Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Eagledad

  1. Of course, but we are talking about taking the older mentor scouts out of the loop. prepubescent boys instinctively tend to herd for protection. Leadership forces them on the open away safety, so heavy mentoring gets them through it. But, 13 year olds are not older scouts and adults aren't good models to mimic. Barry
  2. This is probably where scouting will go, for insurance purposes, but it is the death of scouting as a program where youth develop character through the process of making independent decisions. My experience is under 14 scouts aren't instinctively mature for leadership, leaving the adults to intercede when the growth stalls. Scouting is the one true program that develops maturity to confront the realities of adulthood. Now what? Barry
  3. That’s all quite a reach without hard facts. That being said, what do you propose to make sure it doesn’t happen again? Barry
  4. I don’t know, the scandal of a public school coach caught. abusing girls has been in our news all week. There is probably at least one sex abuse scandal in a public school every week somewhere in the US. That is a lot of scandals. So, let’s replace BSA in your example with “your child’s school” in all public schools and imagine how parents should respond. Should National Leaders shut down all local public schools? Inherent danger? I’m trying to imagine 85,000 school teacher sex abusers. Even with all the press, that still seems like a lot. Barry
  5. I think the moderators have done as good as they can in holding the posters to a scout like tone. And I’ve not always been so kind with my opinions of the mods. The discussion is being dominated by emotionally fueled posters who believe they are the smartest contributors in the thread. Add newer members who expect extra leeway with the victim card, and the discussion gets very one-sided. Fine as long it stays on the facts of chapter 11, but most folks here have a vested interest in the future of the program, so any opinions about the future of the program can draw expected responses.
  6. Our troop had a reputation for being a safe place for many reasons. One reason was it was safe for scouts to make wrong choices and not be shamed for it. Wrong choices were considered a requirement for character growth. But we also had a reputation where scouts were physically and mentally safe. Several families with physically and mentally handicapped sons picked our troop because of our reputation. We also had active scouts who were there because it was safe from mental and physical abuse at home. just from the number of scouts in our troop who used our program as a safe refug
  7. It will be interesting to see how volunteers are guided to deal with tenting two scouts of the same identified gender, but opposite biological gender. I read where a UK Girl Scout Professional was fired for not allowing opposite biological genders' in the showers at the same time. We live in complex times. Barry
  8. Reminds me of one Webelos summer camp in 1993 where a female Webelos leader was asked to leave camp because she walked in the shower area to tell (shouted) her scouts that they were staying in the shower area too long. The whole camp could hear those scouts laughing and joking around. The scouts where in their swimsuits and she was just being a mom walking in the shower area without thinking to tell them to quit messing around and holding up the showers for the rest of the camp. That was when we knew Youth Protection was getting really serious. Barry
  9. Totally agree. My Paintball analogy reflects the same thought. My guess is that organizing strangers into a functional group is a different type of organization skill The reason the Girl Scouts are able to do it so well is because they learned over the years in their Troop. I did an exercise like this at each of our Council JLT training. After all the participants arrived to course, we gave them 15 minutes to organize into patrols of 7 with each scout assigned to a POR position. The only restriction was no two scouts from the same troop could be in a patrol. Barry
  10. Sure, with two older sons and a little girl trailing, I learned there and at other youth organizations that girls tend to fixate on being organized while boys tend to be more adventure oriented. And, in general, girls tend to think in a small picture of details while the boys think in the big picture. What I found is that the young girls will take over a group of boys when it comes to planning and organizing because they like dealing with details. Ever watch very young girls play house? Boys willingly give that up because they hate the tedious small stuff in organizing. What is more frus
  11. My reason against girls in troops is that their natural instinct of organization disrupts the growth of boys learning to organize. But, I could see all girl patrols working within the true patrol method since the personal challenges wouldn't be gender specific. The problems of natural instincts fade as each gender reaches puberty, so I don't think older scout leadership is a big problem at the older ages. It's not perfect, but we live in a culture that cares less about maximin potential growth of the youth. Barry
  12. I agree. I've yet to talk to anyone who cares how this comes out. They believe Scouting will move on as it has. I remember when many folks believe the gay restriction would kill the BSA, then they said allowing gays would kill the BSA. Some felt restricting ashiest will kill the BSA. Restricting girls was killing the program. Admitting girls will kill the program. Just about every person who I saw give these predictions had a history of other anti-BSA rants.. The BSA is a 110 years old, give or take, and has the distinct reputation of developing values and character in the scou
  13. I may be corrected, but I think the answer is "no", parents aren't required on all communications. Just a 3rd person. Of course the unit may have additional policies. Barry
  14. The older Eagles are friends and relatives in their mid 60's. The friends do not know the relatives. My Eagle son was contacted as well. None of these Eagles were victims. Barry
  15. That isn't true. Some folks just want to see the facts.. Barry
  16. Good post. I have no trouble with the anger. I struggle with how the vague numbers are used as fact. One way or the other. When data can't be defended, it becomes a weapon for both sides of debate. Doing this was a big no no in debate class back in high school because it gets nowhere. The 82,000 has gone nowhere for a long time. Better to leave this thread as a reporting the facts of the case. Barry
  17. I don't have an assumption of numbers in this discussion because there isn't accurate data one way or the other. That is the point of my post. Barry
  18. Oh, I see. You're only using a teeny, tiny itty bitty bitty predictive model. Well that is different. See how well that works when engineers used the same amount of design to defend a car wreck or plane crash.. You folks admittingly don't have a clue of the numbers, high or low. Nobody does. Lots of emotion, but not a lot of data. I'm curious, I can understand lawyers using these numbers in court to your advantage. But what do you gain defending those numbers on this forum where it doesn't make a difference. You're situation implies an obvious bias, so you aren't changing any minds.
  19. You have said this before and you should stop because it's purely conjecture based on nothing. I'm an engineer and we learn quickly that quality of the design, and safety in my field, is the result of the precision of facts and elements used in development. Anything less looses integrity. We all have our quirks and the scouts in my troop (and my kids) learned quickly that I am a patient man/father until someone spreads guesses and conjecture as facts. Once they do that, they loose integrity, and that is hard to earn back. In this case, I know a lot of elderly Eagles Scouts who were
  20. I found the greatest role modeling action that bonds and raises trust with scouts is admitting a wrong choice or action. Adults instruct at youth so much of their early life that they rarely see admissions of being wrong from the adults. Youth feel an adult admitting they are wrong raises them, the youth, to an equal level of character and it changes the relationship. Barry
  21. I'm sure I awarded at least 1000 Bobcats for that ceremony and I never saw a single scout who wasn't giddy with excitement waiting for his turn. I was the CM of a pack with 140 scouts, so 30 bobcats wasn't unusual. We looked for several dads to alternate, mainly for the scouts safety. Then Branding became popular to replace the hazing ceremony. An ink print of the Bobcat was dipped in a water base paint and applied to the arm. But, political correctness ended that ceremony. That was before tatoos were as popular as they are now. I'm thinking the ink print might be popular now. Adu
  22. Yes, National hasn't helped either. They for-bided the up-side down Bobcat ceremony because it was hazing. That was stupid, it was a simply holding scouts up-side-down because it was fun for the scouts. Not for the adults. They could have easily said it was a safety concern and everyone would have agreed. I know I would. After holding a dozen scouts up-side-down, I was done for the day. But, National instead insinuated volunteers were purposely humiliating the scouts. They felt they needed leverage I guess, but it only makes National look irresponsible. And how far does hazing and teasing
  • Create New...