qwazse

Go ahead, turn that knife! Teams who lose without giving up a touchdown aren't weak. They are just facing the Steelers.

That's not an NSP. That's a den.

further down in the statement they quote from the young lady's petition "I cannot change my gender to fit the Boy Scouts’ standards, ..." To which BSA may reply, "can't? Or, won't?"

@@SSScout, did the proponents of choice #1 open with, "On the card. Read the instructions. Do what they say."

Actually Scouts Canada are at about 60%. If they can sustain the gains of the past 5 years they may be at their original numbers by decade's end. However, their annual report does not clearly show the counts by sex, so we can only assume they are still serving far fewer boys than they once did.

Time to lasso a tangent ... Chalk it up to intolerance over transitioning?

The boys in my crew are interested in developing a "how to earn a merit badge" skit. If anything comes of it, I'll let you know.

@@Philzer, long time no hear! You need to be specific as to which worksheet. There are lots out there. If I were you, I'd only counsel from MB Pamphlet. If the boys find a worksheet on their own, bully for them. Otherwise, if it's confusing more boys than it helps, encourage them to use garden-variety composition books or field notes to organize their thoughts. (Son #2 started using docs on his smart phone.) For cooking, I'd also keep up to date with what's taught in the BS Handbook and Fieldbook ... as well as any interesting tips in Boy's Life or Scouting magazines. To any Cooking MBCs out there: the online MB Pamphlet? Worth the expense?

Your scouts are half right ... The goal is to be first class (the concept, not the patch). Success -- and this is no joke -- is when death is forestalled because boys are prepared. That is measured in little steps: minor cuts being treated properly, hike/float plans reviewed, everyone reading the map, fires tidy, dishes clean, rights and responsibilities understood, etc ... It takes a lot of work (via SM minutes, teachable moments, spur of the moment patch -- or if you're @@Stosh, field spec -- premiums) to get boys to understand that this game has a big purpose. This is a cultural issue. You don't have a culture of guides. And there is no cultural sense of urgency that the boys know first class skills. In some sense the PLC is always going to be steered by adults. Even with older youth, I have to be careful what I say and what gets said to my crew. Too much "push back", and they stop trying. But, the PLC might also be seeing that your first years aren't having nearly as much fun as they could. And maybe they were also seeing the TG's being set up for failure. Rather than choosing a boy who is a natural teacher, the SPL might have picked a boy who needed a PoR. And looking forward, if a class of boys ages out and you have two classes of boys not yet tenderfoot, the pool of potential guides will shrink. So, you'd better have one talented TG who's as skilled as your average professional educator. So we get back to the physical separation issue. If there is this concern with the older scouts, plan more cracker barrels, "leadership corps" activities, or even Venturing. In other words, acknowledge their need for social engagement, but balance it with the need to roll up sleeves to achieve troop goals. But my bottom line: don't fret over predicted problems. This is just another thing the boys will have to address as it arises.

Metaphors often fail. It's more a juggernaut with segments of its frame turning to flotsam. BSA holds sway over half as many scouting youth as it once did. This includes GS/USA, who abandoned the notion of "first class" in the 50s. Basically, girls (and their moms) stopped taking plays from boys' books. I'd say "rats" are, for example, everyone who participates in outdoor activities outside of BSA's influence. We know they're out there -- just not under anyone's umbrella. National Park Service reports record visits at nearly every spot in the nation. Someone's starting all these forest fires! Certainly in PA, our adult leadership has concluded it is not worth registering with Big Brother to stay on the roster when they can just take their boys and his buddies to "the cabin" in the National Forest. (Which, FWIW, tends to be along paved roads with land lines that weren't there before.) Sure, there's also the politically polarized ... who find that they can no longer use scouting to enforce some counter-cultural revolution. And, there are our post-modern nomads, who live so far from work and their kids' schools that hours of their free time is in a roving tin can. (Maybe we should get some commuter trains to sponsor a few units ... troop meetings in transit!)

You're in for a wild ride: At first, like @@Stosh, I observed that male-female distinction. But that first class of venturers was pulled together by highly motivated girl scouts with Seabase on their mind. Since then, every class of venturers in my crew has defied generalizations! I think the crew really wins when it has a balance of youth from different groups. It really, really wins when venturers spent their Jr. High years being expected to lead their GS or BS troop.

