Pushy Mom Name Tag?

[Eamonn]

MrsSmith makes the point that Moms who question things about the program seem to earn the title of being "Pushy Moms."

I don't think that I use the term. In fact those who know me would think that would be far too tame for me. My Irish temper, which I think I got from my mother who as it happens was a Smith before she married my Dad, is such that I tend to really let everyone know how I'm feeling.

MrsSmith, goes on to ask what do we call a Pushy Dad? Could it be that when we meet a Pushy Dad that we do a better job of welcoming him into the program. Or does he do a better job of joining the program where as Pushy Moms don't?

Could it be that we males are so terrified of these Moms that we resort to name calling?

On the other side of the coin why do I hear about Dead beat Dads, but never Dead Beat Moms?

While I'm not going to lose any sleep about it there are a few other terms that puzzle me.

Why is when I make a speech that it has amusing anecdotes and when someone else does it they are full of it? After a meeting we have another meeting where the real work gets done and when Her That Must Be Obeyed asks I inform her that we had things to discuss. Yet when is on the phone to her co-workers who she has just spend all day working with they are gossiping?

Then when I say something out of line about females I'm labeled a male chauvinist, yet when a woman says the same thing she is just old fashioned.

Maybe one day when I grow up and become wise I will understand. Or maybe we should just be nice and not call people names, at least not out loud!!

Eamonn

[scoutmom]

Eamonn,

 

I can't speak to all the questions you pose, but I believe in Scouting, Mom's who want to be active with their sons scouting and who speak up when they feel something is wrong are labeled "pushy" because they are intruding on a male dominated area. Some men in Scouting (not all) feel that it is their domain and they are the only ones who know the "right" way to run a Scouting program.

 

There are a lot of knowledgable, well trained female Scouters who just happen to be the Mom's of Scouts. I happen to be one of them. The male leaders in my son's Troop DO NOT respect me or my knowledge, in spite of having received the District Award of Merit and holding a significant position on our District committee. Why? I have no idea. I don't want to run the program, but when I see something that is a direct violation of Scouting policy or the Aims and Methods of Scouting, I am going to bring it to their attention. If that makes me "pushy" , then I'm pushy. ---And proud of it, because me being pushy makes these leaders take a second look at what they are doing and hopefully will cause them to follow BSA policy more correctly.

 

 

[acco40]

In our society, a "take charge" attitude from a male is viewed as decisive. The same attitude in a female, well she may get labeled a derogatory term that rhymes with ditch. A demure, agreeable female would be labeled as sweet and devoted. The same characteristics in a male would have him branded as a wimp or worse. Is it fair? No. C'est la vie.

 

My wife is involved at the district level (District Award of Merit recipient) as well as at the unit level (advancement chair). I'm involved at the district level (Unit Commissioner) and the unit level (SM, and yes I know that "by the book" I should not hold both and have discussed it with my ADC and DC). The unit level is where the theory of Scouting meets the practicality of Scouting. Now, I'm not a big proponent of rule bending but I guess I've bent a few rules. For example, recently a Webelos den crossed over to our troop. Out of a dozen boys (a BIG den) two of the boys did not receive AOL, were only 10 years old, and have not finished the 5th grade. Theoretically, they could not join the troop. Practically, if I refused their admission, they would drop out of Scouting. What I did was contact their pack, pay to have them re-register with the pack, have them attend our troop meetings, go on outings, and work on advancement. I contacted our council registrar and told her of my intentions. Come June (after they meet the complete 5th grade req.), the boys will "formally" join the troop, get registered, and mysteriously A LOT of advancement is going to be signed off in early June. This was explained to the parents directly involved, the SAs and no one else. If a "pushy mom" brought it to my attention that the boys should not be attending my meetings my reaction would be dependent on how it was presented to me. No one likes to be told that they are doing something "wrong." Now, I've been told that I do some things "wrong" by many parents, i.e. I don't arrange the patrols correctly. They look at having the boys choose their patrol members as "not right." Do I ignore most of their comments? To an extent but I do feel I owe some a reason why I do what I do. To some, I feel I owe no explanation.

