Lisabob

Do you have some adults that would be willing to be friendly helpers in the cub pack? Maybe also some den chiefs to go with them? Go to the pack with an offer to help them with their webelos program. Be sincere, not condescending about it (even though I imagine you're right in your assessment of their program) and maybe they'll welcome your offer for help. I know many packs who struggle because they have such high adult turn-over and nobody there really knows what the heck they're doing. Most of those packs would welcome offers of help from a troop with open arms.

The fairness doctrine has not been enforced since at least the early 80s. In fact Reagan vetoed an attempt to bring it back in '87 or thereabouts. There was also the "equal time" rule which meant that if a station lets a candidate buy or use airtime, then they have to make a similar offer available to other candidates too. In reality neither of these worked well because the unintended consequence was that most stations simply ducked and dodged political broadcasts whenever possible so as to avoid having to make time available to all sides, resulting in poorer quality (and quantity) of coverage. Suddenly I hear a lot about this from the right but this is just another one of those scare tactics - nobody is serious about bringing either of these rules back. As for Colbert and Stewart, yes of course a lot of it really is just them playing for laughs. On the other hand, sometimes their interviews (particularly Stewart) get to the tough questions that "real" newscasters don't seem willing to ask. For a while, Stewart was one of the relatively few voices criticizing the Bush admin, particularly on the war and on civil liberties issues. I admit to having found some solace during and after the start of the Iraq war, when Stewart seemed to be one of few really trying to hold administration figures accountable for what they had said prior to the war vs. what they were saying once the occupation started to go poorly. So I do think there is sometimes some pretty useful substance there, as a matter of fact. As for students, at least some of them watch something! It isn't PBS, but the Daily Show is better "news" coverage sometimes than what you get on, say, Nancy Grace over on CNN.

It is something of an occupational hazard I suppose, but I spend a great deal of time talking politics with young people. Perhaps you'll be happy to know that most of them see right through the lame-brained "analysis" offered up by all of the figures named in your post, GW. And in fact if we want to talk about parroting, it is far more likely these days that a typical college-aged kid will parrot John Stewart or Stephen Colbert than Michael Moore or Anne Coulter or any of those others. Whether that's an improvement is, of course, a matter open for debate. And it doesn't always mean they understand the reality behind Stewart's or Colbert's comedy either, but more often than you might expect. The 2008 election marks the first time in a really long time that people aged 18-29 made up a larger percentage of actual voter turnout than people over age 60. Uh oh, we'd better hope those kids know what they're talking about!(This message has been edited by lisabob)

Thanks for sharing that link, I quite enjoyed it.

I do not think that any council would have the leeway to set new requirements on which boys a MBC may counsel. There is no such national rule and I suspect the person who told you this was a "new rule" was blowing smoke for some reason. There might, however, be a good underlying reason that this person thinks you shouldn't be a MBC at this upcoming event. Among the reasons could be that the person believes you really are not well qualified to counsel the badge(s) in question, that the troop has been trying to encourage boys to go outside the boundaries of the troop for merit badges so as to strengthen the adult association aspect of the program, or that they think you as SM already have too much on your plate and just aren't good at saying "no" to things. I hope you don't take offense at any of those above scenarios. Not knowing you, they may or may NOT apply. And in any case, if those are the underlying issues then the person in question would do better to just talk with you about it. But I have seen all three of those situations occur among various troops, so they'd be my best guesses as to why someone would tell you that.

There's something to be said for teaching (and modeling) perseverance, though I think a parent's or mentor's actions speak a lot louder than their words, or threats, or promises, or bribes when it comes to these matters. The people I know who are happy, healthy, reasonably secure and successful adults (all at the same time!) are nearly universally people who also have a strong internal motivation to do whatever it is they do with their lives. They know how to set their own goals, what it takes to achieve them, and how to pick themselves up and dust off on the occasion that they do not reach those goals. The people I know who are miserable and seem to have the most problems are also the ones who always need someone else to set the goals for them; without that they're drifting around, apparently without direction or meaning. That latter group always seems to blame someone else for their problems too. Why? Maybe because they don't know how to set their own goals or what to do when they don't meet the standard that someone else set for them. Ownership of one's goals and expectations is an important life skill in my view. The mid and late teen years when most boys in scouting might be working toward Star/Life/Eagle ranks are a good time to let kids test out their abilities to set and live by their own goals in a supportive and fairly safe environment.

