who is at troop meetings unless it is robotics season. This CC is not at meetings so he does not know who is there. He is assuming that Eagles will leave. He has no evidence of that.

 

The other thing I am seeing is that there are some here who do seem to equate wearing the uniform with scout spirit. Of course we encourage our scouts to wear their uniform and as I said, most do. In my opinion, some members of the committee are looking for "legitimate" ways of keeping boys from advancing. Since they are being challenged on the "they are just not ready" or "they are not mature enough", they are moving onto the "show scout spirit" requirement and saying that a boy isn't showing scout spirit if he doesn't wear his neckerchief or doesn't take off his sweatshirt during meetings, and therefor have a reason to hold him back. Personally, I think it is something to discuss, but not a reason to hold a scout back. I am not always sure I interpret the BSA policy correctly so o co,e here to see how others interpret it.

[Krampus]

The other thing I am seeing is that there are some here who do seem to equate wearing the uniform with scout spirit. Of course we encourage our scouts to wear their uniform and as I said, most do. In my opinion, some members of the committee are looking for "legitimate" ways of keeping boys from advancing. Since they are being challenged on the "they are just not ready" or "they are not mature enough", they are moving onto the "show scout spirit" requirement and saying that a boy isn't showing scout spirit if he doesn't wear his neckerchief or doesn't take off his sweatshirt during meetings, and therefor have a reason to hold him back. Personally, I think it is something to discuss, but not a reason to hold a scout back. I am not always sure I interpret the BSA policy correctly so o co,e here to see how others interpret it.

 

That's just it, the committee has zero legitimate way to keep a boy from advancing UNLESS he is has been put on probation for a violation of BSA rules. It is all right here in the Guide to Advancement. All the SM need do is send this to the CC and ask him to cite where in the GTA that the committee has the right to hold back a Scout in good standing in the unit PROVIDED the SM has signed off that the Scout has completed all requirements for the rank.

 

In fact, send me your CC's email and I am happy to sent him this quote from the GTA:  

 

"8.0.0.4 Wearing the Uniform—or Neat in Appearance

It is preferred a Scout be in full field uniform for any board of review. He should wear as much of it as he owns, and it should be as correct as possible, with the badges worn properly. It may be the uniform as the members of his troop, team, crew, or ship wear it. If wearing all or part of the uniform is impractical for whatever reason, the candidate should be clean and neat in his appearance and dressed appropriately, according to his means, for the milestone marked by the occasion. Regardless of unit, district, or council expectations or 8.0.0.0 Section 8. 56 | GUIDE TO ADVANCEMENT rules, boards of review shall not reject candidates solely for reasons related to uniforming or attire, as long as they are dressed to the above description. Candidates shall not be required to purchase uniforming or clothing such as coats and ties to participate in a board of review."

 

I totally get wanting to churn out Scouts that are well-prepared. We do the same thing, HOWEVER, we address his preparedness BEFORE the BOR...or even SMC. Once he's gone through the SMC you can bet he's prepared and met the requirements.

 

This guy is wrong...period! The SM needs to step up and confront this guy.

Edited April 1, 2016 by Krampus

[Eagledad]

First impressions are still important, however, and they have a lasting effect for quite some time.  That is a lesson everyone has to learn on their own.  My boys are not "required" to wear a uniform nor wear it correctly, but if they wish to garner respect as a scout, one had better take the uniform into consideration.  It is also important among my boys that if the uniform is worn it is worn correctly.  Yes, I have seen boys in my troop during flags use the civilian salute of hand over heart because all they had was the uniform shirt.

 

Uniforms are optional, but so is any respect one might receive because of wearing one.  Eventually a boy wearing an Insane Clown Posse t-shirt will probably not be recognized, respected or even taken seriously as a scout by others.  If they learn that lesson from outside the troop, it is far more effective than the SM making a weekly issue out of it. 

My apologies to the mods that this response really belongs in the Uniform Forum. I will gladly accept any action you decide appropriate for my post.

 

Over the years as a adult leader instructor, I've experienced two subjects that seem to challenge adult leaders more than any other subject, including patrol method. Those two subjects are discipline and uniform. They raise above just about anything else in the normal scouting environment because adults approach them from the emotional perspective and emotion is a strong force to change.

 

In the case of the uniform, I find adults stumble around the subject just as I see stosh stumbling around. Stosh suggest that a scout will learn to respect the uniform by the respect he receives from others around him. And yet Stosh is quick to discount guidance or the Scoutmaster's respect, the one person who just have some insight to understanding of the subject. 

 

I select stosh only because his post is representative of 99% of scouters in the BSA. Part of the reason we struggle with the uniform is because the BSA tells us that it is one of the Eight most important methods or applications a boy uses to grow into a man. And yet, they come right back and say "but it is not required. Well, that's interesting. 

