qwazse

Fish, I see a ticket item in the making! Interview your units' 80%. Sure it's half baked, but be prepared to dozens of ideas like that coursing through your mind. Enjoy the experience, love your patrol.

from the stats spouted off on this forum, declines in membership have not encouraged the BSA to make any radical shifts in policy. There are lots of donors who contribute to the organization because BSA sticks to its guns. So you may have a point! I haven't seen a single sexual orientation lobby offer the BSA large sums of cash for a policy change.

The Presbyterian Church is bleeding members over the homosexual leadership issue. Churches that have left the denomination (for denominations that can contiue to deny homosexuals ordination) claim to have seen membership rebound. I'm skeptical about that, but you can expect to see something of the sort in the BSA. Certain COs will select a different youth movement that maintains a nation-wide ban. For them, following Europe's post-modern trajectory is most undesireable. Like Eng said, the kids could care less, until it's time to chose the religion of their fathers or that of this New Age. For the BSA, then, the question becomes "do we need those COs?"

"one more thing" [after a recap of a weekend you delegated to another leader]

The knot guide is a good start, but I alwayse find asking about a particular knot is a fun conversation starter. There are scads of discussions here about how many and which knots should be worn.

Well established SMs do not take kindly to COR's meddling, so unless it is an issue that is at the core of the CO's mission, using that position to push change in leader philosophy is a very very bad idea IMHO. Better for a COR to spend time seeing if the 14 - 20 year old youth in the congregation could benefit from adult leadership from both sexes ( be it via Venturing or some other program).

Growing up, we had an ASM who called his boys "honeybunch". He was a coal mining, rugged, salt of the earth in a coal mining county. His boys were pretty scrappy. Nobody dissed anybody over it. As I mentioned in another thread, Middle Eastern custom requires terms of endearment in conversation. Omission would indicate a sense of superiority along the lines of master-slave relationship. So we grew up speaking to kinds of English: one with a lot of extra verbiage like "beloved", "beautiful", "darling", etc... around family and old country friends. Another short and to the point around Anglos. You could tell the difference by age. (I used them far less than my older siblings.) Just heard a piece on the radio about a linguist who analyzed speed dating conversations. He asserted that in our modern use of American English the speaker who uses "I" more often is usually in an inferior social status, whereas someone who omits the use of the word is in a superior status. Daters' preferences were predicted more by their choice of such functional words than any other factor. Makes me wonder if some of our preferences in the units we choose (or in the bias of a unit towards including femal leaders) has to do with differences in linguistic cues that makes feel more welcome (or more willing to welcome). So there's a pack that really doesn't fit your boy's style, but the dad or your son's buddy explains things in such a nice way that you feel instantly welcome before you darken the door of a meeting.

There's something to be said for that kelly green. Or any shade of green in a shirt. DeLorenta gave the boys the short end of the stick there.

J. A lot can happen in two years. Usually the Cubmaster makes those contacts. He might simply give you a list of troops in the area. Troops might look up your pack and contact him. But here's what you can do ... 1. ask your CM for den chiefs. he should be able to touch base with the SM in your CO about identifying boys suitable for each den, with priority given to Webelos. There's nothing like. Boy Scout to help with all the Boy Scout material you'll be learning. 2. Appoint a male ADL and get him trained. That will allow you to delegate a campout with any exclusively male adult troops. Contrary to popular belief you don't owe it to parents to be present for each and every event. You sand the COR do owe it to them to provide caring adults who will do the job. 3. Camp and hike, a lot. Have fun.

Yep, if you've got inept, spiritless fellows for FC scouts, your problems are bigger than elections!

Yep, that puts in perspective. That's what we're shooting for: almost by accident achievement!

DS, I've known dads who did exactly what you did well into their son's first year. Mark my word, at some point you'll have a parent who you will have to wean from their son. Hopefully you'll be more tactful given the experience you and your son had.

