The Question That Reveals the Heart of the "BSA" Culture Wars

[Hawkwin]

19 hours ago, ParkMan said:

If our troop was run by the dads alone, we'd show up in the parking lot on a Friday afternoon and wing every camping trip.

Hah! Sounds like my household as of late. My wife recently sent me an 8 page google doc link with plans for our next vacation.

[cocomax]

41 minutes ago, Hawkwin said:

Hah! Sounds like my household as of late. My wife recently sent me an 8 page google doc link with plans for our next vacation.

I have never given my wife a "honey do list",  but she has given them to me in the past.  I wonder if writing lists of things for men to do  is a common thing for women, but men for some reason don't do the same to their wives. 

[perdidochas]

On 1/30/2018 at 10:47 AM, cocomax said:

The article points to the popularity of Jordan Peterson,   Jordan Peterson has said many times that the young men who flock to him are hungry for responsibility in a world that scream for rights. 

My question is do young men view BSA as a group to join that would aid them to grow in good character and learn to be responsible or do young men view BSA has something else?

At a time when young men need something like the BSA more than ever how come they are not flocking to join?

 

Video games and year round sports.  

Edited February 2, 2018 by perdidochas

[perdidochas]

On 1/31/2018 at 1:21 PM, ParkMan said:

I agree that these are the things we do today.  My bigger point though is that I think the movement needs to regroup a bit.  We're I in charge of things, I'd do three things:

- clarify the program.  There needs to be much clearer guidance on how to implement much of this stuff.  There should not be arguments on wherther the scouts or the adults should buy tents.  This kind of thing ought to be more clearly spec'd out.

- improve the mechanics.  Just about every troop has boring troop meetings.  It's great that some troop has this figured out. It needs to get captured, distilled, and rolled out.  Not the hokey program notes kinds stuff.  But a real, simple recipe that even I cannot mess us.

- improve training for volunteers.  I'm not talking about the "so you're a new ASM class".  There needs to be a real continuing education program for leaders.

 

 

I agree of clarifiying and improving training.  I learned very little in the Boy Scout level training.  That said, there were people in the training classes with me that learned a lot, and they needed a lot more.  

 

Boring troop meetings are sometimes a consequence of SPLs learning their jobs.  There is no recipe that will work for all troops, as each troop has it's own set of peculiar personalities.  

[perdidochas]

20 hours ago, Col. Flagg said:

My experience has been that moms get stuff done...but usually end up taking away a learning opportunity from the boys. Dads do this too, but not with the frequency of the moms.

I would think as long as the boys are using the Patrol Method and executing the program -- if that means it is not done to the efficiency of the moms or dads -- then that's what you want.

The moms in my troop do things like order t-shirts and help with fundraising. Their choice has been to leave the outdoorsy stuff up to the male leadership.  So, I disagree totally with the idea that men don't get stuff done.  

[Eagledad]

25 minutes ago, cocomax said:

I have never given my wife a "honey do list",  but she has given them to me in the past.  I wonder if writing lists of things for men to do  is a common thing for women, but men for some reason don't do the same to their wives. 

You are lucky, my wife assumes I can read her mind. 

Barry

[Back Pack]

Reading this forum makes me want to stay away from scouting jobs and to stay single. 

[ParkMan]

Thanks for all the thoughts in response to my last set of questions on this.  My basic thinking going in was that there would be things we can make sure we do in a troop's program that will put the boys in situations that develop these traits.  I do see the other line of thinking - that it's the myriad interactions and decisions a scout makes in the context of simply being in the program that do that.  That's something for me to think about.

BTW - I hope that no one misunderstands my comments about the mom's being involved.  I'm very appreciative for what they do and am glad to have them.  Some of my absolutely favorite Scouters are moms.  If anything, it was just thinking through the idea that mom's in the program have an impact on this topic too.  It just got me to wondering if perhaps there were some things we'd stopped doing along the way that maybe we didn't even realize.