I know you said that the next town is 20 minutes away and that many parents will decide that's too far. You are probably right. On the other hand, you can still try to build ties to boy scout troops in that town. Some parents will NOT think it is too far. (Plus, as you'll see for Arrow of Light award, there are some things that webelos scouts need to do together WITH a troop so you might as well make those connections.) Take the 5th graders. Be up-front with their parents that the cub program allows the boys to stay either until they age out or until the end of 5th grade, whichever is later. Visit with your district executive about the possibility of getting a troop going NOW in your town. It doesn't have to be you, necessarily, who starts it as you probably have enough to do with getting the pack up and running. And congrats to you and the new pack! Here's hoping you have a lot of fun with it.

Gee does that mean I ought to stop shopping at the Cabela's in my (very blue) state?

Fundamental difference. Scouting is not school and it is not the job world. It is a place for boys to try new things, build new skills, and challenge themselves in a reasonably low-stress environment. We live in a very achievement oriented society, where grades, material possessions, money, prestigious job titles, etc., are all outward measures of "success" that are widely expected. It might be nice for some kids, particularly high-achieving kids who have plenty of pressures elsewhere, to have scouting as a place where they can choose for themselves what outward benchmarks they think are really important to reach for, and at what pace they seek to achieve those, if at all. As I said, we'll need to agree to disagree on this I suppose.

Scouter760, I think we have a basic disagreement here and we may just need to agree to disagree. Regarding "progress" in scouting, there are many ways to measure that. My experience is that some boys are strongly motivated by external matters like receiving merit badges and rank advancement. Others do not seek that sort of external reward and do things primarily because they want to see what they can achieve or do or learn for themselves or simply for the sake of doing it (not to achieve a patch). And yes, some are just lazy, or perhaps uninterested, or perhaps not ready to take on the responsibilities of the next level. In fact, a lot of boys rocket through the first few ranks, only to hit a plateau at 1st Class, because Star and Life require very different skills, some of which kids just need time to mature before they are ready for those ranks. The same is true of a lot of boys who get to Life and hang there for a long time before they are really ready to do their Eagle projects (if they ever get there). Advancement is a tricky method. It should be used to serve each individual boy's developmental needs. Pushing advancement down the throat of a boy who isn't all that interested in external motivation brings up a question of what the advancement is worth and also of who accomplished it. I know, for my kiddo, that if I push and plead and prod and engage in arm twisting, a) it is likely to backfire and b) whatever he does get, would be suspect in terms of "ownership." At that point it becomes more about my pride than his growth, and I'm not willing to go down that road. He has been very active in his troop since joining. He has the outdoor skills, the service, the leadership aspects. He has had a lot of opportunities to develop character and other intangible traits. He has earned a lot more than the minimum # of MBs, but relatively few Eagle-required. He has used the MB program to explore topics of interest though. He knows my feelings, that I'd like for him to finish up the few remaining items for Star, and then Life, and then Eagle. At some point I rather hope he'll do it. But if not, it doesn't necessarily mean he hasn't done his best. It may be that he has found other ways to get fulfillment out of however long he spends in scouting. So I am not particularly worried about my son's rank. In fact I'd rather have him go slow and know that he well and truly earned the rank to the best of his abilities, than to push him through on my timetable just because I want to have outward signs of "progress." One has to have some respect for the individual child here. As for the bullying stuff, I am not talking about ordinary rough and tumble kid behavior. I'm talking about intentionally harming people, doggedly questioning people's sexual orientation (not in jest or off-hand comments but in really deeply offensive and systematic ways), deliberately making fun of boys with learning or physical disabilities, intentional put-downs of younger kids, forming a group to target one individual boy, destroying his gear intentionally, etc. These, to me, are pretty cut-and-dried, and not matters of "kids will be kids" or ordinary play getting a little out of hand. And they're not all (or even mostly) directed at my kid either - but this is a pattern I've witnessed in the troop where older boys behave this way and get away with it, with nothing more than an occasional slap on the hand if even that. The result, I'm sad to say, is that the pattern appears to repeat itself as those boys who do stick with it learn to behave that way to future incoming scouts too.

The North American Marlon Brando Look-alike Association? (sorry, couldn't help myself) The NAMBLA of which you speak is certainly not something I, or most people whether gay or straight, support. On the other hand, how committed gay couples being allowed a legal recognition of their commitment leads to NAMBLA is a bit cloudy and far-fetched.