 

The biggest problem that I have with parents, both moms and dads are the ones who want to be active with their sons in Scouting; emphasis on with their sons. Many don't want to be active in Scouting for all of the sons. If it doesn't involve their son directly, forget about it. On a Scout outing, troop meeting, etc. we should leave our parental responsibilities at home. Our responsibilities should be to the unit. I know that is difficult for many and I'll get a few arguments, but that is my belief. If one doesn't feel comfortable with that, one should not be a unit leader IMO.(This message has been edited by acco40)

[Eagledad]

Hi All

 

>>Mom's who want to be active with their sons scouting and who speak up when they feel something is wrong are labeled "pushy" because they are intruding on a male dominated area.

[SR540Beaver]

When am I going to learn to keep my mouth shut? Acco, with true respect for all you do; I will say that I think you did the wrong thing in regards to your two Webelos. We were faced with a similar situation this year. We crossed 5 Webelos II's over in February at our Blue & Gold with an elaborate ceremony by the OA. We had two boys who had joined Cubs as Webelos II's this year. Obviously they were behind the curve on earning AOL. What we did was sit down with them and their parents and explain why we thought they should stay in Cubs thru May and earn their AOL. They would only miss about 3 Boy Scout campouts. Actually, they went to Camporee as guests of a troop back in March, so they only missed 2 campouts. Last Friday, we had our Cub Graduation campout and crossed them over into 2 different troops. Since they camped, they only actually missed 1 campout.

 

I guess my point is that there are always alternatives and it isn't necessarily a lock that the boys would have dropped out if the problem were approached differently. Part of our job is to lead by example and if WE fudge the rules, it sends a clear message to the boys that they can fudge the rules too. Since they got to join Boy Scouts "early", what is to keep them from arguing that they should get Tenderfoot since they have all requirements except one completed. Gee Mr SM, couldn't I go ahead and get TF and make up that one requirement when I'm working on Second Class? You let me be in Cubs and Boy Scouts at the same time!

[acco40]

Valid points Mr. Beaver (I always had my beefs with Beavers at Woodbadge, why is that?) but please remember that you are looking at it from a Cub Scout perspective and I, from a Boy Scout perspective. With the two ten year olds in question (and their parents for that matter) they were completely oblivious to the joining rules. So in the youth's eyes, they were not getting away with anything. If they or their parents had brought up any desire at all to work on their AOL in a Pack environment, I would have highly encouraged it. However, they have not even earned their Webelos badges. Their den leader and assistant den leader are gone. They had no "den" to return to. Their desire was to remain with their Cub Scout patrol as it transitioned into Boy Scouts.

 

Now, look at it this way. Webelos may visit Boy Scout troop meetings. Webelos may attend Boy Scout outings. I made sure the boys in question were reregistered with their Pack (our Troop provided the funds to do so). Granted, they don't attend any Pack functions and attend all of our troop functions, but the letter of the law is not really broken. Possibly the spirit of the law.

[SR540Beaver]

Welllllllll.......OK.

 

I will add that I was actually looking at it from both sides. I'm currently dual registered as the CC for my son's old Pack and an ASM for his new Troop. There were three of us who made a promise to stay with the Pack thru graduation last week even though we had crossed over with our sons to Scouts. We got the boys thru their AOL, but they chose different troops than where we went. We didn't care as long as they crossed over. We had 100% crossover!!! Woo hoo!

 

BTW.....Beavers rule!

[Fuzzy Bear]

The ten rules of sin

1. Why are my sins not as bad as your sins?

2. If I sin against thee but thou doesn't know about it, then is it really a sin?

3. Sinning is really only a sin if it be thou decreed a sin.

4. If I confess my sin on the wideband, then it must be the lesser sin. Only large sins are kept hidden for fear of the greater punishment.

5. It is truly only a man that can sin out loud in public and be considered absolved because of his gender.

6. Sins of omission are nothing really.

7. If we must sin, choose carefully. Points are awarded for care.

8. Sins come in many colors but the big ones are white.

9. There can really only be one sin when it is all added up. All of the others are not that critical.

10. God hates the sin but the sinner has a special place.

 

 

FB