Fat Old Guy

"The new Scouts may advance quickly but Scouting is no more about advancement than karate is about belts.

So who said it was? "

You and all the others who crow about First Class/First Year and boys who drop out because they don't advance quickly. If they cared about learning vs. advancement they'd stay in.

We have about six boys in my troop that have all the requirements for tenderfoot, second class and first class checked off except for Scoutmaster conferences and Boards of Review. They all have a bunch of merit badges, come to every meeting and go on every campout. Are they missing out on something? Not in my mind. They are having fun. Are they good Scouts? Yes they are.

On the other hand, we have a Scout whose parents are pushing him. He made life at the earliest possible date and presented his Eagle project to the troop committee the next week. He looks like a good Scout, his uniform is always pressed but he's really gotten nothing out of the program.

Who would I rather have in my troop?

"Scouting isn't supposed to be about hanging with your buds.

I'm sorry you must be talking about a different scouting program than Boy Scouts."

If you want to hang with your buds, go to the corner and hang out. Part of the Scouting experience is learning to deal with different people and even learning to work with people that aren't your friends. Maybe you'll become friends, maybe you won't.

I have the feeling that if BSA abolished the New Scout Patrol tomorrow, Bob would say that was the right thing to do and had been too long in coming.

Oops, missed that campaign hat reference. However, my arguments still stand. No mention is made of other hats that are permitted hence a Cub Scout leader may wear the expedition hat or the campaign hat.

If you follow the assumption that only Boy Scout leaders may wear the campaign hat, what of District or Council committee members? When I'm wearing my grey loops, I am not a Boy Scout Leader per se but I am a Scouter. No headgear is specified for District or Council level volunteers so does that mean we must go bareheaded?

" Anybody know what the heck bombazine was? "

Bombazine is a type of twill, originally made of silk and wool but eventually made of cotton and wool or just wool.

I call it a garrison cap and they are available on ebaY. If you have a big head, it can take a while to find an extra large. Both the wool and cotton versions may be found.

I find it interesting that the Male Leader inspection form makes no mention of the Campaign Hat or the Expedition Hat and the Female Leader inspection form mentions the campaign hat.

We also find no restrictions of headgear in the Insignia guide, however, we do know that any previous BSA uniform hat is still allowed to be worn with any uniform.

Knowing that the campaign hat and expedition hat are legal options for the Male Boy Scout Leader but are not mentioned on the inspection form we can conclude that they are also legal options for Male Cub Scout leaders since there seems to be no evidence to the contrary.

I'm not a fan of the New Scout Patrol. I've seen far too many that were run like Third Year Webelos Dens with the ASM for New Scouts and a couple of Dads running the show. The troop guides are often shut out of the process so you have a bunch of adults ramming everything down the throats of the boys. All of the activities seem to be geared toward specific requirements instead of the Scouts finding advancement opportunities in activities.

Then we have the idea of leadership, the patrol elects a Patrol Leader but what does a 10.5 year old know about leadership or even the patrol method so, again the adults do the work.

The new Scouts may advance quickly but Scouting is no more about advancement than karate is about belts.

My troop reorganized its patrols a couple years ago in an effort to change to mixed-aged patrols. After all the crying was done there was only on mixed-age patrol. Know what? That patrol runs as smooth as silk.

Scouting isn't supposed to be about hanging with your buds. Scouting is about teaching and learning. A group of 13 year olds spend most of their time squabbling about who is in charge, elections be damned. A mixed age group finds the natural leaders.

This idea of age segregation is farily new to our society. Way back when, kids of all ages played together. If you wanted to play a game of football, all the kids in the neighborhood played from age 7 to age 17. One of the great things about ages mixing was that the younger kids learned how to moderate their behavior around the older kids so they'd fit in. Now kids only deal with their own age group and too many seem to be at a loss when they have to deal with older kids or adults.

I read of a couple Scout troops that went to the Pentagon and supplied water to the rescue workers after the ragheads attacked.

However, if you read the old literature, Scouts often served as couriers. Now we have VHF radios, cell phones, etc. so disasters don't need couriers.

Cynical? Me? Nooooooo, not I. :-)

As a famous cleric once said, "Your faith can't be very strong if you can't question your beliefs."

That was then, this is now.

The other Al (I'm not him) is a well known and respected participant of the forum.

So well known that a search of the forum going back to 1997 (the earliest year available on the search page) didn't turn up a single post with his name in it. That's what I call fame.

Why didn't this Al say "hey, what are you doing with my name?" Why hasn't Al come forward instead of hiding behind the moderator's metaphorical skirts?

(This message has been edited by Fat Old Guy)

Bob, Bob, Bob, you're mixed up. Just like you wanted to mix first aid into a discussion about uniforms, you're trying to mix youth wearing uniforms with adults not wearing uniforms.

That your flare for fashion is more important than a boy's positive memories about a moment in scouting?

Huh? Why can't a boy have positive memories and look good at the same time.

Isn't looking "bad" rather sujective?

So is looking good, what is clean, what is dirty, etc..

as the boys grow in scouting so will they grow into these sahes

With apologies to Arte Johnson, very symbolic but stupid. Symbolism is not an excuse for looking bad in a uniform.

My son was like that. His sash almost hit his knees when he got it at 12,

Wouldn't it have been far better to either alter his sash or buy the smaller one? What do they run, $5 or $8? I know, everyone will cry, "I'll have to sew the patches twice!"

I guess I see it a little differently. to me buying a slightly larger uniform for a growing child is "being prepared".

Where did I say, "slightly bigger"? Slightly bigger is how parents have always bought clothes. I'm talking about a kid who would fit a youth small wearing an adult medium. As I said, fitting a a shirt to fit for two years is good enough. You don't need to buy one to fit into adulthood. We have one small boy whose sash dangles to his knees.

