"Scoutmaster' Title Doomed?

[fred8033]

6 minutes ago, skeptic said:

I say again, "nonsense".  Let me add, "rubbish", and "give me a break", and "stop building mountains from molehills".  Tradition has its place, and this is one that deserves to remain.  

Fair enough.  We have different opinions.  That happens.

For me, the tools of scouting is getting scouts outside, active, in-fellowship with other youth and having to work to do things.  I'm less invested in the term "scoutmaster".  But, that's me.  

Edited June 29, 2020 by fred8033

[AltadenaCraig]

On 6/27/2020 at 9:11 AM, Eagledad said:

It doesn’t matter, if we don’t have the maturity to take a down as disagreeing, no words that will work either. For some here, All comments that disagree are “hate”. An arrow is just shorthand I guess. 

Barry

I disagree with you.

I've been thinking all day about your post.  I'll risk hijacking my own thread and reply as it allows a point I feel is important.  I'm happy to post "I disagree with you" - and I'm thankful you posted your disagreement with me, without a downvote.  Words move the ball forward.  But there's nothing courteous or kind about a red down-arrow on one's post.  How many of our fellow Scouters are turned-off from contributing their opinions because they'd feel a downvote is unfriendly?  Isn't that a legitimate consideration?

Edited June 29, 2020 by AltadenaCraig

[69RoadRunner]

Do I now have to call the master cylinder on my vehicles the "brake fluid pressure thingy" now?

I might be good with being called El Jefe.

[yknot]

27 minutes ago, AltadenaCraig said:

I disagree with you.

I've been thinking all day about your post.  I'll risk hijacking my own thread and reply as it allows a point I feel is important.  I'm happy to post "I disagree with you" - and I'm thankful you posted your disagreement with me, without a downvote.  Words move the ball forward.  But there's nothing courteous or kind about a red down-arrow on one's post.  How many of our fellow Scouters are turned-off from contributing their opinions because they'd feel a downvote is unfriendly?  Isn't that a mature, legitimate point?

I agree. I'm never upset by a down vote, but I do hope that someone will at least explain, courteously, why they think I'm wrong. How else do we learn to see other perspectives? Isn't that why we keep visiting the forum? I always love to hear other points of view, even if I don't agree. 

[skeptic]

56 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Fair enough.  We have different opinions.  That happens.

For me, the tools of scouting is getting scouts outside, active, in-fellowship with other youth and having to work to do things.  I'm less invested in the term "scoutmaster".  But, that's me.  

No quibble with the tools as you note; just have issue with the, to me, foolish and narrow minded concept that the term "Scoutmaster" is out dated or negative, or somehow derogatory to the scouts.  Surely we have more serious concerns, say for example, making the best parts of Scouting visible and prominent to the communities they serve, and doing it well enough that the crazies that are trying to destroy it just give up.  There was a reason that the Rockwell Scouting themed paintings were popular and still are, or that major advertisers used Scouts and Scouting themes in their ads, or that in times of stress, like disasters and the world wars, scouts were at the forefront and called upon, respected by the public in general.  They still have the same basic foundation, it is just that society has lost its own compass.  JMHO and last comment.

 

[yknot]

19 minutes ago, 69RoadRunner said:

Do I now have to call the master cylinder on my vehicles the "brake fluid pressure thingy" now?

I might be good with being called El Jefe.

While I agree with the ridiculous trend of re-parsing language so it is less offensive to some, I have to say, Scoutmaster and Cubmaster are weird titles. At least I've always thought so, especially for an organization that is in such trouble because of youth protection issues. I don't have a problem with "master" when discussing technology, music, computer science, electronics,etc. I just really don't like it when we are talking about a youth organization where the use of the term kind of implies that youth are in a subordinate position to adults in a non educational sense. I'm fine with leader, advisor, coordinator, instructor, organizer, etc. ... 

[fred8033]

2 minutes ago, skeptic said:

No quibble with the tools as you note; just have issue with the, to me, foolish and narrow minded concept that the term "Scoutmaster" is out dated or negative, or somehow derogatory to the scouts.  Surely we have more serious concerns, say for example, making the best parts of Scouting visible and prominent to the communities they serve, and doing it well enough that the crazies that are trying to destroy it just give up.  There was a reason that the Rockwell Scouting themed paintings were popular and still are, or that major advertisers used Scouts and Scouting themes in their ads, or that in times of stress, like disasters and the world wars, scouts were at the forefront and called upon, respected by the public in general.  They still have the same basic foundation, it is just that society has lost its own compass.  JMHO and last comment.

 

Well said.  I agree.  I doubt it's the highest priority.  