[Back Pack]

@ParkMan as a recent youth member I would agree that if your troop just sticks to the program that guys will develop in to men and learn those skills. My best role models were my sm and asms. They let us run the troop but were there when we needed them. They did their own thing and we learned by watching them just be good men. 

[EmberMike]

I don't get it. So many folks here are always voicing concerns about the weakening of the program, how things will change when girls arrive, losing the masculinity of the BSA, etc. And yet the consensus here now seems to be that delivery of the program is what drives delivery of the masculine aspect of Scouting. 

Assuming that the Boy Scout program doesn't change because of the girls' program, and if program is the means by which we deliver the whole "turning boys into men" component, then what's the problem? 

[RememberSchiff]

IMO, not girls so much but Family Scouting (at Boy Scout level) being bundled with girl membership is the problem. Family Scouting negatively impacts the Patrol and Leadership Methods. I don't worry about girls in a troop, I worry about families making the troop into another pack

My $0.02

[Pselb]

On 1/30/2018 at 11:42 AM, CalicoPenn said:

I'm waiting for David French to answer his own question.  The only thing I get our of this opinion articles is that Conservatives are right and Liberals are wrong.  The shame of it is that the answer is probably somewhere in the middle.  The culture war isn't raging because one side is right and the other side is wrong (choose your sides according to your beliefs).  The culture war is raging because both sides are right and both sides are wrong and they can't seem to come together to discuss the issues with an open heart and open mind to get to a common understanding.

So what is a man?

 

I have just begun to read this thread and I'm sure they're plenty of debate further on down.  But it would seem that it isn't a "us and them" issue between liberal and conservative factions in as much as it is an acceptance vs. denial of science.  One can give concrete proof of the differences between male and female and yet there seems to be an inordinate amount of varying statements of belief overriding the scientific reality.  Sure someone can think, believe and say they are of a different sex, but it doesn't change the facts.  As a history teacher I know there are those that like to re-write history to accommodate their beliefs, and it's pretty easy to do.  But trying to re-write scientific evidence is a bit more problematic.

I can go along with a man saying he believes he is a woman just as easily as I can go along with a man saying he believes he is a paranoid schizophrenic.     Sure, he can promote feminine traits just as easily as he can promote psychological traits.  And when it comes to science, it's far easier to prove male/female than it is paranoid schizophrenia.

I think the author is correct in the fact that male traits are under attack.  With the amount of medication used on our school children today, it is easy to see that the more aggressiveness of males is no longer acceptable. 

 

 

[cocomax]

1 hour ago, EmberMike said:

I don't get it. So many folks here are always voicing concerns about the weakening of the program, how things will change when girls arrive, losing the masculinity of the BSA, etc. And yet the consensus here now seems to be that delivery of the program is what drives delivery of the masculine aspect of Scouting. 

Assuming that the Boy Scout program doesn't change because of the girls' program, and if program is the means by which we deliver the whole "turning boys into men" component, then what's the problem? 

I don't see the program weakening at all, it is not that hard of a program, there is nothing in there that a girl can't do. I do not get it at all ether.

The program is not the masculine part of Boy Scouts anyway, the girls can do the program and grow in a feminine manor.

Boys and men bring the masculine aspect to Scouting.    

If Boy Scout troops are allowed to continue to be only boys our troop will not change at all due to girls joining a new all girl troop in our town, if someone starts one.  In our town BSA and GSUSA are friends and support one another, I have never once heard one of our boys say anything bad about the girls. Our Girl Scouts are very kind to the Boy Scouts as well. 

The faction of people running around with the idea that to be pro-girl you have to be anti-boy are merely an annoyance.  

[Pselb]

The push for girls to be allowed to be more aggressive (masculine) in their interests is not a "bad" concept.  It would seem that society is accepting of this, but not for males who are by nature this way. 

[Back Pack]

Note that people are saying delivery of the traditional program leads to developing masculinity. Not all the changes and recent ad hoch things groups have chosen to infuse in to the program.