BTW, if you are a BOB (big ol' boy) like me, you don't get an option on different materials for uniforms. They only come in the 65/35 blend.

You can have any uniform item custom made but I'm told that you have to buy two of them.

The standout fact here is that Little League gives the boys the uniform and expects that it will be worn.

They really don't "give" the uniform, it is included in the cost. I run across parents buying those absurdly priced shorts and when I comment, I'm told that they are "required" by the troop. Maybe we give too many parents too many options.

I have run across troops in poor areas where the boys are given a complete uniform by the troop, which usually means that the CO donated it. As they outgrow it, they are given another uniform and turn in the old one for the next generation. I see 100% uniform compliance in these troops. I also never see a wrinkled shirt.

While we're at it, let's work on getting the parents to buy uniforms that fit. $25 or $30 every couple years isn't that big of a deal for most families that I know but I see moms buying a shirt big enough for the kid to wear through high school. I'm always told it is so they don't have to resew all the patches. That's insane.

"The meetings are boring" We used to hear this alot. We also used to have adults planning the meetings. Now the Scouts are planning the meetings and we don't hear the boring line anymore.

I have some Scout Handbooks from countries that were once part of the British Empire and one thing that I noticed are the comments that the only recognition that adults should wear are their Wood Badge beads.

This makes sense because the Brits downplay awards. We give our soldiers medals for joining, staying clean, being there, etc.. The Brits only seem to give medals for spectacular actions. I remember reading that our propensity for meaningless medals caused some consternation among the Brits during WW II. Our guys showed up with a chest full of ribbons to impress the girls and their guys who had already been involved in the shooting had nothing.

I'm like the dog who thinks his name is "Down Boy!" My wife has been calling me "Fat Old Guy" for so long that I think its my given name. :-)

My son had a difficult time passing the swim test and at one time our Scoutmaster had told me that there options for those who were physically unable to pass the test. Fortunately, he managed to squeak through and I didn't have to apply for an exemption.

You'd probably see a drop in the afflulent areas as well. Folks don't mind spending $150 or more to play football but $50 for Scouts is unreasonable.

Bob says that making the uniform mandatory defeats the purpose of it. I don't think that I'll buy that. The military has a mandatory uniform and the reactions to the uniform vary from service to service and even from unit to unit. I've never know a Marine that didn't take great pride in his uniform and what it represented. On the other hand, with the exception of the elite unit, most soldiers seem to view their uniform as a necessary evil.

Quite honestly, I wouldn't mind paying more for a uniform if the quality was there.

For the Scouts, the prices should be more reasonable and there should be a more aggressive marketing campaign to point out that the pants are designed to be grown into and that there is a 100% satisfaction guarantee.

Today's cotton shirts aren't near the quality of the old ones. The material isn't as durable, the stitching isn't the same quality.

I have a cotton short sleeved shirt that started falling apart before it was three years old. Let's assume that I wear it 27 times a year (I have a long sleeved shirt for fall and winter. Since I only wear the shirt for a few hours at a time, I don't wash it every week so it gets laundered maybe 9 or 10 times a year. I also hang dry all of my shirts so it never sees the dryer. In three years, it's been through the washer 30 times and is falling apart. I have cotton dress shirts that have been laundered every other week for three years and are still presentable.

Comfort is in the "eye" of the beholder. What's with the square cut tails on the shirts? I don't like having a big wad of fabric stuffed into my pants.

BTW, I like the knee socks with garters. They look sharp.

Lets be careful about thinking the past was better. All too often our memories act as a filter that magnifies those images we prefer to recall. Back when uniforms were heavy cotton, the buttons were steel and held on with cotter rings.

Sorry but my heavy cotton shirt from 1967 has plastic buttons that are sewn on.

You also treated burns with butter (a very bad idea) and used artificial resuscitation (pushed on the back and pulled up on elbows) for water rescue (another bad idea).

What does this have to do with uniforms?

I am always amused by the number of leaders who do not set the example by wearing a full, uniform when they complain about the fit. When I ask them when did they last wear a pair of uniform pants, answer "oh, I've never worn them".

I've never worn the BSA pants either but I've tried them on. I can't stand the feel of the fabric on my skin. I don't like the fit.

Maybe the first generation green pants as designed by Oscar de le Renta were good but those days are gone.

Ed asked:

temp_changed,

Did you use to be Al Lundy? Why the name change?

I still have that name but I'm not allowed to use it. It seems that another member has that name as well but chooses to lurk behind a pseudonym. He doesn't use his real name but he doesn't want me to use my name. I guess that he complained and I was shut down. To use my own name, I was asked to provide a copy of my DL and I'm not comfortable sending my DL to some internet weenie who has no accountability. Evidently, the other Al is special and didn't have to prove that he is him. So now I'm like many others and lurking behind a pseudonym.

Hops: I'm an Air Force officer who's done a number of things, currently up to my eyeballs in anti-terrorism.

An Air Force officer who wears a beret. . . hmmmmmm.

Everyone wants special treatment, is this a surprise to anyone?

Not everyone. I don't. I expect that I will have to abide by the same rules as everyone else and I studiously avoid using my position to gain and advantage not permitted by the rules.

As for your kids, you've been fortunate. I have a neighbor who raised his children, believing that their viewpoint was important and that all issues needed to be discussed. All of the kids wound up in therapy and have remained there for years.

Leadership may not imbue us with special wisdom but we are put into leadership positions because someone believed that we have special wisdom. An effective leader seeks counsel when he needs it but he has to make the decisions and the others need to abide by them.