Sunday Morning segment on the BSA

[NJCubScouter]

1 hour ago, Jameson76 said:

Did notice the Male leaders (oh no!!) leading them along the trail with no female leader in plain and conspicuous view, though I am sure she was about someplace so as to be 100% compliant to the Girls Den YPT guidelines.

Are we both looking at the photo posted in this thread?  I see two women behind the girls.

I notice that there is no evidence of a uniform on any of the adults, though you can't tell for sure for some of them.

(Added)  I never realized there was a video before just now.  I see what you are talking about.  You do get a brief glimpse of another group behind them, and if the two groups were within sight of each other and there was a woman in the second group, that would cover it.  The group is also walking toward a woman in uniform, though it's not clear that she would have been able to see the first group at all times.

Edited February 5, 2018 by NJCubScouter

[Jameson76]

1 hour ago, Hawkwin said:

Even the second boy standing next to his sister looked demoralized.

 

Thought the same thing, he looked like a very sad prop.  "Hey kid...make sure you stand at least 1 step behind your sister"

[gblotter]

The message of this CBS piece is clear: The Scouting movement as a boy organization is dying. The future of Scouting is girls. The demise of yet another traditional American institution (no wonder the media is so gleefully reporting it).

Benedict Surbaugh is actively promoting this message in his full-access interview with CBS.

Let's see how this works. Sales of Pontiac cars are dropping. Pontiac diehards love the brand because of storied performance cars like GTO, Firebird, and TransAm, but the new models have been unexciting sedans and even generic minivans. In desperation, the Pontiac division head (an account who never really loved cars) decides to pick customers from the dying carcass of Oldsmobile, a brand known for its retiree cruisers. In the end, both Pontiac and Oldsmobile fail even faster because of brand confusion which attracts few new customers but alienates many long-time loyalists.  Pontiac and Oldsmobile executives bail out with self-congratulatory high-fives and huge golden parachutes.

 

Edited February 5, 2018 by gblotter

[NJCubScouter]

Let's all please call people by their correct names, and not make up nicknames.  The CSE's name is Michael Surbaugh, or if one prefers, just Surbaugh, or if you want to just use his title, he's the CSE.

[Gwaihir]

The boys interviewed in that piece look thrilled... 

[Gwaihir]

On 2/4/2018 at 8:54 PM, NJCubScouter said:

I think I have said this before, but I wish that the BSA, as its first decision after letting girls into Cub Scouts, had NOT issued a new article of clothing for the girl-Cubs that emphasizes differences between the genders.  Why couldn’t they just let the girls wear the regular blue shorts and long pants?  And if necessary, offer a girls’ version, the same thing the boys are wearing, just a different “cut.”

I really hope that when the Girl Boy Scouts starts, they just let them wear the uniform pants or shorts and not have a green “skort.”

Is there a “skort” for female Venturers?

 

 

If what the girl wants matters at all, lots of girls want skirts.  I know my own daughter prefers skirts and dresses.  Sometimes it's a fight just to get her to wear jeans. 

I'm a little confused tho, the difference between genders is as plain as using one's eyes.  It's been universally acknowledged for all of human history.   There's no emphasis needed.  I thought the whole point of this family scouting thing was to accept and capitalize on the differences in genders (single-gender programs) while providing the quality content of the program.   

As for Venturers... I don't know, but Scouting Magazine floated this image around a little while back when touting Woodbadge. 

Edited February 6, 2018 by Gwaihir

[WisconsinMomma]

Ah!  No above the knee skirts!    I think the dress code where I worked once was 2" above the knee max.   This one is a little short. 

Edited February 6, 2018 by WisconsinMomma

[ghjim]

On 2/4/2018 at 7:10 PM, HelpfulTracks said:

I routinely hear that the drop in membership in 70's was caused by the program change. I can't say for sure, because I was not involved at that time, certainly not as an adult leader. So I went in search of some numbers. I found some here http://www.allcountries.org/uscensus/443_boy_scouts_and_girl_scouts_membership.html

I decided to chart the numbers for BSA and GSUSA. The dates are a bit strange in the spacing 10 years, 5, 5 then one year increments after that. The gaps in the data can hide a few things like actuall peaks and valleys, but the general trend line remains fairly accurate. The data ends in 1999, so there are no status for this century.

