evmori Posted March 17, 2004 Share Posted March 17, 2004 Makes sense, dan. Thanks Bob White, Huh? Ed Mori Troop 1 1 Peter 4:10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VentureScoutNY Posted March 17, 2004 Share Posted March 17, 2004 Exactly right FOG "Maybe the problem is that Scouting has lost its importance to many because there is too much emphasis on badges and not enough on growing into a man" Many scouts, all they are interested in is earning badges and in my opinion the program to them has become very competitive. Not that competition is a bad thing, it can be used positivly between patrols etc... But individual competition in some ways can hurt. Scouting is working as a team, older scouts teaching and passing on skills to younger scouts. When it gets down to 1 scout agaisnt another scout competing who will earn the most badges the competition blurs the real meaning of earning something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KA6BSA Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 Recently we have really tried in our troop to use the "correct terminology" of Field and Activity uniform but there seems to be just too much familiarity everywhere with the Class A and B terms to make any headway in changing over. Reminds me of the effort to convert to the metric system! It isn't just the boys or the adults in our unit it is everybody in the district and the council hanging onto the A and B designations. And it didn't help either when our unit commissioner, who is a great scouter, has repeatedly insisted that "there is only ONE uniform, you are either in uniform or not" and that the Activity Uniform was actually just an Activity Outfit. The issue goes even deeper in other troops as you can see by searching for the terms on the internet... you find out there is commonly a Class A, B, C and D uniform in many troop rules, with a complicated heirarchy going from full dress with hats sashes and medals, through various combinations of items down to just a T-shirt and jeans. In those systems the Class A we are used to is actually at their B level and our B "outfit" is a Class D! Why not a Class F to just give up and Fail! Just about the time our troop leaders feel the effort at using the Field and Activity words is working then someone gets confused and says it backwards at a Court of Honor where everybody hears it (probably thinking the word Field means out in the bushes), and we slide all the way back to square one! Seems to me the term Field is fine from a historical (military) point of view but it is is really an unfortunate term for people not quite sure and trying to remember which uniform is which. After all this effort and some little success I am sure when we get to summer camp the staff will be saying "Class A's required for dinner!" This issue makes a neat forum topic but in real life it is a difficult change to accomplish in your unit.(This message has been edited by KA6BSA) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJCubScouter Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 The SM of my son's troop has a slightly different spin on the "Class A uniform" thing. He regularly reminds the boys to wear their Class A uniforms; actually, since he usually says this in connection with a particular upcoming event, what he actually says most of the time is "Remember, Class A's!" and the boys are supposed to understand what this means. (I suspect that some of them don't, but they get someone else to "interpret" for them.) Somewhat oddly though, he is not using "Class A" to mean "as opposed to Class B." In fact, the term "Class B" does not seem to be used at all in the troop. Perhaps not coincidentally, there is no established "activity uniform." Uniforms are not worn on weekend camping trips and at summer camp (except at mealtimes and camp-wide assemblies.) When the SM is discussing a non-troop-meeting event where uniforms ARE to be worn, that is when he will usually give the "reminder" about "Class A's." Those events would be such as district-wide events (especially those indoors), the recent trip to the Battleship New Jersey, COH's, Scout Sunday, etc.) When he says "Class A's," I think he is just reminding the boys to wear the uniform, clarifying that it is to be worn at any events where that might not be clear, and also reminding the boys that uniform means "full uniform." Yes, I know that there really is no such thing as an "incomplete uniform," either you are wearing a uniform or you aren't, but I don't think the boys in my troop are unique in sometimes "forgetting" their Scout pants, hats or neckerchiefs." It is "understood" that "Class A's!" means "wear your uniform, and that means the whole thing, not just the shirt." I guess this should be for another thread, but the business of Scout pants comes as something of a "culture shock" for most of the boys and their parents. Almost all of the Cub packs around here (including the one my son was in)basically ignore the existence of the uniform pants, and that goes for both boys and leaders. So when they join the troop, suddenly there is this "new thing" called Scout pants. Our uniform closet routinely lacks pants other than the smallest boy size, but one way or another, everybody (boys and new ASM's) gets the pants within a few weeks of joining the troop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Old Guy Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 I be happy if the Scouts or their parents would at least make an effort to look like they are wearing a uniform. If not the Scout pants, then go to Old Navy or Burlington Coat Factory or the Surplus store and get a pair of olive green pants that FIT PROPERLY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SR540Beaver Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 NJ, I have to hand it to our old Cubmaster. I've never seen the man at a Scouting event when he was not in a full uniform. However, when new boys joined as Cubs, he told the parents that they really needed a shirt, but pants were optional. I don't understand why so many Scouters weenie out on scout pants. But I agree that the bad habit is set in Cubs and carried on into Scouts. Hey, if they were not important in Cubs, why should they be important now? Too many people view Cubs as "just" Cubs. It is fun and games, nothing serious. This is when they are the most impressionable and pliable. Now is the time to get them into good habits. I was guilty of not buying my son scout pants when he was a Cud because he would have been the only boy in the Pack who had them or wore them. I did buy him a pair for cross over and have really pushed him to wear them to his Troop meetings. It does help that the old man wears a complete uniform to everything, but he does offer some resistance. It does not help that our SPL usually wears wind pants and one of the former PL's walks around with his shirt tail hanging out all the time. In short, I'd really like to see Cub leaders setting an example of wearing a full uniform and encouraging the Cubs to do the same. By the time they cross over, hopefully a pattern would be established. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Old Guy Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 I'd like to know whatever happened to the idea of "looking nice." It is one thing if kids wear a clean pair of Wranglers (that fit) with their Scout shirt but that isn't what I see. What do I see? Sweat pants, not just sweat pants but raggedy sweats. Basketball shorts in any of a zillion colors. We have one Scout who wears basketball shorts when it is 20 degrees outside. Dirty, filthy pants with mud and crud on them. One of the duties that seem to have been abandoned by many parents is teaching their children that different activities have different styles of acceptable dress. Then again, many parents don't seem to understand this. There's a dad involved with my daughter's Girl Scout troop who lives in the standard $500,000 home, drives a $40,000 SUV and goes on a cruise with the wife every spring. What is unusual about this guy is that he shows up at the father-daughter dance in a t-shirt and jeans. Nearly every other dad there is in a suit, some in tuxedeos. Not this guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VentureScoutNY Posted March 19, 2004 Share Posted March 19, 2004 FOG I don't understand either. "Looking nice" is a far cry of todays youth. Since I am 19, I have to deal with my age group ALL the time, especially here living in a dorm. You couldn't imagine some of the things my peers will walk out in. Bright orange outfits, with matching shoes, with the laces untied. Pants past ones waist...way past ones waist. How they can run I do not know. They walk around with their hands on the waist of their pants holding them up. Why don't you just wear pants that fit? I dont get it. The best is how weather and temperature has no meaning to many of my peers. Shorts in New England in the dead of winter... Sweat pants when its raining out, or snowing with 2 feet on the ground. Im surprised more people don't get hypothermia walking from class to class. Is it the parents fault? Or the Medias? I ask my roomate why he wears the waist of his pants lower than his behind, and he says "its ill" ( ill is the new word for cool). So basically since I wear clothes that fit, I am uncool... I think todays youth sees so much unconformity on television and from the current popular music stars, that they feel it is normal. That's why they really don't see why or how a Uniform Shirt looks so horrible with bright colored basketball shorts. We don't live in a overly Uniformed society anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twocubdad Posted March 19, 2004 Share Posted March 19, 2004 My wife has a name for guys like that: shlubs. It's one of those quasi-Yiddish words for which the meaning is partially derrived from the sound of the word. Part of the difficulty is that there is a lot of variation in "field uniforms." While either may be technically acceptable, most folks understand there is -- or should be -- a difference between the uniforms you wear to your Eagle BoR and the one you wear to dinner the fifth night of summer camp. "Class A" doesn't really solve that problem, unless you're willing to go the Class A, B, C, D route. I will say that in our area "Class A" and "Class B" are synonymous with "Field Uniform" and "Activity Uniform," as described in the book. Our old CM was like yours, Beaver. Great guy, top-notch Scouter, but for some reason had a burr under his blanket for Cub Scout pants. At last year's new Scout orientation we intentionally assigned the uniform talk to someone else. Lo and behold, the Cubmaster jumps up to the mic to add that official cub pants aren't required, that jeans are okay. Aoy!(This message has been edited by Twocubdad) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob White Posted March 19, 2004 Share Posted March 19, 2004 Did you know that in a couple places in the Cub Scout Leader Handbook it says that if you are are not going to wear the entire uniform it would be better to not wear the uniform at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evmori Posted March 19, 2004 Share Posted March 19, 2004 There is no requirement to wear the complete uniform or no uniform at all! There is no requirement to even have a uniform! I own a couple or more uniforms. I am always in full uniform for Troop meetings, COH's, etc. Our Troop does require all Scouts to have a Scout shirt with all the patches in the correct places. We also require the SPL & ASPL to have Scout pants. We require all adults to have complete uniforms. We hold uniform inspections from time to time. Nothing regular & very seldom announced ahead of time. When our Troop appears in public as a group, we do look good! Ed Mori Troop 1 1 Peter 4:10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Old Guy Posted March 19, 2004 Share Posted March 19, 2004 Ed sed, "Our Troop does require all Scouts to have a Scout shirt with all the patches in the correct places." but a line earlier Ed sed, "There is no requirement to wear the complete uniform or no uniform at all! There is no requirement to even have a uniform!" At the risk of starting trouble, how can you require something that there is no requirement to have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob White Posted March 19, 2004 Share Posted March 19, 2004 Is anyone else familiar with the passage I wrote of? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evmori Posted March 19, 2004 Share Posted March 19, 2004 At the risk of starting trouble, how can you require something that there is no requirement to have? The point I was trying to make is the requirement is up to each unit. Sorry for the confusion. Ed Mori Troop 1 1 Peter 4:10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VentureScoutNY Posted March 19, 2004 Share Posted March 19, 2004 "Did you know that in a couple places in the Cub Scout Leader Handbook it says that if you are are not going to wear the entire uniform it would be better to not wear the uniform at all?" Bob White No Bob, I am not familiar with that. Is that true also in the Boy Scout Leader Handbooks? If not, why is that only for cubs, and not boy scouts? Interesting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now