qwazse

It would be wrong to be outraged. In parts of America ... unless it involves charcoal or mesquite ... men are not to be making snacks or cleaning up after. We may disagree, but only on subjective grounds. Some folks have found certain efficiencies when sexes live up to assigned expectations. When we're working with volunteers, there is no winning strategy that will change that unless in a given unit a female is obviously the best choice for direct-contact leader and the men would do better assisting her, and the men work at the chocolate factory. On the other hand, Son #2 was the go-to guy when anyone in his class needed a cake baked or when his buddies (of either sex) needed someone to cook up breakfast. And, when daughter-in-law was still in training, it was clear that Son #1 was the better cook. They are evenly matched now, and I've seen him chased out of the kitchen to go watch the game on a regular basis. Finally, if you like to taste the chili in your chili, pray that the lot of them -- including Mrs. Q -- are otherwise occupied and I take over the spice rack.

I'm in a community that firmly believes in that the ideal unit leader would be male. I do worry that many good leaders for our boys are being passed over because they are women. Heck I always told my crew up front that they got stuck with the least qualified adult for a crew advisor. But, I also have to admit that my belief takes a back seat to what parents believe. The opposing opinions are intrinsically subjective. By the way, considering how hard it is to get my bulk where it can grip the plug, oil changes would go a lot more quickly if the gals took ownership of them.

I think this depends on what one observes in their community. We boys responded to den moms pretty well, I think, because there was no uncertainty of the belt that would come down upon our backsides if word got to our dads that we were the least bit disrespectful. That seemed to be pretty much the culture nation wide. So, moms were seen as the ideal den leaders. Then, in Webelos we got a male leader and boy did we give him a hard time! In other parts of the world, older teens are seen as the ideal den leaders. Parents are nowhere to be seen. The few adults were mentors to the older teens who ran the program. So imagine a scoutmaster for about 120 youth, both sexes, ages 5 to 20. I had friends raise their kids in Czech scouting. They missed the involvement of adults. On the other hand, their boys had an exceptional level of maturity. I'm sure there are places where much older men are the ideal leaders for the youngest scouts. Now, when it comes to managing adults as well as youth, I've seen that forceful men can wind up getting baited by these "high speed, low drag" dads, and a unit can get strangled as well as flourish. It's a rare CM who can insist "not in this pack" and still be everyone's ally in raising their kids. BSA has put us in a position where parents have a lot of say with their Cub's advancement. I enjoyed this because it gave me and my sons a checklist of things we (and Mrs. Q) could do together. But it does leave the door open to cerebral types who think it's a good thing to eek the bare minimum out of a kid's life as a scout.

Nobody wins law suits by admitting that things are better now. Worse, statistically the guy's kid is at greater risk at home -- even before factoring in that the kid is living with an abuse victim with trust issues. What's next? Vetting parents and relatives?

To answer your last question first. Plenty of Boy Scouts have no clue about Cub advancement ... especially this version of requirements. It's clear this guy wants to cut corners. The CC should have a sit-down with him. Because the goal is to get the scout engaged with the program as much as possible. Rubber stamping is no way to do that.

About now is pine-wood derby building season. So find some older scouts who made some nice cars. Bring in a local athlete or coach to talk about sportsmanship. A race car driver would be optimal (even better with car).

I've met one or two Belligerents (okay, a few more than that). However, at the cub level, for everyone of those there are at two or three who are really engaging in the program with their scout. They just haven't figured out how to infect the entire den with their enthusiasm. Now, I suspect that @jsychk is assuming the worst because of some prior encounters with the dad. But, so what? The program doesn't get any better if you don't talk to him. If that dad was a scout, the odds of him becoming a unit leader are high. That means that if he isn't even questioned about when the scout tried to experience the patrol method now, it will reinforce the notion that his boy can do scouting on his terms, not the troop's. And hitting that wall that hard is truly divisive and an unpleasant experience for all involved. @TMSM's specific suggestions are very good ice-breakers.

Although I agree with RB that 5 and 6 year olds should not be cooking on their own, if there are adults closely supervising lions and tigers (e.g., cutting and slicing ingredients, etc ...), they would be well within the spirit of the G2SS.

Talk to the dad. How is this hard?

That depends on how you read St.John's Apocolypse. It ends with the City of God, a renewed Jerusalem descending on the renewed earth. We're stuck with this planet, even in the resurrection. That's a good thing.

Don't worry @JoeBob, I don't think the problem is irrational posters. National entertains all kinds of crazy. Inflammatory posters on the other hand ...