If the policy is immutable, I would still let your parents know if there is a dad who wants to visit with his boy, he may. Explain why you can't go on the outing with that particular troop. There's nothing awkward, folks need to learn that much of scouting is local and the people who have been putting a lot into a unit hold sway on how a number of things are done. If you personally enjoy hiking and camping, I suggest you and your husband camp with troops who would welcome your company. If you are just putting up with the rocks and bogs for your son's sake, this troop may still be an option for your boy, and this dad with a connection may assist you in facilitating that transition. The troop is missing out. (Unless, of course, all helicopter parents are female, and boys only successfully transition to men if their weekends are with just us guys in the vicinity. Then the the troop wins. )

10+ mile day hikes or 3day/15+ mile backpacking trips are not (nor have they ever been, I think) routine for most troops. I'm not saying they shouldn't be if all your boys are well-conditioned and don't have weekend commitments. But, most of our work schedules only allow for so much time off, and the Mrs. wants part of that, and we always have newbies clamoring for a week of summer camp. So, shorter than MB-required hikes and backpacking trips are the norm. It's a unique group of boys who will say "Hey, let's pick a peak" and cover those longer distances. Hiking and Backpacking MB's are better suited for 10% of boys devoted to the sport. Taking the whole troop is just a drag. That's why I am opposed to the adult supervision requirement for patrol outings. Accommodating adult schedules takes away from the boys time staying fit. (And it keeps good boys off the trails for those of us who may need rescuing someday!!!)

Ya know, when my kids were arguing, I told them that ideally they should begin addressing each other "Oh beloved brother/sister, ..." if they really cared about the point they were trying to make. They never did to each other, but I think that it rubbed off outside of the home because folks would come up and tell me about how respectful they were relative to other kids their age. That stuff is learned. It's part of communications, not citizenship per se. And I wouldn't expect the average American 12 year old to be very good at it given the overwhelming education in the media. Disney Channel, for example, is full of dramatic discourse, not eloquent rhetoric. The SE should not have apologized. He should have explained that the BSA encourages their youth to engage in public discourse and anything that the members of the board could do to help each youth improve their communication skills would be welcome. Then the SE should mention the need for more MB counselors in these areas. He might also suggest a tour of the jail might help the boy see the other side of the issue.

Also, DS, a 5 mile hike is part of First Class requirements (under the navigation category). A patrol could plan a 10 mile circuit just visiting each other's houses. For a boy who's been swimming and boating every day in the summer since age two, sure the MB could be knocked off in a morning. I say get those kids signed off and on their way to life saving and later BSA guard. Other boys may take years to finish the badge.

What the SM would have said: "Here I am am a volunteer for the finest young men in our town, and I have to come up to nine people just to tell them the boy's opinion was his own and not that of the the BSA."

The closest definition of "secure" seems to be Webster's 3a : to get usually lasting possession or control of So, purchasing is not necessarily implied. If he "plants the seed, grows the wheat, harvests the grain, grinds the flour" like Little Red Hen, that would count too. So would raiding the cupboards (with mom's permission). So would coordinated raids of each patrol member's cupboard (with respective mom's permisison). (Remember most grocery stores are a good clip away from home these days.) In other words, sign if the boy shows up with all the ingredients and isn't scrounging the floor of the troop trailer at the last minute.(This message has been edited by qwazse)

An exceptional troop in my mind: 1. Camps a lot. 2. Boys take lead. 3. Parents let them lead. 4. Practices and applies first class skills regularly. 5. Boys are active until age 18. The % and the age distribution of Eagle attainment doesn't factor into the equation at all. Maybe I'm biased because a goodly portion of the boys who stick around our troop do make Eagle, but I'd love to see more of items #2 and #3 from our boys.

if you can't recognize there is a baseline difference between the personalities of men and women, then you are either not being honest with yourself, or you live in a different universe than I do. D, You want to pretend that anyone who opposes you is in denial, and use that as a claim to dismiss their assertion. But, in my post I clearly affirmed we all have experienced [that difference] in a general "baseline" sense. This means that I can recognize that difference. Therefore, I am being honest with myself, and we do live in the same universe! In this universe in which we both live, I have found male SMs and ASMs who are divisive, domineering, backstabbers. (No news there. Your "divided house" reference was originally directed to a male-dominated audience.) And I have met a few female ASMs who are none of the above. And, yes, I have used the "you're not direct-contact" card as a shield from domineering committee members (of both sexes)! The boys notice it too. And you know what? They are willing to forgive the lot of us our faults if they can just go hiking and camping at least every month. I just wish we could dispense grace as readily as the boys. Anyway, you never know who will turn out to be the best adult for your boys. It's like a box of chocolates ...

