Only six months till girls in Scouts BSA.

[Jameson76]

On 8/9/2018 at 1:32 PM, RememberSchiff said:

That was what I thought  but then I heard this Iowa interview  starting around  minute 2:55

Sometime in 2019, we (Iowa) will have our first female Eagle Scout.

We have groups currently waiting for young women to start...so in 2019 we will have the inaugural  class of girl Eagle scouts.

There will be a big announcement...

Confused? So am I.

Good Lord this guy is all over the board.  Not sure he really understands what is actually going on at the unit level.  Sad that a "professional for 23 years" is as clueless as this dude is.

[Eagle94-A1]

7 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

Good Lord this guy is all over the board.  Not sure he really understands what is actually going on at the unit level.  Sad that a "professional for 23 years" is as clueless as this dude is.

Clueless is am understatement. 16 for Venturing? 10 months to earn Eagle? Segregated patrols instead of troops (oops I forgot "Linked Troops"). And if members were so for it, WHY DON'T THEY PUBLISH THE ACTUAL TOWN HALL MEMBERSHIP SURVEY RESULTS? (emphasis) 

[oldbuzzard]

16 hours ago, WisconsinMomma said:

  I think it's interesting that this CO said, "push the boundaries".  I wonder what kind of CO would do that? 

Our chartering church has experience fighting with National. Our home family church is the same denomination. We have had gay/trans leaders and scouts forever. We opted out of the gay ban and were a major force pushing our council to also opt out of the gay ban. For that I am grateful. My wife's church in NH just dropped their BSA charter. Our early 2000's outdoorsy church in Seattle had no scouts since 2 of our 4 ministers would be banned from contact with scouts for being gay. I am glad some liberal churches pushed through that culture war to allow a more inclusive movement..

Quote

I guessed this was in California, but it's in Minnesota, which is too close to home for me!  

But none of the CA or PNW councils chose to defy national, while Northern Star did.

Quote

If I had daughters, I think I would want my daughters in a troop that follows the program.  Because if a CO is winging it, do they lack discipline across the entire program?  Do they follow YPT and the guide to safe scouting?  How do you know what program you are getting if the organization is making stuff up as they go? 

I suppose that could be a concern. But being a Scouting family, I can feel qualified to judge these things. I'm not making any troop decisions but I can recognize traditional scouting when I see it. Would I have made the same decisions...maybe... probably. But I can see YPT is being followed. We have emeritus SMs being written up in Scouting mag. We have camp volunteers in their 50th year at camp. When our younger 11-13yo scouts were planning their BWCA trip this year, we had another emeritus spry fit looking SM come in to talk about  canoe trips and he started his talk out talking to the the younger scouts and the Webelos who we  visiting by saying "I was sitting right where you were, I joined this troop as a Cub Scout in 1947..." While he went on to talk about staffing the Region X canoe base based solely on his troop canoeing experience, you could see the kids slowly doing the math and having their jaws drop. 

Maybe our troop is pushing things too much, but in 6 months it won't matter, and the question was what is your troop doing to prepare for coed Scouts BSA. That's what we're doing.

Edited August 13, 2018 by oldbuzzard
it/in typo

[Eagle1993]

Packs are being told that boy and girl dens can meet at the same time and place.  Many in both the volunteer and professional ranks know the current idea of having 10-12 new leaders to cover all grade levels won’t happen at most of any Pack. In addition, having 5th grade girls have co den meetings with Lions or Tigers is a farce.   We tried it this Spring and while functional... it didn’t feel like true Den meetings.

In my Pack, we left it up to den leaders and families of those dens if they want girl and boy dens to meet together or separate.  100% of our 12 den leaders voted to have boy and girl dens meet together.  We sent this out to the Pack and asked for comments... no one objected and we only received positive feedback.  (I know... I sound like National now).  