Agree. But, I'm not gonna tell a scout that she is not making a concession if that's not how her family brought her up. Doing so is a waste of everyone's time. Either you're okay with occasional weekends around people of diverse religion, or you're not. Either you're okay with folks devaluing atheism, or you're not. The last thing we should do is presume that they should be fine with BSA's DRP merely by virtue of association with X house of worship.

As a Steeler's fan, I instinctively fear for any team who is up 14-0 early in the 1st half. Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory ... it's an art form. But, old-school W.Pa loves a good defense. My bottom line: if your team manages to sack Brady 4+ times, you've got mine beat. So, props to Houston and Atlanta for giving this old guy exactly what he wanted to see.

I don't call it nitpicking. We're working from two sides of the same coin. Thanks to my venturers' shorter attention span. I just remind them, "This is a youth led movement." Like I said, we don't have a lot of Eagles quit, so I've never felt we needed to voice this concern. We have had a lot of older boys who haven't yet earned Eagle, but are slacking. Those are the examples we don't want the young ones to emulate. So, for example, the SM might encourage them to get involved in my crew. Hopefully, then, I can help them define more customized goals that may involve serving younger scouts or doing some good somewhere. This hazards them quitting the troop, but on the flip side, they aren't lounging there being a bad example.

If so, can we venturing wedded couples at least snicker at #6?

I don't have an objection to age-based patrols. Growing up, I was assigned to PL a bunch of crossovers who quickly became their own age-based patrol when I bumped up to SPL. No pining for older scouts there. To me, it boils down to how tight are the boys? Tight enough to hike and camp independently? Do they have the potential to get there? Are there enough boys with integrity to envision what we expect of them? Our community really does not lend itself to tight-knit clusters. Not at least until one of the trustworthy boys turns 16 and gets some wheels. Or, if grandpa is willing to haul them anywhere, maybe the younger scouts can rally around one another better. So, the den our Son #1 grew up with was as good a patrol as any for starters. But, within a couple months they dispersed into the other patrols for summer camp. Within a year or two, older boys were picking him up to go bowling, etc ... Daughter's gang constituted a patrol more-so than either of the boys. Venturing was a no-brainer for them when they turned 14. The down-side was Son #1's posse rarely invested in them (although their slightly younger brothers and fellow scouts did). So their skills and interests didn't get transferred to the next wave. They were friendly enough to Son #2's friends, but really did not bend over backwards to make it to any of their events/recognition ceremonies. Son #2 really clicked with youth a year or two younger or older, so mixed age would turn out to work best for him. But tragedy struck, and it sunk into the boys' psyche to the point they would nominally break into patrols, but insist on doing everything as a troop. Even at summer camp, they would work the patrol method for efficiency's sake, but come steak night, they would cook as a troop (one PL coordinating veggies, the other meat, the other dessert). Outside of the troop and crew, however, he maintained this cadre of friends (mostly younger) who were effectively his co-ed patrol -- minus the name, yell, and flag. So, as far as I can tell, the ideal patrol will happen for any cluster of committed youth. The only question: will it be in a boy's troop or outside of it?

You folks give new meaning to the devil is in the details.

The Romans stoned early Christians because they were "athiests", so by some ancient uses of the word, large swaths of scouting should be excluded. The issue boils down to one of supporting BSA's declaration of religious principle. If a person, in even a modest sense, can support it, then they could submit a membership application. If a person, by virtue of his or her convictions finds the DRP or other membership policies to be totally unfounded, then they should not sign on. I do this with my venturers. They are to read and fill out their own applications. And it cuts both ways. One girl was reading the application and asked me to explain "non-sectarian". I said "We don't put any one religion over the other. But, we want you to believe and value religion. Are you okay with that?" She had to think a bit as she was brought up to never concede the inferiority of her family's faith. She is certainly not alone. So, @@ghjim, care less about labels. Care more about people taking their belief seriously and taking a stand accordingly.

Never heard of one. We have a camping committee that does what your tasks groups seem to do.