A few things I noticed.
1. BSA and GSUSA both take a similar dive in numbers from 1970 to 1980. BSA's drop is marginally worse.
2. BSA's numbers recover more robustly - great gains than GSUSA each year following 1980
3. BSA's numbers eventually exceed the 1970 peak, GSUSA's do regain their 1970 level

That begs the question, if BSA's membership drop was primarily about the program change, then why did GSUSA's numbers follow an almost identical decrease trend?

 

If the current youth membership stands at 2.7 million what has accounted for the decline since 1999?

[Col. Flagg]

29 minutes ago, ghjim said:

If the current youth membership stands at 2.7 million what has accounted for the decline since 1999?

2.7 millions is generous. You'd have to include ALL BSA programs according to the 2016 Annual Report. It is more like 2.3m if you count Cubs, Boy Scouts, Explorers/Varsity and Venturing. Actually that number was revised downward a bit later in 2017. I think the real number is between 2.1-2.2m.

[qwazse]

29 minutes ago, ghjim said:

If the current youth membership stands at 2.7 million what has accounted for the decline since 1999?

Some ideas are here

 

 

[WisconsinMomma]

I will throw 2 cents in and say -- I think the skorts and socks are fabulous.  Now, they may not be practical for camp wear, but they are modest, appropriate and good-looking for meeting wear, they give girls an opportunity NOT to look like the boys, and they make a great look for photographs.  Yes, photographs, and we live in a Facebook - Instagram digital camera world where there will be many photos of girls in Cubs.  

Personally I was hoping for dusty purple shirts for the girls (LOL), but keeping the navy uniform and adding a skort is great, IMO.   There's no harm, and sharp uniforms attract many children to Scouting.  

Thank you for sharing the CBS Sunday morning info, I will watch it.  

Edited February 9, 2018 by WisconsinMomma

[NJCubScouter]

28 minutes ago, WisconsinMomma said:

I will throw 2 cents in and say -- I think the skorts and socks are fabulous.  Now, they may not be practical for camp wear, but they are modest, appropriate and good-looking for meeting wear, they give girls an opportunity NOT to look like the boys, and they make a great look for photographs.  Yes, photographs, and we live in a Facebook - Instagram digital camera world where there will be many photos of girls in Cubs.  

Personally I was hoping for dusty purple shirts for the girls (LOL), but keeping the navy uniform and adding a skort is great, IMO.   There's no harm, and sharp uniforms attract many children to Scouting. 

Well, we usually seem to agree on most things, but not this time.  (But I'm not going to down-vote your post like you did to mine.    )

A note on the socks:  I think that in my entire life (which has included being a Cub Scout and later a Den Leader and Assistant Cubmaster), I have never seen a Cub Scout wearing the official socks, before I saw this video and photo.  (In most of the packs in my area, the kids don't even wear the official pants, they all wear jeans, but that's a different discussion.)  I think the presence of Cub Scout socks supports the suggestion made by a couple of people above that this was sort of a "setup" for marketing/promotional purposes.  Not that there's anything necessarily wrong with that, but if you're going to "stage" something, it is better not to be so obvious about it.

[Tampa Turtle]

@NJCubScouter my kids had cub scout socks about 80% of the time. I had to buy 5-6 pairs to come up with 2 on Pack night and I swear the tents at the rare cub scout campouts eat them.

As for skirts I am for skirts or shorts but no skorts BUT I say let customer demand drive that decision and see what happens. I do think that there needs to be some sort of correlation between skirt lengths for girls and short lengths for boys...I guess that could be a quagmire the way girls grow so fast sometimes and how long BSA has had the shorts the last few years. Maybe we can compromise and everyone can wear the old 70's "hot pants" (my scouts name for them)...yeah they'd all look pretty leggy but they'd be consistent. 

[NJCubScouter]

38 minutes ago, Tampa Turtle said:

As for skirts I am for skirts or shorts but no skorts BUT I say let customer demand drive that decision and see what happens. I do think that there needs to be some sort of correlation between skirt lengths for girls and short lengths for boys...I guess that could be a quagmire the way girls grow so fast sometimes and how long BSA has had the shorts the last few years. Maybe we can compromise and everyone can wear the old 70's "hot pants" (my scouts name for them)...yeah they'd all look pretty leggy but they'd be consistent. 

Customer demand?  The BSA will tell you what you demand! 

[WisconsinMomma]

1 hour ago, NJCubScouter said:

Well, we usually seem to agree on most things, but not this time.  (But I'm not going to down-vote your post like you did to mine.    )

Sorry, I used the down to show disagreement, and wasn't sure if I'd make my own post about skorts or not.