OK I think we've gotten off on a tangent here with the bullying stuff. It is a problem in the troop my son is part of and in ways that I don't think are open to interpretation or shades of grey. I don't want to list specifics but this isn't a matter of hierarchy or having someone in charge. But beyond the bullying issue is the matter of adults either not knowing or not being willing to follow the program. I hate to sound like BobWhite and I'm of teh opinion that probably no troop does everything by the book. So I'm certainly not looking for perfection and in that sense I don't think such a thing exists. But I do think we at times get pretty far off the beaten path. Leaders might have been trained 10+ years back and not to denigrate that, but memories of training may not run that deep, things may have changed, and people's perspectives and how they apply whatever they remember from training also change. So what happens is that people make up stop-gap measures to deal with problems as they arise, and then those stop-gaps become "the way we do things here in troop AAA." The next guy who comes along picks up those stop gaps, modifies them a little further to suit the need, and before you know it you have mostly good people going way off course. I think that it is really important that adults in any unit be open to feedback, rather than ignoring it, dismissing it ("oh they were just looking for a reason to leave") or otherwise diminishing it ("that's a one-time problem, not a trend or symptom of an underlying problem"). I have sort of gotten to the point where I find it hard to put up with this any longer. So, I will try to find a time to talk with the SM and CC for the troop and let them know what I'm seeing. I don't expect it will have a lot of impact though, as feedback along these lines in the past (not just from me) has been soundly ignored.

Either way - thank you Gunny! And the other vets on the board too.

Having been involved with 4H as a youth and as an adult, I would tend to agree with you Calico. I don't intend to leave scouting and I do see a lot of value in what scouting has to offer (when done well as John says). I was just thinking about what it is that makes scouting different, special, or perhaps unique. Many of you have given me food for thought, and I thank you.

Well that's an interesting (if rhetorical) question Barry. I suppose it depends a great deal on how the PLC operates. If it is reasonably youth-led then that's not likely going to happen. But in adult-led troops it can. I've seen both versions play out in front of me. One should acknowledge that it is not hard, often, for adults to push scouts into decisions. We're the adults after all and untested, untrained scouts are used to deferring to adult decisions in most other aspects of their lives. I have to agree that bullying can be a natural result of untrained boys trying to get things done. There's room to teach them a better style of leadership there, even to boys who are just mimicking what they learned at home in terms of leadership methods. While not optimal, bullying that occurs for those reasons isn't insurmountable. The type of bullying I strongly object to is of a much more nefarious sort, name calling, foul language, sexual taunting, and use of physical force (or threat of same) to intimidate or belittle others. There's no excuse in the world for that sort of behavior, it is intentionally malicious, and it upsets me greatly that it seems to be a regular part of some troops' cultures. However, there are apparently some adults who don't see it or don't get it. Or won't stand up to it.

Ah, Kudu, I misunderstood. Thank you for the explanation. In fact my son is also the PL of his troop's venture patrol, which is doing exactly that. I've offered frequently to be the driver and/or "second adult" any time they need me. So far they haven't, but if they do I'll give them their space too. The biggest hurdles appear to be getting the boys to believe they really will be allowed to do things on their own (sort of) and then getting them to find time that doesn't conflict with "regular" troop stuff (the venture patrol is not a permanent patrol assignment). But yes your idea has merit. And I will say that the venture patrol, which has a very different dynamic from the rest of the troop, is about the only thing my son is still interested in being part of in his troop at the moment. Who knows. We may yet see that develop into something bigger. In the meantime, I have to say that the Venture patrol is a band aid. It keeps a handful of older boys who want something more, marginally involved with the troop. Because of its separate status as an occasional patrol outside the structure of the troop, it hasn't really bled over into regular troop operation and definitely hasn't had much impact on the experience of the younger fellows at this point. Maybe it will, if it survives long enough.

I'd agree that the great majority of sports teams do not teach the sort of event planning skills that scouting includes. I'm not certain I'd say the same is true of leadership skills more broadly defined though. Sports teams can teach leadership, though I'm willing to believe that many do not, especially at the rec league level. Many other sorts of youth programs include leadership training as an explicit part of their programs though, particularly those with either a citizenship or entrepreneurial bent to them.