 

Another reason adults struggle with the uniform is because most have an emotional relationship with it. Some adults believe by it because of their experience in the military, law enforcement, sports or whatever. Other adults have negative view of the uniform and are quite happy to let that part of the paramilitary program go. I had once such ASM who was involved in campus anti-authority protest back in the 60s. 

 

As I have said in my Scout Spirit post, units tend to follow the Scoutmaster's approach of the uniform. Which is fine except the reasoning behind the Scoutmasters approach doesn't always make sense among outsiders. Consider stosh who doesn't require his scouts to wear the uniform or wear it correctly. Yet his next sentence is a warning that if a scout does chose to wear the uniform, he better wear it correctly. I'm sure that makes sense in stosh's mind, but those of us on the outside (at least me) is scratching our heads. But as I said, just about all of us struggle with how to use the uniform method. 

 

It's hard to tell in his post, but I think stosh is correct in that he is trying to give the scout the responsibility for justifying his decision. But where we adults struggle in giving scouts credit for ambiguous decisions is the lack of reference for making a "correct" choice. Stosh like to suggest the adults stay out of it. Fine, but scouts then miss out from wisdom that gives them some sense of direction. Freedom and independence can be harmful just as harmful as strict direction when ignorance sends a scout the wrong direction. 

 

Without trying to guide leaders to how I use the uniform in our troop when I am a SM, I try to pull them back some from their emotional tie with THE Uniform dress and instead consider how to use the Method as working toward the 3 Aims (Character, fitness and citizenship). I also try to encourage adults look at these things from a boy perspective in an attempt to sway them away from nebulous or vague objectives like a scouts learning to respect the BSA by simply wearing the uniform. If a scout doesn't like camping, the uniform isn't going to change that. On the other side, there is the reference that stosh points out that if a scout wants some respect from scout outside the troop, the uniform itself does have some power of influence. 

 

What I think Stosh was trying to say is that development of character comes best when a scout rationalizes changing character habits by the experiences of previous decisions. My only advice is that the Scoutmaster should have an opinion so give scouts a starting place or reference to consider and compare against or with their own reasoning. In fact, I think scouts want an opinion from the Scoutmaster, even if they disagree with it.

 

The uniform IS one of the Eight Methods for developing boys into men of character. I wish the BSA hadn't said scouts don't have to wear the uniform because that guidance is subversive to the power of using the other methods to toward the Three Aims. If scouts don't have to wear the uniform, do they really have to use the patrol method?

 

And, quite honestly there is growth in trying to justify cost of uniforming instead of just letting scouts off the hook completely. I have seen scouts  use the cost issue dishonestly (wrong choice)  to justify not wearing the uniform. And yet, the Scout Handbook used to be clear on how a scout should dress for specific scouting activities. Has that changed?

 

I would enjoy a discussion of why each of us think the uniform benefits the scouts. Like stosh, I like each individual scout to make that choice based on his personal experience and reasoning. Some scoutmasters don't trust giving scouts that independence and it is too bad. I said before  that I have yet to observe a perfectly well dressed truly boy run troop. But doesn't mean the troop doesn't have guidelines and expectations, mine certainly does. It just means the scouts are given the time, responsibility and mentoring to figure it out. Just like with the other 7 methods. 

 

Sorry to go off on a different rabbit trail. Mods, its all yours.

 

Barry

[NJCubScouter]

And there is no "uniform."  Instead there is only BSA-branded clothing, with dozens of combinations across a wide price-range.   A uniform would be - duhh! - uniform.

This is what "uniform" means in 2016, I guess. Maybe we should start calling it a Somewhat Similar instead of a Uniform. (Which reminds me of the old lawyer line, How can you call this a Brief? It looks more like a Length to me.)

[TAHAWK]

I think there is no need to call it anything but what it is: "B.S.A. branded clothing."

[DuctTape]

I likely posted this anecdote before in uniform threads. I apologize in advance if I have.

 

When my father was in scouts, neither he nor the other boys had much money. They saved, earned what they could for camping gear. Most of it was made by them, including their "uniform". Each boy made an armband of fabric which had the troop # and a patrol emblem. They wore it over their regular clothing. Since all the boys in the patrol had the same armband, it was uniform.

[ianwilkins]

Scout spirit is something inside, not outside. What you are, not what you wear.

 

Do you use the expression "all fur coat and no knickers"? Yes, it probably doesn't quite fit, but it popped into my head so...

 

Ian

[Stosh]

Scout spirit is something inside, not outside. What you are, not what you wear.

 

Do you use the expression "all fur coat and no knickers"? Yes, it probably doesn't quite fit, but it popped into my head so...

 

Ian

 

I've always referred to it as Banana Republic Generals. 

 

All show, no go.

 

I think if we were to go with the fur coat and knickers, it would get Americanized to trench coat and pants, and that would not be good. 

[Krampus]

I think if we were to go with the fur coat and knickers, it would get Americanized to trench coat and pants, and that would not be good. 

 

Clearly you've never been to 42nd Street.