Re: Hazing

John White wrote:

> On July 27th, Robert Losee sent this as part of a message:
> > The principal enunciated by #3 seems pretty clear to me. Getting into
> Cub
> > Scouts must be solemn and dignified. This eliminates fun. So while many
> > ceremonies in the literature may be fun they can't be used if we follow the
> > prinicipals set forth by national. DON'T DO IT! (have fun that is)
>
> The issue of fun was never dealt with in the previous message. You are the one
> to state this. Having been a CubMaster and Scoutmaster both, I have resources
> at hand which provide all kinds of great ceremonies and games and such. Many
> of these ceremonies give the boy and his parents an opportunity for solemn
> understanding of the step this lad is taking.. But at the same time, they are
> having a great time.

Putting #3 back in the message it reads:> >> 3. It makes a frivoulous [sic]
occasion of what should be a solemn,
> >> dignified ceremony.

This may be a matter of semantics but for me "solemn, dignified" can't mean
laughter or grins, which for me equates with fun. My Merriam-Webster's 9th
Collegiate tells me that solemn must be "marked by grave sedateness and earnest
sobriety".
Now a ceremony may be a "great time" like _Madam Butterfly_ is for some, so long
as it is grave and sedate (and I hope sober). My point was that any ceremony (at
least with Bobcats) that has people grinning, laughing, or smiling is to be
staunchly avoided according to this policy statement.

I don't hide the fact that I disagree with this. I think to attract boys we need
to use the right bait. The right bait seems like it ought to be fun and not like a
grave yard.

But from a policy point of view we volunteers are restricted by this letter to
solumn, dignified, grave, and sedate. In short, Fun? Don't do it.

Bob Losee, SM T25 Lincoln NE

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message
• Previous message
• Maybe in reply to
• Next in thread