Putting the pieces together - Where are we headed?

[shortridge]

4 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

Well, that a pretty anti religious statement. Ironically it also suggests an exclusive program as well. 

So many unbias (friendly) words could have been chosen to make the same point.

Barry

No, Barry, it’s just accurate. Policies that ban and exclude people based on their sexual orientation are homophobic. It doesn’t have to be religiously motivated. If you interpret the word “homophobic” to be anti-religious, well, that says more about your religious preferences than anything.

My religion and the faiths of many people I know and work with practices inclusion, not exclusion. You and your faith are not affected by the BSA’s LGBT-inclusive policies in any way, shape or form.

I have no idea what other, better words I could have used to describe the antiquated BSA policies that barred gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender youth and leaders from joining and serving. What would you have chosen?

But I don’t mean to start an I&P debate. That fight is over, and in my opinion, the right side won. It will take a while for the BSA to rise past the old and misguided policies of years past in the public’s mind. Right now, both sides distrust the organization. But I believe that those changes and opening the program to girls is a change absolutely for the better.

[Eagledad]

There is no debate, my response to your demeaning choice of word does says something about my religious beliefs and something I can’t change. Homophobic is a derogatory trigger word that says no tolerance of homosexual behavior. Many religions believe homosexuality to be immoral. Members of those religions have no choice no matter how they feel about it. I can see that offends you, but I’m sure even your religion teaches a behavior of tolerance.

That you can’t think of a better choices of words exposes your anger and bias. Sore winner? 

Ive learned over years that more often than not choosing silence makes a more powerful statement and reflects maturity. 

Barry

[WisconsinMomma]

I'm taking my boys and some troop mates orienteering today!   it's some First Class stuff. 

[Gwaihir]

23 hours ago, FireStone said:

Kind of related to my original post and where I think we are going from here, in particular modeling the BSA after Scouts UK, as it relates to uniforms I think we should expect more of the UK model there as well. In the "Adding Girls to the Pack" thread (page 9) on this forum there is a video with Anthony Berger, and towards the end he talks about how the WOSM regards just the neckerchief as being "in uniform". And he's wearing his neckerchief in the UK style, with the friendship knot. 

I fully expect to see more of this and a reduced emphasis on Class A uniforming in the BSA. I think we'll always have Class A, but more for ceremonies, COH, Blue & Gold, formal events, etc. In fact I think this video was pretty much confirmation (unofficially of course) that this is happening already. We should expect to see more of the UK-style larger neckers in the BSA, especially going into WSJ '19.  

If that's the destination we're headed to, then I will leave.  I want nothing to do with UK scouting. 

[Cambridgeskip]

23 minutes ago, Gwaihir said:

If that's the destination we're headed to, then I will leave.  I want nothing to do with UK scouting. 

I hope you don't mind me asking but why is that?

[David CO]

2 hours ago, shortridge said:

This new generation of Scouts is going to be great and put us older folks to shame. 

I'll take it. It's better than being shameless.

[WisconsinMomma]

You know, after my boys went out on a hot day,  I can see the use of a class B.  At Wood Badge we wore t-shirts a lot but uniforms for some meals and all flag ceremonies.  I am OK with some flexibility.  

[Buggie]

23 minutes ago, WisconsinMomma said:

You know, after my boys went out on a hot day,  I can see the use of a class B. 

I fell in love with tech shirts a few years back. (and my troop moved to them for their class B.) And I love having the long sleeve tech shirts for sun protection and for an added layer in cold weather. I think uniforms are a great thing, but sometimes I feel folks are too hung up on them. I certainly don't endorse where there's a new uniform pieces you have to purchase every time you move up a year through the programs. It's bad enough for the kids who go through those growth spurts. The talk in the other (or is it this?) thread about new neckerchiefs as the cub scouts move up makes my eyes roll. 

[cgail]

Thanks to Momma for trying to lighten the mood!

[Gwaihir]

6 hours ago, Cambridgeskip said:

I hope you don't mind me asking but why is that?

Because that's not the scouting I grew up with, it's not the scouting I believe in.  It's nothing against you, if it works for you, that's great.  It's not what I signed up for. 

[Cambridgeskip]

6 hours ago, Gwaihir said:

Because that's not the scouting I grew up with, it's not the scouting I believe in.  It's nothing against you, if it works for you, that's great.  It's not what I signed up for. 

OK, but I'm curious as to what specifics put you off?

To lead you a bit if TSA were to say they like the look of BSA and are going to remodel on you I can think of things that I think would work and would be an improvement and things I don't think would work.

Things I'd welcome

Your uniforms. (with the exception of the badge sash) Your shirts look much better than ours. Particularly the blue one for cubs.

Bigger emphasis on the patrol system, would like to see it used more in the explorer section in particular

Things I'd not welcome.

Combining scouts and explorers to run to 18. Not sure it works with natural peer groups here.

Chartering organisations. I wouldn't want to see scouting controlled by other bodies. Albeit we already have a small number of "closed" groups.