Probably only one tarp for everyone's hammock! In addition to those percentages, @Cburkhardt and @walk in the woods, can you provide the number of youth in your districts? That will give us a better idea of how much one districts' gains are offsetting an other distrct's losses.

What some take as your humble attempt to free us from our folly, others take as vindictive. Same sermon, different interpretation, go figure. Happy New Year, Merl! How was your Newton? Did you get pound-cake in your stocking?

Thanks. You confirm several of my suspicions -- especially regarding the Venturing committee's obsession with finding the perfect advancement model ... when that is the last thing concerning most venturers. I hope quality time back in the trenches restores you. Every scout needs a crazy uncle working for their (and their buddies) smiles.

Definitely a productive question (at least more so than "vote the bums out".) Info tech ... put forums on the front burner. Work more ever more closely with volunteer pool. Marketing ... even leaner font guide. Jambo ... sell big-zip tickets to visitors. Let college presidents (aside from WVU?) know that 25,000 youth -- most with academic aspirations -- will be in one place one week. Ask them what they would like to do about it? Supply ... until finances improve: print every document -- including Scouter and Boy's Life -- in black-and-white. Handbook for girls? The line to the young ladies should have been "Make due until we make money." Sell our literature at the WSJ trading post. SMs were telling me they were disappointed to not see it. Summit ... drop the name. Or, rather, use it for the best gathering location for scouts in each district, council, area, and region. Change the goal to developing properties for mini-summits (erstwhile known as summer camp) in every state. I could go on. But, to earn their keep, we need lot's of thought towards ensuring that anybody can scout well within 30 miles of home anywhere in this country. If we don't get it, don't worry, those positions will hit the skids as scouting under different organizations begins to rise to the fore.

@David CO, I don't believe @ParkMan is alone. We all might have salary envy, until we're the guy asked to put in 80 hour work weeks and risk reputation while being in a national spotlight. If those personnel leave for better pastures, it might saddle us with 5 times as much in financial loss due to decisions made by the inept exec who would think a 90K salary is a big deal. Unfortunately, the only folks in a position to know if execs earned their keep are the board. Some of these positions were "earned" through a career of drawing 5 million-dollar donors per year. And that could be a source of the real problem. A million-dollar donor, doesn't necessarily have the vision for what their contribution should look like. Most, would not want it to look like a bunch of fiscally conservative bean counters tightening belts. A few decades ago, some would want it to look like teams of lawyers defending the American way all the way to the supreme court. I'm not sure any donor envisions their contributions as fending off suits brought on by changing statutes of limitations. And we see at SBR that donors known for building envision their bronze statute somewhere on the property. Needless to say, someone caught up in litigation, mortgaging capital, and donor appeasement is not going to be thinking much about program.

So, when you all get a negative recommendation, do you somehow communicate that in advance to the scout so he is prepared to address it at the BoR?

If you have a friend who re-posts a "NASA says ..." fear-mongering meme, be sure to reply with this link about what NASA actually says: https://climate.nasa.gov/ @TAHAWK and I have the dubious privilege of living on the boundary of the neutral change zone on the global climate map. There is a "tongue" of stable, if not somewhat cooler, seasonal temperatures over the years that covers the northeast US, in contrast to accelerating warming trends in the rest of the country. In other words, although not everybody has seen "worst case", the SW US has seen that 4+ degree hop ... it could be 6 degrees at some points. Thus as @Beavah worried: We are the first to be affected when Philmont has no water ... Or rather, it half burns away.

People are also more free to slander if they think that their statement won't be opposed by the accused. IMHO, if someone doesn't have the stones to say it to the scout's face, they don't deserve to be writing a letter of recommendation. I only write open letters of recommendation, and I make a point of giving the person I recommend a copy.

Okay, have any of you ever commented on scoutingwire's Chief's Corner?

@TMSM and @fred8033, if you repeat any advice of mine just be sure to preface it with "A stranger on the internet once said ..."

This has as much to do with how you want to shape the troop culture. In general, I don't want adults indulging scouts' foolishness, but I do want them responding to scouts' industry. In practical terms this means I expect them to raise a high bar for behavior and accountability, but don't turn that bar into a wall. If the Eagle coordinator is any good, then the CC just needs to read and sign. No meetings necessary. At the next meeting, the CC then reports the gist of any projects that were approved. If the EC percieves any real hurdles (e.g., scout will need 500 laborers and you all have 50), then he should talk to the CC. If the EC is still cutting teeth, the scout should feel free to let the CC know that he has a good proposal and would like to present it to the committee at the earliest possible convenience. But, if this is not your troop culture right now, your scout should get on the phone with the EC and ask if he/she thinks it can go to committee as is. If not, identify revisions, make changes, and repeat the cycle until the proposal is good to go.