 So, our boy and girl dens will meet together.... so it will look very much like coed dens.  My unit commissioner is 100% supportive and my DE only asked to make sure there is some separation during the meeting (have the girls and boys in different groups)... which seems to happen naturally anyway.  While we are meeting the rules of BSA we won’t look that much different than @oldbuzzard ‘s Pack.  Perhaps oldbuzzard is being more Trustworthy than BSA’s current policy (which is claiming separate boy/girl dens that can meeting together and to an outside observer look and function like coed dens).  

[ParkMan]

22 hours ago, oldbuzzard said:

Our chartering church has experience fighting with National. Our home family church is the same denomination. We have had gay/trans leaders and scouts forever. We opted out of the gay ban and were a major force pushing our council to also opt out of the gay ban. For that I am grateful. My wife's church in NH just dropped their BSA charter. Our early 2000's outdoorsy church in Seattle had no scouts since 2 of our 4 ministers would be banned from contact with scouts for being gay. I am glad some liberal churches pushed through that culture war to allow a more inclusive movement..

But none of the CA or PNW councils chose to defy national, while Northern Star did.

I suppose that could be a concern. But being a Scouting family, I can feel qualified to judge these things. I'm not making any troop decisions but I can recognize traditional scouting when I see it. Would I have made the same decisions...maybe... probably. But I can see YPT is being followed. We have emeritus SMs being written up in Scouting mag. We have camp volunteers in their 50th year at camp. When our younger 11-13yo scouts were planning their BWCA trip this year, we had another emeritus spry fit looking SM come in to talk about  canoe trips and he started his talk out talking to the the younger scouts and the Webelos who we  visiting by saying "I was sitting right where you were, I joined this troop as a Cub Scout in 1947..." While he went on to talk about staffing the Region X canoe base based solely on his troop canoeing experience, you could see the kids slowly doing the math and having their jaws drop. 

Maybe our troop is pushing things too much, but in 6 months it won't matter, and the question was what is your troop doing to prepare for coed Scouts BSA. That's what we're doing.

I'm generally pretty opposed to troops freelancing on the rules.  There are too many troops who decide to ignore key program rules because they are confident they know better.  I.e. "patrols? Nah, we don't need those."

This seems to be different to me.  What I see here is a faithful (I hope) deployment of the program with a reasoned exception for the inclusion of girls - which is coming anyways.  It is troops like this that will help push national in the direction of co-ed troops.

Someone has to push the issue.  Sounds like this is the kind of place to do it.  They may succeed or they may fail- but I'm okay that they are trying.

[ParkMan]

. Not sure how I get a downvote for that.

As I said - seemed like the troop was making a thought out attempt to advocate for their cause.  It's not a bunch of folks just winging it.  Further, they did it in full visibility to the participants and council.  You or I may not agree with their cause- but if someone is going to practice the Scout version of civil disobedience, this seems the way to do it.

Just my .02

[walk in the woods]

10 hours ago, ParkMan said:

I'm generally pretty opposed to troops freelancing on the rules.  There are too many troops who decide to ignore key program rules because they are confident they know better.  I.e. "patrols? Nah, we don't need those."

This seems to be different to me.  What I see here is a faithful (I hope) deployment of the program with a reasoned exception for the inclusion of girls - which is coming anyways.  It is troops like this that will help push national in the direction of co-ed troops.

Someone has to push the issue.  Sounds like this is the kind of place to do it.  They may succeed or they may fail- but I'm okay that they are trying.

It's easy to agree with the actions when you agree with the cause.

My cause is overturning the ridiculously stupid rules in the G2SS about squirt guns, laser tag, and paintball, because my scouts are fully mature enough to understand the difference between a firearm and a toy, even if BSA National isn't.  My CO and parents are fully onboard with my unit going to laser tag in full uniform and tells the council where to put their stupid rules.  You'd support it because the position is well thought out, it's a faithful deployment of the program (e.g. building patrol esprit de corps), and my CO/parents are onboard?

[ParkMan]

1 hour ago, walk in the woods said:

It's easy to agree with the actions when you agree with the cause.