Those are purely examples and not exhaustive. It's just a prompt more than anything! I'm certainly not trying to provoke an argument. I'm just curious as to what you see, whether it's actually accurate and what you like and dislike about it.

Edited May 27, 2018 by Cambridgeskip

[Gwaihir]

On 5/27/2018 at 4:27 AM, Cambridgeskip said:

OK, but I'm curious as to what specifics put you off?

To lead you a bit if TSA were to say they like the look of BSA and are going to remodel on you I can think of things that I think would work and would be an improvement and things I don't think would work.

Things I'd welcome

Your uniforms. (with the exception of the badge sash) Your shirts look much better than ours. Particularly the blue one for cubs.

Bigger emphasis on the patrol system, would like to see it used more in the explorer section in particular

Things I'd not welcome.

Combining scouts and explorers to run to 18. Not sure it works with natural peer groups here.

Chartering organisations. I wouldn't want to see scouting controlled by other bodies. Albeit we already have a small number of "closed" groups.

Those are purely examples and not exhaustive. It's just a prompt more than anything! I'm certainly not trying to provoke an argument. I'm just curious as to what you see, whether it's actually accurate and what you like and dislike about it.

I think two of the largest areas I don't want BSA to tread down here, are two of the things you'd welcome.  Another poster talked of ditching uniforms except in certain situations, which I am vehemently against and the degradation of the patrol method is another I do not want to see at all.   I am in favor of charter orgs and of reverence and faith being a key part of scouting.  I don't want to see full co-ed for the "scouting bsa" and "Cub scout" programs (which, yes, I know is not the current state of affairs)

 

 

[an_old_DC]

On 5/24/2018 at 8:20 PM, bearess said:

Well, my son’s Troop (in a rural but very liberal state) already has mixed patrols.  And....nothing.  No membership,loss, nobody has complained.  Son enjoys Scouts, is enthused, and the Troop is growing.  It’s been great.  They currently have six girls, out of a troop of thirty.  I’d add that son has recruited two friends to join— in both cases, their parents expressed concern over the history of Scouts.  Sat down with the Scout aster, talked about where the program is and is headed, and signed their sons up.

As to what it looks like— I think normal.  The Troop is transitioning to Scout-led, which has its hiccups.  But the Scouts are learning and growing.  They are proud of their accomplishments and motivated to continue.  Adding girls has changed nothing, as far as I can see.  

It was interesting, a few of the leaders were talking about girls coming in, being better leaders/more mature, outshining the boys, being a distraction.  One of them asked my son if he thought that would happen.  He said “Well, it depends on the girl. Some will, some won’t”.  I think that is the perspective of most kids.  If the grownups can get out of the way, the kids can handle it fine.  Just like camping, cooking, hiking—same principal applies.  Let them lead.

I am curious how the leaders get away with flagrantly disregarding several National policies. Do they collect membership apps and dues from the girls? Do they submit Advancement reports for the girls? Is “Sam” really Samantha? Or are the girls really tagalongs?

are there registered female leaders over 21 at meetings and campouts?

 

[Chris1]

On 5/26/2018 at 7:39 AM, RememberSchiff said:

Adult Association - yes, but let's call it what it is - Adult Domination. Will Troop Committee become Conference of Families?  Will there be any scout-run troops?  Maybe this will force out volunteers with no children ?

Ok, I just have to comment on this one as the misunderstanding and misinterpretation of  Adult Association" is a pet peeve of mine. 

I am tired of people claiming that for a unit to be "youth-led" adults can never speak, never suggest ideas, and just watch for spurting blood. "Youth-led" does not mean "adult-abdicated".  As adults we are to be role models and mentors, as well as friends and as they grow we become colleagues. The scouts do not reach their full potential in either case. 

As I see it, the REAL problem with the method of "Adult Association" is how few scouters know how to properly use it or even what it really means. Sure it is easier to sit in the back and claim "this is a youth-led unit, I can only step in for health and safety" but that gives little benefit to the scouts. 

I have seen WORSE damage done by a Scoutmaster prohibiting adults to mentor or guide leadership techniques or have any interaction with the youth, than a unit where adults plan and run the whole show. It becomes "Lord of the Flies" hazing is rampant and scouts won't try anything new because they know there is no support should they have any challenges. 

And now a few quotes from B.P. :

“The Scoutmaster teaches boys to play the game by doing so himself”
“When a boy finds someone who takes an interest in him, he responds and follows.”
“Success in training the boy depends largely on the Scoutmaster’s own personal example.”
“There is no teaching to compare with example.”
“The Scoutmaster guides the boy in the spirit of an older brother.”
“To get a hold on boys you must be their friend."

[RememberSchiff]

Agree with what you describe is the intended Adult Association.

My observation of some existing units and a prediction of things to come is units will become an Adult or now  Family Outing Club with adults  running the show. Sure adults will do skill instruction,  but will they allow scouts time to try and fail  and learn - the benefit of scouting, when the family eats at 6 and has to be on the road by 9?

My $0.02

 

Edited June 2, 2018 by RememberSchiff