Our boys love hiking (the activity, not the badge)! Half of them would have it if they just met with a counselor and did the paperwork. A couple of them actually do. Seems to me the one sure-fire way you could make a boy hate hiking is to make him walk 10 laps around a track. I bet even our Philmont veterans would quit after lap 2! I don't know what "MB day school" your boys go to, but my son has been working on swimming MB for 3 years! He's a fine swimmer too! Just one req. well within his ability. But, nobody's going to coddle him and call a counselor for him or adjust his camp schedule or any of that helicopter stuff. You probably can gather that in our troop we wouldn't give a donkey of a rodent for Eagle vs. non-Eagle badges. We never tell a boy to focus on one or the other. If all a kid wants to do is earn electives, fine by us.

Even in the OP's case, I see room for a mature SPL to handle discipline. It would be along the lines of: "The 1st years are intimidated by you guys because you seem dead set on making their lives miserable. What gives?" [Hollow explanation by perpetrators follows.] "Here's the deal. You are turning those cans of bug spray in to me. I will secure them until such a time as you are deemed trustworthy for their use. You are inviting the 1st years to this table now and apologizing for being jerks. We are going to let them know that they are our brothers and we want to be kind and courteous to one another. If any of you want to stick to your right to pick on newbies, I'm sure the SM is available for an impromptu conference!" Shortly thereafter, the SPL reports his actions to the SM.

D, I'm saying there is a baselilne general personality difference between a man and a woman That, my friend, is a pre-judgement. You are taking what we all have experienced in a general "baseline" sense and declaring it as justification for disqualifying a particular individual. There's no good-old-boys network. We ... promote the all-male environment. A rose by any other name ... Your insisting that you don't need a 5th wheel (of any sex) is an indication that you're content with the lock you all have on things. And I can't blame you. New ASMs can be divisive and getting them up to speed is a real hassle. But not even making the effort runs the risk of missing the opportunity to nurture a person in the methods as you've laid them out. We never miss the spare tire until we hit a nail 60 miles from home, do we? Stosh, They haven't tossed me yet for such antics, although I'm waiting for the day. Of course, venturing age youth are at the point where they need to learn to "talk straight" to a number of adults of both sexes. I'm learning that boys figure they can approach different dads and moms about different topics, so a little diversity is likely more help than harm.

D, Thinking about your stance a little bit more, it seems you have several issues that need disentangled: 1. Your prejudgment that sex differences adversely impacts a youth's upbringing in a scouting environment. For example you don't think you'd be as good a leader of young women as another woman. Well, I can speak to my experience as a crew advisor that the girls in our community have their choice of units with different leaders. A few of them feel strongly that "I'm the guy." I don't think they're mistaken. For other young women, my co-advisor is "the gal." I don't think they're mistaken. 2. The good-old-boys network that you four guys have built. I'm not being negative here. You all have probably worked out a lot of kinks. Probably one of the biggest hassles is coaching an adult in how to serve a boy-lead troop. A newbie means one more set of kinks to iron out. On the other hand, if your troop isn't hurting for that kind of leadership, your district probably is. And, the only way I have ever seen anybody really "get it" is by having them camp with us and pointing out the long list of things they need to stop worrying about. 3. Being pushed around by the CO. This can indeed make or brake you all. If the church is generally a good group to work with, don't walk away from that. Only on rare occasion is the grass greener. I was just talking to a young adult who was reflecting on how he got in the wrong "spin-off" from our troop. He feels that was the main reason he only stayed in scouts for a few years. You don't want Any of he boys to miss out on a great program over divisiveness among adults. And maybe the CO sees something in this woman that you don't, yet. That's just one of the things a church does: call people to service -- sometimes in the oddest places. Now if the CO is foisting this woman on you to make a politically correct move, if they don't like your boy-led mantra, and if they've been overrun by micro-managers who want to control your every move, it may be time to serve scouting elsewhere. But your best chance of getting beyond any of that is welcoming the lady, getting her around a campfire, and being open and honest about your real concerns.

Who better to teach that then a good man? The best teacher. And that is very hard to determine without a trivial run. If y'all have pitched camp 300' from the boys, I sincerely doubt your gender will impede their growth. Our experience with moms in camp has been largely positive. But we haven't had a mom asking to be ASM either. We've never had a problem with too many ASMs. There's always room for one more.