Scouter760, I respectfully disagree and I think you may have missed something here. My son is not a new scout. He is in his 5th year of boy scouting. It isn't about progress for him, it is about the type of program being offered and his ability to trust in the adult leadership to do the right thing. And I can tell you that while I have a very good relationship with my son, about the last thing he wants is for me to ride to the rescue and "make it better" for him. At his age one thing he wants from scouting is a chance to develop some independence in a reasonably safe environment, not for mom to go camping with him or set his priorities for him! Further, scouting really isn't about attaining rank. Advancement is one small part of the scouting experience, just one of the eight methods that support the program, yet many adults place so much emphasis on it that it becomes all-important. My son has never been particularly motivated by that sort of attitude, and why should he be. I will certainly be proud of him if he earns Eagle but I'll be more proud of him for showing good judgment and character, whether he earns Eagle or not. Bribing him (even if it would work, which I doubt anyway) would tarnish the value of whatever he earned. It isn't my rank, it is his.

In another post I mentioned that persistent bullying has been a problem for the troop my son is part of. In talking with the parent of a boy who left the troop recently because of this issue, she said something along the lines that there are plenty of other youth groups out there where kids get the same moral values as scouting (primarily religious and service-oriented groups), where kids get a positive social experience, and where kids build character, all without the large opportunities for bullying and "Lord of the Flies" behavior to which boy scouting can sometimes be vulnerable. So what makes boy scouts special? Is it our emphasis on the outdoors and camping skills? If that's the key difference, what makes that relevant in the 21st century? Is it our emphasis on youth leadership? Assuming for a moment that most troops actually provide members with that experience, do not other youth programs also offer members opportunities to develop leadership skills? Is it tradition? What makes that tradition salient to today's youth? I'm not knocking boy scouting, because at its best, I think it provides marvelous opportunities for boys to develop their identities and independence and character, as well as a deep appreciation for the natural world. But I admit, there is a proliferation of other youth programs out there, many of which achieve the same underlying purposes as those outlined in the vision and mission statement of the BSA. And I note that the mission and vision statements say nothing about outdoor skills, appreciation of nature, or independence. BSA Mission: "The mission of the Boy Scouts of America is to prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law." BSA Vision: "The Boy Scouts of America will prepare every eligible youth in America to become a responsible, participating citizen and leader who is guided by the Scout Oath and Law." So, in your view, what makes the BSA unique or special in terms of delivering on those underlying purposes?

Thanks for the suggestions, Mike. The thing about the bullying is that it has come up lots of times in the past. To the extent that leaders claim they don't know, it could only be because they have their heads so firmly stuck in the sand. We lose multiple first and second year scouts to this issue every single year. Their parents TELL US that's why the boys are leaving. In fact, usually by the time a kid leaves for this reason, the parents have TOLD US MULTIPLE TIMES and the problems have not abated. Because we are a larger troop and because there are 3 times as many cub packs as troops in our town, this is unfortunately a sustainable pattern. So, your statement that "Your culture could change too if the SM and other adults saw the need for it." is certainly true, but I've lost hope that the folks in charge actually see the need, or are willing to see it. People who do bring up this matter tend to be marginalized as over-protective, or looking for an excuse to quit, or just not cut out for boy scouting. And while I give the current SM some credit for at least talking the talk from time to time, his actions have done nothing to back up what he says about bullying. About other troops. My son is in high school. He has a right to make up his own mind, though he knows I wish he would be willing to give things a try elsewhere. I have a feeling that any hard pushing on my part would just result in him quitting all together. If he's willing to check out one or more of our district's new crews, I'll be happy.

He he, pack I apologize for "turgid expositions"... GA, I won't apologize for my meaning though. You need not agree and it is clear you do not. That's your right. Mine is to say what I think too. You'll note I didn't say that GW cannot say those types of things - I am not generally a fan of censorship as I believe that people are quite capable of judging for themselves who they wish to spend time with and who they wish to avoid. But that doesn't mean I can't say what I think about his remarks, either. If you find that "dishonest and irrational" or "anti-intellectual" then that's unfortunate. I disagree, but frankly, debating PC is not how I intend to use my Sunday morning and I don't feel a need to prove my intellectual bona fides on a scouting discussion board. So, I wish you a good day.

