What's in a name?

[ianwilkins]

15 minutes ago, Monkeytamer said:

IThey feel like they should have earned the right, through many years of hard work and endurance to go out as Boy Scouts, not as some name that doesn't even make sense to them.  One of them asked me: "what even is a Scout BSA?  Tat's not even a noun!"  They feel like they earned the right to earn their Eagle Scout and take the mantle as a Boy Scout, just like their brothers and fathers and every other man who ever reached that pinnacle of Boy Scouting.  So they looked at the timelines and realized that by getting their butts in gear, they could make the deadline and stand among the last remaining Boy Scout Eagles instead of as one of the new "Scout BSA" Eagles.  I think they took proactive steps to make something they wanted happen instead of howling at the sky.  I think it was a pretty mature reaction.

What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other word would smell as sweet;

- Shakespeare

 

[Monkeytamer]

On ‎1‎/‎12‎/‎2019 at 5:04 PM, qwazse said:

@Monkeytamer, all the best to your clutch of Eagles!

I would be remiss if I didn't encourage you to tell them that theirs still work to be done. There a Palms -- not just insta-palms -- to be earned, Hornaday Awards, Patrol leaders to train, camps to staff, adventures to be had, etc ... There's nothing greater than a bunch of fellas modelling scouting to the rest of the troop without fretting over advancement. The rest of their terms should be awesome.

Thank you Sir!  Regardless of all the current controversy, eight boys from the same class making Eagle together is an enormously joyful thing.  When they joined, there were 22 Tiger Cubs in their group.  Thirteen made it to Boy Scouts and these eight persevered. I'd be proud as punch as their scout leader, but that my son is in this group makes it even more special.  Our troop runs old school, i.e. patrol method, all-weather, camping year round.  We haven't had an Eagle younger than 16 in the entire time I've been an ASM (10 years) and then only one or two. In short, these guys are rugged, capable outdoorsmen.  They are experienced leaders and I couldn't be prouder to have been associated with them throughout their youth.

I will of course encourage them to keep coming out and camping.  Their example is something all the younger scouts can still benefit from.    

[gblotter]

On 1/13/2019 at 8:35 AM, vol_scouter said:

Surveys of the youth (and absolutely every group measured including volunteers, donors, Eagle Scouts, the OA and others showed a similar level of support) in Scouting showed a 75% or greater support for the addition of girls so they had a voice.

Do we really need to revisit the topic of the highly manipulative surveys that were selectively distributed and strangely worded to ensure a pre-determined outcome?

Please don't insult the intelligence of this forum by trying to assert that those bogus survey results were in any way a fair representation of support.

Edited January 14, 2019 by gblotter

[qwazse]

I agree with @gblotter. Telling boys about surveys in which they likely did not participate is useless ... especially when the surveys did not address the name of the organization that hopefully they will one day lead.

I've experienced this first first hand with scouts and unit numbers as troops merged. Quick summary: the older scouts felt left behind when a vote went against using the number of the older troop. There was resentment. Then a year later, when the new CO wanted to charge rent, the CC decided to charter under the old CO and old #. So, the next round of crossovers kept that #.

I made it clear repeatedly, that nobody had to pull off numbers of their uniform. No other troop was using either #. So, we have two numbers that can hang on sleeves and pass uniform inspection. Earn respect through cheerful service. You'll be fine.

Unfortunately, for our older scouts, the back-and-forth was too much. Most left scouting at life rank.

Boys are sentimental. Can we blame them? We taught them to love tradition.

Edited January 14, 2019 by qwazse

[Monkeytamer]

22 hours ago, MattR said:

I don't see the benefit of engaging Monkeytamer. It was his first post and he implied he wants to get out of scouts before girls are allowed to join. Which is less than 3 weeks from now so I doubt he'll be around much longer.

The issues being brought up on this forum do not match my experience locally. Everything I've heard from local troops are that whether they do or don't want girls they either will or will not create a girls troop. That's the end of the discussion. So I think these people that say they have to leave before girls join are not that common. What's probably more common is a mix of opinions in each troop. And those that are upset will leave. Those that stick around are going to make themselves miserable.

You are a moderator and you don't see the value of engaging members on this forum should they not have a lot of posts or voice an opinion contrary to what you see as the right way of thinking?  Interesting.  For all the rest of you that engaged me anyway, a tip of the cap to you.  Just for the record, I have spent about half my life involved with scouting (I'm 51 btw).  I never said I was leaving scouting (or this forum), but even if I did, wouldn't it be a good idea to engage such a person and find out why?   

[MattR]

1 hour ago, ianwilkins said:

What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other word would smell as sweet;

- Shakespeare

 

They're scouts. I doubt they'll smell sweet.

 

[Eagledad]

19 hours ago, skeptic said:

Okay, while I apologize for what you feel was a juvenile response, though I would say it just reflects my screen name, I will make an effort to give you a sense of my opinion. 