[69RoadRunner]

5 minutes ago, yknot said:

While I agree with the ridiculous trend of re-parsing language so it is less offensive to some, I have to say, Scoutmaster and Cubmaster are weird titles. At least I've always thought so, especially for an organization that is in such trouble because of youth protection issues. I don't have a problem with "master" when discussing technology, music, computer science, electronics,etc. I just really don't like it when we are talking about a youth organization where the use of the term kind of implies that youth are in a subordinate position to adults in a non educational sense. I'm fine with leader, advisor, coordinator, instructor, organizer, etc. ... 

I've never encountered anyone in person who ever commented on the title in any way, positive or negative.

I get the impression that the vast majority of people give it no thought beyond it identifying who holds the position.  Maybe people have felt otherwise but haven't spoken about it.

It doesn't seem to me to be worth the time and money to change to something else. 

[Eagledad]

31 minutes ago, AltadenaCraig said:

I disagree with you.

I've been thinking all day about your post.  I'll risk hijacking my own thread and reply as it allows a point I feel is important.  I'm happy to post "I disagree with you" - and I'm thankful you posted your disagreement with me, without a downvote.  Words move the ball forward.  But there's nothing courteous or kind about a red down-arrow on one's post.  How many of our fellow Scouters are turned-off from contributing their opinions because they'd feel a downvote is unfriendly?  Isn't that a legitimate consideration?

There are many here who are offended with any opinion that doesn't agree with there post. Some are identified by their constant rebuttals; probably believing they win if they can get the last word. But a lot of us don’t like to get muddy (comes from wrestling with a pig only gets you muddy and makes the pig happy). 

Some posters here want to be clever antagonist. Usually they start out claiming they are neutral or are a good guy (I’m religious), then they follow with offensive trigger words. Ironically, many of those posters don’t see their hypocrisy, so it’s easy to call them on it.

I’m generally pragmatic. I like to get to the point and skip all the touchy-feely filler. Many folks find that offensive, including my wife. But, it tends to push the topic to a discussion based on facts or reality, away from grey area stuff that leads the discussion nowhere.

Do you like the warm fuzzy Green up arrow? Do you require more words (praise?) from the poster?

I notice a lot Red Arrows in reference to the tone of the post. That’s a good indication to try again with a different tone. Unless that tone was Intentional.

The arrows work for folks who are in a hurry or don’t like to wrestle with pigs. But, if a poster truly wants a friendly tone, they will figure it out.
 

Barry

[Eagle94-A1]

Well if they want to get rid of Scoutmaster, let's use the term "Skip" which is what they call SMs over in the UK instead of Mr. ________.

[Eagle94-A1]

4 hours ago, MattR said:

Just an FYI,  we've been removing media that does not pertain to the topic. I'm tired of being the school marm with the ruler smacking knuckles. Consider your knuckles spared

At least you aren't the nuns who used psychological warfare on us when we misbehaved.Still remember Sr. Patricia making me tutor the guy I got in a fight with. A smack on the knuckles would have been  much welcomed.

 

 

[yknot]

1 hour ago, Eagledad said:

There are many here who are offended with any opinion that doesn't agree with there post. Some are identified by their constant rebuttals; probably believing they win if they can get the last word. But a lot of us don’t like to get muddy (comes from wrestling with a pig only gets you muddy and makes the pig happy). 

Some posters here want to be clever antagonist. Usually they start out claiming they are neutral or are a good guy (I’m religious), then they follow with offensive trigger words. Ironically, many of those posters don’t see their hypocrisy, so it’s easy to call them on it.

I’m generally pragmatic. I like to get to the point and skip all the touchy-feely filler. Many folks find that offensive, including my wife. But, it tends to push the topic to a discussion based on facts or reality, away from grey area stuff that leads the discussion nowhere.

Do you like the warm fuzzy Green up arrow? Do you require more words (praise?) from the poster?

I notice a lot Red Arrows in reference to the tone of the post. That’s a good indication to try again with a different tone. Unless that tone was Intentional.

The arrows work for folks who are in a hurry or don’t like to wrestle with pigs. But, if a poster truly wants a friendly tone, they will figure it out.
 

Barry

You have sent me bizarre personal messages and have not responded when I have asked you what the heck you mean.  That is not a friendly tone my friend. 

[yknot]

Just now, yknot said:

You have sent me bizarre personal messages and have not responded when I have asked you what the heck you mean.  That is not a friendly tone my friend. 

Unless some has hijacked your account, in which case I understand. However you have not responded to that request either. 

[David CO]

2 hours ago, Eagledad said:

 

Some posters here want to be clever antagonist. Usually they start out claiming they are neutral or are a good guy (I’m religious), then they follow with offensive trigger words. Ironically, many of those posters don’t see their hypocrisy, so it’s easy to call them on it.

 

Do you mean offensive trigger words... like hypocrite?

 

[David CO]

Getting back to the topic, I don't think the title of Scoutmaster is doomed.  Even if BSA does decide to change the title in their paperwork and publications, many units will continue to use it.  A lot of people don't say Scouts BSA.