Jump to content

New to Scouting?

Sign in to follow this  

Questions and answers for parents and leaders new to Scouting.

223 topics in this forum

    • 20 replies
    • 3122 views
    • 8 replies
    • 1272 views
    • 33 replies
    • 3670 views
    • 13 replies
    • 911 views
    • 24 replies
    • 9604 views
    • 26 replies
    • 4320 views
  1. Skill Awards

    • 12 replies
    • 2407 views
    • 4 replies
    • 947 views
  2. Smaller pack flag

    • 2 replies
    • 825 views
    • 11 replies
    • 1196 views
    • 46 replies
    • 6048 views
  3. square knot patches

    • 5 replies
    • 767 views
    • 4 replies
    • 674 views
    • 73 replies
    • 14855 views
    • 7 replies
    • 1148 views
Sign in to follow this  
  • LATEST POSTS

    • This year is the 50th anniversary of the Girl Rangers! Article below follows Outside article by former Ranger Betsy Teter. “We always knew we were doing something groundbreaking," Teter said. “I wish this sort of outdoor experience existed for everyone. It was formative.” Dunlap and the other former Girl Rangers agreed. “At the time, I knew, you couldn’t be a girl in the 70s, in a Boy Scout uniform, and not think I am doing something different,” Dunlap said. “We did everything in terms of outdoor adventures that the boys did. It felt like a nice leveling of the playing field. I did not miss having to sell Girl Scout cookies and we didn’t do crafts and we didn’t get badges, it was just ‘where could we go?’ and that was exciting and liberating and equalizing.” Spartanburg Girl Rangers broke gender barrier in 1970. What happened to them is a mystery https://www.goupstate.com/story/lifestyle/2020/11/27/decades-before-boy-scouts-went-coed-girl-rangers-broke-gender-barrier/5960676002/
    • Equity is a KEY component of critical race theory. Anything short of an equal start (which is impossible as everyone doesn't have the same life experiences) is discrimination and falls short of "equity". Offering some event to everyone regardless of race, gender, etc is not enough. You have to correct for all disparities or it isn't "equity".
    • Let's start with the "equity" portion. Equity is an impossible goal to achieve. No matter how we strive we will never achieve equal outcomes. The goal of "equity" is a myth, an impossible achievement cooked up by Marxists/Postmodernists. We will ALL make choices in our lives that result in fortunate/unfortunate outcomes. In the US, the VAST majority of what we achieve is due to our personal choices, not the opinions of others. DEI philosophy is not merely "creating a culture that welcomes and respects diverse perspectives" or "creating a sense of belonging and build communities where every person feels respected and valued". If that's all it was, I'd be fine with it and no one in their right mind would oppose it. Should scouts not denounces racism, discrimination, inequality and injustice? You keep posing this question as if it is a neutral topic and people have repeatedly explained that the issue is not general definition of the words " Diversity" and "Inclusion". No one in their right mind is against that. The problem is the application of these topics, the material surrounding it, and the methods by which we achieve those laudable goals; they are highly slanted with leftist propaganda. I don't disagree with diversity as a laudable goals as long as they aren't at the cost of our values or mission. Example: If we utilize funds to recruit more POC, I'm all for it, but if we do so by shuttering camps and reducing opportunities for everyone, then we've gone too far. There is a balance between these.   Denounce racism? Absolutely! Denounce injustice? Sure! Let's start with BSA categorizing the deaths of Breonna Taylor and George Floyd as "murder" when one was not and the other is (at a bare minimum) under some dispute. We can neutrally state with complete confidence that we want justice to be served without taking sides in a matter or inflaming hostilities. Denounce inequality? Probably, but that depends on what you mean. If you mean equality of opportunity, solid "yes" from me. If you mean equality of outcome, that's a hard "no"; it's an impossibility. There will NEVER be equal outcomes no matter what. Denounce discrimination? That depends. We discriminate ethically and legally all the time. That guy that offers you a deal of a lifetime? Yeah, we're reasonably skeptical. That Nigerian Prince in your email? Yeah...hard pass. You say "that's not what I'm talking about and you know it!", well, it really isn't that simple. Obviously we talk about discrimination based on race as being something pretty much