My cause is overturning the ridiculously stupid rules in the G2SS about squirt guns, laser tag, and paintball, because my scouts are fully mature enough to understand the difference between a firearm and a toy, even if BSA National isn't.  My CO and parents are fully onboard with my unit going to laser tag in full uniform and tells the council where to put their stupid rules.  You'd support it because the position is well thought out, it's a faithful deployment of the program (e.g. building patrol esprit de corps), and my CO/parents are onboard?

I'm going to gather you really don't think Laser Tag, squirt guns, and paintball is the issue, but over regulation of youth.  

Then yes, send a letter to your DE, SE, and national telling them that the rules in the G2SS are wrong and you are planning a Laser Tag, squirt gun, and paintball event.  Feel free to invite other troops and units to attend. Tell your parents why you think the G2SS is wrong and that you are planning this event in open defiance of it.  Explain to your CO about your cause and added liability they may assume and get their support for it.

So yes, if you want to really do that, then do it.  That's the basis of my agreement above - this unit is thought out, organized about their actions, and seemingly very open about it.  If there are consequences the BSA wants to pursue, they will bear them.

 

Edited August 14, 2018 by ParkMan
Added squirt guns and paintball.

[qwazse]

10 hours ago, ParkMan said:

. Not sure how I get a downvote for that.

As I said - seemed like the troop was making a thought out attempt to advocate for their cause.  It's not a bunch of folks just winging it.  Further, they did it in full visibility to the participants and council.  You or I may not agree with their cause- but if someone is going to practice the Scout version of civil disobedience, this seems the way to do it.

Just my .02

@ParkMan, hope my "like " bandages your perplexity over a down-vote. Frankly, I appreciate the occasional "-1". I read this thing to understand people whose ideas differ from mine. If I want a bubble, I go to council venturing committees.

I think you captured the sense of what's happened over the past few years. We've heard about troops going rogue over a number of issues. Folks like me (who care about the promise of scouting being delivered to girls ... not about laser tag), talked to tag-along girls and leaders who sanctioned them, and GS/USA moms who created close collaborations with BSA leaders to make fun things happen. Finding mostly smiles (and not white-washing potential downsides), we leaned heavily on the leadership to find a path. We didn't do that because we thought it would help our own units. We did it because the young women in those rogue troops appeared to be first class scouts (concept, not patch) and worthy of recognition as such.

[walk in the woods]

2 hours ago, ParkMan said:

I'm going to gather you really don't think Laser Tag, squirt guns, and paintball is the issue, but over regulation of youth.  

Then yes, send a letter to your DE, SE, and national telling them that the rules in the G2SS are wrong and you are planning a Laser Tag, squirt gun, and paintball event.  Feel free to invite other troops and units to attend. Tell your parents why you think the G2SS is wrong and that you are planning this event in open defiance of it.  Explain to your CO about your cause and added liability they may assume and get their support for it.

So yes, if you want to really do that, then do it.  That's the basis of my agreement above - this unit is thought out, organized about their actions, and seemingly very open about it.  If there are consequences the BSA wants to pursue, they will bear them.

 

I told my parents about the squirt gun ban.  When they picked themselves up off the ground from laughing, they happily filled their kids and their own supersoakers and had a rollicking good time.  But, the BSAs credibility took a hit.  Same thing happens when units openly ignore the membership standards.  

[Saltface]

11 hours ago, ParkMan said:

. Not sure how I get a downvote for that.

As I said - seemed like the troop was making a thought out attempt to advocate for their cause.  It's not a bunch of folks just winging it.  Further, they did it in full visibility to the participants and council.  You or I may not agree with their cause- but if someone is going to practice the Scout version of civil disobedience, this seems the way to do it.

Just my .02

ParkMan, I wanted to organize my thoughts before replying but then @walk in the woods came in and said it better than I could.

I disagree with both your goal and your method. A Scout follows the rules of his family, school, and troop. He obeys the laws of his community and country. If he thinks these rules and laws are unfair, he tries to have them changed in an orderly manner rather than disobeying them.

