qwazse

I refuse to relegate any part of this vast and wonderful language to vulgarity simply because once upon a time people relegated homosexuals to little more that "wood for the bonfire." When I tell my boys to gather faggots for the evening's ceremonies, they know not to give me guff. Being a quintessential gay white male, I insist we take celebration seriously! -- NEFS* *No Euphemisms for Sodomy

momOf2: In deference to our Charter Org., I would not hesitate to tell a couple who hasn't tied the knot to bring separate tents. Or, if they would rather: not put up a tent at all and sleep under the open sky with me. (Oh wait, then I'd be sharing the Almighty's tent with them ... what to do?) I think the OP's problem is that a co-leader judged him/her rather than listened. It's one thing to say, "Hey there's a YP problem here and I'd like to help you fix it before all the cubbies are settled in." It's another to fly off the handle and think that an event organizer is part of the great liberal conspiracy and make a stink to the entire district!

BOR's shouldn't include current events quizzes, but ... It's important to know what's on boys' minds. That includes how they feel about events going on in the world around them. Some of our boys have shown a lot of insight in both community and scouting issues.

That reminds me, in many tribal societies, the woman builds the home, butchers the game, tans hides, carries water (sometimes more on their heads than guys have ever carried on their backs), lights fires, etc ... So while guys may need to grow up with male role models, they also need to learn to respect the women in their lives. That's why I think female ASM's and SM's are needed, as long as they can tone down the (s)mothering behavior! Moms who've camped with us have managed to do this, and I think it's helped boys to actually work on that "mystique."

I bet the SMs' conversation went something like this ... SM1: "So, I guess those girls were practicing some wilderness survival skills this weekend." SM2: "Yep. At least our boys spent the morning on EDGE. One of these days, they'll be able to teach them a thing or two." SMT224 - thanks for keeping the girls sharp!

Sorry BPT. Didn't mean to go all conspiracy theory on you. I can't quote the boy exactly, but I was waiting form him to say one of the four words (especially since he was concerned about seeing it as a requirement), and he didn't. I don't think he was purposefully trying to avoid it. For "explain" he said something like "I told him how to do it." I just generally find that most boys up for Life have developed good intuition about teaching. I don't think knowing an acronym helps teach any better. I do think it could lead someone to teach worse. (Because there's no reminder about the handbook.)

All depends on who pushes the paperwork and how,

This is so simple. I don't see why everyone wants to fight it. What BDPT00 failed to mention was that he knows full well that some of us are actively promoting objectively superior methods ... http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=291125&p=3 Just had a conversation tonight with a candidate for Life Scout who was concerned about this requirement being "slipped in". I asked him to tell us who he taught what last and how he did it. He described EDGE to a tee without using one of those words. I said I'd pass him. The SM said he still had to know the acronym. I explained to him why we disagreed: That I contend that any sufficient method would 1) Not require knowledge of the English language to remember. 2) Enforce the need to read the handbook. He said "Oh yeah, EDGE does lack anything about reference." (His words not mine, people.) SOMEBODY PROMOTE THAT BOY TO TRAINER BEFORE HE GETS SOME TEACHING-SKILL-STUNTING ACRONYM IN HIS HEAD!!!!

I've seen too many people playing semantics with either term to care. Facts on the ground: if the boys have standards of what they need to do to plan and implement, they will live up to them. If the standards fall short, adults will take up the slack. But if by and large the youth are exceeding standards, we keep raising the bar. It works backwards at times: the more slack adults take up, the easier it is to lower standards for the youth, the less capable they'll seem, because they'll have fewer chances to perform. Over time, we wind up lowering the bar. We have to keep reminding folks in which way the balance should be tipping.

Lower drive the time, increase the probability of sticking out the blizzard. It's an issue I talk through with the youth months before we plan a trip. Not only for safety in transit, but for time required to get rescued should the need arise. I've endured a lot of nail-biters on the drive back from "snow belts". Of course if it was only two miles without snow-tires, I would reconsider hauling kids in winter. (There were years when I wasn't that clever.)

The boys who like 'em promote 'em. The boys who don't seem to advance just as quickly.

Not to dramatize the consequences ... A first-class scout in my troop quit because a klondike derby was cancelled because of too much snow. I'm sure safe transportation was the issue, but he didn't see it that way. I met him 30 years after high school and he is one of those starving artists types that has a sordid history of non-starter carreers ... Be glad your boy is sticking with it. Help him to make something happen! If nothing else, you, his best friend, and his best friend's dad head to a weekend fishing someplace.