everyone is against, but what about discrimination based on ability? Is it reasonable to expect that we have all camps and high adventure modified so that someone in a wheelchair can attend? There are some who believe this should be the case. So, in general, yes, I denounce discrimination, but within reason. I'm sorry, but no. Blind adherence to terms that are vaguely defined and can mean a WIDE range of things is NOT what scouts are part of. Again, if we are talking general terms, then yes, we're on the same page AND there's no opposition. However, the trend (from "Diversity and Inclusion" to "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion") seems to indicate a movement toward mandating the teaching of "check your privilege", promoting "anti-racism" , fixing "systemic racism", and a host of leftist mantras. Teaching that America's core principles are "racist" is both absurd and, by definition, antiAmerican. while it's true America was indeed founded during times of racism and oppression, that was the world they lived in. It isn't a reflection of America or its ideals.  
    • EQUAL OPPORTUNITY VS GUARANTEED EQUAL OUTCOME (EVERY YOUTH AN EAGLE).
    • Sadly I do not see the BSA fulfilling "the ability of boys to do things for themselves and others, to train them in Scoutcraft, and to teach them patriotism, courage, self-reliance, and kindred virtues, using the methods which are now in common use by Boy Scouts ." The Patrol Method died on October 1, 2018 when patrols could no longer do day activities, i.e. patrol meetings, patrol hikes, patrol shopping etc. And as noted the Advancement Methods has been destroyed by the "One and Done" mentality prevalent in Scouting today. Scouts no longer have to "Master the skills," like my generation and older did. The badge no longer represents "what the Scout can do, not what the Scout has done." Summer Camps, MBUs, and now the online MBUs are a joke.     The problem is that we did lose over 20% of our membership as a result of this decision. Some of those longtime , experienced Scouters that left still have not been replaced, and it left a vacuum. Others who disagreed with this decision have slowly backed away from non-unit positions, focusing on their units. And again this leaves a void.     I have seen this happen. Do not know the stats, by they do not call FOS 'Fund Our Salary" for nothing.  When My district could no longer raise enough money to pay for a DE, we lost them I know a DE who was trying to start a SCOUTREACH program in his district. When one company found out, they were willing to make a donation to help equip the the units started in the program. When the DE attempted to find out the process for this with his DFS, he was chewed out for attempting to start these SCOUTREACH units and was told they cost more money than they bring in. Several other DEs told me similar stories, the focus is on payroll.   National encourages the awarding of advancement, and turns a blind eye to its problems. In one recent video, National was bragging on the number of belt loops and merit badges being earned virtually, to the point of publically praising the council that had the most awards "earned." Worst case was the "Eagle" whose district BOR found some major problems, and followed procedure to come up with a plan to rectify the situation. The council advancement committee upheld the decision when it was appealed to them. BUT when National got the appeal, they overruled both the council and district decisions, and gave the Scout Eagle. Their rationale was " You do not penalize the Scout for the mistakes of the adults."    Sadly I wish this was true. I have found some challenges. I have found names of youth still on the charter after I had removed them twice on previous recharter documents.     Sadly that is also not true, not only on the local level, but national level as well. You can read about some of the experiences I have had regarding local level. The 411 Commitee and the Philmont Committee are the best examples of professionals not informing key volunteers what they are doing. My personal beef is Instapalms. 94% of those polled were either Against (16%) or Strongly Against (78%), yet they did it anyway.        Agree     Agree with you. Some states did have Mandatory Report Laws that affected Scouters and others did not, prior to and during that phase of YPT. One of the challenges of a national organization is having multiple jurisdictions to deal with.      Yes, the volunteers love Scouting. But the professionals as I have shown actually run things. And for some, it is just a job.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...