First, IMHO, not every scout has to present his project to the committee. The whole committee presentation was novel to me when our troops merged. (The other troop was doing it, ours wasn't.) As far as I can tell, committee review does nothing to make the proposal any better in the eyes of the district advancement committee. On the other hand, our scouts who do present seem to like the feedback and encouragement they get. As far as scheduling things, the more you put in the scout's hands, the better. I would rather the scout arrange the meeting, then ask the coordinator if there's anything else he should refine for his presentation. I get the desire to stay in the background when your son or daughter is the candidate. However, also keep in mind the nature of the project. Son #2 felt that I would be the best adviser for his project, and he wasn't entirely wrong. If you're the best guy for the job, step up. If someone else will do just as good, send your kids their way.

They aren't qualifications, per se. They are means by which a scout can discover what his unique contribution to a troop should be. For example an SPL's election speech might be: "Hello, my name is __, I've been in troop __ for four years, and have obtained Second Class rank. Last year I took Trucking, Railroading, and American Business MB's, among others. But the reason I mentioned those, is because thanks to some counselors who offered to help us, I've come up with a great summer activity that will involve combining these activities, and if you elect me, we will plan a trip where each patrol gets some time behind some serious engines, and culminates with a contest in which the winning patrol gets to ring the opening bell at the stock exchange. I took my patrol to visit the rail yard last month, and we had so much fun that I wanted the chance to help the whole troop try this ..." We could imagine other scouts applying for a PoR to the SPL and saying that they've earned a several MBs that made them think they could do the PoR of their choice well. The one's who've earned a lot of MBs could argue "This year, I've shown that I can get things done. Please give me a chance to do more, sir." I might be biased because our best QM was an MB-grubbing scout. So much so, that he would look for idle scouts at camp and drag them along to whatever MB he was about to try to earn in a day. Yes, he tried to cut corners. Yes, he butted up against us sticklers constantly. But his variety of accomplishments was very useful to the troop. How? Well, by the time he took office, he had mastered organization and sequencing. He had a sense of what scouts would need for which activity. He also knew what we could build into our trailer and how. Then, he focused on advancement, got Eagle and JROTC sucked his time away from us. IMHO, the kid provided more for the troop when he was obsessed with MBs than when he completed (in his mind) rank advancement. Compared to what can be gained from earning about 20 MBs in a year or so, going through trail-to-first class really does not do much in terms of preparing a scout to hold a PoR. I simply think personal growth vs. leadership development is a false-dichotomy. One final thought experiment: if we reduced the number of MBs to 49, would that in any way improve our patrols? I just don't see it. Take away the time the MB-grubbing scout "wastes" on requirements, and it's unlikely you'll get it back in contributions to his/her patrol unit. That's especially true if we take away the MBs that explicitly require the scout to contribute to patrol/troop life.

What is a scout's obligation to his/her patrol? To fulfill the pinnacle scouting experience of hiking and camping independently with his/her mates. New scouts do this by obtaining first class skills. Patrol leaders do this by qualifying (i.e., mastering 1st Class skills) to take their patrol hiking and camping. First class scouts (the concept, not the patch) do this by availing themselves of the MB program according to their needs and interests. What is a scout's obligation to his/her troop? To develop leadership through responsibility based on present skills. Where do those skills come from? Well in general, there is a huge difference between ... a Bugler who's earned Bugling and Music MB's vs. one who's not, a Historian or Scribe who's earned Journalism vs. one who's not, a Librarian who's earned Reading and Scholarship vs. one who's not, a QM who's earned Backpacking, Woodwork, and Welding vs. one who's not, a PL who's earned Signs Signals and Codes vs. one whose not, an SPL who's earned Orienteering and Hiking and one who's not, a JASM who's earned Wilderness Survival and Search and Rescue and one who's not. Thinking along those lines, maybe a scout should not be assigned a PoR or a Star/Life service project until he or she has rightly earned a dozen elective MBs and has some hint of how they could best serve their troop or patrol. It would not look great as a requirement, but I would admire the SM and SPL who announce that scouts who've earned the most MBs in the past year will have first choice of PoR.