MT - Plus the time of each person attending the presentation! Our DAC reviews each Eagle project. The boys meet with him personally. He does not always come to the EBOR, but will send a delegate from the advancement committee. He's a lawyer, so I think he likes working with the boys and helping them survive the paperwork. The goal is to make sure the boy is following the Eagle application to the letter. It doesn't have to be all laser-printed, but he'll dock for penmanship if he can't tell what the specks are. He also takes a moment at every-other round-table to cover recent changes or simply recap the list of "audit flags" that the advancement committee looks out for. Bottom line: this guy taught me everything I needed to coach my boys once they achieved Life. So, if you can devote a small part of your time to training at roundtables, a large part of your time to touching base with each candidate, and none of your time making rules that don't need to be there ... you'll do great!

Never had a request for impeachement. But I had one boy approach me and say "__ is not a good SPL." I replied, "So, how are you going to help him be a better SPL?" I've also had the committee complain about certain issues regarding leadership and discipline among the boys, and admitted that the boys elected the "popular", not the "most effective" leader.

My PM counselor was a bank VP, and to this day I remember meeting him at his desk at the bank and going over the MB. It was very impactful. I wouldn't put a bottom age on the req. Especially with a scout whose family is in financial straights. His self-discipline with $$'s may be a big help to the family.

Now that we bring up the topic of high adventure bases ... If the older boys are going to them, eventually your boys will want to go also. But, don't overwhelm yourself with the concept. Do saddle some of the responsibility with the boys. Here's my lecture to young scouts ... "Personal Managment should be one of the first merit badges a boy takes, not one of the last, on his trail to Eagle. But, since I know it rarely works out that way, and I've seen that look in your eyes when you've heard about Philmont or Seabase or Jamboree, here's what you need to do starting now: Earn and save $100 a month. We're talking your own money in your own account that your folks help you set up. Look at the jobs around the house that your parent's complain about doing. (Laundry, dishes, cleaning up after pets, lawn care.) Offer to do one or two of them. You'll have to stop doing something else that you do every day just to kill time (like playing video games, beating on your little brother or teasing your sister, whatever). You'll have to start doing those jobs -- maybe put in an hour a day. In other words make your self woth that $100. If your dad has a business, maybe you should ask for a job application and work there on Saturday mornings. Your neighbors might be looking for someone to do work. They may not be able to fork over that much cash. Maybe they are already paying you an allowance. Then, *stop* spending your folks' money. Say 'dad instead of that new game system I've been nagging you about, can you put it in a savings account for me? Forget that soda you wanted today. Drink some tap-water instead. Oh, and get the most out of your education by making perfect marks. If folks see you are being frugal with their money (remember they pay for your school one way or another), they may consider you worth the investment. This sounds crazy and maybe impossible, but I think it's within almost every boy's potential to be worthy of $100 per month. If he starts when he's 11 or 12 maybe by the time he's 13 or 14 he'll have bankrolled $2400.00. That'll more than cover the cost of any super-activity. And the best part? If you change your mind and don't want anything to do with scouting, you still have that cash for whatever really interests you!" Your scoutmaster will probably say something of the sort. But you can modify the above for a parent-child conversation and for the method of saving you think is best. As a parent it is really something to see a boy become (somewhat) more responsible around the house.

jb We're Venturing, so you're boy's "in" with us. Although the other stuff in his life sounds like he'll have a shortage of funds and time(Although he'll have one sweet ride in a couple of years! 0 to 250 in .05 sec, probably.) I got some young women who don't want to be treated like girl scouts and boys who are tired of faking boy-led in key positions.

I'd like to put a more positive spin on this ... Then: My SM, one (maybe two, at times, ASM's) three committmee members, and the 40 of us. A kid NEVER interacted with the committee members unless they were taking the "long walk" for their board of review on the nights they met after the troop meeting. Now: My Son's SM, at least SIX ASM's at various levels of training, as many or more Committee members -- all who actively recruit MB counselors for the district. A "trail to eagle" program at our council camp to motivate First Class scouts to move up a rank within the year. This program was started by a donor who asked the question "why aren't there more Eagle Scouts?" There are more Eagles now because a boy's chances are better, and that's because more adults care about the well-being of scouts in their community.

