Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 02/03/18 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    Wow, I read things like this on here and I learn how lucky I am to be in my little council. I also volunteer at the district level and I have heard the SE tell the DE's (and carry through on it) that if they ran a district event and showed a profit he would fire them. His theory being that if your event showed a profit, you didn't offer the kiddos enough program. We may be struggling for funds, we may be spread out all over a huge territory of rural counties, but at least we don't have to deal with the kind of stuff I read about on here. I feel for you guys, hang in there and find a role where you can maximize the experience for the scouts and keep your sanity. Also, I promise not to gripe so much about stuff that goes on at my council.
  2. 1 point
    I don't see the program weakening at all, it is not that hard of a program, there is nothing in there that a girl can't do. I do not get it at all ether. The program is not the masculine part of Boy Scouts anyway, the girls can do the program and grow in a feminine manor. Boys and men bring the masculine aspect to Scouting. If Boy Scout troops are allowed to continue to be only boys our troop will not change at all due to girls joining a new all girl troop in our town, if someone starts one. In our town BSA and GSUSA are friends and support one another, I have never once heard one of our boys say anything bad about the girls. Our Girl Scouts are very kind to the Boy Scouts as well. The faction of people running around with the idea that to be pro-girl you have to be anti-boy are merely an annoyance.
  3. 1 point
    I've seen adopted camp sites at several NC camps, including Raven Knob, Grimes, and Daniel Boone. Some get pretty elaborate, with shelters, power, engineered fire pits, hammock stands, and benches. These camps all have online registration for weekend camping, so it's easy to reserve your favorites.
  4. 1 point
    Yeah, well... Another Scouter in my troop foolishly in the spirit of service to the larger Scouting community, volunteered to be on the committee planning a district Cub Scout camping event. He told me that the financial planning for the event includes a fairly healthy profit for the council, and that the importance of this has been emphasized repeatedly. Apparently this is true for every council/district event or program - Cub family camping, Webelos camping, camporees, Klondike Derby, first aid competition, etc. I realize this is the way things work, but it seems a little sleazy to, in effect, exact "contributions" from people when they don't even know they are contributing. I am sure most unit-level Scouters, and certainly the vast majority of the parents/Scouts who pay the money, have no idea that this goes on.
  5. 1 point
    Agreed. It's a forced unneeded and problematic idea. Now if you have enough boys and girls in a rank to keep them separate and they want to do that, fine. Absolutely fine. But if you don't have the numbers and don't have the volunteers, how the heck would you make it work. Forcing it would just diminish the scouting experience.
  6. 1 point
    You are lucky, my wife assumes I can read her mind. Barry
  7. 1 point
    I am good friends with a GSUSA leader (and former professional) who was congratulating me on Son#2 getting his Eagle. I mentioned (bragged) a few of his highlights and she asked about what an SPL was which led to a discussion of our Troops (sometimes watered-down) youth led mixed age patrol method. She was shocked, just shocked that we trusted them enough to plan and carry out things on their own and while she could see it would be chaotic it would be much more helpful for leadership development than the GSUSA program. She then told me to quit poaching their girls.
  8. 1 point
  9. 1 point
    I think the terminology is tripping the whole forum up too!
  10. 1 point
    One aspect of "learning to be a good man" that I see in our troop learning to work as a team to get a job done. The boys learn to get along with new guys that are difficult to deal with, as the bonds between the boys grow things become less difficult and the boys start to see that troublesome former new guy as a welcome resource to the team. The guys state their beliefs and views on the world and have to defend them when they get called out by someone that feels different. The guys keep things friendly, because they are close friends after all, they know the other boys have their backs. It is a safe place for them to sort out their life so far and share their thoughts on the state of the world. The journey of "learning to be a good man" never ends, I continue to sort myself out. It is a process that I learned from being a scout, it stuck with me. Every generation of scout will be different from the last as the world changes, they will bring to scouting their own experiences that will add to what the other boys bring. Scouts need to learn to observe the world, think about what is right and wrong and sort themselves out.
  11. 1 point
    I'm still struggling with the "masculinity" part of the equation. For starters, I never felt like cultivating masculinity was ever a keystone of Scouting. The whole "turning boys into men" thing, I know that's the ultimate goal of Scouting for some folks here, but officially it's leadership training and character development, as it has been for ages. Two things that are gender-neutral and not dependent on masculinity to achieve. Masculinity isn't under attack as the author of the article in the original post suggests. It is being redefined, and I think rightfully so. The writer longs for the continuation of depictions of masculinity being portrayed by men, when that's just not reality anymore. Women are soldiers, firefighters, etc., and some of them are as tough as they come. So what if masculinity now extends beyond the image of the physically strong man covered in mud and scars? And are we really supposed to just keep pretending that only men can be masculine? Bear Grylls can send a woman survivalist ahead to scout locations for his show, taking more risks than him, but God forbid we put her on camera doing it. I guess I just don't understand what people expect to happen. Are we supposed to just go back to men only doing manly jobs and tell our daughters to just be teachers and nurses again? The genie isn't going back in the bottle on this one. Masculinity, to me, is in what we do, and not in who does it. What made the program ever seem manly, the adventure and the intense activities, the camping, the dirt and mud, the military-style aspects of the uniform, the ceremonies, etc., there is nothing happening that asks any of us to stop doing that stuff. Girls in the BSA aren't the problem, they're not even here yet. Although I'm sure in 10 years if things seem even less "manly" in Scouting, the girls will get all of the blame anyway. I'm hoping maybe some girls will come around to Scouting and show these boys how to be tough again.
  12. -1 points
    "Boy Scout: Life Rank, Senior Patrol Leader" Outside of Scouting, most folks have no idea what the terms "Life Rank" or "Senior Patrol Leader" mean. I think this is why the Eagle Scout Project Workbook uses the term "Eagle Scout Candidate". I think it would be acceptable to say Eagle Scout Candidate or Eagle Scout rank, anticipated winter 2018 (or something similar). Most folks would understand both of these to mean that you are close to earning Eagle Scout rank, but haven't earned it yet. This would be similar to applying for a job that requires a degree while you are still in college. Something like: John Smith, Bachelor of Science in Nursing, expected June 2018.
×