I have spent over fifty years working within the Scouting family and have witnessed boys being challenged by girls in venture groups and on a number of camp staffs, and on one or two occasions unexpected intermixing with Girl Scouts on an outing.  But, most of the observation of which I speak come from working in middle schools and a few high schools where there were mixed gender groups for projects and such.  There were a few instances even at the fourth and fifth-grade levels.  Since I subbed for twenty years in many schools and three districts I had a fairly broad experience. 

I have also spent many years reading various discussions and studies related to these kinds of interactions just for interest sake and a broadening of my perspectives.  

I guess I am simply getting jaded in regard to the over the top responses being proffered in regard to this current issue, but also every issue that suggests moving in new directions within the BSA and Scouting in general.  It should be obvious by other posts that I believe change is a constant and necessary and should be run with to the best of our abilities.  At the same time, I have noted that any changes come with the need to be flexible and find the best paths forward.  Change is inevitable in whatever arena we are in.  So, I hope this post may be cleared now and I have been able to reenter my dotage.

 

 

Hmm. Maybe a name change is due because what you lace all your posts with is not skepticism. 

I will skip most of your reply and go directly to the root of your ranting. and it's not just you, but a few others here also. It's the part where you express frustration of those who resist moving on into the new direction. Shesh, ever since you joined this forum, your angry posts have the appearance of an immature 25 year old without any of life's experiences. And that is who I send my replies. You could Knock me over with a feather when I learned you are probably older than this grandfather.

Your frustration reflects snowflakes preaching Safe-places. Safe-places is code for "restricting free speech". Snowflakes would rather restrict speech than patiently listen and absorb because they don't have life experiences to have a dialoge with reason and logic. They simply lack the maturity to sit, listen, and seek a cohesive resolution. I've read several articles all suggesting this behavior is the result of the Smartphone. But you were weaned off of the old Bell dial phones.

Not all change is good. From what I can see, nobility isn't motivating National's policy changes. Indications are the ONLY reason National changed direction is simply to survive. Not political correctness or to give girls a chance to an outdoor program or any other noble vision. The BSA is simply trying to survive by attaining more funds through a new demographic source of members. Can survival be a noble motivation? That would be an interesting discussion that might change hearts.

OK, girls in the Troops fits your dreams, but surly you can understand why it's not the dream for many who through experience are married to ideals of a program that successfully survived for the last 100 years. Whatever successes you have observed outside of the program, how could they trump my successes inside the program? You should be empathetic to the resistance because change is hard and calm only comes from quiet voices of hope. I'm told by my kids that old men are set in their ways. But maybe not. In my religion, God teaches man humility, not pride. Hope is a fruit of humility. Maybe we can change simply by changing what we preach. 

Girls are here. Just relish in that change and set an example of quiet observance. If you have an antidote to offer some hope, give it without judging those who aren't of the same mind. And while you are calmly working hope into the hearts of the hurting, also remember in your quiet humility, you could be wrong. 

Barry

[RememberSchiff]

Ok then,  we are getting off-topic.  Perhaps this topic has run its course.

[shortridge]

4 hours ago, Monkeytamer said:

I'm sorry John. I don't understand your question.  I'm not being snarky either.  I just don't get what you are asking me.

You wrote back upstream: “We helped them navigate the Eagle process and they all sat for their initial BORs in November or December.  They spent Christmas break helping each other with their Eagle projects, which are all solid projects mind you.  No weak sister projects in the bunch.  five of them, including my son, will sit for their final Eagle Scout BOR next Tuesday night.”

I believe John’s comment was referring to the “initial BOR” and “final Eagle Scout BOR.” There is no such thing. There is one BOR for each rank.

[Monkeytamer]

5 minutes ago, shortridge said:

You wrote back upstream: “We helped them navigate the Eagle process and they all sat for their initial BORs in November or December.  They spent Christmas break helping each other with their Eagle projects, which are all solid projects mind you.  No weak sister projects in the bunch.  five of them, including my son, will sit for their final Eagle Scout BOR next Tuesday night.”

I believe John’s comment was referring to the “initial BOR” and “final Eagle Scout BOR.” There is no such thing. There is one BOR for each rank.

Oh.  Well, it might be semantics on my part.  I know that there is only one Board of Review meaning the body that judges the Eagle candidates, but doesn't every scout have to appear before that body at least twice to earn Eagle?  In our council and district, the boy will sit before the board for the initial approval of his proposed project and then again after he completes the project and the Scoutmaster Conference.  If that's not how it's done everywhere else, I claim ignorance.  As for the process as practiced here, there is a great deal of administrative tasks that the boys have to accomplish in a prescribed order and timely manner just to get to the final time before the BOR.

[Jameson76]

38 minutes ago, Monkeytamer said:

Oh.  Well, it might be semantics on my part.  I know that there is only one Board of Review meaning the body that judges the Eagle candidates, but doesn't every scout have to appear before that body at least twice to earn Eagle?  In our council and district, the boy will sit before the board for the initial approval of his proposed project and then again after he completes the project and the Scoutmaster Conference.  If that's not how it's done everywhere else, I claim ignorance.  As for the process as practiced here, there is a great deal of administrative tasks that the boys have to accomplish in a prescribed order and timely manner just to get to the final time before the BOR.