The other boundary is group cohesiveness. Like E61 said, a bunch of first-years used to everyone else doing everything for them need to build a sense of teamwork. That means scheduling local hikes and service projects and partnering with adults for the accountability they need for trips requiring transportation/overnight stays. This isn't just for the boy's success. This is to increase the confidence level of the adults. When adult A asks "... are you sure ___ picked a workable menu?" I can reply, "I've always ate well when ___ was cooking." Where I haven't let a youth lead, that's where I have my greatest doubts about him/her.

My sentiments resonate with Eamonn's -- with crew officers having more lattitude than a PLC. Like him, there are some places I will not go. For example, one of our crew's first brainstorming sessions included "a trip to the spa". Somehow, that card never made it into my envelope of "must do" activities. Fortunately, no youth ever volunteered to plan it. In a practical sense, I try to facilitate communication. ("You would like to to this? So would ___. Why don't you give him/her a call?") My main goal is to coach every Crew president into doing that for me. On the other hand, I'll fill out tour permits and badger adults for driver info, etc .... All depends on how active my VP-admin wants to be.

Hey Stosh, The real problem is someone realised you're they outsider and felt bothered by it. Now that you have all that time ... let some of your (ex-?) boys know my crew's 5 short on sailors for a Bahama's sailing adventure this summer. If I'm bringing adults, I want the kind who know they're good for nothing and best used that way. If I'm bringing youth, they need to be the kind that know the keel won't pull free from the crab traps until they dive under themselves and cut the lines! Seriously PM me if you're interested.

Never had a 1:1 with our crew's UC. We shake hands at roundtable and other events. He never visited a meeting. He dropped me a line to have me call in to the DE about a parent complaint regarding one of my youth. He was not involved in the conversation, never offered to meet with me and the parent or youth in question. Did that on my own, and sent a note directly to the DE about my plan. It was a lousy month. Would his partnership have helped? I don't know. He's a nice enough guy for what it's worth. We're partly the victims of our troop burning bridges with the old UC. Everyone would rather keep a respectful distance.

I love those "interesting" calls from the DE about problems parents are having with your unit! The main "too much leadership" symptom that you have to worry about is when crossovers are afraid to stick with the troop because they are intimidated by how much responsibility your boys have. Listen to your first-years. If they are excited about the program and feel like the older boys are being brotherly to them, you're probably okay. Here's what I do with the venturing crew: If there is a way that a parent would like to help, I have him or her present what they have to offer to the crew president or VP-program. If the officers approve that person to serve as a consultant for an activity, and they appoint a youth activity chair to partner with them, it moves forward. If it's just a one-parent show, the activity gets tabled. I have very earnest parents whom I've coached to not act unless they get a call from a youth. Troops are a little different. Parents come in with a lot more expectations. Sometimes they aren't even sure if their concerns are about their son's safety, their son's time for other activities, your boy's maturity, the advancement program, or even their own sense of feeling welcome. It all gets bundled up and put under a category that seems to fit, and sent to a UC or DE who has to translate it and he is obliged to get back to you even if he doesn't think it's all that serious. So, your CC has to try to listen to them, and try to have them come on an event at sit with you as you watch the boys in action.

I've had complaints that our unit is not reverent enough ... two replies: 1. What would you expect from a Presbyterian CO? Our ministers instigated the whiskey rebellion! 2. This is a youth-led movement. Is your boy ready to be our new CA?(See jblake's reply about how to use chaplain's aids.) Of course, that's only to the ones who've commented. So, I suspect the one-meeting thing could be working the other way in my neck of the woods.

(aw shucks, Moose) InMyHumbleOpinion - Venturers, along with OA, as they mature, should be the "movers and shakers" of program at the district and council level. Some of them will come in with too much swagger and a be little rough around the edges. Hopefully getting dinged for vulgarities or other misdeeds will straighten them out. Thus the importance of their participation in district events. As they approach that 18-and-over mark they begin to be very helpful at pointing out what the program looks like from "the cheap seats." They have a feel for what events should be exclusive or inclusive, and who should "own" what activity. Us old folks would do well to listen to them. Some folks may be doing that in Fox's district, thus the changing of policies regarding their "Venturing fellowship weekend". So I agree with Fox 76 that it's a pain figuring out where these kids fit in. I just think that there is some gain for all the hassle.