Kudu, I hear you, but that assumes that the same folks who don't appear willing to apply or perhaps understand the patrol method now, be willing to approve real patrol camping. For myriad reasons, I don't see that happening. Folks, thanks. You've confirmed my gut feeling that this is probably a good time for me to step back from the troop. I'll find other avenues. I really do enjoy working with the kids so I may look for another unit-level position a few months down the road. Right now though I think I'll focus primarily on district membership, assuming they're willing to keep me around.

I'm not questioning GW's personal experience although, as I suggested, perhaps that points to a need for him to consider finding a different social circle to be part of, if (as he says) it is problematic for him. On the other hand I guess I am suggesting that maybe it isn't a good idea to draw conclusions about a whole group of people based on one's personal, limited, probably biased, experience. That would be like me saying all scouters are bigoted jerks because I've met some who are. That's not PC. PC would be to argue that one must accept homosexuals despite one's moral or religious views which might be to the contrary. I'm not arguing that at all. I'm recommending that we don't promote ridiculous stereotypes (all gay men are NOT promiscuous, yet that's the implication of what GW wrote). If you find it problematic that I think GW's comments were insulting - and frankly, probably intended to be insulting, given the fact that he frequently uses provocative and hyperbolic language rather than engaging in thoughtful discourse - too bad. I stand behind what I said.(This message has been edited by lisabob)

Wow is that insulting GW. Maybe it says something about the social circles you are in.

I've been putting a lot of thought into the position(s) I hold in scouting and where I want to put my time and energy. I'm not happy where I'm at so I've been weighing options. Many of you on this board have probably been in this same position in the past so I'd welcome your input. Right now I'm the district membership chair of a struggling district, and a troop committee member for my son's troop. I'm not happy with the troop and am considering pulling out of it. My son isn't too happy with the troop either due to some problems over the last 6 months, and he's on the verge of quitting scouts. He is not willing to entertain the idea of joining another troop, though the jury is still out on the idea of joining a Venturing Crew (he's old enough and is currently at 1st Cl rank). The problems with the troop, as I see them, boil down to two things. One is that there are a lot of adults who have their hearts in the right place in terms of wanting to provide kids with a program, but who do not really buy into the idea of boy leadership or the patrol method. Consequently what we have is an adult-led, troop-method program with occasional boy-led aspects as window dressing. That gets boring after a while and isn't the BSA program. The second main problem is that the troop has a bullying culture, has for years, and many of the adults who are active as ASMs and SM and CC (ie, who have direct and regular contact on camp outs where problems occur) just don't or won't or can't seem to do much about it. Every incident is treated like the first one and so not much ever changes. There are other problems (advancement and seriousness about developing scout skills, among others) too. After some pretty big problems this summer my son's about had enough and his interest is declining. For me, after trying to work with current adult leadership to respond to those problems in an adequate manner, I'm convinced that the effort is probably futile. They just aren't following the BSA program, they won't stand up to the families of the boys who are problems, and nothing I say or do is going to make that change. I want to be clear this isn't just frustration about one set of incidents, but a years-long pattern culminating in problems this summer, and I just don't think is going to be changed. And it isn't for lack of trying. So I'm re-evaluating. I've been a committee member with the troop for 4 years but I think I may decide to step down because the alternative is to be very blunt about what I don't like, and that's not going to result in change anyway. The CO is oblivious, by the way, and firmly intends to stay that way. Is that the honorable approach though? Maybe it is better to stay and continue attempting to affect change in the troop culture from within, despite my frustration? I will say I do not have the appropriate scout skills to be the SM, am not gunning for the position, and would not accept it under any circumstance regardless. SO this isn't about controlling the troop, but it is about a big philosophical difference of opinion about how scouting should work. But I hate the thought of being one of "those" parents who plays no active role in supporting their child's unit. If I resign as a committee member, that frees up some time that I could (in theory) dedicate to scouting elsewhere. I could put more time into district membership. We also have a handful of struggling packs who really could use a good Tiger DL and I have often thought about doing that. I'm not certain, realistically, how much time that position takes up though and worry about over-committing. There's a new crew starting that needs some adults for their committee and I have thought about that. I've also thought about just backing out of unit-level scouting entirely for a while and declaring burn-out. What I don't think I can do, is continue on the way things are right now. I am not deriving much enjoyment out of it and I don't think I'm helping anybody either, as a troop committee member. It's frustrating.