That can vary from district to district.  The district does have to approve the Eagle Scout candidates project and sign off on the proposal.  There is mention of meeting, but that is not specifically required.  Only that it be approved prior to any work.  The proposal could be submitted and returned with comments on approval or areas to be answered prior to approval.

For the unit approval it is denoted that the unit can designate one individual to meet and approved Eagle projects, the full committee meeting to review is not required, though the  unit could do that.

[skeptic]

 

Eagledad:

 

"Shesh, ever since you joined this forum, your angry posts have the appearance of an immature 25 year old without any of life's experiences."  

Surely you have me confused with someone else.  Not sure about since I joined the forum, since I have been on it from day one almost.  I am sorry you apparently find me immature and strident, though that is not the general impression I believe I share or how most see me; granting that I do lose patience with some recurring complaints and loss of focus on the important real elements of the program.  Thank you for enlightening me to my irrationalities and seeming reversion to my less seasoned thought patterns.  

Now, back to the important subject of this forum as a whole, the improvement and continuation of Scouting in whatever form it works best.  

 

Edited January 14, 2019 by skeptic
clarify who is quoted.

[RememberSchiff]

Yes. Agree to disagree, even if wrongly identified.

" the improvement and continuation of Scouting in whatever form it works best. "  or whatever form we have to work with?  

Thanks,

RS

@MattR @desertrat @LeCastor @John-in-KC

 

Edited January 14, 2019 by RememberSchiff

[Jameson76]

52 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said:

 

" the improvement and continuation of Scouting in whatever form it works best. "  or whatever form we have to work with?  

 

And that is in fact the real issue isn't it?  The quoted statement starts with the statement the improvement and ends with in whatever form it works best.  

Many view the changes as an improvement and hope to see these changes as a better (re:improved) offering of Scouting.  Other view the changes as not in fact an improvement and further movement away from Scouting roots and sadly see these changes as lesser offering of Scouting.

Unfortunately all we have is anecdotal evidence, supposition, and guesses for either case to be made.  Real challenge is that National BSA has been less than forthcoming on the real reason.  Faulty surveys, public opinion, townhall meetings, and "unanimous" votes do not a groundswell of support make.   Now we are getting into the real rubber meets the road and working to spool up numerous units.  That in and of itself will be a pretty good challenge.  If you work with a unit keeping one that has several years of history and a good track record is a challenge already.  Building all of that from scratch is daunting.

Sad truth is that  @Eagledad correctly noted earlier today that this was a survival mode change, simple math.  As noted in the 1978 classic Animal House "we need the dues"

Now a year and some months following the announcement of Girls being able to join Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts sorry Scouts BSA there have been many other challenges.  

• Linked troops solution and vague answers about are we really going coed?
• YPT that is clearly not balance as one declared gender is required to have a leader of similar gender present, no such requirement for the other gender
• 20% of the registered membership and CO's leaving by the end of 2019
• A name change for the flagship branch of the organization
• Extension for requirements so current joiners in 2019 get 2 years to earn the vaunted Eagle Scout award
• A lawsuit by another organization over use of the names Girls and Scouts
• Possibly going into bankruptcy to stave off lawsuit payments
• Summit payments timeline keeps coming down the tracks

Clearly no one knows if the changes will be an improvement, clearly no one knows if the new scouting "look" will work best.  Will this result in a net increase in youth being served?  No one can tell, we are sort of moving along on a wing and a prayer.  However, this is where we are now, moving ahead and no way to go back.

One cautionary note.  In the 1970's the decision was to reinvent the Boy Scouts program and roll out the Improved Scouting Program (ISP).  At the end of 1970 BSA membership was 6,287,284.  At the end of 1980 BSA membership was  4,326,082.  That is a reduction of over 30%.  Whatever may happen, BSA will not be able to weather another improvement to the program along those lines.

 

Edited January 14, 2019 by Jameson76

[SSScout]

I love it when a plan, er , discussion comes together. 

What to call the MiddleSchool Scouts?  Each Program (age determined) of BSA, er, Scouts USA  has a moniker.  HAD a moniker....    Cub Scouts. Webelos Scouts.  Boy Scouts.  Venturer Scouts .  Explorer Scouts.  Lone Scouts.   The mind boggles with the confusion inherent.   

The last part of the identifier was always "SCOUTS", yes?  Gender neutral "Scouts" ?   I had one respondent to my query suggest "Field Scouts" for the Troops.   

Regardless of the dissension , there is sufficient agreement that our young females can benefit from the BSA program,and there is sufficient dissatisfaction by the young ladies with the usual GSUSA program for the young ladies to flock (?) to the BSA program if offered,  and since the BSA has officially seen fit to offer the usual BSA program to the young ladies, voila,  here we are discussing what to call our new members.....    ,