I guess the "to the unit" IMHO is where we diverge. I'll admit I may be biased because I don't see Eagles quitting more frequently than boys of lesser rank. In any case I've seen lots of reasons why scouters should not presume that their troop is deserving of older boys' time ...First, the unit may not provide the stewardship opportunities best suited to the boy's talents. For starters, half his community (I.e., girls) may have had little opportunity to hike and camp independently with their mates monthly. Another example, his church youth group may have mission opportunities worthy of his time. Second, after providing First Class skills, the unit should not have expended much effort in getting the boy to Eagle. It's not like the unit provides MB classes. The boy could have had friends who weren't scouts working on his Eagle project. Aside from reviews and some paper pushing, the unit really need not be bothered with advancement to Eagle at all. And, maybe by distracting adults with reviews, etc ... the boys will be free to lead. Finally, boys can be as much a drag on the unit by taking their good old time with advancement and sitting in the corner with their buddies, planning nothing of value. Getting those boys to move on may do the unit a favor! Now, if the troop is providing unique service opportunities suited to older boys, physical challenges suited to older boys, and fellowship opportunities suited to older boys ... things for younger boys to grow into ... then the few boys who quit will be of minor concern, as long as they aren't robbing liquor stores to buy drugs.

I've met one unit leader who allows girls to participate in activities with his troop. He was long in the tooth and short on details, but more than willing to brag that his was the first co-Ed troop in council. Seems a far cry from official sanction to me.

But here's the rub. That "sacrifice" that everyone puts on a pedestal is not required for Eagle. Master first class skills, earn a few badges, camp, be responsible for the life of your troop, serve your community. That's all we're asking for. The method of Boy Scouting is "Leadership Development" not "Leadership" per se. (Leadership is a method of venturing, and I pound that it to my crew. By virtue of calling themselves venturers, I am expecting them to be first class scouts -- with or without the patch -- and start making something of this crew.) So, trail to Eagle, IMHO, is merely the preparation for making the sacrifices that mature youth should be expected to make (i.e., tend your family, serve your community, develp your career.) The boys who complete that preparation by age 14-15 may go on to: earn Palms (which require leadership), start Venturing (which as I mentioned, in a good crew, demands every leadership skill they've acquired so far), get their troop backpacking, canoeing, snorkeling, reviving 50's pop songs do great work outside of scouting. If you do not encourage boys to hustle up and advance (assuming they've told you that advancing is their goal) you deprive the community of well-instructed youth. What good is their marking 4 years of time "maturing", when your neighborhoods are in desperate need of well prepared youth leaders now?

So I got home too late to make it to crew meeting. I'm unpacking, and here come three of my crew at 9PM. The older one was driving the two younger ones who were making a quick visit to a friend's house. The take a moment to say hello before running an errand. I can easily envision if I am not challenging these boys to do something with their free time under the Venturing flag, they will do something on their own. It's only a matter of who gives them the loudest "you cant do ...".

@@CalicoPenn, if she did (or, perhaps, when she eventually does), she will be in the thick of it. @@NJCubScouter, no worries. Some folks in this neck of the woods may probably think they need passports to cross the Deleware! I started the tradition of youth reporting because of the crew. One of the official responsibilities of crew presidents is to give an annual report to their crews' CO. So, this time seemed ideal for that sort of thing. We try to have the former crew president sum up the year and then acknowledge the newly elected president. Then, the SM thought that his SPL could speak, so we encouraged that. One year one of the Webelos reported on the pack (the Cubmaster's son helped him prepare it). I gotta say that it is so much more interesting having the youth give their take on the program. This, year, the former president was not available, and the new president is still getting organized, and this young woman likes to speak and does well. It used to be just adult leaders addressing the church. In the program, we've labeled that time as a number of things. I've encouraged the church to call it "Minute for Mission" as many Presbyterians are familiar with that term -- and I hope it gives them the sense that we aren't just saying, "Thanks for keeping the lights on for us." The goal is to make them understand that scouting is a real investment on their part. Even the CO no longer charters the troop, boys still come here from multiple troops for Scout Sunday. We have those boys provide color guard ... Oath and Law are incorporated in the service. This year the new pastor gave the boys lots of speaking and reading parts. Being someplace where they feel welcome ... even if they the style of worship is a little different to them ... means a lot.

So, wait. Mrs. told you to get rid of 3-4 pairs of binoculars, and you only ditched one. How big is your doghouse?