[ParkMan]

7 hours ago, qwazse said:

@ParkMan, hope my "like " bandages your perplexity over a down-vote. Frankly, I appreciate the occasional "-1". I read this thing to understand people whose ideas differ from mine. If I want a bubble, I go to council venturing committees.

I think you captured the sense of what's happened over the past few years. We've heard about troops going rogue over a number of issues. Folks like me (who care about the promise of scouting being delivered to girls ... not about laser tag), talked to tag-along girls and leaders who sanctioned them, and GS/USA moms who created close collaborations with BSA leaders to make fun things happen. Finding mostly smiles (and not white-washing potential downsides), we leaned heavily on the leadership to find a path. We didn't do that because we thought it would help our own units. We did it because the young women in those rogue troops appeared to be first class scouts (concept, not patch) and worthy of recognition as such.

Thanks @qwazse!  I appreciate the words and encouragement.

In our Cub Scout pack we did something similar.  As a result, one of the largest GSUSA troops in our area grew out of that.  My daughter's first experience in Girl Scouting was in that troop.  They really were a separate GSUSA troop and BSA pack.   However, it reinforced for me that kids are kids. 

Thank you!

[ParkMan]

Hi @Saltface & @walk in the woods,

Thanks for the thoughts.  I do get your points here.

My personal feelings on the issue don't impact my perspective here.  Truth be told, I really dislike it when Scout leaders freelance on the rules in Scouting.  The Scoutmaster of my son's troop does that too much for my liking.  In fact, I'm stepping down as CC because I'm just tired of fighting with Scouters who want to apply only the rules that suit their needs.  

Yet, I see a place for organized dissent.  I get the point that Scouts should follow rules, and I really do agree.  But, as long as it's done safely, I see a valid role for adults to advocate for causes that are important to their communities.  I saw in the earlier posts such an organized dissent.  

We can certainly disagree on whether it's appropriate for a troop to openly lobby for a rules change by openly challenging the BSA.  I respect your perspectives here.  All the best.
 

[gblotter]

From a different forum thread, a Scout has been denied Eagle by BSA National because he missed the age deadline by two months. There has been community outcry and petitions over this.

See https://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/westchester/greenburgh/2018/08/15/boy-scouts-no-eagle-rank-greenburghs-hari-channagiri/996348002/

So if the CO,  CC, and SM have a thoughtful organized dissent with BSA National over this issue, I guess it's ok for them to just go purchase some Eagle badges on eBay and award them to the boy anyway, right? We are justified in disobeying BSA National (over any issue I suppose), so long as we are thoughtful and organized in our defiance, right?

[HelpfulTracks]

On 8/9/2018 at 2:34 PM, walk in the woods said:

Maybe.  The OA has already set the equivalencies for induction and past camping experience counts (https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2018/05/23/order-of-the-arrow-to-open-unit-elections-to-scouts-bsa-venturing-and-sea-scouts/.  If Discovery is equivalent to First Class, then it wont' take much in the way of mental gymnastics to say Pathfinder is the equivalent of Star or Life.  

The OA has not set equivalencies. First, they have no authority to do so in any of the programs, the OA does not set policy for Boy Scouts, Venturing or Crew nor will they for ScoutsBSA.

Secondly, the OA worked with Venturing and Sea Scouts to identify the appropriate award level to eligible for election to the OA. While they may have worked with those programs to identify awards that roughly approximated the time and effort of achieving First Class, no one set those as equivalencies. Earning First Class does not get you Discovery, or vice versa. Each must be earned on their own in their own program. If a Scout belongs to both programs, he/she, can count much of the work done in one organization for equivalent requirements in the other (as long as they are actively registered in both simultaneously.)

Additionally, the prospective youth must have earned the rank/award the OA requires in order to be elected in that program. For example a Scout with the Discovery Award cannot be elected from a Troop if they are Second Class, they may only be elected from the Crew.

As for camping nights, Boy Scout camping nights has been the term used and that included Varsity. Boy Scouts being the reference for BSA regardless of the unit. So, yes, camping nights made as a member of a Crew or Ship would count just as they have for Varsity.